Loading...
2021-06-03 WE IDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, June 03, 2021 at 6:00 PM MINUTES ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel Commissioner Bill Cassinelli Commissioner Andrew Seal Commissioner Maria Lorcher Commissioner Nathan Wheeler Commissioner Steven Yearsley ABSENT Commissioner Nick Grove ADOPTION OF AGENDA-Adopted CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] -Approved 1. Approve Minutes of the May 20, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law 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. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] COMMUNITY ITEMS [ACTION ITEMS] 3. Resolution No. PZ-21-03: A Resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission for the City of Meridian, Idaho,Validating Conformity of the Second Amendment to the Meridian Revitalization Plan with the City of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan -Approved ACTION ITEMS 4. Public Hearing for Topgolf(H-2021-0033) by Arco/Murray, Located at 948 S. Silverstone Way A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for an outdoor recreation facility on 11.56 acres of land in a C-G zoning district to include extended hours of operation from 8:00 a.m.to 2:00 a.m., seven days a week, abutting a residential zoning district. - Continued to June 17, 2021 S. Public Hearing for Woodcrest Townhomes (H-2021-0015) by Blaine A.Womer Civil Engineering, Located at 1789 N. Hickory Way Applicant is Requesting Continuance A. Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the future land use designation on 2+/- acres of land from the Commercial to the Medium High-Density Residential designation. B. Request: Rezone of 2.10 acres of land from the L-0 (Limited Office) to the R- 15 (Medium High-Density Residential) zoning district. - Continued to July 1, 2021 6. Public Hearing for Meridian Middle School Cafeteria Addition (H-2021-0032) by Lombard Conrad Architects, Located at 1507 W. 8th St. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit request for an approximate 7,525 square- foot addition to the existing Meridian Middle School cafeteria. -Approved 7. Public Hearing for Popeyes Drive-Through (H-2021-0030) by Erik Wylie of JRW Construction, LLC, Located at 6343 N. Linder Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment within 300-feet of an existing drive-through on 1.0 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. - Continued to June 17, 2021 8. Public Hearing for Gramercy Commons (H-2021-0023) by Intermountain Pacific, LLC, Located at 1873, 1925, and 2069 S. Wells Ave. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 164 age-restricted units within a multi-story building with a multi-story parking garage on 5.24 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. -Approved ADJOURNMENT - 7:07 p.m. Item 1. Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting June 3, 2021. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of June 3, 2021, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Rhonda McCarvel. Members Present: Chairman Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Bill Cassinelli, Commissioner Andrew Seal, Commissioner Steven Yearsley, Commissioner Maria Lorcher and Commissioner Nate Wheeler. Members Absent: Nick Grove. Others Present: Adrienne Weatherly, Ted Baird, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Joe Dodson, Alan Tiefenbach and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE X Nate Wheeler X Maria Lorcher X Andrew Seal Nick Grove _X Steven Yearsley X Bill Cassinelli X Rhonda McCarvel - Chairman McCarvel: Okay. Good evening. Welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for June 3rd, 2021 . Commissioners who are present for this evening's meeting are at City Hall and on Zoom. We also have staff and the city attorney and clerk's offices, as well as the City Planning Department. If you're joining us on Zoom this evening we can see that you are here. You may be able to 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 reply as quickly as possible. If you simply want to watch the meeting this evening we encourage you to watch the streaming on the city's YouTube channel. You can access it at meridiancity.org/live. And with that let's begin with roll call. ADOPTION OF AGENDA McCarvel: Thank you. First item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. We have several items this evening that will be opened only for the sole purpose of continuing and I will -- we will try to move those to the front of the agenda. Items H-2021-0033, Top Golf, requests continuance to June 17th. H-2021-0015, Woodcrest Townhomes, requests continuance to July 1st. And 2021-0030, Popeye's Drive-Through requests continuance to June 17th. We will move those to the top of the agenda. So, with that could I get a motion to adopt the agenda as amended. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 5 Page 2 of 25 Seal: So moved. Cassinelli: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] 1. Approve Minutes of the May 20, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law 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. McCarvel: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and we have two items on the Consent Agenda. We have approval of minutes for the May 20th, 2021, P&Z meeting and Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Gem Prep South, H-2021-0020. Could I get a motion to adopt -- to accept the Consent Agenda? Seal: So moved. Cassinelli: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] McCarvel: So, at this time I will briefly explain the public hearing process. We will open each item individually and begin with the staff report. The staff will report their findings on how the item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. After staff has made their presentation the applicant will come forward to present their case and respond to staff comments. They will have 15 minutes to do so. After the applicant has finished we will open the floor to public testimony. Each person will be called on only once during public testimony. The Clerk will call the names individually of those who have signed in on our website in advance to testify. You will, then, be unmuted. Please state your name and address for the record and you will have three minutes to address the Commission. If you have previously sent pictures or a presentation for the meeting it will be displayed on the screen and our Clerk will run the presentation. If you have established that you're speaking on behalf of a larger group, like an HOA where Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 6❑ Page 3 of 25 others from that group will not be speaking, you will have up to ten minutes. After all of those who have signed up in advance have spoken we will invite others who may wish to testify. If you wish to speak on a topic you may press the raise hand button on the Zoom app or if you are listening on the phone, please, press star nine and wait for your name to be called. If you're listening on multiple devices, a computer and a phone, for example, please be sure to mute those extra devices, so we don't experience feedback and we can hear you clearly. When you're finished if the Commission does not have questions for you, you will be muted and no longer have the ability to speak. Please remember we will not call on you a second time. After all testimony has been heard the applicant will be given another ten minutes to come back and respond. When the applicant has finished responding to questions and concerns we will close the public hearing the Commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss and hopefully be able to make final decisions or recommendations to the City Council as needed. And we have -- I guess I do have a question for legal as a point of procedure. Can we move action items four, five, and seven to the top of the agenda as requested in front of Item No. 3 or do we want to do Item No. 3 first? Baird: Madam Chair, with the adoption of the agenda and the mention of moving those up, I interpreted that to do them now before you take that action item, so that anybody who was here for those items couldn't find the next date for continuance. ACTION ITEMS 4. Public Hearing for Topgolf (H-2021-0033) by Arco/Murray, Located at 948 S. Silverstone Way A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for an outdoor recreation facility on 11.56 acres of land in a C-G zoning district to include extended hours of operation from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m., seven days a week, abutting a residential zoning district. McCarvel: Sure. Perfect. Thank you. So, with that we will open Item H-2021-0033, Top Golf. They are requesting continuance to June 17th. I believe that was a posting issue. Do we have any other comments from staff on that? Okay. Could I get a motion to continue H-2021-0033 to June 17th? Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: I move that we continue file number H-2021-0033, Top Golf, to June 17th, 2021. Seal: Second. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 7 Page 4 of 25 McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to continue Item H-2021-0033, Top Golf, to June 17th. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. 5. Public Hearing for Woodcrest Townhomes (H-2021-0015) by Blaine A. Womer Civil Engineering, Located at 1789 N. Hickory Way A. Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the future land use designation on 2+/- acres of land from the Commercial to the Medium High-Density Residential designation. B. Request: Rezone of 2.10 acres of land from the L-O (Limited Office) to the R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential) zoning district. McCarvel: Thank you for all who wanted to testify on that. We'll see you June 17th. Next item being opened is H-2021-0015, Woodcrest Townhomes. They are requesting a continuance to the meeting July 1 st. Do we have any other comments from staff on this application? Dodson: Madam Chair, not that I am aware, but that's not my project. I don't know if Bill has more comments on that. McCarvel: Okay. Yearsley: Madam Chair? Parsons: Nothing from staff at this point. McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: I think they were talking about not having a -- I don't know if we have a quorum identified for July 1 st. McCarvel: Yes, we do. Yearsley: Okay. McCarvel: Yeah. Can I get a motion to continue Item H-2021-0015, Woodcrest Townhomes, to July 1st? Wheeler: So moved. Seal: Second. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 $ Page 5 of 25 McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to continue Item H-2021-0015, Woodcrest Townhomes. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. 7. Public Hearing for Popeyes Drive-Through (H-2021-0030) by Erik Wylie of JRW Construction, LLC, Located at 6343 N. Linder Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment within 300-feet of an existing drive-through on 1.0 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. McCarvel: Next item, H-2021-0030, Popeye's Drive-Through is being opened and would like to continue to June 17th. Do we have any other comments from staff? Dodson: Madam Chair, only that I put the reasoning at the top of the outline for all of you. Other than that no other comments. McCarvel: Okay. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Yes. Seal: Move to continue file number H-2021-0030, Popeye's Drive-Through to June 17th, 2021. Cassinelli: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to move Item H-2021-0030 to June 17th. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. COMMUNITY ITEMS [ACTION ITEMS] 3. Resolution No. PZ-21-03: A Resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission for the City of Meridian, Idaho, Validating Conformity of the Second Amendment to the Meridian Revitalization Plan with the City of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan McCarvel: All right. Back to the next Item No. 3. This is resolution number PZ-21-03, which does -- is not open for public testimony, but we have presentation from staff. Cleary: Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. This is Planning and Zoning Resolution 21-03, validating conformity of the second amendment to the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 191 Page 6 of 25 Meridian Revitalization Plan with the city's Comprehensive Plan. This is basically a procedural requirement pursuant to Idaho statute, but I will go ahead and provide some context for this item. The original Meridian Revitalization District is due to sunset in 2026. This is the first of several urban renewal actions that will come before you this year. These actions will enable the Meridian Development Corporation, the city's urban renewal agency, to continue its efforts in the downtown core and extend those efforts further north spurring additional private investment in our downtown. This second amendment provides for de-annexation of two specific areas within this existing district. The first is a 1.5 acre area identified in your packet as Attachment A and referred to as the Idaho Block. Ultimately this area will be annexed into the existing union district, which was established last year. The second area is a larger 77.1 acre area identified as Attachment B in your packet and referred to as the Northern Gateway. These properties, along with several other properties that are not currently in any urban renewal district, will ultimately be included in a proposed new district called the Northern Gateway District. The amendment to the Union District plan and the Urban Renewal Plan for the Northern Gateway District will come before you later this year. Those will include a more detailed analysis as to the conformity of those plans with the city's Comprehensive Plan. Because there is no proposed new Urban Renewal Plan, zoning change or proposed development associated with this particular amendment before you this evening, it is, therefore, still in compliance with the city's comp plan. Following your action this evening this plan amendment will move forward to the City Council for approval of an ordinance ultimately adopting this second amendment. As stated this is a required procedural action. Staff recommends approval of Resolution 21-03 and also MDC is represented virtually this evening, as is legal counsel, and if they want to add any remarks for clarification or answer any questions you might have. McCarvel: Okay. Madam Clerk, do we have anyone on Zoom wishing to make comments at this time from -- Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do have Meghan Conrad on the line. Meghan, you have the ability to unmute yourself if you would like to add a few words. Conrad: Thank you, Commissioners. Meghan Conrad. Elam & Burke. 251 East Front Street. Thank you so much for having me here today. I think city staff did an excellent job of setting the stage as to what is coming down the pike. Just procedurally I hope I can fill in a few blanks here. We are -- this timeline to get these parcels out of the existing -- what is referred to as the downtown district and in order to get the value back on the tax rolls really does need to be done by the fourth -- excuse me -- in the fourth Monday in July and there are a number of steps in this process. Following your consideration of the resolution here today, there are three readings of the ordinance, the 22nd, the 6th, and the 13th of July and, then, there is a number of post-adoption transmittals that occur after that time. So, working against that fourth Monday of July deadline really is critical path to getting those values back on the tax rolls. Second, as city staff indicated, there will be further actions taken with regard to discussion of amending the Union District plan to add in what's referred to as the Idaho Block, as well as the formation of a new project area, which includes the de-annexed parcels that are referred to as the Northern Gateway. So, Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 Flo] Page 7 of 25 with that happy to answer any -- any questions or concerns from this body and, again, thank you so much for having me here today. McCarvel: Thank you, Meghan. Any questions for the presenters this evening? Okay. Any other discussion, anyone, or could I get a motion to approve resolution number PZ- 21-03. Seal: Madam Chair, just quick -- are we recommending approval. We aren't approving; correct? McCarvel: We are approving and, then, it goes further through the process to City Council. Cassinelli: We are the deciding body on -- on the de-annexation? McCarvel: Go ahead. Baird: Madam Chair and Members of the Commission, in answer to your question, you are not deciding on the de-annexation. What you are doing is -- is making a finding that the de-annexation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The -- the memo in your packet and the resolution itself outline that and, then, as both Meghan and Tori mentioned, there will be City Council ordinances that will -- the City Council will approve the de-annexation and within those ordinances it will note that this came before you and you passed this resolution and you are finding as required by the statute that it's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. So, you're just a little piece of the big pie. Not to belittle you. Cassinelli: But we can hold it up. Baird: You could, but we would really like to see you take action on it this evening. Cassinelli: So, we are a pretty big part of the pie. Seal: Just the first part. I'll take a stab at this, Madam Chair. McCarvel: Okay. Go ahead. Seal: After hearing all staff, applicant, and public testimony I move to approve resolution number PZ-21-03 as presented in staff -- well, as presented by staff for the hearing date of June 3rd, 2021. Yearsley: I will second that. McCarvel: I have a motion to -- and a second to approve Resolution No. PZ-21-03. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 Fill Page 8 of 25 MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Cleary: Thank you. 6. Public Hearing for Meridian Middle School Cafeteria Addition (H-2021- 0032) by Lombard Conrad Architects, Located at 1507 W. 8th St. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit request for an approximate 7,525 square foot addition to the existing Meridian Middle School cafeteria. McCarvel: Next in the middle of our agenda here we will actually open and hear the staff report for H-2021-0032, the Meridian Middle School Cafeteria Addition. Tiefenbach: Good evening, Planning Commission. Alan Tiefenbach, associate planner with the City of Meridian. I think this will be relatively brief, unless you want me to go on at length. This is a proposal for a conditional use permit. The property is just a little shy of 37 acres, zoned R-4. It's located on Northwest 8th Street, which is in between Linder and Meridian. To the north is office zoned property. East, south, and west are all existing single family residents. There was a -- so -- so, what this is -- this is a conditional use permit to allow a 7,500 square foot addition to the Meridian Middle School. Real quick history of why we are here. So, Meridian Middle School campus consists of seven buildings totaling about 186,000 square feet. The first building started in 1969. In February of this year a representative came in to talk to staff about putting in a 7,500 square foot addition to the north side of the cafeteria building. You can see that here on the site plans that I have put up. This proposed addition -- basically it's going to be a vestibule. It's going to connect the cafeteria to the auditorium and the main classroom building. Some of the things that are going to be included are additional cafeteria space, a new kitchen and IT room, renovations to the choir room and some restrooms. When we were doing the pre-app we told the applicant that a public education institution is allowed in the R-4 zoning district by a conditional use. However, a conditional use has never been done for this school. So, this is really to address the as built conditions and to keep from getting snagged up in the future if the school wants to do any additional improvements. Again, the site plans have been included and shows what the external improvements are. I put a little bubble there, so you can see where it is. There was also a landscape plan. That was submitted. There is going to be two trees that are removed, but they are going to be putting in seven trees. Other than that, if you read our code it says that if you're doing additions of less than 25 percent there is no additional landscaping required. So, they are actually putting in a little more landscaping than they are required to. Here are the architectural elevations. What's existing is comprised of CMU, fiber cement, blue metal paneling and blue standing seam roofs. This -- oh, sorry. This is the new addition here is this little piece right here. That's looking from the north to the south and here is what you would see if you are inside the campus looking towards the north. This here is the addition. The applicant has submitted for a certificate of zoning compliance concurrently -- concurrently with this. So, if this conditional use is approved staff can release the CZC, so that the applicant can pull the building permit. The only two recommendations that staff had on this one is that Public Works commented that it looks Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F12 Page 9 of 25 like there is an existing light pole on the school district within one of our sewer easements. The way this could be remedied is that the applicant could move the -- a manhole in the parking lot and we have showed the applicant which one it would be -- move it slightly to the east and, then, rededicate that easement. It would pull -- basically you would be re- shifting the easement and pulling the light pole out of that. That was the first condition. The second condition is that -- I can back up and show you. There is a very large parking lot here. Only some of it is striped. What the applicant has showed is 318 parking spaces, but actually what they are required per the code is 483. Quite a few more than -- than what they have shown here now. Staff believes a lot of this could be striped. Again, you have got pretty much a blank parking lot. So, staff's other recommendation would be that the school would stripe this parking lot to meet the code and with that staff will conclude our presentation, unless you have any questions or comments. McCarvel: Okay. Any questions for staff? Okay. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Yes. Cassinelli: You did say that with striping that lot that they would have plenty of parking? Tiefenbach: I think the applicant can address that, but they -- I'm sure just random guesstimation on that. It looks like they have got plenty of parking that they would actually stripe that in. Again I will defer to the applicant, if they can actually -- if they have actually done the math on that to figure out if that works or not. Cassinelli: Okay. McCarvel: Would the applicant like to come forward? Raman: Yes. This is Priya Raman. Good evening. This is Priya Raman, senior architect with Lombard Conrad Architects and with reference to the parking striping, we will comply with what is required in the staff report for striping the north parking lot, but given that this is a middle school, most of the students are being dropped off and there is a bus drop off zone as well to the north in that parking lot. Predominantly what that parking -- the lot that you see, the asphalt paved area to the north of the building, is actually a driver's ed is what I'm aware of. Motorcycle driving education is what it is used for when the school is not in session. But when we read through the report that the staff recommended, we have no problems with restriping that parking lot to the north. As for the actual numbers, I am not aware that we can meet the 483. 1 will have to just go through the striping to figure out if we can meet that or not. But I can assure the Commission that there is plenty of parking available on the site for the existing use and we are not adding any extra student population or trips into the site. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Did you have any other presentation? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F13 Page 10 of 25 Raman: I don't have anything else to share, except for the fact that this is a much needed improvement for the school. This existing facility is severely undersized, both the kitchen footprint and also the seating footprint when compared to the other middle schools and considering that this -- this kitchen is operational throughout the year, it would be a big benefit to the school community to have this addition approved. McCarvel: Any questions for the applicant or staff? Okay. Oh. Yes, sir. Tiefenbach: Alan Tiefenbach. I guess my only comment or question is what's required by the -- per the code, good or bad, right, because I understand that most of the kids are being dropped off there. You're probably not going to have 483 cars there. That said the code requires what the code requires. My only pause is that if the condition of approval goes forward as it is, it says that they are going to restripe it per the code, meaning they have to come up with 483 parking spaces. If the Planning Commission wants to decide to tweak the language a little bit to say that the applicant will stripe as many parking spaces as they can and still meet the driver's ed or something, it might give a little more flexibility in the future. Otherwise, staff might have to enforce 483 parking spaces. Does that make sense? McCarvel: Thank you. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to testify on this application? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do not. McCarvel: Okay. Is there anybody in the room or on Zoom who has not signed up that would like to testify on this application? Okay. With that could I get a motion to close the public hearing for H-2021-0032. Yearsley: Madam Chair, before we do that I just have a quick question of staff. McCarvel: Okay. Yearsley: It's in the condition to meet that many parking spaces. Can we actually -- because it's looks like it's been working fine the way it is. Can we remove that condition all at once and not require the additional parking spaces or is that something that we just -- by code we have to meet? Tiefenbach: This is a conditional use. You can remove that. You can add a requirement that the number of parking spaces that exists now is acceptable. Yearsley: Okay. Madam Chair? McCarvel: Mr. Seal. Seal: I will just make a quick comment on there after having my son go to school there that during -- when there was assemblies and things like that that we attended, I would Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F14 Page 11 of 25 have very much appreciated that parking lot being striped. So, during school and everything, yeah, absolutely, there is not a lot of need for it. But when there are gatherings there it's -- it gets messy for sure. Yearsley: Okay. Parsons: Madam Chair, this is Bill. McCarvel: Go ahead, Bill. Parsons: Thank you. Yes, we can -- certainly if the applicant can't get up to that number we can certainly look at something through the alternative compliance process. So, if that's the purview of the Commission to get as many as possible, but maybe not get to that amount per code, then, we can -- I would just add a condition -- either, you know, work with staff on alternative compliance. McCarvel: Right. Parsons: Obtain alternative compliance for a parking reduction for the school site. McCarvel: Yeah. Parsons: Would be my recommendation. McCarvel: Work with staff to have as many as reasonably possible. Parsons: Yeah. We can do that. Again, we can do that staff level with their CZC and design review application that Alan's currently processing. We don't charge the school district any fees for application submittals. They would just have to amend their submittal with an alternative compliance. If they can't meet that, then, we can analyze the parking for the site and I think Alan brings up good points, we -- it's not like it's a high school where you need 1,500 parking stalls, because all the kids are driving, but -- McCarvel: Right. Parsons: -- certainly it's -- I think more is probably necessary, but I don't know if we are going to get to 400 or not without working with the applicant and them striping it out and letting us know exactly what they can provide on site. McCarvel: Okay. Parsons: So, I think we can amend the condition to say provide 800 -- or 480 stalls or apply for alternative compliance, may be the easiest route to go for you tonight. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F15] Page 12 of 25 Lorcher: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: I was a parent there for six years as well and the way the parking lot is now, without the striping -- and I respect the fact that -- that when there are assemblies it can be a little challenging, but because it mostly is a bus terminal of moving hundreds of kids in -- in and out and the Star group doing their motorcycling, it may -- and -- and they may be just a pay client, you know, they may choose to go someplace else if it doesn't work out. I think striping would probably -- the reason it wasn't done is because the alternative uses for that parking lot throughout the year, the striping would --would detract from what they are trying to do. So, whether you are a new bus driver and they want to create these lanes or whatever else the -- the number of assemblies that are done at Meridian Middle in a given year are probably ten at best, whereas they are in school for hundreds of days. McCarvel: Okay. We can open that up in our discussion after we close the public hearing. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: I move that we close the public hearing on H-2021-0032. Cassinelli: Second. Seal: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing H-2021-0032. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: Comments? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli: Cassinelli: Can -- can Star and the others that use that lot -- I mean would the striping of stalls interfere with what they are doing? Because -- I don't know. Alan, do you have a comment -- information on that? Or Bill maybe? Tiefenbach: It might be a question for the applicant. I think that they certainly could stripe this to --to get more parking spaces in. I'm not sure if they have actually done the logistics to figure out what they need for the bus turnaround. They just basically have a big, unstriped open area that would be available to the applicant, as Bill talked about with the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F16 Page 13 of 25 alternative compliance, because we are processing the CZC right now, so they would have to sort of show us what they need to get the buses in and out, what's the reasonable amount of parking spaces that they could get in there, maybe explain what the hours are, so that they have legitimate parking. They have tons of parking there, it's just not striped. Cassinelli: Because I mean I have -- I have been to events there before where, you know, you show up to parking it's -- it's crazy, especially for somebody that isn't going there regularly and you are trying to race -- it's just kind of all over the place, upon on curbs and different things, and I don't know what that's like for the residents along 8th Street there on those days. Dodson: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Yes. Go ahead. Dodson: Sorry. I know it's not my application, but I run through that parking lot quite a lot, because I live in the area. The Star program uses the east side of this parking lot that we are talking about. Striping the west half -- you can literally see the cones when they have it on -- would not interfere with them from what I can see. McCarvel: Okay. Yeah. I think if -- we can maybe move it forward by turning it over to the staff and the applicant to work together to stripe it in the best manner possible for bus traffic and additional parking stalls. Wheeler: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Yes. Commissioner Wheeler. Wheeler: How many additional spaces are needed, because there are several that are on that east side. So, how many -- if we can ask staff that. Tiefenbach: On their site plan they identified 318 parking spaces. Per their code they are required to have 483. McCarvel: Okay. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: If I were to motion on this I would have the wording basically be that work with staff to get as many parking spaces as possible, without inhibiting its use as a bus drop-off, pickup, as well as ancillary uses, such as the Star class training. Yearsley: Madam Chair? Madam Chair? I think he is also -- or we can -- or apply for alternative compliance -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F17 Page 14 of 25 Seal: Okay. Yearsley: -- to reduce the overall number of parking spaces. I think that -- it's just amend that to -- to meet the parking requirements or apply for alternative compliance would be probably just as simple. McCarvel: Okay. Great. Commissioner Seal? Seal: Oh. Sorry. Cassinelli: We are all waiting for you. Seal: I was going to let you keep going. Okay. So, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number H-2021-0032 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of June 3rd, 2021, with the following modification: That they work with staff to stripe the parking lot with as many parking spaces as possible without inhibiting its use for bus, pickup, drop-off and Star class training, et cetera, or they can apply for alternative compliance to meet the requirement. Cassinelli: There was also a condition on the easement. McCarvel: I think that's covered in the staff report. Cassinelli: Is it? McCarvel: Yeah. Cassinelli: Oh. Okay. McCarvel: As written. Cassinelli: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve H-2021-0032 with modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. 8. Public Hearing for Gramercy Commons (H-2021-0023) by Intermountain Pacific, LLC, Located at 1873, 1925, and 2069 S. Wells Ave. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 164 age-restricted units within a multi-story building with a multi-story parking garage on 5.24 acres of land in the C-G zoning district Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F18 Page 15 of 25 McCarvel: Next on the agenda is H-2021-0023, Gramercy Commons, and we will begin with the staff report. Dodson: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. Now, it's my project. Here we go. The application before you is for a conditional use permit. The site consists of 5.24 acres, zoned C-G, located at 1873 and 1925 and 2069 South Wells Avenue. As you can see on the zoning map and somewhat on the aerial, the north, east -- north and the east have C-G zoning adjacent. To the north of the northern most lot is an existing commercial building. To the east is three parcels, two of them are developed with commercial uses and one of them is undeveloped. To the south is a multi-use pathway and, then, further south of that is TN-R and R-15 zoning districts with -- I believe there is some attached single family, as well as some detached single family in there. To the west is R-4 zoning and Mountain View High School. It was originally annexed in 2006 as part of the Kenai Subdivision, now known as Gramercy Subdivision. And platted following that and the applicant has received, as of last Tuesday, development agreement modification approval from City Council for the proposed concept and conceptually for the use of -- that we are here to discuss tonight. Future land use out here is mixed use regional, as you can see on the map on the left. Rather large area, encompasses a lot of acreage on all four corners of the Eagle and Overland intersection. The applicant tonight is requesting a conditional use permit for a multi-family development consisting of 164 age-restricted units within a multi-story building, as wrapped around a multi-story parking garage on 5.24 acres of land within the C-G zoning district. The three parcels that are part of the application actually make up a total of 6.9 acres, but only a segment of parking lay across the shared property line between the northern most lot and the center lot. The applicant has received City Council approval of their concurrent DA mod as noted, which conceptually approved the site plan development and use. The purpose of this application is to ensure compliance with the specific use standards, UDC 11-4-3- 27. The subject project is proposed to be constructed in one phase. Access to the site is proposed via three adjacent drive aisles, one to the north that currently does not exist until the very north of the property as noted. These two drive aisles to the east as well and they do exist currently. ACHD has noted that no improvements are required to any adjacent or nearby public roads and they did not require a TIS, a traffic impact study, because the development is not estimated to generate enough peak hour vehicle trips, despite proposing over one hundred units. ACHD has noted that all adjacent public roads, which would be East Goldstone Street and South 4th Avenue as the closest ones, are overbuilt for their current capacities and capable of handling additional vehicle trips without issue. Therefore, staff is supportive of the proposed development in regards to its transportation impact. All of the departments have also signed off on the proposed development with minimal or no comments, including Fire, Police and Public Works. The site plan depicts a singular multi-level age-restricted -- which would be three and four stories in height, multi-family apartment complex that is wrapped around a parking structure, something we do not have here in the City of Meridian. The parking structure is proposed to contain a majority of the required parking spaces. Around the proposed building the new development plan depicts a drive aisle that -- that circles the entire structure and includes two areas of surface level parking located on the east and north sides of the proposed building and they contain the remaining required parking. The drive Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F19 Page 16 of 25 aisle that circles the building is intended to be for Fire and Emergency Services access. As noted, the project is proposed as a wrapped concept, where the vast majority of the parking is contained within the parking structure located in the center of the building or the site, with the apartment units wrapped around it. This design is affectionately known as a Texas donut and allows for a smaller building footprint and more efficient utilization of the -- of the development site overall. Based on the number of bedrooms per unit, which there are 108 one bedroom and 56 two bedroom units, a minimum of 274 parking spaces should be provided, with at least 164 of those spaces covered or within a garage. The applicant is proposing 291 parking spaces, with 220 coverage spaces within the parking garage. The remaining 71 spaces are located around the perimeter as noted. The applicant is, therefore, exceeding the minimum code requirements. I would like to note that they also included guest parking, which is not a current requirement, but a future requirement, so that is part of why they are exceeding their minimum. A minimum of 41,000 square feet of common open space is required per the specific use standards at the ratio of 250 square feet per unit, because each unit is between 500 and 1,200 square feet in size. The applicant has proposed 42,000 square feet of qualified common open space. The proposed open space consists of those areas outlined on the exhibit before you. A plaza along the east side of the building. A pool and pool deck with assorted amenities on the south side. A terrace with fire pits and barbecues and additional seating areas on the west and a pickleball court and community garden along the north side of the building. All of these areas have been verified by size and use to meet the -- meet and exceed the required quality and amount of common open space. Overall, the submitted open space meets the specific use standards and staff finds the proposed open space is adequate for the proposed development, especially when you combine the array of proposed amenities. Furthermore, the subject sites are within a quarter mile of a city park, which is to the south. They are in close proximity to a plaza park that is within the Gramercy Development and the shared park with everybody and directly adjacent to a regional pathway, which does go across the southern boundary -- or adjacent to the southern boundary. All of these factors present more than adequate open space and recreational opportunities for future residents. As noted, the proposed open space contains all of the amenities, which to be more specific on what I had before, swimming pool, a plaza with a public art, a sports court, which is a pickleball court, a community garden and multiple seating areas with barbecues and firepits. Staff finds the proposed amenities to be adequate in serving the proposed age-restricted multi-family development, in conjunction with the additional amenities nearby. The submitted elevations are for conceptual purposes only and will require future administrative design review approval. Staff notes that the submittal -- the submitted elevations do not meet all of the required design criteria for multi-family development, but at the time of the design review submittal staff will analyze the structure in more detail for the conformance with the -- with our architectural standards manual. An application for certificate of zoning compliance is also required to be submitted along with a design review, which will verify -- confirm these already discussed development points. There has been no written testimony as of 2:00 o'clock this afternoon when I wrote this. Staff does recommend approval of this subject application, because staff finds that proposing an apartment complex within this area of the city that is in close proximity to commercial development, childcare, charter school, which is directly to the east and established regional pedestrian Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F20 Page 17 of 25 facilities, warrants the use, as well as is consistent with the mixed use regional Comprehensive Plan future land use designation. After that I will stand for any questions. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Would the applicant like to come forward? Clark: Hi, everybody. Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street in Boise and working with the applicant and I think Joe is getting my PowerPoint teed up here. As he does I will just mention a couple introductory things about this. We are here to discuss the conditional use permit for this -- what I think is a really cool apartment project in the Gramercy development. It's part of a two phase process procedurally. As Joe mentioned, the first phase was a modification to the development agreement that was processed with the City Council last week. As we discussed that with them, you know, one of the details that I would mention is that this is on the back side of the Gramercy project, kind of nestled there against -- against the high school and next to other multi-family and so Council agreed that it made sense in this location to change that and allow for a mixed -- or a multi-family project. So, with that in place -- this is in the C-G zone, so we have to do a conditional use permit, so that's why we get to come here on the hottest night of the year and see everybody in person. Our presentation is going to move forward in two phases. In order to make sure you're familiar with the details a little bit more beyond what Joe has shown tonight, we are going to have Mark Sindall with GGLO Architects, who is online, kind of walk through what was presented last week, so you guys can see all of that and, then, I'm going to come back and I will go over a few procedural details and, then, it looks like we are still having trouble with the -- the PowerPoint, but -- oh, is it? Good. Oh, it's just not on this screen. Got it. So, after Mark's done I will come back and, then, in the meantime I just want to note that Mike Chidester and Aaron Elton are here, they are with the Meridian based ownership group, so this is a -- truly a local project and a very cool thing for the city. So, with that I will turn the time over to Mark. It's black. I can just look over my back shoulder here. And do we have -- is Mark coming forward, too? Weatherly: Mark, you should have the ability to unmute yourself and turn on your camera if you would like. Sindall: Okay. Thank you. All right. Madam Chair, Commissioners, thank you. Mark Sindall. Principal with GGLO, 1199 Shoreline Lane in Boise. Next slide, please. Keep going. So, this is directly from your comp plan. We will start with that and I will just read it. You know your plan well. Multi-family residential may be allowed in some cases, but should be careful to promote a high quality of life through thoughtful site design, connectivity, and amenities and that's really what the basis of our design was from the beginning. Next slide, please. We also looked at the Gramercy experience and the notion of homes, workplaces, and shopping blending seamlessly into an urban inspired community. Of course, that's the most successful with proximity and walkability, as staff mentioned, and we believe this proposal goes a long way in delivering the truly Gramercy experience. Next slide, please. So, the site is situated adjacent to ball fields and a school. Walking distance to shops, parks, commercial and health services. And, really, as a site it's ideal for age restricted multi-family housing if planned wisely and with the right approach that we will get into a moment, it can open up opportunities for adjacencies and Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F21 Page 18 of 25 future development of sites, with some efficiencies with the parking. So -- yes. There you go. You can see all the proximity. Next slide, please. So, that brings us to parking. Livability means more space for people and open space and a recognition that absolutely we need to accommodate cars, but not at the expense of livability. So, to that end we studied the impact of a four level wrapped garage, as staff mentioned, and Joe -- over a surface parking lot and what that can mean for livability goals for the district. The punchline is that we are reducing by two-thirds how much of paradise is being paved by parking lot, for you 70s or '90s rock fans, and the added benefit, of course, that most residents park on the floor that they live in. This is the nice aspect of a wrapped project. So, here is what we are proposing. If you go to the next slide. A parking garage. Keep going. A parking garage tucked behind a high quality building with large amenity spaces immersed in a beautiful regional landscape. The project traverses the district with outward facing plazas and frontages. You can keep clicking. With residential scale frontages and amenities facing the more pastoral ball fields and the high school. Click again. All right. If you go to the next slide you can start to see the location and the plan of the amenities that were mentioned previously, with terraces, gardens, and amenities and, then, a different approach to the architecture, depending on whether it's facing -- call it the more pastoral ball fields versus the more commercial district on its frontage. Next slide. So, you start to see how this lays out with the garage in the middle, the wrap, and, then, concentric rings with the gardens and amenity spaces and, then, the perimeter parking for access and fire access. Next slide. As was mentioned, we really tried to focus on usable diverse, larger, common amenities, so that this would really provide year around interest and open space for residents. So, community gardens, pollinator gardens, pickleball courts, private patios, common areas for lounge -- with lounges and fire pits and, then, the pool area and a more of a public facing plaza. On the commercial side all again immersed with trees for shade in a regionally inspired Treasure Valley landscape. Next. Just a little bit about the architecture. We don't want to get too much into this, but we are being attuned to the district and picking up with the Gramercy brick and materials and providing a mix of a more commercial and residential feel, providing a little bit of stature and simplicity to the building, given the bridge location that it's in between the high school in the larger fields and the rest of the district. Also just trying to keep it a little bit more simple, so we can focus on quality materials and good detailing. Next slide. So, elegance is key. Also looking at solar shading and how that all works with climate for human comfort and for a more sustainable, less intensive mechanical approach to the project. Keep going. And there is just a few shots. This is that public facing frontage with entries and with the plaza. Next slide. This is the amenity deck that you see there. Next slide. And, then, the more residential side with more modulation. Next slide. Elevations, just to give you an idea of the materials and the rhythm of the building. Keep going. More. And, again, this will just kind of show you what the intent is and we will get into that with design review. Thank you very much. Back to Hethe. Clark: All right. Thanks, Mark. So, again, on the -- on the process, this did go in front of the Council. We are here for a conditional use. Again, it's required in the C-G zone. So, as we look at the proposal, it's well developed, it's a detailed application, as Joe mentioned, and meets or exceeds all of the applicable standards. A couple more details on that. We are proposing that it remain within the Gramercy development agreements Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F22 Page 19 of 25 and all of the existing structure there. That will mean that the exterior parking will be part of the cross-parking, cross-access regime that exists at Gramercy, so it will be integrated into that project and it's part of the -- it will be part of the association as well. It's an age targeted facility, as Mark mentioned. It's very near services. You got right there within walking distance restaurants, physician's offices, banks. So, it's really ideal for an age targeted facility. As far as agency review as -- as Joe mentioned, no negative comments to date and ACHD has approved it without any improvements to the roadway system. So, the -- the question, then, for us is whether the conditional use permit factors have -- have been satisfied. So, we will just run through those quickly. The site is large enough to meet the proposed use. Again, this is a first for Meridian, but it's a very efficient use of the site that allows for less parking field and makes a lot of sense. The project is harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. It's in the mixed use regional designation, which foresees a mixture of residential and commercial uses and, you know, I would just note that within the mixed use regional nodes there is a minimum of ten percent of residential and a maximum of 50 percent of commercial and we are a little heavy on commercial on this -- in this Eagle-Overland area. So, this will actually help get it closer to the -- to the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The product -- or excuse me. The project is compatible with other uses. Again, you got multi-family right there on the east. You have got the commercial that this is going to take care of -- advantage of on the north. It won't adversely affect other properties. As Joe mentioned, we are overparked and we have got a system where folks are going to be able to come in and go right directly to their -- to their units and, then, additional parking on the exterior. It is adequately served by public facilities and those public facilities will not come at excessive cost. Again, all the agencies have commented and they have indicated no issues. There is no excessive production of traffic, etcetera. None of those apply here. ACHD's approved it. And I'm going fast because I think I might be kicking a dead horse here, but -- and, then, finally, there are no natural scenic or historic features affected. One last item that I just wanted to point out. Joe's been great to work with on this one. We had a condition of approval that's in the -- in this staff report that is also in the MDA and so we -- as a result of that we made a modification to the site plan that you can see on the screen and that was to create a connection or a physical connection between this project and the regional pathway to the south. So, we sent an updated site plan to Joe for the -- for the hearing last week and that's what you are seeing on the screen right now and we're going to use pavers to help connect and draw people into the regional pathway. So, with that I think I will wrap up and answer any questions that you might have. McCarvel: Okay. Any questions for staff or the applicant? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Only because we are taking bets whether we would get out of here in under an hour tonight, so I got lots of questions. Actually -- Clark: So, you have the over is what you're saying? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F23 Page 20 of 25 Cassinelli: Exactly. Either for -- for Hethe or for -- for staff. Do you know is -- because I didn't fully read all the ACHD comments. Are they planning on -- on lighting Wells or Bonita at anytime in the future? Dodson: Mr. Cassinelli, I believe that it is supposed to signalize at Wells and Overland, but not Wells and Bonita. I do not know. Cassinelli: Bonita is the next one over coming out of El Dorado. Dodson: To the east. Yeah. Cassinelli: It's to the east. Yeah. But Wells -- there is planned to -- to signal that at some point? Dodson: At Wells and Overland. Yes. Especially with some more apartments potentially going in on the north side of Overland. Cassinelli: Where Winco is going to go? Dodson: Correct. Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you. McCarvel: Okay. Yearsley: Madam Chair? Are these going to be leased or are they looking to be like townhomes or be sold? Clark: Madam Chair, Commissioner Yearsley, they are -- it's intended to stay in common ownership, so they can be leased. Yearsley: Okay. Wheeler: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Wheeler. Wheeler: I have a couple questions here. On this access that's to the north -- let me see. That -- one of the slides there showed an access that was a drive aisle that was going to the north. I just wanted to know if that was actually connecting to the parking lot that was to --what would it be? To the north of there. I think that's like a behavioral health building or behavior parking area. Clark: We will try to get the map out -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F24 Page 21 of 25 Wheeler: It's right there. Yes. That drive aisle there to the north, the access drive, is that actually tying into the property? Clark: Madam Chair, Commissioner Wheeler, so it goes by the -- it's built. It goes by the building, but not into the parking lot. So, it's an access drive, not a -- it doesn't connect directly in there. Wheeler: Okay. So, then, where is that tying into for an access drive for traffic? Clark: I think it goes up to the last road south and parallel -- south of and parallel to Overland. Dodson: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Yes. Dodson: From what I have -- this site plan kind of cuts it off, but when it's put out on the -- on the actual overlay it connects to the existing drive aisle that's there. It just isn't part of the -- the parking lot. It's like an actual drive aisle, not -- not just the parking. So, it will connect and have the future connect -- and allow for connectivity in the area. Wheeler: Okay. All right. I see that here now on the -- on Google Maps there, seeing how that -- that does tie into that. And, then, another question that I have -- so, thank you on that. I had another question. And that was on that amenity building -- so, on that same -- I think it's on that same slide you guys have there. Yeah. That amenity building to the south, is that going to be for privacy there, too? Is it going to be solid? Or is it just going to be a little transparent with a screen. Clark: Madam Chair, Commissioner Wheeler, I'm going to -- that one is going to, obviously, be subject to the design review, but I think we have got a good idea of that. But let me ask Mark to weigh in on that, because I think he's got the best idea. Sindall: Yeah. Commissioners, Madam Chair, thank you. So, yes, the idea is that that has quality materials. There is a rendering, I think, that shows it and we have got vines on the building, planting, openings. So it's a combination of actually frontage to hold the edge a little bit and for privacy and, then, there is going to be bike storage and other things in there. So, it should be quite nice. Wheeler: Thank you. McCarvel: Thank you. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F25] Page 22 of 25 Seal: I like the concept of it and the parking will be -- that will be -- not be open to the elements, it will actually be covered; correct? I think I saw that. Clark: Commissioner Seal, that's correct. Yeah. Seal: Okay. And, then, the only concern I have is the baseball fields. Being the guy that can crank one over the fence every once in a while, that and I could -- I could hit that building. McCarvel: Are you here to brag or is that a question? Seal: Yeah. Well, I just -- that's like -- that -- that seems really close to me for, you know, the amount of people that are going to be in there, so that -- that's just a concern. Clark: Madam Chair, Commissioner Seal that -- duly noted and we will do some measurements and make sure that that's designed properly for that issue. Seal: Okay. Wheeler: Please bring him out to hit some balls, though, so you can see what the range, is just to clarify that. Seal: Right. My sister can hit them farther than me, but I can -- I can knock them out there, so -- Lorcher: It's funny that you mention that, because the first thing I thought about -- if this was an age specific building, so I'm assuming it's more seniors; is that correct? Dodson: Fifty-five and older, yes, ma'am. Lorcher: And seniors and marching bands and kids and the high school and all their noise, I was thinking, oh, is this the best spot for it, because Mountain View is a pretty lively school throughout the year. I live right by the new Owyhee High School and we are looking forward to hearing the marching band in our backyard, but not everybody appreciates that, so -- Clark: Madam Chair, Commissioner Lorcher, you know, that's actually something that we have talked quite a bit about. You know, this is going to be a site where the -- the people who are going to be attracted to this are going to be attracted to the liveliness of the area, the -- you know, the -- the restaurants nearby, the sound, the excitement and we think that the folks who are going to be coming here are actually going to really appreciate that element of it and, you know, this is a conditional use permit, so we are really -- we are kind of focused on the outward effects of this project on neighboring properties, not necessarily their effect on us, but we have definitely thought about that and, in fact, the ownership has been to Mountain View to talk to the -- the leadership there about Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F26 Page 23 of 25 possibilities of our residents coming and volunteering and being engaged. So, we think that's actually a selling point for the -- for the project. Lorcher: It will have to be in their lease that, you know, all marching band music is required. McCarvel: Any other questions for staff or the applicant? Okay. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to testify on this application? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do not. McCarvel: That being said, is there anyone who did not sign up that would like to testify? Nobody on Zoom? Okay. With that could I get a motion to close the public hearing on H-2021-0023? Seal: So moved. Wheeler: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close public hearing on H-2021-0023. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I like this idea. I hope it pans out and works as well as what they are -- they are hoping for. I like the idea that it's -- not only is it a parking garage style, but it's also covered -- you know, it's just not something that's -- you can see from everywhere. So, sometimes parking garages aren't the prettiest thing to look at, so -- plus it adds a small element of security for people that are driving in and out of there. It's a little harder to -- you know, for somebody to get in and out of there I would imagine. But lots of amenities. I think the placement of it is pretty good. I hate to see some of the C-G stuff go to multi- family, but I think they are right, where that's tucked in back there I think it would be a pretty hard sell to get businesses to open back there that are -- you know, want more kind of open frontage appeal to them. The only concern, like I said, is the baseball fields. But outside of that, you know, people might enjoy sitting out on their balcony and watching a baseball game or practice as well. So, I think it's going to be a pretty good project. I do like the way it ties into some of the other amenities that are there available to it already as well. McCarvel: I agree. Wheeler: Madam Chair? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F27 Page 24 of 25 McCarvel: Commissioner Wheeler. Wheeler: Did I cut somebody off there or -- okay. We are good. This is on my jogging path when I jog. I jog right by the spot, go touch Overland and, then, jog back home and I was always curious about what was going to be back in this area and I like the plan, I like it is actually hiding the parking, instead of just having a bunch of surface parking on it. That's a good spot. I do think it could -- if it had like some rooftop patios on there you could actually get like a fan club base up there and cheer them on during some of their softball and baseball games that are going on right there and, then, it's also squeezed in between two --two different schools. There is the charter school that's on the hard corner and the school over here, Mountain View, on the other side. But always was curious when I would run by this, what was going to go in here and this could be a big -- a good benefit for this area. It's surrounded also by other multi-use properties to townhomes type stuff and, yeah, the drive aisles seem to be good and if ACHD doesn't seem to have an issue with that, then, that's good. McCarvel: Okay. Any other comments or -- Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: I guess there is only one concern that I have, just the bulk and scale of this -- this building versus what's around it is a little bit big. That being said, I don't think it's enough to -- to cause any concern about it. I think it's set back far enough from the main roads and I think it will -- with other buildings around it can be obscured a little bit better. Just as a side note, I thought it was interesting the landscaping plans showed all younger families in an age restricted facility, so I just thought that was kind of funny, so -- no, I think it's a good project, I think it is a good area, especially where it's a mixed use area, I think that serves a good niche for that area. McCarvel: Any other comments? Motion? Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number H-2021-0023, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of June 3rd, 2021, with no comment -- no modifications. Seal: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve H-2021-0023. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. June 3,2021 F28 Page 25 of 25 MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Cassinelli: Madam Chair, I move we adjourn. Yearsley: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded that we adjourn eight minutes past -- Cassinelli: Got the over. McCarvel: -- on the official bets. All those -- all those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:07 P. M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. ) APPROVED 6 117 12021 RHONDA MCCARVEL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK Item 1. 3 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Approve Minutes of the May 20, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 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 2. 46 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law 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. Item 2. F47 CITY OF MERIDIAN V IDIAN;--- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ! DAHO DECISION& ORDER In the Matter of the Request for 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 for Gem Prep South,Located approximately 1/8 mile East of the S.Locust Grove/E. Lake Hazel Rd. Intersection on the South Side of E.Lake Hazel Rd.,by Paradigm Design. Case No(s).H-2021-0020 For the Planning&Zoning Commission Hearing Date of: May 20, 2021 (Findings on June 3,2021) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 20,2021, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 20, 2021, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 20,2021, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of May 20,2021,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). H-2021-0020 Page 1 Item 2. 48 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 20,2021, 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 20,2021,attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two(2)Year Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit,when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-513-6F.1. During this time,the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting,the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two(2)year period in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.2. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-5B-6.F.1,the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one(1)two (2)year period.Additional time extensions up to two (2)years as determined and approved by the Commission may be granted. With all extensions,the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521, any affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the governing board may within twenty-eight(28)days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67,Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff report for the hearing date of May 20,2021 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2021-0020 Page 2 Item 2. 49 By action of the Planning&Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 3rd day of June ,2021. COMMISSIONER RHONDA MCCARVEL, CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER ANDREW SEAL,VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER STEVEN YEARSLEY VOTED COMMISSIONER WILLIAM CASSINELLI VOTED COMMISSIONER NATE WHEELER VOTED COMMISSIONER MARIA LORCHER VOTED Rhonda McCarvel, Chairman 6-3-2021 Attest: Chris Johnson, City Clerk 6-3-2021 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: 6-3-2021 City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2021-0020 Page 3 Item 2. ■ EXHIBIT A C� E IDIAN�-- STAFF REPORT f D A H 0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 5/20/2021 Legend DATE: IffProject Lflcfl�iar TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner t-= t 208-884-5533 I } SUBJECT: H-2021-0020 Gem Prep South—CUP s LOCATION: Approximately 1/8 of a mile east of S. x Locust Grove Rd. on the south side of E. r ------------ Lake Hazel Rd., in the NW 1/4 of Section 15 5,Township 2N.,Range 1E. 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 Jill" 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 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 2. ■ EXHIBIT A A. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend w „ 0 feegend Project Lflcfli�on id fic3l I Projent Lflca�ior, d-H 9 F bens. d Rgsid�ntial MU ,C Meal iu R�sider�tial Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend T „ 0Legend 0 Prc*eoi Laofliion R- R- Project Lccflfion - CityLip,-oh R- R-8 — Planned Pumels R-8 R-15 R-1- 9 �� R715 R n � � i RUT -C RUT ' RUT .8 -- ti R-4 R' _M1 mm R-8 i -- i r R T r R- RU T lR h 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 2. F52] EXHIBIT A 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 11-213-3; 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 2. F53] EXHIBIT A 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 2. F54] EXHIBIT A 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 VH,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. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on June 20,2021.At the public hearing,the Commission moved to approve the subject CUP request. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Bill Hadlock, Stacey Walker b. In opposition:None C. Commenting. None d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony a. None 3. Ke, ids)of discussion by Commission: a. Traffic and access to the site during drop-off and pick-up times. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None 5. Outstandin issue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. None Page 5 Item 2. F5-51EXHIBIT A VII. EXHIBITS A. Proposed Site Plan(dated: 3/29/2021) E.LME HAZEL U. ..ate •n��• ,.�.c�a .,n Illl 111 °°"�"mo � r71 � Tru .. . o ill UFm Eh 9t L..—J \� I f k —MATCH LINE-SEESHEETr-1W w�a rR MATCH LINE ME SHEET FiM-S w I _ a QS ! � � L'''\/' �� i;���'•�� l \� -mow��. +...,.,,.. ��� W I E TO'NERST.— x... ao aroma -Ew r1 � N i - ...........a `m a Ci-102S Page 6 Item 2. F56 EXHIBIT A B. Proposed Landscape Plan(dated: 3/5/2021) -----I f -- -. --- ---- BoumaU A I r®NmM1a3*l D.,9w 3N9 6rvtl Raptla,MI4B6l6 S ' � �— 616bN2b160 / � — -. SI: X umvmmru AaunoR3A.[wn r w r ` 1111,l.Il auL 1 1 11.U11111 4 L s a[E�x,do I ''I III C - ��� �••••'••" s rw-•�•• NTfINGEWEIANDSCPPE 59(fIALL,ID STNEEf -- —. - ,G/P �YIIEfIALE[6BN„ SIXII11 C£M - SCHOOL PREIJMIN— IANDSCAPEPIM' �. of ooeow��nienm ueo�rm �'^ .��,�� NO1FpR[UIJ$TRUC1VpN ==7=FST-,. '- - MERIDIAN,ID 83N42 a _ _y�eaw.rw vumn ..i i LAMNSCAPE SPECIFICATIONS: IRRIGATpN SPECIFICATIONS: BoumaU A -. .. ...-. -_nnErxxaxPeu e — - -E r�nxermmamuec�xRm aauor[Iwd r�axor_s�ne Eos ureic CIITTINGEWEIANDSCAPE 5[O]ALLVrDRJNSTNEET _i _ — --._ :.CYt'S'9f •••w...:.e - SOIIM GEM ill-r Eyyy INNOVATION SCHOOL PRELIMINARY IRRIGAIIDN& DWD6CAPE SPECS /� CECIWOI1�5 iF�%MfIING GEfAIL n 91fd1NAP[RCNNfL RANNNG"T L lJ nmmr[xmxurw �J ,vrrxwnti�nrr NOI FOR CLRYSTRVCTIpN U�� MERIDIAN.ID 83fi92 L-2] Page 7 Item 2. F57 EXHIBIT A C. Conceptual Building Elevations(dated: 2/22/21) E%EERpR FINISHES IN o--�: ro 5!i o:g n WEST a E w e j a F LU u n VM ELEVATION Az00 EJ(IEPgRFINRHES I n I o�-�.®vim-m �-�:�,:.-:: ��•., �-o,:�, - o ��®vim •-�:;.- ©m -- Ll 7 B m S} - E w L j a � Lu U ---4 u n SOHTHELEVATION '® AMI Page 8 Item 2. EXHIBIT A 58 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 11-313-8C.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 11-313-12C. 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-513. e. Change the fencing type around the play area adjacent to S.Vertex Way from chainlink to wrought iron. £ 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 11-513-6F. Page 9 Item 2. EXHIBIT A 59 B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. 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.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=227459&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ity E. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=229210&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:llweblink.meridianciU.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228019&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty G. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) hyps://weblink.meridianciU.oLy WeUink/Doc View.aspx?id=228002&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty Page 10 Item 2. F60 EXHIBIT A 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. Stafffinds 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. Stafffinds the proposed use will be served by essential public facilities and services as required. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Staff ,finds the proposed use will not create additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke, fumes,glare or odors. Staff ,finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by the reasons noted above. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction,loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Staff ,finds the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any such features. 9. Additional findings for the alteration or extension of a nonconforming use: Page 11 Item 2. F61 EXHIBIT A 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 Item 3. 62 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Resolution No. PZ-21-03: A Resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission for the City of Meridian, Idaho, Validating Conformity of the Second Amendment to the Meridian Revitalization Plan with the City of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan Item 3. Mayor Robert E.Simison El E IDIANT.� City Council Members: ��► Treg Bernt Brad Hoaglun Joe Borton Jessica Perreault i u A H O Luke Cavener Liz Strader May 28, 2021 MEMORANDUM TO: Meridian Planning &Zoning Commission CC: David Miles, Chief of Staff Cameron Arial, Community Development Director Caleb Hood, Planning Division Manager FROM: Victoria Cleary, Economic Development Administrator Brian McClure, Comprehensive Associate Planner RE: Second Amendment to the Meridian Revitalization Plan Urban Renewal Project Click Here for Second Amendment to Meridian Revitalization Plan Documents Folder This memo is intended to provide Comprehensive Plan related analysis for the Second Amendment to the Meridian Revitalization Plan Urban Renewal Project. The amendment as proposed includes two distinct de-annexations for the areas described as the Northern Gateway and the Idaho Block. Both of these areas are proposed to be removed from the original 2002 downtown Urban Renewal District. Approval of a resolution acknowledging compliance of this amendment with the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan is a necessary pre-cursor to Meridian City Council action on the de-annexation. Ultimately, the purpose of this de-annexation will lead to the designated areas being annexed into other Urban Renewal Districts (Districts). With the original District set to sunset in 2026, these other Districts will provide greater opportunities for continued redevelopment that are otherwise impossible within the lifespan of the existing District. The next steps after de- annexation will include annexing the Idaho Block into the existing Union District, and the creation of a proposed Northern Gateway District. Both of these distinct Districts will allow for continued public-private and public-public partnerships in an area of town with both infrastructure deficiencies and also unique opportunities. The Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council will have discretion to act on the future Union District Plan Amendment and the new Northern Gateway District Plan before they are implemented. Concurrent approval of 1 Item 3. 64 next steps was deemed to be inappropriate due to the timing of work associated with partner agencies and with ongoing Urban Renewal legislation. Recommendation Since there are no new urban renewal area plans, proposed developments, use changes, or zoning changes associated with this Second Amendment, it maintains consistency with the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Community Development staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the resolution confirming compliance of this amendment with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Following is a summary of the de-annexations by area. Summary of De-annexations: District Name Size (appx.) Current Zoning Description Idaho Block 1.5 Acres O-T De-annex intending to transfer to existing Union District Northern Gateway 77.1 Acres O-T,R-8,R-15,R- De-annex intending to incorporate into a 40,L-O,C-C,C-G, new Northern Gateway District,which will RUT also include land not previously within a URD. Item 3. F65 Attachment A: Idaho Block De-annexation Idaho - i Idaho 1 i Meridian Urban i Renewal #1 I a i = = N •� I i Union District I � �l Broadway + Broadway Note: Area designated by the dash-dot-dash line and angled hatch (teal) is to be de-annexed. The single dash-dash line (purple), represents the boundaries of existing Union District. Item 3. F66 Attachment B: Northern Gateway De-annexation Cherry Fairview 1 M S 1 1 ! M 1 , N Gruber —Elm- -Maple � � �, � Badley� T-7 a C N fD Camellia >_ s s jn M s Cherry -•- 1' 2_\ i Washington - �_ �• Washington --M ri ian -M i -i ' Urban -Carlton Renewal #1 `' �rState 1 L M ' Pine Note: Area designated by the dash-dot-dash line and angled hatch (teal) is to be de-annexed. The single dash-dash line (purple), represents the boundaries of existing Meridian Revitalization District. Item 3. F 7 RESOLUTION PZ-21-03 CITY OF MERIDIAN BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO,VALIDATING CONFORMITY OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MERIDIAN REVITALIZATION PLAN WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Meridian(the "City"), Idaho, also known as Meridian Development Corporation, the duly constituted and authorized urban renewal agency of the City of Meridian, Idaho (hereinafter"MDC")has submitted the proposed Second Amendment to the Meridian Revitalization Plan (the "Second Amendment")to the City; WHEREAS, the proposed Second Amendment seeks to de-annex two (2) areas as depicted in the Second Amendment and set forth in certain Exhibits 1 and 2 attached hereto. The first area is generally referred to as the "Northern Gateway Area." The purpose of the de- annexation of the Northern Gateway Area would be to allow the inclusion of these properties into a proposed Northern Gateway Urban Renewal District. The second area is generally referred to as the "Idaho Block." The purpose of the de-annexation of the Idaho Block would be to allow the inclusion of this block into a proposed amendment to the existing Union District Project Area. WHEREAS, the Mayor and Meridian City Council referred the Second Amendment to the City Planning and Zoning Commission for review and recommendations concerning the conformity of said Second Amendment with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended (the "Comprehensive Plan"); and WHEREAS, on June 3, 2021, the City Planning and Zoning Commission met to consider whether the Second Amendment conforms with the Comprehensive Plan as required by Idaho Code § 50-2008(b); and WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed said Second Amendment in view of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that the Second Amendment is in all respects in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan. Item 3. F68] NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: Section 1. That the Second Amendment, submitted by MDC and referred to this Commission by the Mayor and City Council for review, is in all respects in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Section 2. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide the Mayor and Meridian City Council with a signed copy of this Resolution relating to said Second Amendment. Section 3. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 3rd day of June 2021. APPROVED: ATTEST: Chair, Planning and Zoning Commission City Clerk Rhonda McCarvel 6-3-2021 Chris Johnson 6-3-2021 Item 3. F69 EXHIBIT 1 Northern Gateway Area �--ChL/I erry Fairview - M 9C N Gru E!m Maple a Badky FTM E Camellia ��II t cherry a Washington Meri—dian-U— rban - - Washrngton Renewal#1 � r1 1 Y Earlton m .g 10- =—Pine r I Item 3. ■ EXHIBIT 2 Idaho Block 1 Idaho— Idaho Meridian Urban Renewal#1 a e N L .q Unlan � - District— i i Broadway+ Broadway- Item 3. F 1 SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MERIDIAN REVITALIZATION PLAN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT MERIDIAN URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY (also known as the Meridian Development Corporation) CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO Ordinance No. 02-987 Adopted December 3, 2002 Effective December 2002, publication First Amendment to the Plan Ordinance No. 20-1881 Adopted June 9, 2020 Effective June 19, 2020, publication Second Amendment to the Plan Ordinance No. Adopted , 2021 Effective , 2024, publication SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MERIDIAN REVITALIZATION PLAN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT- 1 Item 3. 72 BACKGROUND This Second Amendment ("Second Amendment") to the Meridian Revitalization Plan Urban Renewal Project (the "Plan") amends the Plan for the following purposes: (1) to deannex approximately [77] acres (including right-of-way) generally bounded by Meridian Road on the west and E. Fairview Avenue on the north. The eastern boundary extends south along what would be E. 4ch Street if extended, over to 3rd Street. The southern boundary extends to E. Pine Avenue between E. 3rd Street and E. 2nd Street, and then travels up E. 2nd Street and over E. Washington Avenue to connect back to Meridian Road. This deannexation is from the plan area/revenue allocation area created by the Plan commonly referred to as the"Downtown District Project Area," adopted by Meridian City Council Ordinance No. 02-987, on December 3, 2002, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan in 2020, which deannexed approximately 16 acres from the Downtown District Project Area, as adopted by Meridian City Council Ordinance No. 20-1881, on June 9, 2020 (the "First Amendment") ; and (2) to deannex approximately [1.46] acres (including right-of-way) from the Downtown District Project Area, as amended by the First Amendment, and generally bounded by E. Idaho Avenue on the north, E. 2nd Street on the east, a portion of Broadway Avenue on the south, and E. Main Street on the west. The scope of this Second Amendment is limited to addressing the deannexation of certain parcels from the Downtown District Project Area, as amended by the First Amendment. It is important to note this Second Amendment to the Plan does not extend the Plan's duration. The Plan terminates on December 31, 2026; however, revenue allocation proceeds will be received in 2027 pursuant to Idaho Code § 50-2905(7). As a result of this second deannexation, in 2021 through the remaining years of the Plan, the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Meridian, Idaho, also known as the Meridian Development Corporation (the "MDC") will cease receiving an allocation of revenues from the deannexed parcels. The increment value of the parcels deannexed from the Downtown District Project Area pursuant to this Second Amendment shall be included in the net taxable value of the taxing district when calculating the subsequent property tax levies pursuant to section 63-803, Idaho Code. The increment value shall also be included in subsequent notification of taxable value for each taxing district pursuant to section 63-1312, Idaho Code, and subsequent certification of actual and adjusted market values for each school district pursuant to section 63-315, Idaho Code. The Ada County Assessor's Office maintains the value information,including the increment value, if any, included on the new construction roll for new construction associated with the deannexed parcels. House Bill 606, effective July 1, 2016, amended the Local Economic Development Act, Chapter 29, Title 50, Idaho Code, as amended(the "Act") firmly establishing"[f]or plans adopted or modified prior to July 1, 2016, and for subsequent modifications of those urban renewal plans, the value of the base assessment roll of property within the revenue allocation area shall be determined as if the modification had not occurred." Idaho Code § 50-2903(4). Though the provisions of Idaho Code § 50-2903A do not apply to the Plan, a plan amendment or modification to accommodate a de-annexation in the revenue allocation area boundary is a specifically identified exception to a base reset. Idaho Code§ 50-2903A(1)(a)(iii). This highlights the legislative support for these types of amendments. SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MERIDIAN REVITALIZATION PLAN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT-2 Item 3. 73 AMENDMENTS TO THE PLAN 1. Definitions. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the respective meanings ascribed to such terms in the Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan. 2. The following defined terms are amended throughout the Plan, as amended b. the First Amendment to the Plan, as follows: (a) Delete "Amended Project Area" and replace with "Second Amended Project Area" except where specifically referenced in this Second Amendment. (b) Delete references to "Attachment 5" and replace with "Attachment 5, as supplemented by Attachments 5A and 5B" except where specifically referenced in this Second Amendment. 3. Amendment to List of Attachments. The List of Attachments on page vi of the Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, is further amended by deleting the list of attachments and replacing it as follows: Attachment 1 Legal Description of the Project Area and Revenue Allocation Area Boundaries Attachment IA Legal Description of the Boundary of the Deannexed Area Attachment 1 B Legal Description of the Boundaries of the 2021 Deannexed Areas Attachment 2 Project Area-Revenue Allocation Area Boundary Map Attachment 2A Boundary Map of the Deannexed Area Attachment 2B Boundary Maps of the 2021 Deannexed Areas Attachment 3 Properties Which May be Acquired by the Agency Attachment 4 Map Depicting Expected Land Uses and Current Zoning Within the Second Amended Project Area Attachment 5 Economic Feasibility Study, Meridian Urban Renewal Area Attachment 5A Supplement to the Economic Feasibility Study: Financial Analysis Related to the 2020 Deannexation Attachment 5B Second Supplement to the Economic Feasibility Study: Financial Analysis Related to the 2021 Deannexation 4. Amendment to Section 100 of the Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan. Section 100, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, is amended by deleting the list of attachments and replacing it as follows: SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MERIDIAN REVITALIZATION PLAN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT- 3 Item 3. 74 Legal Description of the Project Area and Revenue Allocation Area Boundaries (Attachment 1); Legal Description of the Boundary of the Deannexed Area (Attachment IA); Legal Description of the Boundaries of the 2021 Deannexed Areas (Attachment 1B); Project Area-Revenue Allocation Area Boundary Map (Attachment 2); Boundary Map of the Deannexed Area (Attachment 2A); Boundary Maps of the 2021 Deannexed Areas (Attachment 2B); Properties Which May be Acquired by the Agency (Attachment 3); Map Depicting Expected Land Uses and Current Zoning Within the Second Amended Project Area (Attachment 4); Economic Feasibility Study, Meridian Urban Renewal Area(Attachment 5); Supplement to the Economic Feasibility Study: Financial Analysis Related to the 2020 Deannexation (Attachment 5A); Second Supplement to the Economic Feasibility Study: Financial Analysis Related to the 2021 Deannexation (Attachment 5B). 5 Amendment to Section 102.1 of the Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan. (a) Section 102.1 entitled "CONFORMANCE WITH STATE OF IDAHO URBAN RENEWAL LAW OF 1965, AS AMENDED" is amended by adding new paragraphs to the end of the language added by the First Amendment to the Plan as follows: Subsequent to the First Amendment, in 2021, the Agency and City reviewed two additional areas for deannexation from the original Project Area, as amended by the First Amendment, as follows: approximately [77] acres (including right-of-way) generally bounded by Meridian Road on the west and E. Fairview Avenue on the north. The eastern boundary extends south along what would be E. 4th Street if extended, over to 3rd Street. The southern boundary extends to E. Pine Avenue between E. 3rd Street and E. 2nd Street, and then travels up E. 2nd Street and over E. Washington Avenue to connect back to Meridian Road; and approximately [1.46] acres (including right-of-way) generally bounded by E. Idaho Avenue on the north, E. 2nd Street on the east, a portion of Broadway Avenue on the south, and E. Main Street on the west. SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MERIDIAN REVITALIZATION PLAN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT-4 Item 3. F 5 This Second Amendment to the Plan (the "Second Amendment") deannexes certain parcels from the original Project Area, as amended by the First Amendment,resulting in a"Second Amended Project Area"as further described and shown in Attachments 1, 1A, IB, 2, 2A, and 2B. This Second Amendment was prepared and submitted to MDC for its review and approval. MDC approved the Second Amendment by the adoption of Resolution No. 21-023 on May 12, 2021 and submitted the Second Amendment to the City Council with its recommendation for adoption. In accordance with the Law,this Second Amendment was submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian. After consideration of the Second Amendment, the Commission filed a Resolution dated , 2021, with the City Council stating that the Second Amendment is in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian,adopted on December 17, 2019,by Resolution No. 19-2179. Pursuant to the Law, the City Council, having published due notice thereof,held a public hearing on the Second Amendment. Notice of the hearing was duly published in a newspaper having general circulation in the City. The City Council adopted the Second Amendment on , 2021, pursuant to Ordinance No. 6. Amendment to Section 200 of the Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan. (a) Section 200, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, entitled "DESCRIPTION OF THE AMENDED PROJECT AREA" is deleted and replaced as follows: DESCRIPTION OF THE SECOND AMENDED PROJECT AREA The boundaries of the Project Area and of the Revenue Allocation Area are described in Attachment 1, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and are shown on the Project Area and Revenue Allocation Area Boundary Map, attached hereto as Attachment 2 and incorporated herein by reference. The Project Area includes several parcels of property which are located outside the geographical boundaries of the City but within the City's impact area. MDC has an existing agreement with Ada County related to such parcels. The First Amendment and the Second Amendment have no impact on that agreement. SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MERIDIAN REVITALIZATION PLAN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT- 5 Item 3. 76 Pursuant to the First Amendment, the boundaries of the deannexed area are described in the Legal Description of the Boundary of the Deannexed Area in Attachment IA and are shown on the Boundary Map of the Deannexed Area in Attachment 2A. Pursuant to the Second Amendment, the boundaries of the deannexed areas are described in the Legal Description of the Boundaries of the 2021 Deannexed Areas in Attachment 1 B and are shown on the Boundary Maps of the 2021 Deannexed Areas in Attachment 2B. The attachments referenced above are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference. 7. Amendment to Section 302 of the Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan. (a) Section 302, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, is further amended by deleting the first sentence of the second paragraph and replacing it as follows: The Second Amended Project Area includes the area as described in Section 200. 8. Amendment to Section 504 of the Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan. (a) Section 504, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, is further amended by deleting the second sentence of the first paragraph and replacing it as follows: Revenue allocation financing authority for the deannexed parcels pursuant to the First Amendment was terminated effective January 1,2020,and revenue allocation financing authority for the deannexed parcels pursuant to the Second Amendment will be terminated effective January 1, 2021. (b) Section 504, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, is further amended by deleting the last sentence of the fourth paragraph and replacing it as follows: No modifications to the analysis set forth in Attachment 5 have been made as a result of the First Amendment or the Second Amendment. The estimated financial impact to the MDC as a result of the deannexation of certain underdeveloped parcels from the original Project Area pursuant to the First Amendment is set forth in Attachment 5A. The estimated financial impact to the MDC as a result of the 2021 deannexation of certain parcels from the Amended Project Area pursuant to the Second Amendment is set forth in Attachment 5B. 9. Amendment to Section 504.1 of the Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan. (a) Section 504.1, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, is further amended by deleting the last sentence at the end of the paragraph and replacing it as follows: No modifications to the Study have been made as a result of the First Amendment or this Second Amendment; however, Attachment 5A includes the estimated financial impact to the MDC SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MERIDIAN REVITALIZATION PLAN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT- 6 Item 3. 77 prepared by Kushlan I Associates and SMR Development,LLC as a result of the first deannexation of certain underdeveloped parcels from the original Project Area pursuant to the First Amendment, and Attachment 5B includes the estimated financial impact to the MDC prepared by Kushlan Associates as a result of the second deannexation of certain parcels from the original Project Area, as amended by the First Amendment, pursuant to the Second Amendment. 10. Amendment to Section 504.3 of the Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan. (a) Section 504.3, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, is further amended by deleting the sentence at the end of the paragraph and replacing it as follows: The deannexation of parcels from the original Project Area pursuant to the First Amendment and the Second Amendment does not substantively change this analysis. As a result of the deannexations,the base assessment roll value will decrease. 11. Amendment to Section 504.4 of the Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan. (a) Section 504.4, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, is further amended by deleting the sentence at the end of the second paragraph and replacing it as follows: The deannexation of parcels from the original Project Area pursuant to the First Amendment reduced the amount of revenue generated by revenue allocation as set forth in Attachment 5A. The deannexation of parcels from the original Project Area pursuant to this Second Amendment is estimated to reduce the amount of revenue generated by revenue allocation as set forth in Attachment 5B. (b) Section 504.4, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, is further amended by adding a new sentence at the end of the third paragraph as follows: Attachment 513 includes the estimated financial impact to the MDC as a result of the second deannexation of certain parcels from the original Project Area, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan. Based on the findings set forth in Attachment 5B, the conclusion is the second deannexation of certain parcels from the original Project Area,as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan,does not materially reduce revenue allocation and the Project continues to be feasible. 12. Amendment to Section 800 of the Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan. (a) Section 800, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, is further amended by adding a new sentence at the end of the first paragraph as follows: The deannexation of parcels from the original Project Area, as amended by the First Amendment, pursuant to this Second Amendment has no impact on the duration of this Plan. 13. Amendment to Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, to add new Attachment 1B. The Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, is further amended to add new Attachment 1B entitled "Legal Description of the Boundaries of the 2021 Deannexed Areas," attached hereto. SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MERIDIAN REVITALIZATION PLAN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT- 7 Item 3. 78 14. Amendment to Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, to add new Attachment 2B. The Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, is further amended to add new Attachment 2B entitled"Boundary Maps of the 2021 Deannexed Areas,"attached hereto. 15. Amendment to Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, to add new Attachment 5B. The Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, is further amended to add new Attachment 5B entitled"Second Supplement to the Economic Feasibility Study: Financial Analysis Related to the 2021 Deannexation," attached hereto. 16. Downtown District Plan, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, Remains in Effect. Except as expressly modified in this Second Amendment, the Plan and the Attachments thereto, as amended by the First Amendment to the Plan, remain in full force and effect. SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MERIDIAN REVITALIZATION PLAN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT- 8 Item 3. 79 Attachment 1 B Legal Description of the Boundaries of the 2021 Deannexed Areas [Legal Description of Remaining Deannxed Areas To Be Inserted Upon Completion] Item 3. F80 URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION FOR MERIDIAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION IDAHO BLOCK A description for Urban Renewal District purposes located in the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 7, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, and being a part of Block 4 of the amended plat of the TOWNSITE OF MERIDIAN as found in Book 1 of plats at Page 30 in the office of the Recorder, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin marking the intersection of N Main Street and E Idaho Avenue, from which a brass cap monument marking the intersection of NE 2nd Street and E Idaho Avenue bears S 88'43'59" E a distance of 380.05 feet; Thence S 88°43'59" E along the centerline of said E Idaho Avenue a distance of 40.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence continuing S 88'43'59" E a distance of 300.04 feet to a point on an extension of the easterly boundary of said Block 4; Thence leaving said centerline S 0'31'47" W a distance of 40.00 feet to a point marking the northeasterly corner of said Block 4; Thence continuing S 0'31'47" W along said easterly boundary a distance of 256.13 feet to a point marking the southeasterly corner of said Block 4; Thence N 88°44'00" W along the southerly boundary of said Block 4 a distance of 90.05 feet to a point marking the southwesterly corner of Lot 8 of said Block 4; Thence leaving said southerly boundary N 0°32'12" E along the westerly boundary of said Lot 8 a distance of 120.07 feet to a point marking the northwesterly corner of said Lot 8; Thence N 88`43'59" W along the northerly boundary of Lots 1 -7 of said Block 4 a distance of 210.08 feet to a point on the westerly boundary of said Block 4, said point being the northwesterly corner of Lot 1 of said Block 4; Thence N 0°33'09" E along said westerly boundary a distance of 136.07 feet to a point marking the northwesterly corner of said Block 4; Page 1 of 2 Item 3. F81 Thence continuing N 0'33'09" E on an extension of said westerly boundary a distance of 40.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. This parcel contains approximately 1.461 acres. NOTE: This description was prepared using record information including Record of Surveys, Subdivision Plats and Deeds acquired from the Ada County Recorder's office. No field survey has been performed. Prepared by: Kyle A. KQomler, PLS r, Q � Aly Civil Survey Consultants, Incorporated ' 4�C NSIS G,p May 26, 2021 a 1878 0 A. KO� Page 2 of 2 Item 3. F82 Attachment 2B Boundary Maps of the 2021 Deannexed Areas [To Be Inserted Upon Completion] [Non-Surveyed Maps Attached] Item 3. 83 Legend " Northern Gateway Existing URD E✓ l��j City Limits Parcels Future Road I � r � I / 'J X x ` ✓k �¢//�"/J � 5 / / 7. 4/J � h Meridian ' - _ � :Jar 7 N'. .�.4. ,•.�'�///////////�'� ' ' e _ � � � ' 3, x a r 1 11 111 The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources and is subject to constant revision.The City of Meridian makes no warranty or guarantee as to the content,accuracy,timeliness,or completeness of any of the data provided,and assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. e� Item 3. 85 Legend �. J Idaho Block Existing URD Parcels � ro n o r © .; J _.: ' � Meridian �III� ���t �•�t;. o Urban - . Renewal-#1 - _ ` -- "a X tilt � M r r. Broadway o � "' niolI� 1 r�- DiJstrict h. Ak The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources and is subject to constant revision.The City of Meridian makes no warranty or guarantee as to the content,accuracy,timeliness,or completeness of any of the data provided,and assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. i Item 3. 86 Idaho 1 Idaho 1 1 Ir Meridian Urban Renewal #1 c N C Union • District Broadway Broadway Item 3. EXHISI 7- 3 87 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT DESCRIPTION T FOR MERIDIAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LOCATED IN THE NW 114 OF THE SW 114 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO POINT OF E IDAHO AVENUE BEGINNING BAS15 OF BEARING 4600' 0 E 3a�04' 4a.00' D D a � g h 0 0 V ❑ o 270.08' A G ❑ 60.02' 30.01' 120.05' o ry W o ry 40, 400 D.o2' 4a.a �a.o1' N 88'44 00" W 90.05' S 88'44 00" E 380. 18' E BRa4DWAY AVENUE LEGEND URD BOUNDARY ��A L A At El URD AREA a 187 0 CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS, INC. �oP 2893 SOUTH MERIDfAN ROAD E MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 � 'A K013 (208)888-4312 SCALE' 1"=50' Item 3. 88 Attachment 5B Second Supplement to the Economic Feasibility Study: Financial Analysis Related to the 2021 Deannexation 4851-4344-7734,v.3 Item 3. F89 Attachment 56 Memo to: Meridian Development Corporation Board of Commissioners Ashley Squyres, MDC Administrator Meghan Conrad, Counsel From: Phil Kushlan, Principal, Kushlan I Associates Subject: Fiscal Impact of de-annexation Date: April 28, 2021 We have been retained to analyze the fiscal impact of removing two distinct geographic areas from the existing Meridian Revitalization Plan Urban Renewal Project Area, also referred to as the Downtown District. The first area is generally bounded by Meridian Road on the west and E. Fairview Avenue on the north. The eastern boundary extends south along what would be E. 4th Street if extended, over to 3rd Street. The southern boundary extends to E. Pine Avenue between E. 3rd Street and E. 2nd Street, and then travels up E. 2nd Street and over E. Washington Avenue to connect back to Meridian Road. This area is generally referred to as the "Northern Gateway Area." The purpose of the de-annexation of the Northern Gateway Area would be to allow the inclusion of these properties into a proposed Northern Gateway Urban Renewal District. The second area is generally bounded by E. Idaho Avenue on the north, E. 2nd Street on the east, a portion of Broadway Avenue on the south, and E. Main Street on the west. This area is generally referred to as the "Idaho Block." The purpose of the de-annexation of the Idaho Block would be to allow the inclusion of this block into a proposed amendment to the existing Union District Project Area. Removing taxable properties from a revenue allocation area, as suggested here, would release the incremental value of those tax parcels back to the general property tax rolls thus eliminating the revenue currently generated by the existing district from those properties. In making a decision on the de-annexation question one must understand the fiscal impact upon the existing Downtown District in the context of that District's ongoing financial obligations. Our study has done that. In our analysis of the Northern Gateway Area, we reviewed each of the 133 tax parcels that are currently within the boundaries of the existing Downtown District that are to be deannexed. In each case we segregated the base value from the incremental value and calculated the revenue generated by each factor. From that analysis, we demonstrated that the 133 parcels generated a total of$379,648 in property taxes in 2020, the latest year for which we have certified values and tax yields. Of that amount $162,121 was generated from the Base Assessed Value and 1 Item 3. Fg—o allocated to the various taxing entities levying property taxes within the Downtown District. The Incremental Values on those properties generated $217,526 in 2020, which was allocated to the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Meridian, Idaho, also known as the Meridian Development Corporation (MDC). This latter number is the estimated amount of foregone revenue that the Downtown District will experience annually though the de-annexation of these tax parcels, from calendar year 2022, through calendar year 2027, the termination year of the Downtown District. In our analysis of the Idaho Block we reviewed ten (10) tax parcels in a similar manner as the process described above. Those parcels produced a total of$28,434 in property tax payments in 2020. Of that amount $15,371 was generated from the Base Assessed Value and thus allocated to the taxing entities. The remainder ($13,063) was allocated to MDC and represents the annual foregone amount upon deannexation of these parcels from the Downtown District. The MDC Annual Financial Statements indicated that the incremental revenue generated by the Downtown District in 2020 was $1,610,499. A reduction of$217,526 from the Northern Gateway Area would be a 13.5% reduction in annual revenue. A reduction of$13,063 from the Idaho Block would be a 0.81% reduction in annual revenue. In addition, we reviewed the Financial Statements for FY 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019. See attached spreadsheet for details. In each of those fiscal years the fiscal results of MDC activities reflected significant Fund Balances. The audited Fund Balance for FY 2020 was $3,750,449. If the $217,526 and $13,063 reductions had been in place in 2020, the Agency would have experienced a 14.32% reduction ($230, 589) in annual revenue for the Downtown District. The Debt Service commitments for the District are relatively small when compared to its overall fiscal strength. The 2020 Debt Service Principal amount was $115,520 and the Interest amount was $8,097. The Agency's 2021 Budget reflected a conservative approach to revenue, appropriating only $1,600,000 in current property tax revenue. Undefined "Special Project" funding was set at $1,179,598 in the 2021 Budget and $1,700,000 was assigned to the Nine-Mile Floodplain project. The Staff and Commission should use their discretion is weighing the importance of the current program funding levels versus the importance of including these parcels in a new Revenue Allocation Area. It appears as though there is sufficient capacity in the fiscal program of the Downtown District to accommodate this loss of revenue should the MDC and City Council choose to do so. 2 Item 3. Fq-1 MID FY 2019 FY 2020 Beginning Fund Balance $ 790,596 $ 728,099 $ 619,459 $ 928,551 $ 1,463,391 $ 2,035,561 $ 2,601,567 Downtown District Revenue Allocation Income $ 693,754 $ 847,571 $ 887,546 $1,075,786 $ 1,392,019 $ 1,499,374 $ 1,610,499 Other Available Income $ 11,078 $ 629 $ 8,021 $ 46,856 $ 40,326 $ 792,265 $ 193,450 Total Available Current Income $ 704,832 $ 848,200 $ 895,567 $1,122,642 $ 1,432,345 $ 2,291,639 $ 1,803,949 Total Availalble Resources $1,495,428 $1,576,299 $1,515,026 $2,051,193 $ 2,895,736 $ 4,327,200 $ 4,405,516 Office and Operating Expenses $ 403,727 $ 498,748 $ 283,447 $ 263,808 $ 557,755 $ 838,079 $ 332,165 Professional Services $ 189,596 $ 177,119 $ 170,758 $ 180,198 $ 177,586 $ 188,087 $ 186,657 Public Education and Marketing $ 19,793 $ 24,951 $ 6,338 $ 19,671 $ 1,215 $ 8,563 $ 12,628 Debt Service Principal $ 99,213 $ 95,269 $ 99,145 $ 103,527 $ 107,685 $ 111,519 $ 115,520 Interst $ 36,019 $ 29,565 $ 25,687 $ 20,598 $ 15,934 $ 12,100 $ 8,097 Capital Outlay $ 18,981 $ 131,188 $ 1,100 $ - $ - $ 567,285 $ - Total Expenditures $ 767,329 $ 956,840 $ 586,475 $ 587,802 $ 860,175 $ 1,725,633 $ 655,067 Ending Fund Balance $ 728,099 $ 619,459 $ 928,551 $1,463,391 $ 2,035,561 $ 2,601,567 $ 3,750,449 De-annexation Revenue Reduction in Dollars $ 230,589 Total Revenue Impact of De-annexation% 6.15% Net after De-annexation Reduction $ 3,519,860 Planning Presentation and Outline for Land Use Hearings Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 3, 2021 ZONINGPLANNED DEVELOPMENTFLUM North ElevationSouth Elevation •Staff recommends approval with these conditions.•parking lot be restriped to provide the required parking for this facility. parking lot accordingly. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that the and additions being undertaken, staff believes this is an opportunity to stripe the 483 parking spaces are required, whereas only 318 are indicated. With the upgrade parking lot is only partially striped. Per the UDC, -The northern 122,000 sf. ft. +/•to the east and rededicate the easement to move the light pole out of the easement.easement. Public Works requested the applicant move a manhole in the parking lot Public Works commented that it appears there is an existing light pole in a sewer FLUM Changes to Agenda: Item #7, Popeyes Drive-through CUP is requesting continuance following publication of the staff report in order to meet and work with Staff on the proposed conditions of approval. Staff/Applicant are requesting the June 17, 2021 hearing. Item #6: Meridian Middle School Cafeteria (H-2021-0032) Application(s):  Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 36.91 acres of land, zoned R-4, located at 1507 NW 8th St (between Linder and Meridian). Adjacent Land Use & Zoning:  North – L-O Zoning (office)  East – R-4 (SFR)  South – R-4 (SFR)  West – R-8 (SFR). History: There was a CZC issued in 2017 to allow a student drop off area Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Civic Summary of Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow 7,525 sq. ft. addition expansion to the Meridian Middle School. The Meridian Middle School campus consists of 7 existing building totaling 185,789 sq. ft with construction of the first building beginning in 1969. In February of this year, a representative of the school met with staff to discuss a 7,525 sq. ft. addition to the cafeteria building. The proposed addition would connect the cafeteria building to the auditorium and main classroom building by a new vestibule. Proposed improvements include additional cafeteria seating space, a new kitchen, an IT room, renovations to the choir room and restroom remodels. During the pre-application meeting, staff informed the applicant that public education institutions are allowed in the R-4 zone district by conditional use. Staff did not find any record of previous conditional uses approved for the property. Because of this, a conditional use is required to address the as-built conditions as well as any additional additions or expansions. Site Plans have been included which indicate the extent of improvements. A landscape plan was submitted that indicates 2 trees with a total of 18” caliper inches will be removed. The landscape plan shows 7 trees will be planted to a total of 19 caliper inches, satisfying the tree mitigation requirements of UDC 11-3B-10. Per UDC 11-3B-2, because this proposal is for an addition of less than 25%, no additional landscaping is required. The existing school is comprised of two different shades of grey CMU, fiber cement, blue metal paneling and blue standing seam roofs. The building form of the addition matches and ties in with the existing buildings by mimicking the roof canopies, parapet styles, columns and storefront glazed windows of the existing buildings. The applicant has submitted for a certificate of zoning compliance and design review concurrently with this conditional use permit. Staff Recommendations  Public Works commented that it appears there is an existing light pole in a sewer easement. Public Works requested the applicant move a manhole in the parking lot to the east and rededicate the easement to move the light pole out of the easement.  The northern 122,000 sf. ft. +/- parking lot is only partially striped. Per the UDC, 483 parking spaces are required, whereas only 318 are indicated. With the upgrade and additions being undertaken, staff believes this is an opportunity to stripe the parking lot accordingly. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that the parking lot be restriped to provide the required parking for this facility.  Staff recommends approval, including these conditions. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to APPROVE File Number H-2021-0032, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of June 3, 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-2021-0032, as presented during the hearing on June 3, 2021 for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0032 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: Popeyes Drive-through CUP (H-2021-0030) - Requesting continuance, as noted at the top of the hearing outline. Item #8: Gramercy Commons CUP (H-2021-0023) Application(s):  Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 5.24 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at 1873, 1925, and 2069 S. Wells Avenue. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: - North – C-G zoning and commercial development - East – Developed and undeveloped C-G properties (daycare/school directly adjacent in the SEC of the site) - South – Multi-use pathway; Residential development with R-15 and TN-R zoning. - West – R-4 zoning and Mountain View HS History: Part of Gramercy Subdivision (Kenai Subdivision) – AZ-06-007, DA Inst. 106141056; PP-06-019; FP-06-048; and H-2021- 0022 (MDA). Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed-use Regional Summary of Request: Applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 164 age-restricted units within a multi-story building wrapped around a multi-story parking garage on 5.24 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. The three parcels that are part of the application make up a total of 6.9 acres but only a segment of parking lays across the property line and into the northernmost parcel. Applicant has received City Council approval of a concurrent Development Agreement Modification (H-2021-0022) to conceptually develop the subject development specific to the terms of the amended development agreement not yet recorded. The purpose of this application is to ensure compliance with the specific use standards in UDC 11-4-3-27. Subject project is proposed to be constructed in one (1) phase. Access to the site is proposed via three (3) adjacent drive aisles: one to the north connecting to an existing drive aisle and commercial property and two to the east to connect to S. Wells Avenue. ACHD has noted that no improvements are required to any adjacent or nearby public roads and did not require a Traffic Impact Study because the development is not estimated to generate enough peak hour vehicle trips, despite proposing over 100 apartment units. ACHD has noted that all adjacent public roads are over-built and are capable of handling additional vehicle trips without issue. Therefore, Staff is supportive of the proposed development in regards to its transportation impact. All other departments have also signed off on the proposed development with minimal or no comments (including Fire, Police, and Public Works). The site plan depicts a singular, multi-level, age-restricted (three and four stories in height) multi-family apartment complex that is wrapped around a parking structure—the parking structure is proposed to contain a majority of the required parking spaces. Around the proposed building the new development plan depicts a drive aisle that circles the entire structure and includes two areas of surface level parking located on the east and north sides of the proposed building that contain the remaining required parking. The drive aisle that circles the building is intended to be for Fire and EMS. As noted, the project is proposed as a “wrapped” concept where the vast majority of the parking is contained in a multi-level parking structure located in the center of the site with the apartment units wrapped around the structure. This design is affectionately known as a “Texas Donut” and allows for a smaller building footprint and more efficient utilization of the development site. Based on the number of bedrooms per unit (108 one-bedroom units and 56 two-bedroom units), a minimum of 274 parking spaces should be provided with at least 164 of those spaces covered or within a garage. The Applicant is proposing 291 parking spaces overall, with 220 spaces covered spaces within the parking garage—the remaining 71 spaces are located around the perimeter on the north and side as noted. The Applicant is exceeding the minimum code requirements. A minimum of 41,000 square feet of common open space is required per the specific use standards at the ratio of 250 square feet per unit; the Applicant has proposed 42,000 square feet of qualified common open space. The proposed open space consists of those areas outlined on the open space exhibit: a plaza along the east side of the building; a pool and pool deck with assorted amenities on the south side of the building; a terrace with firepits, BBQs, and seating areas along the west side; and a pickleball court and community garden along the north side of the building. All of these areas have been verified to meet or exceed the required quality and amount of common open space. Overall, the submitted open space meets the specific use standards and Staff finds the proposed open space is adequate for the proposed development, especially in combination with the array of proposed amenities. Furthermore, the subject sites are within a quarter mile of a City park, in close proximity to a plaza/park within Gramercy, and directly adjacent to a regional pathway. All of these factors present more than adequate open space and recreational opportunities for future residents. As noted, the proposed open space contains all of the proposed amenities: a swimming pool, a plaza with public art, a sports court (pickleball court), a community garden, and multiple seating areas with BBQs and firepits. Staff finds the proposed amenities to be adequate in serving the proposed age-restricted multi-family development. The submitted elevations are for conceptual purposes and will require future Administrative Design Review approval. Staff notes that the submitted elevations do not meet all of the required design criteria for multi-family development and at the time of the Design Review submittal Staff will analyze the structure in more detail for conformance with the Architectural Standards Manual. An application for Certificate of Zoning Compliance is also required to be submitted along with Design Review for this entire development. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the subject CUP application because Staff finds proposing an apartment complex in this area of the City in close proximity to commercial development, child care/charter school, and established regional pedestrian facilities is warranted and consistent with the Mixed-Use Regional future land use designation. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2021-0023, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of June 3, 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-2021-0023, as presented during the hearing on June 3, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0023 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item 4. 92 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Topgolf(H-2021-0033) by Arco/Murray, Located at 948 S. Silverstone Way Application Requires Continuance A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for an outdoor recreation facility on 11.56 acres of land in a C-G zoning district to include extended hours of operation from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m., seven days a week, abutting a residential zoning district. Item 4. F93 (:�N-VE IDIAN IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Sonya Allen Meeting Date: June 3, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Topgolf(H-2021-0033) by Arco/Murray, Located at 948 S. Silverstone Way A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for an outdoor recreation facility on 11.56 acres of land in a C-G zoning district to include extended hours of operation from 8:00 a.m.to 2:00 a.m., seven days a week, abutting a residential zoning district. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing Item 4. F94 Adrienne Weatherly From: Sonya Allen Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2021 4:31 PM To: Straits, Paul; Adrienne Weatherly; Charlene Way; Chris Johnson Cc: Uebelhor, Eric; Bill Parsons; Ted Baird Subject: Topgolf CUP - Request for Hearing Continuance Thanks Paul. Note:The reason for the request is that the site wasn't posted with a public hearing notice sign within the time frame required by UDC 11-5A-6D. From: Straits, Paul <pstraits@arcomurray.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2021 1:29 PM To: Sonya Allen <sallen@meridiancity.org> Cc: Uebelhor, Eric<euebelhor@arcomurray.com> Subject:TG Boise I Request for CUP Hearing Continuance External Sender- Please use caution with links or attachments. Hi Sonya, We are scheduled for a hearing with the planning commission on June 3rd for the CUP we are pursuing for our Topgolf project.At this time,we would like to request a continuance to move our hearing to the next available meeting time on Thursday,June 17tn Please let me know if this is acceptable and I will make arrangements accordingly. I appreciate your continued help. Paul Straits Project Developer ARCO/Murray 331-775-4118 1 vCard www.arcomurray.com 1 Item 5. 95 E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Woodcrest Townhomes (H-2021-0015) by Blaine A. Womer Civil Engineering, Located at 1789 N. Hickory Way Applicant is Requesting Continuance A. Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the future land use designation on 2+/- acres of land from the Commercial to the Medium High-Density Residential designation. B. Request: Rezone of 2.10 acres of land from the L-0 (Limited Office) to the R-15 (Medium High- Density Residential) zoning district. Item 5. F96 (:�N-VE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Sonya Allen Meeting Date: June 3, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Woodcrest Townhomes (H-2021-0015) by Blaine A. Womer Civil Engineering, Located at 1789 N. Hickory Way A. Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the future land use designation on 2+/- acres of land from the Commercial to the Medium High-Density Residential designation. B. Request: Rezone of 2.10 acres of land from the L-0 (Limited Office) to the R- 15 (Medium High-Density Residential) zoning district. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing Item 5. F97 Adrienne Weatherly From: Sonya Allen Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2021 3:52 PM To: Adrienne Weatherly; Charlene Way; Chris Johnson Cc: Bill Parsons; andrew@bawce.com; Don Newell; Matt Drown; Blaine Womer Subject: FW:Woodcrest Townhomes - Request for Continuance to 7/1 The Applicant requests this project is continued to the July Vt Commission hearing. From: andrew@bawce.com <andrew@bawce.com> Sent:Tuesday, May 25, 2021 3:09 PM To: Sonya Allen <sallen@meridiancity.org> Cc: Don Newell <ashton.homes@hotmail.com>; Matt Drown <mdrown42@msn.com>; Blaine Womer <blaine@bawce.com> Subject: Woodcrest Townhomes Continuance External Sender- Please use caution with links or attachments. Sonya, Please let this email serve as our continuance notice for the Woodcrest Townhomes Project (21TMP-005588).The reason for the continuance is we want to make sure our site design and supplemental documents are supportive of staff and addressed the concerns we discussed. In order to do so,the timeline to get these documents to staff for review and current date for the public hearing is to tight. We would like more time to make these revisions and make sure they are done correctly. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thank you, Andrew Newell,PE Blaine A. Womer Civil Engineering 4355 W. Emerald Street, Suite 145 Boise, ID 83706 (208) 593-7555 All reports and plans including electronic media prepared by the engineer as an Instrument of Service shall remain property of the engineer. The Client under a non-exclusive license may reproduce the file for current and future use but reuse without specific approval will be at the Client's risk. The Client agrees,to the fullest extent of the law,to indemnify and hold harmless the engineer from all claims arising from use,reuse or modification of the file by the Client or any person or entity that acquire or obtain these documents through the owner. The engineer shall provide the owner electronic files and printed form of the instruments of service on completion of the project. 1 Item 6. 98 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Meridian Middle School Cafeteria Addition (H-2021-0032) by Lombard Conrad Architects, Located at 1507 W. 8th St. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit request for an approximate 7,525 square-foot addition to the existing Meridian Middle School cafeteria. Item 6. F99 (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Alan Tiefenbach Meeting Date: June 3, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Meridian Middle School Cafeteria Addition (H-2021-0032) by Lombard Conrad Architects, Located at 1507 W. 8th St. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit request for an approximate 7,525 square- foot addition to the existing Meridian Middle School cafeteria. 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: June 3, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 6 PROJECT NAME: Meridian Middle School Cafeteria Addition (H-2021-0032) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 1 i 2 i i 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Item 6. ■ STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 6/3/2021 Legend DATE: 18 Project Lflca i�ar TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Alan Tiefenbach - 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton,Development Services Manager i 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: CUP H-2021-0032 Meridian Middle School Cafeteria LOCATION: The site is located at 1507 NW 8th St, in -- Section 12,Township 3N,Range 1W. =-a _ I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional Use Permit to allow 7,525 sq. ft. addition expansion to the Meridian Middle School. The school is located near the southeast corner of N. Linder Rd and W. Cherry Lane, is on a 36.9-acre lot and is zoned R-4. The Meridian Middle School campus consists of 7 existing building totaling 185,789 sq. ft with construction of the first building beginning in 1969. In February of this year, a representative of the school met with staff to discuss a 7,525 sq. ft. addition to the cafeteria building. The proposed addition would connect the cafeteria building to the auditorium and main classroom building by a new vestibule. Proposed improvements include additional cafeteria seating space,a new kitchen, an IT room,renovations to the choir room and restroom remodels. During the pre-application meeting, staff informed the applicant that public education institutions are allowed in the R-4 zone district by conditional use. Staff did not find any record of previous conditional uses approved for the property. Because of this,a conditional use is required to address the as-built conditions as well as any additional additions or expansions. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 36.91 Future Land Use Designation Civic Existing Land Use(s) Civic(Educational Institution) Proposed Land Use(s) Cafeteria expansion Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 1 Lot,7 buildings Page 1 Item 6. 1 o1 Description Details Page Neighborhood meeting date;#of April 13,2021,2 attendees attendees: Physical Features(waterways, No known physical features or floodplains hazards,flood plain,hillside) History(previous approvals) CZC(A-2017-0104)to allow new student drop off area at the southwest portion of the site. 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 W. Cherry Lane(arterial)and NW 8t'St(Collector) Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Existing Road Network W. Cherry Lane(arterial)and NW 8th St(Collector) Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ There is at least a 50' wide buffer of turf along W. Cherry Buffers Lane.There is no landscape buffer along NW 8'St;it is all parking. There is existing sidewalk along both property frontages. Proposed Road Improvements No improvements are required. Distance to nearest City Park(+ The school contains a large outdoor recreation field,and is size) also within a mile from 8t1i St Park,Generations Park,and Centennial Park. Fire Service No comments Police Service No comments Wastewater Public Works commented that it appears there is an existing light pole in a sewer easement.Public Works requests the applicant move the manhole in the parking lot to the east and rededicate an easement which moves the light pole out of the easement. PW added the applicant should ensure 20' easements for water and 30' easements for sewer. • Distance to Sewer Services There is existing sewer service and no changes are required as a result of this request. Water There is existing water service and no changes are required as a result of this request. Page 2 1 1 1 Qj; ....... :zE 712 M. nil IMP-1— CH NAM —d�.�:- � �'�a Ei-- •171111 =- _a'=�ti ���• E:':.. I';� I'' it ° — ❑ + ' 1 1 W PTIT90 2 ••�uu��uuuu ,_ 2 ..�uu��uuuu.......... V. ,_ pit_, * il•l`..Ir _ } :;?;' ,.L' il•l`..Ir _ II .7 �I r .::. ram, dr -Iii.YS•' �,'�Si .y'�:2`;':: 1�9'11 `r • I 1 1�aii�� � �=S � I Lgo 5. ■I ..r.,a�Yo�.�.. ii�• * ..r.,. iii��G cr.n -Si7 "r�7��7 =_EPE Col______ _ - ' ■°__on���� - �� ______ _ y�:2! • ■=_an,�� _ _. .id __ .i�. ___ ::µ�1�p_� _ :�dl•• � .■..■..■ .i-. _ ___LullWr • ::.!!�, = Eli' = 1 .'la: _ .. .� =5i._ --i •� _ __- PIN E — it :: x� �' �.i:r.�"iiilll•'l loll•'--__:— ! X 1 .. �".+ �,..,•'ry IIL'IN �`JN4 � ::: I_ 'r II U_ an ■ Item 6. F103 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant/Representative: Priya Raman,Lombard Conrad Architects—472 W. Washington St,Boise,ID 83702 B. Owner: Joe Yochum,West Ada School District— 1303 E. Central Dr,Meridian,ID 83642 IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 5/14/2021 Radius notification mailed to properties within 500 feet 5/11/2021 Sign Posting 5/11/2021 Nextdoor posting 5/12/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https:llwww.meridianciu.or /g compplan) The Future Land Use Map recommends this area for civic uses. The purpose of this designation is to preserve and protect existing and planned municipal, state,and federal lands for area residents and visitors. This category includes public lands, law enforcement facilities,post offices, fire stations,cemeteries,public utility sites,public parks,public schools,and other government owned sites within the Area of City Impact. The proposal to expand the existing school is consistent with the goals of the Plan. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https://www.meridianciiy.org/compplan): • 2.03.01B Support construction of multi-use facilities that can be used by both schools and the community. The existing campus contains two gymnasiums, an auditorium, numerous classrooms, a cafeteria, and a large sports field which includes a football field, baseball diamond, tennis courts and a running track. The school has been integrated into and used by the community for decades. • Ensure the location and design of schools are compatible with existing and planned neighborhoods and land uses. (2.03.01D) In general, a school is a community use that can be very compatible with a residential neighborhood. The more the school is integrated into the neighborhood, the more of a benefit to the community and the safer for the students. The existing school campus has been in this neighborhood for 50 years, is established in the community,provides a community benefit and this proposal would result in a very small addition to the campus. • Continue to explore partnerships with alternative providers, such as schools,to increase level of service. (4.01.01 C). The City has been working with West Ada School District regarding improvements to the school to increase level of service for the school and the community. Page 4 Item 6. F104 C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are seven existing buildings comprising a total of 185,789 sq. ft. This includes two gymnasiums,a cafeteria building, an auditorium and main class room building, 2 more classroom buildings to the south and a shop building. This proposal would allow a 7,525 sq. ft. expansion to connect the cafeteria building to the main class room building(reducing the number of separate buildings to six). D. Proposed Use Analysis: This proposal includes an existing 185,789 middle school campus. This is considered an educational use and is allowed by conditional use in the R-4 zone district, subject to the specific use standards below. E. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): UDC 11-4-3-14. (Education Institutions)requires schools to be located within the center of neighborhoods with access encouraged from local streets. Middle and high schools may take access off a designated arterial or collector street. At least thirty percent(30%) of the perimeter of an elementary school site should be open to streets or open space areas. Meridian Middle School is located in the center of an established neighborhood and has been in this location since 1969. There is one existing point of access from W. Cherry Lane (an arterial) and four existing points of access from NW 8'St.No changes to access are proposed with this very small expansion. More than 50%of the northern frontage of the property along W. Cherry Lane is a playfield being open to the street,with the remainder of the frontages along W. Cherry Lane and W. 8t1i Street is parking and access. F. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): Dimensional standards in the R-4 Zone District include a minimum property size of 8,000 sq. ft. setbacks of 25' from the street, 15' from the rear, and 5' from the side. Building height is limited to 35'. The property is approximately 37 acres. The existing and proposed buildings meet all required setbacks. The 50' high existing gymnasium exceeds the maximum height,but the proposed addition is shown at a maximum height of 26',well within the height maximum. G. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): As mentioned above,there is one existing point of access from W. Cherry Lane(an arterial)and four existing points of access from NW 8th St.No changes to access are proposed with this small expansion. ACHD responded that a traffic impact study was not required as there were no additional students proposed with this application. H. Parking(UDC 11-3C): UDC 11-4-3-14 requires one(1) space for every four hundred(400) square feet of gross floor area in all residential or commercial districts. There are seven existing buildings to a total of 185,789 sq. ft. This proposal would connect the cafeteria building to the existing main classroom building with an approximately 7,525 sq. ft. addition,bringing the total gross floor area to 193,314 sq. ft. Based on the parking requirements,483 parking spaces are required whereas 318 parking spaces are required. Staff understands the largest majority of users of this facility are students who would not be driving to the school;they would either walk or bike,be dropped off, or arrive via bus. Staff also understands the purpose of this conditional use is to allow an addition Page 5 Item 6. Fo5l to connect two buildings with additional cafeteria seating space,new restrooms,new kitchen,and IT room; it is not intended to facilitate the enrollment of additional students. However,being community-serving uses, educational facilities are used for a range of purposes including events in the auditorium or sports activities. There is a large parking area at the north side of the property(approximately 122,000 sq. ft. +/-). Based on the site plans submitted by the applicant, only 1/3 of this parking area(on the south side)is striped. With the upgrade and additions being undertaken, staff believes this is an opportunity to stripe the parking lot accordingly. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that the parking lot be restriped to provide the required parking for this facility. UDC 11-3C-6-G requires 1 bicycle parking space for every 25 vehicle spaces. 15 bicycle spaces are required, 50 are provided. I. Pathways ( UDC 11-3A-8): There are numerous pathways existing throughout the campus,this proposal does not include nor require any additional pathways. J. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): There are existing sidewalks of at least 6' wide along both frontages of the property. There are existing pedestrian connections throughout the campus. K. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A landscape plan was submitted that indicates 2 trees with a total of 18"caliper inches will be removed. The landscape plan shows 7 trees will be planted to a total of 19 caliper inches, satisfying the tree mitigation requirements of UDC 11-3B-10. Per UDC 11-3B-2,because this proposal is for an addition of less than 25%,no additional landscaping is required. A 25' landscape buffer would be required along W. Cherry Lane and a 20' buffer would be required along NW 8th St. There is at least a 50' wide buffer of turf along W. Cherry Lane although it does not meet the tree requirements. There is no landscape buffer along NW 8th St; it is all parking.As mentioned above, due to the small scale of this addition,no additional landscaping is required.However, expansions could be cumulative over time,thus future expansions may trigger compliance with current landscape standards even if each expansion is less than 25%. L. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-6): There are no waterways indicated on site. M. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): There is existing chain link fencing along the majority of the property boundary.No additional fencing has been proposed with this small addition. N. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): All utilities are presently installed. Public Works commented that it appears there is an existing light pole in a sewer easement. Public Works requested the applicant move a manhole in the parking lot to the east and rededicate the easement to move the light pole out of the easement. O. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): The existing school is comprised of two different shades of grey CMU, fiber cement,blue metal paneling and blue standing seam roofs. The building form of the addition matches and ties in with Page 6 Item 6. F106 the existing buildings by mimicking the roof canopies,parapet styles, columns and storefront glazed windows of the existing buildings. The eastern elevation of the new addition includes the blue standing seam roof incorporated by the majority of the campus buildings,blue painted steel columns, and more than half of the building face of the addition is storefront windows. The northern elevation of the addition is 40 feet long,which is only 10%of entire northern frontage,and is more than 300 feet from W. Cherry Ln. According to the applicant,windows were not included at this portion of the addition because this is where the IT room will be and security is paramount. The first elevation submitted of the northern addition was a blank wall.After discussions with staff,the applicant agreed to add pilasters on this side to mimic the pilasters along the remaining northern building frontages. Given the very small scale of the addition,that it is consistent with the rest of the northern elevation,and the distance from the right-of-way, staff agrees with the applicant that requiring additional architectural features does not justify the expense and may not be consistent with what is existing. The applicant has submitted for a certificate of zoning compliance and design review concurrently with this conditional use permit. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX. Page 7 Item 6. 107 VII. EXHIBITS A. Building Site Plan(date: 3/22/21) o"T,M""� E]IkriM3 •r pF{ya ON r rr E plTd� Ylullce�Jsaw3 NT, _A '_TYNAl IJY E%ISTwO - _ .. 4 +.uWD M I . ERI111 YO LAE l�OMS �N Ex EnYo drY llalrJ■ Exlxnno S JOP E:Imm iTIAE]RMM -f IERWEr MG I f EXISnw I'! C"HROM2 Mi JEMp TING Mo m ao f11 C b cualRom! wwlr A Page 8 Item 6. ■ B. Overall Site Plan(date: 4/22/2021) ! y New PrEject Limier CICI , -� Addition pile a - _ t IL I pile a i X I r III .I# _ 13r. m - r r r Wft- --- *h* Page 9 Item 6. 1 o9 C. Site Plan Closeup(date: 4/22/2021) ■I - i- -� ---L_New - -----�-- .,_._ F ---------.� - . �--� - -t -_`_ - Addition :p I r � ■ c � E f e � r� o , - ■ M 1 ' r i Page 10 Item 6. 1 10 D. Proposed Landscape Plan(date 4/22/2021:) FIREF-Tr 4* MEW="" rba M1� i-- � _____ __-__ __ 111� ------------- r 4 � Addition I I z ' I �T o 7 607 9w MST "'�•••'�� I I 7 I r � ' , J ` I 7 Y f 1 1 Page 11 Item 6. F-1111 E. Enlarged Landscape Plan(date 4/22/2021:) -r r--- --_-------_------- -- : f it I _____________ _____________ _________ .________ ________ ______I_ A W— n r 1 f � I -. r Page 12 Item 6. F112 F. Site Plan Showing Public Works Comments(date: 5/11/2021) Move tfie manhaletothe east unti I M the Iight pole is no longerin the easement- ' I; u s .-- - �. �I 4P � Vy y J J - tip:. I i k � 7 Page 13 Item 6. 113 New G. Proposed Elevations (date: 5/20/21) Addition H Northern Elevation New Addition T°"' Eastern Elevation . 1 71 NEW EXISTING NEW METAL ROOFING NEW METAL COPING TO MATCH EXIST. TO MATCH EXIST- T.O.W. MEA�IFM ;I I PAINTED STEEL COLUM,TO INSULATED CMU BLOCK, STOREFRONT FIBER NEW EXTERIOR CLADING MATCH EXIST.BLUE TRIM WINDOWS, CEMENT AND WALL EXTENSION TYP. PANEL New South Elevation Addition WA 1 rnoou�m rr�on s�oavaK ma nn�n Page 14 Item 6. F114 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 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. 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. 3. The applicant shall relocate the manhole in the parking lot to the east in order to rededicate and easement which moves the existing light pole out of the easement. 4. The applicant shall re-stripe the northern parking lot to meet parking requirements. 5. Applicant shall comply with all specific use standards required Educational Institution,UDC 1I- 4-3-14. 6. All existing landscaping on-site shall be protected during construction; if any is damaged or removed, it must be replaced prior to obtaining certificate of occupancy. 7. Upon completion of the landscape installation, a written Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Division verifying all landscape improvements are in substantial compliance with the approved landscape plan as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Move the proposed manhole at the northwest side of the site east until the easement does not interfere with the existing streetlight.No permanent structures can be within a City utility easement. IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit The Commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The site meets all dimensional and development regulations of the R-4 zoning district. The campus is already existing, and the site already contains landscaping.As this proposal is only to allow a 7,525 sq.ft. addition, stafffinds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use. However, staff believes the existing parking area is large enough that it is possible to stripe the required parking. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Staff finds that the proposed education institution in the R-4 zoning district is a desired use and has been established in this location for nearly 50 years. The Comprehensive Plan recommends this property for civic uses. Page 15 Item 6. F-1151 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 Meridian Middle School has been in this location since the early 1970's, is surrounded by an established single-family neighborhood and this proposal is for a very small addition. The subject property is compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Any potential impacts associated with Meridian Middle School have long been established, the current proposal would have negligible additional impacts. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools,parks,police and fire protection, drainage structures,refuse disposal, water, and sewer. The proposed use will be served adequately by all public facilities and services. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Staff finds the proposed use should not create any additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Staff finds that the proposed development does not involve activities that will create nuisances that would be detrimental to the general welfare of the surrounding area as any potential impacts have already been established and this is a very small addition to an existing campus. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Staff is unaware of any natural, scenic, or historic features on this site; thus, Staff finds the proposed use should not result in damage of any such features. Page 16 Item 7. Ll 16 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Popeyes Drive-Through (H-2021-0030) by Erik Wylie of JRW Construction, LLC, Located at 6343 N. Linder Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment within 300-feet of an existing drive-through on 1.0 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. Item 7. 117 (:�N-VE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: June 3, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Popeyes Drive-Through (H-2021-0030) by Erik Wylie of JRW Construction, LLC, Located at 6343 N. Linder Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment within 300-feet of an existing drive-through on 1.0 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing Item 7. ■ E STAFF REPORT REPORT a H o COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 6/3/2021 Legend DATE: Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission ', ------ FROM: Joseph Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 a SUBJECT: H-2021-0030 Popeye's Drive-Through—CUP LOCATION: The site is located at 6343 N. Linder � ff Road,the southwest corner of W. Chinden Boulevard/Hwy. 20/26 and N. Linder Road,in the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of 01 Section 26, Township 4N.,Range 1W. � �� I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment within 300-feet of an existing drive-through on 1.0 acres of land in the C-G zoning district with concurrent Administrative Design Review for the proposed building elevations. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 1.0-acre Future Land Use Designation Mixed-Use Community Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped Proposed Land Use(s) Restaurant with a dual drive-through Current Zoning General Retail and Service Commercial District(C-G) Physical Features(waterways, None hazards, flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;# April 5,2021; no attendees(One phone call after of attendees: meeting, see application materials online) History(previous approvals) AZ-06-006;PP-13-031; FP-14-020; MDA-13-019 (DA Inst. #114014784). Page 1 1 1 1 CHIN 1� I CHINDFN r l AA'Y,. man NINE Ill ■11■III■■ +I _ . ■mills _� ►�� �:� _ ■■■ ■■ �■ - emission ■■■ loss , III11 ■■■IIIIIIl11 1111■■■ �_� 1 IIIIIIs � �_ - s:...�-� ��I•, �■■l ill ��■r � � �IIIIIII I f� I °�.,�... -bl 1111111111 - } 5 _ CHINDFN CMINDFN _ IIIr1111111111 IIIII � ■■111111111111 III 1 "� ■I■ �1NI■■■■■■■■■■r Z 11111111■■■■■■■■r Z on OEMONE ■ slss111■■ �" ■■■■■■■ ml 1111 s1 ■ mom■■■■■■ wm111111 11 ■ ■■■ loss Is11111111 �'1■ s■■ ■ o■ss Is11111111 �'�■I■IIs■I �■■l ill s 1111111 � �� :1111 M 1111111 � � �■111111111 ■r11111 IIf� =� �I��II �■■l ill �.�r111111 I111� , =�I�I��II 11WI1s IN — IIIIIs sI1I/ ■ — ■rNw � s111111111� � � 4fl11111111� li� � Item 7. F120] C. Representative: Same as Owner IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning Posting Date Newspaper Notification 5/14/2021 Radius notification mailed to 5/11/2021 properties within 500 feet Site Posting Date 5/21/2021 Next Door posting 5/12/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The proposed drive-through is for a 2,325 square foot Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen restaurant that is within 300-feet of a separate drive-through to the south,which requires Conditional Use Permit approval(CUP)per UDC Table 11-2B-2 and the specific use standards,UDC 11-4-3-11. The submitted site plan shows a rectangular building situated relatively centered on the site with angled parking along the east and north boundaries. The site plan shows one-way drive aisles around the building that connects to a two-way drive aisle in the northwest corner of the site;this two-way drive aisle is off-site but the adjacent property shares the same ownership. The Applicant anticipates the north drive aisle to be the main point of access to the drive-through. The subject site is located within the Mixed-use Community(MU-C)future land use which contemplates a multitude of uses,residential, commercial, and otherwise. Due to the size of the site, this singular site cannot be expected to contain three distinct uses as discussed within the mixed-use sections of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Instead,those uses within the nearby radius should also be contemplated for compliance with this future land use. Staff finds the proposed use and the surrounding uses,both existing and planned, comply with the MU-C future land use designation. 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: In general,Staff does not support the proposed site design and is recommending revisions for the Commission to consider,Staffs analysis of the specific use standards and any recommendations are 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 site layout places a dual ordering drive-through along the south of the site and the pick-up window on the east side of the building. With this site design the proposed drive-through has a minimal stacking lane due to the overall site and building being relatively small. Furthermore, the site design is made for traffic to flow in a circular pattern around the building utilizing a portion of the drive aisle adjacent to the west side of the building as the stacking lane. Furthermore, the proposed site design with the anticipation of the extended north drive aisle as Page 3 Item 7. ■ the main entry point requires patrons who intend to park and utilize the dining room to go through the site along the west boundary, use the shared drive aisle along the south boundary to head east, and finally enter the site again to use the parking spaces.As proposed by the Applicant, Staff can envision patrons double stacking to order faster and block the one-way drive along the west boundary and effectively restricting patrons from using the parking spaces along the east boundary. Staff also envisions patrons blocking and/or utilizing the north drive aisle and obstructing both this anticipated exit and entry for the site with as few as seven (7) cars stacked along the west of the building(approximately 140'from the ordering window to the north drive aisle). Therefore,Staff recommends multiple changes to the site design:1) one drive-through instead of two should be utilized;2) the ordering and pick-up areas be flipped on the site to have the pick-up window on the west side of the building and the menu boards located near the north/east side of the site,and 3)flip the parking from the east side of the site to the west side of the site. These changes will allow for adequate stacking with less potential of obstructing the existing drive aisle along the south boundary of the site and allow customers who want to utilize the dining room better access to parking which would be on the west side of the building instead of the east. Further analysis is below in the Access and Parking sections of this report. In addition,Staff does not agree with the Applicant that the northern drive aisle would be utilized as the main access point to the site and instead Staff believes the existing drive aisle along the south of the site will be utilized more for the drive-through component of the business. Because the site is designed to function as a one-way loop, the Applicant should provide more than adequate signage to ensure patrons utilize the traffic flow correctly. 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 lane(s) are along the west side of the site and are separated from the west drive aisle by striping despite having two drive-through menu boards/speakers. With two proposed drive-through speakers, Staff does not find the proposed separation to be sufficient. In fact, and as noted above, Staff believes patrons would utilize the drive west drive aisle as the second stacking lane and completely obstructing this drive aisle and site exit. Staffs recommended changes above would help alleviate this issue by removing the dual drive-through speaker and placing the singular one along the north/east side of the site adjacent to the one-way drive aisle that is eight feet wider than the west drive aisle. Further analysis is below in the Access section of this report. 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 The stacking lane exceeds 100'in length but utilizes some of the one-way drive aisle as the stacking area so it is difficult to discern where the stacking lane starts. However, there is also no need for a designated escape lane because the site design does not close off the menu board and patrons can exit the drive-through by utilizing the drive aisle. The adjacent drive aisle is wide enough to function as the escape lane so Staff has no concern with the Applicant complying with this standard with the recommended changes noted above that allow for patrons to exit directly west through the new drive aisle along the north boundary or to the south adjacent to the pick-up window on the west side of the site should they decide they no longer wish to order. Page 4 Item 7. F122] 5)The site should be designed so that the drive-through is visible from a public street for surveillance purposes. The proposed drive-through is located along the south and east side of the site and is visible from Linder Road. With Staffs recommended changes, the menu boards would be located along the north side of the property with the pick-up window on the west side of the building and less visible than currently proposed. After discussions with Meridian Police, they are more concerned with the site circulation than they are regarding the pick-up window being less visible on the west side of the building. Locating the pick-up window on the west side of the building still allows it to be visible from Chinden Boulevard and from within the commercial subdivision. Staffs specific recommendations can be found in Section VIII.A2 &A3. The proposed use of a Restaurant is subject to an additional specific use standard listed in UDC 11-4- 3-49 and notes that the minimum amount of parking shall be one(1) space for every 250 square feet of gross floor area.Based on the proposed building size of 2,325 square feet noted on the submitted site plan, a minimum of nine (9)parking spaces are required. The proposed site plan shows 19 parking spaces, exceeding UDC minimums.At the time of the future Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC) application, the data table on the site plan should be corrected to reflect the correct minimum standards of a restaurant use instead of the general commercial ratio. Access: Access to the site is shown via two drive aisles: one along the south boundary which is currently existing, and; one abutting the site in the northwest corner that is proposed to be constructed with this project. The new proposed drive aisle would traverse an undeveloped lot and connect to a drive aisle that serves existing commercial buildings along Chinden(including an additional drive- through). This drive aisle is the proposed main entry point to the site, according to the Applicant. The south drive aisle is existing and traverses through the entire commercial subdivision with an access to a private drive aisle intended to be an auxiliary ingress/egress point for the properties in this area. Because the south drive aisle does not have any parking that directly accesses this drive aisle and has access to an auxiliary ingress/egress point, Staff believes this drive aisle will be far more utilized than the new north drive aisle that starts much closer to the Chinden ingress/egress and is essentially a parking lot instead of a drive aisle. Therefore,with the potential access points and the concerns introduced above, Staff has recommended revisions to the site plan to help mitigate the concerns and increase the efficiency and safety of the site design. First,Staff recommends the drive-through contain only one(1) ordering speaker to help mitigate double stacking issues. Secondly,Staff recommends mirroring the site to have the menu board on either the east or north sides of the site therefore moving the pick-up window to the west side of the building.Staff does not know if the entire site needs to be flipped placing the main entrance facing south;this would not be preferred as the more architectural elevations would be facing internal rather than towards the adjacent busy roads.However,Staff assumes the internal portions of the building can be flipped to move the pick-up window to the west side of the building and maintain the patio space and building entry facing north along the entrwyway corridor. With these changes, the entire building can be shifted south and remove the need for any vehicle use area along the south side of the building.Additional landscaping or other features could be utilized in this area. Furthermore, the building shift to the south allows for the menu board to be placed near the north side or northeast corner of the building further away from the patio area—Staff envisions there would be adequate room along the north of the building site to include additional landscaping to screen and mitigate the additional noise generated by vehicles ordering while patrons utilize the patio space. In short, shifting the site south and flipping the location of the ordering and pick-up windows Page 5 — Item 7. F123] opens up the site and allows for easier and more logical ingress and egress to the drive-through by allowing vehicles to enter the site in the southeast corner,stack along the east and northeast sides of the building,pick-up their order along the west side of the building, and then immediately exit via the southbound one-way drive aisle to the shared drive aisle along the south boundary. Staffs recommended site design is based on the assumption that more traffic will utilize the drive aisle along the south boundary than the proposed drive aisle in the northwest corner. Parking: A minimum of one(1)parking space is required to be provided for every 250 square feet of gross floor area for the proposed restaurant use. The proposed building is shown as 2,325 square feet requiring a minimum of 9 (rounded down from 9.3)parking spaces; the submitted site plan shows 19 proposed parking spaces exceeding UDC minimums. Consistent with Staff recommendations above, Staff recommends flipping the parking from the east side of the site to the west side of the site and face them south to further mitigate conflicts of stacking and parking. By placing the angled parking on the west side and facing them south instead of north, combined with Staffs previous recommendations of flipping the order and pick-up areas, the building can be shifted east by approximately the width of the proposed 20'drive aisle and the angled parking stalls. Therefore, the east drive aisle and south entrance could be used solely for ordering and stacking at the new location of the menu boards along the north end of the site. With the angled parking along the west side of the building, the one-way drive aisle must be at least 13 feet wide per UDC 11-3C-4 but Stafffeels it should largely mirror what is currently proposed on the east side (approximately 20 feet wide) to allow for the drive aisle to function as the escape plan as discussed above. Furthermore, the flip of the site allows the escape lane and the drive-thru exit to pick-up their order and immediately exit to the south without impeding as many parking spaces. The Applicant could then designate the parking along the north drive aisle as employee parking to meet the drive- through establishment specific use standard that states employee parking may be impeded by stacking lanes (the new order and stacking location along the east and north sides of the building could impede the parking along the north boundary). As noted, to make all of this work all of Staffs recommendations should be utilized including the requirement of clear and visible signage noting the required traffic flow for the site. The existing Development Agreement requires cross-access through all of the commercial parcels within the Knighthill Center Subdivision. Staff does not have a copy of said cross-access agreement but with other applications,the Applicant has shown compliance with this requirement.Staff does not have concerns with the Applicant complying with the existing requirement. 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 striped pedestrian walkway is depicted on the site plan from the proposed building to the multi-use pathway along W. Chinden Blvd. as required by UDC 11-3A-1913.4a. It also appears there is a sidewalk proposed near the south boundary of the site as a connection to the sidewalk along Linder Rd. However, it is not clear by the submitted plans where the sidewalk is and appears to run into the proposed trash enclosure location. Staffs recommended changes would allow the trash enclosure to be pushed further north enough to allow for an unobstructed sidewalk along the south boundary of the site. Because it is unclear if the Applicant is proposing a sidewalk along the south boundary, Staff recommends the Applicant make it clearly visible where the pedestrian facilities are when revising the site plan; this allows the Applicant to match what is existing along the south side of the drive aisle along the south boundary of the site. In addition, this pedestrian walkway to Linder has to traverse a drive aisle and should be distinguished from the driving surface. The Applicant should also make it clear where a pedestrian connection to the Linder sidewalk is Page 6 Item 7. F124] proposed. Furthermore, subsection B of this code section requires that the pedestrian walkway be distinguished from the driving surface by being constructed with pavers, brick, or scored/colored concrete. The proposed site plan appears to only show striping which does not comply with this code section. The Applicant should show compliance with this code section with a future CZC submittal. Landscaping: Parking lot landscaping is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-313-8C. Landscaping is depicted on the landscape plan in Section VII.B. 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 11-313-8C.1. The proposed parking spaces align the perimeter of the site which allows the Applicant to utilize the existing street buffer landscaping as the required landscaping. Staff agrees with this design to maximize the site design. This code requirement is also applicable along the west boundary of the site where a 12 foot wide one-way drive is proposed heading south. The submitted plans do not show any perimeter landscaping along this boundary. Because the adjacent property is owned by the same property owner and the western drive aisle is intended to always function as a one-way drive aisle, Staff is amenable to placing the required 5-feet of landscaping on that property instead. With the CZC submittal, the landscape plan should be revised to show the required 5-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to the drive west drive aisle. Street buffer landscaping,including sidewalks/multi-use pathway, along N. Linder Rd. and W. Chinden Blvd.were installed with development of the overall subdivision. The submitted landscape plans show the buffers remaining as it currently exists except for the new pedestrian connection to the multi-use pathway along Chinden.Proposed buffer landscaping complies with UDC requirements. Mechanical Equipment: All mechanical equipment adjacent to 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 VII.0 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 style of the proposed building. The submitted landscape plans do 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. Page 7 Item 7. 125 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 with conditions. Page 8 Item 7. ■ VII. EXHIBITS A. Proposed Site Plan(dated: 4/15/202 1)NOT APPROVED '2f 25 1 "KE55L)RIZED IRRIGATION MAIN LINE! �P ON SIGN I PARKING=19 51`A�E5 �PATIO PRIMARY ACCESS A15LE TO -LJNLI'2 D 5 M DRAIN 13E BUILT IN CONJUNCTION AL VRGTPF,)%ffTA-1NTff'E))PON SITE WITH POFEYE5 SITE 2325 f EX15TING BUILDING 5 1 r6,,F A ING, L R� VACANT LOT 4 D N kT�,3 2�T T WATFF MAIN- fXI.5TING IDFIVff I I L 4. -DUMPYER FNCL05ILJRF • -5EVVER MAIN PARKING CALCULATIONS: REQUIRED: I PEP 5005f`GPO55 rLOOR AREA PROPOSED SITE PLAN PROVIDED: 50%23C2�5-4,65(5 5FACE5 REQUIRED) 19 FA �5 0.80ACRE. I-1ANE)IC r PARKING; REGUIRED: 1-25 PARKING 5FACE5= I MC SPACE + 9 PARKING SPACES FFC)Vli)fD: I 11C 5FACff 110 CAR STACKING 151CYCLEAI 1 5PAff5LCU L.A,1 I ON 5 SCALE:1 20'-0" PEP,G25 PURT'05ED VEHICLESPACES Page 9 Item 7. F127] B. Proposed Landscape Plan(dated: 4/15/2021)NOT APPROVED {•} Flcw�rcefa,j--y' V Y�•�J W4•.f.,ek.y-r,ec.io 4e rc rarer. I INew PIa+s w � • ,Ism s� � ■r.�,aa fi�tee.sr4 • } it I * t�rti# gyyy li.,�r 4&a 6..s4:rs z n w•p.Fad„:�ucl 6�.1�.r7e„/erver 3RW C.,�d'.nr CONCEPTUAL Sf7E PLAN POPE-YES &CAIE.'r-20rV Page 10 Item 7. 128 C. Proposed Building Elevations and Color Rendering �.y u _ q JITk arc8rfecfs ,,.•POPEYES 01 SPECIFICATIONS:q- IEIE�I, HI- TURFRs nwo v s �ti �FG G H'aT' Ne R' FOR SHUiiER M/WUFAGTURERS ULL T. - ... ... sn._i REFER T9 h1A5TERFNGHSGHEGUrE URFNEHES ..„M µ - _ F REFER TU MiuTERLGHTF—IE mwr ,, 1. �•- GHT .a s nRFeFF F�,oNR �eee�ey, Parker .. __ _ ....... ._.,._ POPEYES Page 11 dgs _ Page 12 Item 7. ■ VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 1. Future development of this site shall comply with the existing Development Agreement(DA Inst. #114014784), and associated conditions of approval(AZ-06-006; PP-13-031;FP-14-020; MDA-13-019). 2. The Conditional Use Permit for the proposed Drive-Through Establishment is hereby approved with the following conditions of approval: a. No more than one(1)menu board/order speaker shall be permitted; b. The site shall be redesigned per the specific revisions noted below in VIII.A3 and A4 below. c. The west drive-aisle shall be no less than 20 feet in width(not including the drive- through lane)and the east drive aisle shall be no less than 12 feet in width. d. The parking spaces along the north boundary shall be restricted to employee parking only. e. Additional signage is required throughout the site to efficiently and adequately direct patrons to the menu boards and throughout the site with minimal conflict. f. The proposed off-site east-west drive aisle along Chinden Blvd. shown on the adjacent property(Parcel#R4995350100) shall be constructed prior to receiving Certificate of Occupancy, as proposed; g. Prior to receiving Certificate of Occupancy on the proposed building, a Property Boundary Adjustment shall be obtained by the Applicant to reflect the new location of the west property line, as shown on the submitted plans. 3. The site plan submitted with the future Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised as follows: a. Depict the pick-up window on the west side of the building and the menu board/order speaker along the north/northeast side of the building; b. Depict the north facing angled parking to be on the west side of the site instead of the east side of the site and angle them southbound; c. Shift the proposed building to the east and to the south to allow for better utilization of the site along the north drive aisle with the option to incorporate more landscaping for screening; d. Designate the parking along the north boundary of the site as employee-only parking and move the handicap space to the new parking along the west boundary to place it closer to the building entrance; e. Depict pedestrian facilities along the south boundary of the site to match what is on the south side of this shared drive aisle; depict these pedestrian walkways and their connections clearly on revised site plans; f. Per UDC 11-3A-19B.4b,depict pedestrian walkways across driving surfaces to be constructed with bricks,pavers, and/or colored or scored concrete to clearly delineate the driving surface from the pedestrian walkway. Page 13 Item 7. 131 4. The landscape plan submitted with the future Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised as follows: a. Show compliance with UDC 11-3B-8C by constructing the required 5 feet of perimeter landscaping along the west boundary adjacent to the revised angled parking location. 5. The elevations submitted with the Administrative Design Review(DES) application are approved with the following revisions: a. Ensure the east and west elevations have qualifying modulation per standard 3.1A& 3.1B in the Architectural Standards Manual. It is unclear based on the site plan whether the portions of the wall with the brick fagade have the qualifying modulation. Any revisions to the elevations are required with the submittal of the certificate of zoning compliance application. 6. Submit elevations of the trash enclosure that generally matches the proposed building design. 7. Comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11—Drive-Through Establishment is required. 8. Comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-49—Restaurant. 9. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be submitted and approved for the proposed use prior to submittal of a building permit application. 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. 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.meridiancity.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=229161&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC i& D. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH(CDH) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228244&dbid=0&repo=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. Page 14 Item 7. 132 Stafffinds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed development and meet all dimensional and development regulations of the C-G zoning district if Staffs recommendations of approval are met. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Stafffinds the proposed restaurant and 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. With the conditions of approval in Section VIII, 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. Stafffinds the proposed use will not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity if it complies with the conditions in Section VIII of this report. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways,streets, schools,parks,police and fire protection,drainage structures, refuse disposal,water,and sewer. Stafffinds the proposed use will be served by essential public facilities and services as required. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 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. Stafffinds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by the reasons noted above. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction,loss or damage of a natural,scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord.05-1170,8-30-2005,eff. 9- 15-2005) Stafffinds the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any such features. Page 15 Item 8. Ll 33 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Gramercy Commons (H-2021-0023) by Intermountain Pacific, LLC, Located at 1873, 1925, and 2069 S. Wells Ave. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 164 age- restricted units within a multi-story building with a multi-story parking garage on 5.24 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. Item 8. 134 (:�N-VE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: June 3, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Gramercy Commons (H-2021-0023) by Intermountain Pacific, LLC, Located at 1873, 1925, and 2069 S.Wells Ave. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 164 age-restricted units within a multi-story building with a multi-story parking garage on 5.24 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: June 3, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 8 PROJECT NAME: Gramercy Commons (H-2021-0023) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Item 8. ■ STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING June 3,2021 Legend -' DATE: ® ,r Project Location --- TO: Planning&Zoning Commission _ FROM: Joseph Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 m SUBJECT: H-2010-0023 • i Gramercy Commons CUP 9ramj - LOCATION: The site is located at 1873, 1925, and 2069 S. Wells Avenue, in the NW 1/4 of � D the NE 1/4 of Section 20,Township 3N., Range lE. pIlIq I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional Use Permit request for a multi-family development consisting of 164 age-restricted units within a multi-story building wrapped around a multi-story parking garage on 5.24 acres of land in the C-G zoning district,by Intermountain Pacific,LLC. Applicant has received City Council approval of a concurrent Development Agreement Modification (H- 2021-0022) to conceptually develop an age-restricted multi family development specific to the terms of the amended development agreement not yet recorded. The purpose of this application is to ensure compliance with the specific use standards in UDC 11-4-3-27. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 6.9 acres overall(C-G zoning district)—proposed development is occurring on 5.24 of the 6.9 acres. Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use Regional Existing Land Use(s) Vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Multi-Family Residential and future Commercial Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 3 existing commercial building lots—property boundary adjustment to consolidate lots will be required Phasing Plan(#of phases) Proposed as one phase for the residential.Unknown timeline for future commercial. Number of Residential Units(type 164 multi-family units—proposed as age-restricted,55 of units) years and older. Density(gross&net) Gross—31.3 du/aa;Net—46.3 du/ac. Pagel Item 8. 136 Description Details Page Open Space(acres,total 55,120 square feet of qualified open space proposed— [%]/buffer/qualified) 42,000 square feet of qualified common open space proposed(approximately 18%overall). 13,120 square feet of private open space proposed. Amenities At a minimum,five(5)amenities are proposed—Plaza with public art and picnic tables,courtyard with BBQs& firepits,sports court,community garden,and an additional courtyard that includes a swimming pool,grilling areas, lounges,and outdoor games.Further Staff analysis is below in Section V. Physical Features(waterways, N/A hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of March 11,2021 —no attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) Part of Gramercy Subdivision(Kenai Subdivision)—AZ- 06-007,DA Inst. 106141056;PP-06-019;FP-06-048; and H-2021-0022(MDA). B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes(simple response letter)No TIS required • Requires ACHD Commission No Action es/no Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via driveway connections to existing Hwy/Local)(Existing and drive aisles—two along the east boundary,and one along the Proposed) north boundary. Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Interconnectivity is proposed through the aforementioned Access drive aisles that connect to S.Wells Avenue,a local commercial street. Existing Road Network S.Wells Avenue and E.Goldstone Street are existing public roads near the project site.Project does not take direct access to either public road but utilizes existing drive aisles. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ Not adjacent to any arterials.Closest arterial is Overland Buffers Road to the north and has existing arterial sidewalks and landscape buffers.Eagle Road is nearly''/2 mile to the east and is also improved with buffers and arterial sidewalks. Proposed Road Improvements No public road improvements are proposed or required, according to ACHD. Distance to nearest City Park(+ Gordon Harris Park-9 acres in size and approximately 800 size) feet south of subject site. Gramercy Subdivision also has a 0.8 acre park that is approximately 250 feet to the southeast.It is presumed future residents of this project would be able to utilize this shared area but Applicant should confirm. Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station Approximately 0.9 miles from Fire Station#4 • Fire Response Time This project lies within the Meridian Fire response time goal of 5 minutes. • Concerns The fire department has no concerns with proposed development and/or location of proposed development. Police Service Page 2 Item 8. F137] Description Details Page No comments West Ada School District No comments submitted. Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services Adjacent • Sewer Shed Five Mile Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 14.14 • Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns •Additional 17,011 gpd committed to model •There is a sewer main at the north end of the property in addition to a service line at the south.Whichever one is not used needs to be abandoned at the main per City requirements. Water • Distance to Services Directly adjacent • Pressure Zone 4 • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality Concerns None • Project Consistent with Water Yes Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns •There is an existing 8"water main stub at both the north and south boundaries that either needs to be used or abandoned. C. Project Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map x Legend 0 0 �, . Project Location MEW IM o � o e a OVERLAND Offi r Comrnercial�����'r� �� - MU-RG Civic �- � • 3 3 Meum,Density Resident al LI-C Page 3 Item 8. 138 Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend RUT C-� Legend - '" Project Location L-� -L0 1 00 Project Location City Limits C IC Planned Parcels ' C-G R1 C-G _C C-G C-C L-O ----I-- �- -c-C R-8 i 1 13 - R-4U ® I RR O l� j TN-R — j — 3 R1 ® j �R-4 Rl RUT C-iC III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Mike Chidester,Intermountain Pacific, LLC—2541 E. Gala Street, Meridian,ID 83642 B. Owners: St. Luke's Regional Medical Center,LTD.; The Dagney Group,LLC, and; Elton Family Fund 1,LLC C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning Posting Date Newspaper Notification 5/14/2021 Radius notification mailed to properties within 500 feet 5/11/2021 Public hearing notice sign posted 5/19/2021 on site Nextdoor posting 5/12/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN(https://www.meridianciU.or /�compplan): This property is designated MU-R(Mixed Use—Regional) on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM). Land Use: The MU-R designation is used to provide for 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 Page 4 Item 8. N with only restaurants and other commercial uses. Developments should be anchored by uses that have a regional draw with the appropriate supporting uses. For example, an employment center should have supporting retail uses; a retail center should have supporting residential uses as well as supportive neighborhood and community services. The standards for the MU-R designation provide an incentive for larger public and quasi-public uses where they provide a meaningful and appropriate mix to the development. The proposed development plan depicts a singular,multi-level, age-restricted(three and four stories in height)multi-family apartment complex that is wrapped around a parking structure—the parking structure is proposed to contain a majority of the required parking spaces. Around the proposed building the new development plan depicts a drive aisle that circles the entire structure and includes two areas of surface level parking located on the east and north sides of the proposed building that contain the remaining required parking. The drive aisle that circles the building is intended to be for Fire and EMS but Staff is unaware if the drive aisle will be closed to resident traffic as well. In addition to the building, the new development plan depicts multiple areas of open space and amenities located along each side of the building to include: a pool and other amenities within a south courtyard; an entry plaza along the east side of the building; fire-pits and lounging areas along the west, and; a community garden and pickleball court along the north side of the building.All of the open space and amenity areas appear to be connected with sidewalks and easily accessible by future residents. More specific analysis is below in the Specific Use Standard review, see Section`B"below. In general, the proposed use of multi family development is listed as an allowed use within the MU-R designated areas.In addition to what is proposed within the subject sites, the MU-R designation requires looking beyond the site boundaries to integrate and enhance other uses nearby. Staff finds proposing an apartment complex in this area of the City in close proximity to commercial development, child care%barter school, and established regional pedestrian facilities complies with the MU-R future land use designation. More specific comprehensive plan policy analysis is below. Transportation: Access is proposed via three(3)drive aisle connections: one to the north connecting to an existing drive aisle and commercial property and two to the east to connect to S. Wells Avenue. The drive aisle to the north does not currently exist but the two drive aisles to the east abut the east property line. According to ACHD,the proposed development will not generate enough peak hour vehicle trips to require a Traffic Impact Study despite the number of units being greater than 100. Staff verified with ACHD that the estimated trip generation of the development does not change whether the units are proposed as age-restricted or not. In addition,ACHD has noted that all adjacent public roads are over- built and are capable of handling additional vehicle trips without issue. Because of these reasons provided by ACHD, Staff is supportive of the proposed development in regards to its transportation impact and has no recommendations or proposed changes regarding this element of the project. Furthermore, Staff finds it necessary to discuss in a slightly more detail the proposed parking element of the project as this design is new to the City of Meridian.As noted,the project is proposed as a"wrapped"concept where the vast majority of the parking is contained in a multi- level parking structure located in the center of the site with the apartment units wrapped around the structure. This design is affectionately known as a"Texas Donut" and allows for a smaller building footprint and more efficient utilization of the development site. Staff recommends the Commission look at the Applicant's narrative to see a more illustrative example of this concept and the standard alternative of surface parking. Page 5 Item 8. F140] 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): • "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D) The proposed age- restricted, multi family dwellings would be a new use in this area of the City and the Gramercy Commons development overall. In addition, there are nearly double the number of]- bedroom units proposed as 2-bedroom units (108 to 56) which offers future residents rental opportunities at a lower price than apartments in other areas of the City. • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F) City water and sewer services are available and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. • "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for diverse housing types throughout the City."(2.01.01 G) Traditional three-story, garden-style apartments are currently under construction throughout the City which makes the proposed wrapped concept even more interesting and desired. The proposed residential is also a different type of residential dwelling than the single-family that exists directly south; this area of Gramercy could therefore contain multi-generational housing opportunities in close proximity to one another and desirable commercial uses. • "Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development."(3.03.03A) The proposed development will connect to City water and sewer systems by continuing existing stubs where available. • "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels within the City over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02) The subject site is already annexed and in a widely developed area. However, the subject sites are undeveloped and have been vacant for more than a decade as commercial only properties. It is one of the last areas of the Gramercy development to be developed and the Applicant believes constructing high-end senior housing in this area will jumpstart the remaining commercial properties directly adjacent. • "Require collectors consistent with the ACHD Master Street Map(MSM),generally at/near the mid- mile location within the Area of City Impact."(6.01.03B) The proposed development will connect to S. Wells Avenue, a commercial local street that connects directly to W. Overland, an arterial street. S. Wells has other local streets that bisect it and connect to a commercial collector, S. Bonito Way,further to the east. Overall, Staff and ACHD agree that the public road system nearby is easily capable of handling the minimal additional traffic generated by the proposed development. In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in all Mixed-Use areas,per the Comprehensive Plan(pg.3-13): (Staffs analysis in italics) Page 6 Item 8. 141 • "A mixed-use project should include at least three types of land uses. Exceptions may be granted for smaller sites on a case-by-case basis. This land use is not intended for high density residential development alone." The proposed development is in fact high-density residential. However, the Applicant is reserving an area of approximately 1.5 acres along the north boundary of the site for future commercial use(s). However, Staff does not find it necessary to require at least three land uses on the subject site due to its relatively small size(6.8 acres) in relation to the much larger mixed-use area overall that contains multiple types of uses in relatively close proximity including general commercial, office, retail, education institutions and single-family residential. Therefore, Staff finds the proposed development meets this goal. • "Where appropriate,higher density and/or multi-family residential development is encouraged for projects with the potential to serve as employment destination centers and when the project is adjacent to US 20/26, SH-55, SH-16 or SH-69." The Applicant is proposing multi family residential at a gross density of 31 units/acre which falls within the high density residential range were the project to be located in that designation. In addition, the subject parcels have easy access to a number of employment and commercial destinations within a half-mile of the site. Despite losing 5 acres of commercial zoning, Staff finds the proposed development to be appropriate in this location. • "Mixed Use areas are typically developed under a master or conceptual plan; during an annexation or rezone request, a development agreement will typically be required for developments with a Mixed- Use designation." An overall development plan was approved for this area in 2006 that incorporated multiple types of commercial uses as well as residential uses. The subject parcels were originally slated for commercial development but have been sitting vacant for more than a decade. Therefore, the Applicant requested a DA Modification to allow these parcels to develop in accord with the proposed development plan and with the proposed use of age-restricted multi family. The Applicant was successful in this request and thus the subject parcels are allowed to be developed with additional multi family units. • "The site plan should depict a transitional use and/or landscaped buffering between commercial and existing low-or medium-density residential development." The proposed plan depicts an emergency drive aisle, landscaping, and existing landscaping with a multi-use pathway between the proposed structure and the existing residential to the south. Overall, the proposed site plan depicts buffering to all adjacent uses via a drive aisle and landscaping. • "Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places including but not limited to parks,plazas, outdoor gathering areas, open space, libraries, and schools are expected; outdoor seating areas at restaurants do not count." The proposed development is directly adjacent to a childcare facility and nearby both a charter school and a shared park within the Gramercy development. Furthermore, the Applicant is constructing two connections to a segment of regional pathway that connects to a public park within a quarter mile of the subject sites. The Applicant is also proposing a plaza along the east side of the building that is intended to be shared with the rest of the Gramercy development; this is a major reason why the Applicant insisted on remaining part of the existing Gramercy DA instead of entering into a new DA. • "All mixed-use projects should be directly accessible to neighborhoods within the section by both vehicles and pedestrians." The proposed development will be directly accessible to adjacent neighborhoods through extension of sidewalks from the existing network into the site, including the regional multi-use pathway system. Page 7 Item 8. E Staff believes the proposed site design offers adequate integration and accessibility to nearby neighborhoods. In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in MU-R areas, per the Comprehensive Plan: • "Developments should comply with the general guidelines for development in all Mixed-Use areas." See analysis above. • "Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 10%of the development area at gross densities ranging from 6 to 40 units/acre." The proposed development meets this policy by providing a majority of the subject sites as residential(overall, the Gramercy development contains more than 10%as residential uses) and with a gross density of approximately 31 units/acre. • "There is neither a minimum nor maximum imposed on non-retail commercial uses such as office, clean industry, or entertainment uses." No commercial uses are proposed with this specific project but a plethora of non-retail commercial uses are within walking distance of the proposed development. • "Retail commercial uses should comprise a maximum of 50%of the development area." Staff is unaware of the specific percentage of retail commercial uses within Gramercy overall but by a simple site visit one can see a majority of this area is developed as commercial. Based on the analysis above, Staff finds the proposed plan is generally consistent with the vision of the Comprehensive Plan for this area in regard to land use,density and transportation. B. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE(UDC)ANALYSIS Conditional Use Permit(CUP)—Multi-family Development(UDC 11-4-3-27) Specific Use Standards: The proposed multi-family development consists of 164 age-restricted units within a multi-story building that is wrapped around a four story parking structure. The proposed use of multi-family residential is subject to conditional use permit approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission within the existing C-G zoning district and subject to specific use standards outlined in UDC 11-4-3- 27 and below: 11-4-3-27—Multi-Family Development: A. Purpose: 1. To create multi-family housing that is safe and convenient and that enhances the quality of life of its residents. 2. To create quality buildings and designs for multi-family development that enhance the visual character of the community. 3. To create building and site design in multi-family development that is sensitive to and well integrated with the surrounding neighborhood. 4. To create open space areas that contribute to the aesthetics of the community,provide an attractive setting for buildings, and provide safe,interesting outdoor spaces for residents. As discussed in the Comprehensive Plan analysis section above,Staff finds the proposed multi- family development meets and/or exceeds all of the purpose statements listed. B. Site Design: Page 8 Item 8. F143] 1. Buildings shall provide a minimum setback of ten feet(10')unless a greater setback is otherwise required by this title and/or title 10 of this Code. Building setbacks shall take into account windows, entrances,porches and patios, and how they impact adjacent properties.Proposed project/site design complies with this requirement. 2. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas,waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. The site plan depicts screened trash disposal areas that may only be visible from the north drive aisle; all proposed transformer/utility vaults shall also comply with this requirement. 3. A minimum of eighty(80) square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks, and/or enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other accessways shall not count toward this requirement. In circumstances where strict adherence to such standard would create inconsistency with the purpose statements of this section,the Director may consider an alternative design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions as set forth in section 11-5B-5 of this title.According to the submitted open space exhibit, the apartments are proposed with the minimum required 80 square feet ofprivate open space in the form ofprivate patios and decks for each unit. 4. For the purposes of this section,vehicular circulation areas,parking areas, and private usable open space shall not be considered common open space. These areas were not included in the common open space calculations for the site. 5.No recreational vehicles, snowmobiles,boats or other personal recreation vehicles shall be stored on the site unless provided for in a separate, designated and screened area.Applicant shall comply with this requirement. 6. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. Based on the number of bedrooms per unit(108 one-bedroom units and 56 two-bedroom units), a minimum of 274 parking spaces should be provided with at least 164 of those spaces covered or within a garage. The Applicant has proposed a total of 291 parking spaces overall with 220 within the proposed parking garage and the remaining 71 spaces as surface parking along the perimeter drive aisles on the east and north boundaries of the site. The Applicant provided additional guest parking at the ratio of one(1)space for every 10 units, consistent with code changes that have not yet been approved. Therefore, the proposed parking is in excess of both current code requirements and future code requirements. 7. Developments with twenty(20)units or more shall provide the following: a. A property management office. b. A maintenance storage area. c. A central mailbox location(including provisions for parcel mail)that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access. d. A directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. (Ord. 18-1773,4-24-2018) It is not entirely clear on the submitted plans where these items are contained on-site—where it is not clear, the Applicant shall comply with these requirements at the time of CZC submittal. The site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall depict these items. Page 9 Item 8. F144] C. Common Open Space Design Requirements: 1. A minimum area of outdoor common open space shall be provided as follows: a. One hundred fifty(150) square feet for each unit containing five hundred(500)or less square feet of living area. b. Two hundred fifty(250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred(500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area. c. Three hundred fifty(350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area. Each unit is between 500 and 1,200 square feet of living area. Therefore, 250 square feet of common open space is required per unit in accord with the requirements above. 2. Common open space shall be not less than four hundred(400) square feet in area, and shall have a minimum length and width dimension of twenty feet(20'). Proposed open space submitted as meeting this requirement has been reviewed.All area labeled as qualified common open space on the open space exhibit complies with this requirement. The Applicant has proposed 42,000 square feet of qualified common open space while needing to provide a minimum of 41,000 square feet; the proposed open space exceeds the minimum requirements. The proposed open space consists of those areas outlined on the open space exhibit: a plaza along the east side of the building; a pool and pool deck with assorted amenities on the south side of the building; a terrace with firepits, BBQs, and seating areas along the west side; and a pickleball court and community garden along the north side of the building. All of these areas have been verified to meet or exceed the required quality and amount of common open space. Overall, the submitted open space meets the specific use standards and Staff finds the proposed open space is adequate for the proposed development, especially in combination with the array of proposed amenities. Furthermore, the subject sites are within a quarter mile of a City park, in close proximity to a plaza/park within Gramercy, and directly adjacent to a regional pathway.All of these factors present more than adequate open space and recreational opportunities for future residents. 3. In phased developments, common open space shall be provided in each phase of the development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units. The proposed development is to be developed in one (1)phase, according to the Applicant. 4.Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process, common open space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets unless separated from the street by a berm or constructed barrier at least four feet(4')in height,with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access. (Ord. 09-1394, 3-3-2009, eff. retroactive to 2-4-2009).No common open space or any part of the site abuts a collector street. Therefore, this standard is not applicable to this project. D. Site Development Amenities: 1. All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space and recreation amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows: a. Quality of life: (1) Clubhouse. (2)Fitness facilities. (3)Enclosed bike storage. (4)Public art such as a statue. Page 10 Item 8. 145 b. Open space: (1) Open grassy area of at least fifty by one hundred feet(50 x 100')in size. (2) Community garden. (3)Ponds or water features. (4)Plaza. c. Recreation: (1)Pool. (2)Walking trails. (3) Children's play structures. (4) Sports courts. 2. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of multi-family development as follows: a. For multi-family developments with less than twenty(20)units,two (2)amenities shall be provided from two (2) separate categories. b. For multi-family development between twenty(20)and seventy-five(75)units,three(3) amenities shall be provided,with one from each category. c. For multi-family development with seventy-five(75)units or more, four(4)amenities shall be provided,with at least one from each category. d. For multi-family developments with more than one hundred(100)units,the decision-making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development. 3. The decision-making body shall be authorized to consider other improvements in addition to those provided under this subsection D,provided that these improvements provide a similar level of amenity. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Based on 164 proposed units, the number of amenities required shall be determined by the decision-making body, the Planning and Zoning Commission.According to the submitted plans, the Applicant has proposed approximately 6 qualifying amenities, at least one from each category as required by code. The Applicant has proposed the following amenities:a swimming pool, a plaza with public art, a sports court(pickleball court), a community garden, and multiple seating areas with BBQs and firepits. Staff finds the proposed amenities to be adequate in serving the proposed age-restricted multi- family development. E.Landscaping Requirements: 1. Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. 2.All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The foundation landscaping shall meet the following minimum standards: a. The landscaped area shall be at least three feet(3')wide. b. For every three(3)linear feet of foundation, an evergreen shrub having a minimum mature height of twenty-four inches(24") shall be planted. Page 11 Item 8. N c. Ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area. The submitted landscape plan appears to meet the specific use standard landscape requirements. However, these standards will be further verified at the time of CZC submittal(see Exhibit VII.B). Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): The proposed development is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-G zoning district and those within the specific use standards for Multi-family Development discussed above(UDC 11-4-3-27).As noted above, the submitted plans show compliance with all dimensional and specific use standards, including but not limited to, building height, setbacks, accesses, and parking count. Access(UDC 11-3A-3): Access was discussed within the transportation section of the comprehensive plan analysis section earlier in the report. Please review that section as well as the Community Metrics section at the beginning of the report for the access and transportation facts of the proposed development. Road Improvements: The Applicant is not required to construct any improvements to the adjacent or nearby public roads as ACHD has stated these roadways are currently overbuilt in terms of vehicular capacity. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17) and Pathways: All proposed sidewalks are adjacent to the multi-family residential building and shown to connect throughout the site as at least 5-feet, as required. There is also a segment of regional multi-use pathway abutting the south property boundary that the Applicant is showing two connections to on the submitted plans. Despite UDC 11-3A-19B.4 being applicable to nonresidential uses, Staff is recommending the pedestrian crossings from the multi family building to the multi-use pathway across the emergency drive aisle is clearly delineated from the driving surface by being constructed with either brick,pavers, stamped concrete, or similar. These crossings should be clearly shown on future CZC plans. This point was discussed at the Council hearing for the DA Modification and there is an approved DA provision that requires these connections be constructed in these ways. Staff will verify compliance with a future CZC submittal. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): Because there are no public streets adjacent to the site,there are no requirements for landscape street buffers. However,there are vehicle use areas proposed surrounding the site,the drive aisle that circumvents the entire structure. Per UDC 11-3B-8, at least 5-feet of landscaping is required along the perimeter of vehicle use areas (i.e. drive aisles). The submitted landscape plan depicts an area of landscaping along the perimeter of the circumventing drive aisle except for along the east property boundary. It appears there is enough area for the required landscaping but it is not shown on the submitted plans. Furthermore, this landscape strip is also required to be vegetated with trees located no more than 35 linear feet apart throughout the buffer— trees may also be grouped together where necessary and visually appealing.At the time of CZC submittal, the Applicant should correct the landscape plans to show compliance with both of these requirements. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. No fencing appears to be proposed; any future fencing shall comply with UDC 11-3A-7. Page 12 Item 8. F147] Storm Drainage(UDC 11-3A-18 : An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. Storm drainage will be proposed with a future Certificate of Zoning Compliance application and shall be constructed to City and ACHD design criteria. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the apartment complex but no formal Design Review was submitted. Staff notes that the submitted elevations do not meet all of the required design criteria for multi-family development.All multi-family development requires Administrative Design Review prior to obtaining building permits so, at the time of that submittal Staff will analyze conformance with the Architectural Standards Manual.An application for Certificate of Zoning Compliance is also required to be submitted along with Design Review for this entire development. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the of the requested Conditional Use Permit per the conditions of approval included in Section VIII in accord with the Findings in Section IX. Page 13 Item 8. 148 VII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan(dated: 3/23/2021) m 2 � o g sn z 3 Z D 3 w ° x c - o — - 8 � n n 3 507 32' �' -..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-. ..-..-..-..-..- ------------ - Fire Depariment Access ow c o 3 Po 0 i� ➢ a 0 Q 3 g GI IIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII 3 0 f. O III O 17 �TITfIIII�TTfI O - IIIIIIF IIIIII Acc ss 6-ve z � I ILL.-..-..-..-..-..-.. - -..-..-.. 507.35' 0 1Q - o T n ➢� <� - c) o axm 0 to 0 5.Wells Ave. S 0 Er iD iD o cn o a a F r, r. a F ➢ _ a a 0 9 - n ct 0 'o a a 0 0 Page 14 Item 8. F149] I II Zone:C-G Zone:C-G i a. ! Use:Vacant Use:Office I I u. ! I a I I ! Refuse Collection Zone i 414.39 Access Drive y - - ! + Garage Entry/Exit I Yrash acompactorroom Zane;C-G v Iv I Use:Vacant > a — CL41 Unl3 — Parking Garage III ao;e C 'ii4 II f f M I a a o Access Ddve - •o Bicycle Parking(public) i i - I i ' I i Zone:C-G ! I F i Use:The Goddard ! _ School of Meridian ! y AmenitiesE , Fire Department Access - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ L _ _ _ _ _ _ -.-J . _ .. _ .. _ . _. . _ . . _ .. _ . _. . _. ._ . .J 420•00' Bike Parking Room (residents) E.Goldstone St. Zone:R-15 Use:Residential Zone:TN-R a' 50' 100, Use:Residential Page 15 Item 8. F-15o] B. Landscape Plan(dated: 3/23/2021) SECTION 07 I LANDSCAPE PLAN TREE LEGEND Y11G Malus'Bnow Drip' HHJF FlammngCrabapple PROJECT INFORMATI ON Amerinchier.9randisora Thereare no existi ng natu 11 matures,existing Ili bui ld ings,or 'Autumn Brilliance serviceterry existing trees with trunks greaterthan 4lnches on the site. _ _ �tula nigm'Heriwge Street Trees:see TreesPec M.x.ere�rch �• •• v�, Sheet Buffers:l/a les Gymnoclaausdioiw Kemucky CORee Tree parkin lot ter landscape strip:10'g perimeter pes p: Acer NnNm Bufferwdth between different land uses 10' r _ Nu mberof parking stalls and percent of park'ng area With nternal landscap'ng:71 surface stalls located along'nternal crculaton routes,no more than 12 stalls between landscaping sv. Total numberoftreesand tree spec es mx:94(see Tree Species M'x) Residential Building &Parking Garage yk . s � O Emry Plaza © South Courtyard © S.—Terrace, OComman&y Garden O �_. `.,•�••-. .-. •.`.F © Recreation Coon 9. ■■ _ _ O Garage Emry&S—irn Court c y O Fire ess Depart—Acc J ? Pm 't _uildind C9 8-x 10'Residential Patio Typ. _ O Pedestrian Conreaionto Gordon Harris Park <M AND'SCAPE PLAN - 0' 30' 60' 0 Aw Pedestrian Conrectionto eA,tiw residential Gramercy Commons I Meridian,ID I Conditional Use Permit Application 103.23.2021 GGLO 12 Page 16 Item 8. ■ SECTION 08 1 TREE SPECIES MIX CLASS I CLASS II CLASS III TREE TOTALS Artelanchie-60 18+k a+ Malus 2 Kentucky Coffee=l River Birch 22 Red Maple' 9 ? - 770 L.F.of Street Frontage No existing trees on site # 7, z Amelinchierx grandiflora'Autumn Brilliance' Betula nigra'Heritage' Gymnocladus dioica Serviceberry River Birch Kentucky Coffee Tree Height:15-25' Height:35-50' Height:50-60' Spread:15-25' Spread:30-40' Spread:35-45' Water:Medium Water:Medium Water:Medium Maintenance:Low Maintenance:Low Maintenance:Low y 4 Malus'snow drift' Acerrubrum Flowering Crabapple Red Maple Height:15-20' Height:35-45' Spread:15-20' Spread:25-35' Water:Medium Water:Medium Maintenance:Medium Maintenance:Low Gmm—y Commons I Meridian,10 Conditional Use Permit Application 03.23.2021 Page 17 Item 8. ■ C. Open Space Exhibit(dated: 3/23/2021) SECTION 09 I EXTERIOR AMENITY SPACES TREE LEGEND Malus'Snmv iaiR' ,.1 llJf' Flaxeriig Crabapple EXTERIOR AMENITI ES Amelinc Brills rentliAora �:- h 'Autumn Brilliance Requred: Sernceberry Common Open Space 13320 sq k Bevla nigm'Neritage' pdva�Open Space 13,120 sqk Ri er Birch oral 54,120 sq k - GymnocWtlustlioira Provided: Kenwcky Coffee Tree C--Open Space 42,000 sq ft Private Open Space(private patios&balconies) 13,120 sq ft Acervbvm btal 55,120 sqk Red Maple .i . Residential Bulldfng &Parking Garage _T EXTERIOR AMENITY SPACES O Em yPI.a South Courtyard 13,000 sq k r q © Smset Terrace :rl A 9,000 sq ft 0 CommunkyGarden -' 7,500 sq ft EXTERIORAMENITYS PAC ES 0' 30' 60 © Recreatloncourt SCALE'[ 60 3,500 sq ft Gramercy Commons I Meridian,ID I Conditional Use Permit Application 1 03.23.2021 6W1L0 15 Page 18 Item 8. F153 D. Building Perspective and Conceptual Building Elevations(NOT APPROVED) Mountain View High School a,king Garage Fire Deparhn ent Access South Courtyard - ,M Plaza A Amenity Building 34 cC j p The Goddard School of Meridian SECTION 06 I PERSPECTIVE VIEWS u� •� gi3 l _ — r i S t _ _ J _ 1 ENTRY PLAZA MEW— Gremercy Commons I Meridian,ID I Coidkional Ju Permit Application 1 03.23.2021 6GL to Page 19 SOUTH C044RD k�✓ �� i SECTION 06 PERSPECTIVE VIEWS Page 20 Item 8. ■ SECTION 04 ELEVATIONS Meal Panel Lap Siding Brick V l I I I I I I i I I Nil Nil EAST ELEVATION T wrea conerele Metal Panel Lap 9ding Brick L�7% G SOUTH ELEVATION Gmmercy Co-I Meritlian,ID I-i[ipnal Use Permitapdieation 1 03.23.2021 GGLO 2 SECTION 04 ELEVATIONS Metal Panel SNcco ITT¶ M Lap 9tling ® I 'A WEST ELEVATION Metal Panel Lag 9tling Brick 98999 99 I19 1099 1119 BB ML NORTH ELEVATION Gramercy Commons l Meritlian,ID l Wrdiri—Use Permit Applkafwn 1 03.23.2021 GOLD a Page 21 Item 8. F156 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION Conditional Use Permit(CUP): 1. The Applicant shall adhere to all previous conditions of approval associated with this site(AZ-06- 007,DA Inst. 106141056; PP-06-019; FP-06-048; and H-2021-0022,DA Inst. #unknown at this time). 2. With the future Certificate of Zoning Compliance submittal,the Applicant shall submit a revised site plan with the following revisions: a. Depict the pedestrian crossings to the multi-use pathway along the south property boundary to be constructed with bricks,pavers, colored or stamped concrete or similar to clearly delineate the pedestrian walkway. b. Clearly depict/label compliance with the Multi-family Development Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3-27), specifically subsection B.7: 1. A property management office. 2. A maintenance storage area. 3. A central mailbox location(including provisions for parcel mail)that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access. 4. A directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. (Ord. 18-1773,4-24-2018) 3. With the future Certificate of Zoning Compliance submittal,the Applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan with the following revisions: a. Depict the required parking lot landscaping along the east boundary adjacent to the drive aisle and east property line; b. Throughout all of the perimeter landscaping, depict the required vegetation and trees per UDC 11-3B-8. 4. The Applicant shall obtain Administrative Design Review and Certificate of Zoning Compliance approvals for the multi-family residential building prior to submittal for any building permits for the residential portion of the development. 5. Future building elevations of the multi-family development shall incorporate similar design elements and finish materials seen throughout the Gramercy development to ensure an integrated and cohesive design. 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. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11- 3C-6 for multi-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 8. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. 9. 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. 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 11-3B-14. Page 22 Item 8. F157 11. The Applicant has a continual obligation to maintain compliance with the Multi-family Development Specific Use Standards outlined within this report and in UDC 11-4-3-27. 12. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy on any building,the Applicant shall provide proof of the required maintenance agreement to the Planning Division in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27—all multifamily 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. 13. 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. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 No Permanent structures (buildings, carports,trash receptacle walls, fences, infiltration trenches, lightpoles, etc.)can be built within the utility easement. 1.2 There is a sewer main at the north end of the property in addition to a service line at the south. Whichever one is not used needs to be abandoned at the main per City requirements. 1.3 There is an existing 8"water main stub at both the north and south boundaries that either needs to be used or abandoned. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code(MCC),the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works),a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2"x I I"map with bearings and distances(marked EXHIBIT B)for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, Page 23 Item 8. Fl-581 the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at(208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 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 Page 24 Item 8. E in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. NAMPA-MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:llweblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228987&dbid=0&re2o=MeridianCitX D. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT(CDHD) https:llweblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=228246&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX E. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https:llweblink.meridiancity.org WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228702&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX F. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancioy.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=228605&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit Findings (UDC 11-5B-M: 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, Staff finds the submitted site plan shows compliance with all dimensional and development regulations in the C-G zoning district in which it resides. Page 25 Item 8. F160] 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Stafffinds the proposed use of multi family residential is harmonious with the comprehensive plan designation of Mixed-Use Regional and the requirements of this title when included in the overall MU-R designation analysis. 3. That the design,construction,operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Despite the proposed use being different than the residential uses directly to the south, Stafffinds the design, construction, and proposed operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and should not adversely change the essential character of the same area, so long as the Applicant constructs the proposed building as proposed. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Stafffinds the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways,streets,schools,parks,police and fire protection,drainage structures,refuse disposal,water, and sewer. Stafffinds the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services because all services are readily available. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. All public facilities and services are readily available for the subject site so Stafffinds that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community or create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials,equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke,fumes,glare or odors. Although traffic is sure to increase in the vicinity with the addition of more residential units, all major roadways adjacent to the site are already at their full width and the development has multiple avenues of accessing the arterial network to the north or to the east. Therefore, Stafffinds 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). Staff is unaware of any natural, scenic, or historic features within the development area, therefore, Stafffinds the proposed use should not result in damage of any such features. Page 26 Applicant Presentation GRAMERCY 1.20203.60Meridian Planning & Zoning PERMITCONDITIONAL USE COMMONS NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT "Commercial Land Uses This designation will provide a full range of commercial uses to serve area residents and COMPREHENSIVE PLANNEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT | 3 1.20203.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan-.“G-C, and C-N, C-Sample zoning include: C connectivity, and amenities. cases, but should be careful to promote a high quality of life through thoughtful site design, family residential may be allowed in some -Multi public uses. -well as appropriate public and quasivisitors. Desired uses may include retail, restaurants, personal and professional services, and office uses, as 4 1.20203.6Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing COMPREHENSIVE PLANNEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT | 5 1.20203.6Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing WALKABILITY + CONNECTIVITYNEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT | 6 1.20203.6Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing VICINITYNEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT | 7 1.20203.6Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing STRUCTURED PARKINGNEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT | PROJECT CONCEPT 9 1.20203.6Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan quality of life through thoughtful site design, connectivity, and amenities.promote a high family residential may be allowed in some cases but should be careful to “Multi 10 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan-quality of life through thoughtful site design, connectivity, and amenities.promote a high family residential may be allowed in some cases but should be careful to -“Multi 11 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing SITE PLANPROJECT CONCEPT | 12 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing AMENITIESPROJECT CONCEPT | 13 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing METHODOLOGYPROJECT CONCEPT | 14 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing METHODOLOGYPROJECT CONCEPT | 15 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing 16 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing 17 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing 18 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing ELEVATIONSPROJECT CONCEPT | 19 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing ELEVATIONSPROJECT CONCEPT | 19 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing family in a CG zoneP&Z to review conditional use permit for multi•Council has already approved DA modification and concept plan•Two applications required•G zoneProperty is, accordingly, already annexed and has a C•subject to Instrument No. 106141056 (the “DA”)Property previously annexed as part of Kenai Subdivision (now Gramercy) and •PROCEDURAL CONTEXT LEGAL STANDARDS AND DISCUSSION 19 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing ACHD review shows no improvements to area roadways required•Agencies have indicated no issues•G districtspace, amenities, and dimensional standards for CWell developed application that meets or exceeds requirements for parking, open •SUBSTANTIVE REVIEW LEGAL STANDARDS AND DISCUSSION 19 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing Will not result in loss of a natural, scenic, or historic feature•Will not include excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glares, or odors•Will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services•Adequately served by public facilities and services•Will not adversely affect other property•Compatible with other uses in the neighborhood and vicinity•Harmonious with Meridian Comprehensive Plan•Site large enough to accommodate the proposed use•All Conditional Use Permit Factors Have Been Satisfied:SUBSTANTIVE REVIEW LEGAL STANDARDS AND DISCUSSION 19 103.6| 0Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission| Conditional Use Permit Hearing RESPONSE TO STAFF CONDITIONS LEGAL STANDARDS AND DISCUSSION