The URL can be used to link to this page

2021-05-20 E IDIAN HO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, May 20, 2021 at 6:00 PM MINUTES ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Commissioner Bill Cassinelli Commissioner Andrew Seal Commissioner Maria Lorcher Commissioner Nathan Wheeler Commissioner Steven Yearsley ABSENT Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel Commissioner Nick Grove ADOPTION OF AGENDA-Adopted CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] -Approved 1. Approve Minutes of the May 6, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Jump Creek North Four-Plex (H-2021- 0018) by Kent Brown Planning Services, Located at the Northwest Corner of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. Gondola Dr. 3. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Mountain America Credit Union Drive- Through (H-2021-0019) by Mountain America Credit Union, Located on the West Side of N. Ten Mile Road,Approximately 7S0 Feet South of Chinden Blvd. 4. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for The Oasis (H-2021-0004) by Brian Tsai of Balboa Ventures, Located at 318S E. Ustick Rd. S. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for The Vault (H-2021-0017) by Joshua Evarts, Located at 140 E. Idaho Ave. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] ACTION ITEMS 6. Public Hearing for Prevail North Subdivision (H-2021-0021) by Schultz Development, LLC, Located at 5150 S. Meridian Rd. A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 5.63 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 19 single-family residential lots and 4 common lots on 5.25 acres of land. - Recommended Approval to City Council 7. Public Hearing for Gem Prep South (H-2021-0020) by Paradigm Design, Located Approximately 1/8 of a Mile East of S. Locust Grove Rd., on the South Side of E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for an educational institution on 5.95 acres of land in the C-C zoning district that proposes direct access via a collector street and where there is not a safe, separate pedestrian and bikeway access between the neighborhood and the school site. -Approved 8. Public Hearing for The 10 at Meridian (H-2021-0025) by J-U-B Engineers, Inc., Located at 75 S. Ten Mile Rd. A. Request: Annexation of 40.30 acres of land with R-40 (13.04-acres) and C-C (27.25-acres) zoning districts. - Recommended Approval to City Council ADJOURNMENT - 8:08 p.m. Item 1. Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting May 20, 2021. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of May 20, 2021 , was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Vice-Chairman Andrew Seal. Members Present: Commissioner Andrew Seal, Commissioner Bill Cassinelli, Commissioner Maria Lorcher, Commissioner Nathan Wheeler and Commissioner Steven Yearsley. Members Absent: Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel and Commissioner Nick Grove. Others Present: Adrienne Weatherly, Ted Baird, Sonya Allen, Joe Dodson and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE X Nathan Wheeler X Maria Lorcher X Andrew Seal Nick Grove _X Steven Yearsley X Bill Cassinelli Rhonda McCarvel - Chairman Seal: Good evening. Welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for May 20th, 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 the meeting. However, your ability to be seen on screen and talk will be muted. During the public testimony portion of the meeting you will be unmuted and, then, be able to comment. Please note that we cannot take questions until the public testimony portion. If you have a process question during the meeting, please, e-mail cityclerk@meridiancity.org and they will be able to 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 it at meridiancity.org/live. With that let's begin with the roll call. Madam Clerk. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Seal: All right. First item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. Can I get a motion to adopt the agenda? Yearsley: So moved. Lorcher: Second. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 5 Page 2 of 42 Seal: It's 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] 1. Approve Minutes of the May 6, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Jump Creek North Four-Plex (H-2021-0018) by Kent Brown Planning Services, Located at the Northwest Corner of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. Gondola Dr. 3. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Mountain America Credit Union Drive-Through (H-2021-0019) by Mountain America Credit Union, Located on the West Side of N. Ten Mile Road, Approximately 750 Feet South of Chinden Blvd. 4. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for The Oasis (H-2021-0004) by Brian Tsai of Balboa Ventures, Located at 3185 E. Ustick Rd. 5. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for The Vault (H-2021-0017) by Joshua Evarts, Located at 140 E. Idaho Ave. Seal: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda. We have multiple items on the Consent Agenda. We have the approval of the minutes from our May 6th, 2021 , Planning and Zoning meeting, Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law for the Gem Creek North Fourplex, H-2021-0018; Mountain America Credit Union Drive-Through, H-2021-0019 and The Oasis, H-2020-0004. Oh. And The Vault, H-2021-0017. Can I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda as presented? Wheeler: So moved. Yearsley: 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: 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 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 6 Page 3 of 42 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 is finished we will open the floor to public testimony. Each person will be called on only once during the public testimony. The clerk will call the names individually of those who have signed up on our website in advance to testify. You will, then, be unmuted in Zoom or you can come to the microphone in chambers. You will need to state your name and address for the record and you will have three minutes to address the Commission. If you have previously sent pictures or a presentation for the meeting it will be displayed on the screen and our Clerk will run the presentation. If we establish that you are speaking on behalf of a larger group, like an HOA, where others from that group will allow you to speak on their behalf, you will have up to ten minutes. After all those who have signed in in advance have spoken we will invite any others who wish -- may wish to testify. If you wish to speak on the topic you may come forward in chambers or if on Zoom press the raise hand button in the Zoom app. Or if you are 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 you will no longer have the ability to speak and, please, remember we will not call on you a second time. After all testimony has been heard by the applicant -- the applicant will be given another ten minutes to come back and respond. When the applicant is finished responding to questions and concerns, we will close the public hearing and Commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss and, hopefully, be able to make a final decision or recommendations to City Council as needed. ACTION ITEMS 6. Public Hearing for Prevail North Subdivision (H-2021-0021) by Schultz Development, LLC, Located at 5150 S. Meridian Rd. A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 5.63 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 19 single-family residential lots and 4 common lots on 5.25 acres of land. Seal: At this time I would like to open the public hearing for Prevail North Subdivision, H- 2021-0021. We will begin with the staff report. Dodson: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Can everybody hear me all right? Seal: We can, Joe. Go ahead. Dodson: Perfect. Thank you, guys. As noted, the first item on the Action Items for tonight is Prevail North Subdivision. It is a request for annexation and zoning and a preliminary plat. The site consists of 5.6 acres of land, currently zoned C-2 in the county and is Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 7 Page 4 of 42 located at 5150 South Meridian, which is approximately a quarter mile south of Amity. I will go ahead and share my screen now. To the north is R-4 zoning and an undeveloped city property. There is also -- it's kind of a weird triangle shape that you can kind of see. It's actually a county dispatch tower, which is also north of the subject site. To the east is R-8 zoning and undeveloped land. To the south is R-8 zoning and the Prevail Subdivision, which was approved under the Percy name a couple of years ago. To the west is Meridian Road and further west of that is RUT or some additional R-4 zoning. There is no history with the city on this property until now. The future land use designation out here is medium density residential, which allows three to eight dwelling units per acre. This map here -- I don't know if I have presented it to Commission before, but I use it for Council, but I just wanted to give you guys a bigger overview of the site and what's around it and any improvements that might be there. Currently there aren't any, except for the Amity and -- I believe that's Locust Grove intersection in 2023. As noted, the subject site is 5.63 acres that's being annexed, but the plat is 5.25 acres. It's between multiple parcels -- parcels that are already annexed into the city and the site -- the north is a city-owned property reserved for a future well site and only -- that site currently only has access to Meridian Road. To the south is the 113 lot Prevail Subdivision, which was approved in 2019. It is zoned R-8 and has a future access to Meridian Road via a collector street, which will be constructed along the boundary here. That is both -- that would be this phase -- or I should say Prevail North and the regular Prevail. That would be their only access out to Meridian Road, other than an emergency access. The applicant for this application is the same as that for Prevail, making Prevail North a continuation of that subdivision. Consistent with the future land use designation of medium density residential, the applicant is proposing a density of 3.3 -- .4 acres -- sorry -- 3.4 units per acre. Because this is an extension of the Prevail Subdivision, the applicant is aligning the proposed lots of this phase, Prevail North, with those of the lots to the south to ensure compatible -- compatibility in lot sizes. Furthermore, due to the constraints of the site being deep, but relatively narrow, and having a waterway along the north boundary, the applicant is only proposing homes along the south side of the site. The proposed use is detached single family, with an average lot size of 6,677 square feet and a minimum lot size of 5,362 square feet. The use is permitted within the R-8 zoning district by right. The project is proposed as one phase, but will, essentially, be phase three of the Prevail Subdivision to the south. The revised plat is proposed as 18 building lots and three common lots on 5.25 acres and appears to meet all UDC dimensional standards for the requested zoning district. The applicant has submitted conceptual elevations of the proposed detached single family. Detached single family does not require design review, but the elevations depict a majority of two story homes with two -- two car garages and varying home styles that are noted as traditional, craftsmen, and contemporary. The elevations depict differing layouts of the same field materials of lap siding and stone and varying roof profiles, which overall offer an array of potential home facades. The subject site contains a large section of the Carlson Lateral, which you can see here, and this. The site plan shown before you now has the original position, which would be all this topography here, and, then, the new location here. The proposed location. It is an irrigation lateral that is maintained by the Boise Project Board of Control. The applicant is proposing to both reroute and pipe this lateral consistent with desires of the city engineer for the purpose of benefiting both this applicant and the city-owned property Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 $ Page 5 of 42 bordering the site on the north. On further discussions with Boise Project Board of Control and in coordination with Public Works, the applicant is proposing to pipe the entire segment of the lateral on both properties from Meridian Road, which would be the culvert here, almost all the way to the eastern property boundary. Piping this lateral will allow for more buildable area of the subject site and will help fix some of the topography issues for the city-owned property to the north and allow for easier maintenance by Boise Project Board of Control. Staff supports the piping of this irrigation lateral and the proposed plan complies with city code. The proposed public streets are proposed as 33 foot street sections with attached and detached five foot sidewalks, allowing for on-street parking where no driveways exist, including the entire north side of the new east-west street, minus the bulb out, which is right in the center. Attached sidewalks are proposed along the new street, except for along the north where a detached sidewalk and parkway is proposed. Access is proposed via extension of Keyport Avenue, which is currently stubbed to the southern property boundary in Prevail No. 2. The submitted plans show Keyport extending into the site and, then, heading both east and west as shown as Liberator Street and ends in permanent cul-de-sacs at both ends of the site, which is in alignment with ACHD policy. Liberator Street is approximately 908 feet in length from the center of the western cul-de-sac to the east property line. Although the length of the street from east to west is greater than 750 feet in length when you measure it that way, South Keyport intersects this street approximately halfway, which breaks up the block length so there are no code issues with the proposed block length. In addition, UDC 11- 6-C3, which is our subdivision design standards, notes that a dead end street cannot be greater than 500 feet in length with an intersecting street or by requesting Council waiver. Because South Keyport Avenue intersects Liberator Street as shown, neither the west, nor the east cul-de-sac is greater than 500 feet when measured from the nearest edge of right of way as code notes. It is -- therefore, it does not require any waiver by Council. It is admittedly an unusual road design, but staff does consider it to be the most efficient design for livability and access when considering the site constraints of the irrigation facility along the -- almost the entire northern boundary and the overall topography throughout the site. Furthermore, there are no homes fronting along the north side of the proposal of the street, which -- which further mitigates any staff concern regarding the length on the north side of the proposed street. The applicant is also proposing two sub streets to the adjacent properties, one to the north property out of the west cul-de-sac, and one to the east out of the east cul-de-sac. The original plat proposed both of these stub streets in the east quarter, which was basically one here and, then, a stub street to the east. But following conversations with Public Works the applicant moved the stub street that is proposed to the north to be out of the west cul-de-sac, which would help with future plans for the city well site and also help mitigate some of the topography issues, because there is a lot of topography on the city site in this quadrant over here. Staff supports the overall road layout and the stub street locations as proposed on the revised preliminary plat. Though there is potential for topography to complicate the future road -- future road extension to the east, staff highly recommends maintaining the stub street to the east for added future connectivity through the Brighton parcel. This recommendation is based both in code and from recommendations of the Meridian Fire Department for better neighborhood connectivity and emergency response access when properties to the southeast develop and, frankly, even as the city property develops to the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 191 Page 6 of 42 north. With a revised landscape plan received following publication of the staff report, their proposed landscaping complies with all UDC requirements and, therefore, staff will strike some of the conditions of approval noted in the staff report following the hearing tonight. This includes landscaping within the common open space lot within the proposed parkway and the landscaping along Meridian Road. Along Meridian Road the applicant is required to construct a ten foot multi-use pathway within the street buffer and construct noise abatement, which requires a berm combination that is at least ten feet in height and -- ten feet in height above the centerline elevation of Meridian Road. The proposed landscape plan shows the multi-use pathway, adequate landscaping, and the required berm allowing noise abatement, therefore complying with all of the code requirements. As noted, the subject site is greater than five acres in size, requiring at least ten percent qualified open space and one amenity. The applicant is continuing the segment of the multi-use pathway as noted and that is going to be within the landscape buffer along Meridian Road and qualifies as a required amenity. Because this plat would be an extension of the already approved Prevail to the south, the applicant has indicated these future residents will be able to use the other amenities and open space within that subdivision. The closest amenity to this phase is an open site with a playground that is south of Keyport Avenue, which for reference this is Keyport and, then, you have the micro path and, then, you have the tot lot with more open space. That is the closest amenity to the proposed subdivision. The minimum amount of qualified open space that should be provided is .53 acres based on the plat size of 5.25 acres. For the revised landscape plan, the numbers discussed within the staff report are not accurate. The applicant is proposing approximately 1 .15 acres of overall open space, which is approximately 22 percent, but .74 acres of that area is actually qualifying open space, which is approximately 14 percent. The change that occurred is this fencing along the irrigation. So, now per code and the irrigation district we need to fence off the irrigation easement, which makes that area nonqualifying. That -- that's why the numbers do not match and I will make those adjustments in my staff report following the Commission hearing. Despite being less than previously throughout the proposed -- previously thought -- the proposed open space still exceeds the minimum requirements and staff is still in support of the proposed open space and open space landscaping. There was no written testimony and I made this slide for you guys, just to have a quick little overview. Staff does recommend approval of the requested project with the conditions of approval noted in the staff report. After that I will stand for any questions you may have. Thank you. Seal: Thank you, Joe. Would the applicant like to come forward. Schultz: Good evening, Commissioners. Seal: Go ahead and state your name and address for the record. Schultz: Matt Schultz. 8421 South Ten Mile. Glad to be here instead of on a Zoom meeting. Kind of flipped a coin and decided to come down and be social. So, good to be here after all that time. It's been a while. So, yeah, this is an interesting -- interesting piece of property. It's a little sliver of property north of the Prevail Subdivision, which we Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 Flo] Page 7 of 42 are -- we just recorded phase one and we are getting ready to pave phase two pretty soon and it's moving right along and got the berm -- not quite landscaped, but built along Meridian Road and we originally looked at this piece a couple of years ago, because it was pretty obvious why not buy it when it was for sale and, to be honest with you, it didn't make sense given the -- the constrained geometry, the topography. There is about 20 feet of fall from the -- from the north in -- down to the lower end of Prevail, so it drops about ten feet from the city property down to the Prevail North and another ten feet down to Prevail. So, if you can picture there is a third dimension in here as well -- as well as the extensive piping and single loaded lots on one side of the road. It didn't make much sense. Well, about six months ago it was still for sale and we thought, well, maybe it makes sense now with things escalated as they have and what that does is, obviously, it's -- it's a positive enterprise we think right now to move forward on it, but also lets us control -- I was a little bit scared of who was going to build in there potentially if it would have sold in that year that we didn't buy it and who was going to build there and if I would have to come down and protest them and if they were going to do something quirky or whatever, but this kind of solves that problem as well. We know what's going to go there. It fits in and it's going to be in our HOA and we are going to share the -- the PI system and just --just be one big happy subdivision and kind of clean up what is kind of an odd challenge piece and really clean up that property in line with the city property. We will put in the full fence. We are going to pipe the whole length in exchange for shifting a little bit of that easement onto the city property. We are going to put it right on the property line, the pipe itself. Boise Project Board of Control wants 25 feet either side, flat and graveled, and that's why that fence moved 25 feet into ours and I just sent the Public Works an e- mail tonight that we would like to deed them that extra 25 feet that -- that's shown as that -- that tan area there to the city, because we have no use out of it and if they could park on it or drive on it. It's just an option, you know. Don't have to, but they could, you know. So, that tan area there could -- could be usable by the city later, because it's on the other side of our fence that we don't care about anymore. So, it fits because we have made it fit. We have got the proper bermage, which is an extension along Meridian Road. ITD actually -- the right of way pops out an extra 20 feet from the south end of Prevail to the north, because there used to be a slope down to the fields and they had the right of way out there to catch the slope. Well, we ended up filling it up 15 feet and putting a berm and taking away the need for the extra right away, but ITD wasn't giving it back. In fact, our sidewalk have to wow out, you know, an extra 20 feet to stay out of that right of way. But we are going to landscape the whole thing all the way to the borrow ditch and so in front of this Prevail North there is actually going to be 30 -- I just looked at it tonight and it's not accurately shown. It's actually more I think that's shown here even. I think it's like an extra 30 feet in front of it. So, it will be 55 feet of buffer from our fence of grass and shrubs and trees, 30 feet within the right of way that we don't think ever will be taken away and, then, 25 feet behind it with the ten foot pathway. So, we think it works. Appreciate Joseph's very thorough staff report. We have worked with staff, we have worked with ACHD to get these details finalized for you tonight from what we submitted and we think this reflects a -- an accurate representation of what we are going to build. It's tight, there is a lot of fill, there is a lot of piping, but as an engineer -- or an ex-engineer it's -- it's just good to clean these things up instead of having this awkward little sliver piece that people think they can put a mini storage on it, because that's what it got approved for originally. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 Fill Page 8 of 42 So, they can still keep thinking that, but it's access challenged, because you can't get access to it from Meridian Road any longer and so we have provided that down on the south end of Prevail and that road is now in. We are getting ready to put in a turn bay out in the median to -- to make it a left-in only and a right-in, right-out down there at that intersection, so -- and there is that emergency access you can see in phase two going out to Meridian Road just south of the site. That provides a secondary access until Brighton's world continues to develop to the east and connect over to Locust Grove and Lake Hazel and all that. It's the only access you -- we are the first people in and have the only access at the mid mile right now. So, with that I will stand for any questions and I don't think we have anybody protesting us tonight. So, hopefully it goes pretty quick. Thanks. Seal: Thank you. Are there any questions for the applicant or staff? Cassinelli: Mr. Chair, this is Bill. I don't know if you can hear me and if I have got a bunch of background noise or not. Seal: Go ahead, Bill. Cassinelli: Matt, what -- what's the fence material that's on top of the berm? Schultz: It's just-- it's a -- it's a Simtech --about three times the cost of vinyl. It is plasticky, but it's a -- it's a -- it's filled -- it's filled with foam and it has some -- some noise reduction capability, but the berm that we have that that sits on provides a lot of noise reduction as well. But it's a Simtech composite fence is what it is. Cassinelli: Okay. So, it does -- it's got a lot more sound than -- sound deadening than a -- than a vinyl fence or something? Schultz: It does. In fact, I was out there before we built the berm and it's quite loud off Meridian Road, as you can imagine. Cassinelli: Yeah. Schultz: When the berm and the fence went in -- I mean, obviously, you could still hear that -- that white noise, but it's -- it was a huge reduction on site in terms of blocking that noise. Cassinelli: Thank you. Schultz: Yeah. Seal: Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: The only question I had was if the lateral -- irrigation lateral is going to be behind your fence why did you discuss to pipe it in? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F12 Page 9 of 42 Schultz: Good question. It's very large and it's on the -- on the top of a hill above us, so every once in a while if it's large and not on top of a hill we will ask for a waiver to not pip it, you just have to leave the easement. In this case it kind of meanders across our site in its existing condition and we wanted to straighten it out, so we could actually -- you could kind of see it in the contours there and we want to straighten it out so we could actually get our road in and some other things. So, in order to do that and to make it safe. It's 48 inches. It's quite large and quite expensive, but it's -- it needs to be done up on top of that hill. Lorcher: Thank you. Seal: Any other questions? Okay. At this time we will take public testimony. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up? Weatherly: Mr. Chair, we do not. Seal: Anybody on Zoom would like to raise their hand or anybody in chambers would like to come forward? Okay. Seeing none, would the applicant like to come back and close or are we good? Okay. Good -- good move. At this time can I get a motion to close the public hearing for Item No. H-2021-0021, Prevail North Subdivision. Lorcher: Motion. Yearsley: Second. Seal: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on Item No. H-2021- 0021. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Seal: Okay. Who wants to start us off? Cassinelli: Mr. Chair, this is Bill. Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Thank you. I have got a question and then -- well, I will do my comments first and, then, a question. Comments are I would say perfect -- perfect -- perfect application of a fill that are always difficult to do and, you know, I -- I couldn't have asked for it done better. Like the applicant was saying, we could have had a mini storage or something else that would have brought a lot of opposition to it, but I think this is the perfect use of -- of that little sliver. So, I'm definitely in favor of the project. I do have a -- I do have a question maybe towards staff and that is in a situation where the lateral is piped and the road -- the stub street to the north that would eventually go over that, is there -- is there an additional cost to putting in that road over a piped lateral, unlike a -- I mean if it's open it has to be bridged, which would be a cost to somebody down the road to finish that stub Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F13] Page 10 of 42 street. But in this situation are there any kind of issues with putting in a street over a piped lateral? Dodson: Commissioner Cassinelli, Members of the Commission, I honestly do not know the answer to that. You should ask Matt, he probably would know better than me. My assumption is there might be some kind of additional cost, but that will be incurred by the city and, frankly, the city's getting a deal out of how much piping this applicant is doing already. So, it's -- not to mention that site -- the city site is not going to get developed for probably quite some time. At least five years from what I understand. So, all those costs would be incurred at a later date. But I -- I assume there will be some additional cost on the standard road over no irrigation lateral. Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you. Dodson: You are welcome, sir. Yearsley: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead. Yearsley: So, for --just to help you answer your question, Bill, more than likely they are going to have an appropriate cover over that pipe, so they wouldn't have any issue building a road over that pipe for the future stub out to this city's property. So, I don't see that being an issue. I have to echo Commissioner Cassinelli's comments. When I first looked at the property it looked kind of weird, you know, the way it was laid out, but as you put it with the rest of the subdivision it actually fits really well. So, I think they have done a great job with this and how -- and making that -- not a weird, but just a different size lot to fit in that space and so I think they have done a great job and I don't see any issues with it. Wheeler: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Wheeler. Wheeler: Joe, I have got a question for -- for staff here. I'm just trying to make sure that the piping is -- is -- the whole canal is being put underground clear from Meridian Road and back underneath the -- or toward the property line of this and moving forward; is that right? Dodson: Is that Commissioner Wheeler? Wheeler: Yes. Dodson: Got you. Thank you. Good to meet you virtually, sir. It -- my understanding is that that is true, because there are some irrigation facilities over here already and that's where it's going to end and, then, they are going to pipe it all the way to the culvert in Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F14 Page 11 of 42 Meridian Road. It -- right now you can see it kind of goes along this road anyways, this route when it bends down to the thing, so it's -- it's going to go to there. That's where we have -- the city and say Public Works and the applicant decided that's the best place for it. Wheeler: Okay. Thank you. Dodson: You are welcome. Seal: Would anybody like to take a stab at a motion on this? Yearsley: Mr. Chairman? Seal: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of file number H-2021-0021 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 20th, 2019 -- or 2021 with no modification. Wheeler: I second. Seal: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item No. H-2021-0021 with no modifications. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. 7. Public Hearing for Gem Prep South (H-2021-0020) by Paradigm Design, Located Approximately 1/8 of a Mile East of S. Locust Grove Rd., on the South Side of E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for an educational institution on 5.95 acres of land in the C-C zoning district that proposes direct access via a collector street and where there is not a safe, separate pedestrian and bikeway access between the neighborhood and the school site. Seal: Okay. Now, we will open the public hearing for Item No. H-2021-0020, Gem Prep South. We will begin with the staff report. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. The next application before you tonight is a request for a conditional use permit. This site consists of 5.95 acres of land. It's zoned C-C and is located approximately an eighth of a mile east of the South Locust Grove and East Lake Hazel Road intersection on the south side of Lake Hazel. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is mixed use community. A conditional use permit is requested for an education institution in the C-C zoning district that proposes direct access via collector street and where there is not as safe, separate Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F15] Page 12 of 42 pedestrian and bike way access between the neighborhood and the school site. Specifically the specific use standards for education institutions require conditional use permit in those instances. A kindergarten through 12th grade college preparatory charter school is proposed. Future residential neighborhood are planned to the north and south. A 77 acres city park, Discovery Park, is located directly to the east. The school is open to public streets on all sides and access is proposed via adjacent local and collector streets on the west and southeast boundaries. No access is proposed via Lake Hazel, an arterial street, along the north boundary. Striped crosswalks, signage, and school zone flashing signage, along with a crossing guard, is proposed for the safety of students walking and biking to the school. If you can see my cursor there, there are the crossing sections here. The parent pick up area is located on the north side of the building. The bus pick up and drop off area is located on the south side of the building, which will prevent vehicle conflicts. A minimum of 113 off-street parking spaces are required to be provided. A total of 118 spaces are proposed in excess of the minimum UDC standards. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway is proposed along the northern boundary of the site along Lake Hazel Road. The Williams natural gas pipeline bisects this site within a 75 foot wide easement. Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown, consisting of a two story, 45,110 square foot structure that incorporates various colors of horizontal lap siding and metal panels and various trim colors. Final design is required to comply with the design standards in the architectural standards manual. Written testimony has been received from the applicant Bill Hadlock. He is in agreement with the conditions of approval in the staff report. Staff will stand for any questions. Seal: Okay. Would the applicant -- applicant like to come forward? Hadlock: Yes. Hello. Seal: Hi, Bill. Go ahead and state your name and address for the record and you can go from there. Hadlock: Okay. Sure. This is Bill Hadlock with Paradigm Design and my address is -- it's down in Phoenix, Arizona, 4250 Drinkwater Boulevard. So, yeah, I just -- it was a great presentation by Sonya and I appreciate all the help she has been and all the staff at the city. We have been working very closely for quite some time with ACHD, the city, but -- but also more importantly Brighton, who is doing the Apex development around the subdivision, and I guess with that what I would like to do is turn this over to -- we have the principal of the school that just kind of wanted to give you a little presentation. I think, Sonya, do we had that presentation? It's a little quick PowerPoint. Just to kind of go over Gem -- Gem schools for those that are not familiar with --with them, if that would be okay. I think I sent that in. Allen: Yes. Mr. Hadlock, you have the ability to share your screen and share your presentation on your end. Hadlock: Oh. Oh. Okay. Let me -- boy, I thought you guys were going to share it. apologize for -- for that. One second here, please. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F16 Page 13 of 42 Allen: If you are not able to get to it right away I can share it for you, I just -- you won't be able to control it on your end. So, if you can get to quickly, that's great. If not let me know. Hadlock: Okay. I think I can get to it fairly quickly. So, let me -- all right. Oh. It seems to be -- okay. Yeah. Here it is. Right here. Okay. Can you see my screen now? Seal: Yes, we can. Hadlock: Okay. Great. So, let me introduce Stacey Walker. Stacey, are you -- are you on? She's the principal of the school. Seal: Stacey, if you just want to give us your name and address and you can go ahead and speak. Thank you. Walker: Thank you for sharing that for me. Good evening, Commissioners. Can you hear me okay? Seal: Yes, we can. Thank you. Walker: Okay. Perfect. So, my name is Stacey Walker and I will be the principal of Gem Prep Meridian South and so I was just going to share a couple minutes as an overview of our Gem schools. Currently I'm working in our online school and have --was the founding principal of our Nampa location. So, I'm excited to move into our third Gem Prep school. Who we are. We are a free K through 12 charter school and our focus is college prep and our goal is to serve all students interested in a rigorous college prep program. So, our mission is to prepare students for success in college by providing a high quality personalized, relevant and rigorous education through exceptional teaching, innovative uses of technology, and partnerships with families. So, we have multiple schools and are a charter management organization and so our first goal was Gem Prep Online, which is currently K through 12 and is statewide and, then, we opened our first brick and mortar school, which was Gem Prep Pocatello, just kindergarten and first grade, and has grown to be K through ten and, then, followed by Nampa, Meridian and, then, we have Gem Prep Meridian North opening this August and, then, we are proposing the Gem Prep Meridian South opening following August of 2022, with both of those opening K through five, but, then, growing to be K through 12. Our school size overall will be about 582 students when we are fully grown. Our seventh grade is about 90 students and ninth through 12th grade is 120. So, our goal is to mimic the demographics of the West Ada School District and really promote all of the diversity in the district to go to our Gem Prep Meridian South location. Our elementary will be K through six, but we will be opening K five and focusing on that college prep model starting at the beginning by offering a full day kindergarten paid for by our school for all of the scholars that join us. We will focus on a student rotation model and providing excellent instruction for all of our students and as well as building on holistic competencies that will help them with success in college. Our secondary is our seventh through 12th grade. Bill, do you mind moving to the -- perfect. Thank you. And we have three types of classes that we begin offering in our Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F17 Page 14 of 42 secondary model and we do in-person instruction, which is typical school instruction, but we also do something called a send and receive, where we can actually leverage some of our Gem Prep teachers to teach at some of our other Gem Prep schools across the state and, then, we also use some fully online learning and we do this to offer higher level classes for our students, high school level classes for our middle schoolers, and, then, dual credit classes for our high school students. So, our secondary model -- we continue to focus it on that graduate profile. We do create two graduation tracks for our students and so our goal is by the time they are in their sophomore year that they are choosing whether or not they want to receive their associate's degree or have at least 18 plus college credits. So, we believe that college really prepares our students to have success by getting that start in high school and it saves a lot of money for families and for students, but it also helps prepare them for all the independence that they will need to have in college. The other aspects that make us unique is that we will be a K through 12 school all on one campus and we have seen that our families really enjoy that. They enjoy having consistent messaging, having relationships and options for leadership for our older students to our younger students and now that I am a part of our online school with our K through 12, it's -- it's great to see the students grow through our school and we are celebrating graduation next week and are just really excited, the accomplishments that our graduating class has. We have almost 40 graduates with our online school this year and the average dual credits that they have is 26 dual credits. So, we are just really proud of the accomplishments and excited that our brick and mortar will be following suit with 12th graders soon. The following slide will -- is a proposed campus overview and so I know you guys just saw this a little bit closer, but this is in a screen of -- of looking at it from an aerial view as well. So, thank you for giving me a little time to share a little bit about Gem Prep and who we are and the Gem Prep Meridian South location. Hadlock: Yeah. Thank you. So, yeah, that's -- that's kind of the presentation that we wanted to do. You know, again, we have been working with Sonya and the staff over time and we have looked at the conditions on the report and we are -- you know, we are very excited to move forward with the project. So, I don't really have a whole lot more to present. But, you know, obviously, here for any questions. Seal: Okay. Thank you, Bill and Stacey. Are there any questions for the applicant or staff? Yearsley: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: So, are they not proposing any potential crossing across Lake Hazel or is that not -- had they decided not to do any of that or what's the plan for that? And I guess, Bill, if you want to answer that question. Hadlock: Sure. Sure. I just pull the site plan up. So, right now, no, we don't have that plan. We have been working with Brighton and the new roundabout that's looking to go up there, so there will be that connectivity as that project moves forward, but -- but as of Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F18 Page 15 of 42 right now, no, we are totally planning our crosswalks and -- and crossing guards and everything to the south where the main development is going to be as it moves forward and the development of reconstruction I should say of Lake Hazel happens, then, I'm sure those -- those plans and considerations will have to be made. Yearsley: Okay. So, I also just assume, Bill, that most of the students are coming from not the local area, but just more of the surrounding area, so they will be picked up and dropped off by parents; correct? Hadlock: Yeah. I think, you know, a good portion of them. Some of them are bused in. Some will be dropped off. But I mean, you know, the reason we really like this partnership with Brighton to come in and develop with these residential subdivisions is -- is, obviously, they hope to pull people in from within the subdivision. But, yeah, you are still going to get a lot of, you know, vehicular traffic, people dropping and picking up and as well as the bus traffic. Yearsley: Okay. Thank you. Lorcher: Mr. Chair? Cassinelli: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead. Lorcher: What is the precedent in the City of Meridian to have properties over the Williams natural gas line? Is that pretty prevalent in the city? Is that -- or would staff know? Seal: More a question for -- for -- for Sonya or Bill or -- Hadlock: Yeah. Sure. Sure. So, we are working with the Williams pipeline -- as a matter of fact, we did this exact same thing on Compass, we did the whole -- we are the group that developed the Compass Charter School up there on -- of Black Cat and we had to deal with the same thing, going over this -- I believe it's the same pipeline, but it was actually the Williams pipeline and all. So, yeah, we have actually done it ourselves with -- on a school project and we are -- we are coordinating with them right now. We are in the process of -- they are in review of our drawings and we are working on our development agreement-- easement, I guess if you will, to do our construction. So, yeah, this is something that -- that is allowed and we have done in the past. Lorcher: Thank you. Cassinelli: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Cassinelli. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F19 Page 16 of 42 Cassinelli: Yeah. This is kind of a follow on to Commissioner Yearsley's question. Bill, can you kind of go over the -- the pick up and drop off situation there? Maybe you can get a screen up there to -- of that area and kind of -- Hadlock: Sure. Cassinelli: -- and I guess how many cars, you know, will that -- will that fit and that kind of thing? And so I'm just thinking as far as the access in and out on that. Hadlock: Sure. So -- I don't know if -- can someone open up the site plan? I don't have that in front of me. Maybe the report that Sonya had. Seal: Can you bring that up, Sonya? Allen: Yes. Seal: Thank you. Hadlock: So, we have really got this broken into two pods and one of the things we really like about doing this is we don't like our bus traffic and our, you know, vehicular traffic to commingle, so down in the lower left-hand corner you will see there is the -- is where the bus -- buses will come in -- right there and to stage along the sidewalk. I believe there is four buses that will drop students off and, then, pick them up. That back area there as well is a parking area for the staff. So, that's what that is right there. And, then, up along -- coming on of the other-- up on the north -- across the north pod, if you will, it's a double lane stacking, which, then, up in the corner will be -- I don't have control, but I call it in the -- just before it -- they make the swing down and turn in front of the school -- yeah, go down a little bit -- a little bit further down. Yeah. Right there. There will be a controller that will take it from a two lane down to a one lane to bring in single lane of drop and pick for students and, then, they -- the north lane there would be the bypass. So, once you have either dropped or picked up you can go around them. So, obviously, it's administered during drop off and pick up times. The queuing lengths are -- I don't remember off the top of my head, but I want to say they are like 1 ,500 feet. So, we can get a lot of cars in there and, you know, we have -- we have presented all that with ACHD to make sure that we are not providing any sort of backups onto the public roads. So, does that answer your question? Cassinelli: It did. Thank you. And, then, I -- on that one road that -- where -- where the driveway comes in there is a -- there is a bend there in that road. Was that an issue -- was that a current concern of ACHD as far as visibility there with -- with people coming back out and especially making a left-hand turn? Hadlock: Are you talking about on the north pod or the car traffic? Cassinelli: Correct. Yes. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F20 Page 17 of 42 Hadlock: Yes. No. We have not heard any of that from ACHD. No, they -- no. The -- we have actually been working on this for some time with Brighton and as part of their overall development they are putting those driveways in, so I know through their whole process of getting these roads approved the horizontal deflection of the roadways and the driveways and all have gone through, you know, substantial amount of review and design with -- between their group and -- and ACHD. So, I have not heard anything, no. Cassinelli: So, there were no concerns there on that traffic on that corner, that being a blind corner or anything? Hadlock: No. No. There were no -- we got our clear vision triangles up in there, so people can see, but, no, there were not. Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you. Seal: Quick question on the buses. Will they be kept on site or is that something you contract with like Brown Bus Company or something along those lines? Hadlock: Right. I'm pretty sure it's -- it's contracted. Josh is with Gem. Josh, are you on right now? I don't want to speak out of turn. I don't believe they are being kept on -- but I don't want to speak out of turn there, so -- Josh might have to raise his hand. He's part of our group. He is the development officer for Gem. Seal: We are moving you over, Josh. You want to go ahead and unmute and state your name and address for the record and go ahead and tell us what -- Femreite: Josh Femreite. 40 Ramsay Court in Pullman, Washington. 99163. So, yeah, the -- the buses, they could be on or off. We do contract with Brown Bus and we have a combo of both types of contracts with them. If we have room to safely store them out of the way we would allow them to store on site. Otherwise, they have storage in their bus -- bus lot for the bus storage. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions for the applicant or staff? Wheeler: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead. Wheeler: I have a question about the parking area that's on the -- I believe it's the north side, right where the -- the -- it would be the student or the parent parking or the loop would be for the drop off. It looks like there is 30 parking spaces in there; is that correct? Hadlock: Yeah. It could be. First, the north pod, that -- that sits in the -- right due north of the school? Wheeler: Yes. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F21 Page 18 of 42 Hadlock: Yes. Wheeler: And there is only one in and out of there; is that correct? Out of that 30 parking spaces? Hadlock: Well -- oh, you are talking about the angled piece? Wheeler: Yes. The angled piece there, yes. Hadlock: Okay. Got it. There is. Correct. Yeah. That's -- that's correct. Wheeler: Is there --was there any concern with ACHD on that with the access or is there any issue with maybe just putting a right-out on the --on the --at the side that's the closest to the entrance and exit? Hadlock: No, we didn't -- we did not have any concern with ACHD on that, but that we -- that we know of. We talked a lot about that -- that -- that pod in particular is going to be more of a staff parking. So, you know, overflow. There is some in the back there I had mentioned by the buses, but the remainder of the staff will be up in that -- kind of the corner. So, they will be kind of, you know, coming in and out at times when the parents are not coming in or leaving, you know, dropping and picking. So, I don't -- I don't see any concerns with that. So, I think that should function -- function fine. Wheeler: Thank you. Hadlock: Thank you. Seal: Any further questions? Okay. At this time we will take public testimony. Madam Clerk, anybody signed up? Weatherly: Mr. Chair, no one is signed in. Seal: Okay. If anybody on Zoom would like to raise their hand or if anybody in chambers would like to come forward or raise your hand so you can come forward. It looks like we have Mr. Wardle on here. Weatherly: Mr. Wardle, one moment, please. Seal: Jon, if you want to go ahead and unmute and give us your name and address for the record. Wardle: Commissioner Seal, Thank you. Can you hear me? Seal: Yes, sir. Go ahead. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F22 Page 19 of 42 Wardle: Great. Commissioner Seal and other Commissioners, my name is Jon Wardle. My business address is 2929 West Navigator Drive in Meridian, Idaho. 83642. 1 just wanted to echo the comments that Bill has made tonight and we also are supportive of this project. We feel like it is -- it's very good for the community. I did want to state that the project has been reviewed by ACHD, they have analyzed the entrance points into this and looked as well at the locations where cars will be coming in, staging, stacking, that type of thing. We have also looked and worked with them on crossings -- safe crossings. I don't know that the -- this exhibit exactly shows all those which have been finalized, but ACHD has been very much in those details. One of the items I wanted just to comment on was Commissioner Yearsley asking about the crossing of Lake Hazel. On the site plan here you will see that there is a -- on the east side of what's called Bloomerang -- and Bloomerang is the road that goes across Lake Hazel to Lavender Heights -- there shows a wider ped ramp there and that is intended to connect to the north. It will be -- I don't know if the striping on that -- I would assume it would be striped as well, because it will be received on the north side as well, but that is in process. Brighton has been working with ACHD on a cooperative development agreement. We actually have nearly approved plans for the roundabout and Lake Hazel to this intersection and, then, a quarter mile to the other intersection and, then, an eighth mile north on Locust Grove, an eighth mile south on Locust Grove. So, these improvements will be done this year still. We were intending to start now, but the ACHD project moved up on Amity and Eagle Road and as soon as that opens up and, then, we would commence these improvements, so that the roadways would all be complete well ahead of the school being finished, which I believe is fall or late summer of next year. So, there has been a lot of back and forth with the highway district as it relates with -- to the roads here, access to the school pedestrian wise, and also the configuration of Lake Hazel and the other improvements that will occur out there. So, ultimately, it will be an urban road with the appropriate pedestrian crossings and we feel like this is a really good plan -- site plan and location for Gem Prep and we are excited for them to be part of the community. Seal: Okay. Thank you very much. Anybody else that would like to come up and testify, if anybody would like to raise their hand on Zoom. Don't see anybody in chambers here. All right. At this time can I get a motion to close the public hearing for Gem Prep South, H-2021-0020? Yearsley: So moved. Lorcher: I will second. Seal: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on Item No. H-2021- 0020, Gem Prep South. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Seal: Okay. Who would like to kick us off here? Lorcher: Mr. Chair? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F23] Page 20 of 42 Cassinelli: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead. Lorcher: The design seems like it's very manageable. It's -- when -- it's new to an area that hasn't been developed yet. I know on some of the other projects that we have seen, you know, crosswalks and crossing guards will be required for safety of the kids, but once the -- if there is subdivisions or other businesses that are going to be developed around it, it's going to come. So, I don't have any concerns with their safety plan of moving the kids, especially since the school seems to be more internal of the -- the parcel, as opposed to the edge and because this is not a boundary school, it's a charter school, most of the kids will probably be driven, as opposed to bused. Seal: Commissioner Cassinelli, I think you wanted to chime in earlier. Go ahead. Bill, are you still there? Cassinelli: Yeah. Can you hear me? Seal: Yeah. Go ahead. Cassinelli: Okay. Sorry. Yeah. I'm very supportive of charter schools in general, as some of you may know. The design of this -- I think it's -- it fits well. My concern was the traffic, particularly during drop off and pick up times in the morning, in the afternoon, and that corner, but, you know, it sounds like from testimony from the applicant, ACHD has looked at it and feel that there is -- you know, that the flow will be there. So, that would be my only concern. Otherwise, you know, it's a great fit and we are always talking about the overcrowding in schools. It's always an issue. So, anytime they can find a home for another 500 plus students it's a good thing. Wheeler: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead. Wheeler: I, too, am in support of this and I like the -- I like charter schools. I like seeing them come into the community. I like this plan a lot. It seems to have good flow. There is a lot of the lanes that will be queuing during the times for both pick ups and for drop offs. My only concern is that -- that access there that you could have at one time 30 vehicles exiting out the same exit and all taking that right-hand turn and coming out. It would be nice to see maybe a thought of maybe having just a right-out only towards the south end of that -- or to what would be the southeast section of that just for safety if that lane -- if that exit ever got blocked in some way-- in some fashion, if there was an accident or something happened there, but if it meets ACHD's requirements, then, that's good, but that's just something to think about. Seal: Thank you. Commissioner Yearsley? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F24 Page 21 of 42 Yearsley: I -- I echo everybody else's. I think it's a good design, good layout, and I'm supportive of the project. Seal: I'm right there with you, so I won't belabor the point. I think it looks like a good project. Always welcoming schools coming in and I mean the flow seems to work for me. I actually kind of like the parking lot off to the side. My son goes to Compass. They don't have that there. It would be -- and some of the parking gets a little strange there sometimes during pick up and drop off, so the parking lot outside of that flow seems to work a little better. In my mind anyway, as I'm envisioning it. If there is nothing else at this time I would like to get a motion. Lorcher: I will give it a go. Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead. Lorcher: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file H-2021-0020 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 20th, 2021, with no modifications. Seal: It's been -- oh. Do I have a second? Yearsley: Second. Seal: Now it's been moved and seconded to approve Item H-2021-0020 for Gem Prep South, with no modifications. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. 8. Public Hearing for The 10 at Meridian (H-2021-0025) by J-U-B Engineers, Inc., Located at 75 S. Ten Mile Rd. A. Request: Annexation of 40.30 acres of land with R-40 (13.04-acres) and C-C (27.25-acres) zoning districts. Seal: All right. So, now we will open Item No. H-2021-0025, The 10 at Meridian. We will begin with the staff report. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. The next application before you is a request for annexation and zoning. This site consists of 40.3 acres of land. It's zoned RUT in Ada county and is located at 75 South Ten Mile Road at the southwest corner of West Franklin Road and South Ten Mile Road. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is mixed use commercial in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan. The applicant proposes to annex 40.3 acres of land with R-40, which is 13.04 acres and C-C zoning, which consists of 27.25 acres, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. I have the site up there. A conceptual development plan was submitted as shown Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F25] Page 22 of 42 that proposes a mix of offices, a financial establishment, retail pads, a grocery store, the vertically integrated residential, drive-through restaurants and multi-family residential, in accord with the associated mixed use commercial, high density residential, and mixed use residential future land use map designations for the property. A phasing plan was not submitted. However, the applicant states that three story flats and townhome style multi-family residential and clubhouse would develop in the first phase, along with the associated infrastructure. The four story high density multi-family would follow with the commercial last as tenants will commit. Access is proposed as shown on the concept development plan. ACHD supports the following accesses. Access A, full access. Access B, right-in, right-out only. Access C, right-out only. And Access D, right-in, right- out only. And Cobalt with a right-in, right-out, left-in only. Staff recommends access is restricted through the development agreement as supported by Ada County Highway District. Cobalt Drive is proposed to be extended to the west from Ten Mile Road. The eastern portion lies entirely on the subject property and includes a crossing across the Kennedy Lateral and stubs to the south to be extended entirely on the adjacent property to the south and to the west. The applicant requests Council approval of a waiver to UDC 11-3A-6B3 for portions of the Kennedy Lateral, which bisect this site to remain open and not be piped. Written testimony has been received from Cody Black, representing the property owner immediately to the south. He objects to the western portion of Cobalt Drive being located entirely on their property, leaving them responsible for its construction. He requests Cobalt be located entirely north of their property on the subject property. Wendy Shrief, JUB, the applicant, submitted written testimony. They are in agreement with the staff report provisions as included in the staff report. Staff is recommending approval with the requirement of a development agreement. Seal: Thank you, Sonya. Would the applicant like to come forward -- applicants as they come forward. Shrief: I'm Wendy Shrief and I'm a planner with JUB Engineers. My business address is 2760 West Excursion Lane in Meridian, Idaho. 83642. And it's so nice to be here in person and it's so nice to not have masks. It's a huge difference from six, nine months ago. Seal: Absolutely. Shrief: This is great. First I want to thank Sonya. She's been a really big part of helping to steer this project and making sure that we are really meeting the intent of the Comprehensive Plan for this area and the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Plan. So, Sonya has been integral. Bill helped a lot, but Sonya really helped a ton. They have been a huge resource and really have helped this project. We have got a team here tonight. I'm just going to talk a little bit about the Comprehensive Plan and, then, we have our architect is here and, then, we also have someone who is going to follow up with the conditions and talk a little bit about Cobalt. Hethe is here. So, we are requesting -- it's a pretty straightforward application tonight. We are just requesting annexation and zoning. We have 40 acres. We -- I think perfectly match up with what your Comprehensive Plan shows for the area. We have -- Sonya, if we can get the Comprehensive Plan up. Or Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F26 Page 23 of 42 can I do it with the mouse? Get my PowerPoint? Let's see. So, I think this -- this shows the future land use map. We can go ahead and use this. The majority of this property has been designated for mixed use commercial. That's the 22 acres in the northeast of the property and in the southwest we have 11 acres designated for high density residential. So, this really dovetails with what we are showing. We have -- on the other side of the canal where we have our mixed use commercial we are showing different types of retail, commercial, and I think it will be a really -- potentially office space. A really great mixed use where we have a lot of pedestrian connections. Our architect is going to show you that later. But I think we have really really met the intent of what you want to see in this area where it's a true mixed use area. We are showing -- where your Comprehensive Plan shows high density residential, we are showing -- that's where we are going to have several different types of multi-family housing in that area, which I think also meets the intent of this plan. So, I'm going to have Lane get up. He is our architect and he is going to walk you through the concept plan, but I -- I think we really do meet the Comprehensive Plan and Sonya really kind of put our feet to the fire, we have gone through a couple of iterations and really reworked this plan with staff to make sure we meet what the city wants from this area, so -- thank you. Team member number two is going to be up. Seal: Thank you. Come up and state your name and address for the record. Borges: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. My name is Lane Borges. I'm representing Elk Ventures. My address 11500 Armor Court in Gold River, California. Happy and excited to be here tonight to present this project to you, which I think is an important one for the City of Meridian. The project as we are proposing has been heavily influenced by both the comp plan and the Ten Mile Specific Plan, with the particular goal to create a dynamic place in which people can live, work, shop and play, with an emphasis on managing pedestrian, bike and vehicular circulation. If I can -- let's see. I guess just click on this. Okay. The overall site plan consists of approximately 559 units of residential housing, horizontally and vertically integrated mixed use with four different kinds of housing stock. In addition, we have around the perimeter along Franklin Road -- see if I can get my cursor here to show you. Along Franklin and Ten Mile is approximately 150,000 square feet of single and multi-story office, retail, commercial and recreational uses that will support the residential components of the project, as well as the neighboring community. While we currently are unable to make any firm commitments to our commercial tenants because of the fact that we are still in the approval process, we are actively working and have active interest with grocery store, drugstore, coffee house, dental office, a bank and a couple of restaurants and we are hopeful that as we work our way through the approval process we will be able to make firm commitments with each of those and bring them and additional commercial tenants to the project when we begin construction. The commercial side, obviously, is a little different than the residential side. The residential side you build them and they will come and on the commercial side in today's economy it's kind of the other way around. They have to come first and, then, we build to suit their -- their particular needs. The project consists, as Sonya mentioned just briefly earlier, of five access points, two on Franklin, two on Ten Mile and one on Cobalt and we worked fairly extensively with both ACHD and Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F27 Page 24 of 42 with the staff to workout some of the issues with all of the access points and with Cobalt Drive itself. The alignment of Cobalt Drive was a little bit of a challenge, because to the east we have an existing connection point on Ten Mile Road at the intersection and to the west the road -- which would typically occur, you know, splitting a property line, which would be the convention, isn't possible, because there is actually a development directly to the west of our property and if we were to build Cobalt Drive straddling the property line it would terminate into somebody's parking lot. So, we worked with ACHD to come up with a proposed alignment, which does have to, basically, connect to the south of our property line and what we -- what we attempted to do -- we looked at an option of curving the road south from Ten Mile along our property and, then, dipping it again in order to clear the boundary and make the proper connection, but the multiple curves in the road over a fairly short distance really wasn't a suitable engineering design for smooth and proper traffic flow. So, the next thing we took a look at was what's an equitable solution in terms of overall cost sharing and what we have is effectively about 37 percent of Cobalt Drive--the square footage of it occurs on --within our property, 63 percent on the property to the south. You might ask, well, why is there a differential there, why isn't it 50/50. We looked at it actually from more than just a square footage standpoint, we looked at it from what's the actual cost to construct, because we have some extenuating costs on the west side where we make the connection, the road has to be brought up, because the existing grade is significantly below Ten Mile and the fact that we have to build basically a bridge structure there in order to bring Cobalt Drive over the canal. That brings that portion of the roadway's construction cost basically into -- at a similar basis as the remaining portion that would eventually be built on the south side. So, in order to help promote the goal that we were trying to achieve of meeting the needs of the specific plan -- if I can get back to -- let's see now how do I -- there we go. Oops. This wheel is very sensitive. Okay. So, one of the elements of the plan that we tried to incorporate was the concept in the specific plan of kind of complete streets and when you look at the parameters and you look at the intent of a complete street in the specific plan, it's to help manage the circulation of vehicles, of bicycles, of pedestrians and although the concepts of the complete street were really dictated in the specific plan more for public roadways and public streets, we have kind of adopted them within our project, which is a series of basically private roadways, but we have duplicated the concept, so what you see in red here represents what we call our complete streets or our major roadways. We kind of call them like little mini main streets and so we have one that runs north-south and we have one that runs east-west and, then, we have the smaller connectors that provide access from those out to Franklin and Ten Mile. Each of those roadways is consistent with the design guidelines in the specific plan and that they provide for two way traffic. They provide for designated and separated bike lanes. They provide for parallel parking, as opposed to perpendicular parking. They provide for street trees along both sides of those roadways. So, what we are trying to emulate is the concept for a standard that was developed for public streets onto our private roadway system in order to create the effect that the specific plan envisions within our development itself. The other -- one of the other elements that's important in this specific plan is pedestrian connectivity and it might be a little hard to see from this, but, basically, all of the yellow lines on there represent pedestrian circulation in our project. So, the goal here is to, obviously, encourage people to move from the residential side to the recreational area, which is in the middle of the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F28 Page 25 of 42 project or to the commercial side. So, there is kind of a spider web network of pedestrian activity that will occur within the site to help promote connectivity from the commercial elements to the residential elements. I want to walk you just quickly through, because I know we don't have unlimited time here, some of the residential elements of the project, since we are able to fairly clearly define them at this point. The area highlighted here is our high density housing portion, three, four story buildings. These are the design images of the proposed architecture of those. You can see there is a variation in architectural elements and vocabulary, a term that we use. Varying materials. Massing and articulation to try to break down these fairly large buildings into something that's architecturally interesting. The second portion that's highlighted in this side is part of our -- what we call flats. These are three story residential buildings that are internally loaded so it's kind of like going into in a hotel or something like that where you access your apartment from a corridor inside. These have parking at the ground level, we call tuck under parking, and they face the street. So, this is a good depiction where you can see we have three buildings, which we designate A to the north and two to the south and one of our little mini main streets that passes in between those. So, this is a blow up just to give you an idea of how the idea of this complete street works. You can see that we have vehicular traffic. Just above that we have bike lanes. We have parallel parking. We have street trees and wide sidewalks. We, then, have landscape buffers and we have residential units that interface closely with the street. Each unit, although it is internal loaded, also has secondary access from the street through a small patio or a porch. So, these have connectivity directly from the public space, as well as internally. And, then, all of the parking is accessed from the rear of the building, which is also the parking area for the commercial components of the project. So, these are some architectural elevations of the three story flat buildings. Again, a lot of variation in design elements and materials, colors, and textures. This is the backside. Shows some of the parking garages. And, then, across the street is, basically, the same concept, just a slightly different shaped building. A linear, as opposed to an L-shaped. Same architectural style used on the flats buildings. Some of the outdoor public spaces. The last residential element that I will show you tonight are our townhomes. These are three story attached units that are three bedrooms with a garage. Again, the same concept along the street frontage. Their access is from the front or from the garage and this is the proposed architectural design. Backside of the townhomes. And, then, the last element I will share tonight is our recreation center. Our clubhouse that's kind of the hub for all of the residents here on the project. This building has a lot of the conventional amenities that you would see in a clubhouse gymnasium. A lot of interior meeting spaces, lounge areas, fitness center, a childcare center, a cafe. But in addition we also have on the second level an extensive work center, a co-working area where people who are now working from home don't necessarily have to spend all their working time doing it from their living room or their bedroom. We have private workspaces and group spaces on the second level. Probably about 5,000 square feet of that available for the residents of the community to use. We, of course, have an outdoor pool area, fire pits, pergolas, outdoor lounge seating, a children's pool separated from an adult's pool and that will wrap up my portion. I'm going to turn it over to Hethe Clark, who will speak for a little -- a little bit about the conditions of approval. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F29 Page 26 of 42 Seal: Okay. Hethe, you have about a minute. Clark: So I better go fast. Seal: Name and address real quick and use your best warranty talk. Clark: I will do my best. Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street in Boise, representing the applicant. Just briefly, you know, this property is squarely within the city's future plans for development. We are proposing high density mixed use at two principal arterials. It's the perfect location and you can see that Lane and the rest of the group has done a lot of work to make sure that this is appropriate for the city. It's putting high density housing, office, commercial right where we want it. This is the part where I usually stand up here and I show you guys a slide with my red lines of the conditions of approval and all the things that I want to have changed and tonight I don't have that slide, because we are in perfect agreement with the staff report. We are not asking for any changes there. The only point that I would raise that I think is probably going to come up tonight is this question of Cobalt and I would just make three points on that. First, the layout of Cobalt is consistent with the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan. In fact, it's consistent with the development agreement on the property to the south of our-- of our property. It's also consistent with ACHD's master street map. ACHD reviewed that layout and you will see in their action that they approved it. But beyond that it's fair. And Lane really hit that for you. The portion that is going to be built on our part of the property is going to require much more cost and expense. So, we are not just looking at this from, hey, the die is cast, we are looking at it from a -- from a fairness perspective and that's the reason that it was proposed the way it was. So, with that we would be happy to answer any questions. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions for applicant or staff? Commissioner Yearsley, go ahead. Yearsley: Mr. Chair. On the townhome facilities, were those with -- is that just -- you know, are they apartments on multiple floors or is the townhome encompassing all three floors? Borges: The townhome encompasses all three floors. On the ground level is the parking garage -- the garage and a office or bedroom. The second level is the living area, the kitchen, and the dining area and, then, the top level is two additional bedrooms. Yearsley: Okay. But the other--the other facilities were one room per floor type situation; is that correct? Borges: Yes. The other buildings are -- the flats as we call them is -- they are three stories, there is multiple units, but they are on a single level within that floor. They don't extend up or down from -- from that level that they are on. Yearsley: And, then, the -- the large multi -- like the four -- or the four story apartments -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F30 Page 27 of 42 Borges: Yes. Yearsley: -- they actually also will share that one common -- what do you call it? The -- geez, I lost it. The clubhouse. Borges: Yeah. Yes. All the units will share that. That's an approximately 19,000 square foot facility. So, it's fairly substantial facility in order to support the needs of all the residents and the project. Yearsley: Yeah. It seems pretty large. But given the number of homes it will fill up fast I would imagine. Thank you. Seal: Quick question for you. Is there any access to the roof or is there plans to put any access to the roof-- roof gardens, roof-- Borges: At this point that's something we have not discussed, no. Seal: Okay. Lorcher: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead. Lorcher: In regard to Cobalt, looking at a map and knowing that Cobalt also extends to the east, I don't know if the applicant can address this, but is --there is already a streetlight at Vanguard, but it would probably be too close to put a light so that you can continue across. Does it meet together or is it more like this where it's kind of staggered? Clark: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Lorcher, I think that this map might illustrate your question. You know, at Cobalt we have the -- we have the -- obviously, the obligation to make those match up and so we expect that in the future that there may be some access control there that it would be right-in, right-out, left-in, but it does -- our -- our alignment matches up with Cobalt across the street at Ten Mile. Is that what your question was pointed to? Lorcher: Thank you. Seal: More questions? Okay. Thank you very much. At this time we will take public testimony. Madam Clerk? Weatherly: Mr. Chair, first we have online Cody Black. Seal: And, Cody, if you want to go ahead and unmute yourself, state your name and address for the record. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F31 Page 28 of 42 Black: My name is Cody Black. My address is 3432 West Bay Oak Street. And let me get my screen on here. Sorry. Can you guys see my screen? Seal: I cannot. Black: I think I'm getting closer. Seal: We can see you now. Black: Okay. I'm having a hard time sharing my screen here. Weatherly: Cody, we can help you on this end. Give us just a minute. Black: Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry, I haven't done this before. I thought it would just start once I went -- sorry, I don't know why I can't get this to go over. Seal: That's okay. I think we are going to try and load it up on this end. Weatherly: Cody, we had three slides from you; is that correct? Black: Yeah. That will do just fine. I think the Ten Mile interchange site plan is fine, too. I had a couple other, but I think that will be fine to illustrate our concerns. So, I represent the southern property and our main concern is Cobalt. We are worried about -- I guess can you guys see the Ten Mile Interchange Plan or should I wait? Seal: I would wait just a minute. Black: Okay. Oh. Okay. Great. Seal: There we go. Black: Okay. Awesome. Thank you. Sorry. So, I think this probably looks familiar to everybody. So, these purple lines here are the collector roads that are -- that were stopped for the Ten Mile Interchange Plan and I work for the people who own this property right below. The thin grey lines are the parcel boundaries. So, we -- we have got concerns, I guess, with how much burden our property has as far as building the infrastructure for this Ten Mile Interchange Area. Cobalt, the way it's drawn with the Ten Mile plan, was originally designed to go through this northern parcel and like the applicant mentioned, the subdivision to the west of their development has made it so that Cobalt can't carry through. We understand that you can't have a road going straight into a parking lot. With that in mind, though, I think we would see it being more fair if there was some sort of accommodation for this road at least carrying further west on their property before it comes down and accommodating the burden that we already have with the other road systems that we are required to put in. If you go down to number two, please. Maybe I can do it. Slide two. Oh, thank you. So, here is kind of a map of all the different properties that are around here in the northern tenant, Meridian, and, then, all this white Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F32 Page 29 of 42 is ours. We kind of -- I whited out some of the stuff we have, because it's conceptual. But these orange roads are all the collectors that are starting to be designed and going through a review and this big red one here is Vanguard, which connects to Ten Mile. So, we already have a lot of east-west connections here through our property and with Cobalt being mostly on our property we are just worried about the increased burden and also with it not being really in line with the Comprehensive Plan. We -- we would like it to be considered for denial and rejected until we could have it more accommodating for both parties. I also wanted to comment on the different maps that I have seen during this application process. I think there was two different maps. One map showed Cobalt struggling and last we spoke with ACHD regarding the matter that's the map that they see -- they had seen. They -- they hadn't seen the one with Cobalt just stubbing right it into our property and so I don't know for sure if they have reviewed the new map with Cobalt being solely on ours once it comes down from Ten Mile and that's -- I mean that's our main thing, I think following more of what the City of Meridian has as far as the Comprehensive Plan also benefits us, because Cobalt right now, the way it's designed, we only get the benefit of one side of the road as far as our development and it being pushed all the way down on our property line that's kind of -- what's happened here on Snow Canyon with Corey Barton in that roundabout that was supposed to be more north, everything's just slowly being pushed onto our property from each area and it's creating an increased burden for us. That's all. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Does anybody have any questions for Mr. Black? Cassinelli: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Cassinelli, go ahead. Cassinelli: Yeah. Do you know why that roundabout was pushed so far south? Black: Are you asking me? Cassinelli: Yeah. Yeah. Or whoever has -- I guess whoever -- Brian, maybe you -- you know more, but -- on this, but if staff -- whoever may have an answer. Black: From what I understand, if I can answer, Corey Barton had submitted for approval for that neighborhood and, then, the City of Meridian came up with the Comprehensive Plan and so there is kind of a timing issue I think with -- he got approved for it and, then, the City of Meridian designed their Comprehensive Plan and didn't include that in, at least that's how it's been explained to me. Allen: Mr. Chair? Seal: Sonya, go ahead. Allen: If I may. So, to back up a little bit, the -- the collector streets shown on the master street map are conceptual, they are not a specific location, so there is one shown in this Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F33] Page 30 of 42 conceptual location. If it were to go exactly as shown on the master street map it would stub into the Baraya Subdivision that he mentioned. There is a buildable lot that it would run directly into. So, the alignment of Cobalt needs to shift to the south. The question is is where. So, again, the -- the concept plan that was approved with the Janicek property, which is the property to the south that Cody's representing, did include a map that showed a conceptual location -- actually on the adjacent property, but there was a letter associated with that approval that was from our deputy planning director at the time that said that the location of this east-west collector street would be determined at the time a development application was submitted. So, that's where we are at tonight. It is under the Commission's purview whether-- where that lies. The other side of it is --the eastern side of this street is entirely located on this property. So, it makes some sense, you know, for the -- the property -- or the western portion of it to be on the adjacent property, but it could also be located on the -- on the property line, so -- thank you. Seal: Mr. Black, the Cobalt Drive is -- is that a road that your -- your -- the people that you represent, is that something that they are going to use for access to their business? Black: It wasn't in the plan to, no. We weren't developing or designing our site plan based on Cobalt coming through our property at all. Seal: Right. But knowing that it's going to be there will it be used? Black: No. It still won't be. It doesn't really work -- fit with how we have designed and if we were further along I would have shown more of our site plan, but it's too preliminary I think to share. But it doesn't serve very much purpose or any purpose for us at all. It actually causes a little bit of issue I think with what our planners have told us for traffic and what we can do with the frontage along Ten Mile here. We are worried about who is going to be interested in it -- in putting stuff right on the front with a collector road so close to all that, especially with Vanguard being just --just south of it. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Is there anymore questions? All right. Thank you very much. Weatherly: Mr. Chair, next in house we have Larry. No? Okay. Seal: All right. If there is anybody else out there that would like to come up, please, raise your hand on Zoom or raise your hand in chambers. Okay. If the applicant would like to come back up and have closing remarks. Clark: Members of the Commission, Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street. So, it sounds like we are down to the one issue and, again, I would just reiterate that this location -- and as Sonya mentioned is in conformance with all of the planning, including all the maps that show Cobalt extending through, including on the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan. That is part of the planning for this area roadway network is for Cobalt to continue on through there. ACHD has reviewed and approved this map. The -- if you look at the ACHD action it specifically states that Cobalt would stub to the property to the south, not that it would straddle the line. So, ACHD is very clear on what the proposal is and has Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F34 Page 31 of 42 approved it and, again, I would just emphasize the fairness question. This -- the remaining portion of Cobalt is flat ground, straight up road development, whereas the portion that we are going to be developing, that eastern more than a third, is going to require a box culvert, grading, fill, raising the elevation, all of that. So, we think what we have proposed is fair and so as we move forward we would ask for your recommendation of approval, including on the request to allow the Kennedy Lateral to remain open in -- in locations. That's something that Council has to approve, but I think that would be part of the recommendation tonight and, then, if there is a question about this -- the location of Cobalt, I think I would just ask the Commission to include that in the recommendation, but we think that what we have proposed is -- is something that's fair. With that I'm happy to answer any follow-up. Seal: I will -- yeah, I will start with a question, just -- I mean if Planning and Zoning or Council would recommend more of a 50/50, is that something that you guys are prepared to accommodate? Clark: Commissioner Seal, you know, we are, obviously, happy to continue the conversation. If there is, you know, a compelling reason to adjust that, you know, we are happy to consider that. As we said, we think that this is -- is a -- is a fair accommodation, but if the Planning and Zoning Commission disagrees, you know, we would ask you to include that in the recommendation and we will keep working on it between now and -- and the Commission -- or the City Council meeting. Seal: Any questions? Cassinelli: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Cassinelli, go ahead.. Cassinelli: Yeah. This is -- I don't know if Hethe can answer this or the applicant. I wanted to talk a little bit -- get a little bit more idea -- a better idea, I guess, of some of the commercial that's going in. We talked mainly about the residential portion and, then, Cobalt, but I would like to get -- he did mention there is talks with the grocery store and a drugstore, but I would like to get a little bit more idea of what the overall plan is, what -- you know, maybe some of the descriptions of the buildings, elevation -- heights of some of the buildings and how they are going to front Franklin and Ten Mile and that sort of thing. Borges: Well, we have some information available, obviously, until we actually secure particular tenants, especially major anchors for some of the buildings. We don't have specific buildings already designed. The office buildings that are proposed currently located along Franklin are two story buildings. The retail buildings -- the smaller retail buildings that are along both Franklin and Ten Mile are single story buildings. The larger box buildings we expect from a massing perspective to be somewhere between one and two stories in appearance, but we have not yet developed specific elevations, although the architecture of the commercial buildings will clearly be reflective of the architecture Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F35] Page 32 of 42 that you see in the residential buildings. So, same times -- so, the same type of detailing, same types of scale, same type of massing. We want everything to be compatible architecturally throughout the entire project. Cassinelli: If I may ask another question, Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Are there any other -- you have got the clubhouse for the residential, but what other kind of open space areas do you have? I don't -- can you touch some of that? And even within some of the commercial. Borges: Yeah. Between some of the commercial buildings we have patios for either -- depending upon the ultimate use of the building, whether it's office or whether it's retail or commercial, for outdoor dining, we have widened -- like, for example, at our mixed use buildings where we have retail or service commercial on the first floor, we have like 18 to 20 foot sidewalks there. So, each of those buildings has the ability to have outdoor dining patios and still provide adequate circulation along the roadways. All of the residential buildings have common areas that are scattered throughout the project. The high density buildings usually have small patios and barbecue areas usually at each end of the building. So, throughout the project there are small areas that are interspersed. We do meet the requirements for the open space in terms of the large 50 by 100 square foot recreational spaces and those are all located over in the vicinity of the clubhouse and community center. But, otherwise, spaces are scattered throughout the project and they will, obviously, be developed in more detail as specific tenants and building designs get prepared as part of our design review applications moving forward. Cassinelli: Thank you. Lorcher: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead. Lorcher: Is it relevant that we know what's happening on the south and why Mr. Black is objecting to the road? I mean he said it doesn't fit into the plan of what he was doing, but is the burden a financial burden or a physical burden? Is it because they feel -- Mr. Black feels that they have to be responsible for the road, as opposed to The 10? 1 guess I'm unclear of what the objection is to have access between these parcels compared to the Comprehensive Plan when The Ten Mile Interchange you are going to have mixed use development anyway; right? Seal: Right. But I think the -- the financial burden of building that road and should it be completely on the southern property falls -- that portion of the road falls upon the -- the owner of that property when it -- when it becomes developed I guess. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F36] Page 33 of 42 Clark: Mr. Chair -- and maybe something to point to that and -- and circling back to your comment about 50/50, 1 think the way my -- I think the way I would prefer to have responded to that is the 50/50 really should be looked at in terms of overall costs, not linear feet, and we think that we have proposed something that is very close to 50/50 in terms of the overall cost. So, if that helps in terms of kind of evaluating and weighing those burdens. Again, we have the box culvert, we have the grade that needs to be increased, we have all the -- all the heavy lifting on the 37 percent that's on our side. Lorcher: But your southern neighbor disagrees; is that right? Clark: It sounds like he does. Yes. Seal: All right. Thank you. Yearsley: Mr. Chair, I have a question for Sonya. So, they are just asking for annexation and zoning. They still have to come back for a preliminary plat approval for what they are ultimately wanting to do; is that correct? Allen: Chairman, Commissioner-- Commissioner Yearsley, that is correct. They have to come back with a subdivision application. Yearsley: Okay. So, we get a chance to review what they are proposing. At this point what they are proposing is just conceptual. Allen: Yes, it is. Lorcher: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead. Lorcher: To -- to add on to Commissioner Yearsley, what we are voting on tonight is annexation, not really conceptual design; is that right? Based on your comment? Seal: Annexation and zoning. Lorcher: Okay. Allen: But, Chairman and Commissioners, the -- the concept plan is associated with that annexation and it will be included in a development agreement. And since this is a topic of discussion and an issue, I would recommend that you nail down where that road is going to go. Cassinelli: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Cassinelli, go ahead. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F37 Page 34 of 42 Cassinelli: Maybe before we close the -- the public hearing -- Sonya, what -- historically speaking when a -- when a road -- when this is an issue -- and I don't know if you -- if there is something you can pull up top of mind, but how is something like this typically dealt with in the -- in the city where -- you know, where a road is -- I mean is it usually split 50/50? Is it -- you know, in terms of cost, in terms of where the road lies? Because, you know, I mean half it on -- on one? I mean ideally if they can run it right down the middle of the property line, but that's -- that's -- we don't live in that world on this. What -- you know, historically what's your experience with -- with situations like this? Allen: Chairman, Commissioner Cassinelli, typically-- it depends on the location and the situation and whether the road is needed for access to the property. Typically it is -- if it's needed for access it's typically put on the property line and the first one in does half plus 12 on the street. Cassinelli: When you say half-- half plus 12 -- Allen: Half of the street plus another additional 12 feet. Cassinelli: Okay. Seal: More questions? Yearsley: I just -- Sonya, will you bring up that slide that they -- Mr. Black brought up that showed his development as well -- kind of showed the overall roadway? Allen: Yes. When I can find it. Just a moment. Yearsley: If you -- if you look at this -- this drawing here, he's showing that road being half on their property and half on his, but you end up having two separate jogs in the roadway. I have to -- you know, the -- the -- the applicant is asking for -- you know, that they have to put in a box culvert and thinking that that's fair for their half of the road. I'm not quite sure. Box culverts aren't that expensive, in particular with -- you know, building a quarter mile of road. I don't know what the exact breakdown would be on the two. My looking at it is I think as a roadway having one swoop come in and, then, having a straight shot and not having a second jog for me personally looks a little bit better and having it all on the property to the south, so -- Allen: Mr. Chair, if I may. The applicant just pointed out a section in the ACHD report that said that they were in agreement with the proposed alignment of Cobalt, if that makes a difference to you. That is in the public record and the ACHD report. Seal: Was that referring -- and I will chime in here. Is that -- which -- which -- which image are they -- which image are they using when they do that? Because one of their images shows that completely to the south and one of them shows it dissected and right down the middle, so -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F38 Page 35 of 42 Allen: That's a good point. I assume that they were going off of the concept plan submitted by the applicant. I'm not sure the reason for the discrepancy in the plan that they submitted back with the access. I can't explain that. Seal: Okay. Because that has me somewhat confused, to be perfectly honest. Allen: The recommendation, though, is -- should be based on this -- the plan that was submitted by the applicant. Seal: Okay. Hethe, go ahead. Clark: Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I will just point to page ten of the ACHD action. You know, it says that the applicant is proposed to extend Cobalt Drive from the existing approach on Ten Mile Road that aligns with Cobalt Drive on the east side of Ten Mile Road into the site to stub to the site south property line and, then, ACHD approved that proposal. So, ACHD is looking at the correct map and approved it with a stub to the south property line not straddling, not sharing. Seal: Okay. So, I will play Devil's advocate a little bit here. So, they -- basically they want one -- one side to connect to the other side and where the jog goes in is completely up in the air. Clark: Commissioner Seal, they have reviewed the layout that we have proposed and indicated that that is -- complies with the master street map and the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan. So, they reviewed our specific layout and approved it. They didn't -- there were no hypotheticals about where it could go left or right. They reviewed our -- our proposal and approved it. Lorcher: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead. Lorcher: I'm curious to know if the property to the south had submitted their proposal would ACHD approve it as well, because they didn't see any -- you know, point, counterpoint of where it should be. Do you know what I mean? Like they -- they saw yours, which was -- they are like, okay, this looks great, but did they know of any object -- they probably didn't know any of the objections of the property to the south of the time when they said this looks fine; correct? Clark: Commissioner Seal, Commissioner Lorcher, I don't know what -- whether they looked at anything on the south, but, to be clear, the -- the way that this has essentially always worked is that ACHD only has an application that's in front of them and they rule only on that application that's in front of them. This application is there first. As you heard from the neighbor to the south, they don't have a design. Lorcher: Okay. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F39 Page 36 of 42 Clark: So, that's very much like the property to the west of ours having the parking lot there that blocks Cobalt going there, that--you know, we have to react to their site design. You know, we are -- we have proposed a design that is consistent with all of the mapping and, as I said, proposes an equitable split of the costs and so they reacted to that, they approved it, they said it's consistent with the master street map and the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan, which is a big mouthful and we got to come up with a better acronym. Lorcher: Thank you. Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead. Wheeler: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Sonya, I have a question. I think in -- when you were giving the staff report you mentioned that the road Cobalt Drive has to move south in order for an alignment with the development over to the west. Did I hear that right? Allen: Chairman, Commissioner Wheeler, at the southwest corner of this property, if the road was -- if Cobalt was to be entirely on this property it would stub into Baraya Subdivision into a buildable lot at the west boundary, so that would not work. At some point it has to go down -- Wheeler: Okay. And -- Allen: -- south. Wheeler: -- and how far down are we going to -- to get to -- Commissioner Yearsley's point, is it going to have to make two in order to align with -- with it? Allen: I'm not an engineer, I don't know. Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: If you look at the plan on the deal it shows that this plan showed it as half on the line, so you would end up having two jogs. If you put it all on his south property it wouldn't have a separate jog is what I was referring to. Wheeler: Thank you, Commissioner Yearsley, that's what I was seeing, too, is that this looks like that -- what we are seeing here shows that it's shared equally between the two parcels, is that how I'm seeing that one? Yearsley: Yeah. And this is Cody Black's -- Wheeler: Drawing? Yearsley: -- drawing that he provided. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F40 Page 37 of 42 Allen: The problem with -- I can't tell from this drawing, but it appears that it would stub into that residential property to me -- Wheeler: Okay. Thank you, Sonya. Allen: -- and not work. Seal: Any further questions? All right. With that can we get a motion to close the public hearing for Item No. H-2021-0025, The 10 at Meridian? Wheeler: So moved. Cassinelli: Second. Seal: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on Item No. H-2021- 0025 for The 10 at Meridian. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Seal: Would anybody like to -- I guess I haven't said too much, so I will lead off a little bit here. So, you know, it's the great debate. I -- I understand how it seems equitable when you have the property that has more cost to it. That said, the neighbor to the south didn't pick your lot, you did, and that's basically where you are at. That said, I find it hard to believe that they are going to build something in there that never uses Cobalt Road. So, I think, you know, them having to provide for the build out of that road is -- is more than fair. To me the only thing -- as far as the rest of it, I really like it. I like the way that it's laid out. I like the way that they have provided for foot traffic. There is -- there is a lot -- in my mind, especially on the corner that it's on, they have proposed extremely high capacity residential in there and we have nobody here to dispute that, which is probably the first time ever I have heard of that in Meridian, to be perfectly honest. So, there is a lot of good things that are going on in here. The only thing that really is -- you know, that we are really discussing here is that Cobalt Drive. So, you know, obviously, I'm not going to make a motion tonight. I think if we do move this along to City Council that we should have something in there that provides, you know, some thought as to what is truly equitable for that portion of the drive, whether it needs to be 50/50 -- I mean in looking at it I think that the road could slide a little bit further. You might have to give up a little bit of parking in order to move the buildings around a little bit to accommodate that. You know, obviously, I'm -- I'm talking, you know, as somebody that doesn't have to spend any money to make it show like that on a map, but at the same time, you know, we are still in kind of the conceptual planning portion of it, so -- and with that I will let the rest of Planning and Zoning Council to -- or Commission discuss what they would like to see in it. Wheeler: Mr. Chair? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F41 Page 38 of 42 Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead. Wheeler: For me the -- I like the layout, too. I think it's really well thought out. You have transitional zones, good uses, on the transitions there throughout. I like the way that -- I do like the lateral staying exposed there, it makes it a little more of a green area. Also you got a pathway that's going around there. That's good. Good bike lane usage. Parallel parking. Just a lot of space in between. My -- my only thought is when it comes down to the Cobalt Drive, I'm more concerned with it lining up with the adjacent property and stubby in without having a couple little moves in there and I know that there is an expense definitely to get over that lateral, but to what the --what chairman said here, you know, that's that lot and that's the issue that comes with it is just that expense to get over that lateral. So, yeah, I just -- I see that as a good -- a good use of everything. I'm one that likes to see roundabouts in some of these internal things, but -- but that's me on that. Seal: Anybody else want to jump in here? Cassinelli: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Cassinelli, go ahead. Cassinelli: Yeah. I -- on Cobalt -- well, let's go back to the -- everything else I like about it. So, I'm in favor of the project. What -- if -- we didn't have any other people speaking out against this, other than the property owner to the south and what -- what -- you know, what -- what scares me about -- about this whole thing is Franklin and Ten Mile in that area is already a disaster. We can -- I will just thank ACHD for the lack of vision on -- on those roads and making them like everything else when the density at this corner was coming the way it was coming. So, it's -- but it is what it is. Overall the project is -- looks like a neat project. My added -- my thoughts on Cobalt Drive -- first of all, I like the other -- I like having less straightaway and another jog. I'm not a -- I'm not an engineer in that -- in that standpoint, but to me it seems like it would work for some traffic calming and, you know, the longer straighter road you get the faster people tend to drive on it. So, I like that -- the aspect if that -- you know, if that's workable to have jogs, which may help to solve some of this. The other comment I have, Mr. Chair, kind of-- it goes a little bit of what you have. I think if the -- I think if -- if the attorney representing the applicant here -- I think if the shoe were on the other foot they would have a -- a real different view of -- of what's equitable. I like -- and would be in favor of what Sonya pointed out as far as, you know, the first one is usually half plus 12 and I don't know, you know, if we can take that all the way to the edge of their western boundary or not, but they are the first ones in and -- and I think the road is -- to that point is -- is their responsibility at this point. So, I would be in favor of -- of going half plus 12 on it. I -- you know, I would -- again, I would like to see anotherjog, but if it's straight in my mind I think, you know, I would want to see us condition for -- for that half plus 12 to the western boundary. Seal: Okay. Thanks, Bill. I had a quick question just on the open waterway segment of this. Just for comparison, how -- how much of the waterways are left open on the east property there of Ten Mile? I know there is actually a considerable amount over there, Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F42 Page 39 of 42 but does it compare to this? And are we looking at -- I mean conceptually we are looking at the same kind of layout. Allen: Chairman, Commissioners, as far as I know Brighton is the developer of the property east of Ten Mile and as far as I know they are planning to pipe it all. Seal: Oh. I thought they were keeping some of that open. Allen: I could be mistaken, but I don't believe so. Seal: Okay. Yearsley: I think -- I think the lateral to the -- to the north of this one is the one they were leaving open as part of their-- there is -- because there is another lateral to the northeast of this one that they left open as part of their initial design, I believe. Lorcher: So far it looks open. Yearsley: Yeah. Lorcher: There is a few bridges over some of those laterals. Yearsley: Yeah. Allen: It is open along -- near the intersection I know. Seal: Okay. Just trying to get a sense of -- I mean because there is a considerable amount of this that seems to be left open and so I just wanted to make sure that that's going to fit in -- blend in with what -- what else we have going on around there. I mean not that you want everything to look the same, but some of the look and feel of it is good, especially if it transfers -- you know, I kind of come back to that little path that we have through -- from Ten Mile to Linder, kind of wish all the paths would look like that, and it's an open waterway. It's beautiful, so --just want to make sure that we have got something like that going on in here. Wheeler: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead. Wheeler: Is there going to be a requirement for fencing along that lateral? I'm being assumptive here, Sonya, or -- do you know? Allen: Yes. Chairman, Commissioner Wheeler, there will be requirement for fencing in accord with UDC standards. Wheeler: Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F43 Page 40 of 42 Yearsley: Mr. Chairman? Seal: Commissioner Yearsley, go ahead. Yearsley: You know, I like the overall look and the layout. My -- my personal feeling is I think it's a little heavy on the -- the multi-family housing and not enough retail. I would like to see a little bit more retail. Maybe those apartments to the north to be retail situation, but -- but the overall look I think is looking fine. I actually like the way that Cobalt Drive looks now. I understand Commissioner Cassinelli's thought about having a second jog for traffic calming, but -- you know, which can be done, so -- I don't know. I don't -- I don't know if I have preference one way or the other. Seal: Okay. At some point in time we have got to make a motion on this. So, we kind -- well, do we have some consensus on the Cobalt Drive portion of this? I mean we -- essentially, we need to make a recommendation to City Council as to what our thoughts are on it. So, I'm -- I'm a little bit torn on it. I mean I -- I like the way it flows, the way that it looks right there on the picture. That said I understand, you know, what seems equitable to the property owner to the south compared to the property owner or the applicant to the north -- so, I'm not quite sure where to land on that. But, luckily, I don't have to make the motion, so -- Cassinelli: Mr. -- Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Cassinelli, go ahead. Cassinelli: Commissioner Yearsley brought up a great point. I like -- I like what he said about a little bit heavy on -- on the multi-family and I don't know --just a thought for -- for him. If they knocked down maybe two of the three buildings to three story instead of four story, but on the -- on the -- on Cobalt can we -- I know sometimes there is -- there is not a lot of teeth to this, but is there a way that we can condition it to where it -- that they can only move forward on this when those two landowners are in agreement? And maybe either legal or staff can answer that. Seal: Go -- go right ahead. Baird: A theme of the presentation tonight is you -- you have to act on what's in front of you. You have this application. You don't have the application on the property to the south. You can't -- you can't force them to agree. You have to tell this applicant what you would like to see in your condition of approval. Seal: Yeah. I tend to agree with that. That's -- I mean, essentially, we got to let Council know what we want to see with this. So, do we want to leave it as is in the application? Do we want them to, you know, extend that jog out, so it's literally, you know, half plus 12 or half or do we want to -- you know, do something completely different, so -- I mean those are, essentially, the three things that we can recommend up to City Council that I can see in front of us, so -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F44] Page 41 of 42 Lorcher: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: Could we have something with the modification to say further review of Cobalt Drive to have an equitable space and cost between applicant and southern neighbor? Because that just -- Seal: Yes. But I think the dispute is -- for right now is what is equitable between the two neighbors. So, that's what we have to figure out. What do you think is equitable and from that -- and put that in the form of a motion and that's -- that's the task at hand. Yearsley: Yeah. And -- and that's what -- like I said, that -- you know, I'm willing to make a motion, but I will make the motion that we leave it as is. So, the other motion would be to split Cobalt Drive -- you know, the centerline of the road be on the property line until it hits the end of their property and, then, jugs onto the other property would be the other motion, so -- I think those are kind of the two motions that we have in front of us. Wheeler: Mr. Chair, if I -- if I'm tracking correctly, it's -- also there is two conditions that we want to put on. One was a required DA, if I remember correctly, and then -- Yearsley: That's already -- Seal: That's already -- Wheeler: That's already there. And, then, the one that the applicant was requesting was -- was stating that Kennedy Lateral to remain open. I think that was the other one. Seal: Right. And that's for Council to decide, but if you have any recommendations on that that does need to go into the motion as well. I personally -- on the lateral being open I'm -- especially if it's fenced and made into, you know, something usable, walkable, I -- I actually prefer that personally, so -- Wheeler: I agree. Seal: Nobody from the irrigation district is here to throw things at me, but that's just my preference. Yearsley: So, Mr. Chair, I'm going to throw this out here. Seal: Feel free. Yearsley: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of File No. H-2021-0026 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 20th, 2021, with no modifications. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 20,2021 F45] Page 42 of 42 Seal: Do I have a second? Wheeler: I will second. Seal: It has been moved and seconded to approve Item No. H-2021-0025, The 10 at Meridian. Yearsley: We may want to do roll call. Seal: Yeah. With no modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Cassinelli: Nay. Seal: So, for the record that was Commissioner Cassinelli as the nay. Cassinelli: That is correct. Seal: All right. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE NAY. TWO ABSENT. Seal: Thank you very much. Okay. Can I get one more motion? Yearsley: Mr. Chair, I move we adjourn. Wheeler: Second. Cassinelli: I will second that. Seal: All right. It has been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? All right. Motion carries. Thank you all very much. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:08 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED 6 I 3 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 May 6, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. May 6,2021 F98 Page 95 of 95 MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:16 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED 5 1 20 12021 RHONDA MCCARVEL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK Item 2. 99 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Jump Creek North Four-Plex (H-2021- 0018) by Kent Brown Planning Services, Located at the Northwest Corner of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. Gondola Dr. Item 2. 1 00 CITY OF MERIDIAN E IDIAN�-- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND 1DAH0 DECISION& ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Conditional Use Permit for Jump Creek Fourplex Phase 4, Located on the west side of N.Black Cat Road,midway between W.McMillan Road and W. Chinden Boulevard. in the R-15 Zoning District,by Kent Brown. Case No(s).H-2021-0018 For the Planning& Zoning Commission Hearing Date of: May 6,2021 (Findings on May 20,2021) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 6, 2021,incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 6,2021,incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 6, 2021, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 6,2021,incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the"Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65, Title 67,Idaho Code(I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has,by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian,which was adopted April 19,2011,Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision,which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant,the Planning Department,the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER JUMP CREEK NO 4 CUP CASE NO(S).H-2021-0018 Page 1 Item 2. 1 01 1 7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of May 6,2021, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11- 5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's request for conditional use is hereby approved in accord with the conditions of approval in the staff report for the hearing date of May 6, 2021, attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two(2)Year Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit,when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-513-617.1. During this time,the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting,the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two(2)year period in accord with UDC 11-513-6F.2. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-513-6.F.1,the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one(1)two (2)year period.Additional time extensions up to two (2)years as determined and approved by the Commission may be granted. With all extensions,the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521,any affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the governing board may within twenty-eight(28)days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff report for the hearing date of May 6,2021 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER JUMP CREEK NO 4 CUP CASE NO(S).H-2021-0018 Page 2 Item 2. F102 By action of the Planning&Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 20th day of May, 2021 COMMISSIONER RHONDA MCCARVEL, CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER ANDREW SEAL,VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER LISA HOLLAND VOTED COMMISSIONER STEVEN YEARSLEY VOTED COMMISSIONER WILLIAM CASSINELLI VOTED COMMISSIONER NICK GROVE VOTED COMMISSIONER MARIA LORCHER VOTED Rhonda McCarvel, Chairman 5-20-2021 Attest: Chris Johnson, City Clerk Copy served upon the Applicant,the Planning and Development Services divisions of the Community Development Department,the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By: Dated: 5-20-2021 City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER JUMP CREEK NO 4 CUP CASE NO(S).H-2021-0018 Page 3 'tem2. EXHIBIT A STAFF REPORTC�WE IDIANn-=- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A H O HEARING 5/6/2021 Legend _{ DATE: Fro:ec- !oca=or TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Alan Tiefenbach .R .' 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton,Development ---— Services Manager �.. . 208-887-2211 -- SUBJECT: H-2021-0018 Jump Creek North Fourplex CUP LOCATION: The site is located on the west side of N. Black Cat Road,midway between W. McMillan Road and W. Chinden i ; ;, A Boulevard. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional Use Permit(CUP)to allow 7 fourplexes(28 units) on 2.2 acres in the R-15 zone. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Pa e Acreage 2.2 Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residential Existing Land Use(s) Vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Multifamily Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 7 existing multifamily lots Phasing Plan(#of phases) 1 Number of Residential Units(type 7 fourplex buildings;totaling 28 units of units) Density(gross&net) 12.72 gross density Open Space(acres,total Jump Creek Subdivision approved with 13.54 acres of [%]/buffer/qualified) common open space,which amounts to 15.73%. Amenities 6 amenities approved with the Jump Creek Subdivisions. 3 tot lots,multi-use pathway;connection to pathway systems and 5%additional open space;2 amenities are required for the proposed development. Physical Features(waterways, N/A hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of March 16,2021 —3 Attendees attendees: Pagel Item 2. F104 Description Details Page History(previous approvals) AZ-14-011,PP-14-013,DA Instr. 2014-105206,H-2018- 0113 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) N • Requires ACHD Commission No.Traffic impacts and associated improvements reviewed Action es/no with preliminary and final plat. Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access will occur from W. Joseph Dr.,a local road,which Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) leads to N.Black Cat Rd via W.Malta.Dr. Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross No stub streets proposed. Access Existing Road Network All roads serving this development phase(W.Joseph Dr., W.Malta Dr.)have been installed. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ N.Black Cat including 5'wide detached pathways and 25' Buffers landscape buffer has already been installed. Proposed Road Improvements All road improvements were installed with Jump Creek FP Nos. 1,2 and 3. Distance to nearest City Park(+ 1 mile+/-to Keith Bird Legacy Park size Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 2.8 miles from Station 5 • Fire Response Time Falls within 5-minute response times • Resource Reliability 80%Reliability • Risk Identification Risk Factor 4 because of firefighting in multistory buildings and large amounts of people in one location • Accessibility • Special/resource needs No special needs • Water Supply 2250 gpm estimated,but property less due to sprinkling. • Other Resources None Police Service • Distance to Police Station 7.2 Miles • Police Response Time P 1 <5 minutes • Calls for Service 464 • %of calls for service split by P 1 -%73.7,P2—24.1%,PO—2.2% priority • Specialty/resource needs None listed • Crimes 26 • Crashes 6 West Ada School District • No comments submitted Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services N/A • Sewer Shed N.Black Cat Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See Application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 14.09 • Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan Water • Distance to Water Services 0 Page 2 Item 2. Fo5l Description Details Page • Pressure Zone 1 • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality No concerns • Project Consistent with Water Yes Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns Utilities have already been approved and built. Page 3 Item 2. 106 C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend + Legend + 0 = 4 W LADLE' W LADLF - RA W QS D.4 RA Pr d5 D�m G Sear }ri}j' r rye r ' - �I 4Y I St ED fW-? ` REEK DR {REEK R R"a,S '' ... ZoningMap Planned Development Map Legend ; - Legend IP•ejec� Lcca-iaR ILA DR --_ � F^ale0#Laca-rror% - ft- meaty Um } P�3r•red For-e:s f 1511 kR TFUR R-4 J R- — �f — _ f -I I I III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant/Representative: Kent Brown,Kent Brown Planning Services- 3161 E. Springwood Dr,Meridian,ID 83642 B. Owner: Corey Barton, Open Door Rentals 1977 E. Overland Rd,Meridian,ID 83642 Page 4 Item 2. F107 IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 4/16/2021 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 4/13/2021 Nextdoor posting 4/14/2021 Sign Posting 4/17/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS This proposal is for a conditional use permit to allow 7 fourplexes consisting of a total of 28 dwelling units total on 2.2 acres in the R-15 zone. The subject property was annexed and zoned in 2014 as part of the Jump Creek Subdivision(AZ-14-011,PP-14-013). The approved preliminary plat,final plat (H-2018-0113) and associated development agreement(Instr. 2014-105206) specifically identifies the subject property for a multi-family development. The required infrastructure and landscaping has already been installed; improvements associated with this project would include asphalt driveways, parking lots,and site landscaping. The internal parking lot sidewalks have been installed. The proposal as submitted generally conforms to the site plan, landscape plan and conceptual elevations included with the development agreement except that one of the fourplexes on the northern side of the property is slightly reconfigured. The approved development agreement concept plan reflects two fourplexes on either side of a drive aisle,whereas what was submitted indicates three fourplexes on the west of the drive aisle, and a fourplex on the east side of the aisle. Two of the fourplexes have also been rotated on their axis 90 degrees. A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https:llwww.meridianciu.or /g compplan) The Jump Creek property is designated" Medium Density Residential' (MDR) on the future land use map. The MDR designation allows smaller lots for residential purposes within City limits. Uses may include single-family homes at densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The subject property is one of two multi-family properties that was approved with the preliminary plat(there is another designated multi-family property to the south of which the application for the final plat has been submitted). These two areas conceptually depict nineteen(19)fourplex structures on approximately 4.89 acres. The gross density for the multi-family portion of the development is anticipated at 15.5 dwelling units to the acre which is higher than the MDR designation of the Comprehensive Plan. The overall gross density for this project is 12.72 dwelling units to the acre. However, it was determined with the preliminary plat approval that when combined with the entire development(which includes 318 single family lots)the overall gross density is approximately 4.59 dwelling units to the acre which is consistent with the MDR land use designation. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https:llwww.meridiancity.or /�compplan): • Encourage diverse housing options suitable for various income levels,household sizes, and lifestyle preferences. (2.01.01) This project proposes 7 fourplex units with 28 units total. This increases the diversity in housing and meets the needs,preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents. Page 5 Item 2. Flo] Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs,preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents. (2.01.02D) As mentioned above, allowing 7 fourplexes would contribute to a diversity in housing. • Locate higher density housing near corridors with existing or planned transit,Downtown, and in proximity to employment centers. (2.01.01H) The proposed development will provide housing opportunities in close proximity to an existing Walmart, Costco and an employment area at the southeast corner of Chinden Boulevard and Linder Road. Future employment uses are planned a mile east of the proposed subdivision along the west side off. Ten Mile Road. • Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities. (3.03.03F) City services were required to be extended to the properties upon development in accord with UDC 11- 3A-21. Infrastructure was constructed with phases 1, 2, and 3. No additional infrastructure is required with this proposal. • 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. This proposal was referred to fire and police services as well as WASD. There were no additional comments beyond what were listed with the preliminary plat and final plat. • "Require open space areas within all residential development."(6.01.01A) For multifamily units, UDC 11-4-3-27C requires common open space based on the square footage of the units. In addition, the development agreement approved with the annexation required 15%total open space, and 15.3%was provided with the total development. The landscape plan submitted with this application for this multifamily area is consistent with the conceptual one approved with the annexation and preliminary plat. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The subject property is presently vacant,but the sidewalks serving the fourplexes have been constructed, and the unpaved configuration of the drive aisles and parking lot have already been established with paving to be completed as part of this project. D. Proposed Use Analysis: This proposal is for 7 fourplexes,totaling 28 dwelling units. A fourplex(four units in one building on one lot)is considered multifamily which requires procurement of a conditional use permit in the R-15 zone. E. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): Specific use standards for this multifamily project include a minimum setback of 10 feet, 80 sq. ft. of private, common open space and site amenities per unit, and requirements for a management office, central mailbox and maintenance storage for developments of more than 20 units. The site plan and landscape plan indicate the minimum 10' setback is met along all perimeter property lines. The submitted floorplans indicate patios and decks on the units that are slightly less than the requirement. The applicant will need to submit floor plans at the time of CZC that demonstrate this requirement is met. Page 6 Item 2. Flog] The applicant has noted the central mailbox already exists, although it is not indicated on the plans. The applicant has not provided any information regarding the management office and maintenance storage other than this will be built with the additional 44 units of multifamily that may be part of Jump Creek No. 7 and requires a separate CUP approval. The Planning Commission should determine whether this is acceptable request given Phase 7 has not been approved through conditional use yet,or whether one of the 28 units proposed with this particular phase(Phase 4) should be temporarily reserved for this purpose until Phase 7 is constructed. Requirements for common open space and amenities are discussed below. F. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The fourplexes meet the minimum dimensional requirements for the R-15 zone district. This includes a minimum lot size of 2,000 sq. ft.,minimum setback of 25' from a collector road,rear setback of 12'and side setback of 3' (although the specific use standards for multifamily requires a minimum 10',which the fourplexes also meet.)The existing landscape buffer along N. Black Cat Rd meets the minimum width of 25',and the buildings are approximately 28' in height,well within the maximum building height of 40'. G. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): All access was previously approved with the Jump Creek preliminary plat. Primary access for this project will occur from N. Elmstone Ave. which connects to N. Black Cat Rd via W. Gondola Rd. There is additional access through numerous roads in the Jump Creek Subdivision which eventually terminate at N. Rustic Oak providing access to W. McMillian Rd. H. Parking(UDC 11-3C): UDC 11-3C-A requires 2 parking spaces per 2-3-bedroom units,with at least one in a covered carport or garage. With 28 units of 2-3 bedrooms,this amounts to 56 parking spaces, at least 28 of them covered. The site indicates 65 parking spaces that are 18 feet in length with wheel stops and a one-foot overhang onto a 6-foot sidewalk. The site plan shows 30 of these parking spaces to be covered, and conceptual elevations have been submitted of the carports. However,the conceptual elevations do not indicate architecture and materials other than prefinished metal. At the time of Certificate of Zoning compliance,the applicant shall submit color elevations that reflect that the architecture of the covered carports utilizing similar materials and architecture as that of the fourplexes as well as meet all requirements of the Architectural Standards Manual(ASM). I. Pathways( UDC 11-3A-8): There is an existing 5' wide detached sidewalk along N. Black Cat Rd, at the eastern perimeter of the subject property. As required per UDC 11-3A-19,the development includes a 5' wide pedestrian connection to this sidewalk. J. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): The landscape plan depicts 6' wide sidewalks along both sides of the access road and parking lots. K. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): UDC 11-3B-8 requires a five-foot minimum landscape buffer adjacent to parking, loading, or other paved vehicular use areas,with no grouping of parking spaces to exceed 12 in a row without a parking island. The parking aisles and lot appears to meet all requirements,including Page 7 Item 2. ■ minimum amount of landscape plantings. The foundations of all fourplexes are landscaped with at least 3' of landscaping along their foundations as required by the Specific Use Standards listed in 11-4-3-27. L. Qualified Open Space(UDC 11-4-3-27): The specific use standards for multifamily in UDC 11-4-3-27-C require two hundred fifty(250) square feet of common open space 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. 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(20)feet. The building plans submitted with this application indicate unit sizes of approximately 1,000 sq. ft. per unit. Based on this unit size,this requires 7,000 sq. ft. Staff believes the landscape plan as submitted reflects this project far surpasses the requirements, but staff will require an open space exhibit indicating the exact amount of qualifying common open space with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC). M. Qualified Site Amenities(UDC I1-3G): Two amenities are required with this development. During the approval process for the entire Jump Creek Subdivision(which included both multifamily portions), approved amenities included three tot lots, an integrated pathway system, extension of the Meridian Pathway system and 5%additional open space. All amenities have already been constructed except for one tot lot and several trail connections to be built with Phases 5-7. However, it was not indicated in the associated development agreement whether the residents of the multifamily properties were entitled to use the same amenities as the rest of the Jump Creek subdivision. As a condition of approval, staff recommends that two qualifying amenities be provided on the subject property. N. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, I1-3A-7): The landscape plan indicates there is existing fencing along the northern perimeter that is proposed to be retained.No other fencing is shown with this development. Any fencing should comply with UDC 11-3A-7. O. Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21): All utilities have already been reviewed and approved with the Jump Creek preliminary and final plats. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. See Section VIII.B below for Public Works comments/conditions. P. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): The applicant submitted building elevations as well as building plans. The colored elevations indicate pitched roofs and entry features,horizontal and board&batten siding, and rock accents. Elevations of the multifamily units were included as part of the annexation development agreement, and the elevations submitted with this conditional use generally comply with the approved elevations. Final design is required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. The building elevations submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review applications should be consistent with those standards and the elevations attached as Exhibit F and G below. Page 8 Item 2. F-1111 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. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on May 6, 2021. At the public hearing,the Commission moved to approve the subject conditional use request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing a. In favor: Kent Brown b. In opposition:None C. Commenting: Kent Brown d. Written testimony:None e. Staff presenting application: Alan Tiefenbach f. Other Staff commenting on application: Bill Parsons 2. Key issue(s) testimony: a. Monica Gonsalves and Janice Borchard expressed issues with the safety of children crossing N. Black Cat Rd to get to Pleasant View Elementary School and the additional density. 3. Ke. ids)of discussion by Commission: a. Discussion whether the amenities would be shared b. Proposed timing with management office and maintenance room C. Discussion regarding how the site interfaced with the property at the north d. Future improvements to N. Black Cat Rd. e. Whether a pedestrian timer could be installed. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. The applicant shall convert one of the units into an interim management office and maintenance storage until such time that phase seven is built out and one is permanently installed. Page 9 Item 2. 112 VII. EXHIBITS p A. Final Plat for Phase 4(date: 10/14/2020) " REAL pUnr I UNPLATTED OF BEGINNING --- --�------ __—SM'21'48•E 411.63' RE9YI'+$3Y BLOCK }b 4 faY71'+8'E 157 �1��11 � IIII YAryC RJIRBS OR. I�+ � I rt -- -- �lh� 7 '# i oaer anoa' yr-ay I i}7{+ s^ + }L BLOCK 1.6CAP d�'. ; r 12 11 + JIIYP CREELS 19 1O 1/4 W 9205-9Ti2aR SueaYMON ND. 3 y�f1L--------_ —————— V M 27 y '� 196.Sn' R6.00' 7T.TA' - - - ----- NEB 29}I'w 212.39,- f 5645'Z9'Yf bW, GONDOLA DR. Yi S46'3d4.�7 ` -.uMP CREEK - -- - - f sl7HUN190 r B. Conceptual Site Plan Approved with Development Agreement(date: 11/25/2015) E • k � • +;y. f " � ,i" ' iIhIG#I•«,yArY whF�lh UU AR'►,CAilSiN N t,.,_'.�4 .tii;_,r r Tix.r .. .�'rF.R'i •M1�i,+.wa 4 }:5. ; 2..Lairbukm to or A. A'.11'Lmll CANE WM�Ilkr, +" 7bl�1�11Fgll�o IIF•� �+ �1� tS Page 10 Item 2. ■ C. Site Plan(date: 1/31/2020) I 1 1��.1 - �� '❑AST , B BOG I V f I � n�aE".-1-. I h I I i I I i .0 � � 16l I �� E.1 '❑f� I I - I i I'_ _ I LiZ I I s - I- rIT. I� '1 i - ❑ I ❑ r T. I � �� :i-r. p".-E I p-A IT E 1-•a �.`� J III LOT I: Mr AT n5 6419YI 09, I , Iwxwn� ti ti I I I Page 11 D. Landscape Plan(dutcl/3l/2020) Item 2. 115 E. Floor Plans (date: 12/14/2020) L 1 i 1 17�.-.. _ LL I� lam•' w El La BUILDING TYPE 2-1 BUILDING TYPE 2-1 FIRST FLOOR PLM seams aaxxacn SECOND FLOOR PLLUI ualuaf�emween F. Carport Elevations(date: 12/14/2020) �— --- ---� m -----� --- 12aAY CARPORT PUN 23-BAY CARPORT PLAN -�_ 34-HAT CARPORT PUN r,,.. 3-my CARPORT PUN. . 5:_BAY CARPORT ELEVATION 63_DAYCARPORTELEMIGN 74-BAY CARPORT ELEVATION OWBAY CARPORT ELEVATION V , f v - ----- -------- KEYNOTES i E.M -- - GENERAL NOTES � 3-BAY CARPORT PLAN 10 B-BAY CARPORT PLANTTP.CARPORT END ELEVATION TYPICAL CARPORT SECTION 113-SAYSCAIIPORT E LEVATMN 129-BAY CARPORT t'iEYATEON Page 13 F116] G. Building Elevations d. Page 14 Item 2. F117 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning Division 1. The applicant is to meet all terms of the approved annexation(AZ-14-011),preliminary plat(PP- 12-018, final plat H-2018-0113)and development agreement(Instrument#2014-105206) for this development. 2. The Applicant shall have a maximum of two(2)years to commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval listed above. If the use has not begun within two(2)years of approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to operation or a time extension must be requested in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F. 3. The site plan and landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised to depict a interim management office,maintenance storage area and a directory map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27B.7: appheam shall eenveft one of the units in the seeend phase of the m-Ulti fami4y development etiffently being platted with Jump Greek No. 7 for such use including the assoeiated maifftenanee building in aeeewith UPC 1 l-4-3 2-7L. a. The applicant shall convert one of the units into an interim management office and maintenance storage room until such time that phase seven is built out and one is permanently installed. b. The site plan/landscape plan shall indicate the location of the central mailbox. 4. At the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC),the Developer/Owner shall submit a common open space exhibit that meets the requirements of UDC 11-4-3-27-C. 5. Two on-site amenities shall be provided which meet the requirements of UDC 11-4-3-27-D. 6. The Applicant shall comply with all bulk,use, and development standards of the applicable district listed in UDC Chapter 2 District regulations. 7. At the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC),the Developer/Owner shall submit floorplans which comply with the private open space requirements of 11-4-3-27B. 8. All multi-family developments shall record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including,but not limited to, structures,parking, common areas, and other development features as set forth in UDC 11-4- 3-27F.A recorded copy of said documents shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development. 9. All structures on the site shall be designed to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual.All carports shall complement the design of the fourplexes.A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application(s)is required to be submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior to submittal of building permit applications. B. Public Works C. ACHD Page 15 Item 2. F-1181 https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=225820&dbid=0&repo=M eridianCity D. Meridian Police Department https://weblink.meridiancitE.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=226107&dbid=0&repo=Me ridianCity IX. FINDINGS Conditional Use Permit (UDC 11-513-6E) The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The Commission finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and dimensional and development regulations of the R-15 district. The number and type of buildings and general site configuration was tentatively approved with the Jump Creek Subdivision preliminary plat and annexation. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. The Commission finds that the proposed multi-family development is consistent with the overall density recommendations of the FLUM in the Comprehensive Plan and is allowed as a conditional use in the R-15 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. 3. That the design,construction,operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The Commission finds the proposed design of the development, construction, operation and maintenance should be compatible with the mix of other uses planned for this area and with the intended character of the area and that such uses will not adversely change the character of the area. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The Commission finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report,the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission should weigh any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal,water, and sewer. The Commission finds that essential public services are available to this property and that the use will be adequately served by these facilities. Page 16 Item 3. 119 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Mountain America Credit Union Drive-Through (H-2021-0019) by Mountain America Credit Union, Located on the West Side of N. Ten Mile Road, Approximately 750 Feet South of Chinden Blvd. Item 3. F120] CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW VAND IDIAN -- DECISION& ORDER 1 D A H 0 In the Matter of the Request for Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment within 300-feet of another drive-through establishment for Mountain America Credit Union,located on Lot 13 in the Lost Rapids Subdivision on the west side of N.Ten Mile Road approximately 1/8 mile south of W. Chinden Boulevard in the C-G Zoning District,by Sanders Associates Architects on behalf of Mountain America Credit Union. Case No(s).H-2021-0019 For the Planning&Zoning Commission Hearing Date of. May 6,2021 (Findings on May 20,2021) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 6, 2021, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 6,2021,incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 6, 2021, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 6,2021,incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the"Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code(I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has,by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian,which was adopted April 19,2011,Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision,which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). Mountain America Credit Union CUP,H-2021-0019 Page 1 Item 3. 121 upon the applicant,the Planning Department,the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of May 6,2021,incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11- 5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's request for Conditional Use Permit is hereby approved in accord with the conditions of approval in the staff report for the hearing date of May 6,2021,attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two(2)Year Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit,when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-513-617.1. During this time,the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting,the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two(2)year period in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.2. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-513-6.17.1,the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one(1)two (2)year period.Additional time extensions up to two (2)years as determined and approved by the Commission may be granted. With all extensions,the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521,any affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the governing board may within twenty-eight(28)days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67,Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff report for the hearing date of May 6,2021. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). Mountain America Credit Union CUP,H-2021-0019 Page 2 Item 3. F122] By action of the Planning&Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 20th day of May ,2021. COMMISSIONER RHONDA MCCARVEL, CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER ANDREW SEAL,VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER LISA HOLLAND VOTED COMMISSIONER STEVEN YEARSLEY VOTED COMMISSIONER WILLIAM CASSINELLI VOTED COMMISSIONER NICK GROVE VOTED COMMISSIONER MARIA LORCHER VOTED Rhonda McCarvel, Chairman 5-20-2021 Attest: Chris Johnson, City Clerk Copy served upon the Applicant,the Planning and Development Services divisions of the Community Development Department,the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By: Dated: 5-20-2021 City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). Mountain America Credit Union CUP,H-2021-0019 Page 3 Item 3. 123 EXHIBIT A E STAFF REPORT REPORT a H o COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 5/6/2021 Legend DATE: 0 Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning CommissionTM FROM: Joseph Dodson,Associate Planner - ------ 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2021-0019 &A-2021-0063 o Mountain America Credit Union—CUP WUA &DES � o �LOCATION: W. side of N. Ten Mile Rd.,north of W. �� Lost Rapids Dr. (Lot 13,Block 1,Lost Rapids Subdivision—Parcel L EFIFE #R5330761300), in the NE 1/4 of Section ® ® � 27, Township 4N.,Range 1 W. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional use permit for a drive-through establishment within 300-feet of another drive-through establishment on 1.16 acres of land in the C-G zoning district and concurrent Administrative Design Review. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 1.16-acres Future Land Use Designation Commercial Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped Proposed Land Use(s) Financial Institution with a detached drive-through Current Zoning General Retail and Service Commercial District(C-G) Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of February 18,2021;2 attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) H-2018-0004(DA#2018-079970,Lost Rapids-GFI Meridian Investments II,LLC);FP-2019-0056 Page 1 1 1 11■ ' Al IFO =C 111 � � Ix ■ / a � y ' •■III llmflllll •• CHI�NDEN- CHINDEN - IIIIIIIIII111111 n1■Iinllni QITi► nnm r 1I SUNNI IIIIIII m -_ 11111111111111■ ■ • • I�n11-11111 �111111 1111� 111 IK1 F41111 �ii�■ �^ •�1111 n111111 p•'" �nr=, - - ��■ ��+�1� �`. Zn111111111 IIIIIII � 111/ .e Z . �� 1111 IIIIr_�r1 1 �� ,■ ■ F �x mrll■ulrr WIN oil p NIx1 111 ■� ■N r 1� i a •� ■■ 111 � �-a=�.77I- 111 11..III I7 1111 I I !11 IA..III 11111111 ' 1� CHINDEN I -CH�I�NDEN111 IIIIII nuu11111n1 �n1► 1111111111111 IIIIII 111111111 I �IIIIIIinn111 MR 1 111 IIIIn1111111 ^ �� IIIIIII rr IIIIIII �� IInn11111111�� ' 1111 ^_� .111 IIIII i^^ 1111 IN--_ IIIII IIIIIII IIIIIII 11 n..i (�,..�p� � -1111� LT'. =11 -111■^ � � � 1111�� ^ 111-1111■^ IIIII C � ^��^ IIIII� IIIII� -•V._ ;; i''��^ IIIIIII■1 � � ..i^^....■ �� IIIIIII■DIIIII � � ^i ii i■ii A ' �-^ noon r:.��• � i1111 1111 qll !1• -_:� n 11111111 ql ... .. 11 lI ..r .. ,Z 11 1 11 ��. ■.� ■ 1/11111/1 111 11 ++ ��i r;■. Wl4911111■11 11111� ++ ��IIIII ■p m 1 . �� 1111 IIIIr■p m 1 . �� milli, :■■ 1= .�.111 �- m11lllrllrr■■ 1-�~ .�.111 •i Ir111111Im ■:_.._ WIN■rr1 •i rr1111r111 ■• _ �+-� ��■rr1 IIm11 1 Il 1111 ==• �� IIm11 1111 �� ,r1 mmm ■�1111 ii 1■��1 1 I■m1 1 Ilmmm ■�III t. �� ii 1■�� I I • . � II Item 3. 125 EXHIBIT A C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning Posting Date Newspaper Notification 4/16/2021 Radius notification mailed to 4/13/2021 properties within 500 feet Site Posting Date 4/26/2021 Next Door posting 4/13/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The proposed drive-through is for a financial institution and is within 300-feet of a restaurant drive- through to the south that has recently received Commission approval(Lost Rapids Drive-through,H- 202 1-000 1),which requires Conditional Use Permit approval(CUP)per UDC Table 11-2B-2. 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: Staffs 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; The proposed drive-through has three(3)stacking lanes that are approximately 65'+/-from the drive aisle to the drive-up services for the bank;furthermore, the proposed drive-up services are proposed in a detached structure that is on the west end of the site with the main building being on the east of the site, approximately 95'apart. 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. Per the submitted site plan, the stacking lanes are off of the shared internal access and provide at least 65'of are before any vehicle would impede any access. Staff does not foresee the stacking lanes impeding the circulation lanes, especially due to the proposed design of a detached drive- through. 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 3. ElEXHIBIT A The stacking lanes do not exceed 100'in length so no escape lane is proposed. However, the exit drive-aisle for the detached drive-through is shown as 23'wide, allowing for patrons to exit the drive-through and turn north or south with ample room on either side. 5)The site should be designed so that the drive-through is visible from a public street for surveillance purposes. The detached drive-through is not exceptionally visible from N. Ten Mile Rd. (the closest public street) along the east boundary of the site but the south boundary of the site is one of the main ingress and egress drive aisles for the overall Costco site. Staff finds this shared drive-aisle and overall proximity to Ten Mile Road(no more than 185 feet in distance)provides for adequate surveillance opportunities. Based on the above analysis, Staff deems the proposed drive-through in compliance with the specific use standards as required. The proposed use of a financial institution is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4- 3-17. The proposed site plan appears to show compliance with all of the standards and will be further verified with the future Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC)application.At the time of CZC review,Meridian Police Department will verify compliance with the required specific use 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 and a driveway access via N. Ten Mile Rd. adjacent to the property along the south boundary. 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 500 square feet of gross floor area for nonresidential uses. The proposed building is shown as 4,276 square feet requiring a minimum of 9 (rounded up from 8.5)parking spaces; the submitted site plan shows 30 proposed parking spaces exceeding UDC minimums. 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 12) is grouped with Lot 11 directly to the north and shares a perpetual,non-exclusive cross-parking easement with that lot. 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 is shown on the submitted plans in compliance with code. Pedestrian Walkways: A pedestrian walkway is depicted on the site plan from the arterial/perimeter sidewalk along N. Ten Mile Rd. to the main building entrance as required by UDC 11-3A-19B.4a and meets code as submitted. 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 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. The submitted landscape plan shows the required perimeter buffer but the buffer along the north boundary does not show any trees within this buffer. Trees are required to be provided for within these buffers at a ratio of at least 1 tree every 35 linear feet.With the CZC submittal,the landscape plan should be revised to show compliance with this standard. Page 4 Item 3. 127 EXHIBIT A Street buffer landscaping, including a sidewalk, along N. Ten Mile Rd. was installed with development of the overall subdivision. The submitted landscape plans show a majority of this buffer remaining as it currently exists but towards the southern end of this buffer the plans show additional landscaping to highlight the building and future monument sign. This area of the buffer also contains the new sidewalk connection from the existing sidewalk along Ten Mile to the front of the proposed building. 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. If mechanical equipment is proposed to be roof-mount, all equipment should be screened and out of view as noted above. Building Elevations: The Applicant applied for Design Review concurrently with this CUP application and therefore provided building elevations to be reviewed. The building elevations were submitted as shown in Section VILC and incorporate two main field materials, fiber cement siding and stone. The siding and stone are two contrasting colors(coal-like color and white,respectively) which adds to the overall modern design of the building. On the east and west elevations,the number of proposed windows can act as either an accent material or a third field material. The lack of modulation along the north and south elevations are of concern to Staff. In order to meet the modulation requirements for these two facades, a column of stone at least 6 inches in depth should be added to each facade,matching the overall aesthetic by placing them as evenly as possible on each facade. The detached drive-through canopy is shown with the same two field materials (fiber cement siding and stone)as the main building and meets all of the applicable design standards outlined in the Architectural Standards Manual. No elevations were submitted that show the proposed trash enclosure;this should be corrected with the future CZC submittal and should match the color of the proposed building. The submitted landscape plans show adequate screening of the trash enclosure. Certificate of Zoning Compliance: A Certificate of Zoning Compliance 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 VIII and UDC 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. The Director has approved the administrative design review request. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on May 6,2021. At the public hearing.the Commission moved to approve the subject Conditional Use Permit request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Shane Sanders. Sanders AssociatesApplicant Representative b. In opposition:None C. Commenting: Shane Sanders:Kent Brown,Kent Brown Planning. d. Written testimony:None e. Staff presenting application: Joseph Dodson,Associate Planner f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. Complexity of drive aisles and vehicle circulation within commercial developments. Page 5 item s. EX H I B I T A 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. Location of the drive-through exit in relation to the main drive aisle entrance into the larger commercial development. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None VII. EXHIBITS A. Proposed Site Plan(dated: 3/23/2021) i ! art• 14 CD I I F I 4 � � � * a _ I-::• III �, I I a I ' .. �{ r��' rma� �a -Ac' •°r'. � 7 I-.�'-I _ �. I r !f;•� I�� yd � rrd 'h• � �� ''.11 .' I I' 1V7 'RP' +O 1' Cyr -4 tis I Y .13 • .,r�.io..r I I in IOU ll%% ✓J� I'. �------ --�----------��—_—_--_ �-�� f.+�• fir- �� O Lot with previously approved drive-through(Lost Rapids Drive-through,H-2021-0001). Page 6 Item 3. ElEXHIBIT A B. Proposed Landscape Plan(dated: 3/23/2021) gill \` I Zec�Aw Pmlded-fq]]f vt/19W a :,eiuy Nex Gain Cum*P.-6.$3 eI./IfL� i -sa e. � U. OO. Q a I � x..�ara�:d srdr r...;�ems a.�.�en.m;n '4mb./•_ � .. .a•-r a:'r;x a' ,,..,, ,.c. ,.;7 3 I.'� PLANT 6CHEDfILE U i -�j. 0 6 IYaO / a 7LI�il m ..,...�.....�,. aw ,..:.:.a.. -777 Q III O. c � �'r Z «r u. A ,M w o. Lu ZE •�"' ..,W'� �': ..�_ _ _ �w.x.x�...,mya�w��,v.«.,�. ..,»na„«�x...+�. 'd+ a, >.��...„w x�mix�.x$� m �.x ....,.., `_•�,. "' j Q a �x�../a,,. p... h.a,n,» ..a N-��,:• ......duw Z M T�fA F MFIM .�.,7....,,........,a.. .�.�...n x... m� m�,.m..,m. LAND CAP MOUNTAIN AMERICA LL ceouLr union L l.l Page 7 Item 3. 130 EXHIBIT A III l' l 1 III dl II � �Il I � , r, rrr 9 t I. I T + J ". k1d ` J 1 I' II I I � r* �:..�:. ' fay. .:��t:• sin r, '. I I II f p MACU fl I II II .O:.p.:.. I ��jr I ��}• - .; ..�':' •i■sae,�:�:::'::.::{6�:':Cl:':�F�L�:�!': .:C2: .� ::�:.�::. � "�i' frt Idl ill ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- III fl ; I I I III I f{� ---- ---------------------- -----------�=o. Page 8 EXHIBIT C. Conceptual Building Elevations - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cf 4-L-----J---- LE ------------- AE201 C AE202 41,,�T Page 9 Item 3. 132 EXHIBIT A 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-2019-0056). 2. The site plan submitted with the future Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised as follows: a. Depict the parking stalls in accordance with UDC Table 11-3C-5 to be at least 9' wide and 19' deep unless there is at least a 2' overhang in front of the stall allowing the stall depth to be reduced to 17'. b. If 17' stall depths are desired abutting the proposed building, depict the sidewalk to be at least 7' in width; all sidewalks shall be at least 5' in width. 3. The landscape plan submitted with the future Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised as follows: a. Depict the required number of trees within the planter bed along the north boundary,per UDC 11-313-8. 4. The elevations submitted with the Administrative Design Review(DES)application are approved with the following revisions: a. Show the north and south elevations with additional qualifying modulation per standard 3.1A&3.1B in the Architectural Standards Manual. The revisions to the elevations are required with the submittal of the certificate of zoning compliance application. 5. Submit elevations of the trash enclosure that matches the proposed building color. 6. Comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11—Drive-Through Establishment is required. 7. Comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-17—Financial Institution. 8. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be submitted and approved for the proposed use prior to submittal of a building permit application. 9. Prior to receiving Certificate of Occupancy,the required 35-foot landscape buffer along Ten Mile Road shall be vegetated and completed in accord with previous approvals and UDC I I- 3B-7. 10. 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 asset forth in UDC 11-5B-6F. Page 10 Item 3. 133 EXHIBIT A B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. There are no utilities shown with the plans submitted. Any changes to public water or sewer infrastructure must be reviewed by Public Works prior to approval. C. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:llweblink.meridianciU.org_/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=227458&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty D. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancity.org WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=226253&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty https:llweblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=225686&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC Lty- IX. FINDINGS Conditional Use (UDC 11-513-6) 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. Commission finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed development and meet all dimensional and development regulations of the C-G zoning district. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Commission finds the proposed financial institution with a detached 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. Commission finds the design, construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed use will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood, with the existing and intended character of the vicinity and will not adversely change the essential character of the area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Commission finds 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. Commission finds the proposed use will be served by essential public facilities and services as required. Page 11 Item 3. 134 EXHIBIT A 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. Commission finds the proposed use will not create additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials,equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke,fumes,glare or odors. Commission 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) Commission finds the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any such features. Page 12 Item 4. Ll 35 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for The Oasis (H-2021-0004) by Brian Tsai of Balboa Ventures, Located at 3185 E. Ustick Rd. Item 4. 136 CITY OF MERIDIAN E IDIAN�-- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND 1DAH0 DECISION& ORDER In the Matter of the Request for a Conditional Use Permit request for an approximate 7,000 square foot drinking establishment, music venue, and nightclub for The Oasis,Located at 3185 E.Ustick Road on a portion of 3.26 acres of land in the C-G Zoning District,by Brian Tsai,Balboa Ventures. Case No(s). H-2021-0004 For the Planning& Zoning Commission Hearing Date of: March 18,2021 & May 6,2021 (Findings on May 20,2021) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 18,2021, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 18, 2021, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 18,2021, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 18,2021, incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the"Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65, Title 67,Idaho Code(I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has,by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian,which was adopted April 19,2011,Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision,which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). The Oasis,H-2021-0004 Page 1 Item 4. F137] upon the applicant,the Planning Department,the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of March 18,2021, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11- 5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's request for Conditional Use Permit is hereby approved in accord with the conditions of approval in the staff report for the hearing date of March 18, 2021, attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two(2)Year Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit,when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-513-617.1. During this time,the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting,the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two(2)year period in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.2. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-5B-6.F.1,the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one (1)two (2)year period. Additional time extensions up to two(2)years as determined and approved by the Commission may be granted. With all extensions,the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521,any affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the governing board may within twenty-eight(28)days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67,Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff report for the hearing date of March 18, 2021 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). The Oasis,H-2021-0004 Page 2 Item 4. 138 By action of the Planning&Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 20th day of May ,2021. COMMISSIONER RHONDA MCCARVEL, CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER ANDREW SEAL,VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER LISA HOLLAND VOTED COMMISSIONER STEVEN YEARSLEY VOTED COMMISSIONER WILLIAM CASSINELLI VOTED COMMISSIONER NICK GROVE VOTED COMMISSIONER MARIA LORCHER VOTED Rhonda McCarvel, Chairman 5-20-2021 Attest: Chris Johnson, City Clerk Copy served upon the Applicant,the Planning and Development Services divisions of the Community Development Department,the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By: Dated: 5-20-2021 City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). The Oasis,H-2021-0004 Page 3 Item 4. 139 Exhibit A STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 3/18/2021 Legend DATE: I�l U Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Joe Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 ® m - -- -� FF SUBJECT: H-2021-0004 q _ - The Oasis _; IBM ,J Ey •, ; LOCATION: The site is located on a portion of 3185 - E. Ustick Road at the southwest corner of N. Eagle Road and E.Ustick Road, in the NE I/ of the NE 1/4of Section 5, Township 3N., Range IE. ' I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional Use Permit request for an approximate 7,000 square foot drinking establishment,music venue, and nightclub on a portion of 3.26 acres of land in the C-G zoning district,by Brian Tsai, Balboa Ventures. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage Portion of 3.29(C-G zoning district) Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use Regional Existing Land Use(s) Vacant but being developed Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial Lots(#and type;bldg./common) On 1 of 5 building lots Physical Features(waterways, Milk Lateral runs along southern boundary of property; hazards,flood plain,hillside) easement being respected and verified in CZC approvals. Neighborhood meeting date;#of January 14,2021— 15 attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) H-2019-0082(DA Modification to remove the subject site from an existing DA and enter into a new one specific to this site;DA Inst.#2019-121599);H-2020-0104(Pre-plat approval to subdivide property into 5 lots);A-2019-0376& A-2021-0010(CZC for parking lot,landscaping,and other relevant site improvements);A-2021-0012(CZC and Design Review approval of the building proposed to house requested business). Pagel Item 4. 140 Exhibit A Description Details Page Public Testimony Due to the controversial nature of this project,there has been a number of written and verbal testimony both for and against this project.Please go here to review this public testimony. B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes; Comply with letter noting review that occurred with urgent care CZC(A-2020-0163). • Requires ACHD Commission No Action es/no Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via a proposed shared driveway into Hwy/Local)(Existing and the development from E.Ustick Rd.No direct access is Proposed) proposed or allowed to E.Ustick Rd.or N.Eagle Rd. Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Subject site has existing cross-access agreements in place Access for sites within the original 3 acre parcel. Staff is unaware of any cross-access agreements with adjacent sites to the west and south(Villasport approvals). Existing Road Network Internal drive aisles and adjacent drive aisles are currently under construction. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ The required sidewalks and landscaping are currently Buffers under construction commensurate with the approved CZC plans(A-2019-0376). Proposed Road improvements Applicant is not required to perform any road improvements because Ustick and Eagle are at their full- build out at this time. Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 1.2 miles from Fire Station#3 • Fire Response Time This project lies within the Meridian Fire response time goal of 5 minutes. • Resource Reliability Fire Station#3 reliability currently 80% • Risk Identification Risk Factor 3—commercial W • Accessibility Proposed project meets all Fire required access,road widths,and turnarounds. Police Service • Distance to Station 3.5 miles from Meridian Police Department • Response Time Approximately 3.5 minute response time to an emergency. • Call Data Between 2/1/2019- 1/31/2021,the Meridian Police Department responded to 2,967 calls for service within a mile of the proposed development. The crime count on the calls for service was 251. Between 2/1/2019- 1/31/2021,the Meridian Police Department responded to 198 crashes within a mile of the proposed development. See attached documents for details. • Additional Concerns Following any approvals,Police will want to meet with Applicant on expectations of Police. Page 2 Item 4. ElExhibit A C. Project Area Maps .Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend 0 Legend Project Location = lProject Location 1 n flffg4+FH Medium- Density Resident°aII a ® MU Cornrnercial r �!r Fil y r_ -Low Density MU-RG :�F Residential .Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend 0 Legend 0 Project Location I El Project Location G-1 R-3 City Limits �R-8 Planned Parcels ie ® C-N C-G RUT rR-2� CSC . R-8 R-8 Rl -- - ' -RUT�R�-`2 RUT �I qO Rd R1 �.• o� R-4 R-2-R-1 R-4 L-O IC-C R-40 �4 =--' `�R1 CM=G ,,R,�§3 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Brian Tsai,Balboa Ventures-PO Box 109204,Boise,ID 83719 B. Owner: Nate Ballard,Wadsworth Development- 166 E. 14000 South, Ste. 210,Draper,UT 84020 Page 3 Item 4. ElExhibit A C. Representative: N/A IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 2/26/2021 Radius notification mailed to properties within 500 feet 2/23/2021 Site Posting 3/7/2021 Nextdoor posting 2/25/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The subject property was annexed in 2003 as part of a larger annexation area(AZ-03-018). There was a Development Agreement(DA) associated with this annexation which was modified in 2019 to remove this property from that DA(H-2019-0082) and enter into a new one serving just this site(DA Inst.#2019-121599).The land owner received approval to subdivide the property for future ownership purposes. A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https:llwww.meridianciu.or /e compplan) Mixed Use Regional(MU-R)—In general,the purpose of mixed-use designations is to provide for a combination of compatible land uses within a close geographic area that allows for easily accessible and convenient services for residents and workers. The intent is to promote developments that offer functional and physical integration of land uses,to create and enhance neighborhood sense of place, and to allow developers a greater degree of design and use flexibility. Specifically,the purpose of the regional designation is to provide a mix of employment,retail, and residential dwellings and public uses near major arterial intersections. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses together, including residential, and to avoid predominantly single use developments such as a regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses. Developments should be anchored by uses that have a regional draw with the appropriate supporting uses. The subject site is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of E. Ustick Road(an arterial street) and N. Eagle Road/SH 55. Staff and the Applicant understand the importance of providing more commercial uses in this area, especially on an undeveloped corner. To the east and across Eagle Road are two large commercial centers; to the north is an additional commercial center. These surrounding areas provide a plethora of commercial uses that are used at a regional level. Directly to the west of the subject site is intended to be a high-end indoor gym (Villasport) and further to the south of the site is existing residential and some community serving commercial.As these lots get developed over time, Staff believes that they will continue to add to the City's commercial base and will likely be a higher benefit to users of the future Villasport and residents to the southwest of this site. The proposed business of a nightclub and music venue offers a new commercial use not only to this area of Meridian but to Meridian as a whole. Staff is of the opinion that despite being on a relatively small site, the proposed use would have regional pull for patrons. Therefore, this project, in conjunction with the approved uses to the west, should satisfy the comprehensive plan and mixed-use policies. Page 4 Item 4. 143 Exhibit A B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.or /g compplan): Some applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are cited below with Staff analysis in italics. "Require appropriate building design, and landscaping elements to buffer, screen,beautify, and integrate commercial,multifamily,and parking lots into existing neighborhoods."(5.01.02D). There is no neighborhood directly adjacent to the subject site but the closest home is approximately 330 feet from the southern property line. Future commercial buildings and parking lots will separate this project from existing residential to the southwest. However, with the recently approved CZC and Design Review approval for this multi-tenant building, the approved landscaping meets all code requirements and helps to beautify the property while offering an appropriate visual landscape buffer to the closest neighborhood to the southwest. Likely, the subject site will not be directly viewable from the nearest residential neighborhood once other properties redevelop in the near future. The parking is located on the interior of the overall property which will be largely screened by buildings and helps screen the parking lot from adjacent properties, usually one of the most noise inducing elements of a commercial site. The approved building that is to hold the proposed use is constructed with a modern and urban design that should integrate with the overall design of the other properties and with those adjacent to the site. However, according to the Applicant, the real buffering of the proposed use comes from within the building where there is proposed soundproofing materials, techniques, and technologies. When it comes to screening and buffering any incompatibilities of the proposed use, Stafffinds the proposed landscaping and internal building materials to be sufficient in integrating the use into the existing and planned development. "Diversify Meridian's economic base to establish and maintain a self-sustaining, full-service economy."(2.06.01).Meridian does not have a business of the kind being proposed within this application. The Applicant appropriately described within their narrative the lack of entertainment, art, and music activities available within the City. The Applicant discusses this as a major need for the City. Staff can see the proposed use as adding to the economic base of the City because it would be a new type of use and offer a commercial use in the hours after IOpm, which is not a normal occurrence within the City. "Require pedestrian circulation plans to ensure safety and convenient access across large commercial and mixed-use developments."(3.07.02A).Pedestrian connectivity to this site is not one of the major issues for this proposed use. Where feasible, each building site will have pedestrian connections to one another and will have connections to the sidewalks along the adjacent major roadways on the north and east sides of the overall site. So long as these connections are required with each CZC review, Staff believes the subject site will have adequate pedestrian circulation especially due to the relatively small size of the overall commercial development. In addition, as future commercial sites to the south develop and additional pedestrian connections are introduced to the area,future patrons of this nightclub would have ample places to recreate before and after participating in this use and get to and from different uses safely. "Determine and respond to the community's art and cultural facility needs."(5.03.01E). The City is not working in collaboration with the Applicant so the context of this policy is not precisely what is called for within the comprehensive plan. However, a private business can add art and cultural facilities just as easily as the City.According to the Applicant, a nightclub/indoor recreation facility/drinking establishment can and should add to the community's art and culture. It is the Applicant's intent to increase the availability of a music venue for Meridian residents to have more opportunity to share in music as art and potentially bring new cultural experiences to Meridian through this business and venue. Page 5 Item 4. 144 Exhibit A "Enhance crime prevention awareness through the education of neighborhood watch groups, multi-family property management companies,homeowners'associations,and other organizations."(4.11.02F). The Applicant has been eager to work with the Meridian Police Department in order to help mitigate any future negative impacts of the proposed use. The Police cannot give an "approval"of the proposed project but they are working with the Applicant and have had conversations with the Applicant. MPD has shown interest in educating the Applicant on any and all crime prevention techniques here in Meridian. "Support efforts to evaluate and plan for future transportation services such as public transit,on- demand services, autonomous and shared vehicles."(6.01.04A).Again, the City is not partnering with the Applicant in pursuit of this policy but the Applicant has discussed thoroughly the applicability of ride-sharing for patrons of their proposed business. The Applicant noted that in most markets an average of 40%of the patrons for a business like this utilize ride-shares like Uber and Lyft in order to offset parking or having to drive at all. Staff cannot confirm these statistics but with the lack of public transportation within the City and the overall car dominant landscape we live in here in Meridian, it is unlikely that the 40%usage would occur for those attending The Oasis. There should be no doubt this service would be utilized but not at a level that Staff can overlook the parking and traffic issues presented by the proposed use. Staff finds this development to be generally consistent and in alignment with the Comprehensive Plan as noted above. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The subject site is currently having its basic improvements completed(grading, drainage,water& sewer, and parking lot)but generally is a vacant parcel. Recent site visits also show a foundation of one of the approved buildings within the site (nearest Eagle and in the southeast corner of the subject site). All road improvements along Ustick and Eagle Roads are existing. With the approved CZC,the building,utilities, and drainage will be completed regardless of the proposed use being approved or denied. D. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): The submitted conceptual elevations are those approved with the recent CZC and Design Review approvals. The approved commercial building complies with the UDC and the Architectural Standards Manual. The elevations show modern architecture with glazed glass storefronts, awnings,vertical trellis, and varying wall modulation on all sides of the building. In addition,the elevations show brick,polymer, and rustic corrugated metal panels as finish materials.As noted, these elevations have already been approved by Staff at an administrative level. E. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The building proposed to contain the proposed use has recently received CZC approval and meets all dimensional standards for setbacks,parking,building height, and access. The proposed use of a music venue falls under the Indoor Recreation Facility specific use standards(UDC 11-4-3-2) and if one is to be located within 1,000 feet of an existing residence a Conditional Use Permit is required;part of the Applicant's CUP request is to satisfy this requirement. In addition,one of the proposed uses is for a Drinking Establishment and is also subject to specific use standards(UDC 11-4-3-10); the required dimensional standards noted within this code section are being met with the CUP request. F. Proposed Use Analysis: The administratively approved building,Eagle View Retail Center,will be approximately 8,300 square feet in size with two tenant suites. The Oasis is proposed in the larger suite at an Page 6 Item 4. 145 Exhibit A approximate size of 7,000 square feet. The uses allowed on the subject site are those listed in UDC Table 11-2B-2 for the C-G zoning district. The proposed business is a combination of a nightclub and music venue which falls under Drinking Establishment and Indoor Recreation Facility uses within the development code,respectively. The indoor recreation facility use is a principally permitted use within the C-G zoning district unless it incorporates a music venue and is located within 1,000 feet of an existing residence which then requires a conditional use permit; this is the case with the proposed use of the music venue because the building is approximately 330 feet from the nearest residence.A drinking establishment is a conditional use within the C-G zoning district. Therefore,the Applicant is requesting conditional use permit approval for these two uses to reside within one building and one business, The Oasis. Staff recommends the Commission review the Applicant's narrative to gain further insight into how the business is intended to operate in terms of soundproofing techniques, security,business operations, and alcohol consumption. Staffs use analysis is not exhaustive as the Applicant's narrative details more of their proposals than is necessary to discuss within this staff report. According to the Applicant, The Oasis is meant to be a premier music venue and nightclub that offers entertainment and a nightlife for those in Meridian, much like other prominent cities. The Applicant also understands the negative stigmas surrounding a "nightclub"and provided a detailed response to this within their narrative. Staff agrees with some of the points made by the Applicant but must analyze the proposed uses against development code. As noted, the approved building and proposed uses meet all required dimensional standards as they are not directly adjacent to a residential district(approximately 330 feet from the closest residential district) and meet all building and landscaping setbacks. It is anticipated that directly south of the approved building there will be additional landscaping, a larger parking lot, and a drive aisle. This parking lot and landscaping received preliminary approval with the Villasport applications and a user is currently in process on this site that would make these improvements more tangible. This parking lot and landscaping would abut the drive aisle that extends from N. Cajun Lane to the south and continues north adjacent to this subject site and connects to Ustick, the main access to this commercial development. This drive aisle is currently being constructed with the site improvements for Eagle Commons as a whole to ensure there is more than one way to get to the entrance of the site. Further discussion on this is in the Access section below, V.G. With the proposed uses of a music venue and nightclub, capacity and hours of operation are integral factors in determining the compatibility of the uses with neighboring and planned development. The Applicant proposes hours of operation for The Oasis as 4:OOPM to 1:OOAM on the weekdays and 4:OOPM to 2:OOAM on the weekends. It is unclear what specific days the Applicant is referring to as "the weekends;"Staff is recommending for future analysis, discussion, and conditions of approval purposes that this is in reference to Friday and Saturday nights only. The Villasport site was approved to remain open until 12:OOAM, midnight which would cover a majority of the same operating hours proposed with this application. Both proposed uses, Villasport and The Oasis, are likely to drastically increase activity on this currently vacant corner. However, the Villasport approvals are set to expire soon unless that Applicant applies for a time extension. This calls into question how this corner will look in the coming years and it is not feasible for Staff to speculate too far as there could be many unknowns. Staff must analyze this project based on the current situation known which includes the Villasport development. The Oasis is further away from the existing residential than Villasport but this does not mean any negative impacts are automatically alleviated. Therefore, Staff recommends weekday(Sunday thru Thursday) hours for The Oasis be limited to 4:OOPM to 12:OOAM. These hours of operation for the weekdays match the closing time of Villasport making it more compatible with that use and nearby residential development. The opening time is of less concern to Staff because these Page 7 Item 4. 146 Exhibit A types of businesses do not generally have peak hours of operation earlier in the evening. It can be assumed that the 4:OOPMstart time is likely more associated with private events like that of weddings than it is associated with the nightclub or concert uses. In addition, the hours of operation are only applicable to use of the site by those other than employees; ancillary indoor business activities are allowed beyond these hours for employees, as outlined in UDC 11-2B-3B. Staff recommends the weekend(Friday&Saturday) hours are also limited to help with being compatible to nearby residential. These hours should be limited to 4:OOPM to 1:OOAM, a reduction in one hour of operation from the Applicant's request and one more hour than the weekdays. The Applicant's original narrative estimated a capacity of approximately 1,000 patrons for the 7,000 square foot tenant suite.After receiving a conceptual floor plan,preliminary discussions with Fire plan reviewers discussed a maximum capacity closer to 700 persons; the exact number for maximum building occupancy cannot be known until architectural plans are submitted with building permit submittal at a later date. However, through the CUP process, capacity can be limited further. Because of the issues outlined in this staff report, Staff recommends capacity be limited to no more than 500 persons to include employees. Employees will likely take up parking spaces for the entire hours of operation so they should be included in the maximum capacity. The Applicant and Staff have discussed this number and there is preliminary agreement on this condition. Staff arrived at this number because it is the same ratio as the minimum parking ratio for the proposed use, a 1:4 ratio. 500 persons and 125 parking spaces equate to one (1)space for every four(4)people; drastically improved from one(1)space for every 6 or 7 people with a capacity over 700. Further analysis on the parking is below in section V.H. IF the Applicant can adhere to the recommended conditions of approval noted below, Stafffinds the proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses in that it should be mitigated appropriately. Commission may determine further mitigation is needed through this CUP process. G. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Main access to and for this development will be via a shared driveway connection to Ustick Road limited to a right-in/right-out access—the land owner is currently constructing this shared driveway access for their development because this site is developing before the Villasport project. There are no public streets as part of this commercial development and therefore no stub streets are proposed. Instead,there are private drive-aisles as are standard for commercial developments. The Applicant has an existing cross-access agreement with the adjacent commercial properties (Inst. #106169335)but this agreement does not include a cross-parking agreement. As previously discussed above, the subject site abuts a drive aisle that connects to Ustick and is the main access to this commercial development. This commercial drive aisle will be a continuation off. Cajun Lane, a private street,from the south but in fact will not be a named street. This off-site drive aisle is currently being constructed with the site improvements for Eagle Commons as a whole because Cajun Lane connects to Seville Lane and is an access point to Eagle Road. Constructing this connection ensures there is more than one way to access the site entrance other than from Ustick. The Eagle Road access is an existing access that is off-site and limited to a right-in/right-out only access. Because the overall site, Eagle Commons, has received preliminary plat approval to subdivided the property, cross-access and cross parking between the five proposed lots is required. In the recorded Covenant, Conditions, and Restrictions (Inst. #2020-075457) this cross-access is discussed and dictated for each lot and future user. In addition to the shared drive aisle that abuts the property to the west, The Villasport site improvements and recorded cross-access agreement will include an additional Ustick Road Page 8 Item 4. ElExhibit A access point further west, N. Centrepoint Way. These access points to the arterial are long approved for the site. Staff finds there is adequate and safe access to the site at full build-out and with only the most adjacent Ustick access in conjunction with the drive aisle connection to Cajun Lane and then out to Eagle Road. However, to help mitigate any residential cut-through traffic this Applicant and land owner should work with the Villasport Applicant to construct a driveway through their site in-line with where they plan to construct one in the future. This driveway would provide a more direct means of accessing Centrepoint Way and the existing traffic signal at that intersection without having to use the roads adjacent to the residential subdivision further to the south. Staff also agrees that at peak hours of business (after 8pm) access to the site should be improved as adjacent traffic levels on Ustick and Eagle should be much less than at 5 or 6pm. This is due to the fact there are not many businesses open beyond 9pm within Meridian that draw the kind of customers that can be assumed for the proposed business. However, once the Villasport project is constructed this may change and traffic along Ustick will likely increase in the hours between 8pm and midnight due to their approved operating hours as noted. ACHD is the leading agency on access points for the City of Meridian and because peak traffic times should not be drastically affected by the proposed use on any access point,ACHD did not require a Traffic Impact Study for this application. Even with the assumed capacity of 1,000 persons in the initial submittal this was not required and restricting the capacity to 500 persons should help with the traffic concerns of this type of use. Further analysis regarding access should be addressed to ACHD. H. Parking(UDC 11-3C): Minimum off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-49 for a restaurant use at the ratio of one(1) space per 250 square feet of gross floor area because the Applicant has noted the business will be serving food. If food was not being served,the minimum code required parking ratio would be one(1) space per 500 square feet of gross floor area. In order to meet UDC minimum requirements for the approximate suite size of 7,000 square feet, a total of 28 parking spaces should be provided. With the approved CZC and the additional spaces on the site specific site plan, 102 parking spaces are proposed on-site and would likely be used because there is an existing cross-access and cross parking agreement in place for the site. Both the land owner and Applicant understand the entire site will likely be used for parking for the proposed business. The approved plans do not show any parking along the future northern commercial lots and the land owner has guaranteed that those spaces will be built prior to this use commencing. Staff recommends a condition of approval commensurate with these conversations and assurances. Staff finds this condition and assurance incredibly important to the project because those additional spaces could amount to the 125 total spaces previously mentioned—depending on how the parking is configured on the north side of the site, there is physical room for approximately a maximum of 37 additional parking spaces at the required 9 feet of width and including four landscape planters in line with code requirements.Again, this is a maximum but does show additional parking spaces will be provided on site beyond what is currently being shown. With 30 additional spaces, a total of 132 spaces would be provided throughout the entire site, exceeding the UDC minimums by approximately 450%. However, not just this use can be analyzed on site because only two other users are currently known and there is potential for additional commercial buildings along the north side of the site. The two other uses currently known are an Urgent Care Facility and Jamba Juice. Jamba Juice is intended to share the same building as The Oasis and would be located in the 1,200 square foot suite to its east, requiring five (5)spaces at a minimum. The urgent care facility will be closed by 5pm and requires only 7 Page 9 Item 4. 148 Exhibit A spaces per UDC; these hours of operation for the urgent care facility should not affect The Oasis and are a preferred set of hours when adjacent to a use such as a nightclub and/or music venue that has peak operating hours later in the evening and night. As noted, other future uses on the undeveloped north half of the site are not currently known. Preliminary discussions with the land owners have yielded assumptions that those future uses are likely office uses with a potential for an additional drive-thru but nothing concrete is currently known by Staff. With the potential of additional traffic and parking spaces being utilized during the operating hours of The Oasis once future uses come online, Staff recommends the Applicant and land owner obtain a cross parking agreement with the adjacent properties to the south and to the west to increase the amount of available parking for the proposed use. In addition, a minimum of 125 total parking spaces shall be constructed within Eagle Commons to obtain a parking to patron ratio of 1:4 in accord with previous approvals. IF these conditions can be met, Stafffinds the proposed uses of the property should minimize the impact to the adjacent residential neighborhood. I. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): Minimum 5-foot wide sidewalks are required adjacent to all commercial buildings as outlined in UDC 11-3A-17. The building containing the proposed use has been approved with approximate 8-foot wide sidewalks on the north and west side of the building. These areas of the site are where patrons would congregate as the south and east side of the building contain a drive-thru. The subject building is not directly adjacent to any public streets and was therefore not required to directly connect to those sidewalks. However,the building will have easy access to proposed sidewalks along the drive aisle to the west of the subject site which is being constructed by this land owner because this site is being developed prior to the Villasport site. J. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 5-foot wide landscape buffer is required adjacent to the drive-through along the southern property line. This landscape strip has been reviewed and approved with the existing CZC and complies with code requirements. Furthermore, as the commercial site to the south develops in the future, additional landscaping will be provided to screen the building and any future use from the residences to the southwest. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit application per the conditions of approval in Section VIII and the Findings in Section IX of this staff report. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on March 18,2021 and Mav 6. 2021.At the public hearing.the Commission moved to approve the subiect Conditional Use Permit reaucst. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Kyle Scheffler: Terry Silsby: Zach Yates:Eric Sherman: Josiah Savino b. In opposition: Please see meeting video here. Over 200 written entries and many testified during the hearing on March 18,2021 and May 6,2021. C. Commenting: Please see public record noted above. d. Written testimony: Please see public comments folder here. e. Staff presenting application: Joseph Dodson,Associate Planner f. Other Staff commenting on application: Ted Baird,Deputy City Attorney: Bill Parsons. Planning Supervisor: Joe Bongiorno,Deputy Fire Marshall: Page 10 Item 4. 149 Exhibit A 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. Degradation of the morality of this area of the City by approving the project: b. Nose and traffic issues with proposed use(sl: c. Increase of traffic during high capacity events at one of the busiest intersections in Citv: d. Is there enough parking for max capacity events and where will the excess parking go should the parking lot fill u- e. Does the City, specifically this area,need an additional drinking es It* £ The positive outcomes and additional avenue for arts and entertainment by approving the subject application: g_ Stating that business will allow certain entities use of the space for free is not a viable business plan and appears to be a bait-and-switch tactic to get approved: h. Does proposal meet Mixed-use Regional policy: i. Increase of crime and drunk driving associated with"nightclubs:" Max capacity events of proposed business should not impact peak traffic times as most traffic is gone by 8pm: k. The need for a venue like this within Meridian for local artists and musicians; 1. How can capacity change and business still be viable—is there something nefarious going on with this application- M. Capacity of residential roundabout south of project location that would likely_ be utilized for patrons of proposed use when heading south to get to Eagle Road* n. Safety concerns of more traffic passing residential properties to the south/southwest: 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. Basis of Staff s capacity limitations and how is it enforceable if it is below building/fire code capacity—CUP could be revoked should capacity limitation be repeatedly violated: b. What outdoor component is there,if any—none proposed other than a designated smoking area west of the building on the largest area of sidewalk in response to questions from the Commission: C. How will the Applicant aim to enforce the capacity limitation: d. Whv has the capacity limit continued to fall and how does it allow the business to continue: e. What are the safety protocols proposed for a use such as thisspecifically_ to help mitigate illegal activity,drunk driving, over-parking. f. Ingress/Egress points when building is constructed versus when adjacent Villasport site is built out: g_ Is the proposed location an appropriate location when considering the public testimony and proximity to residences: h. Has a noise study been completed by the Applicant—Applicant states music within venue will be quieter than the traffic noise of Eagle Road: i. What is the appropriate capacity to parking space ratioCommission openly discussed getting to a 3:1 ration instead of Staff s 4:1 ratio and this was one of the reasons for continuance: 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. Limit capacity to 400 persons instead of 500: b. Amplified music is focused away from the nearest homes: C. When more permanent parking is available.Applicant may come back to P&Z to request additional capacity. Page 11 Exhibit A VII. EXHIBITS A. Overall Site Plan(dated: 1/13/202 1) ............. cll! dnoig juawd019AG(I qjJQMSPUM C-4 ca 319V3 ONY m3usn iv SNDWW03 3183 JN �q I HO !NWHIOM as M!2 -am A P i R-C 5 1- oil- oe . ... . .... ... .... ... ... ..... ... .......... ILL IIoi L: The Oasis— Proposed N 46 --———————— Page 12 Item 4. ElExhibit A B. Site Specific Site Plan(date: 2/26/2021)Approved under A-2021-0012 I I II { I I 90Td�PAS.F�Ea ... 'O TfiE`dG E WrA.1F.FOEr N LF?}:< iO THE EMLE I CMOMATLUM AND EAGLE PHLECT a0 a ,, riY NO70flt FUT.DEFER PROPOSED I whs 5lGiE i TIP. i.'Y.'::1j�: ., AMWifP 0LECN BUILDING s pXt7 EA61f PRGECT 'J,�.��.� .' * i 2 L �;m,a alr :riEEcaE � ••• CCMYONS Ai J:nC7i '•'6B.9f ,S14 Tut dM E&;LE FT iru IBd1Y lRORF •�'�.",'rz � �;\. -�'; I 'I•'f' ——— WT-A-FMi.96ER f _._4_ �, ,..... � —armor— CIC-Site Plan � - R'_� Page 13 Exhibit A C. Landscape Plans(date: 01/13/2021 &2/26/2021) pp CO dnojq juawdolMa qjjomspeM 31OV3 amv mousn IV SNOWWOO 319V3 H I FA- Peqj 4 1 II II II 'AF I If 1 AL 26—d L co Page 14 Item 4. Exhibit A '�"V'c I �`! f� rax W �''--W-__..-. - ��•i_ Y _�� ______ ._ .. I II I ..........,,��,,Iyr. i ,lam10) Ac —"—T7, M AA r iI PROPOSED BUILDING r Y' u H4E { {SISR Ire aEu " Y :y'.•�'-' .: �6v@'Q.' ®`—lS�� _ 9P AdHrt' n.F I11 H9: Y 'Ic1aFG'` a + =::..e.. Q$IG6TICNFJudl9lr lllE 1 .�j`i �t7d I { Y G]'+Y ''1-��-_ r;..r 1. - n h;'' M-' �o L'm`ayp�y}'- _ NS(I -'••;o ; V0 ID CIC-Landscape Plan Page 15 Exhibit A D. Conceptual Floor Plan MFZZ ExIT ONLY REST SO NDCABNET .......................... ROOM MEZZANINE MEZZANINE xon ABOVE 2,M OUTLINE INE F2-DFFIOE DASHED (HEAVY) -- - ---------- FI-OFFICE LIGHT(S) LIGHT(S) SOUNDI --- FRIGGING RIGGING LIGHTING : MEzz CFKH) ABOVE EAR BOARD STAGE Tol 20725-8 T-0 JWBAJUICE OASIS RESTAURANT 205 SF L--- AND EVENT MR 701657 ------- FI-OFFIOE '4OUNDCABINEr ------------ ....... ABOVE ......................... REST ROOM 9' ,I-0FFlm II MAN ENTRY L————— ——————— FUTURE I% STOREFRONT "101T I EXIT1111E. LICATIO N Page 16 ® Exhibit E. Approved Building Elevations(date: 2/05/2021) �� Ar■ err+�� -�_- ,��,� L • FROM THE NORTHEAST AP cm THE NORTHWEST I liii n-viEwoz Page 17 Item 4. 156 Exhibit A VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. The Applicant and/or assigns has the ongoing obligation to comply with the existing Development Agreement(Inst. #2019-121599) and all current City of Meridian ordinances and previous conditions of approval associated with this site: H-2019-0082,H-2020-0104,A- 2019-0376,A-2021-0010, and A-2021-0012. 2. The Applicant shall have an ongoing obligation to comply with the specific use standards for a Drinking Establishment(UDC 11-4-3-10)and Indoor Recreation Facility(UDC 11-4-3-2). 3. The Conditional Use Permit is approved with the following conditions: a. The proposed business shall have operating hours as set forth: Sunday through Thursday, 4:OOPM to 12:OOAM and;Friday and Saturday,4:OOPM to 1:OOAM. b. The maximum number of patrons and employees allowed at any one time shall not exceed€wefour-hundred(5400)persons. c. A minimum of 125 parking spaces shall be provided on the overall Eagle Commons site prior to commencement of the proposed uses. d. The Applieant and/or-land owner-shall obtain a er-ess par-king agreement with the e. Prior to obtaining Certificate of Occupancy for the building,the drive aisle connection from Ustick Road to N. Cajun Lane shall be constructed. £ When more permanent parking spaces are available(i.e. via cross parking agreements), the Applicant maygpply for a Conditional Use Permit Modification to request an increase the allowable capacity. g. The internal speakers and any amplified equipment within the venue shall project away from the nearest residences. 4. To establish the new uses,the Applicant shall apply for a Certificate of Zoning Compliance- Change of Use prior to commencing the proposed uses—with this submittal the Applicant shall provide the cross-parking plan with adjacent sites as well as their plan to incentivize patrons to use ride-sharing services to get to the site during events. 5. The Applicant and land owner shall work with adjacent land owners to construct a driveway connection to the west commensurate with the Villasport approvals and site layout to have more direct access to N. Centrepoint Way. 6. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-213-3 for the C-G zoning district. 7. The Applicant shall comply with all previous ACHD conditions of approval. 8. 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 11-513-6F.1; or 2) obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F.4. Page 18 Item 4. 157 Exhibit A B. POLICE DEPARTMENT(MPD) https:llweblink.meridianciU.org_/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=223212&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty C. NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:llweblink.meridianci(E.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=223054&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty D. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancity.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=223661&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty E. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridianciU.org WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=222985&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit Findings (UDC 11-5B-6E1: 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. If all conditions of approval are met, Commission finds the submitted site plan shows compliance with all dimensional and development regulations in the C-G zoning district in which it resides and compliance with the required specific use standards (UDC 11-4-3-2 & 11-4-3-10) 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Commission finds the proposed uses are, with Commission and Staffs conditions of approval, is harmonious with the comprehensive plan designation of Mixed-Use Regional and the requirements of this title. 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Despite the proposed use being different than the residential uses nearby to the southwest, Commission finds the design, construction, and proposed operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general vicinity and should not adversely change the essential character of the same area, so long as the Applicant complies with the conditions of approval 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. Page 19 Item 4. IHIExhibit A Commission finds the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways,streets,schools,parks,police and fire protection,drainage structures,refuse disposal,water, and sewer. Commission finds the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services 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 Commission finds that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community or create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise,smoke,fumes,glare or odors. Although traffic is sure to increase in the vicinity with the addition of the proposed business, all major roadways adjacent to the site are already at their full width and the peak operating hours should be later than peak traffic hours. In addition, if the Applicant complies with all conditions of approval, Commission finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons,property, or 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). Commission 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 20 Item 5. L159 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for The Vault (H-2021-0017) by Joshua Evarts, Located at 140 E. Idaho Ave. Item 5. 160 CITY OF MERIDIAN w IDIAN�-- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND 1DAHO DECISION& ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Conditional Use Permit for The Vault,Located at 140 E. Idaho Ave in the O-T Zoning District,by Kent Brown. Case No(s).H-2021-0017 For the Planning& Zoning Commission Hearing Date of: May 6,2021 (Findings on May 20, 2021) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 6, 2021,incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 6,2021, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 6, 2021, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 6,2021,incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the"Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65,Title 67,Idaho Code(I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code,and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has,by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian,which was adopted April 19,2011,Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision,which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant,the Planning Department,the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). [H-2021-0017#] Page 1 Item 5. 161 7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of May 6, 2021, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning &Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § I I- 5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's request for Conditional Use Permit is hereby approved in accord with the conditions of approval in the staff report for the hearing date of May 6,2021,attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two(2)Year Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit,when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-513-6F.1. During this time,the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting,the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two(2)year period in accord with UDC 11-513-617.2. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-513-6.F.1,the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one(1)two (2)year period. Additional time extensions up to two(2)years as determined and approved by the Commission may be granted. With all extensions,the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521,any affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the governing board may within twenty-eight(28)days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52,Title 67,Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff report for the hearing date of May 6,2021 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). [H-2021-0017#] Page 2 Item 5. ■ By action of the Planning&Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 20th day of May 2021 COMMISSIONER RHONDA MCCARVEL, CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER ANDREW SEAL,VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER LISA HOLLAND VOTED COMMISSIONER STEVEN YEARSLEY VOTED COMMISSIONER WILLIAM CASSINELLI VOTED COMMISSIONER NICK GROVE VOTED COMMISSIONER MARIA LORCHER VOTED Rhonda McCarvel, Chairman 5-20-2021 Attest: Chris Johnson,City Clerk Copy served upon the Applicant,the Planning and Development Services divisions of the Community Development Department,the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By: Dated: 5-20-2021 City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). [H-2021-0017#] Page 3 Item 5. ■ STAFF REPORTC�WE IDIANn-=- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A H O HEARING 5/6/2021 Le g e n d 1 ; I I I I r DATE: ( I ti r f I .�Jproaeot Locaon 10 I III I TO: Planning&Zoning Commission Mun ter � = = FROM: Alan Tiefenbach,Associate Planner -LoterafE-P'IWE-AVE 208-489-0573 SUBJECT: H-2021-0017 EE11 The Vault CUP LOCATION: 140 E. Idaho Ave I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant has submitted an application for a conditional use permit to allow a drinking establishment in an existing building in the O-T zone district. The present business is a cigar bar (retail establishment)that recently begun serving ancillary beer and wine.The applicant proposes to expand the business to allow dispensing of all types of liquor. As this qualifies as a lounge,nightclub, or tavern,UDC 11-2D-2 only allows the use through conditional use permit. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 2,170 sq. ft.+/- Future Land Use Designation Old Town Existing Land Use(s) Cigar bar with ancillary beer and wine. Proposed Land Use(s) Drinking Establishment Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 1 1oto Neighborhood meeting date;#of March 18,2021 —no citizens in attendance attendees: History(previous approvals) CZC-11-023,DES 15-087,A-2017-0216,CZC,DES A-2021- 0048 Page 1 Item 5. F164] Description Details Page B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District Traffic impact study not required.No comments Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Primary access occurs from E. Idaho Ave,a local street. Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Existing Road Network Yes Fire Service No comments submitted Police Service No comments submitted Wastewater • Distance to Sewer N/A Services • Sewer Shed Five Mile Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 14.09 • Project Consistent with Yes WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Comments • No additional comments Water • No comment Page 2 Item 5. 165 C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend F,TU II I I f J Le end 0 E l4VE - Projeot LooationProje ot Lcoation 1 F JFU Id fio ILLL - -Hunter i E=1 I= un r —LoterafE-PIN-E AVE ra P IN.E 1fiE x _' O A .t �. ME - E IBANO IV EBROA�WkVE— - .. - - ---- Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend - 0 Lend avE I I f J l 0 coProjeot Looation Projeot Looation — LU I L7-1 1-1 City Limits If LU I — Planned! Paroels un r ME E P I tern t = E� j 14. ca �+ R-1S � �LI II E IBAHO AVE FIB, Ii ,GOF F �—I- I � I I . I �� [ J � I IIEM E-A�] E BROADW _ _ - - fBWAR-WAY-AVE-- F1=L III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Owner Joshua Evarts,Novemberwhisky Properties LLC—77 E. Idaho Ave, Ste 300,Meridian, ID, 83642 B. Applicant Joshua Evarts -303 E. State Ave,Meridian,ID 83642 Page 3 Item 5. F166] IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 4/16/2021 Radius notification mailed to 4/13/2021 properties within 300 feet Site Posting Date 4/22/2021 NextDoor posting 4/13/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan) Old Town-This designation includes the historic downtown and the true community center. Sample uses include offices,retail and lodging,theatres,restaurants, and service retail for surrounding residents and visitors.A variety of residential uses are also envisioned and could include reuse of existing buildings,new construction of multi-family residential over ground floor retail or office uses. The business is proposed to be located within an existing historic building which was constructed in 1915 and significantly rehabilitated and remodeled by the present applicant in 2015-2016 The current establishment serves as a neighborhood cigar bar with ancillary beer and wine sales (retail establishment), and is proposed to be expanded to allow all types of liquor, although the applicant states the primary use is still a cigar bar. The business fronts directly onto E. Idaho Ave and a certificate of zoning compliance(CZC) and design review(DES)were recently approved to allow a 600 sq.ft. covered outdoor patio in the alley help activate the downtown area in and around Generations Plaza. This type of neighborhood gathering place is exactly the type of locally-owned and serving businesses intended by the Comprehensive Plan. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https:llwww.meridiancitE.or /g compplan): Goals,Objectives, &Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics): • Support redevelopment and infill opportunities Downtown. (2.09.01) The business is located within an existing building in the historic downtown core. This would be considered redevelopment(more specifically, adaptive reuse of an existing structure). The applicant made significant interior and fagade improvements in 2015- 2016 and is currently constructing an outside patio to activate the area. • 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). As mentioned, the business is located within the historic downtown core and zoned Old Town (O-T). Within this area, a mix of land uses is encouraged which creates a vibrant downtown, enhances sense of place, and provides gathering places for locals and Page 4 Item 5. F167] visitors. This existing cigar bar, which is now proposing to expand their uses to allow full service serving of alcohol, is already serving as a community gathering place and this proposal would enhance this use. • Support a compatible mix of land uses Downtown that activate the area during day and night. (2.09.02F) The existing cigar bar and proposed conditional use to allow additional alcohol consumption is the type of downtown use which activates an area during day and night. • Minimize noise,lighting, and odor disturbances from commercial developments to residential dwellings by enforcing city code. The business and the outdoor patio will seat a total capacity of 49 people. Business hours will be from 12PM—IOPMMon-Tours, 12PM to IIPM on Friday, and LOAM to IIPM on Saturday. The purpose of the O-T district is to accommodate and encourage further intensification of the historical city center in accord with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.As this business is within the old town mixed use district, the Comprehensive Plan anticipates activating the area day and night. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The existing and proposed business is located within a 1,500 sq. ft. space in an existing historic building;this conditional use is to allow expansion of allowed uses. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed use is proposed to still be primarily a cigar bar,but with the use expanded to allow serving of all types of liquor(drinking establishment). This use is allowed by conditional use permit in the O-T zone district subject to specific use standards.As this conditional use is to allow the establishment of a new use, a Certificate of Zoning Compliance for a Change in Use will be required per UDC 11-5B-1. E. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): UDC 11-4-3-10 allows drinking establishments with the limitations that it shall not be within 300 feet of a church or any other place of worship or any public or private education institution. For properties abutting a residential district,no outside activity or event shall be allowed on the site, except in accord with chapter 3,article E, "temporary use requirements." The nearest place of worship or educational facility is the United Methodist Church,which is approximately 250 feet away. The closest residence is approximately 100 feet to the north, on the opposite side of the alley as the proposed establishment. However,the church and the residence are in the Old Town zoning district,which is not a residential district, and a mix of uses including restaurants and drinking establishments are appropriate and encouraged. NOTE:If the use is allowed to commence on the property, the applicant is required to obtain a liquor license with the State, County and City prior to serving alcohol. F. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): (double read this) In the O-T zone district,there is not a setback requirement,there is a minimum building height of two stories,and there are requirements for streetscape improvements. The building in which this establishment is already located is within an existing one-story historic building. Other than an outdoor patio,no other extensions or additions are proposed as part of this business. Page 5 Item 5. 168 G. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Access to this business is provided from NE 2'St and E. Idaho Ave. This proposal was referred to ACHD,who had no comments. H. Parking(UDC 11-3C): UDC 11-3C-6B-3 requires one parking space for every one thousand square feet of gross floor area in all traditional neighborhood districts. Lawfully existing structures in traditional neighborhood districts shall not be required to comply with the requirements of this section except when a proposed addition increases the number of off-street parking spaces normally required,then the applicant shall provide additional parking. The business is within an existing building, and no building additions have occurred(covered outdoor seating is not considered an addition). This business is within the historic downtown core,where adaptive reuse of historic structures is encouraged and on-street parking in the area is plentiful. There are at least 17 existing on-street parking spaces in front of the business within 100 feet. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17) Detached sidewalks and streetscape improvements already exist along E. 2'St and E. Idaho Ave. I. Parkways No parkways are proposed with this project. J. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): Landscaping and streetscape improvements already exist along E. 2'St and E. Idaho Ave. K. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): An outdoor eating area has been approved for this project through a certificate of zoning compliance with design review. This includes a Y-6"fence bordering the outdoor area.No other fencing is existing or proposed. L. Utilities All utilities for the proposed development are already in place.No additional services are needed. M. Building Elevations No additional modifications to the existing building fagade have been proposed. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in Section VII per the Findings in Section VIII. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on May 6,2021.At the public hearing,the Commission moved to approve the subject conditional use permit request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing_: a. In favor: Joshua Evarts Page 6 Item 5. F169] b. In opposition:None c. Commenting: Joshua Evarts d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presentinggpplication: Alan Tiefenbach f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s) testimony a. None 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. None 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None Page 7 Item 5. [170] VII. EXHIBITS A. Approved Site Plan(CZC, DES A-2021-0048,March 26,2021) C=22 ea a r I ' a" B. Approved Elevations of Outdoor Sitting Area(CZC,DES A-2021-0048,March 26, 2021) 0 a. NORTH ELEVATION (BUILDING) 0 Page 8 Item 5. 171 C. Site Photos (date: 4/14/2021) 1 4 11kWX _ �-7 ' AHEAD, ROL - -T� �!It Existing business as viewed from E. Idaho Ave Rear of site as viewed from N. 2'St showing area of outdoor patio Page 9 Item 5. F172] VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. The Applicant shall have a maximum of two (2)years to commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval. If the use has not begun within two(2)years of approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to operation or a time extension must be requested in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F. 2. Applicant shall comply with all previous conditions associated with development of this site including CZC-11-023,DES 15-087,A-2017-0216, and CZC,DES A-2021-0048. 3. The Applicant shall have an ongoing obligation to comply with the specific use standards for a Drinking Establishment(UDC 11-4-3-10). 4. The business shall comply with all Idaho state,local and City code regulations regarding the sale, manufacturing, or distribution of alcoholic beverages. 5. Outdoor activity associated with the business shall be restricted to the 600 sq. ft. outdoor patio. 6. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-21)for the O-T zoning district. 7. The Applicant shall comply with the outdoor service and equipment area standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-12. 8. The Applicant shall comply with the outdoor lighting provisions as set forth in UDC 11-3A-11. 9. The applicant shall complete a certificate of zoning compliance for a change in use as required per UDC 11-5B-1. C. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=226106&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC 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 building is an existing building in the O-T zoning district. All parking, sidewalks and landscaping is already installed. The outdoor patio meets all setback requirements and does not encroach into any public right of way. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as Old Town. This designation includes the historic downtown and the true community center. Allowed uses include offices, retail and lodging, theatres, restaurants, and service retail for surrounding residents and visitors. The existing cigar bar and expansion to allow serving of alcohol will encourage a neighborhood "hang out"for locals and guests. This type of use is what has been envisioned for this area by the Comprehensive Plan. Page 10 Item 5. F173] 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. As mentioned, the existing and expanded use is within an existing historic building, and is within the Old Town district in which retail, restaurants and drinking establishments enhance the essential character of the area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The proposed use is within the old town area where the type of use proposed is anticipated. It will not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity any more than any of the other surrounding restaurants, coffeeshops and drinking establishments. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools,parks,police and fire protection,drainage structures,refuse disposal, water, and sewer. The proposed use will be served adequately by all public facilities and services. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The Commission finds the proposed use should not create any additional costs for public facilities and services and will be beneficial to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. This proposed cigar bar and drinking establishment is using existing tenant space within a historic building, and the Commission is recommending outdoor activities be restricted to the 600 sq.ft. outdoor patio. The surrounding area already consists of restaurants, retail, and drinking establishments as anticipated in the old town. The use is appropriate in this location. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) The proposed use will occur in a historic building in a historic district. The applicant has already made significant upgrades to the building, enhancing the area. The proposed use will contribute to a vibrant downtown space. Page 11 Planning Presentation and Outline for Land Use Hearings Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting May 20, 2021 FLUMPLANNED DEVELOPMENT •Control.of Applicant, City, and Boise Project Board of Piping large section of irrigation facility for benefit •Open space in excess of code.•Only access is through Prevail Sub. to the south.•8 min. is 4,000 sf).-Average lot size of 6,677 sf (R•8 zoning district (113 lots in Prevail Sub.).-for R18 building lots on 5.25 acres of land with request Changes to Agenda: Item #6: Prevail North Subdivision (H-2021-0021) Application(s):  Annexation and Zoning; Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 5.63 acres of land, zoned C2 in the County, located at 5150 S. Meridian Road (approximately ¼ mile south of Amity Road). Adjacent Land Use & Zoning:  North – R-4 zoning, undeveloped City property. County Dispatch tower also resides north of project.  East – R-8 zoning, undeveloped land  South – R-8 zoning, Prevail Subdivision (aka Percy Sub.)  West – Meridian Road; County RUT zoning west of road. History: N/A Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium Density Residential (3-8 du/ac) Summary of Request: The subject site is an approximate five (5) acre parcel (5.25 acre plat) in between multiple parcels that are already annexed into the City of Meridian. The site to the North is a city owned property reserved for a future well site that currently only has access to Meridian Road. To the South is the 113-lot Prevail Subdivision (approved in 2019) zoned R-8 with a future access to Meridian Road via a collector street, E. Quartz Creek Street, and a temporary emergency-only access to Meridian Road. The Applicant on this application is the same as that for Prevail Subdivision to the south making Prevail North a continuation of that subdivision. Consistent with the future land use designation of MDR (3-8 du/ac), the Applicant is proposing Prevail North with a gross density of 3.42 units per acre. Because this is an extension of the Prevail Subdivision, the Applicant is aligning the proposed lots of Prevail North with those to the south to ensure compatibility of lot sizes. Furthermore, due to the constraints of the site being deep but relatively narrow and having a waterway along the north boundary, the Applicant is only proposing homes along the south boundary of the site. The proposed use is detached single-family residential with an average lot size of 6,677 square feet and a minimum lot size of 5,362 square feet. The use is a permitted use in the requested R-8 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. The project is proposed as one phase but will be phase 3 of the Prevail Subdivision to the south. The revised plat is proposed with 18 building lots and 3 common lots on 5.25 acres and appears to meet all UDC dimensional standards for the requested R-8 zoning district. Applicant has submitted conceptual elevations of the detached SF homes; this use does not require Design Review but the elevations depict a majority of two- story homes with two-car garages with varying home styles noted as “Traditional,” “Craftsman,” and “Contemporary.” The elevations depict differing layouts of the same field materials of lap siding and stone with varying roof profiles offering an overall array of potential home facades. The subject site contains a large section of the Carlson Lateral, an irrigation lateral maintained by Boise Project Board of Control (BPBC). The Applicant is proposing to both reroute and pipe this lateral consistent with the desires of the City Engineer for the purpose of benefiting both this Applicant and the City owned property bordering the subject site on the north boundary. Upon further discussions with BPBC and in coordination with Public Works, the Applicant is proposing to pipe the entire segment of the lateral on both properties from Meridian Road east to nearly the east property boundary, as shown on the submitted preliminary plat. Piping this lateral will allow for more buildable area of the subject site, fix some of the topography issues for the City owned property and this site, and allow for easier maintenance by BPBC. Staff supports the piping of this irrigation lateral and the proposed plan complies with city code. The proposed public streets are proposed as 33-foot street sections with attached and detached 5-foot sidewalks allowing for on-street parking where no driveways exist; including the entire north side of the new east-west street minus the bulb-out. Attached sidewalks are proposed along the new street except for the north side of the street where the sidewalk is detached and a parkway is proposed. Access is proposed via extension of Keyport Avenue, a local street stubbed to the southern boundary from the Prevail Subdivision. The submitted plans show Keyport extending into the site and then heading both east and west as Liberator Street to end in permanent cul- de-sacs at both ends of the site, in alignment with ACHD policy. Liberator Street is proposed as approximately 908’ in length from the center of the western cul-de-sac to the east property line. Although, the length of the street from east to west is greater than 750’ in length, S. Keyport intersects this street approximately half way to break up the block length so there are no code issues with the proposed block length. In addition, UDC 11-6C-3 (Subdivision Design Standards) notes that a dead-end street cannot be greater than 500’ in length without an intersecting street or Council Waiver. Because of S. Keyport intersecting Liberator, neither the west or east cul-de-sac is greater than 500’ therefore not requiring any waiver. It is admittedly an unusual road design but Staff considers it the most efficient design for livability and access when considering the site Changes to Agenda: None Item #6: Prevail North Subdivision (H-2021-0021) Application(s):  Annexation and Zoning; Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 5.63 acres of land, zoned C2 in the County, located at 5150 S. Meridian Road (approximately ¼ mile south of Amity Road). Adjacent Land Use & Zoning:  North – R-4 zoning, undeveloped City property. County Dispatch tower also resides north of project.  East – R-8 zoning, undeveloped land  South – R-8 zoning, Prevail Subdivision (aka Percy Sub.)  West – Meridian Road; County RUT zoning west of road. History: N/A Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium Density Residential (3-8 du/ac) Summary of Request: The subject site is an approximate five (5) acre parcel (5.25 acre plat) in between multiple parcels that are already annexed into the City of Meridian. The site to the North is a city owned property reserved for a future well site that currently only has access to Meridian Road. To the South is the 113-lot Prevail Subdivision (approved in 2019) zoned R-8 with a future access to Meridian Road via a collector street, E. Quartz Creek Street, and a temporary emergency-only access to Meridian Road. The Applicant on this application is the same as that for Prevail Subdivision to the south making Prevail North a continuation of that subdivision. Consistent with the future land use designation of MDR (3-8 du/ac), the Applicant is proposing Prevail North with a gross density of 3.42 units per acre. Because this is an extension of the Prevail Subdivision, the Applicant is aligning the proposed lots of Prevail North with those to the south to ensure compatibility of lot sizes. Furthermore, due to the constraints of the site being deep but relatively narrow and having a waterway along the north boundary, the Applicant is only proposing homes along the south boundary of the site. The proposed use is detached single-family residential with an average lot size of 6,677 square feet and a minimum lot size of 5,362 square feet. The use is a permitted use in the requested R-8 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. The project is proposed as one phase but will be phase 3 of the Prevail Subdivision to the south. The revised plat is proposed with 18 building lots and 3 common lots on 5.25 acres and appears to meet all UDC dimensional standards for the requested R-8 zoning district. Applicant has submitted conceptual elevations of the detached SF homes; this use does not require Design Review but the elevations depict a majority of two- story homes with two-car garages with varying home styles noted as “Traditional,” “Craftsman,” and “Contemporary.” The elevations depict differing layouts of the same field materials of lap siding and stone with varying roof profiles offering an overall array of potential home facades. The subject site contains a large section of the Carlson Lateral, an irrigation lateral maintained by Boise Project Board of Control (BPBC). The Applicant is proposing to both reroute and pipe this lateral consistent with the desires of the City Engineer for the purpose of benefiting both this Applicant and the City owned property bordering the subject site on the north boundary. Upon further discussions with BPBC and in coordination with Public Works, the Applicant is proposing to pipe the entire segment of the lateral on both properties from Meridian Road east to nearly the east property boundary, as shown on the submitted preliminary plat. Piping this lateral will allow for more buildable area of the subject site, fix some of the topography issues for the City owned property and this site, and allow for easier maintenance by BPBC. Staff supports the piping of this irrigation lateral and the proposed plan complies with city code. The proposed public streets are proposed as 33-foot street sections with attached and detached 5-foot sidewalks allowing for on-street parking where no driveways exist; including the entire north side of the new east-west street minus the bulb-out. Attached sidewalks are proposed along the new street except for the north side of the street where the sidewalk is detached and a parkway is proposed. Access is proposed via extension of Keyport Avenue, a local street stubbed to the southern boundary from the Prevail Subdivision. The submitted plans show Keyport extending into the site and then heading both east and west as Liberator Street to end in permanent cul- de-sacs at both ends of the site, in alignment with ACHD policy. Liberator Street is proposed as approximately 908’ in length from the center of the western cul-de-sac to the east property line. Although, the length of the street from east to west is greater than 750’ in length, S. Keyport intersects this street approximately half way to break up the block length so there are no code issues with the proposed block length. In addition, UDC 11-6C-3 (Subdivision Design Standards) notes that a dead-end street cannot be greater than 500’ in length without an intersecting street or Council Waiver. Because of S. Keyport intersecting Liberator, neither the west or east cul-de-sac is greater than 500’ therefore not requiring any waiver. It is admittedly an unusual road design but Staff considers it the most efficient design for livability and access when considering the site constraints of a large irrigation facility along nearly the entire northern boundary and topography throughout the site. Furthermore, there are no homes fronting along the north side of the proposed local street which further mitigates any Staff concern regarding its length on the north side of the proposed street. The Applicant is also proposing two stub streets to adjacent properties; one to the north boundary out of the west cul-de-sac and one to the east boundary out of the east cul-de-sac. The original plat proposed both of these stub streets in the east quarter of the site but following conversations with Public Works the Applicant moved the stub street to the north to the west quarter of the site due to future plans for the City well site and topography issues.  Staff supports the overall road layout and stub street locations as proposed on the revised preliminary plat. Though there is potential for topography to complicate the future road extension to the east, Staff highly recommends maintaining the stub street to the east for added future connectivity through the Brighton parcel to the east. This recommendation is based both in code (UDC 11-3A-3) and from recommendations of the Meridian Fire Department for better neighborhood connectivity and emergency response access as properties to the southeast develop in the future. With the revised landscape plans received following publication of the staff report, the proposed landscaping complies with all UDC requirements and Staff will strike some of the conditions of approval following the Commission hearing to reflect this. This includes landscaping within common open space, within the proposed parkway, and the landscaping along Meridian Road/SH 69. Along Meridian Road, the Applicant is required to construct a 10’ wide multi-use pathway within the street buffer AND construct noise abatement consistent with UDC 11-3H-4 which requires a berm/wall combination that is at least 10 feet above the highway centerline elevation. The proposed landscape plans show the multi-use pathway segment, adequate landscaping, and the required berm/wall noise abatement; therefore, complying with code requirements. As noted, the subject site is greater than 5 acres in size requiring at least 10% qualified open space and 1 amenity per UDC 11-3G-3 standards. The Applicant is continuing a segment of multi-use pathway along the Meridian Road frontage which qualifies as the required amenity. Because this plat would be an extension of the already approved Prevail Subdivision to the south, the Applicant has indicated these future residents will be able to use the other amenities and open space there. The closest amenity to this phase is an open space lot with a playground that is located due south from the Keyport Avenue extension and has a micro-path in direct alignment with that amenity lot. The minimum amount of qualified open space that should be provided is .53 acres based on the plat size of 5.25 acres. With the revised landscape plans, the numbers discussed within the staff report are not accurate. The Applicant is proposing approximately 1.15 acres of overall open space (approximately 22%) with .74 acres of that area as qualifying open space, which is 14%. The change that occurred since publication of the staff report is that the fencing along the Carlson Lateral easement has been moved to make the easement area non-accessible and therefore cannot be counted towards the qualified open space calculations. Fencing the easement area off aligns with the BPBC comment letter and city code. Despite being less than previously thought, the proposed open space still exceeds the minimum requirements and Staff is still in support of the proposed open space and open space landscaping. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of requested project with the conditions of approval 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- 2021-0021, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 20, 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- 0021, as presented during the hearing on May 20, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0021 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) constraints of a large irrigation facility along nearly the entire northern boundary and topography throughout the site. Furthermore, there are no homes fronting along the north side of the proposed local street which further mitigates any Staff concern regarding its length on the north side of the proposed street. The Applicant is also proposing two stub streets to adjacent properties; one to the north boundary out of the west cul-de-sac and one to the east boundary out of the east cul-de-sac. The original plat proposed both of these stub streets in the east quarter of the site but following conversations with Public Works the Applicant moved the stub street to the north to the west quarter of the site due to future plans for the City well site and topography issues.  Staff supports the overall road layout and stub street locations as proposed on the revised preliminary plat. Though there is potential for topography to complicate the future road extension to the east, Staff highly recommends maintaining the stub street to the east for added future connectivity through the Brighton parcel to the east. This recommendation is based both in code (UDC 11-3A-3) and from recommendations of the Meridian Fire Department for better neighborhood connectivity and emergency response access as properties to the southeast develop in the future. With the revised landscape plans received following publication of the staff report, the proposed landscaping complies with all UDC requirements and Staff will strike some of the conditions of approval following the Commission hearing to reflect this. This includes landscaping within common open space, within the proposed parkway, and the landscaping along Meridian Road/SH 69. Along Meridian Road, the Applicant is required to construct a 10’ wide multi-use pathway within the street buffer AND construct noise abatement consistent with UDC 11-3H-4 which requires a berm/wall combination that is at least 10 feet above the highway centerline elevation. The proposed landscape plans show the multi-use pathway segment, adequate landscaping, and the required berm/wall noise abatement; therefore, complying with code requirements. As noted, the subject site is greater than 5 acres in size requiring at least 10% qualified open space and 1 amenity per UDC 11-3G-3 standards. The Applicant is continuing a segment of multi-use pathway along the Meridian Road frontage which qualifies as the required amenity. Because this plat would be an extension of the already approved Prevail Subdivision to the south, the Applicant has indicated these future residents will be able to use the other amenities and open space there. The closest amenity to this phase is an open space lot with a playground that is located due south from the Keyport Avenue extension and has a micro-path in direct alignment with that amenity lot. The minimum amount of qualified open space that should be provided is .53 acres based on the plat size of 5.25 acres. With the revised landscape plans, the numbers discussed within the staff report are not accurate. The Applicant is proposing approximately 1.15 acres of overall open space (approximately 22%) with .74 acres of that area as qualifying open space, which is 14%. The change that occurred since publication of the staff report is that the fencing along the Carlson Lateral easement has been moved to make the easement area non-accessible and therefore cannot be counted towards the qualified open space calculations. Fencing the easement area off aligns with the BPBC comment letter and city code. Despite being less than previously thought, the proposed open space still exceeds the minimum requirements and Staff is still in support of the proposed open space and open space landscaping. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of requested project with the conditions of approval 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- 2021-0021, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 20, 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- 0021, as presented during the hearing on May 20, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0021 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #7: Gem Prep South (H-2021-0020) Application(s):  Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 5.95 acres of land, zoned C-C, located approximately 1/8 mile east of the S. Locust Grove/E. Lake Hazel Rd. intersection on the south side of Lake Hazel. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Use Community (MU-C) Summary of Request: Conditional use permit for an education institution in the C-C zoning district that proposes direct access via a collector street and where there is not a safe, separate pedestrian and bikeway access between the neighborhood and the school site. th A K-12 grade college preparatory charter school is proposed. Future residential neighborhoods are planned to the north & south; a 77- acre City Park (Discovery) is located directly to the east. The school is open to public streets on all sides & access is proposed via adjacent local & collector streets – no access is proposed via Lake Hazel, an arterial street. Striped cross-walks, signage and school zone flashing signage along with a crossing guard is proposed for the safety of students walking & biking to school. The parent pick-up area is located on the north side of the building; the bus pick-up/drop-off is located on the south side of the building, which will prevent vehicle conflicts. A minimum of 113 off-street parking spaces are required to be provided; a total of 118 spaces are proposed in excess of UDC standards. A 10’ wide multi-use pathway is proposed along the northern boundary of the site along Lake Hazel Rd. The Williams natural gas pipeline bisects this site within a 75’ wide easement. Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown consisting of a 2-story 45,110 s.f. structure that incorporates various colors of horizontal lap siding & metal panels in various trim colors. Final design is required to comply with the design standards in the ASM. Written Testimony: Bill Hadlock, Applicant – In agreement w/the conditions in the staff report Staff Recommendation: Approval Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2021-0020, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 20, 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-2021-0020, as presented during the hearing on May 20, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0020 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #8: The 10 at Meridian (H-2021-0025) Application(s):  Annexation & Zoning Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 40.30 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located at 75 S. Ten Mile Rd. at the SWC of W. Franklin Rd. & S. Ten Mile Rd. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-Commercial in TMISAP Summary of Request: The Applicant proposes to annex 40.30 acres of land with R-40 (13.04-acres) and C-C (27.25-acres) zoning districts consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. A conceptual development plan was submitted as shown that proposes a mix of offices, a financial establishment, retail pads, a grocery store, vertically integrated residential and multi-family residential in accord with the associated MU-COM, HDR and MU-RES, FLUM designations for the property. A phasing plan was not submitted; however, the Applicant states the 3-story flats and townhome style multi-family residential and clubhouse would develop in the first phase along with the associated infrastructure; the 4-story high-density multi-family would follow with the commercial last as tenants commit. Access is proposed as shown on the conceptual development plan. ACHD supports the following: Access A – full access; Access B – right-in/right-out only; Access C – right-out only; Access D – right-in/right-out only; and Cobalt – right-in/right-out/left-in only. Staff recommends access is restricted through the DA as supported by ACHD. Cobalt Dr. is proposed to be extended to the west from Ten Mile – the eastern portion lies entirely on the subject property and stubs to the south to be extended entirely on the adjacent property to the south. The Applicant requests Council approval of a waiver to UDC 11-3A-6B.3 for portions of the Kennedy Lateral, which bisects this site, to remain open and not be piped. Written Testimony:  Cody Black, property owner immediately to the south – Objects to the western portion of Cobalt Dr. being located entirely on their property, leaving them responsible for its construction. He requests Cobalt be located entirely north of their property.  Wendy Shrief, JUB, Applicant – In agreement with the staff report provisions. Staff Recommendation: Approval with the requirement of a DA. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2021-0025, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 20, 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- 0025, as presented during the hearing on May 20, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0025 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item 6. Ll 74 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Prevail North Subdivision (H-2021-0021) by Schultz Development, LLC, Located at 5150 S. Meridian Rd. A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 5.63 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 19 single-family residential lots and 4 common lots on 5.25 acres of land. Item 6. 175 (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: May 20, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Prevail North Subdivision (H-2021-0021) by Schultz Development, LLC, Located at 5150 S. Meridian Rd. A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 5.63 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 19 single-family residential lots and 4 common lots on 5.25 acres of land. 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: May 20, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 6 PROJECT NAME: Prevail North Subdivision (H-2021-0021) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Item 6. ■ STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 5/20/2021 « Legend DATE: FEIIP,,i,ct Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission " '' ; FROM: Joe Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2021-0021 Prevail North Subdivision ` LOCATION: The site is located at 5150 S. Meridian Road, on the east side of Meridian Road ' and approximately '/4 mile south of E. ---- Amity Road,in the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 r of Section 31,Township 3N.,Range IE. ; I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation&Zoning of 5.63 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district and a preliminary plat consisting of 18 single-family residential lots and 3 common lots on 5.25 acres of land. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage AZ—5.63;Plat—5.25 acres Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residential 3-8 du/ac Existing Land Uses Vacant land Proposed Land Uses Detached Single-family Residential Lots #and e;bldg./common) 18 residential building lots Phasing Plan(#of phases) Proposed as one phase(essentially the third phase of the Prevail Subdivision Number of Residential Units 18 single-family units Density Gross—3.42 du/ac Open Space(acres,total 0.83 acres(36,185 square feet),or 15.82%total open /buffer/ ualified space;0.75 acres,or 14.3%qualified open s ace Amenity Multi-use Pathway Physical Features(waterways, Carlson Lateral crosses north property boundary twice. hazards,flood plain,hillside) Applicant is proposing to reroute and pipe this lateral. See further analysis in Section V.N. Neighborhood meeting date;#of March 30,2021 —No attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) N/A Pagel Item 6. 177 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no Access Access is proposed via extension of an existing local street from Prevail No. (Arterial/Collectors/State 2 to the south. Hwy/Local)(Existing and Through Prevail No.2 and a segment of collector street(Quartz Creek Proposed) _ Street),access is then to S.Meridian Road/SH 69. Stub Applicant is proposing internal local streets to end in two cul-de-sacs,one to Street/Interconnectivity/Cross the east and one to the west.The western cul-de-sac would extend right-of- Access way to the northern property line for possible future extension through a city owned property. The eastern cul-de-sac is shown with a stub to the east property line for future connectivity to the east. Existing Road Network No Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ No.Applicant will be required to construct the buffer,noise abatement,and Buffers detached multi-use pathway segment along Meridian Road/SH 69. Proposed Road No road improvements are required with this application. Improvements CIP/Five Year Work Plan for nearby roads: • Amity Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 5-lanes from Meridian Road(SH-69)to Locust Grave Read between 2036 and 2040. • Lake Hazel Road is listed in the CIP to 5-lanes from Meridian Road(SH-69)to Locust Grove Road between 2036 and 2040. • The intersection of Amity Road and Meridian Road(5H-69)is listed in the CIP to be widened to 6-lanes on the north leg,6-lanes on the south,7-lanes east,and 7-lanes on the west leg, and signalized between 2031 and 2035. • The intersection of Lake Hazel Road and Meridian Road(SH-69)is listed in the CIP to be widened to 6-lanes on the north leg,6-lanes on the south,Nanes on the east,and 7-lanes on the west leg and signalized between 2036 and 2040. Distance to nearest City Park 1.8 miles to Discovery Park +size Fire Service • Distance to Fire 3.1 miles from Fire Station#6(2.1 miles from proposed new fire station in Station South Meridian;response time would be approximately 3 minutes from proposed station). • Fire Response Time A portion of the project lies within the Meridian Fire response time goal of 5 minutes. • Resource Reliability Fire Station#6 reliability is 87%(above the goal of 80%) • Risk Identification Risk Factor 2—Residential with hazards(open waterway) • Accessibility • Proposed project meets all required road widths,and turnaround dimensions. • Emergency access in Prevail No.2 to the south is meant to be temporary; additional access to the east or north is preferred by the Meridian Fire Department. Police Service • Concerns None/no comments Wastewater Page 2 Item 6. 178 Description Details Page • Distance to Sewer N/A Services • Sewer Shed South Black Cat Trunkshed • Estimated Project See application Sewer ERU's • WRRF Declining 14.09 Balance • Project Consistent Yes with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns • Flow is committed Water • Distance to Services 0' • Pressure Zone 5 • Estimated Project See application Water ERU's • Water Quality None Concerns • Project Consistent Yes with Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns • Water main will need to be installed in S Keyport Ave to connect to the existing water stub from Prevail Sub Phase 2 • The water main in S Scandia Ave that stubs to the City of Meridian property will need to be discussed with Public Works. C. Project Area Maps .Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend tsity Legend ye nProject Location Project Location IN i H a Medium Density Residential Low Density Residential .Zoning Map .Planned Development Map Page 3 Item 6. 179 Legend 0 J Project Location RUT I-L Legend m s � RU_T Project Location y i City Limits --- R1 Planned Parcels R-8 R°_g R-4 R-4 RUT __FRU��R-41 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Matt Schultz, Schultz Development, LLC—PO Box 1115, Meridian,ID 83680 B. Owner: Carl Reiterman—2697 S. Linder Road,Meridian,ID 83642 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 4/30/2021 Radius notification mailed to properties within 500 feet 4/27/2021 Site Posting 5/7/2021 Nextdoor posting 4/27/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https:llwww.meridianciu.or /�compplan) Medium-Density Residential(MDR)—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 site is an approximate five (5) acre parcel in between multiple parcels that are already annexed into the City of Meridian. The site to the North is a city owned property reserved for a future well site that currently only has access to Meridian Road. To the South is the 113-lot Page 4 Item 6. F180] Prevail Subdivision (approved in 2019)zoned R-8 with a future access to Meridian Road via a collector street, E. Quartz Creek Street, and a temporary emergency-only access to Meridian Road. The Applicant on this application is the same as who received approvals for the Prevail Subdivision to the south therefore making Prevail North a continuation of the already approved Prevail Subdivision. Commensurate with the future land use designation of MDR, the Applicant is proposing Prevail North with a gross density of 3.42 units per acre; therefore,proposing a residential project at the low end of the allowable density. Because this is an extension of the Prevail Subdivision to the south, the Applicant is aligning the proposed lots of Prevail North with those to the south to ensure compatibility of lot sizes. Furthermore, due to the constraints of the site being deep but relatively narrow and having a waterway along the north boundary, the Applicant is only proposing homes along the south boundary of the site. Stafffinds the proposed project to be generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Specific Comprehensive Plan policies are discussed and analyzed below. 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 and subsequent recordation.A final plat will not be accepted until the DA is executed and the AZ ordinance is approved by City Council. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.orglcompplan): The applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are cited below with Staff analysis in italics. "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for diverse housing types throughout the City"(2.01.01 G). The proposed project offers a density and site design that mirrors that to the south. Because of the relatively small lot size, strict adherence to this policy is not feasible and not in the best interest of the City when considering the constraint of the city owned property to the north. Staff finds the addition of 18 more lots matching the already approved project to the south as merely an extension of that project. "Establish and maintain levels of service for public facilities and services, including water, sewer, police,transportation, schools, fire, and parks"(3.02.01G).All public utilities are available for this project site due to the existing stubs abutting the site to the south within the right-of-way of the local street, S. Keyport Avenue. This project also lies within the Fire Department response time goal. However, the singular public road access is through the Prevail Subdivision to the south, currently under development. Fire code only allows 30 homes off of one access and with the two projects combined, there will be 135 homes off of this access. This is why, as seen on the plat and in previous approvals, an emergency-only access is required to Meridian Road and is located adjacent to the southern boundary of this plat. Despite meeting Fire Code, Meridian Fire has concerns over the approved access points and recommends requiring stub streets to both the north and east of this plat for future connectivity. West Ada School District has not made comments on this application but an additional 18 homes are expected to generate approximately 14 school age children which can be easily absorbed into the school system, according to the ratio of 0.8 kids per household. Staff finds that the existing and planned development of the immediate area create conditions for levels of service to and for this proposed project that meet code requirements. Page 5 Item 6. ■ "Preserve,protect, and provide open space for recreation,conservation, and aesthetics" (4.05.01F). The Applicant is proposing this project with .75 acres of qualified open space, or 14.3%. The area chosen for the open space currently contains an irrigation lateral that is to be rerouted and placed on the shared property line between this property and the city owned property to the north—the Applicant has discussed this with Public Works and received approval to do this work. Placing the open space in this location allows for a relatively long and large open space area on one side of the new local street and preserves the area above the lateral for maintenance and for adequate recreation. "Promote area beautification and community identity through context sensitive building and site design principles, appropriate signage, and attractive landscaping."(5.01.02C). As discussed above, the area of most notable open space is the large open space lot along the north property boundary. This open space area is proposed with adequate open area, a detached sidewalk, and appropriate landscaping to beautify the space while not being overwhelmed with trees that would otherwise limit the open area uses of the space. In addition, the Applicant will be required to continue the multi-use pathway and landscaping along Meridian Road adding to the area beautification along a major roadway. "Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity."(2.02.01D).Proposed project is extending the attached sidewalks from the south to allow easy access to the future pedestrian facilities and amenities within Prevail Subdivision. "Ensure that new development within existing residential neighborhoods is cohesive and complementary in design and construction." (2.02.02F).As discussed, the Applicant is proposing lot sizes and lot lines that match those directly abutting the site to the south. This proposed density and lot placement should provide a cohesive project with Prevail Subdivision to the south. "Require new development to establish street connections to existing local roads and collectors as well as to underdeveloped adjacent properties."(6.01.02C). The Applicant is required to and is proposing to extend the abutting local street, S. Keynote, into the site and then "T"off the street by heading east and west with new streets for access to the proposed homes. In order to meet this policy as well as city development code, the Applicant is also proposing stub streets to the east and to the north. Further discussion and analysis on this are below in Section F,Access. Staff finds the Applicants proposed street connections comply with this policy. Staff finds this development to be generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are no existing structures on site beyond the existing irrigation lateral that bends south into the site from the north and runs along nearly the entire north property boundary line. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed use is detached single-family residential with an average lot size of 6,677 square feet and a minimum lot size of 5,362 square feet. This use is a permitted use in the requested R-8 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. Due to the relatively small size of the development(5 acres),the project is proposed to be constructed in one phase but will be phase 3 of the Prevail Subdivision to the south. The proposed use, lot sizes, and lot alignment should provide for a development that is cohesive with the adjacent development to the south. Page 6 Item 6. ■ E. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The residential lots appear to meet all UDC dimensional standards per the submitted plat. In addition,all subdivision developments are also required to comply with Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards(UDC 11-6C-3). The proposed preliminary plat and submitted plans appear to meet all UDC requirements. F. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): The Applicant submitted conceptual building elevations for the proposed detached single-family homes.Note that detached single-family homes do not require Design Review approval therefore Staff does not review these for compliance with any standards. However,the submitted elevations depict majority two-story homes with two-car garages and varying home styles noted as"Traditional,""Craftsman,"and"Contemporary."The elevations depict differing field materials of lap siding and stone with varying roof profiles offering an overall array of potential homes. G. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Access is proposed via extension of Keyport Avenue, a local street stubbed to the southern boundary from the Prevail Subdivision. The submitted plans show Keyport extending into the site and then heading both east and west as Liberator Street to end in permanent cul-de-sacs at both ends of the site, in alignment with ACHD policy. The extension of all local streets is proposed as 33-foot wide street sections with the exception of a bulb-out along the north side of Liberator Street at the terminus of Keyport Avenue. This bulb-out is intended to be a traffic calming measure because the overall Liberator street, east-west, is greater than 750' in length(Liberator is proposed as approximately 908' in length from the center of the western cul-de-sac to the east property line). ACHD notes in their staff report that this type of traffic calming is acceptable but has not given a definitive approval of the location proposed on the revised preliminary plat. The Applicant will continue working with ACHD following any approvals received from the City and will likely be finalized with the final plat submittal at a future date. Staff is not concerned with the proposed location of the bulb-out and believes it will provide the desired traffic calming effects. Although,the length of the street from east to west is greater than 750' in length, S.Keyport intersects this street approximately half way to break up the block length.In addition,UDC 11-6C-3 notes that a dead-end street cannot be greater than 750' in length without an intersecting street.Because of S.Keyport intersecting Liberator,neither the west or east cul-de-sac is greater than 500' therefore not requiring any Council Waiver.It is admittedly an unusual road design but Staff considers it the most efficient design for livability and access when considering the site constraints of a large irrigation facility along nearly the entire northern boundary and topography throughout the site.Furthermore,there are no homes fronting along the north side of the proposed local street which further mitigates any Staff concern regarding its length on one side. The Applicant is also proposing two stub streets to adjacent properties; one to the north boundary out of the west cul-de-sac and one to the east boundary out of the east cul-de-sac. The original plat proposed both of these stub streets in the east quarter of the site but following conversations with Public Works the Applicant moved the stub street to the north to the west quarter of the site due to future plans for the City well site and topography issues. In congruence with this premise, the Applicant has also sited major topography issues with stubbing a street to the east boundary of the site and has specifically noted there could be a ten(10)foot elevation difference between the east stub street finish grade and the current grade of the Brighton owned property to the east. Page 7 Item 6. F183] Furthermore,the Applicant has also provided a conceptual drawing from the land owner to the east in order to show that a stub street to the east is not necessary—the submitted concept plan for the adjacent property does not show a street abutting the east property boundary of the subject site and instead appears to show an open space lot(see Exhibit VII.F). It should be noted that this concept plan is an older concept plan and the adjacent land owners do not have a solid plan in place for the area abutting the proposed plat. Staff supports the overall road layout and stub street locations as proposed on the revised preliminary plat. Though there is potential for topography to complicate the future road extension to the east, Staff highly recommends maintaining the stub street to the east for added future connectivity through the Brighton parcel to the east. This recommendation is based both in code(UDC I1-3A-3) and from recommendations of the Meridian Fire Department for better neighborhood connectivity and emergency response access as properties to the southeast develop in the future. H. Parking(UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table I]- 3C-6 for single-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. Staff will confirm compliance with these standards at the time of building permit submittal for each residence. In addition,the proposed 33-foot wide street section accommodates on-street parking where no driveways exist and where there is no bulb-out. Furthermore,no on-street parking is allowed within any part of either cul-de-sac at the end of the new local streets. I. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): 5-foot wide attached sidewalks are proposed along the proposed streets except for that sidewalk adjacent to the large open space lot where 5-foot detached sidewalks with an 8-foot landscaped parkway are proposed instead. These sidewalks will be an extension of the pedestrian circulation of Prevail Subdivision to the south. The proposed sidewalks and parkway meet UDC 11-3A-17 standards and ACHD standards. In addition to the internal sidewalks,the Applicant is required to construct a segment of 10-foot wide multi-use pathway along Meridian Road,per the Master Pathways Plan. The Applicant is showing this required pathway segment within a landscaped common lot,per code requirements. J. Development Along State Highways(UDC 11-3H): The proposed project has frontage along Meridian Road/SH 69 which requires noise abatement per UDC 11-3H-4. The Applicant is proposing to construct a 4-foot berm with a 6-foot wall on top of it to total 10' above SH 69 centerline height, as required by code. This proposal matches what was approved in Prevail Subdivision to the south. Due to this segment of the wall being less than 300' in length, code does not require modulation in the wall plane. Other analysis regarding access standards of this code section are analyzed above in Section F. K. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): The required landscaping regulated by code within the proposed development are the following areas: that area within the proposed parkways along the local street extension(UDC 11-3A-17 and UDC 11-313); the common open space lot, and; the required landscape buffer to Meridian Road. The submitted landscape plans show landscaping in these areas as proposed. The proposed 8-foot wide parkway is approximately 740'in length on the revised plat requiring at least 21 trees (I per every 35 linear feet). The submitted landscape plan does not show compliance with this requirement because it is shown with less than 21 trees. In addition, the plat Page 8 Item 6. ■ has been revised since the original application submittal and the submitted landscape plans have not been revised to match the new road layout. Regardless, the Applicant should revise the landscape plans prior to the City Council hearing to ensure they match the revised preliminary plat and show compliance with the landscaping requirements. In addition, common open space is required to be landscaped with one(1) tree for every 8,000 square feet of open space. The large open space area is shown as 32,709 square feet in the development table on the preliminary plat. However, Staff's area analysis shows a figure closer to 36,500 square feet. Based on Staffs calculation, the minimum number of trees that are required within the open space lot is five (5) trees. The submitted landscape plans show six (6) trees proposed exceeding the minimum UDC requirements. The landscape buffer along Meridian Road is required to be 35'wide and contain the required multi-use pathway within it. The submitted landscape plans show compliance with UDC requirements for the number of trees, tree spacing/grouping, and additional vegetative ground cover. However, the Applicant is only showing a 25'wide common lot on the preliminary plat for the required street buffer. Therefore, the Applicant should correct both the plat and the landscape plans to depict the required 35'wide buffer. The Applicant is also proposing a micro pathway from the western cul-de-sac to the multi-use pathway and does not appear to have the correct landscaping. UDC 11-3B-12 requires that trees be placed on both sides of the pathway; the Applicant has only proposed trees on the south side of the pathway. Staff is not aware of any easements encumbering the north side of the pathway and the landscape strip appears to be the minimum 5-foot width. Therefore, the Applicant should move one of the trees to the other side of the micro path; Staff recommends the center tree of the three currently shown on the south side of this pathway. Although there is no code requirement for this change, Staff also recommends removing the shrub bed located in the center of the large open space lot. By removing this planter bed and the shrubs there would be an un obstructed area in the center of the open space lot that is at least 9,000 square feet in size; it is rare for a subdivision to provide an area this large for children to play in without obstruction. If the Applicant desires to still include the same number of shrubs as currently shown, they could disperse them to the planter beds shown further to the west and east on the landscape plan. L. Qualified Open Space and Amenities (UDC 11-3G): The subject site is 5.63 acres in size with a plat over 5.25 acres in size requiring at least one(1) amenity and 0.56 acres of qualified open space per UDC 11-3G-3. The Applicant is continuing a segment of multi-use pathway along the Meridian Road frontage which qualifies as the required amenity. Because this plat would be an extension of the already approved Prevail Subdivision,the Applicant has indicated these future residents will be able to use the other amenities and open space in Prevail. The closest amenity to this phase is an open space lot with a playground that is located due south from the Keyport Avenue extension and has a micro path in direct alignment with that amenity lot. Should Commission/Council find that this distance is too great for the future residents of Prevail North to walk to utilize the playground, Staff recommends they require an additional amenity with the large open space lot proposed on this subject site. To help ensure the amenities and open spaces are shared, Staff is including a DA provision that all of the common areas be owned and maintained by the same homeowner's association. As discussed previously,the Applicant is proposing open space in excess of the code required 0.56 acres. Overall,the Applicant is proposing the large open space lot along the north property boundary, a micro-path lot, and the landscape buffer to Meridian Road as qualifying open space—cumulatively these areas amount to 49,878 square feet, or 1.15 acres, approximately 22% Page 9 Item 6. ■ of the 5.25 plat area. However,this calculation uses the 25' landscape buffer width along Meridian Road instead of the required 35' width. Therefore,the actual amount of qualified open space should be slightly larger. The Applicant should correct the open space exhibit to reflect both the revised layout and the correct amount of qualified open space. Staff utilized the lot sizes shown on the revised preliminary plat to obtain the above calculations so Staff is comfortable stating the Applicant is proposing qualified open space in vast excess of code requirements. A Fencing(UDC 11-3A-61 11-3A-7): All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. Fencing is proposed as shown on the landscape plan and appears to meet UDC standards as proposed. Should any fencing locations need to be revised to accommodate any irrigation easement requirements, the Applicant should notify Staff and submit revised drawings at the applicable future application submittals (i.e. final plat and/or final plat signature). N. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-6): The subject site contains a large section of the Carlson Lateral, an irrigation lateral maintained by Boise Project Board of Control(BPBC). The Applicant is proposing to both reroute and pipe this lateral consistent with the desires of the City Engineer for the purpose of benefiting both this Applicant and the City owned property bordering the subject site on the north boundary. Upon further discussions with BPBC and in coordination with Public Works,the Applicant is proposing to pipe the entire segment of the lateral on both properties from Meridian Road east to nearly the east property boundary, as shown on the submitted preliminary plat in Exhibit VII.B. Piping this lateral will allow for more buildable area of the subject site, fix some of the topography issues for the City owned property, and allow for easier maintenance by BPBC. Staff supports the piping of this irrigation lateral and the proposed plan complies with UDC 11-3A-6. O. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-15): The Applicant is required to provide a pressurized irrigation system for the development in accord with 11-3A-15. The Applicant is showing a pressurized irrigation system on the landscape plans commensurate with code requirements. Land Development will review these plans in more detail at a later date when specific irrigation plans are submitted with the Final Plat application. 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 preliminary plat application per the Findings in Section IX of this staff report. B. Commission: Enter Summary of Commission Decision. C. City Council: To be heard at future date. Page 10 Item 6. F186] VII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation and Zoning Legal Descriptions and Exhibit Maps EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION FOR PREVAIL NORTH SUBDIVISION CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXATION AND REZONE A portion of Government Lot 1 of Section 31,T.31N., R.1 E., B.M., Meridian,Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the NW corner of said Section 31 from which the W114 corner of said Section 31 bears South 00°37'56"West, 2641.54 feet; thence along the West boundary line of said Section 31 South 00°37'56"West, 1,113.77 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence leaving said West boundary line North 89°39'29"East, 1,184.97 feet to a point on the East boundary line of said Government Lot 1; thence along the East boundary line of said Government Lot 1 South 00°20'43"West, 206.98 feet to the SE corner of said Government Lot 1; thence along the South boundary line of said Government Lot 1 South 89°39'29"West, 1,186.01 feet to the SW corner of said Government Lot 1; thence along the West boundary line of said Section 31 North 00°37'56"East,207.00 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 5.63 acres, more or less. � OF 1D�1 Gy.O Page 1 of 1 Page 11 Item 6. Fl 87 S25 S30 E. AMITY ROAD S36 531 I I^ r<i UNPLATTED RPOB N89'39'29"E 1184.97' Do 0 x Z L ^ ZONE R-8 IN 4 I0 ¢_ m N 1 w 245355 s f. UNPLATTED o L, 3 5.63 o.c. 10 E2o ,o m wowIu7 0 j- N yj m cci 10 I O S89'39'29"W 11MOV III UNPLATTED EN I^ 0 �^ 1/4 - Safi�S31 A ¢ ENSFQ sG�o N SCALE: 1"=100' a 7729 0 25 50 100 200 C��T�`0 JZ'0�� ?Y G.OA oc 1t—N5 ewe Not NORTJ annm reaensAr 3 9 2021 12:33:05 All IDAHO EXHIBIT DRAWING FOR 21 NO. 1-G25 9955W,EMERALDST. PREVAIL NORTH SUBDIVISION SHEET NO. SURVEY (2W)84 95]Ng"0" CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXATION AND RE—ZONE 1 GROUP, LLC LOCATED IN GOVERNMENT LOT 2 OF SECTION 31.T3N_RAE.,B.M., DWG,DATE MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO 3/19/2021 Page 12 Item 6. 188 n89°39'29"e 1154.97 ai 3 N O N O O C 1186.01 s89"39'29"w s SFa G�GF .e 7729 Y G.CP�Q Prevail North Sub. Annexation Closure Sheet 3/19/2021 Scale: 1 inch=200 feet File: Tract 1:5.6326 Acres(245358 Sq.Feet),Closure:s33.0139e 0.01 ft.(1/471643),Perimeter=2785 ft. 01 n89,3929e 1184.97 02 s00.2043w 206.98 03 s89.3929w 1186.01 04 n0D.3756e 207 Page 13 Item 6. F189] B. Preliminary Plat(dated: 5/7/2021) FiFI IM IN.AH-F.AI tiHDWIN(: j PREVAIL NORTH SUBDIVISION _ LOCAT-O N GOVERNMENT OT 2 OF SECTION -1, 7.3N,. R.1'-_., H.M,. VEKIDIAN. ADA `„UJkl D%Hr,ivj a 2021 w Z z_ - -VICINITY MAP- C7 I ❑ 7 w O T IFIT:�f I ev fIL F ou- � 11_R L: IL Lei —.._ rI . -- •IT ------- - J 21 .. ------ ------ wrr. _ _ -=y I !I - Vm f'IITC! uv'Rr f1 It, ` IT) RD me r I.c o n c o ,, c c c en c 3 c PREMAIL SUB- III � li PHASE 2 i I �I _ - - - n NOTES: - �I PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT FEATURES ENGINEER Sl1RVEVOR PLANNER \ Jol-M-1,i O xm",! 4, mar r.mx m..m.w vnm ur mnw.om ama rsir \ , L � P1.0 Page 14 Item 6. ■ z/:i�zxun rm-uvxx�xom �' ��:� ��• � i�i�x. 1�'�i,�._:�C� S`+ `JN17133NI�JN3 Jl9 S9Sl-ZbE-OOEi 1V 3Nil`JId llV3'`JNI9914 3N0338 �Tf 1 i tea, O O a� I m � U I I NQp r $ 11 �w rr^^ Q is C m m fl Li 4 Z� 1' o all 11 sal LL O I � I a f g~: it ® o I Page 15 EEI F 991 1 C. Landscape Plans(date: 3/17/2021)NOT APPROVED ...... ...... Wd AHVNmniHd Apunwaran NQd 3dV0SGNv-1 Zt7qCS 0HVG1 'NVICIIHAVq CIVOU NVIaIH-AA 9 09[13 0016budod Hia0N 11VA31:Jd Ee E B IXi Ln NMI rum 0-4 itop j mr"a 0 1 Mll NMI i 1 H1 W APE 1 - too w cc Ug ply h 2qt ---------- RY2 9 rM. PIN I MR Hun 1. mom q I govalp:nn PIN 11,R1000 as MR Nam am thaw! S2 aan 4 mcgoommo haw qw, u) 1"N,I!ill",1! 11, 1 1 Page 16 Item 6. F192] ]d AUMMIMA Q S 10 AdVOSONVI ZVKG WOWNON UVOU NVIGU3A M S 09W19 HIHON IVABUd L ph f �a imp Amp 1h 1 u im I I I Rum=RM RON Noise ONE IM� 11111 'N,4, 7-., Nil 1 ENO ,yes T Him 1 h 5 N No 0 , '*-i'%W w, x bill oil J. A a INS 1 WIT tout Oil 1z' ol: TIM chi 11M 1h i;a x JO lal to loll E E) 1— z '7z 7 Cr NJ jai INS I ME !NMI LLJI RE Hq Ho Holm 1 al 01 NMI 48 qH 0 low WHO U LL MH fi�1 1 RE11" Will 11111 A it fit Page 17 Item 6. F 93 a^ p• A 4 •4 ,�e I �.. .. Vie' k� ".! {E �a.�- s ►!-- �6 s ", .�� « w •'� iE'� ,r " y,•t , k','%, i h?,•r 1` .g - r.•_er .. yrj 71 .-��" E LIBERATVR CT. � �1 - C.LIACRP.i[1R L�NC � PREVAIL SV6 IVISIO hf P ASE2 PREVAIL NORTH SUBDIVISION +I�� PREVAIL PHASE 3 MERIDIAN,IDAHO 83646 i� ~ PREVAIL SUBDIVISION PHASE Page 18 Item 6. F194 D. Color Landscape Plan—Prevail Subdivision Overall � dr _ ILI9FRATOR CT. - IMERATORLANE � Ty e 30 3T 9 y l I I I I I I I I I I I ECALDERAST. II I I I 1-- ----"; -- I�__ EAAIMO ST. � L VLH GROAN � I I o I I I t _ — a m I E.TRANTON ST. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IY.HIGF I IU\I'UNLI e��ei ..q� I'll III �U.0 0NI!��.IFNT SIN B'T�LL tI�JnNP::i-FK�TiFT --' •11' PREVAIL SUBDIVISION T) MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 S. MERIDIAN ROAD Page 19 Item 6. Fl 95 E. Open Space Exhibit—NOT APPROVED CITY OF MERIDIAN OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS QUALIFIED OPEN SPACE OPEN 5PAGE PT.20"EM '10% oloVm® OF TM AREA OF TM 51TE. ��(059 PdJ 51�7 (1.19 AL) 101E 22" LANDSCAPE LEGEND GU.4 HBF OPEN SPADE a a 0 z AREA=2,322 SO.FT. Q_yam AREA=36,4135�.FT. AREA=TMI SQ.FT .iiii . Q E. LIBERATOR LANE z m u.i w a a } w Y N NOT TO SCALE 'Eros s 21 PREVAIL NORTH — PHASE 3 311128 21028 MERIDIAN, IDAHO _ _ X1.0 °�•��"��°��= OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT — a ,� Page 20 — Item 6. ■ F. Concept Plan—Brighton Parcel(S 1131244500) �JII I I I I I � I , Area of concern/discussion between two projects. J � 1 I I ' � I \ I `i 0 n c m 0 G v E LAKE HAZEL ED. _ I I Page 21 M [a G. Conceptual Building Elevations Sample Elevations r - Page 22 Item 6. 198 Sample Elevations L: jig as rsmur ILi f —cennm�powy— Coed poetry CalIt611poYmy Page 23 Item 6. Fl-991 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, landscape plan, and conceptual building elevations included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. b. The rear and/or sides of 2-story structures that face S. Meridian Rd., an entryway corridor, shall incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation(e.g.projections,recesses, step-backs,pop-outs),bays,banding,porches, balconies,material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public street. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. c. All amenities and common open space within Prevail Subdivision(aka Percy Subdivision) and Prevail North Subdivision shall be owned and maintained by the same homeowner's association to ensure shared use in perpetuity. 2. The preliminary plat included in Section VII.B, dated May 7,2021, shall be revised as follows prior to submitting for Final Plat approval: a. Revise the plat to show the landscape buffer common lot along Meridian Road to be at least 35 feet wide consistent with the required dimensional standards along an entryway corridor. b. Add a plat note stating that direct lot access to S. Meridian Road/SH 69 is prohibited. 3. Revise the landscape plans, open space exhibit, and all other relevant plans to reflect the revised preliminary plat layout and provide revised plans to staff at least fifteen (15) days prior to the City Council hearing. 4. The landscape plan included in Section VII.C, dated March 17,2021, shall be revised as follows prior to submitting for Final Plat approval: a. Revise the plan to show the required landscape buffer along Meridian Road to be 35' instead of 25'. b. Move one of the trees located on the south side of the micro-pathway in the northwest corner of the site to the north side of the pathway consistent with UDC 1I- 3B-12. c. Remove the center planter bed within the large open space lot, shown as Lot 1,Block 7. d. Plant the proposed 8-foot wide parkway along the north side of Liberator Street with at least one(1)tree per 35 linear feet consistent with UDC 11-3B-7C. Page 24 Item 6. F200] e. Any landscaping within the ITD right-of-way shall be landscaped in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.5. 5. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district. 6. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 7. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. 8. Provide a pressurized irrigation system consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11- 3A-15,UDC 11-313-6 and MCC 9-1-28. 9. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy on any building,the applicant shall submit a public access easement for the multi-use pathway segment along Meridian Road to the Planning Division for approval by City Council and subsequent recordation. The easement shall be a minimum of 14' in width(10' pathway and 2' shoulder on each side). 10. 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 11-313-14. 11. The preliminary plat approval shall become null and void if the applicant fails to either: 1) obtain the City Engineer signature on a final plat within two years of the date of the approved findings; or 2)obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC I 1-613-7. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 Services must tie into sewer mains at a 90-degree angle from the main. Lot 33,Block 1 either needs to be modified to a 90-degree angle into the main, or should be connected to SSMH 2. 1.2 Install water main in S Keyport Ave to connect to the existing water stub from Prevail Subdivision No. 2. 1.3 Contact Public Works Engineering to discuss the water stub to the City of Meridian property to the North. 1.4 A streetlight plan is required to be submitted with the Final Plat application. 1.5 A future streetlight installation agreement is required for the streetlights on Meridian Road. Page 25 Item 6. F201] 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 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 wells that will not continue to be used must be properly abandoned according to Idaho Well Construction Standards Rules administered by the Idaho Department of Water Resources. The Developer's Engineer shall provide a statement addressing whether there are any existing wells in the development,and if so,how they will continue to be used, or provide record of their abandonment. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. Page 26 Item 6. F202] 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures.Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridianciU.oMIgublic_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. Page 27 Item 6. F203] 2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond.Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridianci(y.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=226061&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty D. BOISE PROJECT BOARD OF CONTROL(BPBC) https://weblink.meridianci(y.org WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=226128&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty- E. PARKS DEPARTMENT—PATHWAYS https://weblink.meridianci(y.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=22 7571&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty- F. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=226096&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty G. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT(CDH) https://weblink.meridianciU.or lWebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=226020&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty- H. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridianciU.or lWebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=226474&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC Lty- I. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridianciU.or_/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=228248&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky IX. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application.In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Stafffinds the proposed zoning map amendment to annex the property into the City of Meridian with the R-8 zoning district with the proposed preliminary plat and site design is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, if all conditions of approval are met. Page 28 Item 6. F204] 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed districts, specifically the purpose statement; Stafffinds the proposed zoning map amendment and the request for the development complies with the regulations outlined in the requested R-8 zoning district and is consistent with the purpose statement of the requested zone. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Stafffinds the proposed zoning map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to,school districts; and Stafffinds the proposed zoning map amendment will not result in an adverse impact on the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Stafffinds the annexation is in the best interest of the City. B. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat,or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Stafffinds that the proposed plat is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density, 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; Stafffinds 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, Stafffinds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development based upon comments from the public service providers(i.e.,Police,Fire,ACHD, etc). (See Section VII for more information) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and, Page 29 Item 6. ■ 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 offered their support of the proposed development with the proposed road layout in mind. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. Page 30 Item 7. L206 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Gem Prep South (H-2021-0020) by Paradigm Design, Located Approximately 1/8 of a Mile East of S. Locust Grove Rd., on the South Side of E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for an educational institution on 5.95 acres of land in the C-C zoning district that proposes direct access via a collector street and where there is not a safe, separate pedestrian and bikeway access between the neighborhood and the school site. Item 7. F 07 (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Sonya Allen Meeting Date: May 20, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Gem Prep South (H-2021-0020) by Paradigm Design, Located Approximately 1/8 of a Mile East of S. Locust Grove Rd., on the South Side of E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for an educational institution on 5.95 acres of land in the C-C zoning district that proposes direct access via a collector street and where there is not a safe, separate pedestrian and bikeway access between the neighborhood and the school site. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing 1 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: May 20, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 7 PROJECT NAME: Gem Prep South (H-2021-0020) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Item 7. ■ C�, EI IDIAN�-- STAFF REPORT .►a H o COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 5/20/2021 Legend DATE: ff Project Lccfl-fiar TO: Planning&Zoning Commission I FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner t 208-884-5533 , SUBJECT: H-2021-0020 Gem Prep South—CUP 1 ~ le LOCATION: Approximately 1/8 of a mile east of S. } r� I x Locust Grove Rd. on the south side of E. Lake Hazel Rd., in the NW 1/4 of Section 5,Township 2N.,Range 1E. I I I I I i i I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional use permit for an education institution on 5.95 acres of land in the C-C zoning district that proposes direct access via a collector street and where there is not a safe, separate pedestrian and bikeway access between the neighborhood and the school site. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 5.95-acres Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use Community(MU-C) Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped agricultural land _ Proposed Land Use(s) Public education institution(K-12 charter school) Current Zoning Community Business District(C-C) Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of 1/21/21; 1 attendee other than the Applicant I attendees: History(previous approvals) H-2020-0066(Apex MDA Inst.#2020-178120),RZ);H- 2020-0057(PP—Apex Southeast);FP-2020-0013 (Apex Southeast No. 1) Page 1 Item 7. ■ A. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map (fLegend w 0 (fLegend Project Lcca-fion id tial I Projeot Lncafor d H Density R�sid6tial MU , tY FV 4. Medium_ R�side tial Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend T � If end Project Lcca�ion R- R. I Project Location f� +_i City Limih RIB R-8 - — %nrned Parce's Min R-8 R-15 R.1- R-15 R-�+Q !I i RUT -C RUT ' RUT .8 � -- ti R-4 _ R-8 mm � r TR T r 5 � R-RUT RUT I r7 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Elias Felix,Paradigm Design—4250 N. Drinkwater Blvd., Ste. 120, Scottsdale,AZ 85251 B. Owner: Robert Phillips, Gem Innovation Schools—2750 E. Gala St., Meridian, ID 83642 Page 2 Item 7. F210] C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning Posting Date Newspaper Notification 4/30/2021 Radius notification mailed to 4/27/2021 properties within 300 feet Site Posting Date 5/6/2021 Next Door posting 4/27/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The proposed conditional use permit is required for an education institution on 5.95-acres of land in the C-C zoning district,per UDC Table 11-2B-3; and because the site takes access from a collector street and there is not a safe, separate pedestrian and bikeway access between the neighborhood and the school site,per UDC 11-4-3-14E.4. This land is designated on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM) in the Comprehensive Plan as part of a larger Mixed Use—Community(MU-C) designated area. The proposed school will provide a community-serving public use in this neighborhood as desired in mixed use developments. A kindergarten through twelfth grade college preparatory charter school is proposed. The proposed 2- story structure will consist of a total of 45,110 square feet. Hard top and recreational play fields are proposed. The site is surrounded by public streets—an arterial street(i.e. E. Lake Hazel Rd.)along the north boundary, a collector street(i.e. S. Tower St./S.Vertex Way) along the southeast boundaries; and a local street(i.e. S. Peak Ave.) along the west boundary. The use is anticipated to generate 1,156 vehicle trips per day on weekdays when school is in session per the Applicant's narrative submitted with the application;the ACHD report states 590 vehicle trips per day are estimated based on the Traffic Impact Study(TIS). Idaho Code [SS 67-6519(3)] requires a school site checklist to be submitted,which is included in the public record for this project. Note: The existing Development Agreement allows the C-C zoned portions of this development to obtain building permits prior to subdivision of the property. Specific Use Standards: The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC II- 4-3-14,Education Institution. Accessory uses are allowed as stated. Elementary schools should be located within the center of neighborhoods;they're encouraged to be adjacent to public parks or open space; and at least 30%of the perimeter of the site should be open to streets or open space areas with access encouraged from local streets. Middle and high schools may take access off a designated arterial or collector street. The proposed school includes elementary as well as middle and high school grades. It is located at the north end of the Apex Southeast development adjacent to E. Lake Hazel Rd., an arterial street. Future residential uses are also planned to the north and northwest of this site. Discovery Park, a 77-acre public park,is located directly to the east. The school site is open to public streets on all sides and Page 3 Item 7. ■ access is proposed via local and collector streets;no access is proposed via the arterial street. Staff deems this to be in substantial compliance with the aforementioned standards. Access to the school site from the future residential neighborhood to the south is proposed at the intersection of E. Tower St. and S. Peak Way with striped cross-walks, signage and school zone flashing signage in accord with the school site checklist recommendations. A crossing guard will be required for students that are walking and biking to school. Staff has reviewed the other applicable specific use standards and finds the proposed use and site design to be in substantial compliance with these standards. Williams Pipeline: The Williams natural gas pipeline bisects this site and is located within a 75-foot wide easement. All development within the easement is required to comply with the Williams Developer's Handbook. Access: Access is proposed via one access from S. Peak Ave., a local street along the west boundary; one access via S. Vertex Way, a collector street along the east boundary; and one access via S. Tower St., a collector street along the south boundary of the site. Direct access via E. Lake Hazel Rd. is not proposed and is prohibited. The parent pick-up area is located on the north side of the building; the bus pick-up/drop-off is located on the south side of the building,which will prevent vehicle conflicts. Parking: A minimum of one(1) off-street parking space is required to be provided for every 400 square feet of gross floor area for education institution uses per UDC 11-4-3-14I. Based on 45,110 square feet, a minimum of 113 off-street parking spaces are required. A total of 118 spaces are proposed in excess of the minimum UDC standards. 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. A minimum of five(5)bicycle spaces are required to be provided; eight(8) spaces are proposed in excess of UDC standards. Pedestrian Walkways: A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway is proposed along the north property boundary of the site in accord with the Pathways Master Plan; a 14-foot wide public use easement is required for the pathway unless the pathway will be located within the adjacent right-of-way. The 5-foot wide sidewalks proposed adjacent to parking should either be widened two feet(2') to seven feet(7')to allow for vehicle overhang(the length of the stall may be decreased 2' in this instance) or wheel stops should be provided in the adjacent parking stalls to prevent vehicle overhang in accord with UDC 11-3C-5B. 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 within the parking area as required; a tree should be added at the east end of the row of parking on the north side of the building where none is proposed. Street buffer landscaping and walkways are required with the subdivision improvements for Apex Southeast Subdivision No. 1; however,if this site develops first,it will be responsible to construct and install these improvements. Landscaping is required along the multi-use pathway along E.Lake Hazel Rd.per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C and should be depicted on the landscape plan. 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 Page 4 Item 7. F212] properties and public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-12. Fencing: All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. Chainlink fencing is depicted on the landscape plan around the play area adjacent to S.Vertex Way. Because this site is located adjacent to a collector street, Staff recommends a fencing material of higher quality such as wrought iron is provided. Building Elevations: Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown in Section VII.0 that incorporate various colors of horizontal lap siding and metal panels in various trim colors. These elevations have not been reviewed for compliance with design standards and therefore, are not approved; final design shall be consistent with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. The trash enclosure should be constructed with similar materials and colors 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 VII,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 7. 213 VII. EXHIBITS A. Proposed Site Plan(dated: 3/29/2021) IQ) luni E.LAKE RNZEL RL1. till d 'n O �\4 R• \ ' \ \ y mr W it � I Em I- .w. C.. I/ �- rwTCH IAE SEE SHEET-103S .... y 1 MATCH LINE SEE SHEET GMS °'•9^' �"� m LU LU E.TOW'ERSf.=_ m uvn a C-102S Page 6 Item 7. F 14 B. Proposed Landscape Plan(dated: 3/5/2021) - -�, _- :..:.:,_:, ------ BoumaU A G�q',Ema 2S106..sa 3o9 616SX I -I _ X 6PumallSX.mm I I xvweux,rx f , Dw Cj CUTTINGEDGE IANDSCAPE \� 59O]ALLWORiH STIGEET LANDSUPE PLNJ NOTFORCON mCTKN MERIDIM.ID B3TA2 L-1 IANRSCAPE SPECIFICATXIN3: IRRIGXTpX SPECIFIGTIDN%_ BoumaU A _ m er�o.mx x.xwrre v_ ,ow[u'[xw,LL F�ruu[ u CUT1NGFMELANDSCAPE et"A ,n, 54O]ALLWDRIH STREET T,..,a. Res®a ` y era xe�r� NOIs�L io.�na bM�N"" SGMRI GEM — �y.:�, X INNOVATION SCHOOL �1��• E6 H.�� r�'� .,«.. PPELIMINAXY IRRIWRIXJ&.... LWDSCAPE SPECS DECIDUOUS TREE PIWJTNGOEFAIL n 9Ld1LL198NALRFNINGNETAL �L~ rcl_E xuin�a lJ ]�rwulo, NP]FOR[O.NSTRU[TION MERIDIAN,ID MW met-: � L-2 Page 7 Item 7. F215] C. Conceptual Building Elevations(dated: 2/22/2 1) WERIOR FIN MES I N E WEST LLUVAMM LU LU 0 ih- R RTH ELEVATM A2DD U1 g-7: 1171 Ll m Ul- �IAI-m E =h C). "STD LU F7-1 A201 Page 8 Item 7. ■ VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 1. Future development of this site shall comply with the terms of the existing Development Agreement,preliminary plat and final plat conditions of approval [H-2020-0066(Apex RZ MDA Inst. #2020-178120);H-2020-0057 (PP—Apex Southeast); FP-2020-0013 (Apex Southeast No. 1) and the conditions contained herein. 2. The site/landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised as follows: a. Add a tree at the east end of the row of parking on the north side of the building in accord with UDC 11-3B-8C.2d. b. 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. c. Depict landscaping adjacent to the multi-use pathway along E. Lake Hazel Rd. per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. d. The 5-foot wide sidewalks proposed adjacent to parking shall either be widened two feet (2')to seven feet(7')to allow for vehicle overhang(the length of the stall may be decreased 2' in this instance) or wheel stops should be provided in the adjacent parking stalls to prevent vehicle overhang in accord with UDC 11-3C-5B. e. Change the fencing type around the play area adjacent to S.Vertex Way from chainlink to wrought iron. f. Depict all cross-walks to the school site as included in the school site checklist. 3. Direct access via E. Lake Hazel Rd. is prohibited. 4. Compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-14 Education Institution is required. 5. Parking for the overall site shall be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-4- 3-141 for education institutions. 6. All development within the easement is required to comply with the Williams Developer's Handbook. 7. If this site develops prior to construction and installation of the street buffer improvements associated with Apex Southeast Subdivision No. 1, these improvements are required to be installed with this development. 8. 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. 9. The conditional use permit is valid for a maximum period of two (2) years unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time,the Applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6.A time extension may be requested as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F. Page 9 Item 7. F217] B. PUBLIC WORKS I. The proposed water main extension from S Peak Avenue must be an 8" main. Connect the fire line,water meter service line, and fire hydrant from the 8" main extension. 2. Any changes to public water or sewer infrastructure must be reviewed and approved by Public Works. 3. Water and sewer must be provided to and through this project to adjacent properties per City Design Standards. 4. A streetlight plan is required to be submitted with the building permit application. Streetlights shall be installed and operational prior to occupancy. C. POLICE DEPARTMENT Best practice safety suggestions: - Electronic(AudioNideo)entry into main entrance at the main exterior door and/or the entry door just inside the vestibule. - Removal of sliding window at secretary's office in vestibule to reduce the easy of accessibility into the secure area of the school. - Built in blind in classroom door windows. - Recommend 3M ballistic and shatterproof laminate for main entry door and other exterior entry points. - Proper numbering per IOSSS recommendations in exterior windows of each classroom. - Classroom numbers projecting double-sided wall signage above classroom doors(examples attached). - Hanging signage in hallways T-intersections etc. providing information and ease of movement by first responders throughout interior of the school. D. BOISE PROJECT BOARD OF CONTROL https:llweblink.meridianciLy.orglWebLinkIDocView.asyx?id=227459&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty E. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.asyx?id=228929&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:llweblink.meridiancity.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228019&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv G. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https:llweblink.m eridia n c i ty.org/WeUink/DocView.aspx?id=2 2 8 0 02&db id=0&rep o=Meridia n C iv Page 10 Item 7. F218] 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-C zoning district. 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 K-12 education institution 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. Stafffinds the design, construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed use will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood, with the existing and intended character of the vicinity and will not adversely change the essential character of the area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Staff ,finds the proposed use 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. Staff ,finds the proposed use will be served by essential public facilities and services as required. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Stafffinds 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: Page 11 Item 7. F219] a. That the proposed nonconforming use does not encourage or set a precedent for additional nonconforming uses within the area; and, This finding is not applicable. b. That the proposed nonconforming use is developed to a similar or greater level of conformity with the development standards as set forth in this title as compared to the level of development of the surrounding properties. This finding is not applicable. Page 12 Applicant Presentation MERIDIAN SOUTH We are...We serve ...All students interested in a rigorous college prep program Our focus is ...21-Gem Prep Information Session 2020 12 charter school-A free K OUR MISSION & SCHOOLS 2020. familiespartnerships with innovative uses of technology and , exceptional teachingthrough rigorous education providing a high quality, personalized, relevant and by prepare students for success in college To Mission: 12-Opening August 2022, growing to serve K*5*-, Grades KMeridian SouthGem Prep: 12-Opening August 2021, growing to serve K*5*-, Grades KMeridian NorthGem Prep: 10-, Grades KPocatelloGem Prep: 10-, Grades KNampaGem Prep: 10-, Grades KMeridianGem Prep: 12-(Statewide), Grades KOnline Gem Prep: Our Schools:2021- Student Population Goal is to mimic demographics of West Ada school district● Student Demographicsstudents 58212 Full size is about -K● students12012th gr around -9● students 908th gr around -7● School Size Elementary th 6-K ELEMENTARY 21-Gem Prep Information Session 2020 secondary (early college in hs).Prepares students for success in Excellent instruction & rigor ● Station Rotation Model● college and beyondprepare students for success in Focus on holistic competencies that ● College Prep● PROGRAM FOCUS Secondary 12th-7th SEND / RECEIVE LEARNINGFULLY ONLINE LEARNINGSEND / RECEIVE LEARNINGIN PERSON in a variety of environments. send/receive. By learning in these ways, students develop the skills to communicate and work person, online, and -inGEM PREP STUDENTS ENGAGE IN THREE TYPES OF COURSES:TYPES OF COURSES 3 LEARNING SECONDARY MODEL SUMMARY 21-Gem Prep Information Session 2020 Gem Coaching● 3 Types of Courses● Tuition Free College● 18+or 2 Graduation Tracks: AA ● Competency Framework● Graduate Profile● 12 experience- THE GEM DIFFERENCE counterparts.students. Their confidence grows as they work alongside their older Younger students are encouraged and excited to interact with the older ● role models while encouraging and helping younger students. Older students develop leadership skills and become positive ● Families enjoy having all their students at one school.● high expectations.Our experience has been that students thrive together in our culture of campus togetherONEon 12 -Benefits of having all students K Everything is designed around our college prep mission. Thank you for coming!www.gemprep.org/meridiansouthWebsite: Email: gpmsinfo@gemprep.orgQuestions? Item 8. L220 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for The 10 at Meridian (H-2021-0025) by J-U-B Engineers, Inc., Located at 75 S. Ten Mile Rd. A. Request: Annexation of 40.30 acres of land with R-40 (13.04-acres) and C-C (27.25-acres) zoning districts. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: May 20, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 8 PROJECT NAME: The 10 at Meridian (H-2021-0025) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 2 i I 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Item 8. F 21 (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Sonya Allen Meeting Date: May 20, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for The 10 at Meridian (H-2021-0025) by J-U-13 Engineers, Inc., Located at 75 S. Ten Mile Rd. A. Request: Annexation of 40.30 acres of land with R-40 (13.04-acres) and C-C (27.25-acres) zoning districts. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing Item 8. ■ STAFF REPORTC�,WEIIDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING May 20,2021 Legend DATE: - TO: Planning&Zoning Commission 4 FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 - SUBJECT: H-2021-0025 The 10 at Meridian—AZ LOCATION: 75 S. Ten Mile Rd. at the southwest �- corner of W. Franklin Rd. and S. Ten Mile Rd.,in the NE 1/4 of Section 15, -- Township 3N.,Range 1 W. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant requests annexation of 40.30 acres of land with R-40(13.04-acres)and C-C (27.25-acres) zoning districts. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 40.30-acres Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use Commercial(22+/-acres);High Density Residential(11+/-acres);Mixed Use Residential(3+/-acres) Existing Land Use Undeveloped agricultural land Proposed Land Use(s) Mixed use(residential/commercial) Current Zoning RUT in Ada County Proposed Zoning R-40(High-Density Residential)(13.04-acres)and C-C (Community Business)(27.25-acres) Neighborhood meeting date;#of 3/29/2021;no attendees other than property owner attendees: History(previous approvals) None Page 1 Item 8. ■ B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) No • Requires ACHD Commission No Action es/no Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Two(2)accesses are proposed via Franklin Rd.,two(2) Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) accesses are proposed via Ten Mile Rd.,and one(1)access is proposed via Cobalt Dr. Fire Service No comments were submitted. Police Service See comments in Section IX.D. Wastewater Distance to Sewer Services Adjacent to parcel Sewer Shed South Black Cat trunkshed Estimated Project Sewer ERU's See application WRRF Declining Balance 14.14 Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan Impacts/Concerns None Water Distance to Water Services Adjacent to parcel Pressure Zone 2 Estimated Project Water ERU's See application Water Quality None Project Consistent with Water Yes Master Plan Impacts/Concerns None Page 2 Item 8. ■ C. Project Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend ■ (Legend (f I�Praieci Lcca-fiorM— Aked-Hig - I Denfny t, Identi i rr ri�gh [ L_ - eiid a° ' MU-Rer, IMU Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend RUT - Legend A IoNdjec- Lacaihor R let PrnjectLnca=or city Lirrib -- -- RUT — Planned Para e a r RUT L R1 R= -N R-15 G�c frl3i:f FJ R 4 RUT R-40 C-C H-E III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Wendy Shrief,J-U-B Engineers,Inc. —250 S. Beechwood Ave., Ste. 201,Boise,ID 83709 B. Owner: Erik Pilegaard, Elk Ventures, LLC—5137 Golden Foothills Parkway, Ste. 100, El Dorado, CA 95762 Page 3 Item 8. F225] C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 4/30/2021 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 4/27/2021 Public hearing notice sign posted 5/7/2021 on site Nextdoor posting 4/27/2021 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS LAND USE: The majority of this property is designated Mixed Use Commercial(MU-COM) (northeast 22+/- acres)and High Density Residential(HDR) (southwest 11+/-acres) on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) in the Comprehensive Plan with a narrow sliver of Mixed Use Residential(MU-RES) (3+/-acres)along the southern boundary which will mostly be right-of-way for W. Cobalt Dr. This property is located within the area governed by the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan (TMISAP). The purpose of the MU-COM designation is to encourage the development of a mixture of office,retail, recreational,employment, and other miscellaneious uses,with supporting multi-family or single-family attached residential uses(see pg. 3-9 in the TMISAP for more information). HDR designated areas are multiple-family housing areas where relatively larger and taller apartment buildings are the recommended building type. HDR areas should include a mix of housing types that achieve an overall average density target of at least 16-25 dwelling units per gross acre(see pg. 3-7 in the TMISAP for more information). The purpose of the MU-RES designation is to encourage a diversity of compatible land uses that may include a mixture of residential, office,retail,recreational, employment, and other miscellaneous uses(see pg. 3-8 in the TMISAP for more information). Mixed use designated areas in the TMISAP are recommended locations for development of activity centers that are specifically planned to include both residential and non-residential uses. Mixed use areas are anticipated to have 3 or more significant income producing uses (i.e. retail, office,residential and lodging facilities)with significant functional and physical integration in conformance with a coherent plan(pgs. 3-7 &3-8). The site is proposed to develop with a mix of uses(horizontal and vertical)as shown on the conceptual development plan in Section VIII.B. High-density 4-story multi-family residential apartments (380 1-and 2- bedroom units) are proposed in the HDR&MU-RES designated portions of the site with 3-story multi- family flats(137 1-and 2-bedroom units)and townhouse style(24 3-bedroom units)units with a clubhouse/recreation center[14,000 square feet(s.f.)], 3-story vertically integrated mixed use [primarily retail uses on the 1"floor(20,025 s.f.)with residential(42 1-and 2-bedroom units) on the 2'and 3'floors] and single-story financial institution(5,000 s.£),mixed use service retail buildings (52,775 s.£)and restaurants (9,250 s.£)with drive-throughs with 2-story office buildings (46,600 s.£)proposed in the MU- COM designated portion of the site adjacent to Franklin and Ten Mile Roads. A total of 559 residential units and 147,650 s.f. of commercial uses are proposed to develop in the overall site. Page 4 Item 8. F226] Staff finds the mix of income producing uses proposed as well as the vertical and horizontal integration of such uses and residential densities interconnected by pedestrian walkways and amenities is generally consistent with the goals of the TMISAP for this area. Transportation: Cobalt Drive is proposed to be extended as a collector street from S. Ten Mile Rd. at the southeast corner and along the southern boundary of the site consistent with the Master Street Map in the Comprehensive Plan and the Transportation System Map in the TMISAP. The proposed collector street network approved with the annexation of the Janicekproperty to the south (AZ-11-001, DA Inst. #112073616)depicts the extension of Cobalt as proposed with this application with the western segment lying off-site on the adjacent property to the south. Design: Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the multi-family residential structures and the associated clubhouse building. The design of the proposed multi-family structures appear to be of a high quality and are generally consistent in style,materials and colors. Elevations weren't submitted for the commercial portion of the development as tenants are unknown at this time. Final design of the site and all structures is required to comply with the design elements of the TMISAP per the Application of Design Elements matrix on pg.3-49 of the TMISAP and the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. The commercial portion of the development should incorporate similar design elements,colors and materials as the residential portion of the development. 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) A variety of multi family housing is proposed in this development consisting of flats, townhome and apartment style units, which will contribute to the variety of housing types in the City, specifically in the Ten Mile area as desired, that should cater to different financial capabilities. • "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. • "Locate higher density housing near corridors with existing or planned transit,Downtown, and in proximity to employment centers." (2.01.01H) The site is located at a major intersection along two major mobility arterials (Franklin and Ten Mile Roads) and in close proximity to employment centers. Transit services exist in the Ten Mile Crossing development to the east at the intersection of Vanguard/Wayfinder to serve this area—other transit stops may be added in the future. • "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) The proposed project with multi family residential and a grocery store with nearby employment (retail/office uses) and restaurant uses, should provide a good mix of uses that residents won't have to travel far for, thus reducing vehicle trips and enhancing overall livability and sustainability. • "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) Page 5 Item 8. E This property is an enclave surrounded by City annexed land. Annexation and development of this property will maximize public services. • "Annex lands into the corporate boundaries of the City only when the annexation proposal conforms to the City's vision and the necessary extension of public services and infrastructure is provided." (3.03.03) The proposed development plan is generally conisistent with the City's vision for this property through the Comprehensive Plan; the developer will extend public services and infrastructure as needed for the development. VI. STAFF ANALYSIS A. ANNEXATION&ZONING The Applicant proposes to annex 40.30 acres of land with R-40(13.04-acres) and C-C(27.25-acres) zoning districts. A conceptual development plan was submitted as shown in Section VIII.B that proposes offices, a financial establishment,retail pads, a grocery store,vertically integrated residential and multi- family residential in accord with the associated MU-COM,HDR and MU-RES,FLUM designations for the property. A phasing plan was not submitted;however,the Applicant states the 3-story flats and townhome style multi-family residential and clubhouse would develop in the first phase along with the associated infrastructure; the 4-story high-density multi-family would follow with the commercial last as tenants commit. The proposed C-C zoning district is listed as a possible zoning choice in the MU-COM and MU-RES; and the R-40 zoning district is listed as the best choice in the HDR and possible choice in the MU-RES FLUM designation,per the Zoning District Compatability Matrix in the TMISAP(pgs. 2-4&2-5). The Kennedy Lateral bisects this site and is proposed to be tiled in certain areas and left open in others as shown on the conceptual development plan. The UDC (11-3A-6B.3)required all laterals crossing or lying within the area being developed to be piped or otherwise covered unless left open and used as a water amenity or linear open space as defined in UDC 11-1A-1. The decision making body may waive the requirement for covering such lateral if it finds that the public purpose requiring such will not be served and public safety can be preserved. A waiver from Council is requested for portions of the lateral proposed to be left open;if not approved,the lateral is required to be piped. Access to the site is proposed as shown on the conceptual development plan in Section VIII.B. ACHD has reviewed the proposed accesses and supports the following: Access A—full access;Access B— right-in/right-out only; Access C—right-out only;Access D—right-in/right-out only; and Cobalt—right- in/right-out/left-in only. Staff recommends access is restricted through the Development Agreement as supported by ACHD per the comments in Section IX.K. Page 6 Item 8. F228] e w ;»0" a qL IL �"'i1t Y ,.. •-\5.F .� a `,_: :Ilk --E i+LVfE------- Off-street parking is depicted on the concept plan to serve the mixed use development. Based on(291) 1- bedroom units, (250)2-and 3-bedroom units and 42 vertically integrated residential units,a minimum of 979 spaces consisting of 541 covered spaces and 396 uncovered spaces are required per UDC Table 11- 3C-6; a total of 1,034 spaces are depicted. Based on 138,400 s.f. of non-residential uses, a minimum of 277 spaces are required per UDC 11-3C-6B.1 and based on 9,250 s.f. of restaurant uses, a minimum of 37 spaces are required per UDC 11-4-3-49A.1, for a total of 314 spaces; a total of 448 spaces are proposed in excess of the minimum standards. The proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property and is within the Area of City Impact Boundary. A legal description and exhibit map for the annexation area is included in Section VIII.A. The City may require a development agreement(DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. To ensure the site develops as proposed with this application,Staff recommends a DA is required as a provision of annexation(see provision in Section IX.A). VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Annexation&Zoning with the requirement of a Development Agreement per the provisions in Section IX in accord with the Findings in Section X. Page 7 Item 8. F229] VIII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation&Zoning Legal Description and Exhibit Map EXHIBIT DESmrmm FoR THE 10 AT MERIDIAN CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXATION The NF1M of the NE114 of Section 16, T_3N., R.iW., S,M,, City of Meridian, Ada Count+, Idaho more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at NE corner of said Section 15 from which the NI14 corner of said Section 15 bears North 89°1523"West, 2640.72 feet, thence along the East boundary line of said Section 15 South 09°33'16"VOM, 1,329.09 feet to the N 1116 corner of said Section 15; thence along the South boundary line of the NE114 of the NIS114 of said Section 15 North S9"15'02"West_ 1,321.1.8 feel lu Li it NE1110 oaf said Suutiuo 1 S. thenr,-,along the West boundary line of Nrz114 of the NEi14 of said Section 15 North 00"35'22"East, 1, 8.96 feet to the E1116 comer of said Section 15; thence along the North boundary Ilne of said Section 15 South 8V1513"East, 1,320.37 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING, Containing 40,30 acres, more or less, 7729 Du Page 8 #m& 30 $a OF 8EARNG s'lols'll ApE " 2W32 si5 s�4 SRO 1/4 E1 S W. FRANKLIN RD. s15 1 a ' e qƒF3' 1 !y � � . ka § � 1755334 , z u 40-30 IE w \Ln S � z NE 1/16 N s-? -02 , 1,l N ] SCALE , 0 7729 I o 1� O boa / �)m * OF Page Item 8. F 31 EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION FOR THE i(l AT MERIDIAN CITY OF MERIDIAN ZONE rere A portion of land located in the NE114 of the NE14 of Section 'IS, T.W. R,IW. B.M., C Ity of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho more particularly dewibed as follows, BEGINNING at NE comer of said Section 15 from which the N114 cornarof said swion 15 bears North 88°152Y'west, 2544,72 feet, thence along the East boundary line of said gection 19 South 661-ST16"West, 1.329-09 feet to the N 1116 corner of said Section 15, thence along the South boundary line of the NE114 of the NE114 of said Section 15 North 99"15'02" West, 20.27 feet; thence leaving said South boundary line North 87°DB'08"West, 149.94 feet: thence Worth 60"22'90"West, 293-40 feet; thence North 66"00'44"West, 371.54 feet I thence 131.19 feet along the arc of curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 500.00 feet, a central angle of 15"02'00"and a long chord which bears North 5f]')q'44" st. 150 thence North 42"5944"West, 723.60 feet to a point on the West boundary line- of NE114 of the NE114 of said Section 15; thence along said West boundary line Forth b4°35'2 "East, 310_06 feet to the E1f16 corner of said Section 15; thence along the North boundary line of said Section 15 South SS"15'23" East. 1,320.37 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING Containing 27, 5 ;�ores, more or legs_ CG. w Page 1 af I Page 10 Item 8. F 32 BASIS OF BEARING S.10 5.11 NB9'15'23"W 2640.72" S.15 S,14 5.10 1 4 El/le W. FRANKLIN RD. S.15 13 Q.35 S89'15'2.3'E 1320.37' I 1 I ZONE �� + ++ + 1187150 s.f. I.`,, w +++ `! r 27.25 o,c. + + Z LLJ + + + + + tN + + + # + Vi V1 + # * + + I+ + ZONE R-40 + + " + + + + o+ N57'06'0E1"W a+ + + + 5fi81$4 5.f,+ ++ + ++ * SyE. k• 149.94' + + 13.04 o.c. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 1 + + + + + + + + + , ; + 20 + + + + + + + + + IN6O-22 50 W + + + + # # 1 1 y + # 293.40' + + + NE 1 16 N891502 W 132}_18' N 1/16 L CURVE TABLE -� CURVE RADIUS LENGTH CH011D DIST. CHORD EIRG. DELTA 7 7,2 9 an C1 500.00 131,19 130,91 550'29'4-41- 15'02"00" CF, F r .c SCALE: 0 75 150 300 604 EXHIBIT XHIBIT DRAWING FOR xs LGROU H __ -1 1' ' THE 10 AT MERIDIAN URVEY nrIx e,tio aw LLC RE—ZONE E NE 1 -JN., DATE LDrkTE},IN TFE NE h OF ¢E IR.1i. B.U., CITY OF NEBIIAN, AEIA ❑WNTY, DAHO ]f1�f]427 Page 11 Item 8. F 33 EXHIBIT_ DESCRIPTION FOR THE 1BAT MERIDIAN GMY OF MERIDIAN ZONE R-40 A portion of land looted in the NE114 of the NE114 of Section 1S. T.3N_, R.IW. E.A+1., City of Meridlan.Ada County, Idaho more Wicularly described as fellows: Commencing at NE corner of said Section 15 from which the N114 corner of said Section 15 bears North 8W15'23"West. 2640.72 feet; thence along the East boundary line of said Section 15 South 00°33'16"West, 1,329,09 feat to the N 1116 corner of said Section 15; thence along the South boundary line of the WE114 of the N E 1 A of said Section 16 North 89`1902"West, 20-27 feet the REAL POINT OF BEGIt+ININ ; thence continuing along said South boundary line North 89'1602"West, 1.3W., I feet to the NE106 of said Section 15; thence along the West boundary Iinre of NE114 of the NE114 of said Seetlon 15 North 00835' 2" East. 1,018.91 feet; thence leaving said West boundary IirLe South 42°68'44" East, 723.60 feet; thence 131.19 feet along the arc of curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 500.01) feet, a central angle of 15'02'W' and along chord which bears South 51)°2944"East, 131),81 feet: thence South 58°00'44"East, 371.64 feet; thence South 60"22'W'East, 293,40 feet; thence South 57'W08"East, 149.94 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 13- 4 acres, more or less. 77 'Ibw . Page 1 of 1 Page 12 Item 8. F 34 BASIS OF BEARING .10 s,i1 N9915'23"W 2W.72' $.15 SA4 S.10 1 4 E1 16 W. FRANKUN FAD. E.15 k32D,3 ' ss9 i5'23�� 732'a:'7' �Lo ZONE CC I+ + I+ + 11EI-7154 s.1. I°v rl + + + + Ld + +I. t t ++ + + + 4— + t + + + 10�t + + t t + * + ZONE € —40 + + i + +5fi81$ s.f-+ + + + 5 . 149-94' + + 13.04 ❑.c. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + I + + + + + + + + + + + + I + + + + + + + + + N60'22'50"W + + 20.27' + + + + + + + 293-40' + + + —� t-- 1'�Os91�--t--=_t. + —+ + + :+ + __ NE 116 N89'15'02�1Y 1321.18*� N 1 16 CURW TABLE � CURVE RADIUS LENGTH CHORD MST- CHORD 9RG- DELTA � 17 7 Cl 29 5W-00 131-19 130.61 S50'29'44"E 15'02'00" ' 01 ;SCALE; 1"-.}pp' 4 75 1 DO 3H 00 IDAHO EXHIBIT _ DRAMNO FOR 21 N° THE 10 AT MERIDIAN EET H SURVEY SHEET"°' �" "^"°°"�, RE—ZONE 1 GROUP, LLC L#.wRh IH JW HE) CF 1HE HE 7i Cr.nCGTUN 14. 7-zm4 DWG. wrE R.11L B..M„ CM CF MFAI6NH, AAA CXLWTY. iDAHG sligI2021 Page 13 Item 8. ■ B. Conceptual Development Plan(dated: March 10, 2021) ------------------------------------------------- ------- --------------------- Franklin- Road IIPII ILA iiiii likill 14 RR r,I FIT 0 . . . ........... ..... .... I I III LI is, Projed Surmary w loom III I• o R�k%nbad 5 U.. 61IIIIIII&IIIIN1611111111 sue PartNy ini-Fri PaRingPIZ= 1. C—M % G %=VU Pad qNe TNu F,— .=`d U1,Sl—R-11 aartieg pw— ---------------- C b a 14-1d r-4 V c- .......... . ....... 10 Mile Road & Franklin Road Residential & Commercial Mixed Use Center March 10.2921 Page 14 El ConceptualC. Multi-Family(Flats): FRONT L RIGHT T. RLU FT 1 I 1 r � � - MERL— f�'� �I ■Ord!^ !! �i�.�Q o� !_! !! n,!-r *� -' ''I FRONT RIGHT 1 I � umrrrc !!_, i�■■s W- V !! N■�■■ !! !! ' ■ !! !! REAR LEFT -I--- "wk` Page 15 1 ■■A �, 1 hI F7� l � 4 a. t. '39 l+ I I _ Page 16 i rai � C i � f r y s 3. r� _ n •g' 17 �s fir I (Townhome FdGHT FWW REAR LEFT 1 ■ • .s _J - is•'-�� a - - Page 19 it �r ` i LP-, � � Y (High-Density •. f�1 • 1 � I i I I I��Il REAR EFT Page ► i�l i i I � it 1 20 wr IIIIIIII.� 1 1 Aamillm REAR OG� AM, .3 - - r� /W �a 4 Item 8. F 44 ti � r IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s)at the time of annexation ordinance adoption,and the developer. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. The subject property shall develop in substantial compliance with the conceptual development plan and building elevations in Section VIII.B and the land use,transportation, and design elements of the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan(TMISAP). b. The project shall comply with the applicable design elements as noted in the Application of Design Elements matrix in the TMISAP(see pg. 3-49) and the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. c. Access to the site via W. Franklin Rd., S. Ten Mile Rd. and W. Cobalt Dr. shall be restricted as recommended by ACHD in Section IX.K. d. The subject property shall be subdivided prior to any development occurring on the site. e. The Kennedy Lateral shall be piped in its entirety where it crosses the subject property as required by UDC 11-3A-613.3 unless otherwise waived by City Council as set forth in UDC 11- 3A-613.3a. Page 23 Item 8. F245] B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 Any unused sanitary sewer and/or water services or mains must be abandoned. 1.2 Ensure no permanent structures(trees,bushes,carports,trash enclosures,etc.)are built within any utility easements. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT No comments were received. D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.ory/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=227946&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT No comments were received. F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228197&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity G. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES https://weblink.meridiancioy.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=227634&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity H. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH https://weblink.meridianciU.orgj ebLink/DocView.aspx?id=228247&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX I. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https://weblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228703&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitE J. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCHOOL IMPACT TABLE https://weblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228965&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCioy K. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=229278&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiiy L. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) https://weblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228985&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitE X. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: Page 24 Item 8. F246] 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Applicant is proposing to annex the subject 40.30-acre property with R-40 and C-C zoning districts consistent with the MU-COM,HDR and MU-RES FL UM designations for this property. (See section V above for more information) 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Stafffinds the proposed map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the R-40 and C- C zoning districts and the purpose statements of the residential and commercial districts. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health,safety, and welfare; Stafffinds the proposed map amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare in this area. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Stafffinds the proposed map amendment will not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Stafffinds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City. Page 25 Applicant Presentation Project Location Public Presentations and supporting documents �� ® � ■ � en� e ■ ��;. � y ~_ -_ -® � ��. � �� ■ ■ � �l% .. ° i« m | � .. • 2 � .. - - - - �� ■� __— . _ � � .� � ■ � . � ■ \ — . .: ., � - --2 . e��■ ' ` | | ' -_OtI4 TV tw%_ ��_ � ■ | � _-jc170" | ■ `' _ _ | �yy ` y lI IIIIV • � � •��1��t0�a s I a 6EN81TY RSSm4XN71AL 43.333 AC qp•a I�, ! " : �P a--s 4'0 Oat. ki - --- _ — I R.9f. -.. I •.'4' I I HILiI•I.]tYbIIY HktiIL'Eh-4l- II '! rC:lJr.'4.YIIY I IJ .-�7NI411 IY,iTY f11 I 1$ '�`{b: - i, k1UvIR:.v I}�II<':I u� � _ �dU51NEbb DI�TFt��I I y.l $g91 ilFf i'. I ] FIG11 ikNS TY EMPLU'NEN ' - .- ;'`� ref i• U` °---- 0 f' f,oe AE7. 1 IIgI !k F I NIGH cEMSIIv E".Dy ha -- r -'—' 36.679 RC -.q _ - - -t-- ---- - SITE MASTER PLAN w K IIDR 40 r MH R mu Ki IA p. ' +: EE*ESM NOW OWN Emn eon IN man Ono yr,r'i.;* np na_ PARK r;Tf e CPenK �+ � ■ i{lR Lut I.s7R 5. rr raoRY h1llG � G LrmP FF y Y�fiY{ Ff1R fA r. �r fi ~ T mk Legend - ''' Lund Use Transpariaklan —lAwmuncCnmmarmi(muc) FunetlenelClessffleatlen - - 4 Pk O M-0 w Usr PrslRlrnlfd(h4JR) Alnf Aril r —vi+ Potemi IJ17[wO Extension LD*❑nslly ReNdimBal(DR) r [`.ENIt1r {� wUR WC •� I MemmuensayHesldertral(lduH) issms prxeralaltaeecmreabWon �WdimHighRmSgyRrslrlrnMA(MHnPS umnedACM53 U Nlgh fienSlyr Pesidemal(NqR] ••• PIj(mrlid 5bp"°p I �� y. CrAC. �I rw F)rmilyf ff11pinr Meat(I f)C) Local HIyII De is sy E�I,Nlur+ael s(1 E) -Erlxlry Lucd r muco Lamm+meet(Mt] f2a1/}wmwt r f -keri fitlila(IND) me ®L-,TMn ti{x3[P ar i i amarrn ILWRK) - n rr,Ir(nv C.) ca�Ine Easemelx[cas] K IIDR 40 r MH R mu Ki IA p. ' +: EE*ESM NOW OWN Emn eon IN man Ono yr,r'i.;* np na_ PARK r;Tf a CPenK �+ � ■ i{lR Lut I.s7R 5. rr raoRY h1llG � G LrmP FF y Y�fiY{ Ff1R fA r. �r fi ~ T mk Legend - ''' Lund Use Transpariaklan —lAwmuncCnmmarmi(muc) FunetlenelClessffleatlen - - 4 Pk O M-0 w Usr PrslRlrnlfd(h4JR) Alnf Aril r —vi+ Potemi IJ17[wO Extension LD*❑nslly ReNdimBal(DR) r [`.ENIt1r {� wUR WC •� I MemmuensayHesldertral(lduH) issms prxeralaltaeecmreabWon �WdimHighRmSgyRrslrlrnMA(MHnPS umnedACM53 U Nlgh fienSlyr Pesidemal(NqR] ••• PIj(mrlid 5bp"°p I �� y. CrAC. �I rw F)rmilyf ff11pinr Meat(I f)C) Local HIyII De is sy E�I,Nlur+ael s(1 E) -Erlxlry Lucd r muco Lamm+meet(Mt] f2a1/}wmwt r f -keri fitlila(IND) me ®L-,TMn ti{x3[P ar i i amarrn ILWRK) - n rr,Ir(nv C.) ca�Ine Easemelx[cas] �� ® � ■ � en� e ■ ��;. � y ~_ -_ -® � ��. � �� ■ ■ � �l% .. ° i« m | � .. • 2 � .. - - - - �� ■� __— . _ � � .� � ■ � . � ■ \ — . .: ., � - --2 . e��■ ' ` | | ' -_OtI4 TV tw%_ ��_ � ■ | � _-jc170" | ■ `' _ _ | �yy ` y lI IIIIV • � � •��1��t0�a s I a 6EN81TY RSSm4XN71AL 43.333 AC qp•a I�, ! " : �P a--s 4'0 Oat. ki - --- _ — I R.9f. -.. I •.'4' I I HILiI•I.]tYbIIY HktiIL'Eh-4l- II '! rC:lJr.'4.YIIY I IJ .-�7NI411 IY,iTY f11 I 1$ '�`{b: - i, k1UvIR:.v I}�II<':I u� � _ �dU51NEbb DI�TFt��I I y.l $g91 ilFf i'. I ] FIG11 ikNS TY EMPLU'NEN ' - .- ;'`� ref i• U` °---- 0 f' f,oe AE7. 1 IIgI !k F I NIGH cEMSIIv E".Dy ha -- r -'—' 36.679 RC -.q _ - - -t-- ---- - SITE MASTER PLAN w