2021-07-01 E
IDIAN
HO
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho
Thursday,July 01, 2021 at 6:00 PM
MINUTES
ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE
PRESENT
Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel
Commissioner Bill Cassinelli
Commissioner Nick Grove
Commissioner Maria Lorcher
Commissioner Steven Yearsley (Arrived at 6:05 p.m.)
ABSENT
Commissioner Andrew Seal
Commissioner Nathan Wheeler
ADOPTION OF AGENDA-Adopted
CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] -Approved
1. Approve Minutes of the June 17, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Popeyes Drive-Through (H-2021-0030) by
Erik Wylie of JRW Construction, LLC, Located at 6343 N. Linder Rd.
3. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Topgolf(H-2021-0033) by Arco/Murray,
Located at 948 S. Silverstone Way
ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item]
ACTION ITEMS
4. Public Hearing for Orchard Park Pad C Drive-Through (H-2021-0039) by Mandi
Brozo of CSHQA, Located at 1245 W. Chinden Blvd.
A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a dual drive-through for a multi-tenant
establishment within 300 feet of an existing drive-through on 1.47 acres of
land in the C-C zoning district.
-Approved
S. Public Hearing for DaVinci Park Drive-Through (H-2021-0037) by NeuDesign
Architecture, Located at 4744 N. Park Crossing Ave.
A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment for a
coffee kiosk within 300 feet of an existing residence and residential district on
1.19 acres of land in the C-N zoning district.
-Approved
6. Public Hearing for TM Creek Apartments Phase 3 (H-2021-0035) by Brighton
Corporation, Generally Located South of W. Franklin Rd. and East of S. Ten Mile Rd.
A. Request: Rezone of 5.58 acres of land from the TN-C to the C-G zoning
district.
B. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development
consisting of 238 apartment units (including 2 live/work units) on 7.83 acres
of land in the C-G zoning district.
- Recommended Approval to City Council
7. Public Hearing Continued from June 3, 2021 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.
- Recommended Approval to City Council
ADJOURNMENT - 8:03 p.m.
Item 1.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting July 1, 2021.
Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of July 1, 2021, was called to
order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Rhonda McCarvel.
Members Present: Chairman Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Bill Cassinelli,
Commissioner Nick Grove, Commissioner Steven Yearsley and Commissioner Maria
Lorcher.
Members Absent: Commissioner Andrew Seal and Commissioner Nate Wheeler.
Others Present: Adrienne Weatherly, Ted Baird, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Joe Dodson,
and Dean Willis.
ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE
Nate Wheeler X Maria Lorcher
Andrew Seal X Nick Grove
_X Steven Yearsley (6:05 p.m.) X Bill Cassinelli
X Rhonda McCarvel - Chairman
McCarvel: Good evening and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting
for July 1 st, 2021. The Commissioners who are present this evening are at City Hall. We
have staff from city attorney and clerk's offices, as well as city Planning Department. If
you are joining us via Zoom this evening, we can see that you are here. You may observe
the meeting. However, your ability to be seen on screen and talk will be muted. During
the public testimony portion of the meeting you will be unmuted and, then, be able to
comment. Please note that we cannot take any questions until the public testimony
portion. If you have a process question during the meeting, please, e-mail
cityclerk@meridiancity.org and they will reply as quickly as possible. If you simply want
to watch the meeting we encourage you to watch the streaming on the city's YouTube
channel. You can access it at meridiancity.org/live. And with that let's begin with roll call.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
McCarvel: Thank you. So, at this time first item on the agenda is the adoption of the
agenda. There are no changes. So, could I get a motion to adopt the agenda as
presented?
Grove: So moved.
Lorcher: Second.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 5
Page 2 of 41
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say
aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item]
1. Approve Minutes of the June 17, 2021 Planning and Zoning
Commission Meeting
2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Popeyes Drive-Through (H-
2021-0030) by Erik Wylie of JRW Construction, LLC, Located at 6343
N. Linder Rd.
3. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Topgolf (H-2021-0033) by
Arco/Murray, Located at 948 S. Silverstone Way
McCarvel: Next item is the Consent Agenda and we have three items on the Consent
Agenda this evening. We have approval of minutes for the June 17th, 2021, meeting --
Planning and Zoning meeting and Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for H-2021-
0030, Popeye's Drive-Through, and H-2021-0033 Topgolf. Can I get a motion to accept
the Consent Agenda as presented?
Cassinelli: So moved.
Grove: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. All those
in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
McCarvel: At this time I would like to briefly explain the public hearing process. We will
open each item individually and begin with the staff report. 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 up 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 presentation
for the meeting it will be displayed on the screen and our Clerk will run the presentation.
If you have established that -- let's see. Let's go on from there. After all of those who
have signed up in advance have spoken we will invite any others to -- who may wish to
testify. If you wish to speak on a topic you may press raise hand button on the Zoom app
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 6
Page 3 of 41
or if you are only listening on -- on the phone, please, press star nine and wait for your
name to be called. If you are listening on multiple devices, a computer and a phone, for
example, please, be sure to mute those extra devices, so we don't experience feedback
and we can hear you clearly. When you are finished, if the Commission does not have
any 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 and the Commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss and, hopefully, be
able to make a final decision or recommendation to the City Council as needed.
ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item]
ACTION ITEMS
4. Public Hearing for Orchard Park Pad C Drive-Through (H-2021-0039)
by Mandie Brozo of CSHQA, Located at 1245 W. Chinden Blvd.
A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a dual drive-through for a multi-
tenant establishment within 300 feet of an existing drive-through on
1.47 acres of land in the C-C zoning district.
McCarvel: So, at this time we will open the public hearing for Item H-2021-0039, Orchard
Park Pad C Drive-through and we will begin with the staff report and just wanted to make
note for the record that Commissioner Yearsley is present.
Yearsley: Sorry for being late.
Dodson: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. Good evening. Just
trying to get this all set up, so I can present this to you. The first project for you tonight is
for a conditional use permit. The site consists of 1 .47 acres of land. Currently zoned C-
C and located about a quarter mile east of Linder Road along Chinden Boulevard. It is
Lot 8, Block 1, in the Linder Village Subdivision, which is now being promoted as Orchard
Park. To the north is Chinden Boulevard and to the east, south, and west are C-C zoning,
with planned and I guess existing commercial development. History on this site is like I
noted. Linder Village Subdivision, which originally was an annexation, comp plan map
amendment, preliminary plat and variants for various reasons. Final plat has been
approved and signed and the plat has now been recorded. Recently went through MDA
to update the overall concept plan, but has generally little to do with this application. The
Comprehensive Plan designation on this property is mixed use community. This property,
as well as the -- the entire area should be taken into account and staff finds that the
proposed use, as well as the existing and proposed and planned uses in the area meet
the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed CUP before you tonight is for a dual drive
through, serving a multi-tenant building that is proposed as approximately 5,600 square
feet. The subject drive-throughs are within 300 feet of two existing or approved drive-
throughs, one to the west and one to the east. The building to the east has received
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 7
Page 4 of 41
administrative level approvals and is nearly identical building as the one before you
tonight. The submitted site plan shows a rectangular building with both the northern and
southern most tenants as those utilizing the drive-through. The site plan shows 36 new
parking spaces for this site. The shared parking area between the two multi-tenant
buildings will be at least 74 parking spaces. Code would require 44 between the two.
The site plan -- or sorry. These drive aisles connect to the east-west drive aisle closest
to Chinden Boulevard and is the closest -- the entrance to the drive-throughs. So, this
drive aisle here and you have the north-south drive aisles that connect to it, which is the
entrance of the drive-through. Because the drive-through serve two separate tenants,
the traffic patterns reach across over one another midway through the site along the west
side of the building. The applicant provided a circulation plan, which is the one on the
left, which shows the intended traffic pattern. Staff agrees with this, but has
recommended some minor revisions that the applicant has agreed to. The submitted plan
shows that Tenant A, which is the north tenant, as utilizing the yellow path, which includes
the southern drive-through at the north end of the building noted here. Once a customer
orders along the north side of the building they continue to the west side and pick up their
order. They, then, stop at the determined drive-through crossing and go from being the
inside lane to the outside lane to exit the drive-through at the south end of the site. So,
again, order approximately here, pick up here, stop, crossover and, then, exit. After the
crossing point the yellow lane, the outside lane at that point becomes the escape lane,
which is required for the length of the drive-through lanes. Tenant B, which is the southern
tenet, utilizes the blue path according to the submitted site plan and, essentially, follows
the opposite path of Tenant A. For Tenant B the entrance along the north side of the
building is a stacking lane in order position. Once customers for this tenant order and,
then, stack determined crossing point, they would cross from the outside to the inside to
pick up their order. So, again, just want to make this very clear, enter here, order
approximately here, as noted on the one on the right, stop again here, cross over to the
inside to pick up for this tenant and, then, exit. After pick up customers would continue
south to turn east around the south side of the building and exit the drive-through. The
proposed drive-through design is obvious uncommon and complex, with the added
crossing point. Staff finds that with adequate signage and striping the proposed drive-
through can work. Therefore, staff is recommending not only striping on the pavement,
but also signage at the entrances and along throughout the drive-through lanes to ensure
customers know which business they are in line for and how to navigate the crossing.
Drive-through establishments must also adhere to specific use standards. Staff has
analyzed the submitted plans for compliance and finds that the proposed site plan to
comply with these standards. Based on the exhibits provided by the applicant, the two
ordering locations appear to be approximately 65 feet into the drive-through lanes, which
is this exhibit here. This should allow for three to four cars stacking prior to getting to the
menu boards. Staff does not perceive the proposed businesses requiring extended
stacking lanes like that of a Dutch Bros or a standalone coffee shop. However, staff does
recommend moving the menu boards further into the drive-through to help alleviate the
potential of this conflict. Other than these specific use standards, all landscaping,
dimensional standards, et cetera, will be further analyzed with the CZC and design review
applications. However, initial reviews of all of these requirements have been analyzed
and staff as shown -- sees that they have complied with all of those. Staff does
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 $
Page 5 of 41
recommend approval of the subject CUP application and after that I will stand for any
questions you may have.
McCarvel: Would the applicant like to come forward.
Brozo: Good evening. My name is Mandie Brozo. 200 Broad Street. CSHQA. Madam
Chairman, Members of the Commission, tonight I'm here to present the CUP -- Pad C
CUP for --
McCarvel: Can you pull that microphone real close to you.
Brozo: Is that better?
McCarvel: Dean, is that okay? Okay.
Brozo: I do have a presentation for you guys and so -- okay. Perfect. So, if you want to
go to the next slide, kind of reiterating what Joe has already explained as far as the
conditional use permit for a dual drive-through at Pad C, Orchard Park, Linder Village
Subdivision. You can see Pad B to the west has already been approved through design
review CZC. Pad -- or building three to the east has also been approved. It's right in the
middle of the two of them and this, hopefully, helps clarify some of those traffic patterns
that we were talking about as far as -- if you look at the Pad B sites coming in and going
through -- the pink line actually shows that it is a valet parking pick up for that tenant.
That's a Tide Cleaners. So, we are intending people to drive through the valet, pick up
their laundry, and, then, actually exit through the far east exit lane, which would also be
kind of the escape lane for the drive-through. The orange indicates the northern tenants
drive-through. It's not a typical drive-through. It does not have an order board, it does
not have a speaker menu, it's specifically for that tenants' to go get orders. People have
called ahead, they are just going to drive through, pick it up, and go. That tenant is
actually a Chipotle and based on current health pandemic response, this is actually
something that these tenants are pushing for as they have their standard sit down eat
restaurant, then, also allow them to do a continual drive-through pick up kind of ordering
as well for those who don't want to sit in the restaurant. You can see from the exhibit for
Pad C the intention for the entering to the site, process through the drive-through. Joseph
explained kind of how we intend them to order, maneuver their way through and exit. Pad
-- or building three is the exact same thing, except mirrored on the opposite side of the
site and in response to comments from staff reports, we have added additional
explanations for signage. When you enter in for Tenant A you are going to get to your
speaker board first, order, and, then, turn the corner and, then, you are going to stop after
you get through -- the intention is you stop, you look for the oncoming traffic, they are
going to stop, too, hopefully, and they continue on, so you don't have that collision. Your
-- it's going to be very visible to everybody with stop signs and we are intending everyone
to just come to a complete stop before they continue on and cross the crossover and,
then, as you exit along the south of the building to the east, it should be just an exit lane
for them and, then, Tenant C crosses over, picks up, and, then, goes. If you want to make
a note that on this plan we have been talking to the tenants and we are thinking about
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 191
Page 6 of 41
moving some of these drive-through windows actually further south along for Tenant A to
allow for some additional stacking and, then, also moving Tenant C's drive to the south
of the building to allow for some additional stacking as well. That was a concern as far
as just making sure that we had that addressed. Sixty-five feet at the beginning I think to
be adequate. However, if it's not we want to make sure that we provide enough beyond
the menu board so that we are not going to inhibit any kind of traffic in the drive aisles.
You can see here we intend on a Tenant C drive-through enter sign, a Tenant A drive-
through enter sign for identifying which lane they are supposed to be into as they enter
into the drive-throughs. It might take some people a little bit of time to get used to that,
but there is adequate site for them to circle back around if they need to or just stop and
look at the signage and, hopefully, see where they need to go. We will do some additional
exit signs that are vertical, in addition to any paint and striping signage. That way
everyone sees it vertically and on the ground, make sure that that's something that is
duplicated for everyone to see clearly and, then, obviously, the do not enter signs,
because now you have the potential of two cars coming at you, instead of just the one,
so we are going to have the painted sign and, then, the do not enter sign as you exit the
site. And, then, the rest of the pictures are kind of pretty pictures of the building and kind
of what we are looking at, but I will stand for any questions.
McCarvel: Okay. I do have a question. Where -- where else have you used this
successfully?
Brozo: Building three.
McCarvel: Is it up and running well now or --
Brozo: Yeah. We just kind of thought that this would work, trying to get the density of
two retail tenants in one building, especially for the Orchard Park. These are large 5,000
square feet buildings. So, a single tenant -- orjust one drive-through use isn't necessarily
in our prototype, so we tried to make sure that we could get some density, while making
it safe and really helping that Chinden Boulevard kind of look exciting and lively.
McCarvel: You don't know of anywhere else you have the -- this will be the first? Okay.
Brozo: Yes.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: What about deliveries, especially for -- obviously, it doesn't seem like they will
be able to get deliveries in the rear of any of these, especially Tenant B in the middle.
Brozo: Yeah. So, Tenant B actually has the fire riser and, then, a little bit of the utility
and those are the -- that specific one is small enough that we are encouraging just the
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 Flo]
Page 7 of 41
front load deliveries, working out with the -- early in the mornings and try to not affect the
business.
Cassinelli: So, basically, they don't -- none of these tenants would have rear deliveries
available to them?
Brozo: They have rear doors, if they can work it out to get it delivered after or before
hours, but it would be a matter of closing down those drive-throughs to get deliveries into
the back door.
Cassinelli: Okay. Madam Chair, I have another question if I may.
McCarvel: Yes.
Cassinelli: Did you look at any other patterns, any other traffic flows in the design?
Brozo: We did. This is one of -- it's a unique drive-through, the dual drive-through. We
just feel that this would be a great opportunity to try something like this to see if it works.
The whole concept is very unique and it took me a while to make sure that I understood
what was going on so I could present it to you guys tonight. I think that with the types of
businesses, the hours of operation, you are going to do a lot more for the Tenant A, more
of the breakfast, lunch, maybe dinner. Tenant C would be more of just a -- throughout
the day kind of a thing where you wouldn't really have a huge rush at both of them at the
same time, but with the response and trying to add for additional stacking and things like
that, that's why we are trying to move the boards around and drive-throughs around, just
to make sure that we have that without impeding the actual vehicular circulation of the
site, because there is going to be people who just want to go in, sit down, and we are just
going to make sure that those drive-throughs don't block that.
Cassinelli: So, there are already tenants scheduled for these spaces? There are.
McCarvel: Any other questions?
Lorcher: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher.
Lorcher: I don't know if this is for the applicant or not. When a tenant goes in and you
are kind of designing the space for them, there is no really guarantee that they are going
to stay there forever. So, it could be that you are suggesting that one of them may be a
dry cleaner and one would be a restaurant with a drive-through, but, then, down the --
you know, two or three years from now it could be something different. Would the city
require them to reapply for -- if a new tenant goes in for a drive-through?
Dodson: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, that is -- unless it's a complete
change of use, then, no, we would not require anything. There would be --
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 Fill
Page 8 of 41
Lorcher: The drive-through doesn't change.
Dodson: Correct. Yeah. The drive-through portion would not be reevaluated later.
Lorcher: Okay. Thank you.
McCarvel: Any other questions for staff or the applicant?
Cassinelli: Madam Chair, I do have -- as long as we have gotten both -- and we are open
here. Joe, I think you mentioned -- you mentioned escape lanes, but on the one diagram
you put I just didn't -- I didn't see where that's possible until you get at least past the
window for Tenant A. Can you -- can you talk to that a little bit more?
Dodson: Absolutely. I guess I could just leave that one up. Madam Chair, Members of
the Commission, Commissioner Cassinelli, one of my recommendations was to remove
the curbing here, basically from here down, so that if somebody gets in this lane they can
use this outer lane as an escape lane. But once you get past this crossing point, this is
the escape plan. There is no reason to use it, unless you are leaving. You are not going
to be picking up any food from the outside. So, it, essentially, is functioning as both an
exit and an escape lane, which we--we see a lot with the --any of the dual drive-throughs.
I'm just glad it's not also a drive aisle.
Cassinelli: But before -- theoretically there is no escape plan unless we -- unless that
curb is removed there and they can jump over to the -- from the blue to the green. It
doesn't matter. Correct?
Dodson: Yes. And that's -- that's typical. We wouldn't have any -- if it -- if the building
stopped right there, they wouldn't be required to have an escape lane, because of the
distances for the stacking are not at -- at the mark, so --
Cassinelli: Okay.
Dodson: Because the overall length is -- is long enough that they need this exit lane and
escape lane.
McCarvel: Thank you. 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 in the room who wishes to -- or on Zoom who
wishes to testify on this application? Okay. That being said, I'm assuming the applicant
has no other comments. Okay. Great. With that could I get a motion to close the public
hearing for H-2021-0039?
Lorcher: Motion.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F12
Page 9 of 41
Cassinelli: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2021-0039.
All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: I like it. I think it's cool. And it will take some time for people to -- to get used
to it, but I think you give them a month and they will know exactly what to do.
McCarvel: Yeah.
Yearsley: I understand that the need for most restaurants anymore wanting a drive-
through and I think you are going to end up with something very similar to this in a lot of
areas, because most restaurants want drive-throughs anymore just because of what
happened with COVID. So, I think it's unique. I think it's cool. It if -- I think it will work. I
-- I think it's good. I like it.
McCarvel: Yeah. I think it can, too. Mean it will take some getting used to, but I think
people who tend to frequent drive-throughs are usually mostly the same people over and
over and I think as long as that striping is on there, it's -- it should be -- it's just like a
roundabout, once you get through once you get it figured out.
Lorcher: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher.
Lorcher: I think it would work as long as both weren't food purveyors. So, it was alluded
that one may be a dry cleaner and, then, the other would be, you know, food and the
business -- business hours would be -- even though they would cross over for timing, the
needs of the drive-through would be different. If both of them were food and everybody
was stacking up at the same time, I think you will probably find some long lines and, then,
you wouldn't have the ability for the escape lane, but if there are two unique businesses
that really complement each other, but don't contradict each other, that could -- it could
work.
McCarvel: I think the tenants will figure that out. Anymore comments or motions?
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F13
Page 10 of 41
Yearsley: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve
file number H-2021-0039, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 1 st,
2021, with no modifications.
Grove: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve H-2021-0039. All those in favor
say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Congratulations.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
5. Public Hearing for DaVinci Park Drive-Through (H-2021-0037) by
NeuDesign Architecture, Located at 4744 N. Park Crossing Ave.
A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment
for a coffee kiosk within 300 feet of an existing residence and
residential district on 1.19 acres of land in the C-N zoning district.
McCarvel: At this time we will open public hearing for H-2021-0037, DaVinci Park Drive-
Through and we will begin with the staff report.
Allen: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. The next application
before you is a request for a conditional use permit. This site consists of 1.19 acres of
land. It's zoned C-N and is located at 4744 North Park Crossing Avenue at the southwest
corner of North Locust Grove Road and East McMillan Road. The Comprehensive Plan
future land use map designation for this property is mixed use neighborhood. A
conditional use permit is requested for a drive-through establishment for a 620 square
foot coffee kiosk within 300 feet of an existing residence and residential district on 1.19
acres of land in the C-N zoning district. The proposed development plan is in substantial
compliance with the provisions in the existing development agreement. A full access
driveway exists to this site from the west via North Park Crossing Lane and a right only
route -- excuse me -- right-out only driveway exists to North Locust Grove Road on the
east side of the lot. Direct access via East McMillan Road is prohibited. Because the
width of the area proposed for the one way drive aisle for access to northern parking and
stacking lane for the drive-through is too narrow to accommodate both travel lanes,
vehicles in the stacking lane will encroach into the drive aisle and this is this area right in
here that we are talking about, if you can see my pointer. Staff is recommending the
northern row of parking is removed. That's these spots right here. And a planter island
is added to guide traffic to avoid conflicts. A minimum of two parking spaces are required
per UDC standards. A total of 42 spaces exist and/or are proposed between the proposed
use and the existing 9,500 square foot retail building on the east side of this site. Even
with removal of the row of parking previously mentioned, there are still twice as many
parking spaces as required. Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown
that incorporated a mix of materials consisting of Hardieplank lap siding, Accoya wood
siding and glazing. Per the development agreement some of the same design elements
are required to be incorporated into the commercial portion of the development as in a
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F14
Page 11 of 41
residential portion. Final design is required to be consistent with the provisions in the
development agreement and with the design standards in the architecture -- architectural
standards manual. So, these elevations are not approved with this application, they are
only conceptual. Written testimony has been received from Marla Carson, the applicant's
representative. She requests they be able to retain the five northern parking spaces as
employee parking. Staff does not support this request as stated previously, because
there isn't enough room spatially for the one-way drive aisle to access the parking and
escape lane and the stacking lane for the drive-through. Parallel parking may be an
option in this area for employees instead. Staff is recommending approval with the
conditions in the staff report.
McCarvel: Thank you. Would the applicant like to come forward?
Allen: The applicant is online I believe tonight, Madam Chair.
Weatherly: Marla, you should have permission to unmute yourself and turn on your
camera if you would like.
Carson: Good evening. This is Marla Carson, architect, at 725 East 2nd Street in
Meridian.
McCarvel: Thank you. We can hear you. Go ahead.
Carson: Okay. Can you see my screen?
McCarvel: It looks like it's coming up.
Carson: Okay. I'm here tonight to ask approval for a CUP for a coffee kiosk at 4474
North Park Crossing. The location, as Sonya stated, is the southwest corner of McMillan
and Locust Grove. The same owner of the property has already been approved and
constructed a retail building on the corner of the property. The scope of the work for this
project is a pad ready site as shown here. We are requesting that we may be able to
retain these five parking spaces that could be shared with the stacking for the drive-
through. I believe code does have allowance saying that the stacking lane shall be a
separate lane from circulation lanes needed for access and parking, except stacking
lanes may provide access to staff parking. So, that's what we are asking. We do exceed
the needs for the parking requirement, but this coffee shop only requires two parking
spaces and we can see there being four or five employees that could use these spaces
and just keep the flexibility for this retail space as different tenants come and go, allow
enough parking for everyone. Also there is no real street parking in the area, so we are
thinking if we provide plenty of parking that's going to prevent overflow into this
neighborhood just to the south of the property. Here is our preliminary floor plan for the
project. There is not going to be indoor seating, but we will have patio seating. And here
is our preliminary elevations using similar materials to the existing building. And, then,
this kind of shows what the existing building looks like, the retail space. There is a Shapes
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F15]
Page 12 of 41
Fitness in there and a Precision Hardwood Floors in there right now. That completes my
presentation.
McCarvel: Okay. Any questions for the applicant or staff? With that is there -- Madam
Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to testify on this application?
Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do not.
McCarvel: Okay. That being said is there anyone in the room who would like to testify
on this application? Or on Zoom? Okay. Could I get a motion to close -- or -- and I'm
assuming with that the applicant has no other comments?
Carson: Correct.
McCarvel: Going once, going twice for questions. Can I get a motion to close the public
hearing on H-2021-0037?
Yearsley: So moved.
Lorcher: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2021-0037.
All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Grove: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Grove.
Grove: Jump in real quick. I see not a lot with this -- it's going to be a busy location.
Having lived in this area before there is a lack of coffee. Definitely be a welcome sight
over there. I'm -- I can go either way with the parking. I tend to agree with staff when
they have concerns though.
McCarvel: Okay. Any other thoughts?
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: I think it works. I think it looks good. I do agree with staff, I think that parking
needs to go. I think it's just going to be a conflict with people driving through with trying
to park there. So, I think it makes sense to -- to leave it the way it -- with the conditions
of removing that area of parking spaces.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F16
Page 13 of 41
McCarvel: I would tend to agree, even if they were employee -- clearly marked employee
would be the only way, but, man, I get nervous sitting in drive-throughs where it is butted
up right against where somebody is just begging to back out and everybody's stuck. So,
I would -- I would tend to agree with staff on that as well. Additional comments? Motions?
Grove: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Grove.
Grove: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File
No. H-2021-0037 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 1 st, 2021,
with no modifications.
Cassinelli: Second.
McCarvel: I was going to say, is it written the way you want to --
Allen: May I clarify? The staff report requires removal of the five northern parking spaces.
May I clarify if parallel parking may be considered at the time of CZC if it meets
dimensional standards or if you just don't want any parking there at all?
McCarvel: I think leave it to staff to --
Yearsley: What do you recommend?
Grove: I will leave it to staff to make that decision.
McCarvel: Okay. It has been -- did we get a second?
Cassinelli: Yeah. It has been moved and seconded to -- to approve H-2021-0037 with
modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed. Or -- got it.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
6. Public Hearing for TM Creek Apartments Phase 3 (H-2021-0035) by
Brighton Corporation, Generally Located South of W. Franklin Rd. and
East of S. Ten Mile Rd.
A. Request: Rezone of 5.58 acres of land from the TN-C to the C-G
zoning district.
B. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development
consisting of 238 apartment units (including 2 live/work units) on 7.83
acres of land in the C-G zoning district.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F17
Page 14 of 41
McCarvel: Next on the agenda is Item H-2021-0035, the TM Creek Apartments Phase 3
and we will begin with the staff report.
Allen: Thank you, Madam Chair. Give me just a moment here. The next application
before you is a request for a rezone and a conditional use permit. This site currently is
zoned TN-C and C-G and is located south of West Franklin Road and east of South Ten
Mile Road. Development of this property is governed by the Ten Mile Crossing
Development Agreement. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is
mixed use commercial and high density residential in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific
Area Plan. The applicant has requested rezone of 5.5 acres of land from the TN-C to the
C-G zoning district as shown. Most of the area proposed to be rezoned is designated
mixed use commercial, with a narrow sliver along the east boundary designated as high
density residential. The proposed C-G zoning and multi-family residential and live-work
vertically integrated uses are consistent with the future land use map designations for this
property. Because the area proposed to be rezoned is governed by the Ten Mile Crossing
Development Agreement, a new development agreement or amendment to the existing
DA is not recommended. A conditional use permit is requested for a multi-family
residential development, consisting of 238 apartment units on 7.83 acres of land in the
C-G zoning district. A variety of studio, one bedroom, two bedroom, and live-work units
are proposed. The gross density is 30.4 units per acre. A total of 1 ,815 square feet of
nonresidential uses are proposed in the vertically integrated and residential structure,
which is a principally permitted use in the C-G zoning district and will allow a variety of
commercial uses. The vertically integrated residential use is proposed at the corner
where the private streets intersect Wayfinder. There are two live-work units proposed.
The remainder of the building frontage to the south along Wayfinder is proposed to be
entirely multi-family residential. This area was previously planned for commercial uses
along this street. The applicant has requested alternative compliance to UDC 11-43-27-
B3 to provide a lesser amount of private open space for each unit as noted in the staff
report and to UDC Table 11-3C-6, which doesn't include a requirement for parking for
studio units, to allow the vertically integrated residential standards to apply. The director
has approved these requests as stated in the staff report. Access is proposed via private
street from Wayfinder Avenue, a collector street, along the west boundary of the site.
With approval of alternative compliance, a minimum of 372 parking spaces are required.
A total of 379 spaces are proposed. Based on the size of the living area and the proposed
units, all between 500 and 1,200 square feet, a minimum of 1.37 acres of common open
space is required to be provided within the development. A total of 2.51 acres is
proposed. Although some of this area doesn't qualify, i.e., private open space along
Wayfinder and is not really usable, some of the parking lot planters, the internal common
open space and area along the Ten Mile Creek is 2.2 acres, which exceeds UDC
standards. And that 2.2 acres you can see is contained within the red dotted line here.
So, the other area is what consists of the 2.51 acres shown on the open space exhibit.
Based on 238 units, a minimum of five amenities are required, but the decision making
body is authorized to consider additional amenities if they believe their proposed
amenities aren't adequate for the size of the development. The applicant is proposing a
clubhouse with a fitness center, bike repair room, and pet grooming station. Swimming
pool. Open grassy areas of at least 50 feet by 100 feet in size. Fireside seating. Grilling
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F18
Page 15 of 41
area and sports courts. Smith ball and ping pong. The Ten Mile Creek multi-use pathway
also lies adjacent to the site for residents to use. An eight foot wide pathway is proposed
along the north side of the creek as shown on the concept plan. Conceptual building
elevations were submitted for the proposed four story structures as shown. Building
materials consist of stucco and brick in neutral colors. Final design is required to comply
with the adopted Ten Mile Crossing design guidelines. Written testimony has been
received from Mike Wardle, the applicant's representative. He requests condition number
4-H, which requires the sidewalk along the southern boundary of the site adjacent to the
ten Mile Creek to be widened to ten feet to qualify as a multi-use pathway as
recommended by the Parks Department as a condition of approval of the alternative
compliance request to the private open space standards to be changed to require an eight
foot wide pathway as proposed and that is this pathway right here along the southern
boundary that we are talking about. And deletion of Condition No. 8, which requires a
public-pedestrian easement for the multi-use pathway to be deleted, since an easement
isn't required for nonpublic pathways as proposed by the applicant. A revision is also
requested to Condition No. 9 to remove the language pertaining to compliance with the
design guidelines in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan and the design
standards in the architectural standards manual to reflect compliance with the Ten Mile
Crossing design guidelines as required by the development agreement. That was a typo
in the staff report. So, staff is in agreement with that requested change. Staff is
recommending approval with the conditions in the staff report. Staff will stand for any
questions.
McCarvel: Would the applicant like to come forward?
Beach: Good evening. Josh Beach. Brighton Homes. 2929 West Navigator Drive here
in Meridian. So, we have a -- should have a slideshow. Get it pulled up there. Nice to
see you all in person again.
McCarvel: Welcome back.
Beach: Thank you. So, good evening, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. So,
as Sonya stated -- hopefully I can move this forward. Can I not, Sonya? Okay. Next
slide there, Sonya, if you would. So, as recommended by staff and, then, in the pre-
application meeting, they recommended that we rezone that portion of TN-C to C-G to be
consistent with -- with the area and what we are proposing and so not much else to say
in terms of the rezone. Other than that it -- it does comply with the Comprehensive Plan
with our overall development agreement. So, we were okay with making that application.
Moving on to the conditional use permit -- Sonya, if you will move it forward. So, as you
can see here on the slide, this is the -- will be the third phase of the apartments. There
is the Lofts and Flats just --just to the south and this would be phase three, which is north
of what we are calling the amenity corridor, the Ten Mile Creek there with the Ten Mile
multi-use pathway being on the south side of the creek and the gravel access road for the
irrigation district being on the north side and one of the reasons why in that condition of
approval that we asked to be modified -- there is a multi-use pathway on the south side
and in our minds it didn't make sense to have another multi-use pathway on the north
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F19
Page 16 of 41
side, especially because the access road for the irrigation district is -- is located there and
they typically don't like to -- like to have them on both sides. So, that's one of the reasons.
So, Sonya, if you can move forward again. So, the site plan -- as Sonya said, there is
238 -- what we are calling urban style multi-family units, kind of a breakdown there of the
unit count. The sizes. Sonya, if you can move it forward again for me. So, one of the
cool things about this is we have some live-work units, which is something that there isn't
a lot of in Meridian. Very excited about that and you can see here on the -- on the left for
Wayfinder that we have -- we put some on-street parking -- it's already constructed there
-- on-street free parking for those businesses, so that they can be better utilized by, you
know, customers and typically those live-work units are used by professionals; right?
Your architects, things like that, where they can have their office downstairs and live
upstairs. So, hoping that -- that that goes well here. Sonya, if you can move forward
again for me. So, Sonya has mentioned open space. We have got just over two and a
half acres of qualified open space, which is about 32 percent of the site. It consists of
landscape buffers and the landscape area around what we are calling the central amenity
core, as you can see there south of the central building and, then, the landscaping, again,
adjacent to the Ten Mile Creek corridor. So, as Sonya mentioned as well, there are quite
a few amenities for the project. These photos were taken from the -- the Flats project,
which is just to the south of this proposed site and -- and, you know, one of our -- one of
my co-workers was gracious enough to take some photos of that for me, so we could put
them in the slide. So, there is a workout room, there is a yoga studio, pet grooming, lots
of seating areas inside there. A game room. It's -- it's very cool, actually, the -- the size
and all the different amenities that -- that are just within the clubhouse. Next slide, Sonya.
Oh, back on. There we go. So, outside. So, in addition to the amenities that are -- that
are inside the clubhouse, there is a year round spa and a pool, some grilling areas and
seating areas around the patio. Lounges. Smith ball. Outdoor yoga. Outdoor ping pong.
And these really cool fire tables. You have seen those probably at The Village and other
places and they add some warmth and some heat to the areas so folks can gather around
those. Sonya. So, going back to the -- the pathways a little bit more. You know, this --
this pathway that's there, it's labeled as A or the Ten --Ten Mile Creek and Ten Mile Road
regional pathway. It goes along the south side of that amenities corridor of the Ten Mile
Creek and it's going to connect to a large pathway network just in the Ten Mile Creek
area and we are excited that, you know, this section of that will be just the internal
circulation, that eight foot pathway, that we will have there, but, eventually, there will be
pathways throughout the whole --throughout the whole area, as you can see there, about
three and a half miles of eight and ten foot pathways. So, it will be relatively easy to
connect just about anywhere in the area just with walking. Sonya. And Sonya went
through these a little bit. I'm not going to touch much on these, but these are the -- the
architectural elevations of the buildings. The next slide there, Sonya. Again, it's more
perspective. And, again, we are complying with what was approved in our -- in our DA
for the Ten Mile Creek design guidelines. So, they are a little different than the design
guidelines for the rest of the city, as well as the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan.
We had our own guidelines approved just earlier this year. So, we will comply with those.
Sonya. And as Sonya said, there is -- there is a few conditions of approval. One would
be 4-H, which is, again, that's what we had originally proposed as a seven foot pathway
--would be an eight foot sidewalk along the south side of the project, which is on the north
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F20
Page 17 of 41
side of Ten Mile Creek for internal circulation and as you know, that's not a public
pathway. An easement would not be required for that, which is why we asked that
Condition 8 be removed as well. And, then, as Sonya said, the typo there with the Ten
Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan and it would -- this project would meet the Ten Mile
Creek design guidelines. Next slide there, Sonya. That's all I had in terms of the
presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions on the project that you may have.
McCarvel: Before we get into a whole lot of questions here, Sonya, can you put that last
slide back up, so we have got that? Thank you. Okay. Any questions for the applicant
or staff?
Cassinelli: Lots.
Yearsley: Go for it.
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: I will knock them down. Josh, on the amenities, are they -- are these different
than the other buildings or are they pretty much duplicates? And, then, is there sharing
of the entities from one building -- so, the Lofts and the Flats, can they go to the different
pools, et cetera?
Beach: So, the amenities are slightly different, but we have some -- some themes; right?
The workout room with the aerobic equipment and the outdoor -- outdoor games. We
have tried to change those up a little bit in terms of what outdoors -- like ping pong or
Smith Ball or things like that are a little bit different. But there wouldn't be sharing between
the -- between the different projects of amenities; right? Each -- each -- each -- each
apartment development will have its own amenities and be restricted to those -- those
tenants of that.
Cassinelli: Okay.
McCarvel: Anyone else?
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: So, you -- you kind of tout this as a live-work facility, but yet only two of the
units are a live-work. Why not add more?
Beach: That would be a Jon question.
Wardle: Good evening, Commissioners. For the record, my name is Jon Wardle. 2929
West Navigator Drive, Meridian, Idaho. Commissioner Yearsley, thank you for asking the
question about the live-work. We haven't seen it done very successfully as of yet, but we
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F21
Page 18 of 41
felt like this was a good opportunity to do it and we -- we took the two units that were
closest to that private drive to be able to do that. We will look for other opportunities, but
we felt like this was a good opportunity to try it and make sure that it works. A lot of times
those live-work units are converted back to just residential, but we are hopeful that we
can make this work and do it in other places as well.
Yearsley: Okay. Thank you.
McCarvel: Other questions?
Lorcher: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher.
Lorcher: I had a question and this might -- because it hasn't come up during my time on
the Commission, but did I read it right or see it right that there is going to be no parking
for the studio apartments for the 42 units; is that correct?
Beach: Correct. At the time there wasn't a requirement for studio parking. We have
provided some parking for them, but there isn't a requirement in the code. Or there wasn't
at the time.
Wardle: If I can clarify that. We actually are providing parking one unit per studio. Sorry.
For the record, Jon Wardle again. One per studio, which is actually in compliance now
with the UDC amendment that's coming through as well. Currently there wasn't a
designation for studio units. It was one bedroom and it was one and a half. But in this
case the bedroom and the units all integrated. So, we -- we have asked for one unit -- or
one stall per unit on the studios. So, they will have -- they will have parking dedicated
one space.
Lorcher: Thank you..
McCarvel: Any other questions for the applicant or staff?
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: Josh, is the number of units here -- is it consistent with the original
development agreement?
Beach: In terms of the number of apartment units allowed in the overall development?
Cassinelli: Correct.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F22
Page 19 of 41
Beach: I don't know that we have reached the threshold of how many are allowed and
so I'm not sure if I understand the question specifically. There aren't a specific number
of apartments allowed for a specific apartment development. And, maybe, Sonya, I don't
know if you --
Allen: Madam Chair, Commissioners, there wasn't a specific -- specific number. It's
what's allowed in the mixed use commercial designation and I believe it's no more than
30 percent, I believe. I would have to double check.
Parsons: Yeah. Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, if you recall, when the
applicant came forward with their recent DA mod and design guidelines, this area was
slated for additional residential, if I'm not mistaken, and that's why they are rezoning it to
C-G as well, to allow for that through a conditional use permit. So, again, as Sonya gets
that number for you, I don't believe we capped them to any certain number, but if you also
recall, they also own some additional residential that we anticipate them coming back and
platting and doing and possibly providing you more design guidelines for the residential
component of this development. That's further to the east of this site. So, right now,
again, what Sonya said to you this -- this plan is consistent with the land use designation
and that DA modification that was recently approved.
Beach: Madam Chair, quickly if I could. Our understanding is that there was a minimum
threshold for residential in the -- in the development agreement and that we have already
met that and exceeded the minimum requirement for residential.
Cassinelli: Okay. And Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: Then this may be for staff. But as far as parking, are we more -- are we -- I'm
more confused on the alternative compliance and changing up the parking spaces, but
are we -- do we still have ample parking in there? I see there is a minimum of 372 with a
total of 379, but with -- with the alternative compliance do we still have enough parking?
Allen: Madam Chair, Commissioner Cassinelli, yes, we do. It's in excess of UDC
standards. The funky thing about this is, like the applicant mentioned, staff does have a
text amendment in process right now. The -- the current UDC does not specifically have
a parking standard for studio parking. It's not that we don't require it, it just -- I think it was
inadvertently left out for studios. So, what the applicant's proposing as alternative
compliance is consistent with what staff is recommending as a text amendment currently
in process. So, there are extra spaces provided above the requirements.
Cassinelli: Okay. And kind of to piggyback on that, have -- have we -- has there been a
problem with parking in the existing complexes that would -- that would suggest that we
need more parking?
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F23
Page 20 of 41
Allen: Madam Chair, Commissioner Cassinelli, not that I'm aware of. The applicant may
be able to answer that. I'm not aware of any issues.
Cassinelli: How are the existing buildings handling the parking?
Beach: Madam Chair, Commissioner Cassinelli, I'm not -- I'm not aware of any concerns
either. I think Jon can address that more, but --
Wardle: Sorry. We put Josh on the spot tonight without, you know, perhaps the
knowledge of the project. So, the -- the Lofts project is complete. We are fully occupied
and we don't have a parking issue. We -- and we would know that pretty quickly, because
of the spillover into Primary Health and into some of the other services there as well. But
we feel like the parking works and we also have garages and things like that. So, there
is not a parking issue. We are very comfortable with the standards that we have met and
we have stayed consistent with the Flats and now this phase three across the creek. So,
the parking seems to be working really well.
Cassinelli: Okay.
McCarvel: Any other questions?
Lorcher: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher.
Lorcher: Is this the first four story apartment building for Brighton?
Wardle: Madam Chair, Commissioner Lorcher, actually, this is -- out at Ten Mile this is
the third project with four story buildings. So, the Flats and Lofts both --
Lorcher: Any other four story?
Wardle: We have other projects as well where we have done four and five stories. The
thing that's interesting here -- in typical garden style it's just walk up from outside into the
building in different stairwells. This one's completely conditioned and so you come into
conditioned spaces, corridors, that are internal, so you kind of eliminate -- we have
eliminated those external stairways from the project. The live-work is a little different,
because you can walk right into it from the street, but the rest of the buildings are internal
corridors with a number of elevators as well.
McCarvel: All right. Madam Clerk, do we have anyone signed up to testify on this
application?
Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do not.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F24
Page 21 of 41
McCarvel: That being said, is there anyone in the room who wishes to testify on this
application? Or on Zoom? Okay. Does the applicant have any further comments then,
being no public testimony? Okay.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Oh. Sure.
Wardle: Madam Chair, Jon Wardle. I just wanted to talk -- speak quickly about the
pathway and the sidewalk. So, we established a long time ago with Nampa-Meridian
Irrigation District that the public sidewalk or pathway would be on the south side and their
maintenance, which is a gravel access on the north side, north and west as we work
through the project. So, that starts at Franklin Road and will carry all the way through
and ultimately connect with the regional pathway the city had planned over by Twelve
Oaks and -- I'm trying to remember the other subdivisions over there. The --the sidewalk
that we are proposing on the north side is for internal circulation. Obviously, we want
them to be able to come down to the creek, but they won't have direct access to it until it
-- unless they go out to Wayfinder. Just to the south of that we will -- we will continue the
gravel access for Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. So, I just wanted to distinguish
between those. There -- this is not a public regional pathway. That exists on the south
side and we are going to continue that all the way through. This is just for internal
circulation coming out of those buildings for residents to move back and forth. Now, could
the public access it? Obviously, they would. But this is not the regional pathway and
that's why we are making the distinction here and asking for that sidewalk on the north
and the regional pathway on the south.
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: So, I understand the designation and I'm fine with that. But do you have an
issue of just leaving it at ten feet instead of eight or is there not enough room to make ten
feet in there?
Wardle: Madam Chair, Commissioner Yearsley, we actually do have a little bit of grade
issue there. On the second phase -- well, across --with our first project, but when we did
the gravel access on the north side, it sits pretty low in comparison to where the -- the
terrain is up above. So, we are going to have some terracing, some bouldering that's
going to be there. We would prefer to keep it at eight just to give us enough room to stay
back from that, so that's the reason we requested it to be eight.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F25
Page 22 of 41
Cassinelli: Sonya, can we get your -- a little bit additional input on -- on that. Going from
ten down to eight and why you want ten?
Allen: Yes. The Parks Department recommended ten feet as a provision of approving
the applicant's request for alternative compliance to the private open space standards. A
reduction to those. It's not a giant deal in staff's opinion, but that was the Parks
Department's recommendation.
Cassinelli: And yet the --
Allen: There is a multi-use pathway on the south side of the Ten Mile Creek.
Cassinelli: Yeah. I mean the Parks Department was -- they were clear on the
understanding of that, that the multi-use pathway is on the south side. Okay. And, then,
I had a question and I'm trying to think if you answered it. There is separation between
the sidewalk, whether it be eight feet or ten feet, and the gravel access, is it -- and you
mentioned I think some bouldering. So, is there a -- there is a definite separation there?
Wardle: Madam Chair, Commissioner Cassinelli, as we have looked at the design, yes,
there will be a separation. There will be boulders that will have to retain some of it. Will
it be the entire distance? No. But it drops quite a bit coming off a Wayfinder where that
gravel access is. So, I would expect that we would be stepping back and a couple layers
of boulder walls to make sure that that transition is -- is not too steep and severe between
the gravel access road and where the site would be.
Cassinelli: Okay. So, there is -- I mean -- then would you -- would you classify that as
kind of a natural fence or is it -- I mean is there going to be any kind of fencing between
those two?
Wardle: We haven't had to fence it as of yet on the other side. We have a similar
condition, but -- and given the way we have been able to step it back, it's -- it's not a
hazard. But we will need to look at that as we get out there and do a final civil analysis
of it.
Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you.
Wardle: Thank you.
McCarvel: Okay. Can I get a motion to close the public hearing on 2021-0035, TM Creek
Apartments?
Grove: So moved.
Yearsley: Second.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F26
Page 23 of 41
McCarvel: It's been moved and seconded to close public hearing on H-2021-0035. All
those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
McCarvel: I will jump up. I -- I don't see a big deal of leaving that an eight foot sidewalk,
instead of ten, but -- and I think they have plenty of amenities and open space and being
able to do some decent design work around there. I think it's just as important as having
the other two feet, especially on an internal circulation. Other than that -- I mean it looks
compatible with everything else that is around there.
Grove: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Grove.
Grove: Echo your sentiments on this. I would also like to point out one of the things that
came through a while back with this project was the lack of a gathering plaza, as they put
it, and they have that on one of the maps that they showed of the overall project out there.
So, I think that is greatly appreciated. Having -- kind of tying in all of these developments
together. I know that's not directly tied to this, but it does help. I particularly like the
amendments -- amenities that they have and the large open space. It looks like it will fit
in well with what they have already done. The project overall I don't have any problems
with it and I'm okay with the modifications that they have presented.
Yearsley: Madam Chairman?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: For the most part I'm -- I'm okay with it. Apartments never really excite me.
have to apologize for that comment. But, you know, you don't think two feet is a lot, but
for a ten foot sidewalk, if you have got two groups walking against each other, eight feet
feels very narrow and so I still have a tendency to call it a sidewalk and not a pathway,
but still leave it at ten feet, instead of eight, just to make it -- with that many -- you know,
200 and some homes, you know, you are going to have a lot of people out there wanting
to walk and stuff like that and so you are going to have people walk in different directions.
People on bikes. Having that extra two feet does provide a lot better access and safer.
Lorcher: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher.
Lorcher: I guess my only comment with Commissioner Yearsley is that if it's connecting
to another pathway or sidewalk, would it -- if it was already ten and, then, it's going to go
to eight and, then, it's going to get to ten again or -- it's going to be eight and, then, widen
out to ten -- whatever they choose it should be consistent. Unless it doesn't connect to
anything.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F27
Page 24 of 41
McCarvel: Sonya, correct me if I'm wrong, I don't think it connects to anything, does it?
Allen: Madam Chair, not at this time. Brighton also owns the land and will be developing
to the east of this property, though.
Lorcher: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher.
Lorcher: So, on their -- on the Flats and, then, the Lofts they have -- do they have the
eight foot sidewalk, then, on those projects or are they ten?
Allen: I don't believe there is anything north of the creek that's developed at this time.
Cassinelli: Can you go back a slide to that? I think the previous slide was the -- is the
pathways. Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: Normally I would -- initially I was going to say -- I would be okay with the eight
foot, but Commissioner Yearsley brought up the fact that--the number of apartments and
I agree, you know, even -- even two people -- you know, two groups of two coming head
on, eight feet is -- is not enough. I mean, you know, you kind of need to move a little bit
and with bikes as well. With that many residences it is a -- it's not part of the pathway
system, but I think given the -- the number there that I almost feel that ten feet is -- it
would just make for -- for more comfort there. I understand that the applicant has a little
bit of a space issue there trying to get the boulders in there and whatnot and, then, get
the access for the irrigation district, but I think they can do it, so I think I'm kind of leaning
towards that. I also want to make a comment on the live-work and Commissioner
Yearsley asked the question why only two? I like live-work. I don't -- to me it almost
seems like -- if you put just two in, why bother, because it's not going to attract -- you
know, if it was -- if it was a dozen in there it might attract enough people coming in to --
to be there. They are in there, it's -- it's being approved, I guess -- you know. And the
applicant even said that they could be converted in the future back to just stand-alone
residences. But, yeah, I would like to see -- because I like the idea of-- I have seen, you
know, live-work spaces in different parts of the country where it's -- it's real vibrant when
-- when they are there. So, I would love to see more is my issue there. But getting back
to the pathways, I would -- I would have to go with ten.
Grove: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Grove.
Grove: Just to jump in on the sidewalk aspect, having looked -- you know, driven around
that area before, the -- there is quite a bit of elevation change right along that area and
so I would be hesitant to force the template without having -- without having them, you
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F28
Page 25 of 41
know, take another look at it, I guess, with staff, potentially, maybe wording the -- what
we pass as a recommendation versus an ultimatum.
McCarvel: And I guess I would tend to agree with Commissioner Cassinelli. I'm actually
surprised that the live-work hasn't been successful in other projects, but -- because I think
going forward it might be a more desirable aspect and since a lot -- you know, we are
taking away -- it is kind of a commercial area. I wouldn't mind seeing more. Like they
said, they can always be converted, but it's easy -- I would imagine it's easier to convert
them back. I don't know.
Yearsley: Yeah. I -- Madam Chair, I would -- I would -- you know, I don't know if I would
condition more, but I would recommend more. I think it -- I think it might be -- you know,
again, it's kind of hard to say if it will work or not, but, you know, I would like to actually
see it a little bit more than that and my -- again, with the -- with the eight foot for the ten
foot, just give their civil engineers a little bit more to work on.
Grove: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Grove.
Grove: I don't think I have ever said this before, but I don't -- I don't know if I completely
agree with even wanting more of the mixed use, just because of how much other
commercial is in this general area. I'm usually a huge fan of having additional mixed use
integrated, but it -- I don't know. I -- I guess I wouldn't be opposed to having more, but I
don't see the absolute need for it, because of how much commercial office space is out
there.
McCarvel: Well, I think whoever makes the motion can wordsmith --
Yearsley: Sonya? Sonya, would you put that section back up. Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to
recommend approval to City Council of file number H-2021-0035 as presented in the staff
report for the hearing date of July 1st, 2021, with the following modifications: That
condition H -- or 4-H be modified to read: Widen the sidewalk along the southern border
to the site to ten feet. To strike condition eight to not require that it be in an easement
and to modify condition nine shown on the screen, if that's acceptable to Sonya for the
last one.
Allen: Clarification, Madam Chair, Commissioner Yearsley. The -- if you are wanting the
sidewalk to be widened to ten feet that is the typical width for a multi-use public pathway.
Are you sure you want to remove that requirement for a public pedestrian easement?
Because that's typically required with a multi-use pathway.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F29
Page 26 of 41
Yearsley: I don't know. Like I said, I -- I'm okay calling it a sidewalk, but just conditioning
it to be ten feet wide.
Allen: Thank you.
Cassinelli: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve H-2021-0035 with modifications.
All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
7. Public Hearing Continued from June 3, 2021 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: Next item on the agenda we will continue from June 30 -- June 3rd, H-2021-
0015, Woodcrest Townhomes, and we will begin with the staff report.
Allen: Just a moment, Madam Chair. Alrighty. The last item before you tonight is a
request for a Comprehensive Plan future land use map amendment and a rezone. This
site consists of 1.97 acres of land. It's zoned L-O, limited office, and is located at 1789
North Hickory Way, north of East Fairview Avenue on the southwest side of Hickory Way.
This property was annexed with L-O zoning in 1992 and was later resubdivided as a lot
in Mellane Commercial Complex in 2001. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map
designation currently is commercial. The applicant requests an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan future land use map to change the land use designation on 2.10
acres of land from commercial to medium high density residential and a rezone of 2.1
acres of land from the L-O, limited office, to the R-15, medium high density residential
zoning district. Approval of the map amendment will allow the applicant to develop 19
single family residential attached and townhome dwellings at a gross density of 10.8 units
per acre on this in-fill property, which will contribute to the range of residential land use
designations and diversity in housing types and densities in this area and provide a
transition in land uses from medium density residential to commercial and office uses to
the south. A conceptual site plan and building elevations were submitted showing how
the property is planned to develop with 19 single family attached and townhouse
dwellings, consisting of one single family attached structure, three three unit townhomes
and two four unit townhouses and a 2,500 square foot office building. The property is
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F30
Page 27 of 41
planned to be subdivided through a future application. Because this is an in-fill property
and has an irregular configuration, development of this site is difficult. The parking
proposed for the office building at the southeast corner the site encroaches within the
required land use buffer and does not comply with UDC standards. The Comprehensive
Plan states development in medium high density residential designated areas should
incorporate high quality architectural and site design to ensure quality of place and
incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and pathways and include attractive
landscaping and a project identity. To achieve this goal and alleviate some of the spatial
constrictions on the site, staff recommended the concept plan be revised to remove the
office building from the plan and instead include open space with quality landscaping and
some parking -- excuse me -- pathway connections to the open space and the provision
of a gazebo with a seating area as an amenity, which can be shared between the
residential and commercial development to the south. The applicant did revise the
concept plan as shown on the right and staff is in support of the proposed changes.
Access to the site is proposed via a cross-access easement from an existing driveway
from Hickory Way, a collector street. No stub streets exists to this property. A private
street is planned to provide access to the proposed development and for addressing
purposes. An attached sidewalk is proposed along one side of the private street for
pedestrian access. Off-street parking is proposed in accord with UDC standards. Four
extra spaces are proposed for guest parking in the common area near the entry and five
spaces are proposed in the common area at the southeast corner of the site. On-street
parking is not allowed due to the width of the private street. Because the site is below
five acres in size, qualified open space and site amenities are not required by the UDC.
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed residential structures as
shown with a mix of materials consisting of horizontal wood siding, vertical board and
batten siding, wood shake siding and cement plaster with stone veneer accents and
architectural asphalt roofing. There has been no written testimony submitted on this
application. Staff is recommending approval of the revised concept plan and is
recommending a development agreement with the provisions noted in the staff report.
Staff will stand for any questions.
McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Would the applicant like to come forward?
Womer: Good evening, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. My name is Blaine
Womer of Womer Engineering. We are at 4355 West Emerald Street in Boise, Suite 145.
We appreciate the opportunity to bring this project before you this evening. We also want
to thank Sonya for her efforts in getting us here as well. We are in receipt of the staff
report and we have reviewed it with the client and we are just -- and we do agree, we
concur with the findings and the recommendations in the staff report and we are just here
to answer any questions you might have.
McCarvel: Okay. Any questions for the applicant or staff?
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F31
Page 28 of 41
Cassinelli: The -- this -- this is more for staff. Sonya, is this a -- I don't know if you recall.
Maybe -- Bill, maybe you do. A couple of years ago we were looking at a development
-- I think it was on this piece and it was some -- it was medium density residential. I think
there was -- I'm kind of surprised there wasn't a single public comment. There was a lot
at that time. Can you -- if you recall that one, can you speak to how this is different?
Parsons: Absolutely I recall it and we discussed it this afternoon at our prep meeting. So,
Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, yes, back in 2017 an application came
before this body for a conditional use permit for multi-family development and that
included 40 apartments, and there was two story and three story apartments -- garden
style apartments on this property. The difference here tonight is that this is not a multi-
family development. Well, let me step back a little bit. With that multi-family development
came requirements for open space and amenities to go along with that density. As you
are aware the city denied that request and that rezone and that CUP did not move
forward. This applicant and this property owner has been trying to sell this property since
then and hasn't been very successful and so we have met with this applicant and they
have brought forth another plan to go residential. Now, we did share with them the history
of this site and what happened back four years ago and they assured us that there -- it is
their intent to come forward with a subdivision -- subdivide the property and build
townhomes on this site. So, that's really the distinction is townhomes are treated more
like single family. I mean multi-family -- it's all residential in our code and we don't try to
differentiate between residential and residential. But the stigmatism between multi-family
and townhomes is a little different. So, I think that's probably why you are -- you are not
getting the public comments you are, because this is not a multi-family development, this
is a townhome development that they will again come back, subdivide it, create an open
space that they don't need to provide, but at the recommendation of staff we felt it was
appropriate to provide that transition if there are people living there, having their own
private backyards, it would be nice to have some kind of amenity for the overall
development, so that you, too, kind of soften that commercial parking from the residential
living units. So, really, that's the difference is this time completely different use, a new
use, less zoning. I believe they were asking for R-40, if I'm not mistaken, and this
particular applicant is requesting R-15 and it's -- as you can see by the proposed concept
planning it does provide for a nicer transition to the single family to the north.
Womer: And they will be individual ownership units.
Cassinelli: Will they be -- Madam Chair. I'm sorry.
McCarvel: Yes.
Cassinelli: What--what kind of a setback from the --from the rear property line? Because
I know that was a -- that was a concern, too, back then were -- and, again, it sounds like
part of it -- as Bill addressed, there was three stories there and only two here. But what
is the setback from the rear?
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F32
Page 29 of 41
Womer: We don't have it dimensioned on this conceptual exhibit, but we are -- I think we
are in the 15 to 20 rear yard.
Cassinelli: Okay.
Womer: Twenty-five on some of them, actually.
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: So, just so I clarify, we are talking about each individual home would be a
separate owner, not each building; correct?
Womer: Correct. These will have individual lots.
Yearsley: Okay.
Womer: And they will be ownership.
Yearsley: So, looking at the -- the concept plans, I have to admit I'm a little concerned
about the four townhomes together being adjacent to the -- to the -- I think that's to the
residents and I'm just concerned, because it's -- the mass on that just seems really big. I
was wondering if that might be something to consider swapping that around a little bit to
maybe break that up a little bit more.
Womer: Absolutely. Well, this is -- this is a concept plan. We brought it here, so that the
Commission could kind of get a feel for what we are going to be back to you with and
certainly we can take your comments and try to incorporate everything we can to
accommodate.
McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant or staff? Okay. Thank you.
Womer: Thank you very much.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: On -- what is directly to the south? Is that the -- is that the bank? Is that --
Womer- Directly to the south is the Italian restaurant.
Cassinelli: Okay.
Lorcher: It's Louie's.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F33
Page 30 of 41
Womer: It's Louie's. Yes.
Lorcher: The bank is --
Womer: The bank is to the east.
Cassinelli: Okay.
Lorcher: Sorry. I was looking at a map. So, Louie's is right here.
Cassinelli: So, the park -- so, directly to south is their parking lot?
Womer: Correct.
Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you.
McCarvel: Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to testify on this application?
Weatherly: Madam Chair, we have one person signed in to testify and that is Dave M.
McDonald: Madam Chair, Dave McDonald. 2579 East Grapewood. I'm also well aware
of the history of that previous meeting, so if I can fill in some of the blanks. This is the
second best project that I have ever seen proposed on this property. If it was a
professional office that would be the only thing that would beat this out. I am a proponent
of legal certainty and not flipping zones on a whim. However, you know, coming back to
the question of R-15, the previous proposal was splitting the zoning of the properties
adjacent to my home as R-15. So, changing the zone to R-15 can still put a foot in the
door if you flip the zone. One of our worst fears is the project for Village Apartments that
has been extended from 2015 by Devco on Eagle Road. They are still putting their foot
in the door and dragging that out. So, if you flip the zone it stays empty, because the
housing market goes south that would be bad. But if you -- you do have the ability to
propose the time limit and making sure this project is completed in a timely fashion that
would be desirable and as someone who has been maintaining that green grass strip, I
would be very happy for new owners to take care of that green grass strip and as
someone adjacent to an empty field that I'm worried is going to catch on fire in a few days,
I would like to see that go. So, empty land would be a desirable thing, but not putting a
foot in the door for the previous project to get their foot in the door would be an undesirable
thing. However, I have given out the handout and there is always a lingering concern
that's shared from this project to the next one and, you know, one of the things that
spoke with ACHD was that you can put conditions on time, you can put conditions on
safety issues and I -- I illustrate that Hickory Road is an abnormally busy road, even
though it meets standard by ACHD, it's at the bottom level of standard. The speed study
has said we do qualify for traffic calming measures. Those are some safety concerns.
We did successfully get the light in at the -- at the entrance to Hickory off of Fairview,
simply because of how busy this road is and the speed constraints. That's why we do not
have any memorial crosses at that intersection. We do still need markers along Hickory
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F34
Page 31 of 41
Way because of the speed and the traffic for no parking. So, talking to the ACHD they
said, you know, if you can get it through the development agreement or this process,
come back to me. But I wanted to be on record that there are real safety concerns on
this stretch of road. You can go two miles out from this project and you will not see any
collector road leading into a subdivision with this traffic. Two miles. I just want to be sure
that you are aware of those safety concerns. All those things being said, excuse me, are
minor costs. I mean there -- there are issues with the sidewalk that need to be fixed
because of the TDS fiber optic issues that damage the sidewalk. Those can be easy
fixes. With the 40 percent decrease in lumber prices he can absorb the cost of signage
and safety concerns for his development, but I just wanted to propose that whatever you
decide, whether you propose -- propose, recommend or denial or modifications, that each
one of you state your reasons for yes, no, modifications or whatever, that it's on the record
and be aware that there are safety concerns that I'm wanting to make sure are on the
record and it will be something that we will take to the developer and I hope this project
completes, that I won't have to listen to the construction noise and the dust for ever. That
there is a time limit on the construction project and also I would like the developer to talk
a little bit about the concerns of the masonry wall, maintenance, the maintenance of
amenities. Some of us work from home and need high speed internet. All of the -- all of
those services run between the masonry wall and our property lines. Of that 257 foot
shared border, I own one-third of that and so we just want to make sure that those
discussions are had in this forum before proposed one way or the other to City Council.
McCarvel: Okay.
Womer: Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Madam Clerk, anybody else signed up to testify?
Weatherly: Madam Chair, no one else has signed in.
McCarvel: That being said, we will have the applicant come back after all the questions
are proposed. Yes, ma'am. In the green shirt. I know you had your hand up earlier. And
state your name and address for the record as you get to the mic.
Moon: My name is Shirley Moon. My address 2834 East Clarene Drive, Meridian. And
good evening to all of you. My voice is a little bit scared of you. Anyway. So, I -- I live in
Solterra and I was here four years ago. I was here for all the drama four years ago and
we, as homeowners, totally appreciated the view and the decision, then, that was made
and it was rejected and one thing that was not mentioned this evening was how do they
get into this property? And I don't know if any of you have ever eaten at Louis's, but part
of that property that's being proposed -- Louie's customers park on that property. So,
there is a parking problem when the restaurant fills up. But the interesting thing about
this project is there is no through streets. It's all business driveways. It's not streets.
And, then, they proposed off-street parking. Well, Hickory Way is already -- it's not -- it's
totally busy in the mornings. The traffic gets backed up from Fairview. Eagle Road and
Fairview Road have been declared the busiest streets in all of Ada county and yet Hickory
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F35]
Page 32 of 41
Way is probably less than a quarter a mile from there. So, it -- when the traffic proceeds
on Fairview going west, the traffic light on Hickory Way will stop the traffic and it backs up
all the way to Eagle. So, it's -- it's a tremendous problem. Four years ago when we spoke
about the parking problem, there wasn't the mass of apartments and homes that have
been built between Hickory and Locust Grove. That whole area is just -- it's just -- it looks
like a frenzy of building and so all that affects us. So, proposing last time what's a hundred
-- excuse me -- 70 buildings -- 70 homes. I don't remember if it was apartments or
whatever. So, we figured in our homeowners association, Solterra, we have 89 homes.
So, we figured that's about 180 to 200 cars going in and out all day. So, across -- directly
across the street -- the street that they propose on the information that I have, Hickory --
excuse me -- Solterra runs right into the parking lot directly access to this and so it's -- it's
like they haven't solved -- it seems like to me they haven't solved the parking problem
and it's --there is just a lot and there may be maps -- my profession was medical, so there
is some terms that I don't understand, but I can read a map and on here it says direct
parcel access to North Hickory or Fairview is prohibited. So, are they going to make a
new street? Are they going to use the driveway that's directly across from us on Solterra?
So, here is our traffic -- 200 cars coming and going every day. It's a working
neighborhood. And, then, I think 19 -- so, 20 -- so, maybe that's 40 or 50 more cars.
Hickory is already -- already has a problem. There is an island on the corner of Hickory
Way and Fairview and ACHD said they are going to take that out, but that's not until 2024.
So, that's three more years. So, I spoke to an ACHD person this last week about our
parking problems and he said the city allowed narrow streets providing there was
compliance with no parking on one side of the street and when -- when our people come
in and park it, if two large trucks park across the street from each other, then, it becomes
a city violation, because the street is too narrow just because of that. So, it's really
horrendous for us to think that maybe there is going to be more parking. We have people
that are now doubling up in homes, because of the price of rent. We have -- I'm -- I'm on
the board. We have one home that has three families living with them and there was
seven cars with this three families. So, each home theoretically should only have four
cars, two in the garage and two on the pad. But three extra cars just for one family, that
was even a problem.
McCarvel: Ma'am, your time is up. Could you --
Moon: Okay. So, mostly I am here because of the parking and they have not stated to
you -- or maybe I didn't hear how -- where is their entrance and their entrance goes right
into business driveways, not streets, and they are going to build 19 homes using business
driveways.
McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. The applicant will answer --
Moon: Yeah. Okay. Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Anybody else wish to testify? Yes, sir.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F36
Page 33 of 41
Nelson: My name is -- my name is Randy Nelson. I live at 1873 North Marnita Avenue,
also in Solterra. There is going to be some redundancy, but the portrayal that we see
here doesn't represent that -- that block where this -- that the homes are going in. It is
truly access with jaw dropping -- I'm also nervous. They have got speed traps on this
thing for people to not drive fast through there. So, it's truly just a trail to get access into
a mortgage company, a couple of things in the back. That isn't the road to put 19 homes
in. It is -- it's -- it's a sham that they think that that's supposed to work. It's dressed up
differently, but it's the same problem. Nothing was addressed. You brought that up when
you -- when you started that four years ago we had problems with all this. Nothing has
changed with the access in and out. The safety factors are still there. The busyness.
Business. Kids. All that's still the same -- same story. It's -- we changed the flavor from
apartments to townhouses, but that means nothing to the actual on-site problem. I had
somebody give me a ride home today that wasn't going to be any part of this. We went
over those four speed bumps, we got to the -- to the corner where access off Hickory into
this place. I says can you see? He goes what do you mean? He goes he can't see down
the street. When these people leave their residence, if it -- if it gets approved tonight --
pray it doesn't. If it -- they can't see to make turns, because it's a serpentine road. That's
also part of the problem. It's unsafe to pull out of there. If we are directly across 90
homes coming out, these coming out -- they can't see. We have access because the
serpentine goes this way. We can see. They cannot see leaving their property clearly
every -- I mean it's going to be -- it's an F issue every single time they leave. That isn't
brought up here. It's always just glossed and nice and pretty and good access and blah,
blah. It isn't there. Nothing's changed from four years ago. It's still a Iandlock odd shaped
piece of property that doesn't have a good road to it, it's not illegal, it's access to business
and they want to call that -- you know, have something -- it's just not the right thing.
McCarvel: Okay.
Nelson: Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Yes, sir. Yeah. You have to come up to the microphone and
state your name and address for the record.
Baird: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Yes.
Baird: Point of order. I understand that you are --
McCarvel: Oh.
Baird: -- part of the applicant, possibly the owner. We should probably have the rest of
the public testimony --
McCarvel: Yeah. I'm sorry. I didn't realize --
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F37
Page 34 of 41
Baird: -- and, then, give you a chance to rebut. We want -- we want to keep this -- you
will have an opportunity, we just want --
McCarvel: Yeah. After all the public testimony, then, the applicant is going to have -- you
will have more time to answer all these questions. So, yeah, if you are part of the
ownership and the applicant, it's probably best if we listened -- finished listening to the
public testimony. Okay. Anyone else? Yes, ma'am.
Attarian: Hello. My name is Ann Attarian. Address 2875 East Apricot in Meridian. I'm
also a resident of Solterra. I'm part of the board. I do echo the sentiments of the two
other residents. There is a lot of parking issues in our neighborhood. People,
unfortunately, don't use garages for parking, so they are parking in driveways and what
street parking they have. It has spilled over into the Capitol church parking lot, which we
have had to address with our residents, because they should not be parking there. I also
echo the sentiments about Hickory being a serpentine road. Looking out, going left or
right, you do not have a good line of sight with the current foliage, the berm that is in place
with one of the office buildings. I'm also a commuter, so I exit off of Hickory onto Fairview.
The light there you will wait for quite a while in the morning or coming home when you
are trying to turn right off of Fairview into Hickory. So, there is a lot of parking issues,
there are road issues, and as they have said, we don't feel any of that is being addressed,
because there is only the extra parking in those office buildings and the bank buildings
and the restaurant around that area. Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Anyone else in the room or on Zoom that wishes to testify on this
application? Yes, sir. And you are -- you are with -- yeah. Okay. Yeah. Okay. If there
is no one else for public testimony, would be applicant like to come back? And -- yeah.
If you are part of the applicant's group here, you guys have ten minutes to explain public
-- answer the public testimony. Yeah. Please state your name and address for the --
Mallane: My name is Louie Mallane. I have been a resident of Idaho --
McCarvel: And your address.
Mallane: -- for 62 years.
McCarvel: Sir, can you --
Mallane: I bought this property --
McCarvel: Could you give your address, please, for the record. Your address. Please
state your name and address into the microphone.
Mallane: My name is Louie Mallane. I'm at 569 Carnelian Lane, Eagle, Idaho.
McCarvel: Okay. Go ahead.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F38
Page 35 of 41
Mallane: I have been in Idaho for 62 years. I bought this property in 1995. It's been for
sale since then. As we drew the plans out, we put the road in that all these people are
using, the 40 -- 50 miles an hour that we had to put in those high speed bumps that you
read tonight that nobody likes, just to slow the traffic down. They are all also coming
straight through our parking lot to go over to the Blazer building. I don't know if you
recognize the Blazer -- that's what I know it as. The Blazer building. And outside. And
it's free wheeling. It was -- the way it was planned I know was to go back over through
the Ewing property and have back roads, so that -- and -- and we are the -- we are the
culprits that received that -- received that and now -- the people are now going in and out
constantly. I have had -- I have had this property up three times. I see different people
coming to complain all the time. It is -- it is the area -- dog poop area legally. They --
that's -- that's what my property is and that's what I'm paying the property taxes on. They
come in there, that's where they exercise their dogs and use it. It needs to be something
better than this. These -- they are never going to be happy. They know that they have
us going and I'm kind of really tired of it. I'm not a complainer, but the time has come
where we need to be able to move on.
McCarvel: Okay.
Mallane: I can't even get my will going because I'm waiting for this damn stuff and -- and
we are trying to do everything correctly and the -- that everybody wants. We have not put
one bit of argument on this. What we are doing wrong I don't know. We put the wall up
for the people next door, so that -- to make those people happy along there. They filled
it up with -- with garbage and, then, said I had to go clean it up, you know. There is a
time when I need to be able to get out of this predicament to -- and I don't think we have
got anything wrong going on. They are never going to be happy about it. People that
were there before were are all different people. They taught -- there is -- there is nothing
going to happen that's going to hurt anybody and we can move on. I do have another
option, you know, I'm -- I legally can still turn it back into agriculture and -- and plant. That
-- that seems to be the only thing that's going to make anybody happy here I guess. So,
that -- if that's where we are at --
McCarvel: Did you want the rest of your team to respond to some of those questions?
Please come forward.
Womer: Madam Chairman, again, for the record Blaine Womer, Womer Engineering.
would like to address some of the concerns that have come up this evening. In the
conditions of approval for the project, we are going to have to do a development
agreement and if there is -- if we can mitigate some of the concerns with regard to density,
given the past history that, for the record, we had no part of it. If we can mitigate some
of those concerns by incorporating into the DA a limited number of units at 19, we are
happy to do that.
McCarvel: Yeah. I think it would be tied to the conceptual plan that's in the record,
wouldn't it, Sonya? Or Bill? Yes. Yeah. So, it -- whatever we present here tonight is
kind of tied to the pictures you have shown.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F39
Page 36 of 41
Womer: Okay. Perfect. Then -- okay.
McCarvel: Resemble that.
Womer: Also when we had our neighborhood meeting, the only concern, really, that we
heard was traffic. The -- the concerns with regarding -- regarding traffic. So, before we
came here tonight we got together with a traffic engineer, we had him run some numbers,
based on what we are proposing and what it's currently zoned to allow and what we found
was that the residential development that we are proposing creates approximately 65
percent of the traffic that it -- it is currently zoned at. So, this proposal will actually bring
down the number of vehicular trips than what it's currently zoned and what somebody
could bring today and be in compliance with the zone and along those lines we heard a
lot of people talking about parking and where people are parking. This proposal -- we
have garages for the individual units. Each unit has a garage. Two-car garage. And,
then, the smaller units have a one car garage. And what we have done is set back the
units far enough that people can park in their driveways, they can have guests park in
their driveways to mitigate that concern, so -- and, then, I do understand -- there -- there
is some concern about where we are taking our access. That -- that driveway was
designed as a part of the entire development. We are conditioned not to go out into
Hickory and any other location. So, we do need to utilize this driveway that was
constructed -- and we are going to enhance it and it's going to be better from a traffic
circulation standpoint, but this driveway was put in place and designed in place for the
service of the property we are developing. So, we are taking access where we really
need to take the access for this particular parcel. And, then, lastly, as far as some of the
maintenance concerns that people have expressed with regard to landscaping, the wall,
the project will have an HOA that will be responsible for maintaining all of those aspects
of the development. So, with that I hope we have been able to maybe quell some of the
concerns, but I'm certainly, again, happy to answer any questions you might have.
McCarvel: So, you get -- you're accepting the staff's comment to take away the office
building; right?
Womer: Correct.
McCarvel: Yeah. I think it fits better.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: Blaine, do you know -- right now I think coming out that driveway next to the
restaurant that you can still make a left onto Fairview; is that correct? And is that going
away anytime soon? Do you -- are you aware of --
Womer: I'm not aware. I mean that would be a better ACHD question. I apologize, I
don't have that information.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F40
Page 37 of 41
Cassinelli: But right--the way this is laid out, access can go through the --the businesses
there, is that -- that is correct?
Womer: Correct. There is nothing --
Cassinelli: They can -- they can access Fairview without using Hickory to access these?
Womer: That is correct.
Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you.
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: I just wanted to make sure with staff. This is just a rezone and a land use
change. In the preliminary plat we can at that point try to address the sight distance
issues at the entrance of Hickory; correct?
Allen: Chairman, Commissioners, the -- I'm not sure if I understand your question, but
the existing access is there. That's where it's at and this is what this development is going
to share that. It is in alignment with the Solterra Drive access.
Yearsley: I was just looking on the Google -- or, you know, Google Earth. There is a
sight distance issue, you know, trying to see cars coming as you are coming out of that
intersection and -- and I thought with some potentially relocation of landscaping and --
and opening that up we could probably solve a lot of that sight distance problems. But
that would come at the preliminary plat stage, not this stage.
Womer: And we could bring an exhibit in with us that demonstrates what the -- the sight
distance is and what -- if there is a problem what we can do to mitigate that.
McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant at this time?
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: I just have a clarification with staff. We got rid of step up in zoning; correct?
So, I mean I think there was one -- there was one concern earlier of this being a foot in
the door to go potentially from R-15 to R-40. If we -- if we approve the -- this request
tonight, I mean we are -- we are locked into the -- to the R-15; is that correct?
Allen: Madam Chair, Commissioner Cassinelli. If you approve the land use change to
medium high density residential, that's what it will be. The development agreement will
lock in the concept development plan with the density proposed.
Cassinelli: Okay.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F41
Page 38 of 41
McCarvel: Any other questions for the applicant? All right. If you have no further
comments we are read --
Womer: Thank you. Good evening.
McCarvel: Could I get a motion to close the public testimony on H-2021-0015.
Grove: So moved.
Lorcher: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close public hearing on H-2021-0015. All
those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: I remember -- I can't believe that was 2017, but I do remember that and I think
the first person that gave testimony said this would be the second best option going in
there. It doesn't sound like it's ever going to be perfect and, again, this is one of these in-
fills that's difficult. I think this is probably the best -- and I think if it comes -- you know,
once the -- once this comes back to us again we can address the site issues. That's the
concern is what it seems like and what -- what the applicant stated was that actually a
traffic count would be 65 percent of -- if it's -- if it's office buildings in there, something,
that, you know, you are going to see it at peak hours. So, I do definitely want to see some
changes in here. Commissioner Yearsley brought up kind of the layout there and I hope
that -- and maybe we can make some recommendations in a motion, depending on how
this goes, but I would like to see -- maybe if we can shift them around, maybe a little bit
of a redesign in that to allow for site changes going out onto Hickory and -- and whatnot.
But I think that can all be accomplished maybe moving some of the buildings around or
doing something. But all in all I think this is going to be the best -- really, the best plan for
this land and the owner has -- certainly has a right to do something with this and be able
to sell it. So, those are -- and, again, I just -- it's -- I think it's probably the best that they
are ever going to see on this.
McCarvel: Okay.
Grove: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Grove.
Grove: I have a question for staff real quick. Hickory is considered a collector; is that
right?
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F42
Page 39 of 41
Allen: That is correct.
Grove: And just kind of looking at this overall area, if this were to redevelop -- or was to
develop now versus in the past, most of those -- or that business complex would take
primary access off of Hickory versus Fairview; is that how most of that would work? I
mean if this were coming in without any of those businesses there, it seems like there is
a lot of access off of Fairview that wouldn't necessarily be granted today.
Allen: Yeah. Madam Chair, Commissioner Grove, typically access is taken from the
lesser street classification. So, a collector street versus an arterial, yes.
Grove: Okay. So, the reason I'm bringing that up is this could easily have more accurate
-- or more traffic on Hickory if it were redone and so just kind of keeping that in mind when
we are looking at -- at this project in particular is that -- it's not increasing it as much as
this area could potentially take, based on standards of how access is taken off of the
arterial, Fairview, versus the collector street. So, keeping that in mind as we kind of
discuss some of this. Overall I think, you know, in-fill projects are always going to be
difficult. This seems to be a good compromise as to where it goes. I'm never a huge fan
of losing commercial, but as it is kind of tucked back there I -- I see commercial being a
difficult -- difficult ask for this property based on the size and location. So, with that I'm
more or less in favor of how this is moving forward.
McCarvel: Okay. Thank you.
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: You know, on my first blush with this, without reviewing the -- the site that they
were proposing, my initial one was like no, because I was concerned about losing the
commercial and in that respect, but -- but given -- to look at the site, what they are
proposing, it's not -- it's an R-15, but it's not considered high dense -- you know, not -- not
as high density as they could have. I like the layout and at this point all we are doing is
approving the rezone and the land use map. So, we are not actually approving what's
going on there yet and we get another shot at this to make sure we do it right. I do
appreciate the neighbors talking about the access on that and the sight distance problems
with that, which is I believe there is problems that need to be addressed, but we can
address that as the -- through the preliminary plat review. As for a parking issue, I don't
believe this site has the parking issue. I think it's the Solterra Subdivision that has the
parking problems and it's not this owner's responsibility to fix that problem. It sounds kind
of harsh, but that's -- that's my opinion. I think he has -- he has got -- he has got good
parking with that. He's actually added extra spaces on this property for more parking, if
he has more guests coming over and stuff like that. So, I think he's done a decent job
looking at that and I guess with Commissioner Cassinelli's comment, I am concerned
about the four units facing the -- or backing up against the homes. It's a lot of density or
bulk right behind those homes. If we could limit those to three or two, I would be a lot
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F43
Page 40 of 41
more comfortable when you come forward with the preliminary plat. So, with that I actually
would be in favor of this rezone.
McCarvel: Okay. I will jump in, unless you want to go, Commissioner Lorcher. Okay.
Yeah. I agree. I think this is as good as what we have seen on this back here and I think
it would be a tough sell on commercial. I, as well, can hear the voice of former
Commissioners in not wanting to let commercial go for high density, but I think this
particular spot is a tough one and it is in-fill and it would definitely be better than the fire
hazard that probably exists there right now. And, I agree, I think there could be some
minor changes that would make it better as far as the traffic and the mass of the building
behind the other homes. So, yeah, certainly address that in the future. But I think as far
as this concept plan is concerned and it's tied to this approval, I'm comfortable with this
moving forward and agree the traffic issues are not this owner's responsibility. There is
no -- there is no fixing those traffic issues with anything we do on this property, especially
now that it's less than half of what was proposed several years ago, so --
Yearsley: Madam Chair? Or Commissioner Lorcher. I was up for a motion if --
McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher.
Lorcher: I actually don't have anything else to add. I bank at D.L. Evans every day, so
I'm actually swinging around these entrances and -- and driveways on a -- on a regular
basis and it's -- it's manageable. I mean I can go out any times of the day, 8:00, 9:00,
10:00, 2:00 -- 1 mean it's -- it's -- Eagle Road is right down the street, so it is what it is.
McCarvel: Yeah. Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: Madam Chair, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I
move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number H-2021-0015 as
presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 1 st, 2021, with no modifications.
Grove: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to recommend approval on H-2021-0015,
Wood crest Town homes. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
McCarvel: One more motion, please.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair, I move we adjourn.
Yearsley: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye.
Opposed? Motion carries. Have a great holiday weekend.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. July 1,2021 F44
Page 41 of 41
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:03 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.)
APPROVED
7 1 15 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 June 17, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. June 17,2021 F34
Page 31 of 31
presented in the staff report for the hearing date of June 17th, 2021, with the following
modifications: That the proposed -- proposed phase four completion to allow the agency's
heavy truck traffic will be dependent upon widening Ustick Road and signalizing Naomi
Avenue.
Wheeler: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to recommend approval for H-2021-0029
with modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
McCarvel: One more motion, please.
Wheeler: I move we adjourn.
Seal: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adjourn the June 17th meeting Planning
and Zoning Meeting. All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:44 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.)
APPROVED
7 1 1 12021
RHONDA MCCARVEL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED
ATTEST:
CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK
By Adrienne Weatherly, Deputy City Clerk
Item 2. 35
E IDIAN
'aAHO
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Popeyes Drive-Through (H-2021-
0030) by Erik Wylie of JRW Construction, LLC, Located at 6343 N. Linder Rd.
Item 2. F36
CITY OF MERIDIAN E IDIAN .,..
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW �`
AND IDAHO
DECISION& ORDER
In the Matter of the Request for 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 for Popeyes
Drive-Through,Located at 6343 N.Linder Road,by JRW Construction,LLC.
Case No(s).H-2021-0030
For the Planning& Zoning Commission Hearing Date of: June 17,2021 (Findings on July 1,2021)
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of June 17, 2021, incorporated by
reference)
2. Process Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of June 17,2021, incorporated by
reference)
3. Application and Property Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of June 17,2021,
incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code(see attached Staff Report for the hearing
date of June 17,2021,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. 11-7 84 and Maps.
3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A.
4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction.
5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose
expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed.
6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision,which shall be
signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk
upon the applicant,the Planning Department,the Public Works Department and any affected
party requesting notice.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER
CASE NO(S). H-2021-0030—Popeyes Drive-Through CUP
Page 1
Item 2. F
7
7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the
hearing date of June 17, 2021,incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be
reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the
application.
C. Decision and Order
Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § I I-
5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby
ordered that:
1. The applicant's request for Conditional Use Permit is hereby approved in accord with the
conditions of approval in the staff report for the hearing date of June 17,2021,attached as Exhibit
A.
D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits
Notice of Two(2)Year Conditional Use Permit Duration
Please take notice that the conditional use permit,when granted, shall be valid for a maximum
period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-513-6F.1.
During this time,the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the
conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and
acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or
in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting,the final plat must be
signed by the City Engineer within this two(2)year period in accord with UDC 11-513-617.2.
Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord
with 11-513-6.F.1,the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the
use not to exceed one(1)two (2)year period. Additional time extensions up to two(2)years as
determined and approved by the Commission may be granted. With all extensions,the Director
or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian
City Code Title 11.
E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis
1. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian.
When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521,any affected person being a person
who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the
governing board may within twenty-eight(28)days after the date of this decision and order
seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code.
F. Attached: Staff report for the hearing date of June 17,2021
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER
CASE NO(S). H-2021-0030—Popeyes Drive-Through CUP
Page 2
Item 2. 38
By a�tif of the Planning&Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 1 St day of
u Y 92021.
COMMISSIONER RHONDA MCCARVEL, CHAIRMAN VOTED
COMMISSIONER ANDREW SEAL,VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED
COMMISSIONER NATE WHEELER VOTED
COMMISSIONER STEVEN YEARSLEY VOTED
COMMISSIONER WILLIAM CASSINELLI VOTED
COMMISSIONER NICK GROVE VOTED
COMMISSIONER MARIA LORCHER VOTED
Rhonda McCarvel, Chairman 7-1-2021
Attest:
Chris Johnson,City Clerk
Copy served upon the Applicant,the Planning and Development Services divisions of the Community
Development Department,the Public Works Department and the City Attorney.
By: Dated: 7-1-2021
City Clerk's Office
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER
CASE NO(S). H-2021-0030—Popeyes Drive-Through CUP
Page 3
Item 2. EXHIBIT A ■
E STAFF
N --
STAFF REPORT a H o
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING 6/3/-2021 6/17/2021 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
FEE FFE
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 '/4 of the NE '/4 of
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
® � m
1 1 1
CHIN 1i� CH3ND.FN�--
NIIIIINN11111I 11111 � ����.� .-�
11111111■■Illlllr Z '� Z
man soon ■Iw111
1I111111■■r!■ ��..
■111III■■ �I _ .
111111 _� ►�� �:� _
■■■ ■■ �■ .■IIIIIII '� ���t"""- .',Y,
■■■ ■■■■ , 11111 ■■1111■■■
M■■M
IIIIIII ■111111111 s .�-� ,.r
■■■ ��•r _=IIIIIMI f bl
�11111111■. • � � ■ �� ,• -
�
1 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
_ CHINDFN L AL. CMINDFN _
r p1■_�;■�■■�■II►Q�■■■■■I
■IIrIINN11111I 11111 ■IIIIINN11111I mill "
11111111■■Illlllr Z I1111111■■Ill.lr Z
1111111I ■11111 1 LJ III oil ■IIIII 1 LJ
1I111111 ■■ M 1I111111 ■■ M �I
on son ■ I111III■■ �"
1111111r 1111111
■■■ ■■■ •son ME moil �■ — monsoon
■■■■■■■ MI IIII M1 ■ ■IIII■ ■
MMMMMM■ I■�11111 11 ■
■■■ ■■
■■■ 1■11 II11111111 :IIII ■■■ ■■■■ MI11111111 . ■1111 MIN
■■■■■■ M Noll in _ . MMM MMM �� I111111
■I11111 11� — III II �N111111■IIIMt J
11111111 IN &@ — 11111I MINI/
� 1111111111� � � 41111111111� li� �
•
Item 2. EXHIBIT A F41
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 11-213-2 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 fixture 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 2. EXHIBIT A 42
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
northeast 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 2. EXHIBIT A 43
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 2. EXHIBIT A 44
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 Staff's previous recommendations offlipping 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 Staff feels 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 Staff's 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-19B.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 2. EXHIBIT A ■
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 11-3B-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. hi 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 2. EXHIBIT A ■
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.
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on June 17,2021.At the public
hearing.the Commission moved to approve the subject Conditional Use Permit request.
1. Summary of the Commission public hearing
a. In favor: Erik Wylie.Applicant
b. In opposition:None
c. Commenting: Erik Wylie.
d. Written testimony: None
e. Staff presenting application: Joseph Dodson,Associate Planner.
f. Other Staff commenting on application:None
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony:
a. None
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission.
a. None
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. Agreement with Staff s memorandum and recommended changes based on revised site
plan(see revised conditions in Section VIII belowl.
Page 8
Item 2.
EXHIBIT A ■
VII. EXHIBITS
A. Pr-opo d Revised Site Plan(dated: 4,115/20216/07/2021)NOT APPR NIE—P
T 1 T
L:
FERE55L)WED IRRIGATION
I LINE
PYLON SIGN
-T----r---7-7 V MENU
MIi ORDER CANO
IT
-LAND5CAFE I
4y
ONE VVA'I--
DO NOT F
I'M Fj
5 G
............... CLEARANCE DAR
................
TO
BUILT IN CONJUNCTION
-
PRIMARY ACCESS AISLE
13F 13 1
WITH I SITE LJNDEFGpNN SO.DRAIN
ALL WATER, f A N111 114 SITE
FAT111
BIKE PARKING R LOADING
EXISTING BUILDING
d I_- ...I'- �i I- -LANDSCAPE I
VACANT LOT
4
4'LANDSCAPE BUFFER
LANDSCAPE PLANTER- XX
DRIVE-THPUIENTER SIGN
EXISTING DRIVE
WATER MAIN
T7
r�:Z,:DT�7 ��jC�2;12 THANK YOU/1)C,NOT ENTER SIGN-----__
ONE WAY SIGN
DL)MF5TEK ENCLOSURE
5EWI-K MAIN
PARKING CALCULATIONS:
REQUIRED: I FEK 50051'GROSS SPACES
PROPOSED SITE PLAN FZOVI�,Ci 5011 325=4.G5(5 SPACES RfQU[i
16
2 PACES
0.79ACRE HANDICAP -
6 PARKING SPACES 25 41 5FACff5 I I 5FACff
LIC SPACE
1
10 CAR STACKING IJfCYGLff CALCULATIONS:
8U�FED- I PI2R 21 PURPOSED VEHICLE SPACES
SCALE:1"=20'-0"
V 31714 5TAC 5
Page 9
Item 2. EXHIBIT A 48
B. Proposed Landscape Plan(dated: 4/15/2021)NOT APPROVED
V Y�•�J
W4•.f.,ek.y-r,ec.io 4e
xv arm.
M"SISN
I
if
I New PIa+s
w � • ,Ism s�
� ■r.�,aa fi�tee.sr4
• } it I * t�rti#
gyyy li.,�r
f '• I 4&a
n w•p.Fad„:�ucl
6�.1�.r7e„/erver
3RW C.,�d'.nr
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN POPE-YES
Page 10
Item 2. EXHIBIT A 49
C. Proposed Building Elevations and Color Rendering
�.y
I:L
�.as.. y.
q
arc8rfecfs
,,.•POPEYES
EIEI HIS
SPECIFICATIONS:q-
TURFRs nwo
—tJ
v
s
�ti �FG G
H2OnnAS� NS-2
FOR SHUiiER M/WUFAGTUERS ULL
.r__R.2 _maw -_.u� r �. _ — 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
T4;;
dgs _
Item 2. EXHIBIT A 51
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:
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 15 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 row shown as employee
parking only on the revised site plan.
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. Depiet the piek up wifidew on the west side of the building a-ad the mefm bear-d/ofdef
oaken-a fg the r,,,thLnet4heast side of the .,,4da n ;
b. Depiet the nefth f4eing angled pafkiag te be en the west side of the site instead of the
side of the site a-ad angle them setAMetmd;
the site along the nefth drive aisle with the eptien to ineefpefate mer-e landseaping fe
d. Designate the pafkifig aleng the fiefth betmdai=y ef the site as employee efily par-king a*
setAh side ef this shafed drive aisle; depiet these pedestfian walkways a-ad thei
ewmeetions,.1eaf y revisedon �site p s.
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 2. EXHIBIT A 52
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; this
shall be constructed with this application regardless of the property line location because
there is common ownership between the two properties.
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
as set 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.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=229161&dbid=0&roo=MeridianC
hty
D. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH(CDH)
https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228244&dbid=0&roo=MeridianC
iv
IX. FINDINGS
Conditional Use(UDC 11-5B-6)
Findings: The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the
following:
1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional
and development regulations in the district in which the use is located.
Page 14
Item 2. EXHIBIT A 53
Commission finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed development and meet
all dimensional and development regulations of the C-G zoning district 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.
Commission finds 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, Commission finds the design, construction,
operation and maintenance of the proposed use will be compatible with other uses in the general
neighborhood, with the existing and intended character of the vicinity and will not adversely
change the essential character of the area.
4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not
adversely affect other property in the vicinity.
Commission finds the proposed use will not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity if it
complies with the conditions in Section VIII of this report.
5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services
such as highways, streets,schools,parks,police and fire protection, drainage structures,
refuse disposal,water, and sewer.
Commission finds the proposed use will be served by essential public facilities and services as
required.
6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
Commission finds the proposed use will not create additional costs for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general
welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise,smoke,fumes,glare or odors.
Commission finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons,property or the
general welfare by the reasons noted above.
8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction,loss or damage of a natural, scenic
or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005,eff. 9-
15-2005)
Commission finds the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any such
features.
Page 15
Item 3. 54
E IDIAN
'aAHO
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Topgolf(H-2021-0033) by
Arco/Murray, Located at 948 S. Silverstone Way
Item 3. F55
CITY OF MERIDIAN w IDIAN;_--
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
AND ! DAHO
DECISION& ORDER
In the Matter of the Request for Conditional Use Permit for an Outdoor Entertainment/Recreation
Facility with a Non-Permanent Outdoor Stage/Music Venue on 11.56-Acres of Land in a C-G
Zoning District to Include Extended Hours of Operation from 8:00 am to 2:00 am, Seven Days a
Week,Abutting a Residential Zoning District,by Arco/Murray.
Case No(s).H-2021-0033
For the Planning&Zoning Commission Hearing Date of. June 17,2021 (Findings on July 1,2021)
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of June 17,2021, incorporated by
reference)
2. Process Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of June 17, 2021,incorporated by
reference)
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of June 17, 2021,
incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing
date of June 17,2021,incorporated by reference)
B. Conclusions of Law
1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the"Local Land Use
Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65,Title 67, Idaho Code(I.C. §67-6503).
2. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development
Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of
Meridian has,by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan
of the City of Meridian,which was adopted April 19,2011,Resolution No. It-784 and Maps.
3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A.
4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction.
5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose
expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed.
6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision,which shall be
signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER
CASE NO(S).H-2021-0033
Page 1
Item 3. 56
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 June 17,2021, 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 June 17,2021,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 June 17,2021
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER
CASE NO(S).H-2021-0033
Page 2
Item 3. 57
By action of the Planning&Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 1 St day of
July ,2021.
COMMISSIONER RHONDA MCCARVEL, CHAIRMAN VOTED
COMMISSIONER ANDREW SEAL,VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED
COMMISSIONER NATE WHEELER VOTED
COMMISSIONER STEVEN YEARSLEY VOTED
COMMISSIONER WILLIAM CASSINELLI VOTED
COMMISSIONER NICK GROVE VOTED
COMMISSIONER MARIA LORCHER VOTED
Rhonda McCarvel, Chairman 7-1-2021
Attest:
Chris Johnson, City Clerk
Copy served upon the Applicant, the Planning and Development Services divisions of the Community
Development Department,the Public Works Department and the City Attorney.
By: Dated: 7-1-2021
City Clerk's Office
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER
CASE NO(S).H-2021-0033
Page 3
Item 3. ■
EXHIBIT A
STAFF REPORTC�WE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT f D A H 0
HEARING June 17,2021 Legend
DATE: Continued from: 6/3/2021 ff
0
I�Project Lacfliar
TO: Planning&Zoning Commission MT�
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner ff-
208-884-5533 -T
Bruce Freckleton,Development r
Services Manager --
208-887-2211
SUBJECT: H-2021-0033
Topgolf
� d
LOCATION: 948 S. Silverstone Way
SW 1/4 of Section 16,T. 3N., R.IE. ��
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Conditional use permit for an outdoor entertainment/recreation facility with a non-permanent outdoor
stage/music venue on 11.56-acres of land in a C-G zoning district to include extended hours of
operation from 8:00 am to 2:00 am, seven days a week, abutting a residential zoning district.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details Page
Acreage 11.56-acres
Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R)
Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/undeveloped land
Proposed Land Use(s) Outdoor entertainment/recreation facility
Neighborhood meeting date;#of March 30,2021;one(1)attendee(neighbor)
attendees:
History(previous approvals) H-2018-0126(PP);H-2019-0005 (MDA Inst.#2019-
0037825);H-2019-0081 (MDA Inst.#2019-088365);H-
2019-0128(FP)—Rackham Subdivision(recorded)
Page 1
Item 3. F59-1
B. Community Metrics
Description Details Page
Ada County Highway District
• Staff report(yes/no) Yes-letter stating no improvements are required to
adjacent streets;a traffic impact fee is required to be paid.
• Requires ACHD Commission No
Action es/no
Access(Arterial/Collectors/State E. Overland Rd./Silverstone Way(existing)
Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed)
Existing Road Network Yes
C. Project Area Maps
Future Land Use Map Aerial Map
Legend 0 Legend
Pra}ect l-ncaiiar 21 � Project Lcc o-c r
Oft
-RC
}
ff
Zoning Map Planned Development Map
Legend 0 Legend
0 ff ey ff ,�
Prect Lcca-nor IetPralect Luca-Ron t �-
+_� City Lin-rft
L-O — Planned Parcels
` El
-1
R-3�
RUT
R- .
R1
lx
RUT �
- R.14 - 5 f f fT
Page 2
Item 3. F60]
III. APPLICANT INFORMATION
A. Applicant:
Paul Straits,Arco/Murray— 113 N. May St.,Chicago,IL 60607
B. Owner:
Tonn Peterson, BVA Development, LLC—2775 W.Navigator Dr., Ste. 220, Meridian, ID 83642
C. Representative:
Tanner Micheli,Topgolf International, Inc. —8750 N. Central Expy, Ste. 1200,Dallas,TX
75231
IV. NOTICING
Planning&Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Newspaper Notification 5/14/2021
Radius notification mailed to
properties within 300 feet 5/11/2021
Site Posting Date 6/3/2021
NextDoor posting 5/12/2021
V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (Comp. Plan)
This property is designated Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R)on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM) in
the Comprehensive Plan.
The purpose of the MU-R designation is to provide a mix of employment,retail,and residential
dwellings and public uses near major arterial intersections.The intent is to integrate a variety of
uses together,including residential,and to avoid predominantly single use developments such as a
regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses.Developments should be
anchored by uses that have a regional draw with the appropriate supporting uses.The
developments are encouraged to be designed consistent with the conceptual MU-R plan depicted in
Figure 3D(pg. 3-17).
The Applicant proposes to develop an entertainment complex(i.e. Topgolf) on the site consisting
of a multi-level golf driving range with a full-service restaurant and bar. The site is located in close
proximity to a major intersection at S. Eagle Rd. and E. Overland Rd. and near the Eagle Rd./I-84
interchange. This use will have a regional draw and will have supportive uses in the vicinity
consistent with the MU-R designation.
The following goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan are supported by the proposed
development:
• "Plan for an appropriate mix of land uses that ensures connectivity,livability, and
economic vitality."(3.06.02)
The proposed use will contribute to the mix of uses in this area that ensure livability and
economic vitality of the community.
• "Encourage and support mixed-use areas that provide the benefits of being able to live,
shop, dine,play, and work in close proximity,thereby reducing vehicle trips,and
enhancing overall livability and sustainability."(3.06.02B)
Page 3
Item 3. ■
The subject mixed-use area currently contains office uses and will eventually include other
commercial and residential uses. The proposed entertainment center will offer
opportunities for play and recreation in close proximity to employment and residential
uses as desired.
• "Require pedestrian circulation plans to ensure safety and convenient access across large
commercial and mixed-use developments."(3.07.02A).
An 8-foot wide pathway is proposed within the buffer along the entire frontage of I-84 and
along main driveways within the site for pedestrian connectivity and easy access within
the mixed-use development.
• "Minimize noise, lighting, and odor disturbances from commercial developments to
residential dwellings by enforcing city code."(5.01.0117)
Operation of the proposed use should comply with City ordinances pertaining to noise,
lighting, and odor disturbances.
VI. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC)
The proposed use,an outdoor entertainment/recreation facility with a non-permanent outdoor
stage/music venue,is listed as a conditional use in the C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial)
zoning district per UDC Table 11-2B-2. Extended hours of operation are proposed from 8:00 am to
2:00 am, seven days a week, abutting a residential zoning district,which also requires conditional use
approval per UDC 11-2B-3B.
VII. STAFF ANALYSIS
The proposed use is consistent with the MU-R FLUM designation in the Comprehensive Plan as
discussed above in Section V. The proposed development is generally consistent with the conceptual
development plan included in the Development Agreement(Inst. #2019-037825 ߣ-088365)
for this site and complies with the conditions governing development of the subject property in the
agreement.
The CUP is required for the outdoor stage/music venue that is proposed as a non-permanent
component of the outdoor entertainment/recreation facility,which is a principal permitted use in the
C-G zoning district.Although the subject property abuts a residential zoning district to the east,the
residential homes have been removed by the developer who recently acquired these lots for future
expansion of the mixed-use development to the west(i.e. Rackham Subdivision). Therefore,the
extension on the hours of operation will not adversely affect abutting residential uses as there are
none. In fact,the closest residence is approximately 918' to the south of the driving range.
The outdoor stage is proposed to be located in the patio space which will seat 71 people and will be
fully enclosed by an 8' tall fence. During the summer months the stage is anticipated to be used about
once a week in the afternoons until the venue closes. Performances will be limited to small musical
acts and no additional sound equipment will be used for any performances—all music will be
channeled through the building's integrated sound system.
The proposed use is subject to the following UDC standards:
Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3-21-Arts,Entertainment or Recreation Facility,Indoors
and Outdoors: (Staff analysis in italics)
A. General Standards:
1. All outdoor recreation areas and structures that are not fully enclosed shall maintain a
minimum setback of one hundred feet(100')from any abutting residential districts. The playing
Page 4
Item 3. 62
areas of golf courses, including golf tees, fairways, and greens, are an exception to this standard.
(Ord. 07-1325, 7-10-2007). The outfield and targets for the proposed golf entertainment facility
are located within 100'of the shared property line with a County residential district(RI) to the
east. However, as noted above, the homes on the adjacent lots have been removed and this area
will be redeveloped and included in the subject mixed-use development. Further, this area could
be deemed to qualify as the playing area/driving range of a golf course, which is exempt from this
standard.
2.No outdoor event or activity center shall be located within fifty feet(50) of any property line
and shall operate only between the hours of six o'clock(6:00)A.M. and eleven o'clock(11:00)
P.M. The activity center(i.e. outfield and targets) is not within 50'of any property line. The
Applicant is requesting an extension of the hours of operation from 8:00 am to 2:00 am, 7 days a
week with the CUP application as allowed by UDC 11-2B-3B. See Hours of Operation below for
analysis.
3. Accessory uses including,but not limited to,retail,equipment rental,restaurant, and drinking
establishments may be allowed if designed to serve patrons of the use only.Accessory uses
consisting of a restaurant, bar, golf lessons and golf academies for kids should serve patrons of
the use only.
4. Outdoor speaker systems shall comply with section 11-3A-13, "Outdoor Speaker Systems", of
this title.Applicant shall comply with this and all relevant code sections upon approval.
B. Additional Standards for Swimming Pools: Any outdoor swimming pool shall be completely
enclosed within a six foot(6)non-scalable fence that meets the requirements of the building code
in accord with title 10,chapter 1, of this code.A swimming pool is not proposed with this project.
C. Additional Standards for Outdoor Stage or Musical Venue: Any use with a capacity of one
hundred(100) seats or more or within one thousand feet(1,000)of a residence or a residential
district shall be subject to approval of a conditional use permit. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-
15-2005). The outdoor stage area is proposed to be located in the patio space which is enclosed
by an 8'tall fence and will provide seating for 71 people. This area is more than 1,000'from a
residence but is within 1,000'of a residential district which no longer has any homes. A CUP is
requested as required for the outdoor stage/music venue.
Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2):
Development of the site shall comply with the dimensional standards of the C-G zoning district in
UDC Table 11-2B-3. Staff has reviewed the proposed plans and building elevations and they
comply with the required standards.
Hours of Operation (UDC 11-2B-3B):
Business hours of operation in the C-G district are limited from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm when the
property abuts a residential use or district; extended hours may be requested through a CUP per
UDC 11-2B-3B. Additionally,the specific use standards associated with the use limit the hours of
operation from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm per UDC 11-4-3-2A.2.
A CUP is requested for extended hours of operation from 8:00 am to 2:00 am abutting a
residential district.As discussed above, although the subject property abuts a residential zoning
district to the east,the residential homes have been removed by the developer. Therefore, Staff
believes the extended hours shouldn't affect any nearby residences. Additionally,the closest
residence from the driving range is approximately 918' away to the south. For these reasons, Staff
is supportive of the request.
If extension of the hours of operation beyond 11:00 pm are approved,the use is subject to
the City's noise ordinance(MCC 6-3-0 which states noise may not create a public
Page 5
Item 3. F63
disturbance as defined,between the hours of 11:00 pm and 6:00 am or at any time so as to
unreasonably disturb or interfere with the peace,comfort or enjoyment of others.
Access(UDC 11-3A-31:
Access is proposed on the site plan from E. Talons View Ln., a private street along the southern
boundary of the site,from S. Silverstone Way, a collector street,from E. Overland Rd., an arterial
street to the south.No access is proposed or allowed via I-84. Two points of access are available
for emergency access that meet Fire Dept.requirements—one via S. Rackham Way and one via
S. Silverstone Way.
E. Talons View Ln. ends approximately 200' west of the east property line and is not proposed to
extend to the east at this time. There is a public street, S. Rolling Hills Drive,just off-site from
the subject parcel to the east. Rolling Hills Drive is constructed as a local,rural street with 24' of
pavement and does not have curb,gutter, sidewalk or streetlights. It provides access to the
remaining homes in Rolling Hills Subdivision and dead-ends in a cul-de-sac at the north end.
Because S.Rolling Hills Drive currently serves residences and is not improved to urban
standards (i.e.—no sidewalk,curb, gutter or streetlights and has a narrow pavement width),
Staff recommends access be prohibited to the Topgolf site via S.Rolling Hills Dr. until such
time as improvements are made that are deemed appropriate by ACHD and the City.All
vehicular access,including construction access, should be taken via the private street(Street
A)from S. Silverstone Way until such time.See public record for comments from neighbors.
Parking(UDC 11-3C):
A minimum of one(1) off-street parking space is required per 500 square feet(s.f.)of gross floor
area. Based on 36,771 s.f., a minimum of 74 parking spaces are required. A total of 275 parking
spaces are proposed, exceeding UDC standards.
Landscaping(UDC 11-3B):
Street buffer: The street buffer along I-84 was required to be constructed with the improvements
for Rackham Subdivision.No other public streets abut this site.
Buffer to residential uses: There are no residential uses abutting this site. The former residential
homes to the east have been removed.
Parking lot: Landscaping is required in the parking lot per the standards in UDC 11-3B-8C. No
linear grouping of parking spaces may exceed 12 in a row without an internal planter island
per UDC 11-3B-8C.2b; the row of parking directly south of the green space on the east end
exceeds 12 spaces—the site/landscape plans should be revised to comply.All other
landscaping appears to comply with UDC standards.
Outdoor Lighting(UDC 11-3A-11):
All outdoor lighting is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-11C unless
otherwise approved through alternative compliance. Light fixtures that have a maximum output
of 1,800 lumens or more are required to have an opaque top to prevent up-lighting; the bulb shall
not be visible and shall have a full cutoff shield in accord with Figure 1 in UDC 11-3A-1IC.
Details of the lighting proposed on the site that demonstrate compliance with the standards
listed in UDC 11-3A-11 should be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance
application.
Fencing(UDC 11-3A-�:
No fencing is depicted on the site/landscape plan. Fencing is depicted on the elevations to the
north and south sides of the storefront. Eight-foot tall cedar fencing is proposed to fully enclose
the patio area.All fencing should be depicted on the plans submitted with the Certificate of
Zoning Compliance application and comply with the standards in UDC 11-3A-7.
Page 6
Item 3. 64
Net poles with a polyester barrier netting system ranging from 70' to 156' in height are proposed
around the perimeter of the driving range to contain golf balls. This barrier does not meet the
definition of a fence in UDC 11-1A-1 and therefore is not subject to the fencing standards in
UDC 11-3A-7.
Building Elevations:
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed structure as shown in Section
IX.C. Building materials consist of EIFS and metal in a variety of colors, glazing and composite
paneling. The elevations appear to generally comply with the standards in the Architectural
Standards Manual; however, a detailed review will take place with the administrative Design
Review application.
Certificate of Zoning Compliance (UDC 11-5B-1):
A Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC)is required to be submitted for the proposed use prior
to submittal of a building permit application to ensure compliance with UDC standards and the
conditions listed in Section X.
Administrative Design Review(UDC 11-5B-8):
An application for administrative Design Review is required to be submitted concurrent with the
CZC application. The design of the site and structures is required to comply with the standards
listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and in the Architectural Standards Manual(ASS.
VIII. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in Section
X per the Findings in Section XI.
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on June 17, 2021. At the public
hearing.the Commission moved to approve the subject CUP request.
1. Summary of the Commission public hearing:
a. In favor: Paul Straits,Arco Murray; Tonn Peterson,BVA Development
b. In opposition:None
c. Commenting: Lynette Adsitt; Michael Blowers
d. Written testimony: Amy Wattles; Michael Blowers; Paul Straits,Arco Murray
e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen
f. Other Staff commenting on application: None
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony:
a. Against any access to the site from Rolling Hills Dr.;
b. Concern pertaining to future traffic and related safety issues on Rolling Hills Dr. from
the commercial development.
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
a. Proposed hours of operation;
b. The proximity of nearest residences in relation to the proposed use.
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. None
Page 7
Item 3. F65
IX. EXHIBITS
A. Site Plan(date: 4/16/2021)
RM
rrv�Rsrare as
LU
YN
- �
r a e
�•l�{'��x¢v � l�'�.'lit�C � I � g� it
, 1��
q J
IVATE s ",; -•.s-.t�wr=.,fia ;z i._ -
y
+ - 51lE PLAN
m..ea.eoa
Page 8
Item 3. F66
B. Landscape Plan(date: 4/28/2021)
mmx,xe uc nee w,•..ee¢.uaxx
i All
.xmwx ion z.rmncm w xnuno rxo
arv�r. iuieo mix w avert inmx N _ V
wmwv's mv¢ - -
x
iIBM
�
-- , W
I I
�� wm CZC lAN�6CAPEPIAN ��
�.�M16 w,xx LAMMXECAlcu�noxe TAa.e "--� :��,.ea Z,'�
PLANT SCHEDULEm
u
u
�, BAER S
MWR
WR
.,
.x.x,wao�x�x.m,o...xxx..�x��.x.e .o,�xw�x�,®,. ;�x;r��s���e 4► x...x� -
a g
_ \xTREE PIANTI NG DETAIL xa .
CONFER TREE DETAInL
grans,vxwxs,ay.rs.w,vrttc LJ m
Og
�J
,,e U
\SHRIIBPWli1NG DETAIL �IEDGING DETAIL � �HOIILDER PLACENENr GETP1L
Page 9
Item 3. F67
C. Elevations(dated: 4/22/21)
I
.arm U
Front Elevation
Rear Elevalion
0 6 16 3Z 48' 6 r
limmomm
✓fit
EIFS-1 EIFS-2 META1--1 METAL-2 METAL-3 METAL-4 STOREFRONT COMPOSITE CEDAR PAINT-1
PANELING FENCE
Exterior Elevations aria
Boise,ID Planning and Zoning i April 22,2021 i Page t
GFOl1P
ism_ 9F 1 MEFAL3
or
FEHCE
Left Elevation Right Elevation
0 6' 16, 12, 48' 64'
MEN soon I
EIFS-1 EIFS-2 METAL-1 METAL-2 METAL-3 METAL-4 STOREFRONT COMPOSITE CEDAR PRINT-1
PANELING FENCE
-� Exterior Elevations c9 r 1 a
Boise, l) i Planning and Zoning i April 22,2a21 I Paget I I
GROUP
Page 10
Item 3. 68
64
3'
a
RM4 RaoM naME AREA Fr.
TIGGLE —Sp.I
00]LOOOY L40 Sq at003 REEAIL 90 SoRpR 635 Sq635 S4S46EVERPGESTATION —SQSQ S4
[H HALL'.NAY 355 So.FT.
1' J 011 JANITQR CLOSET 15 So.FT.
011 KITCHEN ]4S6 So.FT.
013 gECIRICAL ROOI,A 96 So.FT.
Ol MECHANICA F— 150 5q Ff.
O15 IOF ROOM 13G Sq Ff.
01 —HYTOILET 6G Sq FT.
Ol ASH ROOM 0-GES Sq FT.
018 OUTDOOR PATIO Lor 2395 s4 FT.
OH MAINTENANCE 630 S4 FT.
HITNNG&lY ]b95 Sq Ff.
HITTING SAY SEATING SM6 Sq Ff.
O? EMRJr GAY 21TG SO,FT
GROSS FLOOR AREA
19,691 TOTAL SQUARE FEET
AT GROUND LEVEL
Floor Plan-Ground Level r
Boise,ID I Planning and Zoning I April 22,2021 I Page 3
ia
GROUP
L- too
mm ROOMNAME AREA ISO.FT.1
]G HALLWAY 140 sa Ff.
1 J 1O WELLNESS ROOM TO Q4
10 HOPPER EA Sa FT.
_ r X RAG STORAGE 1LS SQ Fr.
]0 FAMILYTOIl1T GO QrT
_ K FAMILY TOI 11T SO 54 Fr.
]O RROOM ]AE 54 FT
O � � HALLWAY 1FA Sq FT.
IM HALLWAY LIO SO,Fr.
11 5ERMOE R 3R5 SQ,FT
L J 11 UQJORSTORAGE msa E.
11 STORAGE Jan SQ,FL
11 —TOR CLOSET LS Sq FL
11 EMPLOYEE LOCKHLR M SO,Fr.
11 SA.ra— AS SQ,rT
11 .—E —SO.FT.
11 WORKROOM 4355Q,Ff
11 EVENT SALES ]90 sa FT.
11 STOWE 400 SO,Fr.
HIrIING RfIY 1695 34 FT
HR3INGRAYSEATING —S FT.
11 EVENT RAY 1Z]S Sq FT.
GROSS FLOOR AREA
17,080 TOTAL SQUARE FEET
AT UPPER LEVEL
—! Floor Plan-Upper Level r 1
Boise,I❑ I Planning and Zoning I April 22.2021 I Page 4
G RG LIP
Page 11
Item 3. R
--- ---------- ------ --- --------- --------------------11--------------,�
---- --------
reuaucxox� I•
as
----- ---------- --------- --------- ---------- --------- - ----
--
'+'@+-'"TM1M°���_ siw,w-msixnxonwi
r�wa w+c«ow
-------- ......... - - -----------------------
... 1- •.�.' I ________.__�,na- _ rrnceennexwrnnresrsrni unuur
-------------
' �, LnGLI MESHPkAf
cx
I nurto
sratcrHsr wmR+n.] smwsr+�smnxortm.] .ea°[a.Peuvsr
xnxwL�n n, nxw� s�mnxs�srexcm
p - rLat
—` Net Pole-Elevations r
a i
Boise,ID I Planning and Zoning I April 22,2021 I Page 5
G
Page 12
Item 3. 70
X. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. Planning
1. The Applicant shall comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-2—Arts,
Entertainment or Recreation Facility,Indoors and Outdoors, including but not limited to the
following:
a. Accessory uses including,but not limited to,retail, equipment rental,restaurant, and
drinking establishments may be allowed if designed to serve patrons of the use only, and
not the general public.
b. Any outdoor speaker systems shall comply with section 11-3A-13, "Outdoor Speaker
Systems."
2. Any outdoor event shall only operate between the hours of eight o'clock(8:00)A.M. and two
o'clock(2:00)A.M. as approved with the subject conditional use permit.
3. Outdoor lighting shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-11. Lighting details
shall be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application that demonstrate
compliance with these standards.
4. The site/landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance shall be revised
as follows:
a. The row of parking directly south of the green space on the east end exceeds 12 spaces in
a row without an internal planter island;revise to comply with UDC 11-3B-8C.2b.
b. All proposed fencing shall be depicted on the plans and shall comply with the standards
listed in UDC 11-3A-7.
5. Access via S. Rolling Hills Dr. shall be prohibited to the site until such time as improvements
are made that are deemed appropriate by ACHD and the City for public access to the
Rackham mixed-use development.All access, including construction access, shall be taken
via the private street(Street A) from S. Silverstone Way until such time.
6. Compliance with the City's noise ordinance(MCC 6-3-6),which states noise may not create
a public disturbance as defined,between the hours of 11:00 pm and 6:00 am or at any time so
as to unreasonably disturb or interfere with the peace,comfort or enjoyment of others, is
required.
7. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and administrative Design Review application is
required to be submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior to submittal of a
building permit application.
B. Ada County Highway District(ACHD)
https:llweblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228116&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty
https:llweblink.meridiancity.org WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=229305&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ity
A Traffic Impact Study(TIS) was not required with this application as it was already included in
the TIS for Silverstone(Eagle View Landing)Subdivision.
Page 13
Item 3. ■
C. Nampa&Meridian Irrigation District(NMID)
https:llweblink.meridianciN.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=229759&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty
D. Boise Project Board of Control(BPBC)
https:llweblink.meridianciiy.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228670&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty
E. Police Department(PD)
The Police Dept.has no comments at this time.
F. Meridian Fire Department(MFD)
The Fire Dept.has no access or fire flow issues with this development. The building will need a
plan review by the Building Department.
XI. FINDINGS
A. Conditional Use Permit
The Commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the
following:
I. 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 the dimensional and development regulations of the C-G zoning district for the
proposed use. Therefore, the Commission finds the site is large enough to accommodate the
proposed use.
2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord
with the requirements of this title.
The Commission finds the proposed use will be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan in that
it will provide an entertainment use which will contribute to the mix of uses desired in the MU-R
designation.
3. That the design,construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in
the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and
that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area.
The Commission finds the design, construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed use
with the conditions imposed, should be compatible with the other commercial and residential
uses existing and proposed in this area 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.
If the proposed use complies with the conditions of approval in Section X as required, the
Commission finds the proposed use should not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity.
5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as
highways, streets, schools,parks,police and fire protection, drainage structures,refuse disposal,
water, and sewer.
Page 14
Item 3. 72
The Commission finds the proposed use will be serviced adequately by all of the essential public
facilities and services listed.
6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services
and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
The Commission finds the proposed use should not create any additional costs for public
facilities and services and will 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.
Although traffic will increase in this area due to the proposed use, it should not be excessive and
the estimated traffic counts on adjacent roadways have been determined by ACHD to be
acceptable. Noise will also increase but the closest residence is over 850'away to the south
which should mitigate any adverse impacts of the noise associated with the use. There shouldn't
be any smoke,fumes, glare or odors associated with the use. Therefore, the Commission finds the
proposed use should 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)
The Commission finds 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.
Page 15
E K IDIAN:---
iuAn
Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline
Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting July 1, 2021
FLUM
ZONINGAERIALFLUM
ZONINGAERIALFLUM
Site/Landscape Plan
R15-
Changes to Agenda: None
Item #4: Orchard Park Pad C Drive-Through (H-2021-0039)
Application(s):
Conditional Use Permit
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.47 acres of land, zoned C-C, located at 1245 W. Chinden –
approximately ¼ mile east of Linder Road (Lot 8, Block 1, Linder Village Subdivision).
Adjacent Land Use & Zoning:
North – Chinden Blvd, Hwy. 20/26
East – C-C zoning and identical multi-tenant building
South – C-C zoning and developing commercial properties
West – C-C zoning and developing commercial properties
History: H-2017-0088 (AZ, CPAM, PP, VAR); FP-2020-0004; and H-2021-0034 (MDA)
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed-Use Community
Summary of Request: The proposed CUP is for dual drive-throughs serving a multi-tenant building (three tenants) that is proposed as
approximately 5,600 square feet. The subject drive-throughs are within 300 feet of two existing/approved drive-throughs to west and to
the east. The building to the east has received administrative level approvals and is a nearly identical building and identical drive-
through design.
The submitted site plan shows a rectangular building with both the northern most and the southernmost tenants as those utilizing a
drive-through. The site plan shows 36 new parking spaces—the shared parking area between the two multi-tenant buildings will have
at least 74 parking spaces; code requires a minimum of 44 spaces between the two buildings. The site plan shows two two-way drive
aisles to the east of the building with parking adjacent to both drive aisles. These drive aisles connect to the east-west drive aisle
closest to Chinden Boulevard that is the entrance to the proposed drive-throughs. Because the drive-throughs serve two separate
tenants, the traffic patterns for each cross over one another midway through the site along the west side of the building.
The Applicant provided a circulation plan that shows the intended traffic patterns which Staff agrees with but has recommended some
minor revisions that the Applicant agreed to. The submitted plan shows Tenant “A,” the north tenant, as utilizing the yellow path which
includes the southern drive-through at the north side of the building. Once a customer orders along the north side of the building they
continue to the west side of the building and pick-up their order. They then stop at the determined drive-through crossing and go from
being the inside lane to the outside lane to exit the drive-through at the south end of the site. After this crossing point, the yellow lane
(the outside lane) becomes the escape lane which is required for the length of the drive-through lanes. Tenant “B” utilizes the blue path
according to the submitted plan and essentially follows the opposite path of Tenant A. For Tenant B, the entrance along the north side
of the building is the stacking lane and order position. Once customers for this tenant order and then stack at the determined crossing
point, they would cross from the outside lane to the inside lane to pick-up their order. After pick-up, customers would continue south to
turn east around the south side of the building and exit the drive-through.
The proposed drive-through design is uncommon and complex with the added crossing point. Staff finds that with adequate signage
and striping the proposed drive-through can work. Therefore, Staff is recommending not only striping on the pavement but also signage
at the entrances and along the drive-through lanes to ensure customers know which business they are in line for.
Drive-through Establishments must also adhere to the specific use standards outlined in UDC 11-4-3-11. Staff has analyzed the
submitted plans for compliance and finds the proposed site plan to comply with the specific use standards. Specifically, there is
extremely little possibility for stacking to impede public ROW because there is no direct lot access to public ROW. Additionally, based
on an exhibit provided by the Applicant, the two ordering locations appear to be approximately 65 feet into the drive-through lanes. This
should allow for 3-4 cars stacking prior to getting to the menu boards; if more cars stack in either lane, they will impede the east-west
drive aisle along the north boundary of the site—staff finds there are multiple drive aisles that run north-south within the site and
patrons would have multiple avenues of ingress and egress for the site especially when taking into account the only avenues to exit the
site are to the south so there should not be much desire or need for patrons to exit the site by going north. Staff does not foresee the
proposed businesses requiring extended stacking lanes like that of a Dutch Bros. or other solitary coffee shop. However, Staff
recommends moving the menu boards further into the drive-through lanes to help alleviate the potential of this conflict. The north drive-
through can move the menu board and order speaker at least 10 feet to the west with no foreseeable issues. The internal drive-through
lane does not have as much room but should be able to move them at least 5 feet further west; any additional distance is a benefit.
All landscaping, dimensional standards, etc. will be further analyzed with the CZC and Design Review applications. However, initial
reviews of the site plan show compliance with all code requirements.
Written Testimony: None
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of subject CUP application.
Notes:
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2021-0039, as presented in the staff
report for the hearing date of July 1, 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-2021-0039, as presented during the
hearing on July 1, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2021-0039 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following
reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance)
Item #5: DaVinci Park Drive-Through (H-2021-0037)
Application(s):
Conditional Use Permit
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.19 acres of land, zoned C-N, located at 4744 N. Park
Crossing Ave. at the SWC of N. Locust Grove Rd. & E. McMillan Rd.
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-N
Summary of Request: CUP for a drive-through establishment for a 620 s.f. coffee kiosk within 300-feet of an existing residence &
residential district on 1.19-acres of land in the C-N zoning district. The proposed development plan is in substantial conformance with
the provisions in the existing DA.
A full-access driveway exists to this site from the west via N. Park Crossing Ln. & a right-out only driveway exists to N. Locust Grove
Rd. on the east side of the lot. Direct access via E. McMillan Rd. is prohibited.
Because the width of the area proposed for the one-way drive aisle for access to the northern row of parking & stacking lane for the
drive-through is too narrow to accommodate both travel lanes (vehicles in the stacking lane will encroach into the drive-aisle), Staff
recommends the northern row of parking is removed & a planter island is added to guide traffic to avoid conflicts.
A minimum of (2) parking spaces are required per UDC standards; a total of 42 spaces exist and/or are proposed between the
proposed use & the existing 9,500 s.f. retail building on the east side of this site. Even with removal of the row of parking previously
mentioned, there are still twice as many parking spaces as required.
Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown that incorporate a mix of materials consisting of hardiplank cement lap siding,
accoya wood siding and glazing. Per the DA, some of the same design elements are required to be incorporated in the commercial
portion of the development as in the residential portion. Final design is required to be consistent with the provisions in the DA and with
the design standards in the ASM.
Written Testimony: Marla Carson (Applicant’s Representative) – Requests they be able to retain the (5) northern parking spaces as
employee parking. Staff doesn’t support this request as there isn’t enough room spatially for the one-way drive aisle to access the
parking/escape lane & the stacking lane for the drive-through – parallel parking may be an option in this area for employees.
Staff Recommendation: Approval w/conditions
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2021-0037, as presented in the staff
report for the hearing date of July 1, 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-2021-0037, as presented during the
hearing on July 1, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2021-0037 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following
reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Item #6: TM Creek Apartments Phase 3 (H-2021-0035)
Application(s):
Rezone
Conditional Use Permit
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site is currently zoned TN-C & C-G and is located south of W. Franklin Rd. &
east of S. Ten Mile Rd.
History: Development of this property is governed by the TM Crossing DA.
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Use – Commercial & HDR
Summary of Request: The Applicant has applied for a rezone of 5.58-acres of land from the TN-C to the C-G zoning district. Most of
the area proposed to be rezoned is designated MU-COM with a narrow sliver along the east boundary designated as HDR. The
proposed C-G zoning & MFR residential and live/work (i.e. vertically integrated) uses are consistent with the FLUM designations for this
property. Because the area proposed to be rezoned is governed by the TM Crossing DA, a new DA or amendment to the existing DA
isn’t recommended.
A CUP is requested for a MFR development consisting of 238 apartment units on 7.83-acres of land in the C-G zoning district. A variety
of studio (42), 1-bedroom (120), 2-bedroom (74) and live/work (2) units are proposed. The gross density is 30.4 units/acre. A total of
1,815 s.f. of non-residential uses are proposed in the vertically integrated residential structure which is a principally permitted use in the
C-G district and will allow a variety of commercial uses. The vertically integrated residential use is proposed at the corner where the
private street intersects Wayfinder – 2 live/work units are proposed – the remainder of the building to the south is proposed to be
entirely MFR.
The Applicant has requested alternative compliance to UDC 11-4-3-27B.3 to provide a lesser amount of private open space for each
unit as noted in the staff report; and to UDC Table 11-3C-6, which doesn’t include a requirement for parking for studio units, to allow
the vertically integrated standard to apply. The Director has approved these requests.
Access is proposed via a private street from Wayfinder Ave., a collector street, along the west boundary of the site. With approval of
ALT, a minimum of 372 parking spaces are required; a total of 379 spaces are proposed.
Based on the size of the living area in the proposed units (all between 500 & 1,200 s.f.), a minimum of 1.37-acres of common open
space is required to be provided within the development; a total of 2.51-acres is proposed. Although some of this area doesn’t qualify
(i.e. private open space) & is not really usable (i.e. parking lot planters), the internal common open space & area along the Ten Mile
Creek is 2.2-acres which exceeds UDC standards.
Based on 238 units, a minimum of 5 amenities are required but the decision-making body is authorized to consider additional amenities
if they believe the proposed amenities aren’t adequate for the size of the development. The applicant proposes a clubhouse with a
fitness center, bike repair room and pet grooming station; swimming pool; open grassy areas at least 50’ x 100’ in size; fireside seating;
grilling area; and sports courts (snookball & ping pong). The Ten Mile Creek multi-use pathway also lies adjacent to the site for
residents to use.
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed 4-story structures as shown. Building materials consist of stucco &
bricks in neutral colors. Final design is required to comply with the adopted TM Crossing Design Guidelines.
Written Testimony: Mike Wardle (Applicant’s Representative) – Requests condition #4h, which requires the sidewalk along the
southern boundary of the site adjacent to the Ten Mile Creek to be widened to 10’ to qualify as a multi-use pathway as recommended
by the Park’s Dept. as a condition of approval of the Alternative Compliance request to the private open space standards in UDC 11-4-
3-27B.3 to be changed to require an 8’ wide pathway as proposed; & deletion of condition #8, which requires a public pedestrian
easement for the multi-use pathway to be deleted since an easement isn’t required for non-public pathways.
A revision is also requested to condition #9 to remove the language pertaining to compliance with the design guidelines in the TMISAP
& the design standards in the ASM to reflect compliance with the TM Crossing Design Guidelines as required by the DA. “An
application for Certificate of Zoning Compliance shall be submitted for the proposed project and approved prior to submittal of building
permit applications. Compliance with the Ten Mile Crossing Design Guidelines design guidelines in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific
Area Plan and the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual as applicable is required. See the Application of the
Design Elements matrix on pg. 3-49 of the TMISAP for design elements applicable to the proposed development.”
Staff Recommendation: Approval w/conditions
Notes:
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H-
2021-0035, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 1, 2021, with the following modifications: (Add any
proposed modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2021-
0035, as presented during the hearing on July 1, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2021-0035 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: Woodcrest Townhomes (H-2021-0015)
Application(s):
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Amendment
Rezone
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.97-acres of land, zoned L-O, located at 1789 N. Hickory Way,
north of E. Fairview Ave. on the southwest side of Hickory Way.
History: This property was annexed with L-O zoning in 1992 and later re-subdivided as a lot in Mallane Commercial Complex in 2001.
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial
Summary of Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan FLUM to change the land use designation on 2.10-acres of land from
Commercial to MHDR; and Rezone of 2.10-acres of land from the L-O (Limited Office) to the R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential)
zoning district.
Approval of the map amendment will allow the Applicant to develop (19) SFR attached & townhome dwellings at a gross density of 10.8
units/acre on this infill property, which will contribute to the range of residential land use designations & diversity in housing types &
densities in this area & provide a transition in land uses from MDR to commercial/office uses.
A conceptual site plan & building elevations were submitted showing how the property is planned to develop with (19) single-family
attached & townhouse dwelling units consisting of (1) single-family attached structure, (3) 3-unit townhouses, (2) 4-unit townhouses
and a 2,500 square foot office building. The property is planned to be subdivided through a future application.
Because this is an infill property and has an irregular configuration, development of this site is difficult. The parking proposed for the
office building at the SEC of the site encroaches within the required land use buffer & does not comply with UDC standards. The
Comprehensive Plan states development in MHDR designated areas should incorporate high quality architectural and site design to
ensure quality of place and incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and pathways and include attractive landscaping and a project
identity. To achieve this goal and alleviate some of the spacial constrictions on the site, Staff recommended the concept plan be
revised to remove the office building from the plan and instead include open space with quality landscaping and some parking pathway
connections to the open space and the provision of a gazebo with a seating area as an amenity which can be shared between the
residential and commercial development. The Applicant revised the concept plan accordingly & Staff is in support of the proposed
changes.
Access to the site is proposed via a cross-access easement from an existing driveway from N. Hickory Way, a collector street; no stub
streets exist to this property. A private street is planned to provide access to the proposed development and for addressing purposes.
An attached sidewalk is proposed along one side of the private street for pedestrian access.
Off-street parking is proposed in accord with UDC standards; (4) extra spaces are proposed for guest parking in the common area near
the entry & (5) spaces are proposed in the common area at the SEC of the site. On-street parking is not allowed due to the width of the
private street.
Because the site is below 5-acres in size, qualified open space & site amenities are not required.
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed residential structures as shown with a mix of materials consisting
horizontal wood siding, vertical board and batten siding, wood shake siding and cement plaster with stone veneer accents and
architectural asphalt roofing.
Written Testimony: None
Staff Recommendation: Approval with the requirement of a DA with the provisions noted in the staff report.
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H-
2021-0015, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 1, 2021, with the following modifications: (Add any
proposed modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2021-
0015, as presented during the hearing on July 1, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2021-0015 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. 73
(:>
E IDIAN*-----,
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Orchard Park Pad C Drive-Through (H-2021-0039) by
Mandi Brozo of CSHQA, Located at 1245 W. Chinden Blvd.
A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a dual drive-through for a multi-tenant establishment
within 300 feet of an existing drive-through on 1.47 acres of land in the C-C zoning district.
Item 4. F74
(:�N-WE IDIAN:--
IDAHO
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION
Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: July 1, 2021
Topic: Public Hearing for Orchard Park Pad C Drive-Through (H-2021-0039) by Mandi
Brozo of CSHQA, Located at 1245 W. Chinden Blvd.
A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a dual drive-through for a multi-tenant
establishment within 300 feet of an existing drive-through on 1.47 acres of
land in the C-C zoning district.
Information Resources:
Click Here for Application Materials
Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing
Item 4. ■
E STAFF REPORT
REPORT a H o
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING 7/1/2021 Legend
DATE:
Project Location
TO: Planning&Zoning Commission
FROM: Joseph Dodson,Associate Planner
208-884-5533
SUBJECT: H-2021-0039
EB
a
Orchard Park Pad C Drive-Through— ® 5��' LIJ
�
CUP
LOCATION: The site is located at 1245 W. Chinden
Boulevard, approximately '/4 mile east of
Linder Road(Lot 8,Block 1,Linder qTpm
M.
Village Subdivision),in the NW '/4 of the ®
NW '/4 of Section 25, Township 4N.,
Range 1 W.
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Conditional Use Permit for a dual drive-through for a multi-tenant establishment within 300-feet of
an existing drive-through on 1.47 acres of land in the C-C zoning district.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details Page
Acreage 1.47 acres
Future Land Use Designation Mixed-Use Community
Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped
Proposed Land Use(s) Multi-tenant building with two crossing drive-
throughs
Current Zoning Community Business District(C-C)
Physical Features(waterways, None
hazards, flood plain,hillside)
Neighborhood meeting date;# May 3, 2021;2 attendees
of attendees:
History(previous approvals) H-2017-0088 (AZ, CPAM,PP,VAR); FP-2020-0004;
and H-2021-0034(MDA, currently in process)
Page 1
► ' , s
' CHI • EN —�� CHI N
nnm r a •..,,.
noon IY
nun �i 1 1� _ q■■■ '��`"`
irr'• 0MOZ
Ilr loll I1 H��i■■■■■1■q1�Ia■■p11111� ■ A `� J
on
r: a n�� p-IIIIIInI■n 1 I '
" nnwnn d o ♦ ♦ ♦♦�
/g11111■II 11111111..y
■ ■nn q V �♦i O ♦� �i � �-
num■ r�� � � Y rlum■ ��,�1L --�i�' __-
nun ♦/i Il! 1 molls
nun �► 1� I� �� ■!/■ --:
1 vision I ry��:■nm■nu'nnnnnl' ■ IIr 11 i n�J��:■■■■■■■nn nuunni ■= '.i
*♦ ■ non�Jwl uonnn ■n■■ • nn■nnu ���■nnnnn■nnm ■ . N
■ ,nn1 - -■nnmm� u p • : 1 •nnml -■nnnnm u p p 1��
r: a n�� 11111■■I■n 1 � r� Ium nla� � p-11111■■a■i■ 111 11 rr ♦♦
n■•■In■mq - ■ ♦ ♦ n •■In■m� Ilon - ■ I
gxxnln- O - Iii d♦ /N gnnllll ol ♦ ♦ ♦�
i■ 11111111:�-� �i♦�♦���
■nn n . ,■■m n . ��
• C • • • 11 C •.• C• 1
C •
Item 4. 77
C. Representative:
Same as Applicant
IV. NOTICING
Planning&Zoning
Posting Date
Newspaper Notification 6/11/2021
Radius notification mailed to 6/8/2021
properties within 500 feet
Site Posting Date 6/18/2021
Next Door posting 6/8/2021
V. STAFF ANALYSIS
The proposed drive-through is for dual drive-throughs serving a multi-tenant building(three tenants)
that is proposed as approximately 5,600 square feet. The submitted site plan shows both the northern
most and the southernmost tenants as those utilizing a drive-through with the central tenant being a
standard commercial tenant. These drive-throughs are within 300-feet of a separate multi-tenant
building and drive-through to the west of this site and across the adjacent drive aisle. In addition, a
nearly identical building as the one proposed in this application has already been approved at the
administrative level via Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC) and Design Review(DES) and is
located to the east of this site. These buildings and drive-throughs are also within 300 feet of one
another and share a portion of its parking facilities between the two buildings. Therefore, Conditional
Use Permit approval(CUP)per UDC Table 11-2B-2 is required due to its proximity to the other
drive-throughs. Furthermore,this use is also subject to specific use standards,UDC 11-4-3-11,which
are further analyzed below.
The submitted site plan shows a rectangular building situated to the west portion of the buildable site
area and is proposed with 36 new parking spaces—the shared parking area between the two multi-
tenant buildings will have at least 74 parking spaces; code requires a minimum of 44 spaces. The site
plan shows two two-way drive aisles to the east of the building with parking adjacent to both drive
aisles. These drive aisles connect to the east-west drive aisle closest to Chinden Boulevard that is the
entrance to the proposed drive-throughs.Because the drive-throughs serve two separate tenants,the
traffic patterns for each cross over one another midway through the site along the west side of the
building.
The Applicant provided a circulation plan that shows the intended traffic patterns and Staff agrees
with the proposal but with some minor recommended revisions. The submitted plan shows Tenant
"A,"the north tenant, as utilizing the yellow path which includes the southern drive-through at the
north side of the building. Once a customer orders along the north side of the building they continue
to the west side of the building and pick-up their order. They then stop at the determined drive-
through crossing and go from being the inside lane to the outside lane to exit the drive-through at the
south end of the site.After this crossing point,the yellow lane(the outside lane)becomes the escape
lane which is required for the length of the drive-through lanes. Tenant`B"utilizes the blue path
according to the submitted site/circulation plan and essentially follows the opposite path of Tenant A.
For Tenant B,the entrance along the north side of the building is the stacking lane and order position.
Once customers for this tenant order and then stack at the determined crossing point,they would cross
Page 3
Item 4. ■
from the outside lane to the inside lane to pick-up their order. After pick-up, customers would
continue south to turn east around the south side of the building and exit the drive-through.
The proposed drive-through design is uncommon and complex with the added crossing point. Staff
finds that with adequate signage and striping the proposed drive-through can work. Therefore, Staff is
recommending not only striping on the pavement but also signage at the entrances and along the
drive-through lanes to ensure customers know which business they are in line for. The proposed
signage and striping should be submitted with the future CZC and DES applications for the building
should it receive CUP approval for the drive-throughs. In addition,the north half of the proposed
drive-throughs show a curbing of some kind that separates the two lanes. Staff understands the
purpose of this but finds that a portion of it should be removed to allow for customers to use the
outside lane as an escape lane earlier in the drive-through. See area noted below in red:
..... ...... ............. .............
.......... ............
G
PAD C 250
-� 5,600 S_F_
! O 8
PARKING
39 STALLS �m z
' O - C
I1111#J I I I I I I I III I kHll l l l l
T>:. => D S 5
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 within the Orchard Park Development,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 supports the proposed site design;Staff s analysis of the specific use standards
and any recommendations are in italics.
Page 4
Item 4. 79
1) Stacking lanes have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways, drive aisles and
the public right-of-way by patrons;
Per the submitted site plan, no public right-of-way has direct access to the site so there is no
possibility for stacking to impede public ROW. The stacking lanes for each drive-through vary in
length but both entrances are at the north end of the site and begin at the west end of the
northernmost east-west drive aisle. Based on an exhibit(Exhibit VII.Q provided by the
Applicant, the two ordering locations appear to be approximately 65 feet into the drive-through
lanes. This should allow for 3-4 cars stacking prior to getting to the menu boards; if more cars
stack in either lane, they will impede the east-west drive aisle along the north boundary of the
site. Staff does not foresee the proposed businesses requiring extended stacking lanes like that of
a Dutch Bros. or other solitary coffee shop. However, Staff recommends moving the menu boards
further into the drive-through lanes to help alleviate the potential of this conflict. The north drive-
through can move the menu board and order speaker at least 10 feet to the west with no
foreseeable issues. The internal drive-through lane does not have as much room but should be
able to move them at least 5 feet further west; any additional distance is a benefit.
Furthermore, there are multiple drive aisles that run north-south within the site and patrons
would have multiple avenues of ingress and egress for the site especially when taking into
account the only avenues to exit the site are to the south so there should not be much desire or
need for patrons to exit the site by going north.
Again, Staff does not foresee stacking for the proposed businesses being an existential crisis but
understands the concern and has thus made minor recommendations to help with the potential
problem.At a minimum, Staff is recommending the distance from the start of the drive-through to
the order speakers shall be no less than 65 feet to ensure at least this distance is maintained.
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.
The stacking lanes for each drive-through are separate from the circulation lanes for at least 65
feet from the menu boards to the adjacent drive aisle. Staff finds this shows compliance with this
requirement.
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 for at least one of the proposed drive-through lanes appears to be greater than
100 feet in length. As noted, Staff is unaware of where the ordering location is on the submitted
site plan but it appears to be along the north end of the site for both lanes. With this assumption,
the stacking lane for the overall drive-through is long enough to require an escape lane.As
discussed previously, the outside lane is the escape lane following the crossing point of the two
drive-throughs. Stafffinds the proposed escape lane layout complies with this requirement. To
ensure that the outside lane can be better utilized as an escape lane earlier in the drive-through
process, Staff is recommending a section of curbing shown on the site plan at the north half of the
site is removed(see exhibit above in previous section).
5)The site should be designed so that the drive-through is visible from a public street for
surveillance purposes.
The proposed drive-throughs are located along the north, west, and south sides of the proposed
Page 5
Item 4. 80
building. With Chinden Boulevard and a multi-use pathway abutting the site along the north
boundary, Staff finds the location of the drive-throughs are in appropriate locations for
surveillance. In addition, the drive aisle abutting the drive-through to the west is intended to be
one of the main commercial entrances to the overall Orchard Park Development which should
offer additional surveillance opportunities. Meridian Police have also reviewed the site plan for
compliance with this standard and have not brought any concerns to Staff.
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 5,600 square feet noted on the submitted
site plan, a minimum of 22 parking spaces are required. The proposed site plan shows 36 parking
spaces, exceeding UDC minimums. In addition, this building shares a larger parking area with an
identical building to the east with an overall parking count of 74 spaces between the two sites,
exceeding the minimum amount required by code by 30 spaces.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 multiple parking drive aisles along the south boundary of the
site;these connect to a drive aisle that circumnavigates through the entire Orchard Park Development.
Abutting the site to the west but with no direct lot access is a restricted entrance from Chinden
Boulevard. In short,there are multiple access points to the subject site from Chinden,Linder, and
other nearby public roads to the south and east. Staff does not find any issues with the proposed and
existing access points in relation to the subject application.
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 5,600 square feet
requiring a minimum of 22 parking spaces; the submitted site plan shows 36 proposed parking spaces
in addition to other shared parking spaces to the east, exceeding UDC minimums.All proposed drive
aisles and parking spaces also meet the required dimensional standards.
The existing Development Agreement requires cross-access through all of the commercial parcels
within the Orchard Park Development. Due to all of the shared drive aisles and parking areas, 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 (noted as callout number 14 on the site plan).
Pedestrian Walkways: A pedestrian walkway is depicted on the site plan from the proposed building
entrance sidewalk to the multi-use pathway along W. Chinden Blvd. as required by UDC 11-3A-
19B.4a. This walkway is depicted to traverse both entrances of the drive-through lanes which
introduces a known conflict between pedestrians and vehicles. Therefore, Staff is recommending this
walkway be distinguished from the driving surface by being constructed with pavers, brick, or
scored/colored concrete,per subsection B of this code section. The proposed site plan appears to
show a different material than the drive surface but its material is not called out. The Applicant
should confirm compliance with this code section with a future CZC submittal and note the proposed
material for this walkway.
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. The required
landscape buffer adjacent to Chinden is already constructed or under construction with the
subdivision approvals and is not part of this application.
Page 6
Item 4. ■
A minimum 5-foot wide landscape buffer is required to be provided along the perimeter of the
parking or other vehicular use areas as set forth in UDC 11-3B-8C.1. The proposed parking drive
aisles and drive-through around the perimeter of the subject site are proposed with landscaping at
least 10 feet wide and vegetated with appropriate trees, shrubs, and other vegetative ground
coverage. Staff finds these areas and proposed sidewalks meet and exceed the minimum landscape
requirements. Furthermore, the submitted landscape plan shows all adjacent parking spaces with the
required planter beds and landscaping.
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 and should not be
visible from the nearest right-of-way.
Building Elevations: The Applicant did not apply for Design Review concurrently with this CUP
application but has prematurely submitted for Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Administrative
Design Review for the proposed building. These administrative applications will not be reviewed
until after the CUP has been heard. Therefore,proposed building elevations have been provided to
Staff but Staff has not done a detailed review of the elevations at this time. In general,the elevations
show dark brick and white stucco with reveals as field materials; architectural metal siding and
aluminum framed storefront windows on the north, east, and south elevations for accent materials;
and a concrete banding along the base of the building to tie it to the ground elevation. Detailed review
will occur with the Design Review application but Staff finds the proposed elevations to be
substantially compliant with the Architectural Standards Manual.
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 7
Item 4. ■
VII. EXHIBITS
A. Proposed Site Plan(dated: 4/09/2021)
Orchard
ParkDMG REAL ESTATE PARTNERS, LLC
4� 4 Q O ss M
-- - - _ --- -
—.fib r-• ' —_ J � �� �
EL
o
:; 1
`-� - MIS PAD C 19.0 25.0 19.0�_ 19.0 25.6
d
5,600 S.F. -
�
PARKING
39 STALLS L 4
I 21 I I I
I
0"
I tt 10 I o I
IL
J J_
3fl4 _ O 1495
-- -- — I —T — - — -. - _—
I I l9
I
II 1 I
Page 8
Item 4. 83
B. Proposed Landscape Plan(dated: 4/08/2021)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION-
OF V DITCH SEE CIVILy
PLANS FOR INFORMATION.
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF MON UMENT
\® SIGN.SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR
\ + EXACTLOCATION.SHIFT LANDSCAPE AS R REFER TO PHASE I ROADWAYS
NECESSARY TO FIT FINAL SIGN LOCATION. LANDSCAPE PLAN FIELDFIT
LANDSCAPEAROUNU SIGNAGE
� I I
i
TRASH ENCLOSURE-
I SEECIVIL PLANS
O
Idl
�, cis PAD C I o a f
5,600 S.F. ® I
_ PARKING
LD 39 STALLS ® I i PROJECTLIMITS
0.
I I 11X3 q l
I �J
PROJECT LIMITS- 1 Q p
ao A.
�a
- oero QO, mO" Q
RCOTBARRIER FORS
PLANTERS UNDER S'
l L
Page 9
Item 4. 84
C. Proposed Menu Board and Order Speaker Locations
FU menu board
Fii2 order speaker
_ _ . . . . . . . . . r r . . . . . . . .
+w+�+�+++Y+Y+w+ + + ++l+V+'++ # +W R+'+x+x+* +xrtwaw . • +ax+*++ #* +�+W+W. i+
♦N i.W.W.+.W+W + # . +++•+ W+W+W ++ #. rt # ♦ rt • +W.+.W r+ ♦ ' + * .W.W+W r W+ #r # + rt ♦
r++r+r+r+r+r r
LU
s
# ' E w
+ 1..1..E
+ f
Kneaders order speake
Kneaders menu board
f
Page 10
Item 4. ■
D. Proposed Building Elevations(not a part of approvals)
ORCHARD PARK
SIG NAGE—
I ILI
EAST ELEVATION
T I S
T2ti
2 NORTH ELEVATION 3SOUTH ELEVATION
D
d"
4WEST ELEVATION
Page 11
Item 4. F
6
SIGNAGE
SIGNAGE
md
Mumma
low
.,�
Fron Perspective
•;� oil L
Side Perspective Rea Perspective
VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING
1. Future development of this site shall comply with the existing Development Agreement(DA
Inst. #2019-028376), and associated conditions of approval: H-2017-0088 (AZ, CPAM,PP,
VAR);FP-2020-0004; Comply with amended DA approved with H-2021-0034 (MDA, DA is
not yet recorded).
2. The Conditional Use Permit for the proposed Drive-Through Establishment is hereby
approved with the following conditions of approval:
a. The proposed menu boards/order speakers shall be located no less than 65 feet from the
near edge of curb at the drive-through entrances. Compliance shall be depicted with the
Certificate of Zoning Compliance site plan.
b. The Applicant/Owner shall include both pavement striping and signage throughout
the site and within the drive-throughs to ensure traffic circulation pattern is clear to
patrons; proposed signage AND striping locations shall be submitted and depicted
on the site plan at the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance application and
include both directional and tenant signage to direct patrons to desired tenant drive-
through.
c. Per UDC 11-3A-1913.4b,depict all pedestrian walkways traversing 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 12
Item 4. 87
3. The site plan submitted with the future Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be
revised as follows:
a. Per the exhibit within Section V above,remove a segment of curbing within the north
half of the separated drive-throughs.
b. Provide exhibits of and depict on the plans the striping and directional and tenant signage
4. The submitted landscape plan is approved as submitted. Applicant shall maintain the required
35-foot landscape buffer to Chinden Boulevard per City standards outlined in UDC 11-3B-7.
5. Compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11 —Drive-Through Establishment is
required in perpetuity.
6. Comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-49—Restaurant.
7. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Administrative Design Review application shall be
submitted and approved for the proposed use prior to submittal of a building permit
application. Future Commercial building shall comply with the standards outlined in the
Architectural Standards Manual.
8. The conditional use permit is valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise
approved by the City. During this time,the Applicant shall commence the use as permitted in
accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of
approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or
structures on or in the ground as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6. A time extension may be requested
as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F.
B. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https:llweblink.meridianci(y.org WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=230267&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty-
IX. FINDINGS
Conditional Use (UDC 11-5B-6)
Findings: The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the
following:
1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional
and development regulations in the district in which the use is located.
Staff finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed development and meet all
dimensional and development regulations of the C-C zoning district.
2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in
accord with the requirements of this title.
Staff finds the proposed multi-tenant building and dual drive-throughs 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 and the approved and existing uses in near
proximity to the subject site, Staff finds the design, construction, operation and maintenance of
Page 13
Item 4. 88
the proposed use will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood, be compatible
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 14
E IDIAN;---
Applicant Presentation
Item 5. 89
(:>
E IDIAN*-----,
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for DaVinci Park Drive-Through (H-2021-0037) by Neu Design
Architecture, Located at 4744 N. Park Crossing Ave.
A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment for a coffee kiosk within
300 feet of an existing residence and residential district on 1.19 acres of land in the C-N zoning
district.
Item 5. F90-1
(:�N-WE IDIAN:--
IDAHO
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION
Staff Contact:Sonya Allen Meeting Date: July 1, 2021
Topic: Public Hearing for DaVinci Park Drive-Through (H-2021-0037) by NeuDesign
Architecture, Located 4744 N. Park Crossing Ave.
A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment for a
coffee kiosk within 300 feet of an existing residence and residential district
on 1.19 acres of land in the C-N 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. ■
C�, EI
IDIAN�--
STAFF REPORT .►a H o
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING 7/1/2021 Legend
DATE: I
TO: Planning&Zoning Commission - - - -
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner
208-884-5533 -
&1G4C1G11LLOiN=
SUBJECT: H-2021-0037
DaVinci Park Drive-Through—CUP
U
LOCATION: 4744 N. Park Crossing Ave. (Lot 11,
Block 3,Da Vinci Park Subdivision),in
the NE '/4 of Section 31,Township 4N.,
Range IE. -- -- -
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Conditional use permit(CUP) for a drive-through establishment for a coffee kiosk within 300-feet of
an existing residence and residential district on 1.19-acres of land in the C-N zoning district.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details Page
Acreage 1.19-acres
Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Neighborhood(MU-N)
Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped land
Proposed Land Use(s) Restaurant(coffee shop)with a drive-through
Current Zoning Neighborhood Business District(C-N)
Physical Features(waterways, None
hazards,flood plain,hillside)
Neighborhood meeting date;#of 5/4/21;no attendees other than the Applicant
attendees:
History(previous approvals) AZ-06-041 (DA#107005526,Harpe Sub.);PP-06-042
(Harpe Sub.—expired);RZ-13-016;PP-13-036(DaVinci
Park);MDA-14-002(DA#114034781);FP-14-013
Page 1
� m
1 1 1
■ AZ4 ,?
-
�����I 111111 � 1 N1rx;• ���NII: - .71
_�I■1111111111■J= = ; '� 11 11 � . �, '
in
II RYI�;■ 1� _ _-_� 1 II 1 �± L 1 �•' 4
- II
_R Mil
Ing
- i lif
�Ili�i�li11M11 ' �� !! IIIIi1
u u �� •y u u� u
rf��lir 11 111111 p 1 Hill 11 NII: N�-II III dlllll p 1 1[';•p4,111
_ I�1111111111■J * 11 11 NN�.---..,{IIIIII Illliiiiiiij *2 mid
it 11
■ r . ! ■
Emil III
''��° II •INIIII �I '`���11 IINIIII �I ___
i •
Item 5. 93
C. Representative:
Same as Applicant
IV. NOTICING
Planning& Zoning
Posting Date
Newspaper Notification 6/11/2021
Radius notification mailed to 6/8/2021
properties within 300 feet
Site Posting Date 6/9/2021
Next Door posting 6/8/2021
V. STAFF ANALYSIS
The proposed drive-through is for a 620 square foot coffee shop (classified as a restaurant)within
300-feet of an existing residence and residential district,which requires Conditional Use Permit
approval(CUP)per UDC Table 11-213-2 and 11-4-3-1 IA.1.
The proposed development plan is in substantial conformance with the provisions in the existing
Development Agreement(Inst. #114034781) and with the approved conceptual development plan
included in the agreement.
Specific Use Standards: The proposed drive-through establishment is subject to the specific use
standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11,Drive-Through Establishment. A site plan is required to be
submitted that demonstrates safe pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation on the site and
between adjacent properties. At a minimum,the plan is required to demonstrate compliance with the
following standards: Staff's analysis is in italics.
1) Stacking lanes have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways,drive aisles and
the public right-of-way by patrons;
The width of the area proposed for the one-way drive aisle for access to the northern row of
parking and stacking lane for the drive-through is too narrow to accommodate both travel
lanes—vehicles in the stacking lane will encroach into the drive aisle. Staff recommends the
northern row of parking is removed and a planter island is added to guide traffic to avoid
conflicts.
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 designated employee parking.
The stacking lane and escape lane should be clearly delineated. The northern row of parking
adjacent to the stacking lane should be removed.
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.
Page 3
Item 5. 94
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 and an escape lane is proposed that should be signed
accordingly.
5)The site should be designed so that the drive-through is visible from a public street for
surveillance purposes.
The drive-through is visible from E. McMillan Rd. and N. Park Crossing Ln.,public streets along
the north and west boundaries of the site,for surveillance purposes.
Based on the above analysis, Staff deems the proposed drive-through in compliance with the
specific use standards as required if the recommended revisions to the site plan are made.
The proposed restaurant is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-49 Restaurant,
which requires at a minimum, one (1)parking space to be provided for every 250 square feet of gross
floor area. Upon any change of use for an existing building or tenant space, a detailed parking plan is
required to be submitted that identifies the available parking for the overall site that complies with
UDC standards.
Hours of Operation: The hours of operation are restricted to 6:00 am to 10:00 pm in the C-N zoning
district per UDC 11-2B-3B. The proposed hours of operation are 6:00 to 10:00 pm in accord with this
standard.
Dimensional Standards: Future development should be consistent with the dimensional standards
listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3.
Access: A full-access driveway exists to this site from the west via N. Park Crossing Ln. and a right-
out only driveway exists to N. Locust Grove Rd. on the east side of the lot. Direct access via E.
McMillan Rd. is prohibited.
Parking: A minimum of one(1)parking space is required to be provided for every 250 square feet of
gross floor area for restaurant uses. The restaurant space is proposed to consist of 620 square feet;
therefore, a minimum of two(2) spaces are required for the restaurant(i.e. coffee shop).A total of 42
spaces exist and/or are proposed between the proposed use and the existing 9,500 square foot retail
building on the east side of the site. The minimum number of parking spaces required for the retail
use is 19 based on one space per 500 s.f. of gross floor area. The proposed number of spaces exceeds
UDC standards by 21 spaces. However,with removal of the northern row of parking adjacent to the
vehicle stacking lane for the drive-through,there will be 5 fewer spaces. Staff believes the remaining
number of spaces is still sufficient to serve the use(s).
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 bicycle rack exists on the eastern portion of the site
by the retail building. A bicycle rack should also be provided with the proposed use,capable of
holding a minimum of one bicycle.
Pedestrian Walkways: A continuous internal pedestrian walkway that is a minimum of 5-feet in
width is required to be provided from the perimeter sidewalk to the main building entrance per
UDC 11-3A-19B.4.The pathway should be distinguished from the vehicular driving surface
through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete, or bricks.The walkway should have
weather protection within 20' of all customer entrances. The site plan submitted with the
Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should reflect compliance with this standard.
Landscaping: Parking lot landscaping is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed
in UDC 11-3B-8C. Landscaping is required within all planter islands within the parking area as
Page 4
Item 5. F95]
required. The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application
should reflect compliance with this standard.
There is an existing street buffer and sidewalk along E. McMillan Rd. and N. Locust Grove Rd.that
was installed with the subdivision improvements.
Mechanical Equipment: All mechanical equipment on the back of the building and outdoor service
and equipment should be incorporated into the overall design of buildings and landscaping so that the
visual and acoustic impacts of these functions are fully contained and out of view from adjacent
properties and public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-12.
Building Elevations: Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown in Section VII.0 that
incorporate a mix of materials consisting of hardiplank cement lap siding, accoya wood siding and
glazing. Per the Development Agreement,some of the same design elements are required to be
incorporated in the commercial portion of the development as in the residential portion.
The proposed elevations are not approved with this application; final design shall be consistent
with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual and with the
Development Agreement.
Certificate of Zoning Compliance&Design Review: A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and
Design Review application is required to be submitted for the proposed use prior to submittal of a
building permit application to ensure consistency with the conditions in Section VII,UDC standards
and design standards.
VI. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions included
in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX.
Page 5
Item 5. 96
VII. EXHIBITS
A. Proposed Site Plan(dated: 11/20/2021)
-- -^�- aguaesian
-. E.MCMILLIAN P.D.
c ,
Y
Q
as
Y �
• � � Z
m N
e Q O a
o � o
o
0
WE PLAN
Page 6
Item 5.
B. Proposed Landscape Plan(dated: 4/14/2021)
�,�design
-_ h1I LLIAN RD.
L. m
Y
m W > $a
w �
SCOPE OF WORK 3 0 0
V V01 At
c�
i
m
ROW
wso�n...�i alAN05GAPE PIAN-NRV SITE
' - LANDSCAPE
FLAN
ssYcrersr
Page 7
Item 5. 98
C. Conceptual Building Elevations(dated: 4/14/21)
�. a ,des€on
I
K.
ennsr RFvnnvN NvaM eltvnnvN Y z
0 ws
:o o �T
SOUM REVAl10N 1H6:REVAl10N
EXTERIOR FINISH LEGEND E)CTERIOR
ELEVATIONS
A-211
Page 8
Item 5. 99 1
VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING
1. Future development of this site shall comply with the previous conditions of approval and
terms of the existing Development Agreement [Inst. #107005526(AZ-06-041 Harpe Sub.),
amended as Inst. #114034781 (MDA-13-021,MDA-14-002 DaVinci Park); PP-13-036
(DaVinci Park); FP-14-013] and the conditions contained herein.
2. The site plan and landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance
application shall be revised as follows:
a. The stacking lane, menu and speaker location(s),and window location shall be depicted
in accord with UDC I1-4-3-IIB.
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. A bicycle rack shall be provided on the site capable of holding a minimum of one
bicycle; bicycle parking facilities are required to comply with the location and design
standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C.
d. Depict a continuous internal pedestrian walkway that is a minimum of 5-feet in width
from the perimeter sidewalk to the main building entrance per UDC 11-3A-19B.4. The
pathway shall be distinguished from the vehicular driving surface through the use of
pavers, colored or scored concrete,or bricks and shall have weather protection within 20'
of all customer entrances.
e. Depict landscaping within all planter islands within the parking area in accord with the
standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C. The planting area shall not be less than 5-feet in any
dimension,measured inside curbs as set forth in UDC 11-3B-8C.2a.
f. Remove the northern row of parking adjacent to the stacking lane and install signage for
the escape lane. Depict a planter island along the northern side of the remaining row of
parking to guide traffic, landscaped per the standards in UDC 11-3B-8C.
g. Clearly delineate the vehicle stacking lane for the drive-through and the escape lane.
3. Direct access via E.McMillan Rd. is prohibited.
4. Compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11 — Drive-Through Establishment is
required.
5. Compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-49—Restaurant is required.
6. Parking for the overall site shall be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-
3-49 for restaurants.
7. 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; the design
standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual and with the Development Agreement.
The Development Agreement requires some of the same design elements to be incorporated in
the commercial portion of the development as in the residential portion.
8. The conditional use permit is valid for a maximum period of two (2) years unless otherwise
Page 9
Item 5. Fool
approved by the City. During this time,the Applicant shall commence the use as permitted in
accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of
approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or
structures on or in the ground as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6.A time extension may be requested
as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F.
B. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
Staff Report:
https:llweblink.meridiancity.ory WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=230160&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
hty
A Traffic Impact Study(TIS)is not required for this project.
C. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID)
https:llweblink.meridiancitE.orgzl ebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=230615&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ky
IX. FINDINGS
Conditional Use(UDC 11-513-6)
Findings: The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the
following:
I. 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-Nzoning 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 restaurant(coffee shop) with a drive-through will be harmonious with
the Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with applicable UDC standards with the conditions
noted in Section VIII of this report.
3. That the design,construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in
the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and
that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area.
Stafffinds the design, construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed use will be
compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood, with the existing and intended character
of the vicinity and will not adversely change the essential character of the area.
4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not
adversely affect other property in the vicinity.
Staff finds the proposed use will not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity if it complies
with the conditions in Section VIII of this report.
5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as
highways, streets, schools,parks,police and fire protection, drainage structures,refuse disposal,
water, and sewer.
Staff ,finds the proposed use will be served by essential public facilities and services as required.
Page 10
Item 5. 1o1 1
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:
a. That the proposed nonconforming use does not encourage or set a precedent for additional
nonconforming uses within the area; and,
This finding is not applicable.
b. That the proposed nonconforming use is developed to a similar or greater level of conformity
with the development standards as set forth in this title as compared to the level of
development of the surrounding properties.
This finding is not applicable.
Page 11
Item 6. L102
(:>
E IDIAN*-----,
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for TM Creek Apartments Phase 3 (H-2021-0035) by Brighton
Corporation, Generally Located South of W. Franklin Rd. and East of S. Ten Mile Rd.
A. Request: Rezone of 5.58 acres of land from the TN-C to the C-G zoning district.
B. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 238
apartment units (including 2 live/work units) on 7.83 acres of land in the C-G zoning district.
Item 6. 103
(:�N-WE IDIAN:--
IDAHO
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION
Staff Contact:Sonya Allen Meeting Date: July 1, 2021
Topic: Public Hearing for TM Creek Apartments Phase 3 (H-2021-0035) by Brighton
Corporation, Generally Located South of W. Franklin Rd. and East of S.Ten Mile Rd.
A. Request: Rezone of 5.58 acres of land from the TN-C to the C-G zoning district.
B. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting
of 238 apartment units (including 2 live/work units) on 7.83 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 6. ■
STAFF REPORTC�,WEIIDIAN --
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O
HEARING July 1,2021 Legend
DATE:
IffProject Lacflion
TO: Planning&Zoning Commission
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner
208-884-5533 -
SUBJECT: H-2021-0035—TM Creek Apartments '
Phase 3
LOCATION: South of W. Franklin Rd. and east of S. - - - --
Ten Mile Rd., in the NW 1/4 of Section
14, Township 3N.,Range 1 W. (Parcel
#R8483040240) --
100
I-T�r-r
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Applicant has applied for a Rezone(RZ) of 5.58-acres of land from the TN-C to the C-G zoning district;
and Conditional Use Permit(CUP) for a multi-family development consisting of 238 apartment units,
including 2 live/work units,on 7.83-acres of land in the C-G zoning district.
Alternative Compliance(ALT)is requested to the following UDC standards:
• UDC 11-3A-1913.3,which requires no more than 50%of the total off-street parking area for the site
to be located between building facades and abutting streets; (Note: Staff determined this request is
not necessary—see analysis in Section VI.)
• UDC 11-4-3-27B.3,which requires a minimum of 80 square feet of private usable open space to be
provided for each dwelling unit; and,
• UDC Table 11-3C-6,which doesn't include a requirement for parking for studio units,to allow the
vertically integrated standard to apply.
Page 1
Item 6. Fo5l
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details Page
Acreage 5.58-acres(RZ area);7.83-acres(CUP area)
Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use Commercial(MU-COM)&High Density
Residential(HDR)
Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped land
Proposed Land Use(s) Future commercial(west of Wayfinder);multi-family
development(east of Wayfinder)
Current Zoning General Retail&Service Commercial(C-G)and Traditional
Neighborhood Center(TN-C)
Proposed Zoning General Retail&Service Commercial(C-G)
Number of Residential Units(type 238-apartment units(studio, 1-bedroom,2-bedroom and
of units) live/work)
Density(gross&net 30.4 units/acre oss /30.8 units/acre net
Open Space(acres,total[%]/ 2.51-acres(32.1%)
buffer/qualified)
Amenities Clubhouse with fitness facilities,a bike repair room,pet
grooming station and work rooms;outdoor swimming pool,
grilling area,sports court(snookball)&ping pong and
fireside seating.
Physical Features(waterways, The Ten Mile Creek runs off-site along the southern boundary
hazards,flood plain,hillside) of the site.
Neighborhood meeting date;#of April 12,2021;no attendees other than Applicant
attendees:
History(previous approvals) AZ-13-015/PP-13-030/H-2015-0018/H-2016-0067/H-2020-
0074(DA Inst.#2021-089157)
B. Community Metrics
Description Details Page
Ada County Highway
District
• Staff report(yes/no) Yes
• Requires ACHD No
Commission Action
(yes/no)
Traffic Impact Study No
es/no
Access One(1)private street access is proposed via Wayfinder,a collector street,along the
(Arterial/Collectors/State west boundary of the site.
Hwy/Local)(Existing
and Pro osed
Fire Service
• Distance to Fire 2.3 miles from Station#1
Station
• Fire Response Time Within 5-minute response time area goal
Page 2
Item 6. F106
Description Details Page
• Resource Reliability 70%—does not meet targeted goal of 80%or greater
• Risk Identification 4—current resources would not be adequate to supply service to this project.
• Accessibility Meets all required access,road widths and turnarounds once secondary access is
completed.
• Special/resource Will require an aerial device—can meet this need in the required time frame if a
needs truck company is required.
• Water Supply Requires 2,500 gallons per minute for 2 hours.
• Other See specific comments in Section IX.C.
Police Service No comments were submitted.
West Ada School District
• Distance(elem,ms,hs) Approved prelim Approved MF
Enrolled for plat parcels per units per Miles
2121=22 ca aci attendance area attendance area °e `°kh°°.
• Capacity of Schools peregrine Elementary 466 650 58 235 1.9
Meridian Middle School 1071 1000 797 1795 2.8
• #of Students Enrolled Meridian High School 1940 2075 3507 2419 1.7
School of Choice Options
Chief Joseph Elementary(Arts) 536 700 N/A N/A 5.2
Barbara Morgan Elementary(Stem) 434 Soo N/A N/A 3.3
• Predicted#of students 24
generated from
proposed development
Wastewater
Distance to Sewer Services Directly adjacent _
Sewer Shed South Black Cat Trunk Shed
Estimated Project Sewer See Application
ERU's _
WRRF Declining Balance 14.15 _
Project Consistent with WW Yes
Master Plan/Facility Plan _
Impacts/Concerns • Sewer easements must be provided and be free of encroachments.
• A sewer stub is required to the northern parcel S1214212580
Water
Distance to Water Services Directly adjacent
Pressure Zone 2 _
Estimated Project Water See Application
ERU's
Water Quality None _
Project Consistent with Water Yes
Master Plan
Impacts/Concerns • Water easements must be provided and be free of encroachements.
• Water must be extended to the east property line.
• An easement must be provided to the southeast portion of the site for future
water connection to the east.
• The 6"water main on the east side of the property must be increased to 8"
i e to meet fire flow.
Page 3
Item 6. 107
C. Project Maps
Future Land Use Map Aerial Map
(fLegend - 0 (fLegend
dProjeci LacafKm I Project Lucafian
Axed
b W e't
High- -ensify 'T'Res�idential
diurn
1111- Residential
ti►
-
�I
Sid--Mial�
Zoning Map Planned Development Map
Legend '1-C R� Legend
Project Lacafian � Praject Lflcafian
- +- oafy Lin-rk
R-1
-N I-L — Planned Parcels
I UT ---1 E
RUT TN- C.
C-G R-
-8
U ---
o
1 I-T�r—r I-T�r—r
III. APPLICANT INFORMATION
A. Applicant:
Kameron Nauahi,Brighton Corporation— 12601 W. Explorer,Boise,ID 83713
B. Owner:
Brighton Development—2929 W.Navigator Dr.,Meridian,ID 83642
C. Representative:
Mike Wardle,Brighton Corporation—2929 W. Navigator Dr., Ste. 400,Meridian,ID 83642
Page 4
Item 6. Fo8l
IV. NOTICING
Planning&Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Newspaper Notification 6/11/2021
Radius notification mailed to
properties within 300 feet 6/8/2021
Public hearing notice sign posted
6/17/2021
on site
Nextdoor posting 6/8/2021
V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN(Comprehensive Plan and TMISAP)
Land Use:
The subject property is designated Mixed Use—Commercial(MUC-COM) and High Density
Residential(HDR) on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) in the Comprehensive Plan. Development of
the property is governed by the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan(TMISAP).
The purpose of the MU-COM designation is to encourage the development of a mixture of office,retail,
recreational,employment, and other miscellaneous uses,with supporting multi-family or single-family
attached residential uses.While the focus of these areas is on commercial and employment uses,the
horizontal and vertical integration of residential uses is essential to securing entitlements. As with all
mixed-use areas,this designation requires developments to integrate the three major use categories—
residential,commercial and employment. In MU-COM areas,three or more significant uses also tend to
be larger scale projects. This designation is intended to provide flexibility and encourage developers to
build innovative projects.
HDR designated areas are multiple-family housing areas where relatively larger and taller apartment
buildings are the recommended building type. HDR should include a mix of housing types that achieve
an overall average density target of at least 16-25 dwelling units per gross acre.Most developments in
this area should fall within or below this range, although smaller areas or higher or lower density may be
included. Residential densities can be concentrated in multi-story projects with up to 50 dwelling units
per acre allowed.
Design: Traditional neighborhood design concepts with a strong pedestrian-oriented focus are essential
in the MU-COM designation. The goal in these areas is to achieve a FAR of 1.00-1.25 or more.
Development within these areas exhibit quality building and site design and an attractive pedestrian
environment with a strong street character. The mix of residential uses may be achieved vertically within
buildings;however, some horizontal mixes may be allowed. This land use designation calls for an
overall target density of 8-12 dwelling units per acre,with higher densities allowed on individual
projects.No more than 30%of the ground level development within the MU-COM designation should
be used for residences. See the Application of the Design Elements matrix on pg. 3-49 of the TMISAP for
design elements applicable to the proposed development.
HDR designated areas are typically relatively compact located adjacent to or very close to larger MU-
COM and Employment areas, and other intensively developed lands. The design and orientation of new
HDR buildings should be pedestrian-oriented and special streetscape improvements should be
considered to create rich and enjoyable public spaces.A strong physical relationship between the
commercial and residential components to adjacent employment or transit centers is critical. Housing
types desired in HDR areas are apartment buildings,townhouses or row houses,and live-work units;
however,the expectation is that most buildings will be relatively dense multi-family types.
Page 5
Item 6. Flog]
Transportation:The Transportation System Map (TSM)in the TMISAP does not depict any local,
collector or arterial streets across this site other than the existing S. Wayfinder Ave., a collector street,
which lies along the west boundary of the proposed residential area.
A Traffic Impact Study(TIS)was not required because this area was studied and included in the
TMISAP.
The streets in this vicinity(i.e.W. Franklin Rd., S. Ten Mile Rd. and S. Wayfinder Ave.) are fully built-
out.
Proposed Use: A multi-family development containing 238 dwelling units consisting of apartments and
live/work units is proposed to develop on the site. The proposed development lies within two different
FLUM designations—MU-COM&HDR. Multi-family apartments and live/work units are desired uses
in both designations.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES:
Goals,Objectives, &Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be
applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics):
• "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of
Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D)
The proposed multi family apartments will contribute to the variety of housing types and financial
capabilities for such in the City as desired.
• "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and
urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for
public facilities and services."(3.03.03F)
City water and sewer services are available and can be extended by the developer with development
in accord with UDC 11-3A-21.
• "Locate higher density housing near corridors with existing or planned transit, Downtown, and in
proximity to employment centers." (2.01.01H)
The proposed multi family development is located in close proximity to S. Ten Mile Rd., a mobility
arterial,providing access to 1-84 and is within an employment center area.
• "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for
diverse housing types throughout the City."(2.01.01 G)
The proposed multi family apartments will contribute to the mix of housing types available in the
City. There is currently a mix of housing types within a mile of this site consisting of single family,
townhomes and multi family apartments.
• "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land."
(3.07.00)
The proposed multi family apartments should be compatible with existing multi family residential
uses to the south and southwest and future commercial/retail uses in this area.
• "Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the
extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian
Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development."(3.03.03A)
The proposed development will connect to City water and sewer systems; services are required to be
Page 6
Item 6. 1 10
provided to and though this development in accord with current City plans.
• "Encourage and support mixed-use areas that provide the benefits of being able to live, shop,dine,
play, and work in close proximity,thereby reducing vehicle trips, and enhancing overall livability and
sustainability."(3.06.02B)
The proposed residential uses will allow folks to live in close proximity to employment, retail and
restaurant uses which will reduce vehicle trips and enhance livability.
VI. STAFF ANALYSIS
A. REZONE(RZ):
A RZ of 5.58-acres of land is proposed from the TN-C to the C-G zoning district.As discussed above,
the associated FLUM designation for the area proposed to be rezoned is mostly MU-COM with a narrow
sliver along the eastern boundary designated as HDR. The proposed C-G zoning and multi-family
residential and live/work(i.e.vertically integrated)uses are consistent with the FLUM designations for
this property.
A site plan and building elevations were submitted as shown in Sections VIII.B and D that show how the
property is proposed to develop with multi-family residential and vertically integrated uses consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and the TMISAP. The proposed density at 30.4 units per acre is also
consistent with the density desired for this area,which is mostly designated HDR.
A legal description and exhibit map for the area proposed to be rezoned is included in Section VIII.A.
Because the subject property is already included within the area governed by a Development Agreement
(DA) (Ten Mile Crossing H-2020-0074,Inst. #2021-089157)and the proposed development is
consistent with the provisions in the agreement, Staff does not recommend a new DA or an amendment
to the existing DA as a provision of the rezone.
B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT(CUP)
A CUP is proposed for a multi-family development containing(3)4-story structures with 238 apartment
units consisting of(42) studio, (120) 1-bedroom, (74)2-bedroom and(2) live/work(i.e.vertically
integrated)units on 7.83-acres of land in the C-G zoning district. The size of each of the unit types
proposed is as follows: 516 square feet(s.f.) for studio units; 685 s.f. for 1-bedroom units; 1,036 s.f. for
2-bedroom units; 733 s.f. for small live/work unit; and 1,082 for large live/work unit. The gross density
of the development is 30.4 units per acre.
A total of 1,815 square feet of non-residential uses are proposed in the vertically integrated residential
structure,which is a principal permitted use in the C-G zoning district and will allow a variety of
commercial uses.
Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3):
The proposed use is subject to the following standards: (Staff's analysis/comments in italic text)
11-4-3-27: MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT:
Site Design:
1. Buildings shall provide a minimum setback often 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. The proposed
site plan complies with this standard.
Page 7
Item 6. Fill
2. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas,waste storage, disposal facilities, and
transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall
be fully screened from view from a public street. The site plan depicts screened trash
enclosures; all proposed transformer/utility vaults and other service areas shall comply with
this requirement.
3. A minimum of eighty(80)square feet(s.f.) 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 access ways 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.
Alternative Compliance is requested to provide zero or a lesser amount ofprivate open space
than required, as follows: 0 for studio units; 79.58 sf.for 1-bedroom units; 66.84 sf.for 2-
bedroom units; 75.91 sf.for 1-bedroom vertically integrated unit; and 67.8 sf.for 2-bedroom
vertically integrated unit.
As an alternative, the Applicant proposes common open space and site amenities above the
minimum requirements coupled with innovative new urban design with an emphasis on
integrated internal open space,facilities and access to the Ten Mile Creek regional pathway
system. Because the proposed design includes design features consistent with "new urbanism"
and promotes walkable and mixed-use neighborhoods with access to the adjacent regional
pathway along the Ten Mile creek and a vast amount of open space, the Director finds the
Applicant's proposal to be sufficient and approves the Alternative Compliance request as
proposed with the condition the 7-foot wide pathway along the southern boundary of the site is
widened to 10 feet.
4. For the purposes of this section,vehicular circulation areas,parking areas, and private usable
open space shall not be considered common open space.Private usable open space areas for the
units fronting on Wayfinder were included in the common open space calculations, which don't
qualify. However, the internal common open space at 2.2-acres complies with the minimum
standard; other areas as shown on the plan that are a minimum of 400 square feet in area and
have a minimum length and width dimension of 20'also qualify and exceed UDC standards.
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. The 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. The Applicant requests alternative compliance to the parking standards
listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6, which doesn't include a requirement for parking for studio units,
to allow the vertically integrated standard to apply. One (1)space is required for a 1-bedroom
unit in vertically integrated residential as opposed to a 1-bedroom apartment unit, which
requires 1.5 spaces with at least one of the spaces being in a covered carport or garage.
With approval of alternative compliance, a minimum of 372 parking spaces are required with
194 of those in a covered carport or garage,for(42)studio, (120) 1-bedroom, (74) 2-bedroom
and(2) vertically integrated residential units.A total of 379 spaces are proposed with 231 of
those being covered(201 in a covered carport and 30 garage spaces).
Because the proposed design includes innovative design features based on "new urbanism, "and
promotes walkable mixed-use neighborhoods, the Director supports the requested alternative
compliance.
Page 8
Item 6. F112
Bicycle parking is required per the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6G and should comply with
the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. One bicycle parking space is required for every 25
proposed vehicle parking spaces or portion thereof. Based on 379 spaces, a minimum of 15
spaces are required; a total of 16 spaces are proposed in excess of UDC standards.
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)
The site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should depict
the location of these items in accord with this standard.
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. There are no units containing 500 sf or less 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.All 238 of
the units fall within this square footage range; therefore, a minimum of 59,500 square feet
or 1.37-acres of common open space is required. A total of 2.51-acres (or 32.1%) is
proposed in accord with this standard. Although some of this area does not qualify(i.e.
private open space) and is not really usable(i.e.parking lot planters), the internal common
open space and area along the Ten Mile creek is 2.2-acres, which exceeds UDC standards.
c. Three hundred fifty(350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two
hundred(1,200) square feet of living area. There are no units proposed that contain more
than 1,200 square feet of living area.
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'). The common open space areas
depicted on the open space exhibit in Section VIII.D meet this requirement.
3. In phased developments, common open space shall be provided in each phase of the
development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units. This
project is proposed to develop in one phase.
4. Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process,common open space areas shall
not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets unless separated from the street by a berm or
constructed barrier at least four feet(4') in height,with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for
pedestrian access. (Ord. 09-1394, 3-3-2009, ef£retroactive to 2-4-2009) The Applicant requests
the street buffer along Wayfinder Ave., a collector street, is allowed to count toward the common
open space for the development although it is not separated from the street by a berm or barrier.
Without this area, the internal common open space along the creek corridor still meets and
exceeds the minimum standards.
D. Site Development Amenities:
Page 9
Item 6. F113
1. All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space and recreation
amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows:
a. Quality of life:
(1) Clubhouse.
(2) Fitness facilities.
(3) Enclosed bike storage.
(4) Public art such as a statue.
b. Open space:
(1) Open grassy area of at least fifty by one hundred feet(50 x 100)in size.
(2) Community garden.
(3) Ponds or water features.
(4) Plaza.
c. Recreation:
(1) Pool.
(2) Walking trails.
(3) Children's play structures.
(4) Sports courts.
2. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of multi-family development as follows:
a. For multi-family developments with less than twenty(20)units,two(2) amenities shall be
provided from two (2) separate categories.
b. For multi-family development between twenty(20) and seventy-five (75)units,three(3)
amenities shall be provided,with one from each category.
c. For multi-family development with seventy-five(75)units or more, four(4)amenities shall
be provided,with at least one from each category.
d. For multi-family developments with more than one hundred(100)units,the decision-
making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed
development.
3. The decision-making body shall be authorized to consider other improvements in addition to
those provided under this subsection D,provided that these improvements provide a similar
level of amenity. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005)
Based on 238 proposed units, a minimum of 5 amenities are required but the decision-making
body is authorized to consider additional similar amenities if they believe the proposed
amenities aren't adequate for the size of the development.
The following amenities are proposed from each category: a clubhouse with a fitness center,
bike repair room and pet grooming station;swimming pool; open grassy areas at least 50'x
100'in size;fireside seating;grilling area; and sports courts (snookball&ping pong). The Ten
Mile Creek multi-use pathway also lies adjacent to the site for residents to use.
E. Landscaping Requirements:
Page 10
Item 6. F114
1. Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3,
"Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title.
2. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The foundation
landscaping shall meet the following minimum standards:
a. The landscaped area shall be at least three feet(Y)wide.
b. For every three(3)linear feet of foundation,an evergreen shrub having a minimum mature
height of twenty-four inches (24") shall be planted.
c. Ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area.
The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should
depict landscaping along the street facing elevations adjacent to S. Wayfinder Ave. in accord
with these standards.
F. Maintenance and Ownership Responsibilities: All multi-family developments shall record legally
binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of
the development,including,but not limited to, structures,parking, common areas, and other
development features. The Applicant shall comply with this requirement.
Access: One(1) east/west private street access is proposed via S.Wayfinder Ave. for the development
with three (3) accesses off the private street. An application for approval of the private street is
required to be submitted that demonstrates compliance with the design and construction
standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4.
A cross-access easement is required to be granted between all non-residential lots in the subdivision per
requirement of the preliminary plat in accord with UDC 11-3A-3A.2.
Landscaping(UDC 11-3B):
A 20-foot wide street buffer exists along S. Wayfinder Ave., a collector street,with on-street parking,
benches,planters and tree grates in accord with UDC Table 11-2B-3, 11-313-7C and the TMISAP.
Landscaping is required within parking lots in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C. The
"diamond"planter islands proposed along the eastern boundary of the site comply with the established
design standards for TM Crossing.
Landscaping is required to be provided along the pathway adjacent to the southern boundary of the site
per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C,which require a mix of trees, shrubs, lawn and/or other
vegetative groundcover. Landscaping should be added to the landscape plan in accord with this
standard; calculations demonstrating compliance with this standard should also be included in the
calculations table.
Landscaping is required within common open space areas per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3E.
Calculations should be included in the calculations table demonstrating compliance with this
standard.
Parking: Off-street vehicle parking is required for the proposed multi-family dwellings and vertically
integrated residential as set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-6 as discussed above.
Alternative Compliance(ALT)is requested to UDC 11-3A-19B.3,which requires no more than 50%of
the total off-street parking area for the site to be located between building facades and abutting streets.
No parking is proposed between the building and Wayfinder Ave. Garages are proposed adjacent to the
Page 11
Item 6. F115
private street,which screen the parking between the street and the multi-family structures negating the
need for ALT.
Pathways: A 7-foot wide pathway is proposed along the southern boundary of the site adjacent to the
Ten Mile Creek. Staff recommends as a condition of approval of the Applicant's request for
Alternative Compliance to the private open space standards in UDC 11-4-3-27B.3,the pathway is
widened to 10-feet and a 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement is dedicated for the pathway as
recommended by the Park's Dept.
Internal pedestrian walkways are required to be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces
through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete, or bricks per UDC 11-3A-19B.4b.
Fencing:No fencing is depicted on the landscape plan for this development. Any fencing constructed on
the site should comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7.
Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual):
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed 4-story structures as shown in Section
VIII.E. Building materials consist of stucco and bricks in neutral colors. Final design is required to
comply with the adopted TM Crossing Design Guidelines.
A Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be submitted and compliance with the TM
Crossing design guidelines is required as set forth in the DA prior to submittal of building permit
applications.
VII. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed RZ and CUP and the Director has approved the requests for
ALT per the provisions included in Section IX in accord with the Findings in Section X.
Page 12
Item 6. 116
VIII. EXHIBITS
A. Legal Description&Exhibit Map for Proposed Rezone
t.EUAL DESCRIPTION
'U'vl Greek '1-N4' Zone Fluundars
Ike of the NW1 t4 of S"titan 3 North. Rangc I West. not w kleridiuot_ Ada County. Tdaho
descrilwd.w
Niegiuninj;at point being S99,6WRI"I; 1577.94 C t alnn8 the'qeckn line and S001134'40"w 294.26
teot from the northwest corner of said Seel ion 14_
Running thcncc N$5t"25'20 fir'290_60 fee1:
theaxe N99"2649"94 297.44 feet;
thence 900033'I l"W 186.45 feet:
ihrn«SO4°00'00"W 2 43.81 reet to u point of a non-tanpenl curve;
thence along saidcurve W the left 7.90 lixt(Curve Daw: Radius-,17Q. fix; , Delta=t°40'33-',chord hears
S89"03'34"F 7_W Feet);
thcncc SHcP52'5 r"F 1715.16 feet;
thence N87°54'01"L 101.03 feet;
thence N89042'19'T41_44feet to rhewst Iineot-the NW[14NV4IAofmid iculicm 14;
thence along said east Iilie NOOr 34'40'F 10.00 to the port# line offen Mile Stub Draim,
thence along.said north lure N99'1l'067"249.02 feet;
th4ncc; ND0034ATE410.51 feet #hc Point ofBcginning_
Pamel Contains 5.58 Acres morc.or less.
f3asrs of ReAeingr
Ncxrth �ecLian line of the N W1 M of Section 14 Commencing at the Nc rthw t eonwr of Stxticm 14 themv
S89'09'50"F, a di-. aitice of 2657.99 fek:r to the N 114 orSection Ito
L t,AN.0
0-1
b- 12224
OF 1
Page 13
Item 6" Fl 17
LOCATED IN NW 1J4 OP SECTION 14, T3N., R.-VV BW-
ADA COUNTY. IDAHO
1
CNRA T,19LE
CU#1ulx --SWlN RACiux I*11A TWIENT CHM5 Lr AIFJG _
G1 ".09 5611 via'—"37:1y MR 479'3d�f'v1
Ca %770 TWW W51'16- 5a.19 106-W $rr 041fw
C] W.42 194w 2EW4T 47f5 5WWa7W
1 3TaCU 7'4tr97 T #4R 7911
ECAE
pcfl FRANKLIN ROAD
1n 1F
r SS4'24'7P'E 79ad#- - --
k S S NC'34'4VE 29.2v
< �r f c ZONE TN-
- N@'a0'96E 21U@L'
� N1c917-aisWi
ao#'l-A
ir
4R%9o'9Hti9'f Y5'
UJ
ZONE CG
51i'1f{'Abgi6Vr'w+ 72+199@D7Z-G6
M � GSFa+-E lneae
5"51'4m 9101' '
� 111 @1.3V '. -NBi'?O s4w 47 TJ ZON
kb9'2&t+"N aC Oe r nuw �7 �{l�
I 'Mre So 21w 10:4 R�-FL1
G N71'71'qQ'H n
977$v' 141# �-
�` I
ie[ii rota'41T 1 YYf idhA'.'� �
179Y Sa9'li'a�'E 7G�
ma-lea" '2rp"q
Sd@'iP4%, 9174r-
I
xu o
�I
Y
1:
w BRIGHTON
CORPORATION
KILLER
#i*04�d�ii�
rdr.,Id
ZONING BOUNDARYit
4 Y•Y
�I+M�7R
LEGAL DESCRIPTION MAP FOR TM CREEK
Page 14
Item 6. F118
B. Site Plan(date: 4/30/2021)
o �
B
I
EFTEETI
4
DJU
is o
H— w
LLLF
SITE LAYOUT
Page 15
Item 6. 119 1
C. Landscape Plan(dated: 5/3/21)
����."[��'.,,_�s�-ems:#rcr ;.,�.a+�ai..:. •.-:-..�-r.-.d^.�-�-� :as- 's��: a.i.�ae.,�:4,,-:dr
x PRIVATE TRUE
wi
Z
j
yE I 1
J.
TEN MILE CREEK BRIGHTON
CONCEPTUAL 5UBJECTTO CHANGE
a ".' Q rye w. a
Y
91
jl F
x
,9 merc®u.rxuxurmu.wx m�o "
1'
_71
,
d .. .
77
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT LANDSCAPEWE PLAN
ir
&,FFER-51REETIREECFICUTATQ%(1TRE35LF)
PARKNG ISIANPIRFESx .,{p� "� VL 1 . vm
iREEGf£NES MIX ® -• .•}1 e
ETGPTON
' ........
mw ,a .e c 11R
G Page 16
Item 6. F120]
D. Qualified Open Space (dated: 5/3/21)
I UIIIII
b d I
I
ff
I
e w
I
I ss rmr,r a
I I _
mm I 2
O
�ox W
x G �
W¢ ~
b
it
r
C
I p
V
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT QUALIFIED OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT
.��•,_� PRELIMINARY SITE CALCULATIONS
�a anm _wwnm imm
km
El
Page 17
! !!i !! eee !!! !1! !!! 1!1 ! u !!� �u es:■■n■�!
e■ e■ ■■ ■■�� ■■■een■■■ e■■■■ a seu eee ■n e�w ■■ n
__ -
■■ �E it u !i
■ee ■ ■ ■ w
■. ee ■ ■.■ .■■ e■■
oil IN
-- ■ on IN ■ e■al I211 on e■ in
-- ■ ■■ ■ 1■■ ■ ee■e u�ee on ■
Il�rf ■r■ ■ Ell o ■■ ■■ ■e■e see ■■ - -- II
m REWBW
111 ii I!1 iii ii 111 !t■] a �11 11� � 1!� �11 11� � J11
iii WIN
�` �"�1 I '�■ ■■ �: >� 11� ■� a ;�1 111 � �1�low
". - -- - U .4 --- - - -
T • ,
�,. oil,
�r
$ti
all �ii ar;
� c.
! � r ov" r
_ N 6
f ,a
Item 6. 123
WAYFINDER AVE. - STREET FRONTAGE
_Lwwww_
❑c)
INTERIOR HALLWAY UNIT ENTRANCE
LARGE- 1,082 SF "WORK"—LOWER LEVEL SMALL-733 SF
❑ 76G!! Lj
erxe I L�LI ;
nnn
LARGE-1,a82 SF "LIVE"— UPPER LEVEL SMALL-733 SF
Page 20
Item 6. F124]
IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
Conditional Use Permit:
1. The Applicant shall comply with the provisions in the existing Development Agreement(Inst. 2021-
089157) and all other previous conditions of approval.
2. The multi-family development shall have an ongoing obligation to comply with the specific use
standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27.
3. The multi-family development shall record a legally binding document that states the maintenance
and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development,including,but not limited to,
structures,parking, common areas, and other development features as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27F.
A recorded copy of said document shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance
of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development.
4. The site and/or landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance shall be revised
as follows:
a. Depict the locations of the property management office,maintenance storage area, central
mailbox location(including provisions for parcel mail,that provide safe pedestrian and/or
vehicular access),and a directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient
location for those entering the development in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.7.
b. All transformer and utility vaults and other service areas shall be located in an area not visible
from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street in accord with
UDC 11-4-3-27B.2.
c. Depict landscaping along the foundations of all street facing elevations adjacent to S. Wayfinder
Ave. as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27E.2.
d. Include a detail of the proposed site amenities.
e. Depict a gate across the emergency access driveway from W. Franklin Rd. as required by the
Fire Dept.
f. Depict landscaping along the pathway adjacent to the southern boundary of the site per the
standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C,which require a mix of trees, shrubs, lawn and/or other
vegetative groundcover.
g. Calculations should be included in the calculations table demonstrating compliance with the
required landscaping in common open space areas per UDC 11-3G-3E.
h. Widen the pathway along the southern boundary of the site to 10-feet.
i. Internal pedestrian walkways are required to be distinguished from the vehicular driving
surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete,or bricks per UDC 11-3A-
19B.4b.
5. Submit an application for the proposed private street that demonstrates compliance with the design
and construction standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4.
6. The Director approved the Applicant's request for Alternative Compliance to the off-street parking
standards for multi-family dwellings listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6, as follows: a total of 379 spaces
shall be provided with 231 of those being covered(201 in a covered carport and 30 garage spaces).
7. The Director approved the Applicant's request for Alternative Compliance to the private usable open
space standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27B.3 for each dwelling unit as follows: 79.58 square feet
Page 21
Item 6. 125
(s.f.) for 1-bedroom units; 66.84 s.f. for 2-bedroom units; 75.91 s.f. for the 1-bedroom vertically
integrated unit; and 67.8 s.f. for the 2-bedroom vertically integrated unit. Floor plans with square
footages noted for patios and balconies shall be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance
application that demonstrate compliance with the alternative compliance approval.
8. Submit a 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement for the pathway along the southern boundary of
the site along the north side of the Ten Mile Creek in accord with Park's Department requirements.
9. An application for Certificate of Zoning Compliance shall be submitted for the proposed project and
approved prior to submittal of building permit applications. Compliance with the design guidelines
in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan and the design standards listed in the Architectural
Standards Manual as applicable is required. See the Application of the Design Elements matrix on
pg. 3-49 of the TMISAP for design elements applicable to the proposed development.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
No comments at this time.
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT
https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=230631&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU
D. POLICE DEPARTMENT
No comments were submitted.
E. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS)
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=231480&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID)
No comments were submitted.
G. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCHOOL IMPACT TABLE
https://weblink.meridiancit E.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=231292&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
H. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD)
https://weblink.meridiancitE.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=231215&dbid=0&repo=Meridian QU
I. PARK'S DEPARTMENT
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=230766&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCi1y
J. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=231070&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
hgps://weblink.m eridia n c i ty.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=2 2 9 0 8 6&db id=0&rep o=Meridia n City
Page 22
Item 6. F126]
X. FINDINGS
A. Rezone(UDC 11-5B-3E)
Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall at the
public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall
make the following findings:
l. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
Stafffinds the rezone of the subject site from the TN-C to the C-G zoning district is consistent with
the associated MU-COM and HDR FL UM designations in the Comprehensive Plan for the subject
property proposed to be rezoned.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the
purpose statement;
Stafffinds the proposed map amendment to C-G will assist in providingfor the retail and service
needs of the community consistent with the purpose statements for the district while allowing multi-
family residential uses as desired in the HDR FL UM designation.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare;
Stafffinds that the proposed rezone should not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any
political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school
districts; and
Stafffinds that the proposed rezone will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of
services by any political subdivision providing services to this site.
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
Because this application is for a rezone and not an annexation, this finding is not applicable.
B. Conditional Use Permit(UDC 11-511-6E)
The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit requests 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 that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and
dimensional and development regulations of the C-G district(see Analysis, Section V for more
information).
2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with
the requirements of this Title.
Stafffinds that the proposed use is consistent with the future land use map designations of MU-C
and HDR and the multi family residential use is allowed as a conditional use in UDC Table 11-2B-2
in the C-G zoning district.
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.
Page 23
Item 6. F127]
Staff finds the proposed design of the development, construction, operation and maintenance should
be compatible with the mix of other uses planned for this area and with the intended character of the
area and that such uses will not adversely change the character of the area.
4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely
affect other property in the vicinity.
Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use
will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission should weigh any public
testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect other properties in the
vicinity.
5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as
highways,streets,schools,parks,police and fire protection,drainage structures,refuse disposal,water,
and sewer.
Staff finds that essential public services are available to this property and that the use will be
adequately served by these facilities.
C. Alternative Compliance(UDC 11-513-5):
In order to grant approval of an alternative compliance application,the Director shall determine the
following:
1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements is not feasible; OR
The Director finds strict adherence to the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27B.3 is feasible.
Pertaining to the request for Alternative Compliance to UDC Table 11-3C-6, there are no parking
standards for studio units.
2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and
The Director finds the proposed alternative compliance of providing integrated internal open space,
a pathway creek amenity and site amenities and common open space in exess of UDC standards
coupled with innovative, new-urban design provides a superior means for meeting the requirements
in UDC 11-4-3-27B.3.
The Director finds the proposed alternative for parking for studio units provides an equal means for
meeting the requirements in UDC Table 11-3C-6.
3. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended
uses and character of the surrounding properties.
The Director finds that the proposed alternative means of compliance will not be detrimental to the
public welfare or impair the intended use%haracter of the surrounding properties.
Page 24
E IDIAN;---
Applicant Presentation
TM Creek Apartments #3 1 July 1, 2021–Planning and Zoning CommissionRezone and Conditional Use Permit
REZONE AgreementConsistent with Development •Comprehensive Plan/FLUMConsistent with •G-C to C-5.58 acres from TN•2
PHASE 2 PHASE 3 3 THE FLATS
SITE PLAN 2 live/work units•bedroom units-74 two•bedroom units-120 one•42 studio units•unitsfamily -style multi-238 urban•4
LIVE/WORK UNITS 5
OPEN SPACE corridor.Creek Tenmilethe Landscaping adjacent to •amenity coresouth of the central Landscaping around and •Street Landscape buffers•space (32.1% of site)2.51 acres of qualified
open •6
SITE AMENITIES-24fi throughout Amenity Areas-WiWork RoomsWarming Kitchen Pet Grooming StationParcel Locker System Bike Repair RoomEntertainment/Game Area Conference Roomhour Resident
Lounge-24 7
OUTDOOR AMENITIES CourtSnookballOutdoor Fireside SeatingOutdoor Pool LoungeOutdoor YogaSide Patio & Grilling Area -PoolOutdoor Ping Pong/Lounge Round Spa -Resort Style Pool & YearOutdoor
Amenities 8
TEN MILE CREEK site circulation.of the property for internal sidewalk along the south side We are proposing an 8’ •of Ten Mile Creek.located along the south side use pathway is -A 10’
multi•Future Gathering Plaza9 8’ and 10’ Pathways3.5 Miles SITE AMENITIES/PATHWAYS-OFF
ELEVATIONS 10
ELEVATIONS 11
TEN MILE CREEK development..49 of the TMISAP for design elements applicable to the proposed -See the Application of the Design Elements matrix on pg. 3required. is Ten Mile Crossing
Design Guidelinesand the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual as applicabledesign guidelines in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan submittal of building
permit applications. Compliance with the 9. An application for Certificate of Zoning Compliance shall be submitted for the proposed project and approved prior to reference to the TMISAP
is not applicable; thus, that condition should be modified as follows:CUP Condition #9’s3.Standards Manual, except for the deviations specified in this agreement.pertaining to land
use, transportation and design; UDC standards; and design standards in the Architectural Design Guidelines Future development shall be consistent with the guidelines for development
in the Ten Mile Crossing from the recently approved Ten mile Crossing DA state:“conditions governing development of governing property”Inasmuch as the the north side of the Ten Mile
Creek in accord with Park’s Department requirements.foot wide public pedestrian easement for the pathway along the southern boundary of the site along -8. Submit a 14in its entirety:
Condition 8deletion of pose we pro—public useand is not a regional facility for general —foot sidewalk is for internal project circulation-Because the 82..8 feetfeet-10along the southern
boundary of the site to sidewalkpathwayh. Widen the :Condition 4.hon of foot reference, we propose modificati-Because the CUP Site Plan denotes the sidewalk at 8 feet rather than the
narrative’s 71. 12 MODIFY CONDITIONS
Questions?13
Item 7. L128
(:>
E IDIAN*-----,
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing Continued from June 3, 2021 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.
Item 7. 129
(:�N-VE IDIAN
IDAHO
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION
Staff Contact:Sonya Allen Meeting Date: July 1, 2021
Topic: Public Hearing Continued from June 3, 2021 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 7. ■
STAFF REPORTC�,WEIIDIAN --
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O
HEARING July 1,2021 Legend ® - -
DATE: 2021�3 Pr
J r Continued om:June , ( - _
f I otect Lacfl�iar
TO: Planning&Zoning Commission
00
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner
208-884-5533 , 00
SUBJECT: H-2021-0015
Woodcrest Townhomes—CPAM, RZ F1
LOCATION: 1789 N. Hickory Way, in the SE '/4 of
Section 5,Township 3N.,Range lE.
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map(CPAM)to change the future land use
designation on 2.10-acres of land from Commercial to Medium High-Density Residential; and Rezone(RZ)
of 2.10-acres of land from the L-O(Limited Office)to the R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential)zoning
district.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details Page
Acreage 1.97-acres
Future Land Use Designation Commercial
Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped land
Proposed Land Use(s) Residential and office
Current Zoning Limited Office(L-O)
Proposed Zoning R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential)
Lots(#and type;bldg/common) NA(property is not proposed to be subdivided at this time)
Phasing plan(#of phases) NA
Number of Residential Units(type 19 units(single-family attached&townhouse dwellings)
of units)
Density(gross&net) 10.8 units/acre(gross)/13.5 units/acre net
Open Space(acres,total[%]/ NA I
buffer/qualified)
Page 1
Item 7. 131
Amenities 10' wide multi-use pathway along Meridian Rd./SH-69
Physical Features(waterways, None
hazards,flood plain,hillside)
Neighborhood meeting date;#of 1/28/21; 10 attendees
attendees:
History(previous approvals) Annexed&subdivided in 1992 as Angel Park Sub. (Lot 1,
Block 1)with L-O zoning;re-subdivided in 2001 (Mallane
Commercial Complex PP-00-021);FP-03-001 (Lot 4,Block
1);H-2017-0165 (RZ&CUP—denied)
B. Community Metrics
Description Details Page
Ada County Highway District
• Staff report(yes/no) Yes
• Requires ACHD No
Commission Action
es/no
• Existing Conditions Hickory Way is improved with 2-travel lanes,curb,gutter&
5' attached sidewalk.No additional improvements or right-of-
way dedication is required with this application.
• CIP/IFYWP NA
Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via the existing driveway via Hickory
H /Local)(Existin and Proposed) Way.
Proposed Road Improvements None
Fire Service See Section IX.C
Police Service No comment.
West Ada School District
Distance(elem,ms,hs) Approved prelim Approved MF
Enrolled plat parcels per units per Miles
Capacity of Schools for 21-22 Ca aci attendance area attendance area
#of Students Enrolled River Valley Elementary 445 700 571 764 1.6
Lewis&Clark Middle School 866 1000 978 1319 2.4
Centennial High School 1981 1900 549 1234 4.8
School of Choice Options
Pioneer Elementary(Arts) 713 775 N/A N/A 4.4
Spalding Elementary(Stem) 697 750 N/A N/A 4.1
Wastewater
• Distance to Sewer Services Directly Adjacent
• Sewer Shed _ 'Go 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 •Do not have services crossing private lots
•Flow is committed.
Page 2
Item 7. 132
•Existing sewer not shown correctly.Missing existing manhole and shown as
extends further into the property then existing sewer actually goes.
•There is an existing 8" stub from existing manhole that looks like it will not be
used.If this is the case the existing stub must be abandoned at the manhole per
City Requirements.
•Ensure that infiltration trenches are located so that sewer services do no pass
through them.
Water
• Distance to Services Directly adjacent
• Pressure Zone 3
• Estimated Project Water See application
ERU's
• Water Quality Concerns None
• Project Consistent with Yes
Water Master Plan
• Impacts/Concerns •Do not have services crossing private lots
Page 3
Item 7. F133]
C. Project Maps
Future Land Use Map Aerial Map
'
Legend Legend 1!!1r1!�
Pra}eci Lacafar '1diU
Sld lltlbi ;- 7,., M-L!
MU-RG
r—Re u
� -C -
4J
1 4
Zoning Map Planned Development Map
®h1JT R: {�Rj Legend
LH
L
Legend d�
R1 Pro"ec- Laca=or ® - �1 R-4 ��Pfaject Lacafar
g
R- RU +_i city Limik m[]d
Planned Pnme s
L R-4
a;-L!
L- - RU L-0 `
t
R1
� o
0
$o
L I-L 3J _
r
R-40
1
4 �i RU rH
T
III. APPLICANT INFORMATION
A. Applicant:
Andrew Newell,Blaine A.Womer Civil Engineering—4355 W. Emerald St., Ste. 145,Boise, ID 83706
B. Owner:
Don Newell,Landmark Pacific Development, LLC—PO Box 1939,Eagle, ID 83616
Page 4
Item 7. F134]
C. Representative:
Same as Applicant
IV. NOTICING
Planning& Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Newspaper notification
published in newspaper 5/14/2021
Radius notification mailed to
property owners within 300 feet 5/12/2021
Public hearing notice sign posted
6/10/2021
on site
Nextdoor posting 5/11/2021
V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS
LAND USE: This property is designated as Commercial on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in
the Comprehensive Plan. This designation provides for a full range of commercial uses to serve area
residents and visitors. Desired uses may include retail,restaurants,personal and professional services, and
office uses, as well as appropriate public and quasi-public uses.
The Applicant proposes an amendment to the FLUM to change the existing Commercial designation to
Medium High-Density Residential(MHDR). The MHDR designation allows for a mix of dwelling types
including townhouses, condominiums, and apartments. Residential gross densities should range from 8 to 12
dwelling units per acre. These areas are relatively compact within the context of larger neighborhoods and
are typically located around or near mixed use commercial or employment areas to provide convenient
access to services and jobs for residents. Developments need to incorporate high quality architectural design
and materials and thoughtful site design to ensure quality of place and should also incorporate connectivity
with adjacent uses and area pathways, attractive landscaping and a project identity.
The Applicant proposes to develop the site with a total of 19 single-family attached and townhome dwellings
at a gross density of 10.8 units per acre consistent with the land uses and density desired in MHDR
designated areas; and an office building.
This site abuts a larger residential neighborhood to the north and is located in close proximity to mixed use
designated land and employment uses to the east and southeast, including vacant land yet to be developed,
The Village at Meridian, Scentsy and other uses along the Eagle Road corridor,which will provide
convenient access to services and jobs for residents. The development should incorporate high quality
architectural and site design to ensure quality of place and incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses
and pathways and include attractive landscaping and a project identity as desired in MHDR
designated areas.
Transportation: The Master Street Map(MSM) does not depict any collector streets across this property.
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)
Page 5
Item 7. 135
The proposed single-family attached dwellings and 3- and 4-unit townhomes will contribute to the
variety of residential housing types in this area and within the City as desired. Single-family detached
and attached homes exist to the north and northeast in Dove Meadows subdivision, zoned R-8.
• "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and
urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for
public facilities and services."(3.03.03F)
City water and sewer service is available and can be extended by the developer with development in
accord with UDC 11-3A-21.
• "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area; provide for
diverse housing types throughout the City."(2.01.01 G)
The proposed single-family attached and townhouse dwellings will contribute to the diversity in
housing types in this area, which currently consist ofsingle family attached and detached homes.
• "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through
buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices."(3.07.01A)
The proposed residential uses will provide a transition in uses between existing single-family homes
to the north and commercial/office uses to the south.
• "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land."
(3.07.00)
The proposed residential development and site design should be compatible with existing abutting
single-family residential homes to the north.
• "Support infill development that does not negatively impact the abutting, existing development.
Infill projects in downtown should develop at higher densities,irrespective of existing
development." (2.02.02C)
The proposed residential infill development shouldn't negatively impact abutting development as
existing uses are also residential in nature and the medium high-density residential uses will assist
in providing a transition to the commercial/office uses to the south.
• "Maintain a range of residential land use designations that allow diverse lot sizes,housing types, and
densities."(2.01.01C)
The proposed MHDR FL UM designation for this property will contribute to the range of residential
land use designations in this area of the City which mainly consists of medium density residential
(MDR).
• "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 with development of the
subdivision;services are required to be provided to and though this development in accord with
current City plans.
• "Require appropriate landscaping,buffers, and noise mitigation with new development along
transportation corridors(setback,vegetation,low walls,berms, etc.)."(3.07.01C)
A street buffer already exists along N. Hickory Way, a collector street, along the northern boundary
of the site.
Page 6
Item 7. E
• "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter,
sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G)
Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks are required to be provided
with development of the future subdivision.
• "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels
within the City over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02)
Development of the subject infill parcel will maximize public services.
VI. STAFF ANALYSIS
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT(CPAM)
As discussed above,the Applicant requests an amendment to the FLUM to change the future land use
designation on 2.10-acres of land from Commercial to MHDR for the development of 19 single-family
attached and townhome dwellings at a gross density of 10.8 units per acre. An exhibit map showing the
existing and proposed FLUM designations is included in Section VIII.A.
Approval of the proposed amendment to MHDR will contribute to the range of residential land use
designations and diversity in housing types and densities in this area as desired. Additionally, it will
provide for a transition in land uses between existing medium density residential uses to the north and
commercial/office uses to the south and east. The change to a residential designation and subsequent
proposed development will provide for fewer vehicle trips per day than would result from commercial
development. For these reasons, Staff is in support of the request for a map amendment to MHDR.
B. REZONE(RZ)
The Applicant proposes to rezone 2.10-acre of land from the L-O(Limited Office)to the R-15 (Medium
High-Density Residential)zoning district consistent with the proposed FLUM designation of MHDR. A
legal description and exhibit map for the rezone area is included in Section VIII.B.
This vacant/undeveloped property is an enclave surrounded by property developed with single-family
residential uses to the north and commercial/office uses to the south and east; only the property to the
west is yet to develop. Developent of the subject property will provide more efficient provision of City
services.
A conceptual site plan and building elevations were submitted showing how the property is planned to
develop with(19) single-family attached and townhouse dwelling units consisting of(1) single-family
attached structure,(3) 3-unit townhouses, (2)4-unit townhouses and a 2,500 square foot office building.
The property is planned to be subdivided through a future application. The existing subdivision plat(i.e.
Mallane Subdivision)requires all lots in the subdivision to obtain conditional use permit approval prior
to construction commencing on the lots; this requirement will be removed with re-subdivision of the
property. The existing plat also depicts a 10' PUDI easement and 25' wide landscape easement along the
west and north boundaries and a sanitary sewer,water main and public utilities easement along the east
boundary of the site. The landscape buffer easement will be removed since a landscape buffer isn't
required between residential uses and the PUDI easements will be replaced with new easements with the
future plat.
Single-family attached and townhouse dwellings are listed as a principal permitted use in the R-15
zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. Future development is subject to the dimensional standards
listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 zoning district.
The conceptual development plan depicts access to the site via a cross-access easement from an existing
driveway from N. Hickory Way, a collector street; no stub streets exist to this property. Direct access via
Page 7
Item 7. F137]
N. Hickory Way is prohibited. A private street is planned to provide access to the proposed development
and for addressing purposes; an application for such should be submitted with the preliminary plat
application and compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4 is required. Staff recommends
the Applicant work with the property owner to the east to extend the private street to Hickory
Way in order to better facilitate emergency access to the site for wayfinding purposes.
An attached sidewalk is proposed along one side of the private street for pedestrian access.
Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6.
A minimum of 2 spaces are required per dwelling unit for 1-and 2-bedroom units,with at least one of
those in an enclosed garage,the other space may be enclosed or a minimum 10' x 20' parking pad. For
3-and 4-bedroom units, a minimum of 4 spaces are required per dwelling unit with at least 2 in an
enclosed garage, other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum 10' x 20' parking pad. Garages are
proposed for each unit with parking pads in front of the garages. Four extra spaces for guests are
proposed in the common area near the entry. On-street parking is not allowed due to the width of the
private street.
A minimum of one(1) off-street parking space is required for ever 500 square feet(s.f.) of gross floor
area for non-residential uses(i.e. the office). Based on 2,500 s.f. for the office,a minimum of(5) spaces
are required. A total of(9)spaces are proposed, exceeding the minimum standards. Most of the parking
spaces for the office encroach within the required 20-foot wide buffer to residential uses,which is not
allowed.
Because the site is below 5-acres in size, qualified open space and site amenities are not required by the
UDC per UDC 11-3G-2.A total of 0.29-acre of open space is proposed as shown on the concept plan.
A 20-foot wide landscaped street buffer and attached sidewalk exists on this site along N. Hickory Way
that was installed with the subdivision improvements that is proposed(and required)to remain.
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the single-family attached and 3-unit and 4-unit
townhouse structures as shown in Section VIII.D. Building elevations consist of a mix of materials
including horizontal wood siding,vertical board and batten siding,wood shake siding and cement plaster
with stone veneer accents and architectural asphalt roofing. Conceptual building elevations were also
submitted for the office with building materials consisting of cement plaster with stone veneer and
decorative wood timber accents and architectural asphalt roofing consistent with the residential
structures. Final design of all structures is required to comply with the design standards in the
Architectural Standards Manual. Detailed review of the elevations for compliance with these standards
will take place with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application prior to
application for building permits.
The City may require a development agreement(DA) in conjunction with a rezone pursuant to Idaho
Code section 67-6511A. To ensure the site develops as proposed with this application, Staff
recommends a DA is required with the provisions discussed above and included in Section IX.A.
Staff Recommendation: Because this is an infill property and has an irregular configuration,
development of this site is difficult. The proposed concept plan with an office at the southeast
corner with parking that encroaches within the required land use buffer does not comply with
UDC standards as noted above and is constricted.The Comprehensive Plan states development in
MHDR designated areas should incorporate high quality architectural and site design to ensure
quality of place and incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and pathways and include
attractive landscaping and a project identity. To achieve this goal and alleviate some of the spacial
constrictions on the site,Staff recommends as a provision of the rezone that the office building is
removed from the plan and open space with quality landscaping and some parking is provided
instead with pathways along the south and east sides of the development and a gazebo with a
Page 8
Item 7. 138
seating area as an amenity which can be shared between the residential and commercial
development.Prior to the City Council hearing,the Applicant should revise the concept plan
accordingly.
VII. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map and Rezone with
the requirement of a Development Agreement per the provisions in Section IX in accord with the
Findings in Section X.
Page 9
Item 7. F139]
VIII. EXHIBITS
A. Future Land Use Map—Adopted&Proposed Land Uses
Date-6/28/2021
Adopted Land Uses
500 1,000 s
Feet
Medium.Density
'Residenfial
MU-KG
Legend
`TMISAP Boundary
Commercial � ���'
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Med-High Density Residential —
High Density Residential
-Commercial I-C
Office
General Industrial
j
- Industrial �
civic Proposed Land Uses
Old Town
Mixed Use Neighborhood
Mixed Use Community
Mixed Use Regional _ —_
- Mixed Use Non-Residential
0 MixedUse-Interchange edium-Density
'Residential
Low Density Employment —j__j---_
I U
- High Density Employment
Mixed Employment MU-KG
—J MU-Res
�— Med-High
L— MU-Cam Dens'
® Lifestyle Center Residential
•ommercial
1
� MU C
Generallndustrial
Page 10
Item 7. F140]
B. Rezone Legal Description and Exhibit Map
WOODCRESI'TOWNHOMES SUBDIVISION
EXHIBIT'A'
LEGAL.DESCRIPTION
A PARCEL LOCATED IN THE SOUTIWEST 1/4 OF TIM SOUTHEAST 114 OF SECTION 5,TOWNSHIP 3
NORTH,RANGE 1 EAST,BOISE MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO,AND ALSO BEING A PORTION OF
LOT 4,BLOCK 1 OF MALLANE SUBDIVISION,AS SHOWN IN BOOK 87 OF PLAI'S ON PAGES 9881
THROUGH 9883,RECORDS OF ADA COUNTY,IDAHO,AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS.
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER.OF SAID SECTION 5 AS SHOWN ON SAID PLAT;
THENCE NORTH 001128'03"EAST A DISTANCE OF 67,14 FEUTTO A V8 INCH DIAMETER IRON PIN
MARKING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3, BLOCK 1 OF SAID MALLANE SUBDIVISION;
THENCE CONS TINUING NORTH 001128'43"EAST ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 3,A
DISTANCE OF 252.95 FEET TO A 112 INCH DIAMETER IRON PIN MARKING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER
OF SAID LOT 4 AND THE TRY;E P0114 I'OF BEGINNING;
THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 00028'03"EAST ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 4,A
DISTANCE OF 129.73 FEET TO A 5/8 INCH DIAMF,TF,R IRON PIN;
THENCE NORTH 430 19'32"EAST ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 4,A
DISTANCE OF 257.72 FEET TO 518 INCH DIAMETER IRON PIN;
I HLNCE CONTINUING NORTH 4301932"EAST ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION OF
SAID NOTIIWESTERLY BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 34.49 FEET TO THE CENTER LINE❑F NORTH
HICKORY WAY,
THENCE SOUTH 76012'56"EAST ALONG SAID CENTER LINE,A DISTANCE OF 90.01 FEET TO THE
BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 400.00
FEET,
THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTER LINEAND SAID TANGENT CURVE,93.24 FEET
THROUGH A CENTRAL.ANGLE OF 13021'21"TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY
PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 4;
Page 11
Item 7. 141
PAGE 1 OF 2
THENCE SOUTH 00°2644"WEST ALONG SAID PROLONGATION,A DISTANCE OF 33.93 FEET TO Ala
INCH DIAMETER MON PIN MARKING THE MORTHFAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 4;
THENCE SOUTH 00°2644"WESTALONG SAID EASTERLY HOLINDARY,A DISTANCE OF 210.08 FEET
TO A 5/8 INCH DIAMETER IRON PIN;
THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY BouNDARy NORTR 89*3420"WEST,A DISTANCE OF 244.56 FEET
TOA5/8 INCH DLAMETER IRON PIN;
THENCE SOUTH 00°28'04"WEST,A DISTANCE OF 47.00 FEET TO A 5f8 INCH DIA.MEfER IRON PIN ON
THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 4;
THENCE NORTH 8"722"WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY,A DISTANCE OF 129.20 FEET
TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINS 2.10 ACRES,MORE OR LESS.
EXHIBIT`B'ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.
i
L
@l � f
7732
06
q A. '
Page 12
Item 7. F142]
m
A-
"a
0 71
a
rn rn
o
rae
4
.. .... ..... .......•............... ............... ....... :. :.:.<....!. .
.. ..
w
lLA
773
'�] A•
JN14120 Annexation description 4/21/2021
Scale: 1 inch= 50 feet File:
Tract 1:2-1063 Acres(91752 Sq,l seta,Closure:n00.i7000e UO ft.(11281991).Perimeter=12701t.
01 n002803e 129.73 08 n89-3420w 244.66
02 n43.1932e 257.72 09 s00.2804w 47
03 n43-1932e 34. B 10 o89.3722w 129.2
04 s76.1256e 90.01
05 Rt,r=400.00,delta=013.2121,arc--93.24
06 s00.2644w 33.93
07 s- 0OIW44w 210.08
Page 13
Item 7. F143]
C. Conceptual Development Plan(NOT APPROVED)
t /
PRE UEP• —APPAOVEN G4iE
`/
I r
y \ R' / / 25005E OFFICE
SPACE
FAUX GATE - - --��
\ _---_-_--__
SEAL-ENGINEER xcNiae a�rrr w.
,H-u Or—El.rtw-,G E ESTOF MERMEN,M-`EElV' aI' xxavesm= WCCOCRESi TCEPTUAL S SUBOMI910NE�� r�rw EE � ri, LAINE A.WOMER1'k�
EEWNG CONCEPTUAL PLAN ru xo.
aT�S.
PREIJMINRRY PIT •^..,••••.»,••."•... ._"'••••••• 1420W4
Page 14
Item 7. ■
D. Conceptual Building Elevations
l: m -
Ll
6 6 WOODCREST TOWNHOMES(2 UNIT)
ARCHITECTURE
Page 15
Item 7. 145
� m 0
17 17
LD
`e WOODCREST TOWNHOMES(3-UNIT)
ARCHITECTURE
------------
WOOUCREST TOWNHOMES(3-UNIT)
T�
Page 16
Item 7. F146]
m..m®
C L
M �®
I
❑' ❑ M. m�
III _ ��.���.�
6M—
WOODCREST 70WNHOMES(4-UNIT)
ARCHITECTURE ,,,�,�
❑ ❑ ❑
8 WOODCREST TOWNHOMES(4-UNIT)
ARCHITECNftE ��,
Page 17
Item 7. Fl 47
g0
4
��[)5 WOODCREST OFFICE SPACE
aR HirEcru�E „�,�
Page 18
Item 7. F148]
IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
Prior to the City Council hearing, Staff recommends the conceptual development plan is revised to
remove the office building and replace it with common open space with quality landscaping that
incorporates the following: parking,pedestrian pathways along the south and east sides of the
development,and a gazebo with a seating area which can be shared between the residential and
commercial development.
1. A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to
approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the
property owner(s)at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer.
Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to
commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the
Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall,
at minimum, incorporate the following provisions:
a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development
plan and building elevations included in Section VIII and the provisions contained herein.
b. Future development shall comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards
Manual.An application for Design Review shall be submitted and approved for the single-
family attached and townhouse structures prior to submittal of building permit applications.
c. Direct access via Hickory Way is prohibited.
d. The proposed development shall incorporate high quality architectural design and materials and
thoughtful site design to ensure quality of place and also incorporate connectivity with adjacent
uses and area pathways, attractive landscaping and a project identity consistent with the Medium
High-Density Residential Future Land Use Map designation in the Comprehensive Plan.
e. The subject property shall be subdivided prior to submittal of a Certificate of Zoning
Compliance and Design Review application(s) for the site.
f. The Applicant shall work with the property owner to the east to extend the private street to
Hickory Way if possible in order to better facilitate emergency access to the site for wayfinding
purposes.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
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 Do not have water and/or sewer services crossing private lots.
1.3 The existing sewer is not shown correctly. Missing existing manhole and shown as extending
further into the property then existing sewer actually goes.
1.4 There is an existing 8" sewer stub from existing manhole that looks like it will not be used. If
this is the case the existing stub must be abandoned at the manhole per City Requirements.
1.5 Ensure that infiltration trenches are located so that sewer services do no pass through them.
Page 19
Item 7.
General Conditions of Approval
2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works
Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide
service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover
from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in
conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications.
2.2 Per Meridian City Code(MCC),the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water
mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement
agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5.
2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right
of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for
a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but
rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The
easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed
easement(on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho
Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked
EXHIBIT A)and an 81/2"x I I"map with bearings and distances(marked EXHIBIT B)for
review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO
NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be
submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval.
2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface
or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point
connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,
the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to
prior to receiving development plan approval.
2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat
by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation
and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC.
2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals,or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting,
crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per
UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207
and any other applicable law or regulation.
2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service
per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering
Department at(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used
for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of
Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at(208)334-2190.
2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City
Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures
and inspections(208)375-5211.
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.
Page 20
Item 7. F_15o]
2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy
of the structures.Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance
surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set
forth in UDC 11-5C-3B.
2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction
inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan
approval letter.
2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with
the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act.
2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting
that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office.
2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H.
2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building
pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material.
2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a
minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure
that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above.
2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or
drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district
or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed
in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a
certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project.
2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per
the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and
approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the
project.
2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan
requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting.A copy
of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272.
2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount
of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure
prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by
the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit,cash
deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the
Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for
more information at 887-2211.
2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of
20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for
duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the
owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an 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 887-221 L.
Page 21
Item 7. 551
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT
1. Roadways: When required by the Fire Marshall, "No Parking Fire Lane"signs shall be used per
appendix D of the 2018 IFC.No other signs shall be approved:
Roadways: All entrances, internal roads, drive aisles,and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28'
inside and 48' outside,per International Fire Code Section 503.2.4.
Roadways: All common driveways and alleys shall be maintained at all times for access by fire,
police and EMS at all times of the year.
D. POLICE DEPARTMENT
No comments at this time.
E. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID)
https:llweblink.meridiancity.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228988&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity&cr
=1
F. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT(CDHD)
https:llweblink.meridianciN.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=228242&dbid=0&repo=Meridiancioy
G. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD)
https:llweblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=229685&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City
H. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https:llweblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=228193&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City
X. FINDINGS
A. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment
Upon recommendation from the Commission,the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the
public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan,the
Council shall make the following findings:
1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the other elements of the Comprehensive Plan.
Stafffinds the proposed amendment to MHDR is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the
proposed infill development will provide a transiton in uses from single-family residential to
commercial uses to the south and contribute to the diversity in housing types in this area as desired.
2. The proposed amendment provides an improved guide to future growth and development of
the city.
Stafffinds that the proposal to change the FL UM designation from Commercial to MHDR will allow
a transition in uses between existing medium density residential homes and commercial uses and
will provide an improved guide to future growth and development of the City.
3. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the Goals,Objectives and Policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Stafffinds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the
Comprehensive Plan as noted in Section V.
4. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified Development Code.
Page 22
Item 7. F152
Stafffinds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified Development Code.
5. The amendment will be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses.
Stafffinds the proposed amendment will be compatible with abutting existing residential uses and
existing commercial land uses in the near vicinity.
6. The proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities.
Stafffinds that the proposed amendment will not burden existing andplanned service capabilities in
this portion of the city. Sewer and water services are available to be extended to this site.
7. The proposed map amendment(as applicable)provides a logical juxtaposition of uses that
allows sufficient area to mitigate any anticipated impact associated with the development of
the area.
Stafffinds the proposed map amendment provides a logical juxtaposition of uses and sufficient area
to mitigate any development impacts to adjacent properties.
8. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City of Meridian.
For the reasons stated in Section V and the subject findings above, Stafffinds that the proposed
amendment is in the best interest of the City.
B. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-5B-3E)
Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full
investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation
and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
The Applicant is proposing to rezone the subject property with R-15 zoning and develop single-family
attached and townhouse dwellings on the site at a gross density of 9.64 units per acre consistent with
the proposed MHDR FL UM designation for this property. (See section V above for more information)
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
Stafffinds the proposed map amendment to R-15 and development generally complies with the
purpose statement of the residential districts in that it will contribute to the range of housing
opportunities available in the City consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare;
Stafffinds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and
welfare as the proposed residential uses should be compatible with adjacent single-family
residential homes/uses in the area.
4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any
political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to,
school districts; and
Stafffinds City services are available to be provided to this development.
Page 23
Item 7. ■
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
This findings is not applicable as a rezone, not an annexation, is proposed.
Page 24
o
o
CD
LO
00
o
CD
CD
N �
L
co C)
C)
LO
M
C)
C)
C)
M
LO
N O
C)
LO
N
4-
C) c
N p
® � d� C)d co LO
O
o
C)
O
C)
OC)
ULO
UQ
> M
4-
� �' U
L
�
1 U
U
Q