Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2021-09-16
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, September 16, 2021 at 6:00 PM MINUTES ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel Commissioner Nick Grove Commissioner Andrew Seal Commissioner Maria Lorcher Commissioner Nathan Wheeler Commissioner Steven Yearsley ABSENT Commissioner Bill Cassinelli ADOPTION OF AGENDA - Adopted as Amended (See Item #5) CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] - Approved 1. Approve Minutes of the August 19, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] DEPARTMENT REPORTS 2. COMPASS Development Review Checklist and Fiscal Impact Tool Presentation ACTION ITEMS 3. Public Hearing for Burger King Drive-Through (H-2021-0051) by Legend Engineering, Located at 6211 N. Ten Mile Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a dual-ordering drive-through establishment within 300 feet of another approved drive-through establishment and within 300 feet of a residential district for a 2,910 square- foot Burger King with 37 parking spaces on 0.877 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. - Continued to October 7, 2021 4. Public Hearing Continued from July 15, 2021 for Heron Village Expansion (H- 2021-0027) by Tamara Thompson of The Land Group, Inc., Located at 51, 125 and 185 E. Blue Heron Ln. A. Request: Annexation of 1.36 acres of land with a R-40 zoning district. B. Request: Rezone of 4.18 acres of land from C-G and R-8 to R-40. C. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow expansion of an existing 108-unit, 5-building multifamily complex to allow an additional 36 units in two new buildings. - Recommended Approval to City Council 5. Public Hearing for McFadden Property (H-2021-0048) by Doug Tamura, Located at 104 W. Cherry Ln. A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 17.87 acres of land with the C-G zoning district. (Agenda amended to correct noticed zoning designation from C-G to C-C) - Recommended Approval to City Council 6. Public Hearing for Fairview Row Townhomes (H-2021-0049) by Riley Planning Services, Located at 2065 E. Fairview Ave. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 16 attached townhome units on 1.02 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. - Approved 7. Public Hearing for Hatch Industrial (H-2021-0026) by Hatch Design Architecture, Located on the East Side of N. Linder Rd. and the North Side of W. Franklin Rd., South of the Railroad Tracks, and at 160 N. Linder Rd. A. Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the future land use designation on 42 +/- acres of land from Mixed Use – Community to Industrial. B. Request: Annexation of 1.59 acres of land with an I-L (Light Industrial) zoning district. - Recommended Approval to City Council 8. Public Hearing for Fields Sub-Area Plan (H-2021-0047) by City of Meridian, the Location Consisting of Approximately Four (4) Square Miles and Bounded by Chinden Blvd. on the North, McDermott Rd. on the East, McMillan Rd. on the South and Can-Ada Rd. on the West A. Request: Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to incorporate the Fields Sub-Area Plan. - Continued to October 21, 2021 ADJOURNMENT - 9:40 p.m. a ❑ Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting September 16, 2021. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of September 16, 2021 , was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Rhonda McCarvel. Members Present: Chairman Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Andrew Seal, Commissioner Nick Grove, Commissioner Steven Yearsley, Commissioner Maria Lorcher and Commissioner Nate Wheeler. Members Absent: Commissioner Bill Cassinelli. Others Present: Adrienne Weatherly, Kurt Starman, Caleb Hood, Bill Parsons, Joe Dodson, Alan Tiefenbach, Brian McClure and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE X Nate Wheeler X Maria Lorcher X Andrew Seal X Nick Grove _X Steven Yearsley Bill Cassinelli X Rhonda McCarvel - Chairman McCarvel: Okay. Good evening and welcome to Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for September 16th, 2021. The Commissioners and staff who are present for this evening's meeting are at City Hall and on Zoom. If you are joining us on Zoom this evening we can see that you are here. You may be able to observe the meeting. However, your ability to be seen on screen and talk will be muted. During the public testimony portion of the meeting you will be unmuted and, then, be able to comment. Please note that we cannot take questions until the public testimony portion. If you have a process question during the meeting, please, e-mail cityclerk@meridiancity.org and they will reply as quickly as possible. And we will begin with roll call. ADOPTION OF AGENDA McCarvel: Thank you. First item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. Burger King Drive-Through, H-2021-0051, will be open for the sole purpose of continuing this item to the regularly scheduled date of -- what do we have? October -- October 7th. Yeah. So, if there is anybody here tonight to testify on that particular application, we will be not -- we will not be taking testimony this evening. And we also have a scrivener's error on Item 5, 1 believe it was, and I'm going to let Kurt Starman tell us about that. Starman: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just for the record, the applicant in this instance originally applied for C-G zoning designation and so the original notice was published that way. Since that time the applicant is requesting a C-C zoning district, which is a less Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 6 Page 2 of 62 intense zoning district and so the notice was proper and we are fine to proceed tonight, because the zoning being discussed by the Commission later this evening is a less intense zoning district than what was noticed for the public. McCarvel: Thank you. So, with that could I get a motion to adopt the agenda as amended? Seal: So moved. Yearsley: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] 1. Approve Minutes of the August 19, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting McCarvel: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and we have just the approval of minutes for the August 19th, 2021, meeting. Could I get a motion to approve the Consent Agenda? Wheeler: So moved. Seal: Second. McCarvel: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the -- to adopt the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] McCarvel: All right. So, at this time I would like to briefly explain the public hearing process. We will open each item individually and begin with the staff report. The staff will report their findings on how each item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. After the staff has made their presentation, the applicant will come forward to present their case and respond to staff comments. They will have 15 minutes to do so. After the applicant has finished we will open the floor to public testimony. Each person will be called on only once during the public testimony. The Clerk will call the names individually of those who 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 a Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 7 Page 3 of 62 presentation for the meeting, it will be displayed on the screen and our Clerk will run the presentation. After all those who have signed up in advance have spoken we will invite others who may wish to testify. If you wish to speak on a topic you may press the raise hand button on the Zoom app or if you are only listening on the phone, please, press star nine and wait for your name to be called. When you are finished, if the Commission does not have questions for you, your time -- your time is up and 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 final decisions or recommendations to City Council as needed. DEPARTMENT REPORTS 2. COMPASS Development Review Checklist and Fiscal Impact Tool Presentation McCarvel: So, at this time we will start with Item 2 on the agenda, Department Report from COMPASS. Miller: Good evening. My name is Carl Miller. I'm with COMPASS. I assume you can hear me all right. McCarvel: Yes. Miller: Great. Thank you. Appreciate you hosting me. Thank you for hosting me remotely. I'm going to share a short presentation that will talk a little bit about COMPASS's new tool, our fiscal impact tool, that we think will be really helpful -- and I did the wrong one. Hold on just a second. We think this will be a really helpful tool for providing another data set and other information for planning and zoning commissioners, city council members, and others to really look at the financial impact of new development and growth. Okay. Are you able to see my presentation now? Is that working right? Okay. You would think after a year and a half of doing this I had got this down, but we are still -- every once in a while it gives me fits. So, thanks. Before I get started I just wanted to kind of start with a few rhetorical questions for you to think about in the background as I'm sharing this new tool with you. First, if a new subdivision is approved in Meridian, could you afford the new services that would be required of it? How would you know if your Comprehensive Plan is financially viable? What's the financial impact of new House Bill 389? And can you answer any of these questions right now? COMPASS would like to -- well, I would like to share a little bit more about COMPASS, why we did this new fiscal impact tool, what it does, how we are going to report this and make this tool available to you, as well as your staff. And, then, answer any questions that you have at the end of the presentation. Obviously, if you have any questions throughout, though, please feel free to interrupt me. I would rather address those questions as they are fresh in your mind. COMPASS, if you are not familiar, is the Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho, we are the metropolitan planning Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 $ Page 4 of 62 organization for Ada and Canyon county and in that role we bring in federal dollars through Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration to do long range transportation planning. Really working with your staff to identify what is the most important transportation infrastructure and services that we can provide and, then, getting dollars either through FHWA and FTA or searching out for grants to make sure that we can get the most dollars here in the Treasure Valley and -- and work towards transportation planning. We also have a -- maybe a secondary role as a council of governments, which means that we are really enabled to do whatever our -- our board of directors asks us to do and our board is made up of mayors, city council members, board of county commissioners and others and who has been growing increasingly concerned about the --the rate and pace of growth and trying to answer the question is growth paying for itself and that's something that collectively as a region we are all struggling with, obviously, as we grow so quickly and making sure that we are not burdening future generations with the -- the things that we approve today and so we were tasked with -- we are hiring a consultant. We hired TischlerBice out of D.C., who actually now has moved an -- an office to the Boise area because of the work that they are seeing in the intermountain west because of the new growth we are seeing in this -- in this region. But to also work with our -- our community partners, City of Meridian, Ada County Highway District, Idaho Transportation Department and others to really build this fiscal impact tool. The fiscal impact tool really, at its simplest, it really is just a calculation of the expected revenues that we are going to see and the expected expenditures for new subdivisions, rezones, land use plans, changes and those kinds of things. So, we are really looking at the impact fees, property taxes, those things that will generate revenue for communities, and, then, the expenditures, the -- the amount of new infrastructure, the capital, the operating and all those things that we are obligated to provide when new growth comes to an area. So, we have looked at, really, everything under the public service purview from transportation to new public schools, safety and emergency services, parks and recreation, administration of all those things and so forth. In fact, we have over a hundred different public sector service categories built into this fiscal impact tool, so really from A to Z we can understand what is the impact of new growth. Just quickly, what this tool is not. It's not an economic impact tool. So, it's not going to be able to tell us, you know, if a new business, new firm comes into the Treasure Valley, what's the spillover effect, what is the new doctors and dentists and drycleaners and restaurants that will be generated by that and how many new jobs or how much new income is generated by new businesses. Really this is focused on public sector finances and is not meant to be an economic impact tool and it's not meant to be more than a tool. It really relies on good information in and good information coming out and so the assumptions that went into this were developed through a lot of lengthy conversations with your staff, your public works, your planning, your finances, and others to make sure that we understand your public budgets, your capital improvement plans, your long range planning and everything else that would go into this and it's also not meant to be anything more than a tool. It's one data set, amongst others, that are important to you in your Comprehensive Plan and in your city goals. But we definitely think public finances is one of them. As many communities develop these fiscal impact tools, it somewhat becomes the end all, be all, and that any decision by planning and zoning sometimes comes down to what is the fiscal impact tool say and -- and while that's important, we want to make sure it's -- it's one Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 191 Page 5 of 62 perspective, one lens to view on long range planning and there may be many good reasons to, you know, approve development, even if it doesn't pencil. Affordable housing, that could be one. I know that with our consultant they talked about it in Boulder, Colorado, when they generated results, restaurants wouldn't often pencil and yet to Boulder, Colorado, that meant tourism, that meant nightlife, that meant so many other things that they were trying to generate that -- that was one consideration, but not necessarily the end all, be all. So, as we receive development reviews we will provide this fiscal impact analysis to you and to your staff. Just to give you a little bit of maybe behind the scenes to the tool, this is one of the maps that we include in the fiscal impact tool and as you can see there is a lot of granularity built into this. A lot of times when communities build fiscal impact tools, they say, you know, what is the average cost of a new student, you know, when a new home comes in how many average new students, what does that mean? We really wanted to drill down and be very specific with this, because in different parts of the community there could be different impacts and different ability for communities to serve that. You will notice, especially on the Canyon side of things, we have several highway districts, several school districts, and we split that out by who the service provider is, and is the ability for our public sector services to serve those different areas and so you will see that Meridian, for example, has I think eight or nine different geographic areas that we developed through feedback with your staff to reflect how well the city can serve certain areas versus others. And, then, we have the ability to do very -- look at different types of growth and different ways that growth would impact us. Three different single family residential types, five different multi-family, over a dozen different employment types and, then, we can mix and match for any mixed use development that we see in the city. We like to think that this covers about 95 percent of all development types. Almost -- most of what we see is going to fit nicely into one of these categories with new proposals that are seen before the Planning and Zoning Commission. There is every once in a while, you know, a new baseball stadium, a new Expo Idaho, that doesn't really fit nicely into any of these categories and we would have to do some specific modeling for that. It can be done, but just so you know that this is intended to cover maybe 95 percent of all the -- the things that you will see. And, then, finally, based on those geographic areas and based on those land use types that we have identified, we can say what is the impact on the --the different service providers. So, how many new people are going to be generated by an average new single family unit? How many new students? How many vehicle miles traveled or law enforcement calls or fire and EMS calls are going to be generated both at that land use type in this location, but also at different price points? Well, one thing that we found is that at -- at higher price points, as for single family attached detached homes -- and this is here in Meridian. I think this is northwest Meridian -- there is less students per household. So, that's, obviously, going to be a different impact on the West Ada School District, than those at a lower price point or those detached housing or multi-family housing. So, we can vary -- look to see what is the -- what is the impact based on these different locations and land use types. COMPASS will be using this tool as we work with your -- your staff to identify opportunities for this where you will want to know the impact of new growth. We can provide this information both at the city level, county impact, school district, highway district and Valley Regional Transit, include -- including when does that break even, you know, maybe there is a couple of years of capital improvements that need to take place Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 Flo] Page 6 of 62 and, then, later on the property taxes that see that, so we break even at -- at, you know, year five for the highway district or sometimes they break even right away. This is from a hypothetical grocery store and 50 multi-family units in Kuna, but, obviously, this could be generated for -- for the City of Meridian. We can also chart that out, so you can see how the revenues exceed expenditures, if that's the case, over time. COMPASS has been providing our development review checklist to you for larger scale developments, anything over 50 residential units, or more equivalent amount of commercial space. We provide this to really help bridge that local planning that you need to do with the regional goals that we have agreed on as a region to say how well is a particular development doing and are there things that we can look for or change to make sure that we are meeting the goals that we all collectively have. We have changed the format a little bit to better reflect our upcoming long range transportation plan Communities In Motion 2050 and that's the -- the screen on the left and, then, the one on the right will basically -- we will include this as the fiscal impact analysis that we do with that development review checklist. So, I will indicate with -- with green checkmarks where we are -- where there is a net positive fiscal impact, red will be net negative, and yellow will be somewhere in between where maybe there is a positive, but it takes several years to get there. So, very quickly you will be able to see what is the financial impact of this development proposal through these icons and what's the breakeven point. This is the example that we will use for the development review checklist that I know you have seen in the past. We also have the ability to review this or use this tool as you look at, you know, a new Comprehensive Plan or sub area plan or any scenarios that you want to test, so that way we can also look at what does this mean at the end of the day. You know, as we develop comprehensive plans this will help us to be able to say does this comprehensive plan pencil, does this make financial sense to us. So, we are also going to be running these at COMPASS. We are working with our consultant right now on making a web-based tool available to your staff, so that at pre-application meetings or if your staff is considering different policies or densities or any types of changes, you will have the abilities at your fingertips to -- to also run the evaluation and know what the different scenarios would -- would generate as far as public sector finances. So, anyway, I think I have given you a lot to chew on. There is a lot more detail I could get into, but I think that's pretty good overview for now, but this is also an image to help me remember that this tool will take care and feeding. We will need to come back and meet with your staff again to keep this tool up to date and current with current budgets, current capital improvement plans, any -- any planning that's changed the ability for the city to serve different areas and so this will probably be the first of maybe several times you will see me down the road as we update this plan -- update this tool and keep it current and fresh. So, that way it can be a really useful tool to -- to -- to help us all with the decisions that we have to make. But, in conclusion, this will help us to start using the tool, better evaluate the financial ramifications of land use decisions and be a tool at your fingertips. Any questions for me? McCarvel: Any questions for Carl? Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 Fill Page 7 of 62 Seal: Just a quick question on the -- will the financial analysis be included in the -- essentially is your agency -- what am I trying to say? Is it going to be included in our planning and zoning reports I guess is what I'm trying to say. Miller: Commissioner Seal, it sounds like a question for your staff; is that right? Or was that intended for me? Seal: Well, generally COMPASS submits something as -- as far as each plan that comes through, so I just want to know if this fiscal impact analysis would also be submitted. Miller: I see. Thank you, Commissioner. You will see a report similar to what you see on the screen right now. Hopefully you are seeing this on your screen. But, basically, we will include some of those regional goals that we have in those four boxes, safety, economic vitality, quality of life and convenience and, then, a supplementary page is included on your right that you will be able to see how well does the development proposal made city, highway district, county or school district finances with those little icons there. So, that's the way that we will be reporting this to you. Seal: Okay. Thank you. McCarvel: Thank you. Any other questions for Carl? Okay. Thank you. Look forward to seeing this. Miller: Thank you for your time. Appreciate it. ACTION ITEMS 3. Public Hearing for Burger King Drive-Through (H-2021-0051) by Legend Engineering, Located at 6211 N. Ten Mile Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a dual-ordering drive-through establishment within 300 feet of another approved drive-through establishment and within 300 feet of a residential district for a 2,910 square foot Burger King with 37 parking spaces on 0.877 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. McCarvel: So, at this time we will open H-2021-0051, Burger King Drive-Through and, as mentioned before, they are requesting continuance to October 7th due to failure to post the site with public hearing notice sign with the required time frame prior to the meeting. Could I get a motion to continue H-2021-0051? Seal: Madam Chair, I move to continue file number H-2021-0051 to the date of October 7th, 2021. Yearsley: Second. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F12 Page 8 of 62 McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to continue H-2021-0051. All those -- to October 7th. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. 4. Public Hearing Continued from July 15, 2021 for Heron Village Expansion (H-2021-0027) by Tamara Thompson of The Land Group, Inc., Located at 51, 125 and 185 E. Blue Heron Ln. A. Request: Annexation of 1.36 acres of land with a R-40 zoning district. B. Request: Rezone of 4.18 acres of land from C-G and R-8 to R-40. C. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow expansion of an existing 108-unit, 5-building multifamily complex to allow an additional 36 units in two new buildings. McCarvel: Now we will continue from July 15th, H-2021-0027, the Heron Village Expansion and we will begin with the staff report. Tiefenbach: Good evening, Planning Commissioners. Alan Tiefenbach remotely. Associate planner with the City of Meridian. This is a proposal for an annexation, a rezoning, and a conditional use. The property is located at the southeast intersection of North Meridian Road and East Blue Heron Drive. It consists of-- let me go here--consists of six properties. So, if you can see it -- well, one, two, three, four, five, six. Five of these properties are already in the city. They have different zonings. R-8, C-G and R-40. There is one property that is to be annexed and that's what you see here that's about 20 acres. It's located roughly a quarter mile north of the East Fairview-North Meridian intersection. A little history on this. The existing Heron Village Apartments consists of 108 units and five buildings. That's what's there now. That's what you can see here. Conditional use was approved for this in 2013. In 2014 there was a modification in regard to changing the amenities. Certificate of zoning compliance was approved in April 2013. In September of 2020 the applicant requested a pre-application meeting to discuss annexation of an additional 1 .36 acres. That's, again, what you see here. That's to the east and also to include this to expand by constructing 36 more units in two buildings. Because the existing Heron Village Apartments were on several properties with different zoning districts, again, it would be the C-G here and, then, they are looking at doing this as well -- staff recommended to clean it up and to zone the entire thing to R-40. The Comprehensive Plan recommends this for mixed use neighborhood. This is a copy of what is being proposed. So, there is two buildings. There is one here. There is one here. This is what they are proposing for open space and their parking is here. There is one existing access right now. That's what you see here from Blue Heron Road. They are proposing an additional access here. Meridian Fire has commented that although this site does provide two points of access, both of these accesses are from East Blue Heron Drive with only one way -- one way in and one way out. Not good emergency access. They have talked to the applicant and the discussion involves this east of Blue Heron Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F13 Page 9 of 62 Lane there is an existing pathway that's there. The applicant has agreed to widen this pathway to 15 feet wide. If you look in the staff report originally it said 20. So, that's a correction to the staff report. They would be widening -- widening this to 15 feet wide. This would not be primary access, this would only be emergency secondary access. So, there would be bollards there. But that would provide the emergency access that they need. This is a condition of approval of the annexation and the rezoning. Phase one was required to provide 204 parking spaces, with 102 of them -- so, roughly half of them being covered. Two hundred and seven parking spaces are provided, with about 195 of them actually being covered. Phase two is -- this one is required to provide 69 parking spaces. Roughly half of those are covered. In this case 87 parking spaces are required, with 71 of them being covered. Six total bicycle spaces and new bicycle covered parking is required with this development. Basically the -- the parking that's now being proposed would exceed the total requirements of this development by 21 spaces. However, I want to mention Meridian Fire, Police, and the surrounding residents have all commented that parking and traffic is a continuous issue for this development. Residents and guests often park on both sides of East Blue Heron Drive, which makes it very difficult for access. One cause of this -- and probably a primary cause for this is that many of the garages that were required to be covered and were intended to be used to satisfy the parking requirements are now being used as storage. It's very difficult to enforce whether or not they are using their garages as storage, so they are using the garage as the storage and, then, they are parking elsewhere. So, they are losing -- they are losing a lot of those parking spaces to the garage. As 71 of those parking spaces on phase two are required to be covered, staff and fire have talked and we think the best solution to that would be to require only carports for the next phase and not garages, since carports would not really be able to be used for storage, they would be used for parking. So, that would certainly help with the parking situation, as well as to the additional 21 parking spaces that they are providing. Forty-one thousand -- roughly a little less than an acre of open space was required with phase one. That's what you see in blue. That's qualified open space. Fifty-three thousand square foot was provided. With this phase 10,200 square feet is required and 15,330 square feet is proposed. So, a little more than 5,000 square feet of additional office space is provided. It does exceed what's required -- the minimum requirement. Per our code four amenities meets categories required for a multi-family development of more than 75 units. But if there is more than a hundred, it says that the decision making body shall require additional amenities. So, again, 75 or less would be four, but what they have provided thus far is a half basketball court, a plaza containing benches and a trellis, a 1,600 square foot clubhouse with an exercise room, a playground, a horseshoe pit, barbecues and picnic tables and with this proposed expansion they would be looking at 50 times a hundred square foot open space, that's what you see on the northeast corner, and 52 additional enclosed bike storage facilities. Again, though, the Planning Commission should decide if the amenities are sufficient. There are elevations that have been provided. These are basically consistent with the existing complex. As I noted, staff has received comments. We have gotten seven letters and voicemails from adjacent property owners. The issues are almost primarily centered around traffic and access, particularly along East Blue Heron Road and the amount of parking that happens along on that road. As this proposal, though, does meet all the UDC requirements -- in fact, it exceeds them -- staff recommends approval with Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F14 Page 10 of 62 conditions. The conditions are in your staff report, but to summarize, one of the conditions is that phase one and two would share access parking, amenities, and open space. There is a requirement that the applicant should widen and improve the pathway between East Blue Heron Road to 15 feet wide as a secondary access. The denser units on the north side, we think that they should be screened better. They show fences and they should have landscaping as well to soften it down and, most importantly, staff is recommending that the -- the requirement for covered parking only be provided by carports and not garages, so that the garages can't be used by storage and that -- that concludes my presentation, unless you have comments or questions. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Would the applicant like to come forward? Thompson: Good evening. This is Tamara Thompson with The Land Group. McCarvel: Good evening, Tamara. Thompson: Great. I never know if you guys can hear me or not, it takes so long to get in. Thank you. I have a PowerPoint, if it's okay if I share my screen. McCarvel: Go ahead. Thompson: Let's see here. All right. Are you able to see that? McCarvel: Yes. Thompson: Okay. Perfect. All right. So, we will go over quickly -- Alan covered much of it. This is an in-fill project and it is an expansion of an existing multi-family community located at the southeast corner of North Meridian Road and East Blue Heron Lane and this existing facility, multi-family community, was approved in 2013. As Alan showed you, it is a patchwork quilt of zones currently and so these two are the new property, but part of the development is C-G. So, we will be cleaning it all up. There is R-40 to the south and R-40 to the north as well. So, it will just make this whole area R-40. And, then, just to show you the -- the land use. So, this -- this little R-1 area is in the county still, so that's an annexation of 1.36 acres and, then, the rezone is that annexed area, plus the properties that are already in the city. So, the rezone is 5.54 acres, as highlighted here, and I put that here on this one. You can see this little -- those little shapes. So, this proposal is also for a conditional use permit to include 36 additional residential units in two buildings and it does have one additional access onto Blue Heron. ACHD has reviewed and has a staff report. They have approved this access point. The parking, as Alan said -- he went through all the numbers. We are -- we have 21 more parking spaces than required by code and those are all carports. We have -- Alan had that no -- no -- no more garages and we will comply with that and just have those in carports. Some of the areas that --this is the landscape plan. There will be a sidewalk continuing on. This open space is actually 70 by 100 and a nice little -- kind of park amenity there and to give you some existing photos -- so, this is the -- the existing clubhouse. There is a fitness facility and a kitchen in the clubhouse. This is the outdoor space. There is already a tot lot. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F15] Page 11 of 62 These amenities will be shared. And, then, we have some new amenities coming in, too. Alan gave you an overview already of the elevations. This will go through design review and CZC. And just to give you an overview of the existing amenities, the half court basketball plaza with benches and trellis. Sixteen fifty square feet clubhouse with an exercise room. There is a playground, horseshoe pit, barbecues and picnic tables. And, then, the proposed for phase two, the expansion -- and, again, these are all shared. They will be the same management company. So, that open space park with the sidewalks is 8,600 square feet. Additional park benches, picnic tables and they are including 52 new enclosed bike storage spaces. The secondary access -- I just wanted to point that out to you. So, the -- this is the -- the end of where development is. So, it's definitely an off- site, but there is an existing path there currently. It's a paved path for pedestrians with bollards on each end that connects to North Eureka Drive and to Blue Heron and so this will just be widened along this area. It's already ACHD right of way, so there is nothing to -- to acquire or anything there and it's just widening out the existing pavement and so the -- the way that that current condition reads is a 20 foot -- 20 foot pathway -- or 20 foot emergency access within the right of way or as approved by the Meridian Fire Department and we are just asking for a small change there, that that will be 15 feet or as approved by the Fire Department and ACHD. I think ACHD should be included in there. And that's Condition 2-C. And, then, I will go over quickly with you on the -- on the parking and the parking on the street. The management company, when the Fire Department and Planning brought this up to us at our pre-app meeting, as far as the on-street parking, so the management company conducted a parking audit between February 24th and March 25th, so a full 30 days, and they did this between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. So, each evening for 30 days. And what they did is they took counts of the parking within the community, how many parking stalls were being used, how many were vacant, and, then, how many parking -- how many cars were on the street and what they learned is that on average there were 35.2 parking stalls within the community that were vacant and so roughly 81.8 percent of the -- of the stalls were being occupied, but there were 35 -- a little over the average -- it was a little over 35 parking stalls were vacant and this number increased on the weekends. So, there were four weekends in that audit and that number went up to 38.9 spaces during the weekends that were vacant within the community. On average on Blue Heron there were roughly 24.7 vehicles parked on Blue Heron and when the -- when the residents fill out their applications for -- to live here, they fill in what their -- what their license plate number is, so the management company could cross-reference those to determine who was parking on the street and they did find that on average 70 percent of those cars parked on the street were residents of the Blue Heron community and 30 percent were not. There are other residential -- there is townhouses to the north. Not sure if it's from there, but there are other residential areas. So, they -- so, they took this information and they started educating their -- their -- their residents and they put it in their monthly newsletter that they are encouraging people not to park on the street, but to use the community parking stalls and they are encouraging anyone that's not using their garage to use those. They don't believe that's an issue here, because there are so many extra parking stalls on site. So, in general, they have -- they learned that there is more than enough vacant parking spaces on the property within Heron Village community to park all the vehicles that are on East Blue Heron and so they are educating their tenants and encouraging them not to park on the street. So, we have read the staff report and Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F16 Page 12 of 62 we want to thank staff for their thorough review. We agree with staff's analysis and the recommended conditions of approval with that small clarification of 2-C, which relates to that pathway--the emergency access pathway and we respectfully request your approval tonight. Thank you. McCarvel: Okay. Any questions for the applicant or staff? All right. Madam Clerk, do we have anyone signed up for public testimony? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we have a couple people signed up. One is Misti Stelluto from Dave Evans Construction. She's online with us. Misti, go ahead. Sorry, Madam Chair. One technical difficulty here. It's not doing what I asked it to do. Hang on just a moment. Okay. Misti, if you can hear us you should be able to go ahead with your name and address now. Stelluto: Yes. I was just going to comment with Tamara if there was any questions for both of us, so I'm good to go. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you, Misti. Do we have anybody else? Weatherly: No one else indicating a wish to testify, Madam Chair. McCarvel: Okay. That being said, is there anyone in the room or online that wishes to testify on this application? No one in the room. Do we have anybody online? Oh, go ahead. Ma'am in the front row. Yes. You need -- if you wish to testify, please, come forward. One at a time is fine. And, please, state your name and address for the record. Rogers: Okay. My name is Sandra -- McCarvel: And you need to pull that -- the microphone right down to you. Sorry. Rogers: My name is Sandra Rogers and I live at 102 East Waterbury Lane. McCarvel: Okay. Rogers: That's a complex of 34 townhomes. Okay? Many of us in there feel the parking spaces that they made in the first complex is very inadequate and a lot of cars and trucks -- sometimes trucks with trailers are parked on East Blue Heron and it's very difficult -- we are a senior park and it's very difficult for people to --we have to get halfway out into Blue Heron sometimes to see around these vehicles. There is only one way -- as she stated there is only one way in and out and that's to Meridian Road. We have a stop sign when we go out. They don't when they come out of the complex. Our other worry is about emergency vehicles coming in and out. Like I said, we are a senior complex. We frequently have emergency vehicles in there. So, that's a big concern. The other concern is the parking -- not adequate parking. And if you could see the way some of the people park it's just ridiculous. You are supposed to be so many feet back from a driveway. We also have overflow parking for our guests and they park there and unless we see them Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F17 Page 13 of 62 actually walk across to the complex we can't do anything about it, because we don't know if they are a visitor or family member or whatever and it's just -- it's just a nightmare the way they park and the other issue we have is trash. Throwing trash out and, of course, not picking it up and so we -- we try to do that when we walk. There is a lot of us in there that walk and try to keep the trash picked up, but many of us are just against this, because it's just not adequate parking places. McCarvel: Okay. Rogers: Okay. McCarvel: Thank you. Rogers: Uh-huh. McCarvel: Please state your name and address for the record. Sorensen: Okay. I'm Belinda Sorensen. I live at 136 East Waterbury Lane. I live in the senior townhomes across the street and listening to the adequate number and that of parking places that are provided right now that are up to code, there are times that -- yesterday I counted 36 cars parked on the street. There are times when --when they are full at capacity that both sides of the street, clear down past the meat packers on both sides of the streets, are full of cars. I have talked to some of the tenants there. Sometimes there is up to four people living in one unit. There are construction workers that -- that live there, so they have trucks with trailers parked on the street, so when you try to pull out you literally cannot see. Last night I tried to pull in and an emergency vehicle was trying to pull out and I could barely -- we could barely squeeze by each other. That's a big concern. That wasn't even a fire truck. One of the concerns I also have is from Richter, from their first entrance to the street to North Meridian Road, there are times when you -- when you are turning off of North Meridian Road it is so dangerous, because you can't see and there is -- there is -- if they are parked on both sides of the street it's really hard to pull in off of the road, especially when it's snowy and you have to be really careful to make your turn. Sometimes they will park almost to the corner. Perhaps if this goes through maybe you should --they should consider making it a red zone from Richter from their first entrance to North Meridian Road, so that it's safe to pull in and out. Also the trash is -- it's just unbelievable their trash. They just opened up their car doors and just throw it on the ground everywhere. They-- it's -- it's -- it's just frustrating. The parking especially is frustrating. They park on the sidewalks. They leave abandoned vehicles. They have -- their company comes and parks in our overflow parking and we have had words with them and they have become very angry, used foul language. There has been some scary times. So, we just let them park, because we don't want to be hurt, you know, or -- by them. McCarvel: Thank you. Sorenson: Well, thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F18 Page 14 of 62 McCarvel: Anyone else that wishes to testify in the room or online? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we have one person online Gail Simpson. Excuse me. Gail Simpson. Gail, you should to be able to unmute. Simpson: Yes. Thank you very much. Can you hear me? McCarvel: Yes. And you have three minutes. Thank you. Go ahead. Simpson: Thank you. I appreciate the time. I was going to attend, but I had a medical procedure done, so -- McCarvel: Gail, can you give your full name and address for the record, please? Simpson: Okay. It's Gail L. Simpson. 93 East Waterbury Lane. I also live in the senior townhomes and I have written a letter about my -- my feedback and input and I thank you for allowing us to Zoom. That's really wonderful. My concern is not only the parking, which has been talked about a lot, which I double all the concerns. I'm one of the ones that live on the side of the road -- actual road. So, I hear a lot of cars coming in and out at night, which is understandable, because people have different work schedules. However, on the weekends in particular there is a lot of partying going on, a lot of thumping, a lot of people out standing by the cars on the road partying and drinking and it's kind of scary, because you just know we have so many people from out of state coming in or just -- safety is a concern for me and, then, when we talk about the number of cars per unit. Do they take into consideration that there is -- I think somebody mentioned two -- more than one person in a unit. Well, if there is four persons in a unit there is four cars and if a person has two cars that just adds up. So, I want to know if that's been taken into consideration and also -- also the visitors of these people. We have overflow parking for our visitors, but if there is a party going on and they are inviting a lot of visitors into their clubhouse, that's additional parking and those people are going to park on the side of the road. So, asking them not to park there where are those people supposed to park? The trash is an issue. A lot of us have pets and they zoom up and down inside our private parking area and I'm not just concerned about our pets, but like Sandy said, a lot of us walk. 1, the other day, had to stop somebody and tell them to slow down. Well, they were selling their car and they were test driving it in our little private parking area and I said this is private and they were speeding. So, how are they going to address all those concerns? I think adding additional parking isn't going to solve those -- those issues at all and it is hard to come in and out of our units. I -- I don't think expanding 15 or 20 feet is going to solve the issue of the parking or the emergency services. Thank you. McCarvel: Thank you, Gail. Anyone else, Madam Clerk? Weatherly: Not that I -- not that I see, Madam Chair. McCarvel: Pardon me? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F19 Page 15 of 62 Weatherly: No. McCarvel: Okay. So, Tamara, would you like to come back -- if there is no more public testimony, so would you like to come back on? Thompson: Yes, Madam Chair. Tamara Thompson with The Land Group again. The three items that I heard were parking, trash and emergency access. I addressed to two of the three. So, there the -- the emergency access is something that's been satisfied. The Fire has -- has approved that and so has ACHD. As far as the parking, we did submit that parking analysis that was done by the management company and they -- that study -- we submitted that to the city. That study concluded that there was adequate parking on site, that there are empty parking stalls and they are educating the tenants on where to -- where to park. The -- additionally what could happen -- because it is public street and so they can't control what happens on the public street -- is -- is that we could -- we could go back to ACHD and talk to them about some striping and signage there. If the -- if the road is too narrow for parking on two sides I would think that ACHD would -- would take care of that and looking at an aerial it looks like it accommodates parking on both sides, but perhaps that's something we can work with ACHD on and doing some additional signage and some striping. The -- the trash I don't -- I don't know anything about. I do know that this is professionally managed. They do have a management company on this and we can forward that information on to that management company that they need to take a closer look at those -- at those common areas. So, with that the -- the project meets or exceeds city requirements. We have 21 more parking stalls than required by code and we are requesting to add 36 more units to the existing development and we respectfully request your approval and thank you very much. McCarvel: Okay. Can I get a motion to close the public hearing for item H-2021-0027, Heron Village Expansion? Seal: I may have some questions for -- McCarvel: You have more questions for-- okay. All right. I thought we were going to get away with it when nobody asked questions before, but apparently I'm wrong. Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just wanted to ask a couple questions that relate to the parking. I know there is a study done that shows that there is parking there, but if -- if there is adequate parking on one side and not the other that could be the -- why things are lopsided, people using the street instead. You know, if I had to park 30 feet away, instead of a quarter mile away or eighth of a mile away on the other side of the complex, I would choose to park closer for sure. On the CC&Rs that are written in for the folks that have to live here, is there any verbiage in there at all about using the garages for storage instead of parking? Thompson: Madam Chair, Commissioner Seal, I don't know that that would be a CC&R, but that would be a lease, because these are leased premises and I believe they do have that and they have been talking to them -- they have been doing an audit on those also Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F20 Page 16 of 62 to make sure that people are not using those for storage and they are using them for parking. Seal: What's the enforcement on that? Thompson: That -- I can't answer that. I'm not sure. I don't know if they -- I can find out for you, but I don't know that for sure. Seal: Can the management company that's used for that, can -- can that information be given out to the folks that live across the street, so there is a more ready communication line open? Thompson: Absolutely. Seal: I guess what I'm driving towards is there -- I mean it's 80 percent full on parking -- again, if I pull into one side of it, I'm not going to drive around all day and try and find a spot, I'm going to go park on the street. So, that to me is the issue. I'm hoping that there is more of a solution to that, but if we are going to rely on the report, then, we can go ahead and close this up. McCarvel: I did have another -- since you started the question train. Tamara, tell me about -- another concern seems to be the trash and I know that's not -- I mean as part of this new application in front of us is it possible to provide more trash cans throughout, you know, by the parking areas and such that makes it more convenient for people to not just throw their trash in the street? Thompson: Madam Chair, yes, that would be acceptable and we are adding pet stations with those -- with those trash cans. So, we are -- we are planning on adding those. McCarvel: Okay. And maybe just a few more throughout the complex in more convenient area -- additional convenient areas. Any other questions for the applicant, so I don't jump the gun again? All right. Could I get a motion to close the public hearing on H-2021- 0027? Seal: So moved. Grove: Second. McCarvel: Okay. It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H- 2021-0027. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: Thoughts? Concerns? Discussions? Grove: Madam Chair? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F21 Page 17 of 62 McCarvel: Yes. Commissioner. Grove: Overall it doesn't look out of line. I think it's good to move forward in my opinion. I would put in here just some of the things that we talked about to encourage the group to go back and seek an ACHD request to limit parking on one side and to encourage the property management to do the parking enforcement a little bit better, as well as put in language to add trash receptacles. McCarvel: Anyone else? Yearsley: Madam Chair, I would agree. I think those are very appropriate conditions. However, I prefer the -- to keep that pathway at 20 feet, instead of 15 feet. I know fire code requires 20 feet, so I don't know if I agree with allowing -- or asking them to go down to 15 feet. I would prefer to keep it 20 feet. McCarvel: Question maybe for staff. And correct me if I'm wrong. Is the request for that because of an easement confinement? Tiefenbach: Alan Tiefenbach -- McCarvel: Yeah. There we go. Tiefenbach: Yeah. Alan Tiefenbach, associate planner. Thank you, Madam Chair. My understanding and I would probably defer more to the applicant, but there is a couple of utility poles that are on either side of the pathway that prohibits them from getting it to a full 20 feet wide. McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley, does that answer -- do you want to keep it at 20 and have them move poles or -- Yearsley: I'm okay to move poles. You get one time to do it right -- McCarvel: Yeah. Yearsley: -- and my opinion is let's do it right. McCarvel: Okay. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: On the 15 feet instead of 20, 1 think what they are asking for is 15 feet or what is approved by the Meridian Fire Department. So, if the Meridian Fire Department says, no, we need 20, is that acceptable verbiage in there? I agree we get one time to do it right and if they need to move power poles they need to move power poles. But if the Fire Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F22 Page 18 of 62 Department says, yes, this will work, this gives us the access they want -- because they -- they are -- they want to have that access for sure. Yearsley: Well -- and my guess is the 20 foot is because that's what the Fire Department wanted, so -- Tiefenbach: So, if I can -- Yearsley: I'm not going to just kill the deal based on my five feet. But I still would prefer the 20. McCarvel: Prefer the 20. Go ahead, Alan. Tiefenbach: My apologies. Not always easy to not interrupt when there is a Zoom meeting going. Yeah. So, originally we did talk about 20 feet. There was a lot of discussions, again, with Joe Bongiorno, who is with Fire, and Joe actually gave me in writing that 15 feet was acceptable. So, I think that they have -- would have to improve it to hold the weight and I think the number is an 8,000 pound fire truck. Bill will probably interrupt me if I'm wrong. But it would be designed for fire access. McCarvel: Okay. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I mean overall the fact that this is in-fill, I'm -- I'm a little bit torn on this. So, I mean I like to see the in-fill come in. It makes sense to put -- to expand what's already there. It fits well. But I mean I have used that road -- I use Meridian Meat Packers and I have had difficulty getting in and getting down the road and dropping things off there myself. So, completely understand what people are talking about in that. I would like to see that -- if -- if we try and move this forward for me to be on board -- I mean I would say we would have to have some kind of better enforcement. I don't know how we get better enforcement on them parking in their garages. That's the conundrum that I'm in right now is -- I mean you can educate people all you want, you can do what you want to, but mean if somebody pulls in, they have a truck and a trailer, they are not going to park in a garage. They don't have anywhere to park, number one. Number two, if they don't want to -- if they want to use their garages for storage right now it seems like they just do it and there is no enforcement to that. So, I don't know how we get around that. It's definitely a problem and it is a safety issue for me. So, unless that can be resolved I just can't see moving forward with this. Lorcher: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F23] Page 19 of 62 Lorcher: One strategy that both communities can employ for free is if you work with a parking enforcement company through a tow truck company, they can patrol -- the management company can designate stickers on each of the cars, so that you know who belongs to where. The city -- they can also enforce the number of days a car might be parked on the street. What are you allowed three days, two days, to be -- be able to be on a public street; is that right? Is that -- so, there is several companies out there that can help patrol. They can -- the property management can institute a sticker where you know who the residents are and, then, for your community, if you have people that don't belong there, you can have them towed and that becomes a huge financial deterrent, because as soon as the tow truck hooks to a car it's 125 dollars and, then, it's five dollars a mile and if it's late at night it's 50 dollars to get in and if they have to use dollies because it's a four wheel drive that's another 50 bucks. So, you are looking at a 300 dollar fine just to kind of institute parking enforcements. It's a very good deterrent. Usually there is a lot of bad behavior at the beginning and, then, everybody gets it pretty quick. So, these types of services -- there is no cost to your community, there is no cost of the Blue Heron community, because the tow truck company makes up, you know, their costs by the -- by the towing part of it and so that might be one way to at least manage the parking within each of your communities without -- but the property management would be the company that would have to not only enforce it, but to implement it and, you know, keep it -- keep it on track. McCarvel: Thank you. Wheeler: Madam Chair. Thank you. No. I like this project and it's an in-fill, it's going to be the -- a better -- higher and better use than what it's currently being used as. When it comes down to the parking side, the fact that there is 21 more parking spaces in here than what was needed by code I think we will be able to help out with the parking issues that are there and hopefully mitigate some of the parking that we see in phase one. I also want to just encourage the applicant, as they have said that they have already wanted to do is talk with ACHD about maybe moving like a no parking area on at least one side of the street or within the distance within that side of the street and that might help out also with some of the visibility that's coming out from the Waterbury and Richter Lanes accessing Blue Heron, but I think this is good. It looks like they have taken care of a lot of the issues that could come up with this kind of a project and I'm with you, Commissioner Seal, I don't know how you would enforce on a -- you know, a private business here on how to -- what they put in their garages and everything like this. That's just a tough -- that's just a tough thing to do and so I think there is ways to maybe mitigate it with -- on the public way -- public right of ways of the streets and with the towing option, as the Commissioner said, so I think that that's -- I think that these are some of their points in the direction that they are going to go with it. I think it would be a good in-fill project for the City of Meridian. McCarvel: Thank you. Yeah. I think there is analysis and, then, I think there is real life and real life --you can count those license plates and everything, but the fact of the matter is there is probably people living there or long-term visitors that are parking around there. So, I think, you know, part of the answer is definitely getting ACHD involved in putting up Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F24] Page 20 of 62 no parking signs on one side of the street, doing some additional, like we said, striping as far as getting no parking around the entrances and that kind of thing. But, you know, the other option, too, is with the conditional use permit requiring more parking or less units. Throwing that out there as an option. Lorcher: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: I agree with the commissioner who said that this project is fine as long as the existing issues can be resolved before they add more. Right? Can we put in that talking with ACHD, maybe consulting with a private company for parking lot management, be part of their conditional use permit first before they add more on, because adding more is just going to add more of the same. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Honestly, I wouldn't -- I mean I would like to see this go forward, but at the same time I would like to see these issues resolved or at least a plan to resolve them that has some teeth in it. So, honestly, I wouldn't mind doing a continuance on this to give the applicant more time to put some teeth into it to show us how the lease has been rewritten, to show how they are going to have better enforcement, to show that they have went to ACHD, that they have contacted a parking enforcement company and things like that, then, I would feel much better about it. Grove: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Grove. Sorry. Grove: I would have similar thoughts, but I think maybe a different approach, so that we don't necessarily have to hear this again for something that's relatively straightforward. I think we can -- staff might be -- correct me, but put a condition on it for occupancy or something that they have to show that they have talked to ACHD or something to that effect. I don't know -- is that possible? McCarvel: I don't know if just talking is going to be what we want to have in there for -- Grove: Or put more teeth -- McCarvel: -- to put teeth into it. Grove: Put more teeth into it, but -- McCarvel: Yeah. Because this is a conditional use permit, it's not going on anywhere Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F25] Page 21 of 62 else. This is it, so -- Grove: But they will need to get occupancy before residents can move in; right? McCarvel: Right. Sure. I get you. Yearsley: This does need to go to the City Council, because it's an annexation as well. McCarvel: Oh, it's an annexation -- Yearsley: So, it will have to go to City Council. So, we could have them present that -- make that a condition before City Council. McCarvel: Thank you. Tiefenbach: That's what I was going to suggest, Madam Chair. Alan Tiefenbach. This does have to go to Council for approval, so you can make that a condition for them to discuss this with ACHD first. McCarvel: Yeah. Thank you. It's been a long day. And a long week. Yeah. So, are we at the point of a motion, then, or more discussion? Grove: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Grove. Grove: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number H-2021-0027, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16th, 2021, with the following modifications: That prior to City Council the applicant has a parking plan that has been addressed with ACHD to address the concerns from tonight. That they have an agreement in place with the property management on enforcement of the parking regulations and that they add additional trash receptacles and show that on the plan and that condition 2-C is amended from 20 feet to 15 feet. Wheeler: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve H-2021-0027 with modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Seal: Nay. McCarvel: Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F26 Page 22 of 62 5. Public Hearing for McFadden Property(H-2021-0048) by Doug Tamura, Located at 104 W. Cherry Ln. A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 17.87 acres of land with the C- G zoning district. McCarvel: Next on the agenda is H-2021-0048, McFadden Property, and we will begin with the staff report. Tiefenbach: Okay. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Can you see my screen? I'm assuming yes. McCarvel: Yes. Tiefenbach: Okay. This is a --this next one is a request for an annexation and a rezoning. The property consists of about seven -- a little -- not quite 18 acres of land, zoned RUT in the county, located at the northwest corner of North Meridian Road and West Cherry Lane. Probably recognize this property. It often has horses on it. Large rural piece of property surrounded by city. So, the property is bordered by L-O and R-8 to the north, West Cherry Lane and OT to the south. There is commercial, which is the Albertson's across North Meridian Road to the east and R-8 to the west. The Comprehensive Plan recommends this property for MUC. So, a little history on this. What you can see on the left is basically showing the property. What you are seeing on the right is concept plan. The -- so, this annexation and zoning of 18 acres of land is proposed to annex it with the C-C zoning district. The reason why this is being done is that the north -- the Meridian Development Corporation is writing a new Northern Gateway Urban Renewal Plan. As they have been working on this plan they approached this property owner about annexing this property into the district, which is the reason why this is being moved forward. So, they don't have a very clear concept plan at this point, it's mostly conceptual, because, again, the purpose of this is just to get this into the urban renewal district. The future land use map designates this property for mixed use community, so that's allocating areas where community service uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the project. What you see on the right is a conceptual plan that they submitted. The plan shows three buildings oriented along Cherry Lane. That's what you see here at this corner and, then, there is five more buildings to the north along North Meridian, with the parking to the back and to the side. Where you see that large box, according to this concept plan, is what is known as phase two. In their narrative the applicant suggested what they wanted to do is to develop the buildings right here at this intersection first, including possibly a gas station with a convenience store, maybe retail or office, and, then, as the second phase they would be doing multi-family uses. The applicant proposed -- this has been quite a bit of discussion with the applicant with Meridian Development Corporation and the city -- sort of a comprehensive effort between all three of us. The applicant knows that before any specific uses can be built after that they would have to do a development agreement modification. We do mostly support what the applicant wanted to do, but we weren't okay with all the commercial along North Meridian being built out without a further plan, just Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F27 Page 23 of 62 because this is a large piece of property, a lot of work with Meridian Development Corporation, we want to make sure that it builds out with the -- the real mixed use type of concept that is required. However, we do think that those three buildings right there on the corner could probably be built initially and wouldn't have a huge impact on the rest of the project. That's why we do support a limited amount of commercial. Again, those three buildings, two along West Cherry Lane and the one right there just south. We are okay with that being built out. We are not okay with the rest of it along North Meridian Road being built out with the concept plan as it is. So, as I said, based on this we recommend allowing development of the first three commercial buildings, which would be along the West Cherry Lane frontage and south of that existing access. Our recommendation would be a development agreement with -- with plans that are consistent with the mixed use community designation of the Comprehensive Plan and the Northern Gateway District. We received one letter of support from the Meridian Development Corporation and they -- they were in support of this project, but they mentioned how important it was about the timing on this project, because they are working on a timeline that includes this project, but they have to get their North Gateway plan to the Council at a certain point during -- based on statutory requirements. So, if this -- if this particular approval stalls out, then, that could stall them out. We do recommend approval of this annexation and we have certain conditions. The first one is that with the first phase of development the applicant -- we would be okay with them building up to three commercial buildings along West Cherry Lane and south of the existing access, as indicated on the concept plan. The applicant after that will have to submit a plan -- or sorry. As part of that first phase the applicant would have to submit a plan illustrating how the pedestrian connections in the first phase would tie to the future development, because we do want to make sure the whole thing works together. Also we want to make sure that the applicant works with the city and the MDC on the design of an entry feature at the southeast corner. There is a lot of discussion in the plan about entry features and sense of place. So, we wanted to make sure there was a gateway or some kind of feature. We would want to make sure that those buildings, as it was built out, were oriented knowing that that feature was going to happen. With the first phase staff would recommend that the developer has to install the 25 foot landscape buffers. Beyond that -- after that in the other development we would recommend that the developer would have to submit a development agreement modification that would come through to you and the Council and that develop -- that development agreement would address things like concept plan, general layout and configuration of buildings, circulation plan, open space, conceptual building elevations. So, it would be the whole thing shown as it was going to develop comprehensively. Also we are recommending that whatever they do in the future it would comply with any future design concepts of the Northern Gateway Plan. There is some requirements on the size of building square footage. That's because the -- the Comprehensive Plan actually talks about how -- what the maximum size of building should be in a mixed use neighborhood. There is a requirement on how many-- at least three types of uses and there is a limitation on that -- that at least 20 percent of it has to be commercial at a density of six to 15 dwelling units. I know that's a lot, but in general basically what this would do is allow the first three buildings to get built, as long as they had a pedestrian plan showing how that would work and installing the landscape buffers. With that I would stand for any questions or if the applicants wants to say something. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F28 Page 24 of 62 McCarvel: Thank you. Would the applicant like to come forward? Tamura: Madam -- can you hear me? Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, my name is Doug Tamura. I reside at 732 Santa Paula Place in Boise, Idaho, and I'm the owner of the McFadden property located at the northwest corner of Meridian Road and Cherry Lane. This spring I was pleasantly surprised when the City of Meridian reached out and requested that I become a part of the Northern Gateway Urban Renewal District. I'm here tonight to request both annexation and zoning. I concur with staff's findings of fact and conclusions and conditions of approval. I'm a small town developer, but my goal is to make this property the keystone of the Northern Gateway Renewal District. Appreciate your consideration. McCarvel: Thanks. Tamura: Any questions? McCarvel: Yeah. Any questions for staff or the applicant? Tamura: All right. Thank you. McCarvel: All right. Thank you. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to testify on this application? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we have a couple of people signed in, but nobody indicating a wish to testify. McCarvel: Okay. With that being said, is there anyone in the room at this time that would like to testify or on Zoom? Sir, come forward. Rice: My name is Earl Rice and I live in Marsing, but I am representing the Church of God Seventh-Day Meridian Church at 1808 West 3rd Street and also the General Council of Church of God at 1824. We own the property right to the west of this property right behind the U.S. Bank all the way back to the end of that property. Questions I have, obviously, is traffic coming along now our property. We have a park area. We are going to get more traffic onto our park area that we have been cultivating. I have -- we have a lot of concern for that. We -- our facilities get used every single day by multiple churches, not just by us. The safety of the children and the people there -- I was looking at the concept that shows the road going right alongside of our property and thatjust takes away from what we have been trying to develop and so that's a big concern and, then, putting the phase two is a real big concern for me as well for us, because it shows multiple things that could go in there, like hotels and offices and -- tall stuff. We -- that just detracts so much from the feel that we have created there and so that was were a big concern for us for that. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else that wishes to testify? Okay. Would the applicant like to make any other comments? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F29 Page 25 of 62 Tamura: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, Doug Tamura. In talking with staff in preliminary, it was requested that we provide some kind of access to our property to the church's property in that -- in that northern section. You know, we are a long ways from, you know, reaching what -- what that vision looks like, so -- but, you know, we could put that as a condition of approval if we need to. But I know that it's been addressed. McCarvel: Okay. Yearsley: Madam -- McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: Madam Chair. I'm assuming as you develop your property that you would probably fence your boundary as well, is that not the case? Tamura: You know, it's -- it's a large parcel and I want to make sure and do it right, so our intention is to move relatively slowly and -- and, you know, and -- and the other thing that we are concerned about is the buffering of the single family residential to the north and, again, I promised that neighborhood that we would be conscious of making sure that we do things right as far as your privacy and your buffering and stuff. So, when we get to that position, you know, with both the church and with the neighborhood to the north, we will -- we will get them involved and make sure that we, you know, design whatever is necessary to -- to be good neighbors. But, you know, it's -- it's an 18 acre development, so it's -- we have got a long ways to go. So, our main goal right now is just annexation and rezone. Thank you. McCarvel: Thank you. Any other questions at this time? Lorcher: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: I'm not sure if this is the right time to ask it. So, he would still -- the developer would still have to put together a developmental plan as far as where the streets and buildings are going to go, even -- even though there is a conceptual idea here. The concerns of the church and what he addressed was the concerns of the neighborhood can be directly addressed during the developmental planning stage; correct? McCarvel: Yes. Lorcher: So, we are just voting on, like he said, the annexation. McCarvel: Okay. If there is no other questions, could I get a motion to close the public hearing on H-2021-0048? Seal: So moved. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F30 Page 26 of 62 Grove: Second. Yearsley: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2021-0048. All those in favor say aye. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: Apparently I'm not the only one that had a long day. Thoughts? Concerns? Discussion? Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I like the way that staff has gone about this where we can see some -- some, you know, things happening right away, but -- and it's refreshing to hear the -- the applicant say this as well, where they want to take their time and move into this. So, you know, we can see some development happening in there, some businesses coming in. I'm really happy to see that this is going to be very business oriented. We need more of that in our town. But there is also the phase two piece of it and there is concerns that have been raised from the neighbors. It sounds like they are going to be addressed and I hope that they honor that. They tried to build something in there that's going to keep that somewhat secluded back there, keep it more of a neighborhood kind of feel, instead of a commercial kind of feel, so -- and if that can't be accommodated, then, hopefully, some -- some type of noise mitigation is put in there or, you know, something along those lines in order to help out with that. But for the most part it looks -- it looks promising to me. I'm happy to see development like this come into Meridian. McCarvel: Yeah. I agree. I think there is a lot of potential there and a lot of room for good transitions all around. Grove: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Grove. Grove: So, having been in downtown, both living and working, for a while now, I'm excited to see this move forward. I can walk out my door and see those horses. So, I'm ready to see what happens here. I know with working with urban renewal, there is additional tools that will be able to help this project develop, along with the other parts of that urban renewal district. So, I think, you know, getting this moving forward is -- is very important, so that those plans can be, you know, incorporated. It will be a lot more difficult for this property to develop without some of those tools and so I think that, you know, getting it moving forward so that those tools can be utilized is a very important aspect for this project overall. I'm less concerned with any of the phasing, so much as moving this Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F31 Page 27 of 62 project forward, allowing those partners and those resources to be properly utilized. Wheeler: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Wheeler. Wheeler: I have a question concerning the zoning here. So, I'm seeing here that it was C-C; is that correct? Initially? But, then, it was -- it was actually asking for C-G; is that right? McCarvel: Other way around. Wheeler: Other way around. He's asking for C-C. McCarvel: Yeah. Wheeler: Okay. So, is there a height limit, then, or restriction on C-C on some of the buildings compared to C-G? Tiefenbach: Would you like me to answer that, Madam Chair? McCarvel: Go ahead, Alan. Tiefenbach: Yeah. I believe it's 55 feet and my understanding he wants to go to 65 feet. This was actually probably the most contentious issue with -- that we had discussed, because the applicant really wants to go higher than that. He has the ability -- so, with the 55 feet that's required by C-C, he has the ability to do a conditional use to ask for a higher height, just depends on where the building is, what the building is. That would be something that would be coming in front of you. Originally he did want to do C-G and we were not supportive of that, because there are some very -- other intensive uses as well with the automatic entitlement for 65 feet. We recommended C-C. It was an object -- it was a -- it was a topic of quite -- quite a lot of debate. At the end of the day, again, he's okay with C-C, understanding that he's going to have to do the conditional use to go higher than that. Wheeler: Okay. McCarvel: It's in the future when -- there is some play on there. Wheeler: My -- my only -- my only concern on the C-C with the 55 foot -- they can go up to 55 feet and, then, beyond that with -- with the CUP is that this butts up next to single family dwellings and that was also one of the concerns that the testimony from the church was about was the --just kind of that density side. So, I'm wondering if -- can we -- can we allow for two different kinds of zoning on this, the one that's closer to the road and, then, something that's more interior might be of a less density? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F32 Page 28 of 62 McCarvel: I guess allow -- I mean have full discussion, but looking at that north end there and it looks like he's got two story residential -- office -- an office upon the end as a -- as transition. I think that's --there is a lot of room there for a lot of different -- sort of transition to allow for proper transition. Grove: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Grove. Grove: On that north side also, once you step back past the -- the water, it drops in elevation quite a bit and so you are not going to be able to necessarily grade some of that out I don't think. So, I think some of the concerns of going large next -- on that northern portion will be limited in the --just the topography of the parcel itself. Tiefenbach: Madam Chair, can 1, again, add some clarification on that? McCarvel: Yeah. Go ahead, Alan. Tiefenbach: Yeah. I guess -- I wanted to say this again. With the first phase you want -- the first phase all he wants to do are these three buildings. Based on what he wants to do and based on this concept plan, it's extremely unlikely that those are going to be more than one story. Anything other than that has to go through a DA modification and all of the height issues can be controlled under that DA mod. He would have to show an entire development plan of this whole thing. So, he wouldn't -- he's not -- he's not entirely entitled to do C-C, he's entitled to build this. But after this he has to do a DA mod, which would include the entire development plan. So, all that stuff could be controlled. Wheeler: Okay. Very good. Thank you. McCarvel: Thank you. Anymore discussion or a motion? Yearsley: 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-2021-0048 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16th, 2021, with no modifications. Seal: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve H-2021-0048. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F33] Page 29 of 62 6. Public Hearing for Fairview Row Townhomes (H-2021-0049) by Riley Planning Services, Located at 2065 E. Fairview Ave. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 16 attached townhome units on 1.02 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. McCarvel: Sorry, I had moved on to the next CUP already. Next item on our agenda is H-2021-0049 and we will begin with the Fairview Row Townhomes and we will begin with the staff report. Dodson: Thank you, Madam Chair. Can you all hear me all right? McCarvel: Yes. Dodson: Perfect. Thank you. I'm presenting remotely just because of health concerns surrounding just being in and out of the office so much,just trying to be safe for my family. So, I appreciate the opportunity to present remotely and still do my job. As noted, this first item by me -- I guess not by me -- Fairview Row Townhomes, which is a conditional use permit on a site that consists of just over one acre of land currently zoned C-G, located at 2065 East Fairview, which is halfway between Locust Grove and Eagle on the south side of Fairview. It's directly across the street -- almost directly across the street from the Sonic that's on Fairview. It's right to the east of the Pizza Hut. There is the Pine 43 development directly to the east and to the south. This property was annexed in 1995 and since, then, it's had a myriad of different uses. Most recently it was a residential home that was used for some kind of commercial use, but it's all been vacated now. The existing structures are there, but it has been vacated. This image here to the right is north, just to let you guys know. It is a very skinny property relative. About 400 feet long or deep and only about a hundred feet wide. The application before you tonight, as noted, is a conditional use permit for a multi-family development, which consists of 16 attached townhome units. Two eight-plexes. All services are readily available. The product is within the Fire Department's five minute response time goal. It meets the Comprehensive Plan as outlined in the staff report. Specifically, due to the site constraints -- specifically its relative deepness versus its width, staff does believe that the multi-family development versus commercial promotes a thoughtful site design and should consequently exist in future commercial in the area. Existing will be to the west and Pine 43 commercial will be to the east. The proposed multi-family development as noted does consist of two eight-plex townhome buildings. This use is subject to conditional use permit approval by this commission, because it's being requested in the C-G zoning district. It is also subject to specific use standard as outlined in 11-4-3-27. It--those standards are generally about open space amenities and overall site design standards. The applicant is proposing approximately 10,500 square feet of qualified common open space, which exceeds the minimum requirement of 5,600, which would be 350 square feet per unit due to each unit being over 1,200 square feet or approximately 2,000 square feet, each unit. I did not note as well, but each building is proposed as a three story building as well. In addition to the common open space each unit should provide a minimum amount of 80 square feet of Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F34 Page 30 of 62 private usable open space. The applicant has proposed approximately 200 square feet of private open space for each unit in the form of private balconies. Obviously, this 200 exceeds the required 80. At least two amenities should also be provided from two different categories noted within the code. The applicant has proposed two from two different areas, a quasi-area with a water feature, which is this area here and a shade structure. These amenities meet the minimum code requirements for multi-family of 20 units or less. Based on number of bedrooms per unit, which all 16 are two bedroom units, a minimum of 32 parking spaces should be provided with at least half of them being covered or within a garage. The applicant has proposed a total of 35 parking spaces. Three surface parking spaces and each unit will have a tuck under garage -- tuck under two car garage. Therefore, the proposed parking exceeds the minimum required amount, especially after the covered or garage, as that is -- they are proposing there twice as much as would be required. Access to the development. This shows access a little bit better. So, this would be the existing zoning and a little bit of the area underneath the zoning. Pine 43 to the east. Existing commercial to the west. Fairview along the north. The access is proposed via East Wilson Lane, which is a collector street proposed to be extended along this property's southern boundary going west to east. The existing access to Fairview Avenue is proposed and is required to be closed. A new one will be added closer to the west boundary that is only an emergency only access. ACHD is not allowing any public access to Fairview Avenue. The drive aisles as proposed are 26 feet wide due to the proposed three story buildings and provides accesses to all the garage units. So, the garages are facing west. The entrances with sidewalks, as you can see on the site plan, are facing east. The drive aisle and garage. Pedestrian entrances to the units on the east. The Pine 43 development directly to the east is currently under construction and will further extend Wilson Lane from its property to North Webb. That's what this dotted line here is. They are already required to construct it, they just have not done that quite yet. The timing of this is not yet known explicitly, but it should coincide relativity with the construction timeline of this project if it were approved. The subject property is the last property of this Wilson Lane frontage to be entitled. So, in order for this to connect from Locust Grove to Webb, this property would need to construct this hundred foot segment, give or take, of Wilson Lane as well. In addition, staff has approved alternative compliance -- an alternative compliance request made by the applicant. That is an administrative review, but I did want to relay it to the Commission. They are requesting to reduce the landscape buffer on East Wilson Lane. This request was made because of the subject site and its site constraints being relatively deep, but thin. Again, approximately 400 feet deep and a hundred feet wide. It affects the building footprints when accounting for all their dimensional and access requirements. The applicant states in order to fit the proposed buildings, the required access, appropriate open space and other landscaping and buffers, the reduction to the buffer along Wilson Lane is needed only adjacent to the building, which is approximately 36 feet in width -- or length, however you want to measure that. Due to the relatively small impact of this short linear length and a belief that a reduction in any of the other project aspects, like landscaping and buffers and other areas, as well as building footprints, staff does believe that the alternative compliance request is amenable and has, therefore, approved it. The project meets or exceeds all other dimensional standards. These are some conceptual elevations proposed. Future -- they did not submit for design review with this conditional Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F35] Page 31 of 62 use permit. So, a future application for zoning compliance and design review will be required as the next step after-- if this were to be approved. Initial review of these building elevations do show three story buildings that combine different fill materials, modulation and material coloring. The main materials shown are stucco, lap siding and some stone cladding. The elevations also show second and third story decks that offer recreation and a different architecture element to the elevations. Preliminary review of the elevations do show compliance with our architectural standards manual, but I will confirm this at the future -- when the future design review application is submitted. As of this afternoon around 4:00 o'clock there was no public testimony and staff has recommended approval of this conditional use permit for all the reasons noted in my presentation, as well as in my staff report for both the Comprehensive Plan and the Development Code. After that I will stand for any questions. McCarvel: Thank you. Would the applicant like to come forward? Constantikes: Thank you, Madam Chairman. For the record, Penelope Constantikes, representing Tradewinds General Contracting. My address is Post Office Box 405, Boise, Idaho. 83701. I'm very pleased to present this innovative project to you this evening for the Fairview Row Townhomes. The developer directed the project team to develop a residential use that would compliment the surrounding uses and provide an alternative to housing options that are available in the vicinity. We do believe that we have met this goal. The applicant project team have reviewed the staff report and concur, with one very minor adjustment to one of the conditions of approval that I will cover in a few minutes. As you know, this is a 16 unit residential development in two buildings. We have substantial personal private space and a generous common area that is 43 percent greater than what is required by the UDC. To maximize the benefit of the open space it was concentrated, as Joe talked about, on the east side of the property. To the west of us is a tall, blank wall that has no architectural or aesthetic character. So, we shifted everything to the east of us. With the completion of Pine 43, along with the variety of services that are east, north and west -- excuse me -- these residents will have a walkability and bikeability option for all kinds of services that are in the immediate vicinity. The applicant has visited with the property owner to the west, which is the L-shaped strip mall, and there are two points of pedestrian access that we are going to implement with that property owner, so people can easily get from the Row Townhomes westward into that strip mall to benefit from the services that are available there. As you know, each townhome has a two car garage and guest parking that is in compliance with the UDC. The alternative compliance application submitted addresses the treatment to the south end of the site adjacent to Wilson Lane. Staff has provided an excellent discussion regarding that item. I don't think I need to cover it anymore. I would like to confirm that the applicant is in agreement with the slight modification to this area with the expansion of a sidewalk attach 71 -- 75 -- excuse me -- seven foot wide sidewalk. Because on page eight of the staff report the Wilson Lane was brought up, I went out there today and wanted to verify parking along Wilson Lane. So, what I found was that there is no parking west of the rear entrance to D&B. Everything to the east of there has got parking on both sides of the street. It's constructed to commercial collector standard. So, that would make sense that it would be wide enough. The proposed parking with the development Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F36 Page 32 of 62 application does meet the UDC standards and we are not dependent on Wilson Lane for any parking, but because the staff report brought it up I thought I should go do a little bit of reconnaissance. The proposed landscaping that is shown on the west property line will be updated prior to submittal for a certificate of zoning compliance. Idaho Power has requested that trees located in this area be lower and slower growing trees, so that they don't have problems with those above ground power lines that serve a variety of uses to the south of us. So, the overhead line is not going to go away. We would request that the conditions of approval be minimally modified and -- and that would just be for Item 8- 3-A, which is the first one in that list. We would just ask that the condition reference Idaho Power's preferences regarding the kinds of trees that are planted there. A revised site plan will be provided that shows the pedestrian crossing both of the north and south boundary of the site that uses some kind of a treatment that differentiates the pedestrian crossing from driving surface and with that I would be happy to answer any questions you have. McCarvel: Thank you. Any questions for staff or the applicant? Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: So, are you planning to allow parking in that drive aisle of the 26 feet? Constantikes: No, sir. Yearsley: Okay. Constantikes: It will be not a parking area. Yearsley: So, they have the garages there, so they have to park inside the garage? There is no stacking in front of the houses; is that correct? Constantikes: Correct. Yearsley: Okay. Constantikes: And there was a question about solid waste and we are going to have a -- a recessed area in the garage that will be the right size to store those handcarts. So, we even took care of that. Yearsley: Okay. And, then, with losing access to Fairview, do you have any concerns about trying -- people trying to -- if they get down to the end and can't -- find they have to turn around and come back, is there a concern about a turnaround down at that -- that end? Constantikes: No. That's an interesting question. I think in 26 feet if somebody does Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F37 Page 33 of 62 have that they can do a three point turnaround. We just --the issue with Fairview Avenue being a primary or principal arterial and -- and an actual turnaround, a circular turnaround, would eat a substantial portion of that site. So, we were trying to thread the needle carefully and make sure that we had a wide enough drive aisle and still maximize the space for residential, because it's so walkable and bikeable. So, I don't see that that will be a problem. ACHD didn't indicate that that was an issue for them. Yearsley: Okay. And just one last quick question. Are these going to be sold off as individual units or more of a rental type entity? Constantikes: Madam Chairman. I apologize. I have been dropping my protocol. Madam Chair, Commissioner, no, these are going to be leased opportunities. Yearsley: Okay. Constantikes: The site will not be platted. Yearsley: Okay. Thank you. McCarvel: Any other questions for the applicant or staff? Grove: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Grove. Grove: Real quick question. You had mentioned the connection to the commercial to the west and providing the pedestrian access. Were you planning to do pedestrian access to that -- the break in between those two buildings or is it just the pedestrian access on the north and south of the property? Constantikes: Madam Chair, Commissioner, actually, now that you mention it, there will be three points. So, there will be the -- the sidewalk along Fairview Avenue. There is a break between the buildings that's kind of a patio area, outside restaurant area. The third point would be on the north side of the parking lot that's along the back of that commercial development and there are more commercial uses that actually face south and Wilson Lane. So, there will be two interior and, then, the sidewalk along Fairview. Lorcher: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: This is a message for staff and so this is a new guy on the commission question. If there is already an approach on Fairview currently, why wouldn't we continue to support that as an access point? Dodson: Commissioner Lorcher, this is Planner Joe. The -- because the site is being Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F38 Page 34 of 62 requested for development, because it had -- it's being intensified, ACHD basically has the run of the mill on what access they can and can't allow or will or will not. I -- there was some discussion at the beginning of all of this that if the applicant or the city really wanted to push to keep an access out to Fairview that we may allow it to be -- that ACHD may allow it to be right-in, right-out, but it would require a lot of additional steps from the applicant. Because Wilson Lane is going to be extended and that's a lesser classified street, ACHD policy kind of pushes everything to say, hey, take access from there. There is a lot of successive driveways along this segment of Fairview, so reducing one of those to be only emergency access is really prudent, to be honest, and I believe that's the applicant -- that's their intent as well, to help with some of the safety concerns. I, frankly, don't want to go down the rabbit hole with ACHD about trying to get an access out there to Fairview. I think that might be a big uphill battle for everybody, even if it was commercial, which is why they are -- part of why they are not proposing commercial here, ACHD was going to attempt to limit the access to Fairview, if not eliminate it, even though there is one currently. Just because you have it doesn't mean you are entitled to keep it. It depends on the use you are proposing and if you don't intensify it, then, you are allowed, but if you intensify it you are going to be subject to their policies. Lorcher: All right. Thank you. Dodson: You are welcome. Sorry I was long winded. I'm sorry. Constantikes: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Yes. Constantikes: If I might add one more thing. We are going to bollard that. So, it really will only be emergency access. McCarvel: Okay. Lorcher: I wouldn't want to be on -- have a fire on that last one if you have to go all the way around. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Question for staff and possibly the applicant. The Wilson Lane there, is that -- do you have a time frame on when that's going to be extended all the way through? Constantikes: Madam Chair, Commissioner, no. It -- that final extension will be the purview of Pine 43, but they are out there moving dirt right now and -- and I think they are moving forward pretty quickly. Based on just preliminary review of application materials that were submitted to the city, it looks like they are going to also be putting in townhouses along this stretch that would be very similar to our section of Wilson and -- and they have Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F39 Page 35 of 62 got their curb cut in already in their main road that runs through -- I can't remember the name of the -- the primary connection between Fairview and Pine. So, those -- the curb cut's in. They have cut in to start laying their base. So, it looks like they are moving forward pretty quickly. Seal: Okay. Thank you. McCarvel: Any other questions for staff or applicant? Okay. Thank you. Constantikes: Thank you. McCarvel: Madam Clerk, do we have anyone signed up to testify on this application? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do not. McCarvel: Okay. With that being said, is there anyone in the room or on Zoom that would like to testify on this application? Okay. I assume the applicant has no further comment then. Could I get a motion to close the public hearing on H-2021-0049. Wheeler: So moved. Yearsley: Second. McCarvel: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2021-0049. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: I'm just going to say I love the look of these. Two story balcony and stuff. That's cool. I think they have done pretty good thought through this little skinny parcel. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I agree with what you are saying, however, I am concerned about the parking there. You know, I always mentioned if it's Super Bowl Sunday and everybody has folks over, where are they going to park. The folks here can, obviously, park in their garages and they will, essentially, be forced to, which I love, but if anybody else is going to come over and park they are probably going to park in the -- over in the commercial parking or along Wilson. So, that's a concern. A bigger concern of mine is, honestly, the cut-through through the commercial property, where if somebody's coming into this, if they are coming down Fairview they are not going to want to come clear around to Locust Grove, then, to Wilson. Turning from Locust Grove left onto Wilson is problematic at best. So, I have a concern that there is going to be a lot of cut-through traffic coming through that residential area until the road is completed all the way through. So, I almost want to throw a condition Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F40] Page 36 of 62 in there of no occupancy until that road goes all the way through just to prevent that. I just don't see people going all the way down Wilson, contending with Locust Grove at that intersection, rather than going through the parking lot. Me being a normal human being I know I would just go through the parking lot, so -- but I do like the layout of it. I like the design of it. It's -- it's different. I mean considering it is a very small parcel of land, I think they have tried to incorporate a lot of livability into it. So, those pieces of it I like. It seems to fit in this area. There is going to be a lot of business and residential and this fits in that -- in that way. But I do have those concerns. McCarvel: Thank you. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: My initial take on this was kind of a little concerning, but looking at it more fully and remembering the -- what's going into the east of them, I think it actually fits very well and -- and, to be honest with you, I'm not too concerned about the Wilson Lane. My guess is Tradewinds is going to be very anxious to talk to the development to the east and have that included with their design to save money. So, my guess is they are going to want to have that be built prior to that. They are opening anyways. By the time they get their plans built, ready and go, my guess is the roads are going to be -- be completed through the entire site. So, I have -- I don't have as much concerns with that,just because knowing how long it takes to get something, you know, designed and put together and, then, finally built, I think it will be done prior to that work. So, I do like the fact that it's more of a leased type entity where they have a little bit better control on no parking and parking with the garages. That was one of my concerns. Given the narrow strip and all that -- that works out, so I like that ability. So, with that I'm in favor of this project. Wheeler: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Wheeler. Wheeler: I would like to make a motion. McCarvel: Always an order. Wheeler: Okay. After consideration -- after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number H-2021-0049 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16th, 2021, with the following modifications: That in the staff report 8-3-A, that the kinds of trees be slow growing. Yearsley: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve H-2021-0049 with modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F41 Page 37 of 62 MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: And I'm guessing by looking at the clock my fellow Commissioners would like a five minute break before we continue. Okay. See you in five. (Recess: 7:59 p.m. to 8:06 p.m.) 7. Public Hearing for Hatch Industrial (H-2021-0026) by Hatch Design Architecture, Located on the East Side of N. Linder Rd. and the North Side of W. Franklin Rd., South of the Railroad Tracks, and at 160 N. Linder Rd. A. Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the future land use designation on 42 +/- acres of land from Mixed Use — Community to Industrial. B. Request: Annexation of 1.59 acres of land with an I-L (Light Industrial) zoning district. McCarvel: All right. We will resume the meeting here tonight with H-2021-0026, Hatch Industrial, and we will begin with the staff report. Parsons: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. Next item on the agenda is Hatch Industrial. The application before you this evening includes a Comprehensive Plan map amendment and annexation. You can see here that there are several properties that are currently annexed and zoned within the city. As part of the application with the Comprehensive Plan map amendment that encompasses approximately 42 acres and is -- and the annexation request itself is approximately 1.59 acres in total. Current zoning in this area consists of C-C, R-1 in Ada county, L-O and I-L or -- yes. Moving on here you can see here the exhibit on the left-hand side shows you which area is currently part mixed use community and the applicant is here tonight to, again, change that designation from mixed use community to light industrial. So, going from a light beige to a gray, if you will. Back in 2019 this body actually did approve a Comprehensive Plan map amendment and a rezone for these two lots that fronted on Franklin Road and that was in -- as we were -- prior to the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan I should say -- or the new Comprehensive Plan and so the city always envisioned that this larger mixed use area may change at some time in the future. If you look at the aerial for this particular site, if I step back here, you can see that a lot of it is already slated or developed as industrial uses. So, in our -- in our opinion it makes some sense to change the future land use map to mimic what's actually occurring in the surrounding area. A couple of the projects, like along the north boundary just south of the railroad tracks, is an existing daycare center that is currently L-O and there is also a birthing center that's zoned C-C right in the middle of the proposed development as well -- or at least the comp plan change. I would let this body know that just because we are changing the color of the map does not affect the zoning or the current operations of those businesses. Any of the county residents that are currently zoned R-1 will have the ability to annex at Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F42 Page 38 of 62 some point with an I-L zoning designation. The other reason why staff supports the Comprehensive Plan map amendment is if you look at -- again because a lot of the area is already developed and the -- the properties that are currently in the county are R-1 and long narrow strips of property, it doesn't seem feasible -- feasible from staff's standpoint that there will be a true mix of uses in the area. If you recall, a mixed use community designation likes to have a minimum of three land use types and no less than 20 percent residential. Again, we don't see that this will be a viable use -- or at least a valuable mixed use project in the future and that's why we are supporting the Comprehensive Plan map amendment. The exhibit on the right-hand side -- you can see is the portion that the applicant is proposing to annex in and it's that -- essentially two lots within the county, zoned R-1, and, then, the exhibit below shows you the existing zoning that's surrounding this property. As you know as part of annexation request the applicants do provide us a concept plan to show you what they envision to develop on the property. The applicant is here tonight to discuss with you developing approximately an 20,000 square foot multi- tenant industrial building. Don't have any uses proposed at this time, but they envision contractors yards, flex space, potentially some warehousing here. You can see here that the main access is off of Linder Road and the applicant is also providing cross-access to the property owner to the north and on the south, which is consistent with UDC standards. I would mention to you that the uses that the applicant is proposing only requires a certificate of zoning compliance and design review in the future. So, this is pretty-- again, if -- if the Comprehensive Plan map amendment gets approved, the request for I-L is consistent with that request. The applicant -- because the applicant does have county residents on either side along the north and the south, they are required to provide a 25 foot landscape buffer on those boundaries. The applicant has gone to both of those property owners and gotten consent, so to speak, agreeing to allowing a reduced buffer if and when they decided to develop this property. The Council, as part of the annexation request, will take -- will take that reduction under consideration as part of their approval. But I did just want to let you know that it does take Council waiver to allow the reduction in that buffer, but the applicant does have written agreements from both property owners that they are in agreement with that. The landscape buffers that you see on the concept plan here. I looked at the public record before the hearing for -- the property owners that are part of the Comprehensive Plan map amendment have provided written testimony in support of this application. I believe the applicant is also in agreement with the staff report. So, again, staff is recommending approval of the Comprehensive Plan map amendment and the annexation request with the requirement of a development agreement and those provisions are contained in the staff report. With that I will conclude my presentation and stand for any questions you may have. McCarvel: Thank you. Would the applicant like to come forward? Hatch: Good evening. Jeff Hatch with Hatch Design Architecture. Our address is 200 West 36th Street, Boise, Idaho. 83714. Good evening, Chairman McCarvel and Commissioners. Thank you for your consideration of our annexation application this evening. As Bill did a great job recapping, basically, we are wanting to clean up the future land use map zoning in this area based on the existing uses that are already there. We have some tilt up industrial buildings to the east. We have industrial to the west. We got Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F43 Page 39 of 62 railroad tracks to the north, which complements industrial. We got a canal to the south. So, most of the property that's being annexed -- or being rezoned, not annexed -- being zoned is already in use in the industrial nature. To do this type of application it's not something that you can do in a couple months. We have been working on this for about a year now, because we have to go meet with each of these property owners. We got to discuss the intent of this future land use map amendment and what that does to them. Educate them on the nature of what a land use map amendment does versus annexation and how they aren't the same thing and you are not annexing their property for them into the city and all that takes time to educate people. In addition, looking at the -- at the property, even -- to the east we have the two highlighted parcels in the middle in the blue color are the ones that are actually being proposed -- my applicant's -- or property owners to be annexed to the city. You can see a little bit better here photos of the industrial nature to the east and to the west as well. Recapping our proposed site plan, we had to spend several months discussing with the property owner to the north and more particularly the property owner to the south to obtain written approval for the buffer reduction. Really what -- what they concluded was, well, you know, eventually we are going to be industrial in nature like properties to the east of us and so we are in favor and in support of this. We were able to put in our presentation -- the written approval from the applicant to the north. The applicant to the south is actually building a house in a remote area. We caught him at Cabela's this afternoon and he mailed that letter signed to Bill about ten minutes before this hearing started. So, just under the wire, but we did get all the clear documentation and really had been trying to get that for about six months. So, it's not-- not a short order task to get those reductions and communicate that to the public in a way that they understand and are comfortable signing their name to. A lot of legwork, a lot of effort in getting what's proposed. A couple other things on the site plan. We have a utility easement of 30 feet on the east, which in discussions with -- with Idaho Power may be something that's abandoned in the future and may be an opportunity for some kind of industrial use to the east as well in talking with that property owner. So, there is some -- some collective collaboration that may transpire there for potential connectivity. But for now we are proposing connectivity to the future use in the south, future use to the north to reduce congestion on Linder and really kind of set the precedence for that kind of business use and reducing traffic on -- on Linder Road with this application. As -- as Bill had described, we have a concept for industrial businesses to be able to utilize this, but it's set up so you have a bathroom core, potential for an office, potential for warehousing. You have a range of flexibility of uses or the space that are complementary to the industrial nature of the area, but we would like to think it -- since you have some street frontage, wanted to raise the caliber of that up, the expectation for the neighborhood along Linder, and so have a -- more of a retail frontage on the west. So, a little bit more store front, a little bit more glazing, something that's got some curb appeal, looks a little bit more retail in nature. We have varied the proposed roof heights, again, to add some distinct character and not keep the typical kind of gabled roof that just runs and has a bunch of metal. So, we wanted to make sure that we set a nice proposed structure there as well and I will stand for any questions. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Any questions for staff or the applicant? Okay. Thank you. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to testify on this application? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F44 Page 40 of 62 Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do not. McCarvel: Okay. That being said, is there anybody in the room or online who wishes to testify? I'm assuming, then, the applicant has no further remarks. Great. Hatch: The only remark I have is that Meridian just recently went through a very substantial Comprehensive Plan revisioning about a year or so ago where a lot of this type of zoning was identified. At that time we presented to the Mayor a separate industrial zone off of Fairview at that time without application. They agreed upon that. Talking with staff about a year ago, they said, you know, we didn't -- we didn't get to a point where we could really explain this properly and we think this is the opportunity to clean up much needed industrial land in Meridian and so as a -- as an advocate for that use in Meridian as a need for the city, we just wanted to --to express our--our support for this application. McCarvel: Thank you. Would we like to -- do I have a motion to close public hearing on H-2021-0026? Seal: So moved. Yearsley: Second. McCarvel: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2021-0026. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Lorcher: Madam Chair, I will start. McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: So, right down the street at Pine and Linder is Meridian Storage and in front of there there is several businesses, including the one that I can think of off the top of my head is Ace Auto Body and since we are in transportation we use that business quite frequently and my--when he presented this, this is kind of the vision of more of that along this corridor. I also know that the City of Meridian is -- is trying to promote Linder to continue on across the freeway and this would be the last busy access point at that point in time. So, if it's going to be light industrial anyway and it seems to have gone that route, this seems to be a good fit. McCarvel: Any other comments? Motions? Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I will -- I will just throw a motion out there. I think this is kind of a slam dunk -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F45] Page 41 of 62 McCarvel: Yeah. Seal: -- in a lot of ways. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council a file number H-2021-0026 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16th, 2021, with no modifications. Grove: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve H-2021-0026 -- or I'm sorry. Recommend approval of Hatch Industrial with no modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. 8. Public Hearing for Fields Sub-Area Plan (H-2021-0047) by City of Meridian, the Location Consisting of Approximately Four (4) Square Miles and Bounded by Chinden Blvd. on the North, McDermott Rd. on the East, McMillan Rd. on the South and Can-Ada Rd. on the West A. Request: Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to incorporate the Fields Sub-Area Plan. McCarvel: Last on our agenda is H-2021-0047, The Fields Sub -- Sub Area Plan and we will begin with the staff report. All right. Or just presentation. Sorry. McClure: Good evening, Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission. I'm here tonight to discuss The Field Sub Area Plan with you. My name is Brian McClure and for those who don't know me I'm a long range planner. Caleb Hood is also here and Megan Moore with Logan Simpson, our lead project consultant, is on Zoom. Briefly this is the presentation outline. We will do an intro, cover the background, briefly describe the process, the plan and go over the request and, then, take questions. The Fields Sub Area Plan is a direct continuation of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan. This is a sub area plan with a high priority for Council, which continued funding the work. The application before you tonight is a Comprehensive Plan text amendment. The proposal would be to add this new sub area plan to the list of adopted plans and studies by reference. This is like the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, pathway master plan, Destination Downtown Ten Mile plan, various utility plans and many others. There are no future land use map revisions. As I said, this is a direct continuation of the work and the analysis from the Comprehensive Plan. There are also no proposed annexations or development. Any proposed development with annexations would have their own public hearing process and the city does not engage in forced annexation. This area is unique and so some background and additional context is probably useful. Planning work has been ongoing for more than a decade now. In 2008 that area was formally added to the city's area of impact for Ada county. Land uses assigned at this time were generally considered interim. As a result, there have been multiple studies and white papers, multiple local and regional working groups to look at potential economic activity and patterns of Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F46 Page 42 of 62 development and there have been quite a few design charrettes and visioning exercises. None of this really coalesced and, frankly, caused a lot of confusion. The city began to solidify plans in 2017 with amendment around the Intermountain Gas facility and the Williams Pipeline connection. The Williams Pipeline is a 24 inch, 30 mile long, natural gas pipeline that traverses much of Meridian and is a connection to Intermountain liquefied natural gas tank south of McMillan and just west of the Phyllis Canal. The city's separation requirements codified in the Unified Development Code for the pipeline. The seven million gallon Intermountain tank filled with natural gas has been chilled into a liquid state. For those that are curious, natural gas, it becomes liquid at negative 260 degrees Fahrenheit and is 600 times smaller than the gaseous form. It's either really cool science or magic. The photo here is at dusk earlier this year. There is a red combine for reference scale highlighted. The tank needs 1 ,000 foot nonresidential safety buffer, which falls a little outside of their property and there are some other off-site impact considerations, such as light, noise, conductivity and quality of place. Another obvious influence in the area are development pressures. The construction of Owyhee High School has brought a new level of that. This is a challenge as we don't currently have adequate fire service and our police officers have long travel times. Utility infrastructure is inadequate. We still need some major improvements to sewer, including a new lift station. There is also uncertainty with road improvements and the State Highway 16 extension west of McDermott. Finally, there is no neighborhood services and many that are likely to be of interest earlier are not necessarily in the best location or had the best community or long term value. And, finally, as previously noted, 2019 Comprehensive Plan was a huge basis for a lot of the background and context for this plan. It identified the future plans for the area and the need for more integrated development patterns and service planning. I realize this map is a little late, but it serves as a -- as a good transition here. The left shows the region and The Fields area and the right shows the adopted future land uses without the other noise. The liquid -- the liquefied natural gas tank is called out. The candy striped line near McDermott is State Highway 16, which will have crossings only at Ustick, Chinden, McMillan and Five Mile Creek. The Phyllis Canal and Five Mile Creek wrap around the industrial area and the Intermountain facility in the southwest corner. The background information here is all context and history for the Comprehensive Plan. We have had some questions on it, though, and it's casual -- and casual why not type comments. So, it may be useful for newer P&Z members not involved in this work previously. During the Comprehensive Plan build out and analysis consider neighboring cities, citywide allocation, corridor analysis and sub area planning. The Fields area was one of the several dedicated focus areas. Most of the adjacent regional land uses are mixed use in today's market and away from the highway that's largely -- likely to largely be residential with linear commercial along the frontages. In Meridian and of late the next best use from commercial that has reached saturation is multi-family. This vacant commercial -- chances are someone has thought about putting multi-family there and regardless of conductivity, access transportation, employment or supportive uses. Star is actually looking to pair their commercial uses back due to viability. You can see this in Meridian. People think Chinden, for example, should all be commercial, but most of it is, in fact, residential. Limited access requires nonresidential to be focused and there has been no reversal of the effect, except generally for those destination uses and spaces that really shine. Employment opportunities in The Fields area focus in the southwest, Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F47 Page 43 of 62 northeast and neighborhood center. In the right context and conditions these each have an opportunity to specialize in different markets and uses. Parks and open space is also important for context. There is probably a little too -- too much information here. However, I want you to see a previous discussion point with City Council and one of the driving reasons for this work. Despite valiant best efforts by our Parks and Recreation Department, the city has not been gaining on its service goals. It's been going the other way, unfortunately. The Fields area in particular has no previously acquired land or dedicated land. The Borup on Cherry, Discovery on Lake Hazel, and to a lesser degree Aldape property along the river, all areas that the city has been proactive in planning for city park space prior to development coming. We don't have anything like that out here, though. The city didn't expect the high school and developments happening. State Highway 16 is coming and it just hasn't been a good opportunity previously. With some important background covered, we will step into a brief review of the process. This has focused on a recent engagement. As reiterated, this work has made use of further recent efforts. This has led to some challenges and opportunity. It's challenging because newer stakeholders and those that did not participate previously sometimes wanted to talk about previous steps. It's an opportunity, because it allowed us to focus on how much we really cared about. Usually, though, we just got asked about roadway questions. The consistent feedback through all this, however, was on pathways connectivity and a distinct community thematic. This was great as it's alignment with city's previous efforts and feedback received. For this project we began with small group interviews, in person and online. The focus of these meetings was concerns and opportunities and included partner agencies, city staff, development and financing professionals and key stakeholders, those near the community center. After initial direction and concept work the project team moved an online workshop. This used an interactive tool called Mural. The technology is still a little awkward, but worked well. All property owners in The Fields area were notified and invited to participate. The focus was still on the neighborhood center, but included broader visual preference, polling and discussion. Again, most of the questions were about the roads. Prior to submitting for public hearing, the city notified all previous participants and invited them to review and comment on a preview draft. This utilized a public comment tool equivalent to a market tool and PDF, Adobe Acrobat, but was available to all and made comments publicly visible. After submitting -- submitting for public hearing, we again notified all property owners of the public -- of the project and process and shared their project website with links to the final draft on the project folder on the record system. Staff has also continued to meet and engage with stakeholders throughout this process. Thankfully and despite the very large area and constant changing ownership, there are not a lot of unique property owners in the area. Unique being the number of property owners. This slide isn't going to do the platform justice, but here you can see a few screen captures from the Mural platform. This is a digital collaborative whiteboard that was used for the online workshop. The tool has been gaining in popularity and for good reason. You can engage with more people more easily, not just those who are close by and have more time. That was a long setup, so we will transition into the plan now. The Field Sub Area Plan includes four chapters, with an intro, overview of the public process, the plan or vision and implementation. The vision includes elements on transportation, parks and pathways, economic development, character and a focus on the neighborhood center. The graphics here will be discussed Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F48 Page 44 of 62 and some late changes later, so, please, make a note of that. Implementation is focused on priorities, city participation, and action items. The heart and focus of the plan here is the Star-McMillan center. It is central to the area, accessible, but it's insulated from highways and yet distinctly Meridian. It's not Nampa or Star. It's intended to be iconic and to have a unique destination identity. It's designed and accessible for locals, but attracted to everyone else, too. Makes use of one of the city's pathways network and -- makes use of the city's pathway network and especially the Five Mile Creek pathway. This will have one of the few crossings on State Highway 16 with an underpass. It includes a main street style that provides more opportunities for destination uses and placemaking. This area is prime for partnerships and synergies, not just the pathway network and linear open space, but also to provide Iocational benefits from a future city park. A key characteristic here is the east-west alignment to make best use of access down McMillan. The access points nearest historic McMillan intersection may be limited or at least not as efficient. Market absorption may take some time here as contemplated, but to propose synergies and limited competing land uses in -- in the near vicinity provide a huge amount of opportunities long term. The mixed use nature allow some ebb and sway in trends with flexible and convertible space development. While a park or other destination uses may support a fully realized neighborhood center sooner, it has an opportunity to be self sufficient long term with the rooftops necessary to support the desired uses. The vision is that many of the services residents may normally drive to can be accessible without getting onto an arterial roadway or -- or crossing a congested state highway. A lot of thought went into how this can work. If you look at areas like Bown Crossing or this 36th Street Bistro and Hill, they have had problems. It's about combination shortcomings, including in lack of external access, local community access, visibility, essential use anchors, public amenities, programming, competing areas, and total rooftops were are all contributing factors. The project team looked at neighborhood center success stories and retail trends. Case study examples in the area and the region included Daybreak, Utah: Ferguson Farms in Bozeman, Montana; Montava in Fort Collins and others. There is going to be strong local demand in the future and with a river crossing at Star and overpass on McMillan, there will be visibility and traffic. The center itself will be a destination draw. This is an illustrated look and field sketch. This isn't prescriptive, but it does include many of the sense of place and focus elements that stakeholders have commented on. Here is a smattering of other images that have received positive feedback for look and feel elements. All these come from the plan. Next steps is crucial. The plan has limited usefulness of this self document. We didn't need to go to this level of effort for just development review. As mentioned, there is a lot of challenges and opportunities, including State Highway 16, and continued transportation impacts and existing infrastructure. A fully functioning high school, still largely in the middle of nowhere. A funded, but unconstructed fire station, changing land ownership and increasing development pressures. The coordination of partnerships can't be reinforced. In fact, it probably needs its own slide. Aligning city and partner agency services will be key. The high school shook things up and this plan is a good step to get service planning back in alignment. We can help that through public-public, public-private and private-private partnerships to reduce some of the risk with advanced timing and to address otherwise negative circumstances and barriers and, instead, create positive opportunities. I also want to be very straightforward. This plan has some of the usual Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F49 Page 45 of 62 planning development guidelines, but it's also put a lot of responsibility for success on the city. It's not just evaluating consistency of broad planning elements with unique development proposals, but the city working with developers and owners and other stakeholders to ensure we have something special. The process to get here and the framework is important, but I would argue that next steps are even more important. That was a relatively quick summary. The project -- project team believes we have a balanced -- we have balanced a lot of perspective and interest with short and long term needs. The plan and staff report do touch on some other topics and there are, quite frankly, some other equally big ideas, such as funding, that fall on staff and City Council. I didn't go through the comp plan policies that support this work or the plan or the findings as illustrated in the staff report, but we feel this is not just consistent with the comp plan, but also finishing the work we already started. Quickly I will go through the request and some additional recommended changes. There is a lot of depth to discussion we could have on any number of topics, but it's difficult to do most of that outside of questions or several hours of debrief. The big request of Commission tonight, as previously noted, is to adopt The Field Sub Area Plan by reference. That amounts to one new row and table on page D of the Comprehensive Plan. We do have a few other proposed changes to the draft as well. The city has had some questions and feedback since the draft plan was submitted for public hearing. Most of these have been around understanding the purpose of text and some conservative prescriptive standards. A lot of this is very understandable and valid. The project team had proposed some adjustments to adjust -- to address some of these. More broadly, though, there are a few things to remember. The first is that this is a high level planning document. It's not all things to all projects. There is a narrative for data. There is narrative for data for records -- and reference. The plan is used for city priorities and projects and the plan is also used to review development in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan, UDC, architecture standards and other approved documents. Another reminder is that not all development is the same. The location, size, and context is very important. This plan should not be blindly followed and -- with all -- with all elements required in all conditions. It's also difficult to strike up balance that makes everyone happy. The plan has to have language that is strong enough to be enforceable and provide confidence to both residents and development, but avoid blindly imposing an inappropriate condition or being so weak and broad as to lack any means to be implemented. This screen in the staff -- this screen and the next are both in the staff report as part of the staff recommendation. I won't linger here. This language is all intended to provide more context on why some of the information is there and why it's important. This page are just some simple clarification to other text and, again, these ones are included in the staff report as part of the staff recommendation. These changes are not in the staff report, so, please, consider these with any approval motion. COMPASS provided a few comments in their agency response. One set of comments -- comments were related to use as described on the illustrated framework map. That was the image referenced earlier. The quote uses described are not in the city's future land use designation portfolio. That was not fully evident apparently and so these changes are trying to make clear. Those were generalized uses, not future land uses. Those comments are to reference different regional planning documents. The wrong ones are cited in the document. That's the presentation. Lastly, doing the future amendment we would like to tweak a few sections of the Comprehensive Plan to better Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F50] Page 46 of 62 accommodate all sub area planning types into one section. They are currently sort of all over. That is a little intensive and distracting from the actual work now, though, and so we are planning to do that with the next round of cleanup and update to the comp plan itself. I'm also hoping we can create a responsive website for this sub area plan, just like the Comprehensive Plan. We have the tools and ability, we just need some time. I just need some time. With that, myself, Megan and Caleb, are happy to answer any questions you may have. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Any questions for staff? Lorcher: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: I'm not sure if this is the right time to ask it, but the corner of Star and McMillan has some historic buildings on it. I assume that was the name of a town back in the wayback days. Does this Comprehensive Plan include saving what Meridian was? McClure: Madam Chair, the -- the Comprehensive Plan has some historic elements in the -- in the main document. This specific-- or the sub area plan does not call out specific structures to save. It does, however, identify that church on the southwest corner of McMillan and Star as an historic structure. We did speak with the owners of that property. The church has acquired some other property on Star and they are interested in potentially relocating that-- moving that in the future. I can't say it will be a difficult balance in the future due to the proximity of the intersection with any future intersection widening. So, hopefully, they do relocate it, rather than tearing it down or having it removed for them. Grove: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Grove. Grove: Brian -- Brian, does the timeline on the highway extension change like how -- how important this is in terms of timing to get some of these things moving? McClure: Commissioner, the timing for the State Highway 16 is ever evolving. It's changed from 20 years from now to sooner to an interim condition that could start really soon. I don't know how important it is to this plan's timing right now. I don't. But understanding how it will impact where development occurs is important. A lot of that is probably more for the broader Comprehensive Plan and not sort of focused on the neighborhood center, but certainly it's something that's very important and will have some huge impacts and we need to be aware of what they are. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F51 Page 47 of 62 Yearsley: You know, it's surprising to me how fast this has come about. I was on the Planning and Zoning Commission when we were looking at the subdivisions there off of McMillan -- off McDermott -- McDermott and how far out I thought that was and now we are planning all the way out to the city limits or impact area. It just amazes me how fast this is moving and -- and expanding. I applaud the city for getting ahead of this now and trying to plan for what this should look like and especially planning for services and parks out that way. So, I appreciate your efforts. McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for staff? Okay. And point of order to my legal counsel. We are taking public testimony on this this evening? Starman: Yes. McCarvel: Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to testify on this application or this -- Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do. There are several people signed in. I will just call them as they signed up. First up is Jeff Hatch. I think he left. Mark Bottles. Bottles: This mic or this mic? Both of them are live? McCarvel: They are both -- both are live as long as you are close enough. Bottles: Okay. Good evening, Chair and Commissioners. My name is Mark Bottles at 839 South Bridgeway Place, Eagle, Idaho. First I want to thank all the city staff, Brian and Caleb and the Mayor and everyone at the city that has contributed to get here tonight. We are extremely excited about the Field Sub Area, what we believe is really the last best area of Meridian and the planning that's gone into it. I'm here tonight with Jim Houk from Kimley-Horn; Deb Nelson and Emily Mueller, who is in my office, to discuss in greater detail some of our specific comments to the plan. Is there -- Brian, can you put up this -- do you have the slide for -- map just showing the parcels? Thank you. Together with several partners I -- or control approximately 630 acres in The Fields Sub Area. This represents almost a third of the developmental ground in the entire Fields district. We are invested in this area. Very excited about the plan and partnering with the city to make this a vibrant place to live, work and recreate. We are excited about the pathway system that's going to connect it all together in the park. After engaging with the city staff and Logan Simpson over the last year, we are left with only a few, but important comments to the plan prior to its adoption. These comments are primarily focused on the Star-McMillan center, which partner owns 62 acres of that. If we could go to that slide. If we have got the right one. Yeah. There we go. Thank you. The neighborhood center, which is adjacent to the current city limits, my partners are ready to bring this application in within the next six to 12 months. We are very excited about the center. We share the city's vision for the neighborhood, community center with walkable retail streets, with direct connection to adjacent neighborhoods and to the community pathway system, which it will be located on. While we -- while we cast vision for this area for the next five, you know, 20 and 50 years of the plan in the future, the plan should allow flexibility and Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F52 Page 48 of 62 creativity in the mix uses and the design standards to respond to the market demand that will support and maintain the economic viability of the center. I'm very familiar with the successes and struggles of centers throughout the valley and -- and believe allowing the center's development to be driven both by the city and by the city's vision and the market demands, this will be key in allowing us to bring this center to life, so we are excited. I'm going to have -- introduced to you Jim Houk with Kimley-Horn, who I think should be on on Zoom. I guess that's what we call it. Weatherly: Yes, sir. I'm transferring him over now. Bottlers: Okay. Thank you. Weatherly: Jim, you should have the ability to unmute yourself and turn on your camera if you would like. Houk: Thank you, Mark and Chairman and Council -- Commissioners I should say. We appreciate the opportunity to -- again to -- to share in this adventure with the city and the planning efforts that the city has put forth. As Mark had mentioned, you know, the -- the town center is an important part of the puzzle and even as Brian, excuse me, has outlined, you know, it becomes kind of a cornerstone for a lot of what's being envisioned for the community and we are excited to be part of that. I think what I would really just stop and say is we think, you know, from our planning efforts and as a team and working with the city, there is -- there is alignment. There is a great alignment that's going to make this very possible and it's exciting to know that Mark and his partners are in the position to really bring this plan forward in the near future. So, we are excited to be a part of that. We are excited to also share with you some -- some initial thoughts tonight. This bubble diagram was -- was provided as an additional version or concept of what's possible out here today and we are excited that city staff has allowed us to bring our own ideas to the table and show how maybe what one other version might look like for the town center as a -- as a -- as a whole. We understand that -- that through this alignment we are going to provide, you know, great pedestrian and auto connections east, north, south, west from the center, really encouraging the multi-modal options, but also eliminating some of the traffic concerns that we, you know, are all experiencing on the major corridors today. But what we are really talking about, too, here is about the principles of creating -- creating place. One of those buzzwords out there in the planning world. Sense of place doesn't always happen overnight, it takes time, it takes people living there, it takes, you know, time for places to get ownership and a sense of authenticity and we think moving the plan forward we need to make sure that the language continues to support those options, supports new ideas that we haven't even thought about yet moving forward and we appreciate Brian's efforts to talk about the limitations or changing the language a bit on prescriptive tones within the original draft that we were reviewing with them. Moving forward we want to recognize that -- again, that the plan should recognize the time that it will take to mold the community as we -- as we talk about the market forces, but also giving time for the neighborhoods to begin to develop and for the housing mix to kind of evolve and we are encouraging that the plan continue to reinforce that language, opening up the opportunity -- opportunities for a series of potential opportunities around the town Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F53 Page 49 of 62 center as it relates to the mixed use and how that begins to take shape. So, we would continue to just -- and ensure that the document clearly states how that vision and the town center will move forward, but also that --that there are options on the table, as Brian had mentioned, that really will embrace some of the things out there from the market standpoint, but also from the residential development perspective. I want to move on to the next slide real quickly. This slide was really just introduced as a way to give some perspective on -- on the Bown property and the development that's happened there, you know, that we -- when we talk about envisioning a plan and moving it forward, it really comes based on, you know, what our history has been, what we have experienced, success and failures, and as planners, you know, we --we talk a lot about lessons learned and I think in this case, you know, we can see the -- the success, but -- but also the evolution of how the -- the project has gotten to where it is today and just for reference also the --the spread that you see before you on the aerial, it's about two and a half acres, and that same two and a half acres -- and, then, that's reflected over here on the bubble diagram as a -- just I guess for reference and perspective on what the town center here potentially could be and how it will maybe evolve with the main street, the connections to the greenway, as well as the civics pieces there in blue. We even envision kind of celebrating the agricultural history of the place and encouraging civic space for commerce markets and things of that nature, but also recognizing that as we move forward we want to -- my screen is frozen. Sorry. The bubble concept we think in this case, as well as the one that's shown in the plan, really begins to celebrate those connections that are important to the overall vision for the plan. We believe it's important that the sub area plan continues to be flexible and nimble, enough to develop over time and that's where we really have been talking more with Brian and staff and team about just making sure that some of the language is -- will benefit options in the future, really support the benefits of new business and new housing opportunities that will be coming to The Field at some point. So, with that I think we are grateful for the opportunity to share this bubble concept with -- with you all and the opportunity to share and can be part of the development of this plan and we think it will be a great -- a great next steps for the City of Meridian. With that I will be open to any questions, but, if not, I could -- I could pass the mic on. McCarvel: Any questions for this testimony? Okay. Madam Clerk? Weatherly: Madam Chair, I believe it's Deb Nelson. Nelson: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, Deborah Nelson. My address is 601 West Bannock Street. It's a pleasure to be with you this evening. We are here to support the plan. I'm here on behalf of the team that's representing the current landowner and developer and we do -- we are very grateful for the process and opportunity to weigh in on this. We do have some relatively minor, but very important adjustments that we are asking you to address and my focus this evening is to talk about some of this prescriptive language. You know, Brian addressed that this is supposed to be a high level planning document. That's its purpose and we completely agree. There is just a few places in the plan where we would suggest some of the language doesn't accomplish that goal of being a high level planning document. Instead, it gets prescriptive to the point that it operates more like a zoning ordinance and could limit market opportunities, could limit innovation. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F54 Page 50 of 62 So, I want to highlight a couple of those areas. First on -- on page 315, addressing the center components, a particular language that we asked for some change on, if you look under on the right you can see where the plan language says under main street style -- and here is just a very prescriptive sentence of two to three story mixed use buildings fronting a curved street running east-west. You know, we would just ask that rather than prescribing the layout and the building types with this level of specificity, instead you address -- you address design qualities that are desired here and how to accomplish those. So, we suggested language more like -- that incorporates innovative design and uses based on market demand with on-street parking and pedestrian oriented streetscape. You know, requiring the two and three story buildings can not only stifle that innovation, but really limit market interest and you are trying to develop a successful commercial center here. Commercial uses are particular about building height and often do prefer a single story frontage opportunity and you can still achieve with that single story appearance the same main street feel that's part of the architectural theme here and that's really illustrated well by these types of examples. Single story retail. They activate the streetscape without overpowering it. They encourage walkability. They still have that great interface with the pedestrian and the street frontage and they really capture the theme of this plan as set forth of contemporary rural thematic that's really sought here for the commercial. So, you can accomplish that, whether it's one, two or three story buildings, we just asked that that not be so prescriptive. The second area that we wanted to focus on is on page 420 of the plan. Design standards. Here there are some -- within the recommended action items, which is, really, a place where the -- the plan is calling for the development of future architectural standards. We recognize that that's calling for a future action, but the direction that's given here about what should be in those standards is very prescriptive and we would just ask for some minor changes on the first two bullets to incorporate flexibility, so that when the people come together, the city is working with stakeholders and developing these architectural standards, which, of course, our developer is excited to be a part of, that they haven't started out of the gate with too many rules in place before they even get there. You can still incorporate these great concepts, but we ask that it includes some language such as, you know, incorporate material such as, but not limited to. So, you give the guidance for how they are going to develop these standards. The third bullet was probably the most concerning I guess to us, because it seemed like the most prescriptive, where it says to discourage or allow only a very limited use of -- and, then, it lists quite a few materials. These materials are commonly used in high quality, innovative developments and still are used in ways that can meet these -- these character goals. You know, we would ask you, instead, to make sure the design standards in the plan and the resulting architectural standards are flexible enough to achieve the development that can meet those character goals, create a successful commercial area without limiting important materials for that creative process. For some examples, these are all on the restricted list. As I said, this type of material, composite siding, metal siding, cement board, they are appropriate, they are attractive and can be used in innovative and quality ways and are. The plan doesn't need to restrict these materials to accomplish its goals. In fact, a good architectural standard, you know, can and should work for a variety of materials and particularly in today's market conditions where supply of materials is so limited. You know, let the architectural design come through without arbitrarily cutting out these basic materials used day in day out in Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F55] Page 51 of 62 commercial developments. And so with that we thank you for your consideration of those changes. We are very supportive of the plan and the process. Appreciative of all the work that Brian and everybody on the city staff has put into this and their welcoming of our input and they have been very receptive to that. So, very appreciative. Just focusing on a few details that we ask you to consider. Thank you. Weatherly: Madam Chair, Emily Mueller. Mueller: Good evening, Madam Chair and Commissioners. Emily Mueller. 839 South Bridgeway Place, Eagle, Idaho. And I will just be wrapping up the last couple minor comments that we have to the plan from this ownership group. The two main requests that we ask to be addressed in the plan include Table 4-A, which is an overview -- overall development program table. Staff did address some of our concerns that we have had in the interim over the last several days with comments that Brian shared earlier. However, with those comments it is still unclear to us what the purpose of this table really is. Is it a target four square footage or is it just an estimate or a record of what's been done? And, additionally, it's unclear how the figures were reached to us and we have had additional follow up with Logan Simpson, which we really appreciate, but we would like that to be included in here and -- and it's hard for us to replicate those -- those estimates or those -- those figures and so while the plan -- so, yeah, the intended use of this table I think is the primary concern here, it not being clear, and -- and while some of the added language that staff included says that this is -- is to estimate -- this is to estimate a table, it still is used to consider the overall development of the area and while we agree that it's important to balance uses and consider the area, while paired -- while that language is paired with these really specific numbers, it's -- it can be confusing and problematic. So, we would request that this table either be removed or that it's revised to explain how these figures were reached and add a statement that the table reflects estimates and doesn't present standards for consideration of future development applications. Our final request is regarding some of the recommended action items on page 4-11 of the plan and the first bullet point here suggests that a specific action would be to limit single family developments per planned use designations and our concern with this clause is that it's somewhat of a blanket statement about -- about product type. Single family product is consistently being refined with denser product types. I live in a neighborhood where my single family home is smaller than the townhomes in my neighborhood and so we feel that this was more of a blanket statement on a product type, instead of the goal, which is to include density where we need density. The second bullet point recommends codifying standards -- stronger standards for a maximum percentage of land use dedicated for residential within mixed use areas and we would recommend not including this. It would really be the first time that there is maximum standards prescribed for residents in mixed use and we don't think that precluding residential will bring commercial. Market brings commercial. And so we don't think that that is an appropriate action item moving forward. I have included here a summary of our recommendations just for convenience. I also have a handout for you. The most important of them being the invitation we got to submit a concept of our desired development that is consistent with the -- the aesthetic of the plan to include and so that is our first and our primary recommendation, the plan that Mr. Houk went over and the rest of our recommendations are summarized here. So, if I can Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F56 Page 52 of 62 give these to you. With that I or any member of our team, if you have a specific question for a member of our team, can stand for questions. Thank you. McCarvel: Any questions at this point for the current testimony? Madam Clerk, do we have anybody else signed up? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do not. McCarvel: Okay. I'm thinking just as we go forward on this discussion -- I don't know that we really opened -- point of order, sir. We haven't really opened a discussion, so we don't need to close the public hearing, because this presentation was not really an application. Starman: Test. Test. I think it was advertised as a public hearing. McCarvel: Okay. Starman: Or staff can correct -- planning staff correct me. I think it was advertised as a public hearing. So, I would consider the testimony you received this evening as part of that public hearing. You can ask if there are additional members in the audience or on Zoom that want to speak, but after that I would -- I would say just close the public -- McCarvel: Go ahead and -- Starman: Or continue to where ever the Commission's desire might be. McCarvel: Okay. Would the Commissioners like to leave the public testimony open to ask more questions or close the public hearing and move on with deliberations? Seal: Madam Chair, I have a few questions. McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just for staff and Brian specifically, I mean we have got -- we have got a big list of things that we could make a motion out of, but, personally, I would like these discussions to happen between the folks who gave the presentation and staff and for us to not be an intermediary in that, unless staff basically says, yes, we agree to everything they say. McClure: Commissioner, this is the city's application. Our consultants have delivered to you what they feel is in the best interest of the city. Public testimony is important and I would encourage you to consider and listen to that, but at the end of the day it's not really a negotiation at this point, it's whatever you think is best. So, staff's happy to talk to the -- some of the stakeholders in the area further, but I'm not in a position to necessarily negotiate the details of those. It's sort of we have given to you what our consultant feels -- feels is best and if you think some of this is valid or would like to have some discussion about it we could, but I'm not going to be in a position -- I'm not in the best position to go through those further. They have given most of this to us previously. We understand and Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F57 Page 53 of 62 feel that a lot of them are valid and understand and recognize them, but there is usually reasons for why some of them were not made. Maybe I will have to defer to Caleb as to -- yeah. Lorcher: Madam Chair? Oh, are we -- McCarvel: Yeah. Go ahead, Caleb. Hood: I don't have much to add, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. As Brian mentioned, we have -- we have met with the folks that have testified thus far on this project. It's not that we don't agree with some of their -- their comments, we thoughtfully have considered them. Some of them we could make. I think at this point, though, it's good to hear back from the Commission on what you think is in the best interest of the city and what you have before you now is what we are proposing to move forward. But no hard feelings if there is additional changes. You have questions and want to talk about some of those we are certainly happy to do that. McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: So, are you -- are you willing to make any changes to the recommendations that have been made or are your design -- your presentation for the city final? These bullet points that they have brought forward to you. You have listened to them. Are any of them open for consideration or you have already considered them and made your designs -- McClure: We have made some -- some recommendations based off some of these already. They are in the list of staff recommended changes in the staff report. For example, to the table -- they have reviewed that and they -- it's still not where they like it to be and that's fine, but we have made the changes that we thought were appropriate. If you guys think more changes are appropriate that's certainly within your purview, happy to have specific discussions about them. But this table is more for you than it is for me at this point. Lorcher: Thank you. Grove: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Grove. Grove: Brian and Caleb, is this document that we have been presented, what is its long term use in terms of being amended or modified as we go? Is it, you know, in line with like a comp plan where you don't want to go back in and make significant changes as, you know, things on the ground change or is it a recommending document more than anything else where changes are okayed a little bit more? I'm kind of thinking like the Ten Mile Specific Area Plan or whatever that -- it's not as rigid as some of the other documents that are out there. So, what are --what's the long term use of this document? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F58 Page 54 of 62 McClure: Commissioner, I don't think we ever want to change the plan more than necessary. It is -- this plan would be a text amendment, because it's adopted by reference. Well, actually, I'm not sure --we would generally consider it a text amendment to modify the plan. Text amendments aren't as difficult now as the map amendments, which have a restriction. Staff can change the text whenever we want, so if there is an appropriate time the staff can do it. Development interest, stakeholders, anyone can make a request to change the text of the plan. Long term reason for the plan is just like the Comprehensive Plan, it just has some additional areas of focus that sort of deal with the unique conditions of this area. So, this is not a future land use map plan. There is -- there is no element of that here. It would just be text to modify the plan. Does that help at all? Grove: It does. Thank you. Hood: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Caleb. Hood: I would just note -- and maybe you are getting there. I just want to make sure we -- we have other folks in the audience. I imagine they are here for -- to testify, but this is a public hearing, so if you are willing to take additional public testimony we would certainly like to hear that, too. McCarvel: Oh, absolutely. I thought we had gone down the road. Sorry. We had no more that were signed up; right? Okay. Anybody else in the room that would like to offer comments? Wessel: Madam Chairperson, Commissioners, my name is Tim Wessel. I live at 5080 North Baylor Lane, directly in line with where all this is going to happen. We have been here for two years. This is the first notification whatsoever that we have ever received of any of this. So, not good with communication, I guess. I come from the service side. I'm a retired fire chief out of southern California. Thirty years in the fire department and I would have been strung up had we not communicated with people in the area better than this. There is talk of high density housing directly across McMillan from our street and, then, with the high density housing comes a lot of things that are not nice. Higher crime, trash and all kinds of other great problems. I just would hope that in the future going forward with this project that those of us that are living in the middle of it are going to be contacted and be talked to and asked what our opinions are, because so far we haven't been. I just really hope that in the future as this moves forward -- because I know that things can change and things will change as this whole process goes forward. But I really hope that there will be an effort to talk to those of us that are going to be directly impacted by this, because this is going to directly impact us. I live on a street with seven houses. There is a cornfield in front of us and a farm behind us. So, we are going to be impacted by this. I just really hope in the future that -- that you guys will take the time to make sure that we are talked to. Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F59 Page 55 of 62 McCarvel: Okay. Madam Clerk. Oh, you said we had nobody else. Is there anybody else in the room? Sorry. Ross: Madam Chair, Commissioners, my name is David Ross. I live with my wife at 5595 North McDermott. Couldn't have said it better. Our first notification was that postcard we got in the mail as well. Large impacts. We understand that development is coming and it has to come. Commissioner Grove, you brought up a very significant issue and it is Highway 16. To our knowledge no one has got Idaho Transportation Department involved in this process either. So, we are on the north side of this, but when we first saw that map on the postcard that has us in your impact zone in your Comprehensive Plan, we are here tonight just to go on record that we oppose any annexation. McCarvel: Okay. Anybody else in the room that wishes to testify on this? Madam Clerk, did we have anybody online that is raising their hand? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we have one person. Warren Ryrie. Warren, you should be able to unmute yourself and state your name and address for the record. Ryrie: Yes. My name is Warren Ryrie. I live at 8478 West McMillan in Meridian. My wife and I own the property that's -- that's on the northwest corner of McMillan and Star Road. My concern is is that as this project began it appeared that the intent of the planning was to maintain more of an open, even an agricultural appearance for this land and preserving that -- that openness and that type of lifestyle that is so important and has been so important in the development of this area and as what I see happening here and even more today with some of the changes is an intense effort to move towards high density -- very high density housing associated with that and it appears to me that the comments that have been made by the folks that live in this area and that own property in this area, other than Mr. Bottles, has not been listened to and we do not agree with the -- with the shift towards such high density housing development in -- in this area. Thank you. McCarvel: Madam Clerk, anybody else online? Weatherly: Madam Chair, not that I see. McCarvel: Then could I get a motion to close public hearing on H-2021-0047. Seals: So moved. Grove: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2021- 0047. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Lorcher: Madam Chair, I have a question for staff. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F60] Page 56 of 62 McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: In regard to the designation and the gentleman who was on -- I think McDermott in regard to annexation, nothing's being annexed. Correct? It's all being discussed as far as just a designation. But in order for the parcel to be annexed it would have to be brought forth to the City Council or the Planning and Zoning; is that correct? McClure: Commissioner, that's -- that's correct. There are no proposed land use changes. These were all adopted with the 2019 Comprehensive Plan and there are no proposed annexations. This is a text amendment only. McCarvel: No. Sorry. Grove: Madam Chair? McCarvel: It's not you, it's the process. Mr. Grove. Grove: Madam Chair. I would just like to make a point of reference here for the last three that presented. I know that it might feel sudden, because you hadn't read the documents or weren't in the area when some of the decisions were made. But this was part of the comprehensive plan that was an 18 to 24 month process that was formally voted on by the City Council on 2019. So, a lot of this was discussed prior to that. It was part of that larger Comprehensive Plan. So, just saying -- just want to make a point of order that a lot of this documentation and conversations have been had for many, many years and that's where some of these discussions came out of with the document that they are presenting tonight. Wheeler: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Wheeler. Wheeler: I -- I for one would kind of like to see -- like Commissioner Grove pointed out -- that this was something that was done in a process for, you know, 18 to 24 months. City Council take a look at it. Had I'm assuming focus groups go through the verbiage, things of that nature. I'm for one that would kind of like to see their plan that they have accepted kind of play out in this area, personally speaking. I'm looking at also just one of the points here under item one, about -- about being two to three story, mixed use buildings and a front. I go through Bown Crossing and those are all two story buildings as you drive down that street. Personally I kind of like the feel of that, rather than the single stories and the flats on that. For me, it's kind of -- and everything deals with ratios and some restrictions one way or another. We do that with open spaces. We do that with parking. We do that with densities all over and -- and that's what holds on to the community to make it viable for generations to come and to me that's part of what the Council underwent for two years in getting this input, going back and forth, putting it together and they came up with this verbiage in their mind of how this community in this four square mile block could look and really benefit. So, for me I'm -- I'm more of one that Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F61 Page 57 of 62 says, hey, I would like to see this play out and if something comes up that needs something, then, it can be adjusted at a CUP or something at that time when something is submitted. But to go through and change the text is not really something I'm in support of. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I would like to thank staff and for the people that are feeling that this is all at once and that things are kind of being forced on you, like Commissioner Grove said, there has been a process in place to go through this. It took several years in order to get there. Unfortunately, we can't notice the entire city and the Comprehensive Plan literally dealt with the entire city area of impact. It is something that was very public that had a lot of involvement and in the end the properties that you have don't have to do anything. You don't have to annex, you don't have to sell, you don't have to do anything. You will be impacted, because, like you said, it's coming. I mean it's coming and, you know, I have got things -- I have got a nice farm field out in front of my house. It's not going to be there anymore. So, I'm in the same spot that you guys are. So, it's part of living in Meridian at this point in time, fortunately or unfortunately, depending on how you -- you know, how you view that. What the city and staff are trying to do at this point I personally commend, because there has been a lot of areas where people don't -- didn't get a notice in their mailbox until stuff was getting built. So, you all -- all of a sudden had multi-family sitting out in front of your doorstep, where they are trying to corral this in, set up a plan to where it looks good, instead of having pathways like the one that exists between Ten Mile and Linder Road that's like being on the Greenbelt that dead end and go absolutely nowhere. That's one of the ones that I ride all the time. They are trying to get in front of this and trying to make it something cohesive, something that's going to blend into the community and not just be an add on as more garage farms basically. So, I like the idea that they are going through this or trying to get in front of it and everything. I do have some reservations about the recommendations that are coming in. I mean I think some of these are good recommendations. But, again, I'm not a city planner. I mean I understand that there is reasons why they may not have taken these recommendations in, but I -- I don't have enough information to really know if that's the way that it should lean or not, to be perfectly honest. I mean as a Commissioner I would like more information on why some of these are or are not good recommendations, why they shouldn't be included. I know there is some things -- just the way overall amount of amendments to what's being submitted tonight has me thinking that this isn't ready. There is a lot of stuff that you guys submitted to change. There is a lot of things that are being recommended to change. I just don't think this is ready to go forward in its current iteration. I think it could use some more work, because I will use -- I will use the same thing on this as we do on developers as they come in. We get one chance to get this right. So, let's get it right. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F62 Page 58 of 62 Yearsley: I wholeheartedly agree. For me I need to take time to review what they are asking and kind of go back to the plan and have a chance to better review it to better understand what's being asked of us before I feel comfortable making a decision. Lorcher: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: Looking at this map that they handed out today -- and if you break it down into little sections, over 67 percent that is being recommended as high density. Do we really need another -- and when we say high density, aren't we talking about things like multi- family housing, multiple stories, people kind of on top of each other with -- with shared spaces and there is definitely a need and a place for that in our city and we have seen a lot of that along the 1-84 corridor and the Ten Mile interchange. But this quiet little farmland out in the middle of the edges of our town, do we really need another blast of high density housing? I just don't -- you know it -- it needs to be gradual where we have our density and, then, we kind of level out a little bit, so that the -- the history of Meridian and what we are about and the farmland has some existence. Otherwise, we lose what Meridian started as. So, I'm opposed to this plan in regard to -- I like The Field idea. I love having another city center out there. But surrounding it with high density housing and not having any medium or low density housing indicated at all would be a horrible addition to our city out in that area. Grove: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Grove. Grove: We are not litigating what's already been put into the Comprehensive Plan. We are --we are litigate --we are talking about the text that kind of clarifies some of the points that are already there. So, we are looking at this not from a five year standpoint, but more of a 50 year standpoint. What does this look like in 50 years? How is this built out to make the community sustainable? In this general -- like in this area we are looking at two major highway systems that are -- are at the northeast corner of this property -- or this general area. We are not talking about an annexation. We are not talking about a subdivision. We are talking about a general area that has much higher level pieces and I think if we start getting like sucked into the bubble plan that was out there or any of the images, then, we are kind of losing focus on what we are asked to be looking at tonight, which is a much larger, long-term piece of planning than what we are typically charged with looking at. It is much more complicated, much more nuanced in a lot of ways, but also a little bit easier, because we are not saying, okay, this is exactly where that road goes, this is exactly what this needs to look like, we are -- we get a chance to create an entire -- you know, they mentioned a sense of place and that is something that is not always available to us when we are doing smaller developments or looking at, you know, even a one square mile part. We are looking at four square miles here. We are looking at this from a long-term perspective. One of the things that Commissioner Wheeler said kind of resonated with me in thinking about, you know, the market might not do right now Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F63 Page 59 of 62 the one -- you know, they want the one story. That makes sense. But does that have that long term viability for our community if we think about how does something redevelop, how does something have character, how does something have identity as we move forward and I think we need to take a few steps back and --and look at what this document is, what it is being added to and why we are talking about it. McCarvel: Any other comments or motions? I'm thinking on the general consensus we want a little more time to read through and digest what we have been presented with tonight. It is text amendment to the plan. It's not annexing or approving a plan at all tonight. Or with this presentation, so -- but there is significant text changes that they are asking us to look at and I think probably warrants some time to think and compare. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Yeah. I would like more time, but I mean, essentially -- I mean I would look at a continuance so that they can include all of those into their submission with anything that they also agree with from the group that presented tonight. That way we can have one comprehensive document in front of us that we are -- that we know what, you know, they are willing to yield on, what they are not willing to yield on and maybe some explanation as to why. That would be very helpful in this, because, again, just, in my mind, trying to make a motion of this with everything that we have been presented is -- it's not within my possibilities. Starman: Madam Chair, I'm not sure how the Commission wants to proceed tonight and you will figure that out shortly, but I did want to -- maybe for the Chair and for the Commissioners, if you do decide to table us and come back, you may want to consider reopening the public hearing and continuing it, so you can take further testimony. You don't have to do that if you just want to deliberate amongst yourselves in two weeks, that's fine as well. But if you do want the opportunity for additional public input interaction, I would recommend that you open the -- reopen the public hearing and continue it. McCarvel: And we need to do that to hear from staff as well; correct? To reopen the public hearing? Starman: I missed the first part of -- McCarvel: We need to reopen the public hearing just to even hear from staff; correct? Starman: I think if the Commission is just deliberating and has specific questions to staff, I don't think you need to reopen the public hearing for that, but I think if you want to take -- McCarvel: Additional -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F64 Page 60 of 62 Starman: -- feedback from the group that spoke tonight or from the public in general, then, you ought to do so. McCarvel: Okay. Let's start there. Would the Commission like to keep the public hearing closed or reopen it? Grove: Madam Chair, I have a question real quick. Are we approving or are we recommending approval? McCarvel: Recommending. Seal: We are the recommending body for this. Starman: Commission is being asked to make a recommendation to the City Council. McCarvel: Yeah. To the -- yeah. Yearsley: Madam Chair, I think it would be -- McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: -- advantageous to open the public hearing back up and -- and in doing so I would make a motion to open the public hearing. McCarvel: Do I have a second? Wheeler: Second. Grove: Second. McCarvel: It's been moved and seconded to open the public -- reopen the public hearing on H-2021-0047. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Yearsley: And I guess the next question I would have is when do we want to continue this to? McCarvel: Yeah. The next available is October 7th. Madam Clerk, can you tell us what -- is that one already stacked or should we go onto the next one? Weatherly: Madam Chair, currently on October 7th with the continuance of the Burger King CUP there are six hearing scheduled for October 7th. McCarvel: Okay. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F65] Page 61 of 62 Weatherly: After that is October 21 st. There are currently five hearings scheduled for October 21 st and that date has not been noticed yet, so it's possible the Planning Department could add on another application. McCarvel: Okay. Weatherly: I could, Madam Chair, make a recommendation to the Planning Department that they don't add anymore applications that night if you want to continue this one. I'm happy to do that for you. I think Caleb could help me out with that. McCarvel: Okay. I'm guessing the 7th is not just a whole bunch of small ones. Weatherly: Madam Chair, so we have the Burger King conditional use permit. So -- let me get to my list. A small rezone of less than an acre and a short plat. There is an expansion of a wood products business on 3.1 acres. There is annexation and zoning of ten acres with a rezone of 6.84 acres and a preliminary plat on that one with 65 single family detached buildings, et cetera. There is an apartment's conditional use permit for multi-family consisting of 164 units on nine acres. On the 21st if you want to know what -- is that good enough? McCarvel: Yeah. Weatherly: Okay. McCarvel: Okay. Next motion, please. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I move to continue file H-2021-0047 to the date of October 21 st, 2021, in order to provide a more comprehensive summary and include any modifications in the plan before submitting back to Planning and Zoning. Yearsley: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to continue H-2021-0047. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: One more, please. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. September 16,2021 F66 Page 62 of 62 Yearsley: I move we adjourn. Seal: Second. McCarvel: Okay. It has been moved and seconded to adjourn the meeting of September 16th, 2021. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:40 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED: 10 07 1 2021 RHONDA MCCARVEL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK L E IDIAN*,----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Approve Minutes of the August 19, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. August 19,2021 6 Page 2 of 2 2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Cole Valley Christian School Portable Classrooms (H-2021-0043) by The Land Group, Located at 1108 N.E. 2 '/2 St. McCarvel: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and I believe we have two items on the Consent Agenda, approve the minutes for the August 12th, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, and Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Cole Valley Christian School portable classrooms, H-2021-0043. Could I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda? Seal: So moved. Lorcher: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to accept the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] McCarvel: Can I get one more motion, please? Seal: Madam Chair, I move we adjourn. Lorcher: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adjourn the meeting. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:05 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED 9 116 12021 RHONDA MCCARVEL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK C E IDIAN�-- Public Presentation(s) COMPASS Fiscal PlannerMiller, AICP CTP, PMP, Principal Carl Can You Answer the Following?Can you answer any of these questions right now?What is the financial impact of House Bill 389?services that will be required?If a new subdivision is approved, can you afford the new financially viable?How would you know if your comprehensive plan is Today’s Topic Q&AHouse Bill 389Fiscal Impact ReportingCOMPASS Fiscal Impact ToolIntro COMPASS INTRODUCTION TO FISCAL IMPACT What is Fiscal Impact?ImpactFiscal capital needsOperating, Expenditures feespermits, Taxes, Revenues Fiscal Impact Components input)community (Capital Plans Budget and activating datanavigating and macros for Excel VBA (user input)valuesunits, assessed res/nonres -planDevelopment input)(community needs capital and demographics based on Service areas WorkflowTwo Page InputGrowth & CostsRevenues Specific KeyLocator ResultsFiscal Transportation Services Evaluated Administration and much more… Parks and RecreationSafety and Emergency ServicesSchools What it is NOT factors One of many •Be All”The “End All GIGO•Assumptions•Model or ToolMore than a effectSpillover •createdNot jobs •Impact ToolEconomic FISCAL IMPACT SCENARIOS Fiscal MapSubareaImpact Scenario Inputs Represents 95% of development typesUse-MixedTypologies15 •TypesEmployment 5 Typologies•Residentialfamily -Multi3 Typologies•TypesResidential family -Single Demographic Profiles Single FamilyPersons perStudents perVehicleLawFire/EMS DetachedHousing Unit \[1\]Housing Unit \[2\]Miles Traveled \[3\]Enforcement Calls \[4\]Calls \[5\] <$200,0003.440.6470.090.460.10 $200k-$300k3.240.6066.020.440.09 $300k-$400k3.040.5661.940.410.09 $400k-$500k2.840.5357.870.380.08 $500k-$600k2.640.4953.790.360.08 $600k+2.440.4549.720.330.07 Note: Demand factors are estimated by taking the average between the western towns and including a factor for being in unincorporated areas. \[1\] Source: COMPASS analysis of U.S. ACS Survey 5-Year Estimates Data, 2017. \[2\] Source: COMPASS analysis of U.S. ACS Survey 5-Year Estimates Data, 2017. \[3\] Source: Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 10th Edition (2017); 2012 COMPASS Regional Household Travel Survey. \[4\] Local call data is not available. City of Meridian Police Department data is used in lieu of local data. The average call rate is set to the average value home, other values are scaled based on household size. \[5\] Local call data is not available. Ada County fire/ems countywide data is used in lieu of local data. The average call rate is set to the average value home, other values are scaled based on household size. FISCAL IMPACT REPORTING Reporting Table 50 MF units (Year 4)•store (Year 1)20,000 square foot grocery •example in Kuna:Results are for a hypothetical Reporting Chart Fiscal Impact Tool Use Policy IDAHO HOUSE BILL 389 House Bill 389 PENDINGUrban renewal district adjustments PENDINGcapital projectsfor maintenance and operations, and 3% for future budgets by an adjusted process: 1% Forgone levying authority may be included in PENDINGexceed 8%The maximum property tax increase cannot YES$125,000Homeowner’s Exemption increased to YESrestricted to 90% of the taxable valueLevies for new construction and annexation FITCOMPASS House Bill 389 Q&A and Thank You!Source: California Dental Association E K IDIAN:--- iuAn Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting September 16, 2021 Zoning 0027) 2021Item #4: Heron Village Expansion (H AERIALFLUM Staff Recommendation Covered parking shall be provided only by carportsfencing.Heron Ln. shall have additional landscape screening in addition to 4’ high vinyl All condenser units on the north side of Building F which are visible from E. Blue feet wide (or as approved by Meridian Fire).-The applicant shall widen and improve the pathway between E. Blue Heron Ln. Phase One and Two shall share access, parking, amenities and open space. recommends approval with conditions:As the proposal meets or exceeds all UDC requirements, staff Zoning 0048) 2021Item #5: McFadden Rezoning and Annexation (H AERIALFLUM Staff Recommendation and N. Meridian Rd.The developer shall install 25’wide landscape buffers along W. Cherry Ln. of zoning compliance. entry feature at the SE corner, near the intersection with the first certificate The applicant shall coordinate with the City and MDC on the design of an certificate of zoning compliance application.the first phase area will tie to future phases of the development with the first The applicant shall submit a plan illustrating how pedestrian connections in plan with the following additional requirements.existing access at N. Meridian Rd. as indicated on the attached concept commercial buildings along the W. Cherry Ln. frontage and south of the With first phase of development, the applicant may develop up to three (3) Staff Recommendation considered with a future development agreement modification.densities ranging from 6 to 15 units/acre. Other residential densities may be Residential uses comprising a minimum of 20% of the development area at gross vertically integrated buildings as one of the uses.The development containing at least three types of land uses, which could include integrated structures are proposed.-verticallyBuilding footprints limited to 30,000 sq. ft or 60,000 sq. ft for a grocery store unless established for the new Northern Gateway District.Requirement for future development of the site to comply with design concepts open space and amenity plan, and conceptual building elevations. motorized transportation, -buildings, circulation plan for both motorized and nonDetailed concept plan that includes general layout and configuration of address the following provisions:development agreement modification. At a minimum, the DA modification shall With any other phase of future development, the developer shall submit for a Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting September 16, 2021 Item #6: Fairview Townhomes PLANNED DEVELOPMENTZONINGFLUM Maps– Site Plan Item #7: Hatch Industrial AERIALFLUMZoning Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment & Annexation– Comprehensive Plan AnnexationMap Amendment Conceptual Site Plan Changes to Agenda: Item #3 – Burger King Drive-Through (H-2021-0051) – Applicant requests continuance due to failure to post the site with a public hearing notice sign within the required timeframe prior to the hearing. Item #4: Heron Village Expansion (H-2021-0027) Application(s): Annexation, Rezoning and Conditional Use Size of property, existing zoning, and location: The property is located at SE intersection of N. Meridian Rd and E. Blue Heron Dr. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: The project consists consists of 6 properties. Five of them are in the City and are zoned C-G, R-40 and R-8. The property to be annexed is zoned R-1 in the County. Site is located a quarter mile north of the E. Fairview / N. Meridian Rd intersection. History: The existing Heron Village Apartments consist of 108 units in 5 buildings. A conditional use permit was approved for the multifamily complex in 2013. In 2014 a modification to the conditional use was approved to allow replacement of several of the amenities. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance was approved in April of 2013. In September of 2020, the applicant requested a pre-application meeting with staff to discuss annexation of an additional 1.36 acres of land to the east of the existing complex to construct 36 more units in two buildings. Because the Heron Village Apartments were on several properties within different zone districts (C-G, R-40 and R-8) and because they were annexing and zoning additional property anyway, Staff recommended to the applicant that it would be preferable to rezone all of the associated properties to R-40. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Recommended for MU-N. Summary of Request: Access There is one existing access from E. Blue Heron Ln. (local road) serving the existing 108 units; one additional access is proposed from E. Blue Heron Ln. Meridian Fire has commented that although the site does provide two points of access, both of these accesses are from E. Blue Heron Ln. with the only way in and out occurring from N. Meridian Rd. Fire; they prefer another point of access that does not solely rely on N. Meridian Rd. E. Blue Heron Ln. terminates into a pathway at the east end which then connects to N. Eureka Ave. Based on discussion with the applicant, they agreed to widen this pathway to 15 feet wide or as approved by Meridian Fire, and provide bollards on either end to allow secondary fire access. Staff has recently discussed with applicant, and the applicant clarified 15’ was the minimum width not 20’ as initially stated. Fire has agreed this is acceptable. Parking Phase One was required to provide 204 parking spaces with 102 of them covered spaces. 207 parking spaces are provided, with 195 of them being covered. Phase Two is required to provide 69 parking spaces, with 36 of them covered spaces. 87 spaces are provided, with 71 of them being covered. 6 total bicycle parking spaces are required with this development. The parking exceeds the requirements by 21 parking spaces. Meridian Fire, Police and the surrounding residents have commented that parking has been a continuous issue for this development, as residents and guests often park on both sides of E. Blue Heron Dr, making emergency access difficult. One cause of this issue is that many of the garages that are intended to be used to satisfy parking requirements are being used for storage, leading to spill-over in other areas of the development and along the local streets. As 71 parking spaces are proposed to be covered with Phase II, staff recommends these covered spaces be accommodated by carports and not garages, to avoid dedicated covered spaces being used for storage. Open Space and Amenities 41,870 sq. ft. of open space was required with Phase One whereas 53,000 sq. ft. is provided. 10,200 square feet of qualified open space is required with Phase 2, whereas 15,330 sq. ft. is proposed. The open space provided for Phase 2 exceeds the requirements. 4 amenities from each category are required for multifamily developments of more than 75 units, but for multifamily developments with more than one hundred (100) units, the decision-making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development. The existing development provides a half basketball court, plaza containing benches and trellis, 1,620 sq. ft. clubhouse with exercise room, playground, horseshoe pit, barbeques and picnic tables. With the proposed expansion the applicant proposes a 50’x 100’ sq. ft. open space area and 52 additional enclosed bike storage facilities. The Planning Commission should decide if the amenities are sufficient for the existing development as well as the proposed expansion Elevations Applicant has submitted elevations that are consistent with the existing complex. Written Testimony: Staff has received 7 letters and voicemails from adjacent property owners – issues raised were traffic, emergency access and parking along E. Blue Heron Staff Recommendation: As the proposal meets or exceeds all UDC requirements, staff recommends approval with conditions. Conditions include: Phase One and Two shall share access, parking, amenities and open space. The applicant shall widen and improve the pathway between E. Blue Heron Ln. and N. Eureka Ave. to 15-feet wide (or as approved by Meridian Fire). All condenser units on the north side of Building F which are visible from E. Blue Heron Ln. shall have additional landscape screening in addition to 4’ high vinyl fencing. Covered parking shall be provided only by carports 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- 2021-0027, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16, 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 File Number H-2021- 0027, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0027 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: McFadden Property (H-2021-0048) Application(s): Annexation and Rezoning Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 17.8 acres of land, zoned RUT in the County, located at the NW corner of N. Meridian Rd and W. Cherry Ln. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: Property is bordered by L-O and R-8 to the north, W. Cherry Ln and O-T to the south, Commercial (Alberton’s) across N. Meridian Rd to the east, and R-8 to the west. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-C Summary of Request: Annexation and zoning (AZ) of 17.88-acres of land with the C-C (Community Business District) zoning district. The main purpose for seeking annexation at this time is to ensure this area can be included as part of the Northern Gateway Urban Renewal Plan currently being developed by the Meridian Development Corporation (MDC). The FLUM designates the property for Mixed Use Community. The purpose of this designation is to allocate areas where community-serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The applicant submitted a conceptual plan as part of this application. The Plan shows three buildings oriented to the W. Cherry Ln. / N. Meridian Rd. corner with parking in the front of the W. Cherry Lane frontages, 5 more buildings to the north along N. Meridian Rd. with parking to the back and to the side, and a Phase Two in the center which is intended for future commercial office, retail, hotel or multifamily uses. The applicant’s narrative suggests their intent is to develop the buildings shown along N. Meridian Rd. and W. Cherry Ln. as an initial phase, with uses including a gas station with convenience store, additional retail or office, and multifamily and / or hotel uses as a second phase. The applicant proposes that before any specific use may be constructed within Phase II, a Development Agreement Modification must be approved that would include a conceptual plan for that area. Staff does support a limited amount of commercial construction occurring in the short term at the SE corner based on the concept plan that has been provided thus far, but does have concerns allowing complete build-out along both arterials as presently shown. Based on the concept plan submitted by the applicant, staff recommends allowing development of the three commercial buildings along the W. Cherry Ln. frontage and south of the existing access at N. Meridian Rd. as the first phase of this development. A development agreement modification and detailed concept plans that are consistent with the mixed-use community designation of the Comprehensive Plan and the Northern Gateway District would be required prior to any additional development. Written Testimony: Staff has received a letter of support from Meridian Development Corporation. MDC commented on the importance of timing for this application as they have statutory deadlines that must be met for the incorporation of the new Northern Gateway Plan. Staff Recommendation: Staff does recommend approval for this annexation and rezoning with the following specific conditions: 1. With first phase of development, the applicant may develop up to three (3) commercial buildings along the W. Cherry Ln. frontage and south of the existing access at N. Meridian Rd. as indicated on the attached concept plan with the following additional requirements. 2. The applicant shall submit a plan illustrating how pedestrian connections in the first phase area will tie to future phases of the development with the first certificate of zoning compliance application. 3. The applicant shall coordinate with the City and MDC on the design of an entry feature at the SE corner, near the intersection with the first certificate of zoning compliance. 4. The developer shall install 25’wide landscape buffers along W. Cherry Ln. and N. Meridian Rd. 5. With any other phase of future development, the developer shall submit for a development agreement modification. At a minimum, the DA modification shall address the following provisions: a. A detailed concept plan that includes general layout and configuration of buildings, circulation plan for both motorized and non-motorized transportation, open space and amenity plan, and conceptual building elevations. 6. Requirement for future development of the site to comply with design concepts established for the new Northern Gateway District. 7. Building footprints limited to 30,000 sq. ft or 60,000 sq. ft for a grocery store unless vertically-integrated structures are proposed. 8. The development containing at least three types of land uses, which could include vertically integrated buildings as one of the uses. 9. Residential uses comprising a minimum of 20% of the development area at gross densities ranging from 6 to 15 units/acre. Other residential densities may be considered with a future development agreement modification. 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- 2021-0048, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16, 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- 0048, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0048 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Changes to Agenda: Item #3 – Burger King Drive-Through (H-2021-0051) – Applicant requests continuance due to failure to post the site with a public hearing notice sign within the required timeframe prior to the hearing. Item #4: Heron Village Expansion (H-2021-0027) Application(s): Annexation, Rezoning and Conditional Use Size of property, existing zoning, and location: The property is located at SE intersection of N. Meridian Rd and E. Blue Heron Dr. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: The project consists consists of 6 properties. Five of them are in the City and are zoned C-G, R-40 and R-8. The property to be annexed is zoned R-1 in the County. Site is located a quarter mile north of the E. Fairview / N. Meridian Rd intersection. History: The existing Heron Village Apartments consist of 108 units in 5 buildings. A conditional use permit was approved for the multifamily complex in 2013. In 2014 a modification to the conditional use was approved to allow replacement of several of the amenities. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance was approved in April of 2013. In September of 2020, the applicant requested a pre-application meeting with staff to discuss annexation of an additional 1.36 acres of land to the east of the existing complex to construct 36 more units in two buildings. Because the Heron Village Apartments were on several properties within different zone districts (C-G, R-40 and R-8) and because they were annexing and zoning additional property anyway, Staff recommended to the applicant that it would be preferable to rezone all of the associated properties to R-40. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Recommended for MU-N. Summary of Request: Access There is one existing access from E. Blue Heron Ln. (local road) serving the existing 108 units; one additional access is proposed from E. Blue Heron Ln. Meridian Fire has commented that although the site does provide two points of access, both of these accesses are from E. Blue Heron Ln. with the only way in and out occurring from N. Meridian Rd. Fire; they prefer another point of access that does not solely rely on N. Meridian Rd. E. Blue Heron Ln. terminates into a pathway at the east end which then connects to N. Eureka Ave. Based on discussion with the applicant, they agreed to widen this pathway to 15 feet wide or as approved by Meridian Fire, and provide bollards on either end to allow secondary fire access. Staff has recently discussed with applicant, and the applicant clarified 15’ was the minimum width not 20’ as initially stated. Fire has agreed this is acceptable. Parking Phase One was required to provide 204 parking spaces with 102 of them covered spaces. 207 parking spaces are provided, with 195 of them being covered. Phase Two is required to provide 69 parking spaces, with 36 of them covered spaces. 87 spaces are provided, with 71 of them being covered. 6 total bicycle parking spaces are required with this development. The parking exceeds the requirements by 21 parking spaces. Meridian Fire, Police and the surrounding residents have commented that parking has been a continuous issue for this development, as residents and guests often park on both sides of E. Blue Heron Dr, making emergency access difficult. One cause of this issue is that many of the garages that are intended to be used to satisfy parking requirements are being used for storage, leading to spill-over in other areas of the development and along the local streets. As 71 parking spaces are proposed to be covered with Phase II, staff recommends these covered spaces be accommodated by carports and not garages, to avoid dedicated covered spaces being used for storage. Open Space and Amenities 41,870 sq. ft. of open space was required with Phase One whereas 53,000 sq. ft. is provided. 10,200 square feet of qualified open space is required with Phase 2, whereas 15,330 sq. ft. is proposed. The open space provided for Phase 2 exceeds the requirements. 4 amenities from each category are required for multifamily developments of more than 75 units, but for multifamily developments with more than one hundred (100) units, the decision-making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development. The existing development provides a half basketball court, plaza containing benches and trellis, 1,620 sq. ft. clubhouse with exercise room, playground, horseshoe pit, barbeques and picnic tables. With the proposed expansion the applicant proposes a 50’x 100’ sq. ft. open space area and 52 additional enclosed bike storage facilities. The Planning Commission should decide if the amenities are sufficient for the existing development as well as the proposed expansion Elevations Applicant has submitted elevations that are consistent with the existing complex. Written Testimony: Staff has received 7 letters and voicemails from adjacent property owners – issues raised were traffic, emergency access and parking along E. Blue Heron Staff Recommendation: As the proposal meets or exceeds all UDC requirements, staff recommends approval with conditions. Conditions include: Phase One and Two shall share access, parking, amenities and open space. The applicant shall widen and improve the pathway between E. Blue Heron Ln. and N. Eureka Ave. to 15-feet wide (or as approved by Meridian Fire). All condenser units on the north side of Building F which are visible from E. Blue Heron Ln. shall have additional landscape screening in addition to 4’ high vinyl fencing. Covered parking shall be provided only by carports 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- 2021-0027, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16, 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 File Number H-2021- 0027, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0027 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: McFadden Property (H-2021-0048) Application(s): Annexation and Rezoning Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 17.8 acres of land, zoned RUT in the County, located at the NW corner of N. Meridian Rd and W. Cherry Ln. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: Property is bordered by L-O and R-8 to the north, W. Cherry Ln and O-T to the south, Commercial (Alberton’s) across N. Meridian Rd to the east, and R-8 to the west. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-C Summary of Request: Annexation and zoning (AZ) of 17.88-acres of land with the C-C (Community Business District) zoning district. The main purpose for seeking annexation at this time is to ensure this area can be included as part of the Northern Gateway Urban Renewal Plan currently being developed by the Meridian Development Corporation (MDC). The FLUM designates the property for Mixed Use Community. The purpose of this designation is to allocate areas where community-serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The applicant submitted a conceptual plan as part of this application. The Plan shows three buildings oriented to the W. Cherry Ln. / N. Meridian Rd. corner with parking in the front of the W. Cherry Lane frontages, 5 more buildings to the north along N. Meridian Rd. with parking to the back and to the side, and a Phase Two in the center which is intended for future commercial office, retail, hotel or multifamily uses. The applicant’s narrative suggests their intent is to develop the buildings shown along N. Meridian Rd. and W. Cherry Ln. as an initial phase, with uses including a gas station with convenience store, additional retail or office, and multifamily and / or hotel uses as a second phase. The applicant proposes that before any specific use may be constructed within Phase II, a Development Agreement Modification must be approved that would include a conceptual plan for that area. Staff does support a limited amount of commercial construction occurring in the short term at the SE corner based on the concept plan that has been provided thus far, but does have concerns allowing complete build-out along both arterials as presently shown. Based on the concept plan submitted by the applicant, staff recommends allowing development of the three commercial buildings along the W. Cherry Ln. frontage and south of the existing access at N. Meridian Rd. as the first phase of this development. A development agreement modification and detailed concept plans that are consistent with the mixed-use community designation of the Comprehensive Plan and the Northern Gateway District would be required prior to any additional development. Written Testimony: Staff has received a letter of support from Meridian Development Corporation. MDC commented on the importance of timing for this application as they have statutory deadlines that must be met for the incorporation of the new Northern Gateway Plan. Staff Recommendation: Staff does recommend approval for this annexation and rezoning with the following specific conditions: 1. With first phase of development, the applicant may develop up to three (3) commercial buildings along the W. Cherry Ln. frontage and south of the existing access at N. Meridian Rd. as indicated on the attached concept plan with the following additional requirements. 2. The applicant shall submit a plan illustrating how pedestrian connections in the first phase area will tie to future phases of the development with the first certificate of zoning compliance application. 3. The applicant shall coordinate with the City and MDC on the design of an entry feature at the SE corner, near the intersection with the first certificate of zoning compliance. 4. The developer shall install 25’wide landscape buffers along W. Cherry Ln. and N. Meridian Rd. 5. With any other phase of future development, the developer shall submit for a development agreement modification. At a minimum, the DA modification shall address the following provisions: a. A detailed concept plan that includes general layout and configuration of buildings, circulation plan for both motorized and non-motorized transportation, open space and amenity plan, and conceptual building elevations. 6. Requirement for future development of the site to comply with design concepts established for the new Northern Gateway District. 7. Building footprints limited to 30,000 sq. ft or 60,000 sq. ft for a grocery store unless vertically-integrated structures are proposed. 8. The development containing at least three types of land uses, which could include vertically integrated buildings as one of the uses. 9. Residential uses comprising a minimum of 20% of the development area at gross densities ranging from 6 to 15 units/acre. Other residential densities may be considered with a future development agreement modification. 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- 2021-0048, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16, 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- 0048, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0048 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: Fairview Row Townhomes (H-2021-0049) Application(s): Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.02 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at 2065 E. Fairview Avenue. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North and West – C-C/C-G zoning; Commercial Uses East – C-G Zoning currently under development (Pine 43) South – Undeveloped R-40 zoning (also Pine 43) Southwest – I-L zoning; warehouse/other light industrial uses History: ORD. #721 - Butte Fence/Elliott AZ (1995) Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial Summary of Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 16 attached townhome units on 1.02-acres of land in the C-G zoning district. All services are readily available, project is within Fire’s 5-minute response time goal, and it meets the comprehensive plan, as outlined in the staff report. Specifically, due to site constraints, Staff believes the multi-family development does promote a thoughtful site design and should complement the existing and future commercial uses in the area. The proposed multi-family development consists of 16 multi-family residential units within two 8-plex townhome buildings. Use is subject to conditional use permit approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission within the existing C-G zoning district and is subject to specific use standards outlined in UDC 11-4-3-27 that outline open space, amenity, and site design standards. Applicant is proposing approximately 10,500 square feet of qualified common open space exceeding the minimum requirement of 5,600 square feet (350 square feet per unit). In addition, each unit should provide at least 80 square feet of private open space; the Applicant has proposed approximately 200 square feet of private open space in the form of private balconies for each unit, also exceeding the minimum amount required. At least two amenities should be provided by the Applicant. The two proposed amenities are a plaza area with a water feature and a shade structure. These amenities meet code requirements. Based on the number of bedrooms per unit (16 two-bedroom units), a minimum of 32 parking spaces should be provided with at least half of those spaces covered or within a garage. The Applicant has proposed a total of 35 parking spaces with each unit having a tuck- under two-car garage. The Applicant is also proposing three (3) surface parking spaces intended for guest parking. Therefore, the proposed off-street parking is in excess of code requirements for total number of spaces and the number of covered spaces required. Access to the development is proposed from E. Wilson Lane, a collector street proposed to be extended from the property’s west boundary to its east boundary along the southern boundary. The existing access to Fairview Avenue is proposed and required to be closed; a new one will be added along the west boundary that would be an emergency-only access. The drive aisle is proposed at 26 feet wide due to the proposed 3-story building height and provides the access to the tuck-under garages for each unit. The Pine 43 development directly to the east is currently under construction and will further extend Wilson Lane from this property to N. Webb. The timing of this is not explicitly known but should coincide relatively with the construction timeline of this project if approved. The subject property is the last property to be entitled that has Wilson Lane frontage so it is an integral piece to fully connect Locust Grove to N. Webb and provide a backage road to Fairview Avenue. Staff has approved an Alternative Compliance (administrative review) request made by the Applicant to reduce the landscape buffer along E. Wilson Lane. This request was made because the subject site is deeper than it is wide (approximately 400 feet deep and 100 feet wide) which affects building footprints when accounting for all other dimensional and access requirements. The Applicant states in order to fit the proposed buildings, the required access, appropriate open space, and other landscaping and buffers, a reduction to the buffer to the extension of E. Wilson Lane is needed. Due to the relatively small impact of the short linear length of the request and a belief that a reduction in any of the other project aspects noted above would be more of a detriment to the project than a reduction in this buffer, Staff approved the Alternative Compliance request. The project meets or exceeds ALL other dimensional standards. Initial review of the conceptual building elevations shows 3-story buildings that combine different field materials, modulation, and material coloring. The main materials shown are stucco, lap siding, and stone cladding. The elevations also show second and third story decks that offer both recreation and a different architectural element to the elevations. Preliminary review of the elevations show compliance with the Architectural Standards Manual but Staff will confirm compliance with the future Design Review application. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval with noted conditions. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2021-0049, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16, 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-2021-0049, as presented during the hearing on September 16, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0049 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: Hatch Industrial (H-2021-0026) Application(s): Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Annexation Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This map amendment portion of the site consists of 42+/- acres & the annexation portion consists of 1.59 acres of land, zoned R1 in Ada County, L-O, I-L and C-C, located on the east side of N. Linder Rd., south of the railroad tracks, and north side of W. Franklin Rd. History: There is an existing childcare facility located on the property at 444 N. Linder Rd., zoned L-O; a birthing center/women’s healthcare facility located at 270 N. Linder Rd., zoned C-C; vacant/undeveloped land at the northeast corner of Linder/Franklin, zoned C-C; and warehouse/industrial uses on the eastern portion of the site in Creamline Park, zoned I-L. Note: The properties entitled with commercial/office zoning will be allowed to continue to operate as-is and/or develop with commercial uses as allowed by UDC Table 11-2B-2. The remainder of the 1+/- acre properties within the CPAM area that front on N. Linder Rd. are developed with single-family residential homes. If the CPAM is approved, the residential properties, when redeveloped, should be rezoned to I-L or I-H and develop with uses allowed in the applicable district as listed in UDC Table 11-2C-2. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Use – Community (MU-C) Summary of Request: Request for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan FLUM to change the future land use designation on 42+/- acres of land from Mixed Use – Community to Industrial as shown. The Industrial designation allows a range of uses that support industrial & commercial activities. Industrial uses may include warehouses, storage units, light manufacturing, flex, and incidental retail and office uses. Approval of the proposed CPAM to Industrial will accomplish the following: 1) it will allow the existing residential/commercial properties within the site to redevelop with industrial uses which should be more compatible with existing industrial uses on the site and adjacent to the site; 2) industrial uses should be more compatible with existing industrial uses than uses allowed in the MU-C designation, which should minimize conflicts between land uses; 3) for the properties already zoned I-L and developed with industrial uses on the eastern portion of the site in Creamline Park, the amendment will “clean-up” the FLUM for this area so that the land use designation coincides with the existing approved uses; and the amendment will allow more industrial uses to develop which are needed in the City. A concurrent application was submitted for annexation of 1.59 acres of land with an I-L zoning district consistent with the proposed map amendment to Industrial. The subject property is part of an enclave area surrounded by City annexed property. Annexation of this land will provide more efficient provision of City services. Industrial uses exist to the west across N. Linder Rd. and to the east; single-family residences exist to the north and south in Ada County. The Applicant proposes to develop the property with a 19,975 square foot 10-unit industrial building to lease to contractors, mostly for storage with the potential for each space to have a small office and restroom. A warehouse use is principally permitted in the I-L district; professional services (i.e. offices) are allowed as an accessory use. Flex space is also a principally permitted use in the I-L district subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-18. The conceptual development plan shown depicts the proposed structure, associated parking, driveway access and drive-aisles within the site. A 30’ wide easement exists along the east boundary of the site. Access is proposed via Linder Rd. with driveway stubs to the properties to the north & south for future cross-access upon redevelopment of those properties. A 25’ wide buffer to residential uses is required to be provided along the north & south boundaries. The Applicant requests Council approval of a reduced buffer width to 5’. Conceptual building elevations were not submitted for the industrial building; the design of the structure is required to comply with the design standards in the ASM. Written Testimony: Gary Reimer (230 N. Linder Rd.); Joe Olson (110 N. Linder Rd.); Bogdan Martsenyuk (C-C zoned property at NEC of Franklin/Linder); and Soerabaia Living Trust (L-O zoned property at 444 N. Linder Rd.) – in support of CPAM request that includes their property. Gary Reimer – in support of requested buffer reduction to 5’ next to his property at the north boundary of the AZ area. Staff Recommendation: Approval w/a DA per the staff report. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2021-0026, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 16, 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- 0026, as presented during the hearing on September 16, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0026 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) L E IDIAN*,----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Burger King Drive-Through (H-2021-0051) by Legend Engineering, Located at 6211 N. Ten Mile Rd. Application Requires Continuance A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a dual-ordering drive-through establishment within 300 feet of another approved drive-through establishment and within 300 feet of a residential district for a 2,910 square-foot Burger King with 37 parking spaces on 0.877 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. F 8 (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: September 16, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Burger King Drive-Through (H-2021-0051) by Legend Engineering, Located at 6211 N. Ten Mile Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a dual-ordering drive-through establishment within 300 feet of another approved drive-through establishment and within 300 feet of a residential district for a 2,910 square- foot Burger King with 37 parking spaces on 0.877 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing 9 WE IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing Continued from July 15, 2021 for Heron Village Expansion (H- 2021-0027) by Tamara Thompson of The Land Group, Inc., Located at 51, 125 and 185 E. Blue Heron Ln. A. Request: Annexation of 1.36 acres of land with a R-40 zoning district. B. Request: Rezone of 4.18 acres of land from C-G and R-8 to R-40. C. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow expansion of an existing 108-unit, 5-building multifamily complex to allow an additional 36 units in two new buildings. -1 F 0 (:�N-WE IDIAN IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Alan Tiefenbach Meeting Date: September 16, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing Continued from July 15, 2021 for Heron Village Expansion (H-2021- 0027) by Tamara Thompson of The Land Group, Inc., Located at 51, 125 and 185 E. Blue Heron Ln. A. Request: Annexation of 1.36 acres of land with a R-40 zoning district. B. Request: Rezone of 4.18 acres of land from C-G and R-8 to R-40. C. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow expansion of an existing 108-unit, 5-building multifamily complex to allow an additional 36 units in two new buildings. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing -1 F 1 STAFF REPORT C�WEI'Q!IN��=-- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 9/16/2021 Legend !ffzC7 n DATE: TO: Planning&Zoning Commission OID lei Prajec!Lacs lion Li-J, FROM: Alan Tiefenbach,Associate Planner �I 208-884-5533 r �� SUBJECT: H-2021-0027 Heron Village(Phase 2) --- LOCATION: The site is located at 51, 125 and 185 E. Z Blue Heron Ln,in a portion of Government Lot 6 of Section 6, Township 3 North,Range 1 East. N Fi� 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This is a proposal for annexation of 1.36 acres of land with the R-40 zoning district,rezoning of 4.18 acres of land from C-G and R-8 to R-40, and a Conditional Use Permit to allow expansion of an existing multifamily complex to allow 36 additional units in two new buildings. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 1.36 acres being annexed,5.54 acres being rezoned to R-40 Future Land Use Designation MU-N Existing Land Use(s) Single Family Residential/Rural Proposed Land Use(s) Multifamily Lots(#and type;bldg./common) Existing development is on 5 lots,one more lot would be annexed. Phasing Plan(#of phases) One phase Number of Residential Units(type 108 existing,36 more proposed of units) Density 19.6 du/acre(total) Open Space(acres,total Existing— 1.58 acres(29%),Usable.96 acres(17%) [%]/buffer/qualified) Proposed— 10,200 sq.ft.req'd, 15,300 sq.ft.proposed Amenities Existing amenities include half basketball court,plaza containing benches and trellis, 1,620 sq.ft.clubhouse with exercise room,playground,horseshoe pit,barbeques and picnic tables. Page 1 12 Description Details Page Proposed amenities include 70'x100' grassy area,park benches and picnic tables,enclosed bike storage. Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of February 10,2021 —7 attendees attendees: Staff has received 2 letters and 5 voicemails in opposition to this request.Issues expressed include parking along E. Blue Heron and lack of emergency access. History(previous approvals) AZ 01-014,CUP 12-0021,MCU 13-005,CZC 13-038, DES 13-039) B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no Access(Arterial/Collectors/State One existing access from E.Blue Heron Ln(local road), Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) one additional access proposed from E.Blue Heron Ln Existing Road Network E.Blue Heron Ln(local road)and N.Meridian Rd (arterial) Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ • Sidewalk already exists along N.Meridian Rd. Buffers • 5' wide sidewalk is constructed along the portion of Blue Heron Ln of which the existing multifamily development exists • The landscape plan indicates this sidewalk will be extended along the frontage of the additional property where the expansions are proposed. Proposed Road Improvements Staff is recommending an existing pathway connecting the east terminus of E.Blue Heron to N.Eureka Ave be widened for emergency access only. Distance to nearest City Park(+ '/z mile to Settler's Park,3/4 mile to 8th St Park, size) Distance to other key services 0.5 mile+/-to shopping center and commercial services at N.Meridian Rd/E.Fairview Ave intersection. Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 1.8 miles to Fire Station 3 • Fire Response Time <5 minutes • Resource Reliability 78% • Risk Identification 2—current resources not adequate to supply service • Accessibility A Meets all requirements • Special/resource needs Aerial device will be required • Water Supply � 2,250 gpm • Other Comments • All buildings must be sprinklered. • Fire has expressed issues with parking availability and cars parked along W.Blue Heron. • Fire has recommended secondary emergency access to N.Eureka Rd. Police Service • No comments West Ada School District Page 2 Item 4. F13 Description Details Page • Distance(elem,ms,hs) 4.4 elem, 1.7 ms,2.6 hs • #of Students Enrolled 4 additional school-aged children projected Wastewater • Distance to Sewer N/A Services • Sewer Shed Five Mile Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 14.16 • Project Consistent with Yes WW Master Plan/Facility Plan Water • Distance to Water Services 0 • Pressure Zone 2 • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality No concerns • Project Consistent with Yes Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns • No proposed water infrastructure submitted with this record.Engineering must review any new infrastructure. Connect to existing apartment development to west and to Blue Heron Ln. • Existing water services must be abandoned at the main in Blue Heron Ln. • Both addresses(125 and 185 E Blue Heron Ln)have a meter to the site.If these meters are not used they need to be abandoned at the main. • Provide looping of water line from Blue Heron Rd to existing water line to the west in Heron Village. • Provide water stub to east property boundary to facility future looping. • Ensure no permanent structures(trees,bushes, buildings,carports,trash receptacle walls,fences, infiltration trenches,light poles,etc.)are built within the utility easement. Page 3 m IY - - r� IIII Ilp 1� ■ I'= Z ■■o■■ ■■■ ■■ II101101 ■ all uul * � 1■u i = o 'Ell C R # LUI wlm I WIN CUZI CHER EAI 4EL ll5f .II • Y ' Y 1 I Y Y r ;t. - Illlllp yf ,zrx __ i _ 1111 llll ic ir MEER �1,{'r Y yr y. _� :- ■Ill �i f A'.4� _ }. sir y. � .a}K I LLJ i•' +. ;fk#`. ■■■■■■■ 1111111n�1 h - - � �l< L ' i.�3 755� Y f S Y 1. �2..• .,'Sf al Y.Y• --,CHE f Y FArK V E Item 4. 15 III. Applicant Information A. Applicant/Representative: Tamara Thompson—The Land Group, Inc—462 E. Shore Dr, Ste. 100, Eagle,ID, 83616 B. Owner: PPHC Heron Property LLC—28717 Grumman Dr.,Eugene,OR 97402 IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 6/25/2021 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 6/22/2021 Nextdoor posting 6/22/2021 Sign Posting 9/7/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS Background The existing Heron Village Apartments consist of 108 units in 5 buildings on 5.5 acres. 0.65 acres are zoned R-8 and were platted with the J. E. Pfost's Subdivision in 1908. The remaining 4.86 acres are zoned R-40 and C-G and were annexed in 2002 as the Ted Williams Annexation. There are several conditions of approval of this annexation regarding road and infrastructure improvements,but no development agreement. A conditional use permit was approved for the multifamily complex in 2013 (CUP 12-021). hi 2014 a modification to the conditional use was approved(MCU-13-005)to allow replacement of several of the amenities.A Certificate of Zoning Compliance was approved in April of 2013 (CZC 13-038). hi September of 2020,the applicant requested a pre-application meeting with staff to discuss annexation of an additional 1.36 acres of land to the east of the existing complex(185 E. Blue Heron Ln)to construct 36 more units in two buildings. Because the Heron Village Apartments were on several properties within different zone districts (C-G,R-40 and R-8)and because they were annexing and zoning additional property anyway, Staff recommended to the applicant that it would be preferable to rezone all of the associated properties to R-40. A. Annexation The proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property and is within the Area of City Impact Boundary. A legal description and exhibit map for the annexation and rezone area is included in Section VII. There is not a development agreement with the existing development.As will be discussed below, staff and the applicant have discussed this project with the understanding that what is currently being proposed is a second phase and expansion to the existing development with shared parking, amenities and open space. To ensure this intent is met and the project develops cohesively, staff recommends this be reflected in a development agreement. Page 5 Item 4. 16 B. Future Land Use Map Designation(https:llwww.meridianciu.or /g compplan) The Future Land Use Map designates the subject property for Mixed Use Neighborhood(MU-N). The purpose of this designation is to assign areas where neighborhood-serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to avoid predominantly single-use developments by incorporating a variety of uses. Land uses in these areas should be primarily residential with supporting non-residential services.Non-residential uses in these areas tend to be smaller scale and provide goods or services that people typically do not travel far for(approximately one mile)and need regularly. This proposal is to annex a 1.2-acre lot zoned R-1 in the County, and zone it and a 0.65-acre lot to the west(already zoned R-8 in the City)to R-40. The purpose is to proceed with a conditional use for a 36-unit expansion to an existing multifamily development. This application also includes rezoning the portion of the existing multifamily development that is C-G to R-40 so the entire development is in the same zone district. The subject property is between high density residential at north and south, with uses becoming progressively more commercial to very intensive commercial uses at the N. Meridian Rd. E. Fairview Ave intersection. As this project is to allow expansion of the existing multifamily to an infill vacant parcel to the east, staff believes at the regional scale this proposal meets the intent of the Plan. C. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https:llwww.meridiancioy.or /g compplan): • 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 multifamily residential development will contribute to the variety of housing types available within the City. • Support infill development that does not negatively impact the abutting, existing development. (2.02.02C) This proposal is to allow infill of an existing vacant parcel on the northeast portion of the subject properties to allow expansion of an existing multifamily development, surrounded by existing multifamily development to the north and south, industrial uses to the east, and religious and single family residential across N. Meridian Rd to the west.Although there could be some incremental impacts associated with additional units, the impacts associated with this development are already primarily established and there would be few or negligible impacts on the single family residential across N.Meridian Rd. • Encourage the development of high quality, dense residential and mixed-use areas near in and around Downtown,near employment, large shopping centers,public open spaces and parks, and along major transportation corridors, as shown on the Future Land Use Map. (2.02.01E) This expansion to an existing multifamily development is located along N. Meridian Rd, in close proximity to a variety of commercial uses, including approximately%mile to a shopping center, along the intensely commercial E. Fairview IN. Meridian Rd. intersection. • Encourage infill development. (3.03.01E) The proposed annexation of an additional parcel of land surrounded by existing development to allow expansion of an existing multifamily complex would be considered an infill development. • 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) Page 6 Item 4. 17 Urban services and public facilities are already being provided to the existing multifamily complex. This proposal would allow an additional 36 units in two buildings. D. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is an existing residence,which was constructed in 1954, and accessory structures on the property that is currently zoned R-8. All structures will be removed with development of the additional 36 units. E. Proposed Use Analysis: The request is to annex 1.36 acres with an R-40 zone, and rezone a R-8 zoned parcel as well as the C-G zoned portion of the existing multifamily development to R-40 to clean-up the zoning for the existing development and to allow 36 additional multifamily units. This is allowed by conditional use per UDC 11-2A-8. F. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): The specific use standards for multi-family developments listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 apply to development of this site as follows: i. Buildings shall provide a minimum setback of ten(10)feet. The site plan indicates both buildings meet a minimum setback of at least 10'on all sides. ii. 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 submitted landscape plan reflects dumpsters in an enclosure and screened by landscaping at the east portion of the property. Details regarding this enclosure and any additional ground or roof mounted mechanical or electrical equipment meeting the requirements of 11-3A-12 and 11-4-27 will be required to be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC). The landscape plan indicates ground-mounted condenser units. One of these groups of condenser units is at the north side of Building F, directly along E. Blue Heron Ln. Although the landscape plan suggests 4'high vinyl fencing screening these unit, staff believes there should be additional mitigation to soften the view from the street. Staff recommends additional shrubs be grouped in this area. It should be noted shrubs are required along the building foundation already per the specific use standards, so this would be in addition to that requirement. iii. A minimum of eighty(80)square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks, and/or enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other accessways shall not count toward this requirement. Floorplans of the units indicating this requirement is met shall be required at the time of CZC. iv. Developments with twenty(20)units or more shall provide a property management office,maintenance storage area, central mailbox location, including provisions for parcel mail, and a directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. All of these requirements have already been provided and shown on the site plan associated with the CZC approved for the existing development. Page 7 Item 4. 18 V. A minimum of 250 sq. ft. of common open space shall be provided for each unit of between 500 sq. ft. and 1,200 sq. ft in area; 350 sq. ft. of common open space is required for all units greater than 1,200 sq. ft in area. The applicant has provided an open space exhibit which reflects the required open space for both Phase I and Phase 2. 41,870 sq.ft. of open space was required with Phase One whereas 53,000 sq.ft. is provided. 10,200 square feet of qualified open space is required with Phase 2, whereas 15,330 sq.ft. is proposed. The proposal meets the minimum requirements of UDC 11-4-3-27. vi. Amenities The existing development consists of 108 units, and an additional 36 units are proposed. The existing development provides a half basketball court,plaza containing benches and trellis, 1,620 sq.ft. clubhouse with exercise room,playground, horseshoe pit, barbeques and picnic tables. This proposal proposes two additional amenities-an approximately 8,600 sq.ft. open space park and 52 new bicycle storage spaces. UDC I1-4-3-27-D states `for multifamily developments with more than one hundred (100) units, the decision-making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development." The Planning Commission should decide if the amenities are sufficient for the existing development as well as the proposed expansion. vii. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The landscaped area shall be at least three(3) feet wide. For every three (3)linear feet of foundation, an evergreen shrub having a minimum mature height of twenty-four(24)inches shall be planted. The landscape plan does show landscaped areas around the foundations of the buildings, although it does not indicate whether this includes shrubs. As mentioned above, staff is recommending additional landscaping around the mechanical equipment visible from E. Blue Heron Ln. G. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): Dimensional standards of the R-40 zoning district include 10' front setbacks, 12' rear setbacks, 3' side setbacks, and a maximum building height of 60'.However, as mentioned in the specific use standards above, 10' setbacks are applied to all multifamily projects (on all sides). The development as proposed meets these setbacks, and the elevations provided indicate a maximum height of approximately 42' from the highest roof pitch. The proposal meets all the dimensional requirements. H. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-311--4): There is one existing access from E. Blue Heron Ln. (local road) serving the existing 108 units; one additional access is proposed from E. Blue Heron Ln. Meridian Fire has commented that although the site does provide two points of access,both of these accesses are from E. Blue Heron Ln.with the only way in and out occurring from N. Meridian Rd.Fire;they prefer another point of access that does not solely rely on N. Meridian Rd. E. Blue Heron Ln.terminates into a pathway at the east end which then connects to N. Eureka Ave. Based on discussion with the applicant,they agreed to widen this pathway to 20 feet wide or as approved by Meridian Fire, and provide bollards on either end to allow secondary fire access. Page 8 Item 4. 19 1 I. Parking(UDC 11-3C): UDC 11-3C-6 requires 1.5 parking spaces per each one-bedroom dwelling unit and at least 2 parking spaces for 2-3 bedrooms units. At least one parking space for each of these units must be in a covered carport or garage. As requested by staff,the applicant submitted a site plan which indicates the required and proposed parking for both Phase One(the 108 units) and Phase Two(the 36 additional units). Phase One was required to provide 204 parking spaces with 102 of them covered spaces. 207 parking spaces are provided,with 195 of them being covered. Phase Two is required to provide 69 parking spaces,with 36 of them covered spaces. 87 spaces are provided,with 71 of them being covered. 6 total bicycle parking spaces are required with this development. The parking exceeds the requirements by 21 parking spaces. The site plan indicates 17' long parking spaces on the south side of Building F, east side of Building G and surrounding the open space. As required by UDC 11-3C-5, sidewalks are at least 7' in width in these areas to allow for vehicle overhang. The remaining parking spaces are shown to be 19' in length. The applicant should be aware that all off-street parking areas shall be provided with a substantial wheel restraint to prevent cars from encroaching upon abutting private and public property or overhanging beyond the designated parking stall dimensions. Wheel stops are not indicated on the site plan or landscape plan. These should be indicated on the site plan with the CZC. Meridian Fire,Police and the surrounding residents have commented that parking has been a continuous issue for this development, as residents and guests often park on both sides of E. Blue Heron Dr,making emergency access difficult. One cause of this issue is that many of the garages that are intended to be used to satisfy parking requirements are being used for storage, leading to spill-over in other areas of the development and along the local streets. As 71 parking spaces are proposed to be covered with Phase II, staff recommends these covered spaces be accommodated by carports and not garages,to avoid dedicated covered spaces being used for storage. Elevations of the carports have not been provided. At the time of CZC,the applicant will need to provide elevations that reflect the accessory structures are compatible with the primary buildings and meet all the minimum dimensional requirements of UDC 11-3C-6. The applicant should also be aware that the site plan indicates striped pedestrian crossing areas across the parking lots.UDC 11-3A-19-4 requires internal pedestrian walkways to be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks. J. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): Sidewalk already exists along N. Meridian Rd,which has recently been reconstructed. 5' wide sidewalk is constructed along the portion of Blue Heron Ln. of which the existing multifamily development exists;the landscape plan indicates this sidewalk will be extended along the frontage of the additional property where the expansions are proposed in accord with UDC standards. K. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 25' wide landscape buffer has already been provided along N. Meridian Rd as required by UDC Table I I-2B-3.W. Blue Heron Lane is classified as a local street and as such does not require a street buffer in the R-40 zoning district. However,a 17' wide landscape buffer was installed along the portion of the property frontage developed with Phase One, and the landscape plan indicates this buffer is proposed to continue along the frontage to the property line with Phase Two. A 12' +/-landscape buffer is proposed along the eastern property line,although a Page 9 Item 4. 20 residential buffer is not a requirement for multifamily in the R-40 zoning district and this property is directly adjacent to an existing meat packing plant. It does appear there is at least 3' wide landscaping areas along the foundations of both buildings with street facing elevations as required per the specific use standards for multifamily,but the landscape plan does not specifically identify shrubs in this area. As mentioned, staff believes there should be additional landscape screening along the street-facing sides of the condenser unit screen fences along E. Blue Heron Ln. The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall comply with all landscaping requirements and is required to be prepared by a landscape architect, landscape designer, or qualified nurseryman,per UDC 131C-3B. L. Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3G): The applicant has provided an open space exhibit which reflects the required open space for both Phase 1 and Phase 2. 41,870 sq. ft. of open space was required with Phase One whereas 53,000 sq. ft. is provided. 10,200 square feet of qualified open space is required with Phase 2,whereas 15,330 sq. ft. is proposed. The open space provided for Phase 2 exceeds the requirements. M. Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G): UDC 11-4-3-27 requires 4 amenities from each category for multifamily developments of more than 75 units,but for multifamily developments with more than one hundred(100)units,the decision-making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development. The existing development provides a half basketball court,plaza containing benches and trellis, 1,620 sq. ft. clubhouse with exercise room,playground,horseshoe pit,barbeques and picnic tables.With the proposed expansion the applicant proposes a 50'x 100' sq. ft. open space area and 52 additional enclosed bike storage facilities. The Planning Commission should decide if the amenities are sufficient for the existing development as well as the proposed expansion. N. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): The landscape plan reflects perimeter fencing that is to match existing fencing.At the time of the CZC,the applicant shall provide all fencing details on the landscape plan. O. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): There is infrastructure serving the existing development.All development is required to connect to the City water and sewer system unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. P. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual elevations were submitted with this proposal. The elevations utilize architecture that is consistent with the existing buildings including multiple roof pitches,dormers,canopies and outdoor second and third story railings. Building materials include hardiboard lap siding, hardishake shingle siding, cultured stone columns and asphalt singles. Building elevations will be reviewed against the ASM manual at time of CZC. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the annexation of 1.36 acres of land with the R-40 zoning district, rezoning of 4.18 acres of land from C-G and R-8 to R-40, and a Conditional Use Permit to allow expansion of an existing multifamily complex to allow 36 additional units in two new buildings Page 10 Item 4. 21 per the provisions and comments included in Section VII in accord with the Findings in Section VIII VII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan(date: 3/18/2021) -- - -I -E. E HE L- .E o. - - . M MOM] TYF. I � {OPEN SPACE El 0= A•. 0�. F - - JU 12 ❑ _❑ F . IIC�II 0 = rR.,, 0 ,o T .T F1 TILJ — i 7 � � -�ZJ� lYR ' I e ! 1!I y L-1 L . t LE% H tI �.—� • - I I .. 1 TYR , 7- ElV - I ' '•�. v, IL�IFaC�E � ,k � Page 11 Item 4. ■ B. Landscape Plan(date: 4/2/2021) Ir f7 .. .. ,�J,41 ti...... . •� . is ..�.'..lyl� r,`i:•i".•. J _�' ,f�» � J. i.�_• •J Fi_ LI�] ILILt .-T I T� L----------- j 7 . 1. R. I I I r 64JILbING G' I T'.' BUILDINGA 24-PLEA r - $U ILaING B -�I 12LPLEX l a nai nn�nwr r• Page 12 Item 4. 23 C. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(date: 8/20/2021) ol _ y NEW PHASE OAE7d SPACE I' NEW awLVIN_GP B�5y2' ■ VAQU tED-52-332SF 24iLEi( ��—`N PROVIDED-M.0 EF I __ ■ PHASE i lS EWFFIT C1AII,IBE WIEITNE33 CENTER 8 F'IA2A PICNICAREA3 THRDUGHOIIT HALF SPORTS COURT TOT LOT PHALGE I Nk1Y�IKE STOMGE ■ RFOLPR D-,1 SPACE -- - PROVIDED=F9,2093F ® t� PROVIDED=19,5195F I - PHASE?AMENITIES I'll NEW CARPORT P-- ■ ENCLOSED BIKE STORAGE FOR@BIKES _ WILDING G' -� MXIU2 OPENFIELD I Hl I DAVE —�HERON VILLAGE APARTMENTS PHASE I & II PEVANS d, C GNsrRuc 11 D N OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT o,7E70811?0=1 Page 13 Item 4. F24 D. Building Elevations(date: 3/18/2021) 11 II ❑ KEY NOTE +. 0 ° m 0 . .....<<<<. ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ m ❑ ❑ r r ❑ �-n —�v FRONT ELEVAT]ON ❑ I_ CH=T'-0' I I I I I I ❑ �m _�. ` p. �Irt m p1mli ° m P p m P ,a F P BACK ELEVATION SCa�F IIB'=f-0' ❑ P. ° ❑MLLMwim L-7 ❑ qlf lil lil III Ild — SIUE�ELEUATIO p N SIDE ELEVATION P N P em R + r. ❑ ❑ ❑ pp m m SOUTH ELEV&ON' ® m OT- ❑ ❑ m p ❑ ❑ m ❑ NIORTH F]FVATION 'Ir_ALF Page 14 Item 4. F25 E. Annexation Legal Description ANNEXATION BLUE HERON APARTMENTS PHHC HERON PROPERTY, LLC An area of land being portions of APN: R7039000005 and APN: R703900300, Ada County records, located in a portion of Government Lot 6 of Section 6,Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the West One Quarter corner of said Section 6,thence on the east-west mid-section line of said Section 6, North 89'35'33" East, 505.66 feet,to the POINT OF BEGINNING: Thence continuing on said east-west mid-section line, North 89' 35'33" East, 166.44 feet,to a point,from which the Center West One Sixteenth corner of said Section 6 bears, North 99' 35' 33"East, 418.18 feet; Thence leaving said east-west mid-section line,South 00' 21' 57" East,384.21 feet; Thence North 67'07'38" West, 185.36 feet; Thence South 89' 55'20" West,9.00 feet; Thence North 00' 20'55" East, 93.00 feet; Thence North 89*38'42" East, 9.00 feet; Thence North 00*20'55" East, 217.94 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described area of land contains 1.36 acres(59,435 Ftz), more or less. PREPARED BY: The Land Group,Inc. 5�0 F_NS Michael Femenia, PLSt�, 0 � 1 9Te OF ld s. b3/1-7/2021 Page 15 Item 4. F26 Annexation far PPHC Heron Property, LLC Situate in a Portion of Gov't Lot B of Section B Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian City of Meridian,Ada County, Idaho 2021 W 114 SEC.6 CP&F#201$-0597 17 EAST BLUE HERON LAND' N89°35'33"E 109D.72` f 505.66, 76 44' 418.18, ROB CW 1/16TH SEC.6 CP&F#I04034014 EMT BLUE HERON LANE PPHC HERON MOPERTYLLC APN_R70390000D5 Q I C} U3 .- Q Q 1 LD 185 EAST BLUE HERON LANE _vt II PPHC HERON PROPERTY LLC 1 a APN:R7W9000W0 125 EAST BLUE HERON LANE 1 I QD PPHC HERON PROPERTY LLC h, APN11703MG170 I SW COR.SEC,6 — &F#113105589 N89'38'42"f � ' 245 EAST BLUE HER024 LANE NOD°20'55'E 93.00' AREA OF ANNEXATION SCHWEROJAMIE i PPHC HERON PROPERTY LLC APN:R70396U0200 �`�1 1.36 Acres (59.435 Ft2)± . , 4 g89°55`20'w B.fla' I c 36, O �RL 03I17I2t;2l Page 16 Item 4. F27] F. Rezoning Legal Description ..,, z.:.... �..�.T REZONE to R40 BLt1E HERON APARTMENTS PHHC HERON PROPERTY, LLC An area of land being APN: R7039000005,APN: R7039000300, a nd APN: R7039000170 AND portions of APN:R7039000090,APN: R7039000080,and APN: R7039000057,Ada County records,located in a portion of Government Lot 6 of Section 6,Township 3 North,Range 1 East, Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County, Idaho, being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the West One Quarter corner of said Section 6,thence on the east-west mid-section line of said Section 6, North 89'35'33"East,341.03 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING: Thence continuing on said east-west mid-section line, North 89'35' 33" East, 331.50 feet,to a point, from which the Center West One Sixteenth corner of said Section 6 bears, North 89"35' 33" East,418.18 feet; Thence leaving said east-west mid-section line,South 00°21'57" East,384.21 feet; Thence South 67'07'3B" East,192.71 feet; Thence South 31"38'35" East,39.83 feet; Thence South 89'33'08"West,389.49 feet; Thence South 84' 29'31"West,129.04 feet; Thence South 89' 27'49"West,75.47 feet; Thence South 00'32' 11" East,21.00 feet; Thence South 89' 27'49"West,119.20 feet; Thence South 00'09'00" East,24.79 feet; Thence North 88"59' 16"West,165.03 feet,to a point on the west line of said Section 6,from which point the Southwest corner of said Section 6 bears, South 00' 18'10"West, 2100.10 feet; Thence on said west section line, North 00' 18' 10" East,237.50 feet; Thence leaving said west section line, North 89'36'00"East,496.84 feet; Thence North 00"20'55" East,93.00 feet; Thence South 89'38'42"West,155.99 feet; Thence North 00"18' 10" East, 217.78 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNI NG. The above described area of land contains 5.54 acres(241,398 Ft'),more or less. PREPARED BY: The Land Group, Inc. "�N1,LA Michael Femenia,PLS ENS 0 `I 4FkD EL S. 43/17/2Uf21 Page 17 Item 4. F28 W 1{4 SEG.6 POB CW 1/16TH SEC'6 CPU#201 EO55t717 CP&F#1 04034 81 4 r N893533F 1a�O,72' _ r EAST BLUR HEMV LANE 341.03' .c rj,u' ir,N14 cwii 1 Er}MOU18'1O"E 217.78' a� ,u� Q LI n _ C4 I nr-asp rue-eil.nk � N? I UN1A!E BE p[I wt•rs:ia•n.AFii- I I ST W iL1.fF11'L W M I I 4 589 38'42"W U �01 I 155.89' 44.5' _ NDa°20'S5�E �I D ,n on. CP MxP�ere# I ''h*pM�¢ s�, 1�a�°ss'ao"E �106,94� in I IkRU OF RHONE 5% PPHC HERON PROPERTYLL. 88 ���+ � r� r" 5.54 Acres{241,39B Ftq A Q S89"2T4B`W oo SM2749V 75. 47' S89'33'08"W 389.49'20, �1 21 N88�59'16"1N L3 L2 Rezone tar SW CDR.SEC.5 PPHC Heron Property, LLC l CP&F#113105589 Situate in a Portion of Gov't Lot 6 of 5ectaon 6 Township 3;North. Range i East, Boise MerWan City of Meridian,Ada County, Idaho 2021 Page 18 Item 4. 29 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS PLANNING DIVISION Site Specific Conditions of Approval 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. 2. 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 site plan, landscape plan, qualified open space exhibit and elevations submitted with the annexation application contained herein. b. Phase One and Two shall share access,parking, amenities and open space. c. The applicant shall widen and improve the pathway between E. Blue Heron Ln. and N. Eureka Ave. to20-feet wide(or as approved by Meridian Fire),capable of supporting an 80,000-pound fire truck with bollards on either end to allow secondary emergency access. 3. The developer shall comply with the specific use standards for multi-family developments listed in UDC 11-4-3-27. 3. All condenser units on the north side of Building F which are visible from E. Blue Heron Ln. shall have additional landscape screening in addition to 4' high vinyl fencing. 4. Off-street vehicle parking shall be provided on the site in accord with UDC 11-3c-4 for multi- family dwellings. Covered parking shall be provided only by carports. 5. All carports shall be constructed to be compatible with the associated residential buildings i.e. similar building and roof forms, architectural elements and details,and materials and colors to maintain the quality of the architectural character)in accord with the Meridian Architectural Standards Manual. 6. The applicant shall record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of both phase of the development,including,but not limited to, structures,parking, common areas, and other development features. Documentation of compliance with this requirement shall be with submitted with the first Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 7. All off street parking areas shall be provided with a substantial wheel restraint to prevent cars from encroaching upon abutting private and public property or overhanging beyond the designated parking stall dimensions per UDC 11-3C-5. When a bumper overhangs onto a sidewalk or landscape area,the parking stall dimensions may be reduced two (2)feet in length if two(2) feet is added to the width of the sidewalk or landscaped area planted in ground cover. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Any fencing constructed on the site shall be consistent with the standards asset forth in UDC 1I- 3A-6, 11-3A-7. 2. Comply with all bulk,use, and development standards of the applicable district listed in UDC Chapter 2 District regulations. Page 19 Item 4. 30 3. Install lighting consistent with the provisions as set forth in UDC 11-3A-11. 4. Construct all off-street parking areas consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3C-1. 5. Protect any existing trees on the subject property that are greater than four-inch caliper and/or mitigate for the loss of such trees as set forth in UDC 11-313-10. Page 20 Item 4. F 1 IV. FINDINGS 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: A. ANNEXATION AND REZONE 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; This is a proposal for annexation of 1.36 acres of land with a R-40 zoning district, rezoning of 4.18 acres of land from C-G and R-8 to R-40 to allow the expansion of an existing multifamily complex. This complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan,particularly to provide a diversity in housing opportunities and to encourage infill development. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed map amendment to R-40 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; Staff finds with the recommended conditions of approval the proposed R-40 map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the property is surrounded by multifamily to the north and south, industrial in the County to the east, and N.Meridian Rd to the west. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Staff finds that the proposed zoning amendment 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. Staff finds the proposed annexation and rezone is in the best interest of the City if the property is developed in accord with the provisions in Section VII. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following,and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s)is adequate to establish: a. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Staff ,finds that if the site is designed in accord with the site plan in Exhibit A and the conditions of approval in Exhibit B, the site will be large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet Page 21 Item 4. ■ the dimensional and development regulations of the R-40 zoning district and the multi family specific use standards. b. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. The proposed multi family residential use in the R-40 zone meets the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and UDC. c. 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. This proposal would allow an additional 36 units to be added to an existing 108-unit multifamily development. Most impacts have already been established. The general design, construction, operation and maintenance of the multi family use will be compatible with other residential and commercial uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the vicinity and will not adversely change the character of the area. d. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. As this is an addition of 36 units to an existing 108-unit multifamily development, impacts have already been mostly established and staff finds that the proposed development should not adversely affect other property in the vicinity if the applicant complies with all conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B of this staff report. e. 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. Essential public facilities and services are presently serving the existing development. Sanitary sewer, domestic water and irrigation can be made available to additional property. Please refer to comments prepared by the Public Works Department, Fire Department, Police Department and other agencies. f. 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. This addition will be part of a larger existing multifamily development. The applicant will pay to extend the sanitary sewer and water mains into the site. No additional capital facility costs are expected from the City. The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay impact fees. g. 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. Page 22 Item 4. F33 Staff finds that the proposed development will not involve uses that will create nuisances that would be detrimental to the general welfare of the surrounding area. Staff recognizes there will be a small increase of traffic and noise with the approval of this development; whenever undeveloped property is developed the amount of traffic generation does increase. h. 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. Staff finds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural feature(s)of major importance. Page 23 E IDIAN;--- Applicant Presentation Heron Village, Phase 2 0027-2021-H September 16, 2021 Annexation, Rezone, CUP Vicinity Map Current 8-R8-RG-C40-R40-R40-R40-RG-C40-R8-R 8-R15-RG-C Annexation 8-R8-RG-C40-R40-R40-R40-RG-C40-R8-R 8-R15-RG-C 1.36 Acres Rezone 8-R8-RG-C40-R40-R40-R40-RG-C40-R8-R 8-R15-RG-C 5.54 Acres Site Plan Site Plan Existing Community Elevations Secondary Emergency Access THANK YOU Amenities:spaces52 new enclosed bike storage ••Park benches•8,600 SF open space/park•Proposed:•Barbeques ••Playground•room1650 SF clubhouse with exercise •Plaza with benches and trellis•Basketball ½ court•Existing: 34 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for McFadden Property (H-2021-0048) by Doug Tamura, Located at 104 W. Cherry Ln. A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 17.87 acres of land with the C-G zoning district. Item 5. F35 (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Alan Tiefenbach Meeting Date: September 16, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for McFadden Property (H-2021-0048) by Doug Tamura, Located at 104 W. Cherry Ln. A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 17.87 acres of land with 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 5. ■ STAFF REPORTC�WE IDIANn-=- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A H O HEARING 9/16/2021 Legend p� , DATE: Project Lccaian % TO: Planning&Zoning Commission II M FROM: Alan Tiefenbach 3 208-884-5533 + Bruce Freckleton,Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2021-0048 McFadden Property LOCATION: The site is located at 104 W. Cherry Lane,in the East'/2 of the SE 1/4 of the SE � � r�rm rRn rrrr 1/4 of Section 1,Township 3N,Range 1W. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation and zoning(AZ) of 17.88-acres of land with the C-C(Community Business District) zoning district. The main purpose for seeking annexation at this time is to ensure this area can be included as part of the Northern Gateway Urban Renewal Plan currently being developed by the Meridian Development Corporation(MDC). IL SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 17.88 Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use Community(MU-C) Existing Land Use(s) Rural Agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) Mixed Use Lots(#and type;bldg./common) One existing,future to be determined. Phasing Plan(#of phases) 2 Number of Residential Units(type N/A of units) Amenities Amenities will be determined with future build-out. Staff is recommending a development agreement provision that requires detailed amenity,open space and circulation plans after construction of the first phase. Physical Features(waterways, Settler's Canal bisects the property east to west. hazards,flood plain,hillside) Page 1 Item 5. F37 Description Details Page Neighborhood meeting date;#of June 23,2021 -6 Attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) N/A B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes(future proposals will require additional ACHD review). • Requires ACHD No ' Commission Action es/no Access(Arterial/Collectors/State N.Meridian Rd. and W. Cherry Ln. (both Hwy/Local)(Existing and arterials). Proposed) Traffic Level of Service LOS>E Stub First phase will rely on access from N.Meridian Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Rd. and W.Cherry Ln. Access Existing Road Network N.Meridian Rd.and W.Cherry Ln. (both arterials). Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ There are no existing buffers.Existing sidewalk Buffers between 5'-7' exists along the N.Meridian Rd. /W Cherry Ln. Rd. frontage. Proposed Road Improvements No proposed road improvements with the first phase. Distance to nearest City Park(+ 3/4 miles to Settlers Park size Fire Service • 1 No comments on this phase. Police Service • Distance to Police No comments on this phase. Station West Ada School District • Distance(elem,ms,hs) No comments submitted Wastewater • Distance to Sewer N/A Services • Sewer Shed South Black Cat Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See Application ERU's • WRRF Declining 14.18 Balance • Project Consistent with Yes WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Comments • Sewer is available in N.Meridian Rd. • Capacity availability will be determined when development is proposed for the property. Water Page 2 Item 5. 38 Description Details Page • Distance to Water 0 Services • Pressure Zone 2 • Estimated Project Water See Application ERU's • Water Quality No concerns • Project Consistent with Yes Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns No changes to public water infrastructure.Any changes to infrastructure must be approved by Public Works. Page 3 � m ' � n ONE ■ r VI E1N _ ~,- CH E F FtY�•'R ME NINE ON ME ip, ■ iuu ■■ ■■ ■u■ u■ ■ Nnl■1 - ly�� * a: I'4J X_ ^aim,_ ..._• L' Id. � _ ■ �■�� ■■Now - -FOR, F! � H�■Y �•�,+mot _• .. � - .I[-� � � _, N. 111. INI■ ■■■■■■ MINI ■ ..■ .yMEN �P =�S ■ ■ ■ ■■=:S ■ MINE ■■■■■■ a. ■11 .� ■s� ■1■ ■ � glWNlgl IUINNIIU ■ N l7 •I� ; 1 _,I �_ � 1ME ME . - ONEEEE MINE ism NEI ■ 1■1�� ..uuu • ; Y■�� ..101011 EE �■ ■ _ . uuu �■ ■ ; . ■u■1 � _� � � -- ■■ ■■ = i■■■ ■■■■■■■ ■■ ■■ - i■■■ ■■■■■■■ = NMI ■ ■■ ■ ._.._...._ ■ N ■■ ■ . .._ _. I = 11 ■■ ■IN■■ ■ f ■■ ■EN■■ ■ \ice •__•o - 111� III ■�gill NINON■o■ _ • ■�IINI ■uu■v. _ Item 5. F40 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Doug Tamura— 1124 Santa Maria Dr,Boise, ID 83712 B. Owner: Kobe LLC - 1124 Santa Maria Dr,Boise, ID 83712 IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 8/27/2021 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 8/25/2021 Sign Posting 9/7/2021 Nextdoor posting 8/26/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Annexation The proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property and is within the Area of City Impact Boundary. A legal description and exhibit map for the annexation area and area of rezoning is included in Section VII. To ensure the site develops consistent with the Mixed-use Community design elements and future Northern Gateway concepts, staff recommends a development agreement to guide future development of the site. B. Future Land Use Map Designation(https://www.meridiancity.or /�compplan) The FLUM designates the property for Mixed Use Community. The purpose of this designation is to allocate areas where community-serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses, including residential, and to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings.Non-residential buildings in these areas tend to be larger than in Mixed Use Neighborhood(MU-N) areas,but not as large as in Mixed Use Regional (MU-R)areas. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of the variety that people will mainly travel by car to,but also walk or bike to(up to three or four miles). Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood are encouraged. The Comprehensive Plan describes components of what would be considered mixed use. Elements pertinent to this proposal include: • At least three types of land uses; • Higher density residential development encouraged when there is a potential for an employment center; • Mixed Use areas typically being developed under a master or conceptual plan; during an annexation or rezone request, a development agreement; Page 5 Item 5. ■ • In developments where multiple commercial and/or office buildings are proposed, the buildings should be arranged to create some form of common, usable area, such as a plaza or green space; • Transitional uses and/or landscaped buffering between commercial and existing low- or medium-density residential development; • Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi public spaces and places including but not limited to parks,plazas, outdoor gathering areas, open space, libraries, and schools being expected; • Being centered around spaces that are well-designed public and quasi public centers of activity. Spaces should be activated and incorporate permanent design elements and amenities that foster a wide variety of interests ranging from leisure to play. These areas should be thoughtfully integrated into the development and further placemaking opportunities considered; and, • All mixed-use projects being accessible to adjacent neighborhoods by both vehicles and pedestrians. Pedestrian circulation should be convenient and interconnect different land use types. Vehicle connectivity should not rely on arterial streets for neighborhood access. In addition,the Plan discusses the following additional pertinent requirements for mixed use community: • Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 20%of the development area at gross densities ranging from 6 to 15 units/acre; • Vertically integrated structures being encouraged; • Unless a structure contains a mix of both residential and office, or residential and commercial land uses, maximum building size should be limited to a 30,000 square foot building footprint. For community grocery stores, the maximum building size should be limited to a 60,000 square foot building footprint; The applicant submitted a conceptual plan as part of this application. The Plan shows three buildings oriented to the W. Cherry Ln./N. Meridian Rd. corner with parking in the front of the W. Cherry Lane frontages, 5 more buildings to the north along N. Meridian Rd. with parking to the back and to the side, and a Phase Two in the center which is intended for future commercial office,retail,hotel or multifamily uses. The concept plan indicates restaurant,retail,hotel,office and multifamily family uses proposed for the site,which would be consistent with the requirement for at least three uses. Also,Phase Two does indicate a potential for a multifamily component, although there are no details provided at this time. The applicant's narrative suggests their intent is to develop the buildings shown along N. Meridian Rd. and W. Cherry Ln. as an initial phase,with uses including a gas station with convenience store, additional retail or office, and multifamily and/or hotel uses as a second phase. The applicant proposes that before any specific use may be constructed within Phase II, a Development Agreement Modification must be approved that would include a conceptual plan for that area. Staff does support a limited amount of commercial construction occurring in the short term at the SE corner based on the concept plan that has been provided thus far,but does have concerns allowing complete build-out along both arterials as presently shown. As the Page 6 Item 5. ■ intersection of W. Cherry Ln. and N. Meridian Rd. is intensely commercial, staff believes build-out in this immediate area could occur in the short term under the concept plan as shown and have limited impacts to the overall cohesiveness of the project. Also,because this intersection is so intensely commercial, staff believes it appropriate to have automobile- oriented uses directly at the intersection,with the buildings in this area providing a buffer for the buildings more internal to the project as well as allowing the buildings further to the north and along N. Meridian Rd. to transition to more integrated mixed use. Also,because this property would be the entrance into the Northern Gateway District, staff believes some type of entry or identity feature for this development appropriate. Based on the concept plan submitted by the applicant, staff recommends allowing development of the three commercial buildings along the W. Cherry Ln.frontage and south of the existing access at N.Meridian Rd. as the first phase of this development.A development agreement modification and detailed concept plans that are consistent with the mixed-use community designation of the Comprehensive Plan and the Northern Gateway District would be required prior to any additional development.However,as part of the first phase,staff recommends the development agreement require the building orientation account for a gateway or entry feature at the SE corner, near the intersection as will be discussed further in the qualified open space section. C. Comprehensive Plan Policies(ht(ps://www.meridiancily.or /g compplan): • Encourage diverse housing options suitable for various income levels,household sizes,and lifestyle preferences. (2.01.01) The Plan notes an intent of mixed use is to integrate a variety of uses, including residential. Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 20%of the development area at gross densities ranging from 6 to 15 units/acre.Although the intent of this application is to annex the property into the City so it is eligible to be included into the North Gateway Plan and for development of the first three commercial buildings, the applicant has indicated a residential component on the concept plan in a future phase. Types of housing and the density would be addressed in this future phase, but because this residential would be in a mixed-use center and at a higher density, it would likely lead to diversity in housing satisfying this goal. • Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for diverse housing types throughout the City. (2.01.01G) As mentioned above, although residential is not planned with this current phase, given the nature and density of housing that would occur in this mixed-use center under future development, it would likely increase diversity in housing. • Locate higher density housing near corridors with existing or planned transit,Downtown, and in proximity to employment centers. (2.01.01H) The Destination Downton Plan indicates W. Cherry Ln. as a future transit line, and N. Meridian Rd. is a major commercial corridor. The site is located on a major commercial intersection, with a range of services including a grocery store, directly across N.Meridian Rd. to the east. There are numerous employment opportunities in this area, and it is adjacent to what is still considered the Downtown Area. • Support redevelopment and infill opportunities Downtown. (2.09.01) The subject parcel is an enclave parcel with all surrounding land developed and existing infrastructure available. This would be considered infill development. Page 7 Item 5. 43 • Develop concept plans of potential destination activities and promote appropriate development, infill, and redevelopment of activity centers. (2.09.03E) This application is to annex the property into the City so Meridian Economic Development Corporation can include the property into the new Northern Gateway Plan, and to allow the applicant to construct the first three buildings.As mentioned, a development agreement modification will be required for any future phases, which will include detailed concept plans. This project is eventually intended to be an activity center. • Require pedestrian circulation plans to ensure safety and convenient access across large commercial and mixed-use developments. (3.07.02A) Staff is recommending a development agreement provision that will require the developer to submit a plan illustrating how pedestrian connections in the first phase area will tie to future phases of the development.A complete pedestrian circulation will be required as part of the development agreement modification for future phases. • 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. This project is intended to develop as a mixed-use center. • Focus development and redevelopment intensity on key transportation corridors. (3.07.02C) This property is located on the intersection of W. Cherry Ln. and N. Meridian Rd., both key transportation corridors, and W. Cherry Ln. is anticipated to eventually be a transit line. D. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The property is presently vacant, although it is being used for horse pasture. E. Proposed Use Analysis: At this time,proposed uses are only conceptual. However,the Applicant's concept plan depicts multi-family residential, commercial,hotel and office/retail uses.This application is requesting C-C zoning. All the above uses are principally-permitted except for multi-family residential, which is a conditional use in the C-C zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. As mentioned in the comprehensive plan analysis above,this property is recommended for mixed use community uses,with an intent to provide community-serving uses and dwellings seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric and an integrated variety of uses. Use requirements include at least three types of land uses,higher density residential, and at least 20%residential at gross densities ranging from 6-15 unit/acre,but a mixed-use designation is not intended for high density residential development alone.Vertically integrated structures are encouraged,but unless a structure contains a mix of both residential and office, or residential and commercial land uses, maximum building size should be limited to a 30,000 square-foot building footprint unless it is a grocery store,which can have a footprint up to 60,000 sq. ft. Plazas, open spaces,gathering spaces and similar should comprise at least 5%of the developable area. As mentioned,based on the submitted concept plan, staff is amenable to supporting development of the first three commercial buildings along the W. Cherry Ln. frontage and south of the existing access along N. Meridian Rd. in the short term but believes more detailed concept plans should be approved before further buildout can occur in order to ensure this development is representative of the type of mixed-use development illustrated by the Plan.In addition to the other DA requirements already listed, Staff recommends a DA provision that limits building footprints to 30,000 sq.ft or 60,000 sq.ft for a grocery store unless vertically-integrated Page 8 Item 5. 44 structures are proposed,a requirement that at least 20% of the square footage in future phases be residential, and at least 5% of the developable area being plazas,gathering places,etc. This would be in addition to any open space or amenity requirements for multifamily development. F. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): The concept plan indicates a wide range of commercial retail, office,hotel and multifamily uses. At time of development agreement modification or Certificate of Zoning Compliance proposed development will be reviewed against the specific use standards of UDC 11-4. G. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): All future lots,buildings and public streets shall be required to meet all UDC dimensional standards. This includes property sizes,required street frontages,road widths, and development consistent with the mixed-use community principles listed in the Comprehensive Plan. H. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): The property is presently served by two arterials-W. Cherry Lane and N.Meridian Rd.N. Meridian Road is improved with 5 travel lanes,curb, gutter, and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk abutting the site. Cherry Lane is improved with 5 travel lanes,curb, gutter, and 7-foot wide attached concrete sidewalk abutting the site to the east of the existing driveway on Cherry Lane. There is 5-foot wide attached concrete sidewalk abutting the site to the west of the driveway. The concept plan shows 3 access points from N. Meridian Rd., one access from W. Cherry Ln., and a stub to the office park at 3537 Hunters Cir. There are two existing curb-cuts providing access to the property. There is an existing 26-foot- wide driveway from N. Meridian Rd. approximately 500 feet north of Cherry Ln.,and a 26-foot- wide curb cut driveway providing access from Cherry Ln. approximately 300 feet west of N. Meridian Rd.ACHD has responded that if a property has frontage on more than one street,access shall be taken from the street having the lesser functional classification. Cherry Ln. is a principal arterial and ACHD policy typically prohibits access from a principal arterial if access from a lesser classified street(N. Meridian Rd.) is available.ACHD has noted the existing access on Cherry Lane is not guaranteed to be allowed by ACHD as part of a future development application. If access is requested on Cherry Lane, an access analysis may be required to be submitted to ACHD for review prior to the submittal of the development application which may include a waiver. Staff notes the concept plan indicates the southern access being moved to the west,which would unlikely be supported due to spacing requirements with NW 3d St. ACHD has responded a TIS will likely be required for this project. As the purpose of this present application is very preliminary at this time, staff will await conditioning the access points until such time that future development applications and a TIS are submitted. However, staff does have concerns with the three access points along N. Meridian Rd.,whether ACHD would approve two additional accesses, and whether spacing for the northern access is adequate from W. Willowbrook Dr. (as well as shifting the existing access along W. Cherry Rd. to the west). Finally, future development in the area should also provide access to the west in accord with UDC 11-3A-3.NOTE: City Council has the ability to grant the proposed access points to the abutting arterials,however staff does recommend future decision should be deferred until ACHD has determined the appropriate access to this property,confirmed through a reviewed and approved traffic study. Internal circulation should be consistent with the mixed-use goals of providing wider sidewalks, street trees,complete streets and providing accessible pedestrian connectivity. Also,the Destination Downtown Plan anticipates a future transit line along W. Cherry Ln. This should be Page 9 Item 5. 45 considered in future circulation and multi-modal plans.At time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance for the three buildings as recommended by staff,or during time of the development agreement modification for development of the remainder of the property, additional analysis will be required, and may require a TIS at a later date. Staff is recommending a DA provision that the required DA mod for future development include a circulation plan that addresses future access points,internal and external automobile circulation,transit connectivity and locations of possible transit shelters,and multi-modal"complete street" design including pedestrian circulation plan consistent with mixed use development goals. I. Parking(UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11- 3C-5 for all uses other than single-family detached dwellings. Included in these standards are those for commercial and retail,office, and restaurant uses. The Plan does encourage vertically-integrated mixed-use buildings. The concept plan does not indicate these types of buildings at this time. However, as already mentioned, staff recommends only allowing development of the three commercial buildings along the W. Cherry Ln. frontage and south of the existing N. Meridian Rd. access for the first phase. If vertically integrated buildings are proposed,there are specific parking requirements per UDC 11-3C-6. Future planning land use applications will determine the required number of parking spaces for all uses. J. Pathways ( UDC 11-3A-8): No multi-use pathways are proposed or required with this development. However,one of the main goals of a mixed-use designation is wider sidewalks,outdoor furniture,and safe non- motorized access and connectivity. Staff is recommending a DA provision that prior to any development on the site,the applicant provide a plan illustrating how pedestrian connections in the first phase area will tie to future phases of the development.A more comprehensive circulation plan will be required with future DA modifications so staff can analyze pedestrian circulation on the site once end-users are known for the proposed development. K. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): Sidewalks are already existing along the W. Cherry Ln. and N. Meridian Rd. frontages. Future development projects on this site will be analyzed for compliance with the required sidewalk widths and locations. L. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): No parkways are shown with the first conceptual plan,but any parkways associated with future development shall meet the requirements of UDC 11-3A-17. M. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 25-foot wide landscape buffer is required adjacent to both W. Cherry Ln. and N.Meridian Rd., landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-313-7C. Internal parking lot landscaping will be required per UDC 11-3B-8, and a residential landscape buffer will be required along the western and northern property lines which abut existing residential zone districts. To ensure consistent and cohesive installation of landscape buffers, staff recommends a development agreement requirement that prior to any development of the site, a 25' wide landscape buffer shall be installed along the W. Cherry Ln. and N.Meridian Rd.frontages.This will require coordination with ACHD and the City regarding approved points of access. For any development beyond the first phase,staff recommends the applicant submit an open space plan that includes common useable areas, amenities,outdoor gathering places and plazas, Page 10 Item 5. 46 green spaces,and landscape buffering and transitioning between uses consistent with the objectives of the Mixed-Use Community designation. N. Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3U): The Applicant has requested C-C zoning and has stated their intention of developing a mix of uses including retail commercial, office,restaurant,hotel and multifamily uses. In the C-C zone, multi-family residential is a conditional use and qualified open space will be required based on the square footages of units per the specific use standards in UDC 11-4-3-27 (the requirement for open space to be provided under both sections of code is currently under review by staff and the Open Space Committee; therefore,this statement may not be entirely accurate and the Applicant may have different standards that are required upon submittal of future land use applications). As mentioned,plazas,open spaces, gathering spaces and similar elements are mentioned in the Mixed-Use Community policies. The Plan also mentions establishing distinct, engaging identities within commercial and mixed-use centers through design standards. Development of future phases will require a complete open space and circulation plan that addresses interior building orientation, common useable areas, outdoor gathering places and plazas throughout the development. Staff recommends future development agreement modifications include a requirement for a prominent gateway and/or entry feature to announce the corner at the SE portion of the site. The applicant should coordinate with the City and MDC on this feature. O. Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3U): As mentioned throughout this report, staff is recommending an entry feature or element at the southeast portion of the site,with open space, amenity and multimodal circulation plan required for future phases. Future multifamily development will require additional amenities as outlined in UDC 11-4-3-27. P. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-ft The Settlers Canal bisects the property east—west in approximately the center of the property. The canal will be required to be piped or designed as an amenity as required by UDC 11-3A-6. Q. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): Public services are available to accommodate the proposed development. All water and sewer is available in N. Meridian Rd. R. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): No building elevations were submitted with this application. As stated above, staff is only supporting the development of the first three buildings directly at the southeast portion of this site with this application. These buildings will be required to meet minimum architectural standards as required in the Architectural Standards Manual(ASM). However,the purpose of the mixed- use designation is to promote compatible land uses within a close geographic area to create sense of place with innovative and flexible design encouraged. Architectural design principles of mixed-use developments include a cohesive design theme,pedestrian oriented features such as increased ground floor transparency(windows), awnings,porches or other overhangs,pedestrian lighting,building relationship in regard to scale,massing and orientation, fagade differentiation, and 360-degree architecture. To ensure consistency as the development builds-out, Staff is recommending a DA provision that requires buildings to incorporate cohesiveness in design.Conceptual building elevations will be required with the development agreement modification required for future phases. Page 11 Item 5. 47 VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation and zoning with the requirement of a Development Agreement and the provisions noted in Section VII.A per the findings in Section IX of this staff report. Page 12 Item 5. F 8 VII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation and Zoning Legal Description E Hlt3tTA A ipu*n of this t=asl 'K Of IhO SE'/a of!ha SE'I,❑f Section 1,Tam hip 3 North. Flange 1 West.60*e Meridian,Ada County. Idaho. described as Follows: Commencing at a f0titid brAss cap monument marking the SE corner of said SeOM 1 at lh B center line inferseoflgn of West Cherry Lane and W6 Meddlan Road,frorin Which a faNnd alwn[wm cap(Tian rnt+nt marking the E'/ram of sard Secb6fl bears N 00"1$'02'E a distance of 2648,32 feet; Ihenca adarig said Ma N 00'18'07 E a distance of 1324.35 feet to a(atind atuminurn sap Monument marking the NE�ornar of said oast Vz of the SE YA of tM SE'/,, the S 111811L comer, th ence westerly Ang the north lim of sod Easl'A of the SE!/a of the SE'/,, N 69°2732"VV a Manor of 48M felt io-a found steel on on the weskAy rights-of--way line of said berth Meridian Read the POW OF f3EGINN IN . thence soWheNy along said dgfib ❑#-way iins the fOfrowing she(6)❑ wsgs_ S 00'18117 W a distance of _25 feel to a foci rid steel pint- S t °24'f 'VV a distar Of BOO.40 fWt to a f'awd steel p.rn; S 00°18' "4V a distance of 213_66 feel to a[bond steel ph,, S 11"59'5T'W a diatance of 31.62 i i to a found sisal on: S 00'30'07 E a distance of 307,44 feat In a bund steel pin, 44'07'37"VV a dlatarice of 33,30 feet to a found Meeel plrr on the northany righis-txf--way line❑i VUc�st Cheery Lane; Thence along said norttrerly rights alf-way 4i a tie fbfl4wing Iwo(2)cou.ses; S 86"43'49'VV a dislance of 87.39 last to:3 bind steal on; N 89° 7'04"4V a dlslance of 493.45 kei parallel lo and 43.i70' rwrtherly of the south Nne of saki SectiQn 1 la a found steel pin on the wast Fine of Said East of the SE 'l,Df the GE'i; Thence along safci west tine N 00'33'84"E a distance of 287.46 feet to a point; +henry ieaving said line, S W3030"f_a dislanca of 423,59 tel�o a paint; Them N 02*DU39 E a distance of 1 ool 14 Feet to a point on the north line of said Ewt 14 4f the 8E Y+r}f it he S E Y4; Thence easteNy Tong said line S 89°27'32°E a d+stance of 172M feat to the PolNT OF BEGINN ING. The abm-descrlhed Irsot oFiaDd contains 7.89 a= more❑r less subiectlo all existing easemerft and agh%-of-way. Ssa ExWt B arta&ed hereto aed made part af. ! �. p te�sw1tiZ10fit} fn1Le aati2tOfiO3 GC ZqP�i]�scri uan Ph 1 461�?21Aac 14 A4+'s Page 13 Item 5. F 9 f mot+ +II�tAPF� ',7 __ ---- —.—.- 7 Ja7-Trr-]_ t 14 LEA Jt N ia}t s R i•0��1 � i I� �I �� M C, I �kj - Cox i cl M INN I f _ a r}I Page 14 Item 5. F-1 B. Site Plan(date: 8/20/2021) r I s r � � r r � r ri 1 r r _ F,TF,L LmnTrmj r - r �* Staff supports this area being developed as the first phase. CL r�- — — — Y 1.1 Page 15 Item 5. 51 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement(DA)is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption,and the developer. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. With first phase of development,the applicant may develop up to three(3) commercial buildings along the W. Cherry Ln. frontage and south of the existing access at N. Meridian Rd. as indicated on the attached concept plan with the following additional requirements: 1. The applicant shall submit a plan illustrating how pedestrian connections in the first phase area will tie to fixture phases of the development with the first certificate of zoning compliance application. 2. The applicant shall coordinate with the City and MDC on the design of an entry feature at the SE corner,near the intersection with the first certificate of zoning compliance. 3. The developer shall install 25'wide landscape buffers along W. Cherry Ln. and N. Meridian Rd. in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. b. With any other phase of fixture development,the developer shall submit for a development agreement modification. At a minimum,the DA modification shall address the following provisions: 1. A detailed concept plan that includes the following: a. General layout and configuration of buildings for the remainder of the site. Layout of buildings shall consider the principles of mixed-use community, including arrangement to create some form of common,usable area, such as a plaza or green space, orientation of buildings to streetscapes to create pedestrian interest and enclosure of space,walkability and 360-degree design. b. A circulation plan for public and private streets including street cross sections that addresses future access points,internal and external automobile circulation,pedestrian circulation,transit connectivity and locations of possible transit shelters if future transit is projected in this area, and multi- modal"complete street"design including pedestrian connectivity consistent with mixed use development goals. c. Open space and amenity plan reflecting common useable areas, amenities, outdoor gathering places and plazas,green spaces, and landscape buffering and transitioning between uses consistent with the objectives of the Mixed- Use Community designation. At least 5%of the total developable area shall be plazas, gathering places, etc. This would be in addition to any open space or amenity requirements for multifamily development. Page 16 Item 5. ■ d. Conceptual building elevations indicating cohesiveness in building design, pedestrian and street-oriented features, and 360-degree architecture. c. Future development of the site shall comply with design concepts established for the new Northern Gateway District. 2. Building footprints shall be limited to 30,000 sq. ft or 60,000 sq. ft for a grocery store unless vertically-integrated structures are proposed. 3. The development shall contain at least three types of land uses,which could include vertically integrated buildings as one of the uses. 4. Residential uses shall comprise a minimum of 20%of the development area at gross densities ranging from 6 to 15 units/acre. Other residential densities may be considered with a future development agreement modification. 5. The applicant shall comply with all provisions of 11-3A-3 with regard to access to streets. Access and the proposed street network shall be reviewed and approved by ACHD. B. PUBLIC WORKS GENERAL CONDITONS 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 Specifications. 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. 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. 4. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(MCC 9-1-28.C). 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. 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. Page 17 Item 5. ■ 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. 7. Any wells that will not continue to be used must be properly abandoned according to Idaho Well Construction Standard Rules administered by the Idaho Department of Water Resources. The Developer's Engineer shall provide a statement addressing whether there are any existing wells in the development, and if so,how they will continue to be used, or provide records of their abandonment. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 14. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 15. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 16. 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. 17. 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. 18. The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. Page 18 Item 5. 54 19. 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. 20. A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridianciU.oMIgublic works.aspx?id=272. 21. 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. 22. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond.Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. IX. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Staff finds the annexation and proposed zoning map amendment to the C-C would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan if all provisions of the Development Agreement are complied with. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed districts, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment will allow for the development of multiple types of residential and commercial uses. This will contribute to the range of housing opportunities and goods and services available within the City and more employment opportunities in the Downtown Area, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose statement of the Mixed-Use Community designation. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health,safety,and welfare; As long as staffs recommended conditions of approval are followed, staff would find this annexation and zoning should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. Page 19 Item 5. 55 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Staff ,finds the proposed zoning map amendment will not result in an adverse impact on the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. The subject property is a 17.88-acre enclave property on an intensely commercial intersection surrounded on all sides by existing development.Additionally, the new Northern Gateway Urban Renewal Plan is being developed with this property.As long as the property develops consistent with the Mixed-Use Community principles as discussed above and staffs recommended conditions of approval are followed, staff finds this annexation would be in the best interest of the City. Page 20 56 WE IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Fairview Row Townhomes (H-2021-0049) by Riley Planning Services, Located at 2065 E. Fairview Ave. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 16 attached townhome units on 1.02 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. F57 (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: September 16, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Fairview Row Townhomes (H-2021-0049) by Riley Planning Services, Located at 2065 E. Fairview Ave. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 16 attached townhome units on 1.02 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 REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING September 16,2021 Legend DATE: 0 01 Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission # FROM: Joseph Dodson,Associate Planner - 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2021-0049 -- ' Fairview Row Townhomes CUP LOCATION: The site is located at 2065 E. Fairview Avenue, in the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 8,Township 3N.,Range 1E. r s I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 16 attached townhome units on 1.02- acres of land in the C-G zoning district,by Riley Planning Services. The Applicant is also requesting Alternative Compliance for the required landscape buffer adjacent to Wilson Lane along the southern boundary of the site. Staff analysis and determination is below in the landscape section of V.B. The Director is the decision-maker on the ALT request. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 1.02 acres Zoning C-G(General Commercial) Future Land Use Designation Commercial Existing Land Use(s) Vacant single-family home. Proposed Land Use(s) Multi-Family Residential Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 1 existing building lot Phasing Plan(#of phases) Proposed as one phase. Number of Residential Units(type 16 multi-family units of units) Density(gross&net) Gross— 15.7 du/ac.;Net—61.54 du/ac. Open Space(acres,total 11,295 square feet of common open space proposed [%]/buffer/qualified) (approximately 25%); 3,114 square feet of private open space proposed via private balconies. Amenities Two(2)amenities are proposed—Plaza with a water feature and a shade structure. Page 1 Item 6. F5_9 Description Details Page Physical Features(waterways, N/A hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of May 7,2021—no attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) ORD.#721 -Butte Fence/Elliott AZ(1995) Distance to nearest City Park(+ Settler's Village—0.57 acres owned by West Ada size) Recreation;approximately 0.7 miles away. B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Not at this time;No TIS required • Requires ACHD Commission No Action es/no Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via a driveway connection to a proposed Hwy/Local)(Existing and extension of Wilson Lane,a commercial collector street Proposed) along the south boundary.The existing access to Fairview Avenue is proposed as an emergency-only access. Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross No direct interconnectivity is feasible on this site.Multiple Access parcels utilize Wilson Lane. Existing Road Network E.Fairview Avenue(an arterial street)is existing.Wilson Lane terminates at the southwest corner of the site and is proposed to be extended. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ Existing sidewalk but no existing buffer. Buffers Additional right-of-way is being dedicated for future road improvements to Fairview Avenue. Proposed Road Improvements Applicant is proposing to extend E.Wilson Lane through the site along the south boundary(approximately 100 feet in length). Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station Approximately 1.5 miles from Fire Station#4 or#1 • Fire Response Time This project lies within the Meridian Fire response time goal of 5 minutes. • Concerns The fire department only has concerns with the availability of guest parking for the site. Police Service No comments West Ada School District No comments submitted. Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services N/A • Sewer Shed Five Mile Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 14.18 • Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns • Sewer extension in Wilson Lane heading east can end at SSMH A-2 unless applicant has had discussions with the property owner to the east. • Additional 1,867 gpd committed to model • 20'easement required over sewer line. Page 2 Item 6. 60 Description Details Page Water • Distance to Services 0' • Pressure Zone 3 • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality Concerns None • Project Consistent with Water Yes Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns • Water line requires a 20'easement. • Ensure no permanent structures(trees,bushes,buildings, carports,trash receptacle walls,fences,infiltration trenches,light poles,etc.)are built within the utility easement.There appears to be some plants and trees in conflict with the easement. • There is an existing blowoff valve on the western waterline stub that needs to be shown on the plans with a callout for removal. • For blow off valve on the eastern boundary of the site add to note that the blow-off must be per standard drawing W 12. • If existing water meter and service is not going to be used it needs to be abandoned back to the water main. Page 3 � 1 1 ■� .M1111. OR •• - • - • �� ,��� - • - • t L f Yam'}y �� e - f �1111_III 1 3II� a ra Al! D - 1111111� � � __ i � �• �. 1 ° �p W FAIR !_TEW. Wes- FAIRV7 rR Q .. Q ■ oil • • - • • • 1■■1111 111� .� � • - • • • 1■■■IIIIIII 11 .It'll\ II ■�Nl • ■ Ny :II •N, �Itl mom FAIRV3�EW ■■ W FAIRV,E,W o _ ..� �� == � III ■�. �� � � � 4.1 IIIII IIIII�� li�.�, r . ,11.111 �' ry 'il anm nmr Illul i • Item 6. 62 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning Posting Date Newspaper Notification 8/27/2021 Radius notification mailed to properties within 500 feet 8/25/2021 Public hearing notice sign posted 9/3/2021 on site Nextdoor posting 8/26/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN(https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): This property is designated as Commercial on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Land Use: The Commercial designation is meant to provide 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. Multi-family residential may be allowed in some cases,but should be careful to promote a high quality of life through thoughtful site design, connectivity, and amenities. The proposed multi-family development plan depicts two 8-plex townhome buildings generally centralized in the site so that the access drive aisle proposed along the west boundary offers the vehicular access to each unit and the resident access is along the east boundary within a 20-foot wide linear open space area the length of the entire lot. Each unit is proposed as a 3-story unit with the first level being a two-car garage accounting for the required parking for each 2-bedroom unit. According to the submitted site plan,three additional surface parking spaces are proposed for guest parking in between the two multi-family buildings and abut a 40-foot wide common open space area connecting to the linear open space that provides the main entrances into the 16 units. This future land use designation anticipates commercial uses,especially when adjacent to major arterial roadways like Fairview Avenue. However,it also specifically allows multi-family residential as noted in its purpose statement above. The subject property is relatively deep that is approximately 400 feet deep and only 100 feet wide allowing only a single drive-aisle for the site regardless of proposed use. In addition, due to availability of access to Wilson Lane(a lower classified street)and safety concerns of intensifying an existing curb cut to Fairview,ACHD is not allowing any access to Fairview regardless of use. Because of the access constraints imposed by ACHD and the lack of meaningful arterial street frontage,the Applicant does not find a commercial use as viable on this property.Furthermore, directly to the west is existing commercial within multi-tenant buildings and to the east the commercial component of the Pine 43 development is under construction. The Applicant finds the circumstances of the subject site as well as the surrounding properties to be conducive to a multi-family development instead of commercial. In general, the proposed use of multi family development is listed as an allowed use within the Commercial designated areas.Due to the noted site constraints,Staff believes the multi family development does promote a thoughtful site design and should complement the existing and future commercial uses in the area. Therefore, the proposed development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. More specific comprehensive plan policy analysis is below. Page 5 Item 6. 63 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES(https:llwww.meridianciU.or /g coml2plan): 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 3-story, townhome style multi family dwellings would be a new type of multi family residential in this area of the City, including within the adjacent Pine 43 development currently under construction to the east and southeast. In addition, the placement of these units would be directly adjacent to existing and planned commercial development which allows for residents to live in an urban type of multi family development but with a smaller number of units than traditionally found adjacent to commercial uses. • "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. Furthermore, the proposed multi family residential project would be directly adjacent to multiple urban services (commercial and retail uses). • "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) Development code essentially defines infill development as a parcel with at least 80%of the adjacent land as developed land. Staff does not find 80%of the adjacent land as developed but 100%of the adjacent parcels are either developed or entitled. Staff finds the proposed multi family development should not negatively impact abutting, existing development because the proposed project meets all required dimensional and parking standards except for the singular request to have lesser landscape buffer along Wilson Lane which is being addressed with the alternative compliance request. • "Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development."(3.03.03A) The proposed development will connect to City water and sewer systems by continuing existing stubs where available. • "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels within the City over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02) The subject site is already annexed and in a widely developed area of Meridian. However, the subject site is underdeveloped as the existing single-family home is no longer occupied and is located adjacent to existing and planned development. The Applicant believes the proposed development is appropriate • "Require collectors consistent with the ACHD Master Street Map(MSM), generally at/near the mid- mile location within the Area of City Impact."(6.01.03B) The proposed development will connect to and extend E. Wilson Lane, a commercial collector street along the southern boundary of the subject site. This extension is a key piece in connecting Locust Grove to N. Webb, the main access point to the Pine 43 development to the east and southeast of the subject site. Despite not being at the mid-mile mark, Wilson Lane is an existing and planned collector Page 6 Item 6. ■ street that would benefit the circulation element of this entire geographic area if it were to be connected to N. Webb as planned. Overall, Staff and ACHD agree that the public road system adjacent to the site is easily capable of handling the minimal additional traffic generated by the proposed development. Based on the analysis above, Staff finds the proposed plan is generally consistent with the vision of the Comprehensive Plan for this area of the City. B. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE(UDC)ANALYSIS Conditional Use Permit(CUP)—Multi-family Development(UDC 11-4-3-27) Specific Use Standards: The proposed multi-family development consists of 16 multi-family residential units within two 8- plex townhome buildings. Multi-family residential is subject to conditional use permit approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission within the existing C-G zoning district and subject to specific use standards outlined in UDC 11-4-3-27 and below: 11-4-3-27—Multi-Family Development: A. Purpose: 1. To create multi-family housing that is safe and convenient and that enhances the quality of life of its residents. 2. To create quality buildings and designs for multi-family development that enhance the visual character of the community. 3. To create building and site design in multi-family development that is sensitive to and well integrated with the surrounding neighborhood. 4. To create open space areas that contribute to the aesthetics of the community,provide an attractive setting for buildings, and provide safe,interesting outdoor spaces for residents. B. Site Design: 1. Buildings shall provide a minimum setback of ten feet(10')unless a greater setback is otherwise required by this title and/or title 10 of this Code. Building setbacks shall take into account windows, entrances,porches and patios, and how they impact adjacent properties.Proposed project/site design complies with this requirement. 2. All on-site service areas,outdoor storage areas,waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. The site plan does not depict where trash disposal areas are but the Applicant will be required to comply with this standard. All proposed transformer/utility vaults shall also comply with this requirement. 3. A minimum of eighty(80) square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks, and/or enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other accessways shall not count toward this requirement. In circumstances where strict adherence to such standard would create inconsistency with the purpose statements of this section,the Director may consider an alternative design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions as set forth in section 11-5B-5 of this title.According to the submitted floor plans and Applicant's narrative, each apartment is proposed with approximately 200 square feet of private open space in the form of private patios and decks for each unit. Page 7 Item 6. 65 4. For the purposes of this section,vehicular circulation areas,parking areas, and private usable open space shall not be considered common open space. These areas were not included in the common open space calculations for the site. 5.No recreational vehicles, snowmobiles,boats or other personal recreation vehicles shall be stored on the site unless provided for in a separate, designated and screened area.Applicant shall comply with this requirement. 6. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. Based on the number of bedrooms per unit(16 two-bedroom units), a minimum of 32 parking spaces should be provided with at least half of those spaces covered or within a garage. The Applicant has proposed a total of 35 parking spaces with each unit having a tuck-under two-car garage and three(3)surface parking spaces intended for guest parking. Therefore, the proposed parking is in excess of code requirements for total number of spaces and the number of covered spaces required. It should be noted that Wilson Lane is a commercial collector and posted with no parking signs,so guest parking will be limited in this development. 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) This development is proposed with less than 20 units, so Staff finds this section is not applicable. C. Common Open Space Design Requirements: 1. A minimum area of outdoor common open space shall be provided as follows: a. One hundred fifty(150) square feet for each unit containing five hundred(500)or less square feet of living area. b. Two hundred fifty(250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred(500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area. c. Three hundred fifty(350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two hundred(1,200)square feet of living area. Each unit is over 1,200 square feet in living area according to the Applicant's narrative. Therefore, 350 square feet of common open space is required per unit in accord with the requirements above which equates to a minimum area of 5,600 square feet. 2. Common open space shall be not less than four hundred(400) square feet in area, and shall have a minimum length and width dimension of twenty feet(20'). Proposed open space submitted as meeting this requirement has been reviewed.According to Staffs calculations, the Applicant has proposed approximately 10,500 square feet of qualified common open space exceeding the minimum requirements. The proposed open space consists of linear open space along the east boundary(at least 20 feet wide) and a plaza area in the center of the development. Page 8 Item 6. 66 Overall, the submitted open space exceeds the specific use standard requirements.Staff finds the proposed open space is adequate for the proposed development, especially in combination with the pedestrian connectivity along the east boundary which will be directly adjacent to commercial development to the east.In addition, the proposed open space vastly exceeds the minimum requirement by being proposed at nearly twice the required amount. These factors should provide for adequate open space opportunities for future residents. 3. In phased developments,common open space shall be provided in each phase of the development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units. The proposed development is to be developed in one(1)phase, according to the Applicant; this requirement is not applicable. 4.Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process, common open space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets unless separated from the street by a berm or constructed barrier at least four feet(4)in height,with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access. (Ord. 09-1394, 3-3-2009, eff.retroactive to 2-4-2009).No area adjacent to the abutting collector and arterial streets are included in the common open space calculations. D. Site Development Amenities: 1. All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space and recreation amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows: a. Quality of life: (1)Clubhouse. (2)Fitness facilities. (3)Enclosed bike storage. (4)Public art such as a statue. 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. Page 9 Item 6. 67 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 16 proposed units, the Applicant is required to provide at least two(2) qualified amenities.According to the submitted plans, the Applicant has proposed two (2)qualifying amenities,from two separate categories as required by code. The Applicant has proposed a plaza area with a water feature and a shade structure. Staff finds the proposed amenities to be adequate in serving the proposed multi family development especially when considering the development's proximity to commercial development which should allow for additional recreational opportunities. E.Landscaping Requirements: 1. Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. 2. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The foundation landscaping shall meet the following minimum standards: a. The landscaped area shall be at least three feet(Y)wide. b.For every three(3) linear feet of foundation,an evergreen shrub having a minimum mature height of twenty-four inches(24") shall be planted. c. Ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area. The submitted landscape plan shows compliance with the specific use standard landscape requirements. However, these standards will be further verified at the time of CZC submittal(see Exhibit VII.B). Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The proposed development is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-G zoning district and those within the specific use standards for Multi-family Development discussed above(UDC 11-4-3-27).As noted above, the submitted plans show compliance with all dimensional and specific use standards, including but not limited to, building height, setbacks, accesses, and parking count. Access(UDC 11-3A-3): Access to the development is proposed from E. Wilson Lane, a collector street proposed to be extended from the property's west boundary to its east boundary along the southern boundary. The existing access to Fairview Avenue is proposed and required to be closed and a new one will be added along the west boundary that will be an emergency-only access. The drive aisle is proposed at 26 feet wide due to the proposed 3-story building height; it is proposed to connect from Wilson Lane to Fairview Avenue(with only an emergency access)and provides the access to the tuck-under garages for each unit. Please review the Community Metrics section at the beginning of the report for an overview of the access and transportation facts of the proposed development. ACHD has not submitted their staff report to the City but Staff has discussed this project with ACHD in the interim. ACHD generally supports the Applicant's proposals noted above. ACHD will require some additional right-of-way dedication for Fairview Avenue that the Applicant has already taken into Page 10 Item 6. 68 account in their setbacks and site plan. In addition,ACHD has expressed approval of the proposed emergency access to Fairview but will not allow any type ofpublic access. The Pine 43 development directly to the east is currently under construction and will further extend Wilson Lane from this property to N. Webb. The timing of this is not explicitly known but should coincide relatively with the construction timeline of this project if approved. The subject property is the last property to be entitled that has Wilson Lane frontage so it is an integral piece to having it connect fully from Locust Grove to N. Webb and provide a backage road to Fairview Avenue for both residents in this area and commercial lots along the arterial. Therefore, Staff supports the access and transportation element of the proposed development. Road Improvements: The Applicant is required to dedicate additional right-of-way for Fairview Avenue and extend E.Wilson Lane along the southern property boundary to terminate at its east boundary.No temporary turnaround is required, according to ACHD,because the extension is less than 150 feet in length—as noted,the property is deep and not wide.No other road improvements are proposed or required. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): The Applicant is proposing to maintain the existing 5-foot sidewalk along E.Fairview Avenue(future ACHD road widening projects may alter its location and/or width) and construct a 5-foot wide attached sidewalk along the north side of the Wilson Lane extension at the south end of the site. Collector streets generally require detached sidewalk but the Wilson Lane road sections to the west have attached sidewalk and maintaining this design better ensures continuity of pedestrian pathways along this corridor. All other sidewalks proposed are shown as at least 5-feet wide adjacent to the multi-family residential building and are shown to connect to a 5-foot sidewalk that is proposed to go the entire depth of the property and connect Fairview to the Wilson Lane extension. These sidewalks also connect to the guest parking spaces and the plaza in the center of the development containing the shade structure and water feature. Staff finds the proposed sidewalks and their placement should offer superior pedestrian connectivity throughout the site and to adjacent sites. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 25-foot landscape buffer to E. Fairview Avenue is required and is required to be vegetated per UDC 11-3B-7. The submitted landscape plans show compliance with this requirement in buffer width and landscaping materials. The submitted landscape plan depicts linear open space along the east boundary of the site and is shown with sidewalks, grass, shrubs, and trees. The correct number of trees appear to be shown in this open space area and should provide both visual interest and shade for the future residents. In addition, there is a 5-foot wide area of landscaping along the west boundary adjacent to the drive aisle in compliance with UDC 11-3B-8. However, this landscape strip is only shown with a few existing trees and shrubs. UDC 11-3B-8 requires trees to be located no more than 35 linear feet apart throughout the buffer—trees may also be grouped together where necessary and visually appealing. Because of the proximity of the commercial building directly to the west, Staff understands large trees are likely not feasible or desirable in this landscape bed. However, Stafffinds Class I ornamental trees spaced appropriately to comply with this code section are feasible and should be included in this landscape bed.At the time of CZC submittal, the Applicant should correct the landscape plans to show compliance with this requirement. A 20-foot landscape buffer to the extended E.Wilson Lane is also required. The Applicant is requesting alternative compliance to Unified Development Code(UDC) 11-2A-6& 11-3B-7, which dictates the minimum width and landscaping requirements for landscape buffers along streets. Staff s analysis and decision is below: Page 11 Item 6. ■ As discussed throughout the report, the subject site is deeper than it is wide(approximately 400 feet deep and 100 feet wide) which affects building footprints when accounting for all other dimensional and access requirements. The Applicant states in order to fit the proposed buildings, the required access, appropriate open space, and other landscaping and buffers, a reduction to the buffer to the extension of E. Wilson Lane is needed.As a byproduct of these spatial constraints, the proposed buildings are thin and long(north-south) which makes the linear length of the requested buffer reduction approximately 40 feet in length. So,for 40 linear feet adjacent to the southern building, the Applicant is proposing a 6-foot landscape buffer behind the 5-foot attached sidewalk. In lieu of the required 20 foot buffer, the Applicant is proposing a larger landscape bed adjacent to the building with larger shrubs (at least 3 feet in height). Because this area is at least S feet wide, Staff recommends the Applicant include at least one additional tree in this area of the buffer to help buffer any activity of Wilson Lane. In addition, the remaining linear length of the required buffer(approximately 30 feet) is part of the large linear open space area that connects from Wilson Lane to Fairview, vastly larger than the required 20 feet. Due to the relatively small impact of the short linear length of the request per the findings above and a belief that a reduction in any of the other project aspects noted above would be more of a detriment to the project than a reduction in this buffer,Staff supports the Alternative Compliance request. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, I1-3A-7): All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. According to the submitted landscaping plans, no fencing appears to be proposed; any future fencing shall comply with UDC 11-3A-7. Storm Drainage(UDC 11-3A-18 : An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. Storm drainage will be proposed with a future Certificate of Zoning Compliance application and shall be constructed to City and ACHD design criteria. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the apartment complex but no formal Design Review was submitted. All multi-family development requires Administrative Design Review prior to obtaining building permits so,at the time of that submittal Staff will analyze conformance with the Architectural Standards Manual.An application for Certificate of Zoning Compliance is also required to be submitted along with Design Review for this entire development. Initial review of the conceptual building elevations shows 3-story buildings that combine different field materials, modulation, and material coloring. The main materials shown are stucco, lap siding, and stone cladding. The elevations also show second and third story decks that offer both recreation and a different architectural element to the elevations. Preliminary review of the elevations show compliance with the Architectural Standards Manual but Staff will confirm compliance with the future Design Review application. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the of the requested Conditional Use Permit per the conditions of approval included in Section VIII in accord with the Findings in Section IX. The Director has approved the ALT request. Page 12 Item 6. F70 VII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan(dated: 8/02/2021) WILSON LN z - A: _ a j �i I ® a 77p E.FAIRVIEW AVENUE' -4 yO a cuErm - ° N TTRADEWINDS BUILDING COMPANY b1'a FAIRVIEW APARTMENTS a� Page 13 Item 6. F 1 3f1N3AY H1IMI VJ'J w #A I i P?lD�x4T�16iItl.� 4 s k 14' al 19'P Y � M R � 3 A'. 4 N 1 NOSlIM' ' G v V� Page 14 Item 6. ■ B. Landscape Plan(dated: 5/24/2021) v:r nil gil Lj - a x i Bp � -- '.+,fit,�o-r=:.�, .•�� ¢ LU • yi �} I , -- - - y jNVI NOSILY w��w IR ���� �:.+•�x5.�..---hT Page 15 Item 6. F 73 C. Conceptual Building Elevations and Floor Plan 9P 7 A I ION 'ILI 444 - 51, Lr-ILSON-N r � � � =ALL E, _ o�ES,w�a�,Ea��,� Q�� d" 2�FAIR-b LOOKING SE 3 WILSON LN LOOKING q) I n El L3 n EJ n El 0 �: ELEVATICIAS r] 7"77 Page 16 Item 6. ■ ❑ ❑ s� Ll NORTE ELEVATION pp �4 0 c f LL _ r IFfiloNnL FFAL'w� e0.a, Oa' 01� WILSON LN LOOKING NE =FAIRVIP LOOKINGSW P nn F-1n p' nniFl Eppp fl nni �I 1-1 11 �uupnn11 ' nn u��xx uuIi 7i� 7 I�F m q R �I F Il I7 �l 1 q j III I� - ., EXTERIOR I � I ',,, _ ELEVATIONS J _ l C 0 QG - II II 'I II I I I II I II I I 'I II I' I �— - F q-212 1 W-SI EL-VAIUN Page 17 Item 6. ■ 's r 1 I �I I II neUdesign UNITZ' UNITY UNITY UNITY UNITYi UNIT i UNITY i UNIT r, T 75T FLOOR-OVERALL PLAN r. F_ I I o I I l UNIT Z'� UNITY UNIT Y UNIT Y UNITY IUNITY UNITY UNIT o _ oI I �Ji a 2SE' FLOOR OVERALL PLAN U O O n O \J \HJ (J NU ITZ UNIT Y,. UNIT Y UNIT Y - UNITY -,� III UNITY,- III UNITY UNITZ J ❑ hI f pig,' VIA' ❑ ❑ �I ❑— _ ❑ lI, ❑ III ❑ � .❑ � .F OVERALL PLANS 3""rLOOR-0vERALL FLAN Page 18 Item 6. 76 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION Conditional Use Permit(CUP): 1. The Applicant shall adhere to all previous conditions of approval associated with this site: ORD. #721 -Butte Fence/Elliott AZ(1995) 2. With the future Certificate of Zoning Compliance submittal,the Applicant shall submit a revised site plan with the following revisions: a. Depict the pedestrian crossings across the drive aisle(at the north and the south ends of the site)to be constructed with bricks,pavers, colored or stamped concrete or similar to clearly delineate the pedestrian walkway. 3. With the future Certificate of Zoning Compliance submittal,the Applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan with the following revisions: a. Depict the required number of trees along the west boundary adjacent to the drive aisle,per UDC 11-3B-8. b. Per the Alternative Compliance approval, depict an additional tree within the reduced buffer area adjacent to E.Wilson Lane. c. Revise the plan to match the revised site plan—show the correct number of units and dimensions of proposed buildings. 4. The Applicant shall obtain Administrative Design Review and Certificate of Zoning Compliance approvals for the multi-family residential buildings prior to submittal for any building permits for the residential buildings. 5. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-G zoning district. 6. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11- 3C-6 for multi-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 7. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. 8. Provide a pressurized irrigation system consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15, UDC 11-3B-6 and MCC 9-1-28. 9. Upon completion of the landscape installation, a written Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Division verifying all landscape improvements are in substantial compliance with the approved landscape plan as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14. 10. The Applicant has a continual obligation to maintain compliance with the Multi-family Development Specific Use Standards outlined within this report and in UDC 11-4-3-27. 11. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy on any building,the Applicant shall provide proof of the required maintenance agreement to the Planning Division in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27—all multifamily developments shall record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including,but not limited to, structures,parking, common areas, and other development features. 12. The conditional use approval shall become null and void unless otherwise approved by the City if the applicant fails to 1) commence the use, satisfy the requirements, acquire building permits and Page 19 Item 6. 77 commence construction within two years asset forth in UDC 11-5B-6F.1; or 2)obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F.4. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 No Permanent structures(buildings, carports,trash receptacle walls, fences,infiltration trenches, lightpoles,trees, shrubs,etc.)can be built within the utility easement. 1.2 Sewer in Wilson Ln can end at SSMH A-1,unless owner has had a specific discussions and/or agreement with the property owner to the east. 1.3 There is an existing blowoff on the western waterline that needs to be shown on the plans, and called out for removal. 1.4 The eastern portion of the site shows a blowoff must be built per standard drawing W 12. 1.5 Any unused services and mains must be abandoned. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department,and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet,if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code(MCC),the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s)for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility,or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works),a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2"x 11"map with bearings and distances(marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. All easements must be submitted,reviewed,and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches,canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per Page 20 Item 6. F78] UDC 11-3A-6. hi performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at(208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. 2.11 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. 2.12 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. 2.13 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.14 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.15 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.16 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. 2.17 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. 2.18 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. 2.19 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. 2.20 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. 2.21 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 Page 21 Item 6. 79 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. 2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond.Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=23611 S&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX D. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) No staff report submitted at this time. IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit Findings(UDC 11-5B-6D: The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. If all conditions of approval are met, Staff finds the submitted site plan shows compliance with all dimensional and development regulations in the C-G zoning district in which it resides. 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 use of multi family residential is harmonious with the comprehensive plan designation of Commercial and the requirements of this title when all site and area analysis is included. 3. That the design,construction,operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Despite the proposed use being different than the commercial uses directly to the west and those planned to the east, Staff finds the design, construction, and proposed operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and should not adversely change the essential character of the same area, so long as the Applicant constructs the proposed buildings as proposed. Furthermore, Staff finds the proposed use may amplify and activate the adjacent commercial uses due to the proposed site design. 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, if it complies with all conditions of approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Page 22 Item 6. 80 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 adequately by essential public facilities and services because all services are readily available. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. All public facilities and services are readily available for the subject site so Staff finds that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community or create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise,smoke,fumes,glare or odors. Staff finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons,property, or the general welfare because it will not have public access to E. Fairview Avenue and should not involve any other activities, etc. that will be detrimental to the surrounding area or persons. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction,loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord.05-1170,8-30-2005,eff.9-15- 2005). Staff is unaware of any natural, scenic, or historic features within the development area, therefore, Staff finds the proposed use should not result in damage of any such features. B. Alternative Compliance Findings (UDC 11-5B-5E): The Director's decision is based on the following Findings: 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements are not feasible; or The Director finds strict adherence to the requirements in UDC 11-2A-6 for the landscape common lot width is feasible but not ideal because it would either create a shift in the adjacent building and reduce the more usable open space plaza area and remove a guest parking space or require a loss of one unit which Staff finds excessive in the case of this project. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and The submitted plans show landscaping equal to the requirements of the buffer except for missing one additional tree. If this tree is added, the required landscaping materials will be equal to those required within a wider buffer. Furthermore, the remaining linear length of the required buffer (approximately 30 feet) is part of the large linear open space area that connects from Wilson Lane to Fairview, vastly larger than the required 20 feet. Therefore, the Director finds the proposed alternative means of compliance provides at least an equal means for meeting the requirements of landscape buffers along streets with Staffs recommended addition of one tree. 3. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of surrounding properties. The Director finds the alternative means of compliance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of surrounding properties, existing and Page 23 Item 6. 81 proposed. The proposed landscape buffer should offer adequate mitigation, access, and visual interest from Wilson Lane along the south boundary. Page 24 82 E IDIAN*,----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Hatch Industrial (H-2021-0026) by Hatch Design Architecture, Located on the East Side of N. Linder Rd. and the North Side of W. Franklin Rd., South of the Railroad Tracks, and at 160 N. Linder Rd. A. Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the future land use designation on 42 +/- acres of land from Mixed Use —Community to Industrial. B. Request: Annexation of 1.59 acres of land with an I-L (Light Industrial) zoning district. Item 7. F83 (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Sonya Allen Meeting Date: September 16, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Hatch Industrial (H-2021-0026) by Hatch Design Architecture, Located on the East Side of N. Linder Rd. and the North Side of W. Franklin Rd., South of the Railroad Tracks, and at 160 N. Linder Rd. A. Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the future land use designation on 42 +/- acres of land from Mixed Use - Community to Industrial. B. Request: Annexation of 1.59 acres of land with an I-L (Light Industrial) zoning district. 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 September 16,2021 Legend DATE: Project Lacfl�iar TO: Planning&Zoning Commission ■ a FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner LEHE 208-884-5533 Of SUBJECT: H-2021-0026 Hatch Industrial—CPAM,AZ LOCATION: CPAM: East side of N. Linder Rd., south of the railroad tracks, and north side of W. Franklin Rd. L AZ: 160 N. Linder Rd. (Parcel No. EM R3579000045 &R3579000040; Lots 8 & / - - 9,Heppers Acre Subdivision) SW 1/4 of Section 12,Township 3N., Range 1 W. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map(CPAM)to change the future land use designation on 42+/-acres of land from Mixed Use—Community to Industrial; and Annexation of(AZ) of 1.59 acres of land with an I-L(Light Industrial)zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 42+/-acres(CPAM); 1.59 acres(AZ) Future Land Use Designation MU-C(Mixed Use—Community) Existing Land Use Mix of residential,industrial,childcare facility and healthcare uses Proposed Land Use(s) Storage facility&future industrial uses Current Zoning or R1 in Ada County,L-O(Limited Office),I-L(Light Industrial)and C-C(Community Business) Proposed Zoning I-L(Light Industrial) Physical Features(waterways, I None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Page 1 Item 7. F85 Neighborhood meeting date;#of 3/30/21;4 attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) 270 N.Linder Rd. [AZ-09-004(Ord.#10-1442);CZC-10-071 —The Baby Place];Parcel#51212336031 (Ord.#387 JMK Properties AZ);444 N.Linder Rd. (AZ Ord#827—Kathleen &Wendell Lawrence) B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no • Existing Conditions Linder Rd.is improved with 5-travel lanes,vertical curb, gutter&7' attached sidewalk.No additional improvements or right-of-way dedication is required with this application. • CIP/IFYWP No further improvements required. Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is depicted via Linder Rd. for the property proposed to Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) be annexed with a cross-access driveway to adjacent properties to the north&south. Proposed Road Improvements None Fire Service No comment. Police Service No comment. C. Project Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map (fLegend M�€ (fLegend 0 e Prajeci Laoa-Ran ® I Project Lcc v i h sihy esih i_ ploy�rr`Yenf t .High D S Id IG U-Res 10�� ,Iry Page 2 Item 7. F 6 Zoning Map Planned Development Map (fLegend LII mm 0 (Legend ��€ o ( Pro"ea- Lac❑=or �� 1R "�� L ( Project Lflca=arRE I!IL R1 F ;-I city Limik -O �L-O L-O - -5 R- L� — Planned Pumels sTTn I-L I-.L 3 F-1 i= - r � 9H E R R R-4 - RUT III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Steve Thiessen,Hatch Design Architecture—200 W. 36' St., Garden City,ID 83714 B. Owner: Ronald Hatch—P.O. Box 776, Meridian,ID 83680 C. Representative: Jeff Hatch,Hatch Design Architecture—200 W. 36t'St., Garden City,ID 83714 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 8/27/2021 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 8/25/2021 Public hearing notice sign posted 9/1/2021 on site Nextdoor posting 8/26/2021 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATION: This property is currently designated as Mixed Use—Community (MU-C)on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) contained in the Comprehensive Plan (see map in Section VIII.A). The purpose of this designation is to allocate areas where community-serving uses and dwellings Page 3 Item 7. 87 are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses, including residential, and to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings.Non-residential buildings in these areas have a tendency to be larger than in Mixed Use Neighborhood(MU-N) areas. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of the variety that people will mainly travel by car to,but also walk or bike to(up to 3 or 4 miles). Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood are encouraged. Developments are encouraged to be designed according to the conceptual MU-C plan depicted in Figure 3C. (See pgs. 3-11 through 3-16.) PROPOSED LAND USE DESIGNATION:The proposed FLUM designation for this property is Industrial(see map in Section VIII.A). The Industrial designation allows a range of uses that support industrial and commercial activities. Industrial uses may include warehouses, storage units,light manufacturing, flex,and incidental retail and office uses. In some cases uses may include processing,manufacturing,warehouses, storage units, and industrial support activities(see pg. 3-11). There is an existing childcare facility located on the property at 444 N. Linder Rd.,zoned L-O; a birthing center/women's healthcare facility located at 270 N. Linder Rd.,zoned C-C;vacant/undeveloped land at the northeast corner of Linder/Franklin,zoned C-C; and warehouse/industrial uses on the eastern portion of the site in Creamline Park,zoned I-L. The properties entitled with commercial/office zoning will be allowed to continue to operate as-is and/or develop with commercial uses as allowed by UDC Table 11-2B-2. The remainder of the 1+/-acre properties within the CPAM area that front on N. Linder Rd. are developed with single-family residential homes. If the CPAM is approved,the residential properties,when redeveloped, should be rezoned to I-L or I-H and develop with uses allowed in the applicable district as listed in UDC Table 11-2C--2. Staff believes it would be difficult for the residential properties fronting on Linder Rd. to redevelop consistent with the current MU-C FLUM designation due to the depth of the properties at 320+/-feet and the type of development that would likely occur(strip commercial buildings); it's likely these properties would develop on a"piece by piece"basis and not as a larger integrated mixed use planned development. Because industrial uses exist on the eastern portion of the site,residential uses wouldn't integrate well or be compatible with existing uses and interconnectivity between uses isn't feasible. Development would also not be consistent with the General Mixed Use Concept Diagram in the Comprehensive Plan(see pg. 3-12) as the site is not deep enough to provide the transition in uses shown on the concept diagram. The land on the west side of N. Linder Road and to the east of the CPAM area is designated as Industrial on the FLUM and zoned I-L, except for one parcel abutting the east boundary of the site fronting on W. Franklin Rd. which is designated Commercial and zoned I-L. Because of the industrial nature of the overall area south of the railroad tracks on the north side of Franklin Rd.,the need for more industrial land, and Staff s belief that industrial uses would be more compatible with existing industrial uses, Staff is supportive of the CPAM request. 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): • "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 of the property proposed to be annexed with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. No development is proposed on the remainder of the CPAMproperty at this time. • "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) Page 4 Item 7. ■ The proposed industrial use will be required to provide a landscaped buffer along property lines adjacent to residential uses (i.e. to the north and south)with development per UDC Table I1-2C-3. • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land." (3.07.00) The proposed industrial development should be compatible with existing industrial uses to the east and west. The required buffer to residential land uses to the north and south should minimize conflicts between land uses. • "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 infill industrial development shouldn't negatively impact abutting uses as other industrial uses exist to the east and west, and a landscaped buffer is required along the north and south property boundaries to residential uses which should minimize conflicts. • "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 be required to connect to City water and sewer systems with development;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.)."(3.07.01 C) A 25 foot wide street buffer is required to be provided with development along N. Linder Rd., an arterial street,per UDC Table 11-2C-3, landscaped per the standards in UDC 11-3B-7C. • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G) Curb, gutter and sidewalk was recently constructed with the road widening project along Linder Rd. Hook-up to City water and sewer service is required with development. • "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 the provision of 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 42+/-acres of land from Mixed Use—Community(MU-C)to Industrial. An exhibit map showing the existing and proposed FLUM designation is included in Section VIII.A. Approval of the proposed amendment to Industrial will accomplish the following: 1)it will allow the existing residential/commercial properties within the site to redevelop with industrial uses which should be more compatible with existing industrial uses on the site and adjacent to the site; 2)industrial uses should be more compatible with existing industrial uses than uses allowed in the MU-C designation, which should minimize conflicts between land uses; 3)for the properties already zoned I-L and developed with industrial uses on the eastern portion of the site in Creamline Park,the amendment will "clean-up"the FLUM for this area so that the land use designation coincides with the existing approved Page 5 Item 7. 89 uses; and the amendment will allow more industrial uses to develop which are needed in the City. For these reasons, Staff supports the request. B. ANNEXATION(AZ) The Applicant proposes to annex 1.59 acres of land, including right-of-way to the section line of N. Linder Rd., from the R1 zoning district in Ada County to the I-L zoning district in the City consistent with the proposed FLUM amendment to Industrial. A legal description and exhibit map for the annexation area is included in Section VIII.B. The subject property is part of an enclave area surrounded by City annexed property. Annexation of this land will provide more efficient provision of City services. Industrial uses exists to the west across N. Linder Rd. and to the east; single-family residences exist to the north and south in Ada County. The Applicant proposes to develop the 1.41-acre property with a 19,975 square foot 10-unit industrial building to lease to contractors,mostly for storage with the potential for each space to have a small office and restroom. A warehouse use is principally permitted in the I-L district;professional services (i.e. offices)are allowed as an accessory use per UDC Table 11-2C-2. Flex space is also a principally permitted use in the I-L district subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-18. Conceptual Development Plan: The conceptual development plan shown in Section VIII.0 depicts the proposed structure, associated parking, driveway access and drive-aisles within the site. An existing 30- foot wide easement is depicted along the east boundary of the site on the Heppers Acre Subdivision plat. Access: One(1)driveway access to the site is proposed via N. Linder Rd. with driveway stubs to the properties to the north and south for future cross-access upon redevelopment of those properties. A cross-access easement should be recorded granting access to/from N.Linder Rd.through the subject property for those properties; a copy of this easement should be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for this site. The minimum drive aisle width for 90 degree parking with 2-way drive aisles is 25-feet per UDC Table 11-3C-5. Sidewalk/Pathway: An attached 7-foot wide sidewalk was recently constructed along N. Linder Rd. along the frontage of this site. The Pathways Plan designates a 10-foot wide detached multi-use pathway in this area. Because the sidewalk was recently constructed, Staff does not recommend it's removed and a new pathway constructed in its place at this time; however, Staff does recommend a 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement is recorded for the pathway. Parking: Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C- 6 for industrial uses(i.e. 1 space for every 2,000 square feet of gross floor area). Based on a 19,975 square foot building, a minimum of nine(9) spaces are required. A total of 30 spaces are depicted on the conceptual development plan,which exceeds the minimum number of spaces by 21. Landscaping: A 25-foot wide street buffer is required to be constructed along N. Linder Rd., an arterial street,measured from back of sidewalk; the buffer should be landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. Parking lot landscaping is required per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C. A minimum 5-foot wide buffer should be provided along the east property boundary unless the requirement is reduced or waived by the Director for truck maneuvering areas as set forth in UDC 11-313-8C.1 a. A 25-foot wide buffer to residential land uses is required per UDC Table 11-2C-3, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C, residential uses exist to the north and south of this property. The Applicant requests City Council approval of a reduced buffer width of 5 feet adjacent to residential uses as allowed by UDC 11-3B-9C.2 with notice to surrounding property owners.A reduction to the buffer width shall not affect building setbacks; all structures shall be set back from the property line a minimum of the buffer width required in the I-L district(i.e.25-feet). Page 6 Item 7. 90 Landscaping is required along the multi-use pathway adjacent to N. Linder Rd.per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. There are existing trees on this site that may require mitigation if removed per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-I0C.S. Staff recommends the Applicant contact Matt Perkins,the City Arborist,to schedule a site inspection prior to removal of any trees from the site to determine mitigation requirements. Elevations: Conceptual building elevations were not submitted for the industrial building. The design of the structure is required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual (ASM). Staff recommends the design is required to comply with the design standards for commercial buildings rather than industrial buildings because the property fronts on an arterial street(i.e.Linder Rd.) and will be highly visible.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 submittal of an application for a building permit. The City may require a development agreement(DA) in conjunction with a annexation 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. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map and Annexation with the requirement of a Development Agreement per the provisions in Section IX in accord with the Findings in Section X. Page 7 Item 7. Fq_1 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Future Land Use Map—Adopted&Proposed Land Uses Date:7130/2021 Adopted Land Uses k 500 'LOCO 0Feet 7 High DensJ!Y L Residential Mixed Employment General Indusfrial Mu-C - Legend `TMISAP Boundary I Law Density Residential Medium Density Residential _ Med-High Density Residential Commercial Office Civic - High Density Residential d-High _ - Commercial y y dent1a III . - Office - Industrial -= -- Civic Proposed Land Uses Old Town . I Mixed Use Neighborhood qe - 0 Mixed Use Community High Density Residential - Mixed Use Regional - Mixed Use Nan-Residential — ® Mixed Use-Interchange F - Law Density Employment - High Density Employment Mixed Employment _ Mixe d—F7 _J MlJ-Res Employment— General MlJ-Cam Indusfrial ® Lifestyle Center 1 r ® Qffice Medium AAed-High Civic Mu-Com DensifyJ Commercial Density R si tial �ResidenfiaY Mu-Res - .. __ --------- Page 8 Item 7. F92 B. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit Map iTrc ACCURATE � �p SURVEYING & MAPPINR '�fRV4�•�' Annexation Description A parcel of land being all of Lots 8 and 9 of Heppers Acre Subdivision as recorded in Book 19 of Plats at Pages 1298 and 1299,Records of Ada County,said parcel is located in the Southwest Cluarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 12,Township 3 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the found 4 inch aluminum cap monument at the corner common to Sections 11, 12, 13 and 14,T3N, R1W from which the found 3 inch brass cap monument in asphalt at the quarter corner common to Sections 11 and 12,T3N, R1W bears N 00'32'39' E a distance of 2645.87 feet;thence N DG'32'39" E along the section line for a distance of 646.92 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence N 89'41'22" E for a distance of 40.00 feet to a found 5/811,inch iron pin labeled PLS 11779 at the northwest corner of Lot 8; Thence N 89`41'22" E along the line common to Lots 7 and 8 for a distance of 315.19 feet to a set 5j8'inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11453 at the northeast corner of Lot 8; Thence S 00'46'31" W for a distance of 192,00 feet to a found Y'inch iron pin,replaced with a 5J8th inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence 5 88`31'38"W along the line common to Lots 9 and 10 for a distance of 314.52 feet to a set 5/V inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463 at the southwest corner of Lot 9; Thence 5 88'31'38"W for a distance of 40.02 feet to a point on the section line; Thence N 00'31'39" E along the section fine for a distance of 199.18 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Parcel contains 1.593 acres, or 69,379 square feet, more or less. G d 11163 ��,�•J7•Z#fl ¢'port+ " t� i 1602 W_ Hays St- Suite 306 Boise, ID 83702 Phone:208-488-4227 www.accu rates u rveyors.co rn Page 9 Item 7. F 3 HX.ffII31T A-P LOTS 8 & 9, HEPPER.S ACRE SUBDIVISION, BOOK 19 OF PLATS, PAGES 1298-1299, ADA COUN TY RECORDS, LYING W THIN THE SW 114 OF THESIN 114 OF SEC TI DN I Z T_JN, R.I W., B.+IA. COUNTY OF ADA STATE OF I€}AHO W PINE AVE. 114 CORNER 11 12 CF&F INST No, 172085074 07 Z SCALE I"=100' 40 O N 89*4 1 '22" F 355. 19 �i 40.00' 375. r O rQ �r Ct IN 1.59J Acres, x 69,3T9 Square Feet 4).02 314.52 � NEPPFRS ACRE SU00iVfSJGN � � 11463 � f+ �� 010U a I � LEGEND Lo 4•Zl•z �q 1 � _ - ANNEX BOUNDARY C� 14- }t SEC T'IQIV LINE PARCEL LINE PLATTED LOT LINE SECTION CORNER 11 12 W FRANKLIN RD. FOUND 3" BRASS CAP M-WYt,?ENT CF&F INS T - -- No. 2016-11D3S4 74 13 FOUND 4" ALUMINUM GAP MON. D .SET 518" IRON PIN W+PTH 2" ALUMINUM CAP, PLS 114,63 A CALCULA TED POINT 0 FOUNO DISTURBED 112" IRON PIN. A.M � I LJATE REMO vEQ AND REPLACED MTH S/9' o IRON filly. W9774 2" ALUMINUM CAP, ti SDRvEYING & mAPp11� 6 PLS 11463 1602 W.Hays Street I • FOUND 112" IRON PIN, k��' (20a)488-4227 -raise,Idaho 83742 MTH PLASTIC CAP, AS NOTED s 4 ;C'. www.accuratesurveyvrs.corn (9� PLATTED LOT NUMBER DAT01-INE,2021 JOB 21-211 Page 10 Item 7. F94 C. Conceptual Development Plan F. rn rn rn r! LAND- APE BUFFER LANDSCAPE 0 24'-Cm BUFFER 50y ao J , MEC N z 235-V ,7% 11 F .-30'-W 25 - ----------- - -------------- LA-1 UTILrry EkSEMEtfr - X ----------- NEW DEVELOPMENT FUR: HATCH INDUSTRIAL LGO N.LINGER RD.,MERIDIAN.ID.83642 Page 11 Item 7. 95 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s)at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development plan included in Section VIII,Unified Development Code standards, design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual and the provisions contained herein. b. Future structure(s) on the site shall comply with the non-residential design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual for commercial districts (i.e. CD). c. A cross-access easement shall be granted to the abutting properties to the north(Parcel #R3579000034)and south(Parcel#R3579000050) for access to/from N. Linder Rd. through the subject property; a copy of the recorded easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for this site. d. A 25-foot wide buffer shall be provided to residential land uses as required per UDC Table 1I- 2C-3, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C,unless otherwise reduced by City Council. e. There are existing trees on this site that if removed may require mitigation per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-IOC.5. The Applicant shall contact Matt Perkins,the City Arborist,to schedule a site inspection prior to removal of any trees from the site to determine mitigation requirements. f. A 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement shall be recorded for the multi-use pathway along Linder Rd. as required by the Park's Department.A copy of the easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. g. A minimum 25-foot wide street buffer,measured from back of sidewalk, is required to be provided along N. Linder Rd., landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. B. PUBLIC WORKS Any changes to public utility infrastructure must be reviewed by the Public Work's Department. C. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https://weblink.meridiancioy.or lWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=235914&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitE D. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancit .00rg/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=2 3 7 03 3&db id=0&rep o=Meridia n City E. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridianciU.ory WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=236543&dbid=O&repo=MeridianCitX Page 12 Item 7. 96 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 Industrial is compatible with adjacent industrial uses in the area and is consistent with the goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan as noted in Section V. 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 Mixed Use—Community to Industrial will provide an improved guide to future grown and development in this area and will be compatible with adjacent industrial uses. 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. 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 to Industrial will be compatible with other existing industrial uses in the area. 6. The proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities. Stafffinds that the proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned 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: Page 13 Item 7. ■ 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Applicant is proposing to annex the subject property with I-L zoning and develop industrial uses on the property consistent with the proposed Industrial FLUM 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; Staff finds the proposed map amendment to I-L and conceptual development plan generally complies with the purpose statement of the I-L district in that it will encourage industrial uses that are clean, quiet and free of hazardous or objectionable elements and that are operated entirely or almost entirely within enclosed structures and is accessible to an arterial street(i.e. Linder Rd.). 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health,safety,and welfare; Staff finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed industrial use should be conducted entirely within a structure. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Staff finds City services are available to be provided to this development. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Staff finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City. Page 14 E IDIAN;--- Applicant Presentation Hatch Design Annexation Request Sept 16, 20210026-2021-H160 N. Linder Rd.Hatch Industrial eArchitectur Hatch Design Sept 16, 20210026-2021-H160 N. Linder Rd.Hatch Industrial eArchitectur Hatch Design Sept 16, 20210026-2021-H160 N. Linder Rd.Hatch Industrial Vicinity Map eArchitectur Hatch Design Sept 16, 20210026-2021-H160 N. Linder Rd.Hatch Industrial Proposed Site Plan eArchitectur Hatch Design Sept 16, 20210026-2021-H160 N. Linder Rd.Hatch Industrial Proposed Floor Plan eArchitectur Hatch Design Sept 16, 20210026-2021-H160 N. Linder Rd.Hatch Industrial Proposed Elevations eArchitectur Thank you for your time.Sept 16, 20210026-2021-H160 N. Linder Rd.Hatch Industrial Annexation Request eArchitecturHatch Design Questions? LL98 WE IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Fields Sub-Area Plan (H-2021-0047) by City of Meridian, the Location Consisting of Approximately Four (4) Square Miles and Bounded by Chinden Blvd. on the North, McDermott Rd. on the East, McMillan Rd. on the South and Can-Ada Rd. on the West A. Request: Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to incorporate the Fields Sub-Area Plan. Item 8. F99 (:�N-VE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Bill Parsons Meeting Date: September 16, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Fields Sub-Area Plan (H-2021-0047) by City of Meridian, the Location Consisting of Approximately Four (4) Square Miles and Bounded by Chinden Blvd. on the North, McDermott Rd. on the East, McMillan Rd. on the South and Can-Ada Rd. on the West A. Request: Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to incorporate the Fields Sub-Area Plan. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing Item 8. ■ STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A H O HEARING 9/16/2021 DATE: 16 TO: Planning&Zoning Commission 2s 55 FROM: Brian McClure, Comprehensive Associate Planner ' 208-884-5533 Legend ; SUBJECT: H-2021-0047 - Fields Subarea Plan(CPAT) �_:AOCI + �City LOCATION: Northwest Meridian: Generally between Limits —� Chinden,Ustick, Can-Ada, and r wCounty McDermott/SH-16(future). ■ Line Future Road I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This City of Meridian Planning Division submitted an application for a Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment(CPAT)that proposes to adopt the Fields Subarea Plan. This amendment will effectively add the Fields Subarea Plan(Subarea Plan) to the Adopted by Reference section of the existing Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan). This request does not include an amendment to the Future Land Use Map. The Fields Area is a unique opportunity to plan for one of the City's last growth areas. Surrounded on three sides by other cities/county, and soon to be defined on its east boundary by the now funded SH-16 extension, this area of Meridian may feel disjointed from the rest of the City. Further, other constraints including SH 20/26 (Chinden Boulevard), a litany of large irrigation facilities and infrastructure, and a 7-million-gallon Intermountain Gas Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) storage facility, present barriers to a quality-built and connected environment. Where the area could compete for an identity, the Fields is instead anchored with an inward facing concept that helps to preserve its roots, make use of its challenges, and seeks to further the vision described in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. This Subarea Plan integrates implementation elements to promote high-quality neighborhoods, continues to plan for essential employment, and seeks to expand and further integrate parks and pathways into the area. A central mixed-use activity center, located at the southeast corner of the Star/McMillan intersection will serve as a hub for surrounding neighborhoods. This will provide the community with centralized neighborhood-scale retail and services, office, civic, and park space in an environment distinctly Meridian. Page 1 Item 8. 1o1 1 This area is not a bubble far removed; to the contrary it is well connected with access to SH- 20/26, has access to a Boise River crossing along Star Road, and will have an interchange at Ustick and SH-16 soon. Future residents and other stakeholders will be able to enjoy a sense of community with consolidated neighborhood services, linear open space, and the stage set for a future public park all integrated in close proximity homes. While many residents will choose to commute, ideally many will have an opportunity to work close to home, and if-not, then employment centers can capture some Canyon County trips from traversing the City, or reverse commutes can spread the load. After adoption of the Subarea Plan into the Comprehensive Plan, a more detailed guide for how this area should develop will be in place. A"full service" community with opportunities to live, work,play and raise a family are envisioned. Implementation measures will be evaluated by City staff as development is proposed and as opportunities arise to further the vision for the area. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Reference Acreage 2,430 acres, or just under 4-square miles Future Land Use Designation Varies, see Project Area Maps II-B Existing Land Use(s) Varies, see Project Area Maps II-B History(previous approvals) H-2017-0079 Intermountain Gas Map Amendment, V H-2019-0101 New Comprehensive Plan B. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend 0 Legend Project Location E31Project Location _ M01 RIG e o MU-1� LDR m MU-C Industrial MHDR - MDR Civic MU-N MU-N'R MU-RG Office I .. Page 2 Item 8. ■ Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend 0 Legend 0 Project Location a N Project Location — Rl R-8 City Limits , Planned Parcels s R7-8 RUT R-15 R-4 R-T5 a R1 R-8 RUT R:-4 o R-8— m R-4 m RUT R-8 III. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Notification published in newspaper 8/27/2021 Notification mailed to property Not applicable, see owners within 300' UDC 11-5A-6 Applicant posted public hearing Not applicable, see notice sign on site UDC 11-5A-6 Nextdoor posting 8/26/2021 IV. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Caleb Hood,Planning Division Manager, 33 E Broadway Ave,Meridian, Idaho 83642 B. Owner: Not applicable C. Representative: Not Applicable V. PROJECT BACKGROUND A. Area History Planning work in the Fields has been ongoing for more than a decade,but this Subarea Plan really got its start in 2017 as part of the Intermountain Gas Liquified Natural Gas (LNG)Map amendment. In an effort to address safety concerns by Intermountain Gas, and to reflect the existence of the facility on the City's Future Land Use Map,the City processed a Comprehensive Page 3 Item 8. ■ Plan Map amendment changing the land use designation from low density residential to industrial for the LNG property. However,this change did not address a needed non-residential zone buffer around the plant however. Since there was another regional planning collaborative known as Growing Together causing some concern and confusion for stakeholders at the time,the City agreed to hold off on additional changes until that effort completed. The Growing Together effort, which was largely based on agriculture and ag-tech industry attraction,ultimately concluded without impact. Shortly after the Growing Together effort,the Meridian City Council directed work on a new Comprehensive Plan(2018). Part of that work would include several focus areas, one of which was the Fields Area. The City held several engagement opportunities during the Comp Plan development, including one in-person in the Fields Area where stakeholders generated several mapping concepts. These maps were ultimately synthesized into a preferred future land use concept, included an online review period and ultimately integrated into citywide analysis. This work helped to understand transportation and land use relationships, and the overall balance of land uses across the City. In December of 2019 the new Comp Plan and Future Land Use Map with an integrated,preferred concept for the Fields Area,was adopted. Future land use designations were identified and adopted,putting to rest long-held stakeholders concerns with land uses that were previously seen as interim, or not"highest and best use", stakeholder engagement and response was generally very positive during development of the Comp Plan. However,there was still a desire by both stakeholders in the Area and the larger City to imagine development that better considered both what once was, and what was to come. Broad land uses were not seen as a sufficient solution for future development, given the location, history,and future impacts of a SH-16 extension. The opportunity was great to further define how the area should evolve over time into a premier section of the City. B. Project History: Subarea Plan Development& Outreach After adoption of the Comp Plan, City staff worked with Council to develop a number of priority projects as follow-up work to the broader visioning effort. The Fields was near the top of the priority projects, and in 2020 Council directed Staff to continue work with Logan Simpson on this area. This allowed the original focus area to continue forward in greater detail. Despite some delays due to COVID,the relatively small number of unique properties and the limited area of focus allowed an efficient, if a slightly slow process,to continue forward. Initial work by the project team sought to understand potential pitfalls and hurdles. Several rounds of listening sessions were held with agency partners,developers, finance experts, and City Departments. City staff also met early with property owners in the core of the Subarea(near Star and McMillan), and sought to understand stakeholders' specific vision and future plans for their properties. Several engagement meetings were held early in the process to discuss the project, general purpose, and to receive feedback on conceptual schematics of the Subarea core. This early work was supported by economic and buildout analysis done both with the 2019 Comprehensive Plan, and supplemented with this project. Leland Consulting Group again supported Logan Simpson with this analysis to consider realistic buildout and guide City efforts. Critical to early periods of work,was understanding what it would take to see the Fields Subarea Plan come to fruition. Leland identified areas essential for City guidance,partnership, and investment understanding future demand. This included detailing implementation and funding strategies, and then having discussions with City Council on interest and support for level of City participation and effort. After initial concept work was refined, an interactive online public engagement meeting was held with all stakeholders in the four-square mile area invited. Postcards were sent to every property Page 4 Item 8. F104 owner in the Area. The meeting allowed participants to make live comments,draw, and included image preference surveys to understand the look and feel desired by stakeholders. Most of the received feedback only reinforced what was already known; that stakeholders wanted to maintain some rural thematic elements and site design characteristics, continuing the"Fields"theme. Comments received were integrated, and stakeholders were invited to review and comment on a draft PDF of the plan that incorporated built-in markup tools. Subsequently,new images,text, and other revisions were made, and combined to include the final draft for public hearing. Postcards were again sent out to all property owners in the four-square mile area for the public hearing before the Planning&Zoning Commission. It should be noted that there has been a great deal of land optioning and sales during project development. Some stakeholders that were initially and heavily vested are no longer present, and others have some level of control on new properties. Staff is aware that not all stakeholders are thrilled with all elements of this Plan,but to City staff s best understanding,most of these concerns are not related to prescriptive elements which could be seen as non-negotiable. There are very few"shall"type statements in the Fields Subarea Plan; all density related thresholds and basic purpose and intent type language are still driven by the Comprehensive Plan unless otherwise provided. Some areas which will always have some natural push and pull, are the balance between short- term market demand and long-term need in mixed use, commercial, and higher density residential areas. Change is expected and the Fields Subarea Plan is structured to be adaptable,but the Plan is also fully committed to a diversity and balance of uses. There are limitations of market driven variations when the City is also charged with orderly and efficient growth. While land investments carry with it cost, and investors seek return,there may be cases where waiting for the right use, in the right or a future market,will be essential to achieving a critical mass of location appropriate uses that support the vision. VI. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS (Comprehensive Plan) A. Future Land Use Map Designation (https:llmeridianciU.oMIglannin /g compplan/evolving) 1. General Adherence The adopted future land use designations in the Subarea Plan are broad and intended to provide diversity and address unique site-specific context. These were developed as part of focused visioning activities during the Comprehensive Plan,by stakeholders, and this proposed Plan remains true both to that work, and to the City's larger balance of land uses. The one exception to this is are the 80 acres on the north-west corner of Ustick and McDermott, addressed below. Overall Land Uses (Detailed further in the Subarea Plan): Future Land Use Designations Acres Civic 88 General Industrial 218 Low Density Residential 116 Med-High Density Residential 7� 201 Medium Density Residential ME- 1,523 Mixed Use-Interchange 99 — 80 MU-NR 82 Page 5 — Item 8. F105 Future Land Use Designations Acres MU-RG 3 3 Total Area 2,441 Note: Total land use areas are gross and reflect considerable area of ROW and undevelopable or previously committee land. Some areas will change as the City or other public agencies acquire additional property and changed to revise their civic nature. Land Use totals described in the Subarea Plan are not gross, and reflect more realistic developable land area. 2. Interplay of Future Land Uses As mentioned earlier in this report,no changes to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Comprehensive Plan are proposed with this application. While no land use designations are changing,the intent of the Subarea Plan is to further define the expectations of how this area will change, evolve and develop over time. This section of the report summarizes some of the details from the Plan and puts into context key areas of importance. Neighborhood Center at Star and McMillan (Mixed Use- Community FL UM desi ne ation): The area of Mixed Use—Community, at the heart of the Subarea Plan, is a crucial element and requires commitment by the City and future development to fully realize. Even during the Comprehensive Plan,this land was envisioned as a consolidated neighborhood center for which many neighborhood services could be supported. It is intended as an attractive,vibrant, and active space that is worthy of destination travel. These goals and assumptions were inherent in this Subarea Plan work. This Plan has purposefully planned to not bisect commercial opportunities by busy arterial intersections; that configuration can't work here. Adjacent uses such as churches and low density residential would make transitions difficult, and stripped-out commercial would detract from the higher intensity neighborhood center. The neighborhood center was and is located in the perfect area for a consolidation of diverse land uses to occur. Further, its located along the planned Five Mile Creek pathway network and provides a unique opportunity to fully integrate both private and civic spaces. It is worth noting that several interviewed participants suggested increasing commercial along SH-20/26 (Chinden). Additional non-residential along Chinden were not expanded by the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee,because that type of development pattern ends up as linear,non-integrated frontage development. The market does not support the same quantities of this post Amazon effect, and then other uses such as multi-family are requested and proposed as the next best thing. Further, additional commercial along Chinden would compete with the non-residential proposed at the Star/McMillan intersection leaving the market for developing consistent with the vision problematic.Neither highway commercial or higher density residential support this area plan. Rooftops can better support the neighborhood center and provide greater access to more community services for more people, and which reduces trips. The cities of Star and Nampa both have more commercial and mixed use designations along their frontage than is likely feasible, and Meridian's Comprehensive Plan intentionally focused its commercial uses into select areas with high visibility(near interchanges), close to major attractors(such as Owyhee High School), or to buffer and separate uses with higher degrees of incompatibility(around the Intermountain Gas LNG facility). This has the benefit of reducing impacts to major arterials and highways by reducing points of access,which becomes points of congestion, and eventually turn into points of conflict(and crashes). Page 6 Item 8. F106 Non-residential uses outside the planned areas may very easily detract from the Neighborhood Center, and the City must remain diligent in limiting commercial creep into other areas;patience and public amenities like the pathway and future park may drastically quicken the pace for which the Neighborhood Center can be realized and supported. Intermountain Gas Facility Area (Industrial and Mixed Use Non-Residential FL UM designations): The Subarea Plan is fully consistent with the original vision of the Intermountain Gas LNG work in 2017, and with subsequent work done with the 2019 Comp Plan. However,new ownership and the natural change that comes with time,may result in future requests to shrink the Industrial and/or Non-Residential uses planned around the Intermountain Gas LNG property. This area is in Meridian, and likely to be very attractive to new residents given a vibrant neighborhood center and robust pathway and park spaces proposed. The LNG tank is a massive facility that isn't going anywhere anytime soon. It is visible for miles around, and made more evident at night with bright lighting, and occasional audible siren tests reminding nearby stakeholders of its presence even when not in view. For simple comparison,the LNG tank is 7-million gallons whereas a large City reservoir tank is only 2- million gallons. While good design can address most potential land use conflicts,it's important to reinforce the significance of this facility.It is essential that Meridian maintain a balanced portfolio of land uses that contribute towards a diverse mix of both dwellings and jobs, and works to reduce transportation related burdens to Meridian residents already heavily impacted by regional commuting patterns. One large industrial area was not approved in the final 2019 Future Land Use Map(north of railroad tracks and McDermott), and subsequent Map amendments have removed a considerable area of non-residential uses (vicinity of the Waste Water Resource Recovery Facility)and that may be further reduced in the future due to simple proximity, additional residential influences, and reduced overall market potential for large projects. Therefore,it is essential that any future land use designation changes proposed in close proximity to this facility in the future consider the need for safety, quality of life, sense of place, and for essential employment opportunities both in the Subarea Plan and citywide. Thoughtful changes to these designations may be appropriate in the future,but as the Ustick and McDermott revision suggest(see below),they require additional analysis and outreach to understand cumulative impacts. Lastly, it's worth touching on the William's Pipeline which ties into the LNG facility and bisects many of the properties in the area. City code already requires buffering and maintaining easements around the pipeline. The Subarea Plan,page 1-4,very generally depicts this high-pressure pipeline facility. Page 7 Item 8. 107 Y � . OIL jjt., Earthen barrier I c � Image Above: 2017 Isometric aerial,facing east. Farm Combine for reference s . - A- Earthen barr(LNG tank ier than it . Image Above: 2021 photo near Star Road, facing East at dusk. Waterways, Future Parks and Pathways Desiknations on FL UM The City's Comprehensive Plan adopts by reference both the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and the Pathway Master Plan. The Pathway Master Plan includes a series of pathways shown in the Fields Area, generally along waterways. The Fields Area is bisected by a series of waterways including the Five Mile Creek,Five Mile Creek Feeder,McFadden Drain, Phyllis Canal, and several laterals. Some of the laterals may ultimately be tiled,but the Five Mile Creek and Phyllis Canal will not be. Page 8 Item 8. ■ During all periods of outreach, almost all stakeholders including agency partners discussed the importance of pathways. There was consistent discussion about integrating this system into the Fields Plan, connecting it to adjacent cities and points of interest, and generally doing more. Of greatest importance,the City's Five Mile Creek pathway system traverses this area. There is a planned underpass crossing of SH-16 for the Five Mile Creek pathway even in the interim phase of development,which will allow contiguous connection to the rest of the City. ACHD is also planning for some type of future pathway crossing to the west, across Star Road in the future. That may be some type of pedestrian signalization,or at grade separated crossing like SH-16. Related,the Comprehensive Plan includes a number of park symbols with halos on the Future Land Use Map. These depict in very generalized fashion the need for future park facilities. However,there is no land set aside for parks and there are no planned park improvements despite other prioritized service improvements,rapidly vanishing land opportunities, and despite the access challenges posed by SH-16. The Fields Plan provides a refined opportunity to maximize the location of a future park,generally central to the area and well connected on the Five Mile Creek pathway,near the Neighborhood Center to build synergies, and to transition and buffer uses to the west. This location is not set,but should be viewed as an ideal to strive for. Other parks in the area are likely to be owned and operated by future HOAs or created through other partnerships, and do not have the same level of locational need or benefit. Ustick and McDermott(Mixed Use Interchanze with a future SH-16 Interchanize desi nation on the FLUM): During the final hearings of the Comprehensive Plan adoption process, stakeholders requested a different designation via public testimony, and was granted a Mixed Use Regional designation. This change was not studied by the project consultants, City staff, or the Comp Plan Steering Committee. Staff would have recommended caution had the owner solicited feedback, due to limited access of the future SH-16 and associated interchange at Ustick. The northern 40 acres,under different ownership, is reliant upon the lower for transitions and connectivity. Further,the Owyhee High School approvals did not provide east-west connectivity adequate to support more intense uses near to the future interchange. Lastly, and equally important,both 40-acre parcels had active development proposals (now withdrawn or still pending)during the Subarea Plan development. It's possible that the lower 40-acres will find it very difficult to address findings that describe compliance with the purpose and intent of the Mixed-Use Regional designation. Future development applications here will have to contend with SH-16 improvements and access restrictions intended to preserve interchange efficiency and public safety. As a result of the challenges and previous development applications,these parcels may benefit from this sub- area plan,including identity by proximity,but will adhere only to the adopted Comprehensive Plan,not this specific area plan. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (hops.11www.meridiancity.orz/comoplan): It could be argued that virtually all of the Comprehensive Plan policies have some applicability within this large geographic region and over a longer-period of time with development applications. However, and specific to the proposed text and implementation up for adoption, and understanding that the Subarea proposes no future land use changes or development, City staff finds the following to be most applicable to the adoption of the Subarea Plan. Staff analysis is in italics below. Page 9 Item 8. Flog] • 3.03.01, Plan for an appropriate land use mix,recreational and civic facilities, and phased service extension within specific area plans and urban renewal districts. This Subarea Plan continues to support a diverse mix of land uses, and contemplates them interconnected within the broader context of conditions, context, and future community needs. 0 3.03.01A, Continue to develop and implement the desired vision in special areas, areas with specific plans, and along key transportation corridors. This Subarea Plan is the literal continuation of work that began with the Comprehensive Plan, and works to further the vision with additional implementation and context. 0 3.03.01B,Actively engage with City leadership and community members to explore the idea,process, and potential impacts of implementing districts, subareas,neighborhood association areas, or similar concepts. The project team repeatedly invited all stakeholders within the four-square mile area to participate through engagement activities, both during the initial 2019 Comprehensive Plan and as part of specific Subarea Plan work. Further, City staff coordinated with City Council and other agency partners to discuss process, ideas, and level of effort to ensure the planning work was feasible and implementable. 0 3.03.01 C, Consider developing new subarea plans as appropriate for areas with unique characteristics,public/private partnerships in place, and that are compatible with Comprehensive Plan policies in order to provide additional guidance on future land uses, design, infrastructure, and amenities. As a direct outcome of the Comprehensive Plan work, and Council prioritization of follow-up work, this Subarea Plan is directly applicable to this work. The proposed Subarea Plan include additional guidance for development of the planning area. Other high-level policies that are appropriate include: • 2.01.01, Encourage diverse housing options suitable for various income levels,household sizes, and lifestyle preferences. This plan adheres to the adopted Future Land Use Map, which includes a variety of land uses intended to support a range of housing products. The Fields Plan furthers this and includes and integrates a variety of described housing references in both text and images. • 3.03.02A, Engage with service providers, City leadership, and community members to identify priority growth areas. This Area has been prioritized for City service improvements. The project team met with a variety of service providers including Nampa Meridian Irrigation Districts, ACHD, and maintained communication with Idaho Power and others. City leadership was apprised and involved throughout Plan development, and included conversations with City Council. • 3.03.02E,Develop incentives for appropriate investment in strategic growth areas; discourage development outside of established growth areas. While specific incentives are not proposed, the Plan identifies a variety of partnership opportunities and is clear that City participation will be necessary, to achieve desired results given the unique context of the planning area. Page 10 Item 8. 1 10 • 3.04.02A, Solicit public participation in the land use and entitlement process through a variety of digital and in person methods. Development of the Fields Plan continued the robust public involvement efforts of the Comprehensive Plan. Stakeholders were involved through digital and in person meetings, and included new and innovative tools such as the Mural platform. This has since grown in popularity and been replicated by other agencies in the Valley. • 3.05.00, Ensure that all planning,zoning and land use decisions balance the interests of the community by protecting private property rights for current citizens and future generations. The Fields Subarea Plan is very light on prescriptive standards, understanding that time changes all things. The Plan strives for balance between short-term development pressures and long-term essential needs of the City. • 3.06.02, Plan for an appropriate mix of land uses that ensures connectivity, livability, and economic vitality. The Plan continues the work of the Comprehensive Plan by further linking the integration of land uses by identifying specific needs and opportunities to address connectivity, livability, and economic vitality through additional detail and description. 0 3.06.02A, Support the inclusion of small-scale neighborhood commercial areas within planned residential developments as part of the development plan,where appropriate. The Fields Plan provides a better prototype for how the Mixed Use Community neighborhood center may develop, describing the needs of the center and how it may be supported through other public improvements including pathway and park connectivity. 0 3.06.02B,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. The concept for the neighborhood center is intended to guide future development towards integrated opportunities to live, shop, dine, and play. It is centrally located within an area otherwise bisected by highways and major regional corridors. 0 3.06.02C,Encourage the development of supportive commercial near employment areas. The Plan describes desired non-residential uses in the Fields Area, and includes specific consideration for ensuring that commercial is supportive of employment areas, and not necessarily replacing employment areas. 0 3.06.02E,Discourage residential land uses in close proximity to the Wastewater Resource Recovery Facility,the Intermountain Gas Facility on Can-Ada Road, and other incompatible land uses. The Plan supports prior land use changes in 2017 and 2019, and further describes how changes that may in occur in the future should not lose sight of the needs that adopted land use designations address. • 4.01.00,Pursue partnerships and funding sources to facilitate and expand access to parks and recreational facilities,programming, and services. The Plan recognizes that partnerships and new funding strategies are essential to realizing all intended benefits. The Five Mile Creek pathway integration with the Page 11 Item 8. F-1111 neighborhood center, and connectivity to a regional like park are paramount to this work. The Plan explores new and old funding tools and compares their pros and cons. o 4.01.01A, Explore additional partnership opportunities as well as build on existing partnerships with focus on low-service areas. The Fields Area has been identified as low-service area without additional work to quickly identify new park site opportunities.All other areas of the City have existing land either in development or slated for future development that will accommodate a public park. The Fields Area may otherwise be the most disconnected and far removed part of the City without a public park. The right park in the right location could help the Fields Area to be realized as a premier park service area or the City. • 4.02.01, Continue working toward the park land level of service goal of four acres/1,000 persons and a 0.5 miles service area radius from residences. This Area has been identified as a low-service area.A park utilizing a new funding source and not competing for impact fees, such as those identified in this Plan, could help the City to recover from recent years of lost progress towards park service goal. The central location of the identified park places it closely to the most populated areas, and maximizes synergies with the neighborhood center. • 4.02.0113, Continue to find and purchase additional land for future park development where level of service is below threshold. This Plan does not propose a specific acquisition of land, but identifies a desired area and the context for the selection.A park is needed closest to high density residential uses to maximize public benefit and minimize vehicle trip generation. • 4.02.01D, Look for opportunities to add parks and pathways in new growth areas. The park opportunity identified in the Fields Subarea Plan is central to the planning efforts. Pathways have already been identified but are further integrated. • 4.04.02 Link pathways to important pedestrian generators, environmental features, historic landmarks,public facilities,Town Centers, and business districts. The 2019 Comprehensive Plan and the Pathway Master Plan already achieve this vision for the Fields Area. The Plan builds on these opportunities and works to create new opportunities and synergies with public private benefit. 0 4.04.02A, Identify opportunities for new paths that connect residential neighborhoods and community facilities, such as the library and city hall,parks, schools, athletic facilities, swimming pools,historic districts,the Downtown, as well as other commercial and retail activity centers in Meridian. The Plan continues the work of the adopted Pathways Master Plan, and is integrated into both the neighborhood center(commercial and retail activity center), and into a future park. The Five Mile Creek pathway network continues into the downtown area, and all the way to Eagle Road. 0 4.04.02C, Continue partnerships with area irrigation districts to continue to expand pathway system along existing waterways. The City has and continues to coordinate implementation of the Pathway Master Plan with irrigation district partners. Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) was coordinated with specific to the Five Mile Creek Pathway and the Neighborhood Center. NMID was supportive of a public pathway on the north side of Five Mile Creek. Page 12 Item 8. F112 • 4.1 0.00,Protect public health and safety by guiding growth and development away from hazardous areas that pose a threat to people and property. The Intermountain Gas LNG facility and the Williams Pipeline have both been previously identified as hazards, and include appropriate buffers to protect the health, safety, and welfare of residents. The Fields Plan includes additional discussion on this topic to ensure that future decisions adequately consider historical context for decisions. • 5.01.02C,Promote area beautification and community identity through context sensitive building and site design principles, appropriate signage, and attractive landscaping. The Fields Plan does include some high-level general guidance and direction for future work, to promote aesthetic design nods towards a unified Fields thematic. • 5.01.02F,Explore development and implementation of architectural and/or landscape standards for geographic areas of the City. The Fields Plan does include some high-level general guidance and direction for future work, to promote aesthetic design nods towards a unified Fields thematic. • 6.01.011),Pursue construction of the City's pathways network. The Plan identifies the pathway network and especially the Five Mile Creek pathway, as crucial to success of this Plan. • 6.01.0313,Require collectors consistent with the ACHD Master Street Map(MSM), generally at/near the mid-mile location within the Area of City Impact. The Plan supports ACHD's MSM and works to further use and benefit the collector roadway system, and supplements them with robust local roadway and pathway connections, as an alternative network for local stakeholders to busy arterials dominated by regional traffic. C. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Revisions 1. Proposed Text Revisions Pages C through D of the adopted Comprehensive Plan include a List of Adopted Plans and Studies by Reference. Similar to the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Plan, and Destination Downtown,this CPAT would add the Fields Subarea Plan to these pages. This entry would be added to the end of the list on page D, and include(in strike tht:ettgh and underline): List of Adopted Plans by Reference Plan Lead Agency Link Fields Subarea Plan(2021) City of Meridian https://meridianci_ .or /g fields In the future,a new section of the Evolving Community Chapter(3),may be appropriate to highlight Specific and Subarea Plans. Currently,the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan is described within the future land use section; it has its own unique future land use designations. Destination Downtown is mentioned in several areas, including the Premier Community Chapter(2), and within the Old Town Section of the Future Land Use section (even though the District boundaries eclipse the Old Town area),but has no dedicated section. 2. Proposed Future Land Use Map (none) There are no proposed revisions to the Future Land Use Map. Page 13 Item 8. F113 In the future,and with the broader cleanup revisions to the Future Land Use Map,the Subarea Plan could be better distinguished, and other revisions made to better consider multiple specific or subarea plans more consistently. Informally, and in the interim,this area can be added to interactive maps on the City's website to better highlight the Subarea Plan. 3. Proposed Revisions to Draft Fields Subarea Plan After application submittal and before the public hearing, City staff met with several stakeholders who discussed concerns with language intent. There are several areas that Staff believe can be improved, and are now recommending changes to enhance clarity of purpose. i. Revise map title on page 1-4: Existing Site Features and underling Future Land use Map(at time of adoption) ii. Revise Table 4A notes on page 3-9: Notes: The table above is intended to show approximate ranges of land uses that can be anticipated in the area. The table reflects residential density ranges adopted within the Comprehensive Plan. Assumptions for commercial values are based on typical averages from uses supported within designation types. Because mixed use areas vary,the followinga ssumptions are used within the context of future land use purpose text and descriptions. Assumptions: The Star/McMillan Center and Star/Ustick Center assume 40%residential; Chinden centers assume 20%residential. Commercial uses are broken down as follows: MU-C and MU-R assumes 90%commercial and 10% governmental/other; MU-NR assumes 50%office,40%office/flex, and 10%other; and MU-I assumes 50% office, 30%governmental/other,and 20% flex. iii. Add text to Development Program,first paragraph: The Development Program is intended to provide an estimate for understanding service needs and general allocation and balance of uses. Because these are for broad land use areas, and generalized,these are not prescriptive standards intended for case by case review. As shown i the deve epmen4"r-egr- above, estimated square footage for retail and office uses are expected to take nearly 50 years to fully build out,while industrial and flex space markets could be built out in only 15 years. The City should consider the aggregated commercial impacts this i of development proposals and monitor near-term residential demand and development to preserve opportunities for the lagging, long-term employment demand. Overall balance of residential and non-residential uses is essential. iv. Revise text on page 4-3. Critical path items are actions that should be abided by the Ci prior to and as development occurs. These items include the following: v. Revise Action Item on page 4-20. Elevate a distinct community identity by creating exterior design standards for the Star/McMillan Center, adjacent residential areas, linear park and greenway and regional park, including a contemporary rural thematic throughout commercial structures and public facilities. • Within commercial structures, incorporate gabled roofs, exposed trusses and rafters, covered porches, oversized architectural hardware,transitional landscape walls,gates,railings, chimneys,dormers,brackets,corbels,belly band board trim,posts,masonry piers, or other thematic elements in eammer-cialst..,,et Page 14 Item 8. F114 • Within commercial structures, incorporate stone,cultured stone, or brick masonry;horizontal lap siding,vertical board and batten siding,beadboard paneling, and taper sawn shingles; corten and/or wrought iron,or other local thematic materials into eemmer-eial s'.-.,,.tufes. • Within commercial structures, discourage or allow only a very limited use of pre- cast concrete,EIFS,PVC or plastic materials,metal siding,plywood or pressed- board materials, or composition siding into eemmer-eial s«,.,,,.tufes • Incorporate distinct architectural elements into monuments, signage,building addressing, and structural infrastructure within landscape buffers,parking lots, and open space that enhances primary structure architectural features. D. Implementation Crucial to the success of the Fields Plan, and the Fields Area itself, is implementation. The unique circumstances and conditions of the area, and the speed at which development is lining up pending planned utility improvements,require commitment by all partners to see the vision of both the Comprehensive Plan and Fields Subarea plan come together. This Subarea Plan isn't a transportation plan,but it considers regional transportation improvements and ACHD's Master Street Map (MSM). As Meridian continues to bear the burden of regional traffic impacts, and particularly east-west travel,the interrelation of land use and transportation is essential. The 2019 Comprehensive Plan took this into consideration, and the balance and mix of land uses is essential in this context not just for the Fields area,but citywide. While time will bring changes, it is essential that City staff and elected decision makers not lose sight of the higher-level vision, and the reasons for past decisions. Shorter-term market driven changes are not necessarily bad and may be very positive,but they should not undermine long- term community needs. Thoughtful changes should consider comprehensive impacts,both within the Subarea and Citywide. Many land use decisions include land development configurations that have the unintended consequences of discouraging desired uses and services later or elsewhere in the City. Further, and depending on the speed of development in the area, it is very possible that some essential services and uses in support of this vision,will take time to realize the required rooftops,trips, and other supportive uses and services to be viable. Some of this may be positively influenced through partnerships including private-private,public-private, and public-public. Regardless, it may be a useful to remember that"highest and best"changes with time,that the Comprehensive Plan does not guarantee timing of additional entitlements or services, and that the City is charged with orderly and efficient growth. Construction of the Owyhee High School, committed improvements for both sewer infrastructure and a new fire station, and prioritized improvements for roadways represent considerable investment by local public agencies in this area. Despite the commitment of so many resources, realizing that the Fields Area is now effectively a growth priority area,more efforts are still needed.Acquiring and constructing park space, and prioritizing pathway improvements to support and advance community spaces in the neighborhood center, are paramount to the Plan. While timing of some improvements may be delayed,building relationships,partnerships, creating agreements, and further identifying or exploring and implementing additional funding mechanisms will need to be fast-tracked to set the stage. Spaces need to be preserved for these critical infrastructure elements. Development carries a high degree of risk, and with full services not yet in the ground and Meridian increasing the need for coordination and commitment to a better-defined Vision,it will Page 15 Item 8. F-1151 be important for the City to be a partner. The City's role is not a subsidy for development; it's a commitment to work towards service standards in coordination with willing partners. Partnerships are more difficult,but bring additional opportunities. The timing of Owyhee High School was not foreseen by the City and required significant alterations to expectations for market growth and service improvement priorities. The unique conditions of the area require additional coordination and focused efforts,not a disproportional level of services by the City. VII. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS UD Not applicable.No specific development or annexation is being proposed with this application. VIII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends revising the text of the Comprehensive Plan to add the Fields Subarea Plan(2021), to page D, within the List of Adopted Plans by Reference. B. Commission: Enter Summary of Commission Decision. C. City Council: Enter Summary of City Council Decision. Page 16 Item 8. F116 IX. EXHIBITS A. Illustrative Framework Plan (NOT intended for explicit adherence of development application review) City of Star Area of City Impact / Illustrative Framework UnionNoounaD/US 2ORd L Plan — Aegionil r Interchange Area Use Type ' sh9'Gnol—j comer $� Cahange A Pedmm Density Neighborhoods Cedmm High Density Neighborhoods Anidential tleighbarhood�lg West by Sdblarcr11 al Industrial Area Neighborhoods L:Pdrk ��° {' R<hil/Office Areas 2 Resideoml Aesidmtial Neighborhoods Neighborhoods Business Park Win,Eeua(wa Potential School/Church 53'Iaterzl - Parks and Greemrays PotentWl Chic Si Prcumum udrTnnsitim of Historic Site Park Potential Existing Raul Neighborlwods l(sArnot chic etc) Grit Sae(srb-oo4 Roadways and Pathways durd4-e15-) W_Ledgerwaod,En/ s's°tat�ml — Hi- vDeovh 7 z Highways and Arterials ` N V Hearing Collectors Eaisturg —I} , Cemenh i MtN Local Sneers e - auX Rom 1pm'jA Pathways Higher'Densiry' r Stu/MiNillin Fire.MJa-rnk;Padrwal Hosing �hentei r—1 Rekr to Star/N<Nillan Schematic Concept For PnrXMdr(eeA v. L J additional devil /- �FbeSMdecGeekiPaTway Im—onntain Gas Note:The Illustrative Framework Plan is -,Facility- I cmceptml in nature.Final piatiing and design ,,r ra•l.,_ I Highe�De.[.. Ikladdm:Padrway _ may differ. ng ~ / I Futurt-Ekmmtary Nrw Cmucma Roan NEw CufouE Aom School Sae (Irdusniil \� �I n Nbili nbarbnods owykee Pick / � Eigh1.M.1,Pathway Nigh sataml o� II IB�sin ess pPa 1 Neighborhood)Park (� Mued;ll e�I Higher Densay O Higg g us _ Houseg Abng Ustih Haus®` g=Us AL .. 0 I/A mile 1/4 mile 112 mile Nao Unrza Rocs City of Nampa Area of City Impact Page 17 Item 8. F117 B. Neighborhood Center Concept (NOT intended for explicit adherence of development review; see Fields Subarea Plan for described context of needs and conditions) Urban and Greenway Oriented Housing seg. StariMcMillan Center Character a,41tments,condos,lofts) E Fa ded G aoai a a (ennal commons 1110 r as `;� Naie Street ����\\ak R� '.•�uc6Use r . Pa k ng a f ) k r ! H � ' � Gat ay i e t Roundabout fotremoe ro Residential Yiaed Use � a NdghEorhaeds Parking-. 'y & 8 �� Anchor C raal rI k s _ I 4s.. V ■! ► ��� Potential, e. ti iecnatioeyeeoeeilr cents.fMiq) , FiK Nk[reek Patlwa�aed 6ieenwry Page 18 Item 8. 118 C. Conceptual Fit and Feel Render of Neighborhood Center c D. Conceptual Fit and Feel Render of Neighborhood Center Residential l \ G Page 19 Item 8. 119 1 X. FINDINGS A. Required Findings from the Unified Development Code 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the other elements of the comprehensive plan. The Subarea Plan is an extension of the Comprehensive Plan and which contains all seventeen (17) elements required by Idaho State Statute. Stafffinds the new Subarea Plan to continue the vision and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed amendment provides an improved guide to future growth and development of the city. Stafffinds that the proposed Plan provides an improved and more relevant guide to future growth and development with the City.As originally envisioned, this Subarea Plan is a natural extension of the Comprehensive Plan and is 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 the proposed policies are consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, as all of the original policies are in place, some of which supported this Subarea Plan, and new policies only further and enhance existing policies. 4. The proposed amendment is consistent with this Unified Development Code. Stafffinds the proposed Plan provides the necessary guidance to effectively administer the requirements of the Unified Development Code (UDC), and to direct work to maintain and modify the UDC to remain consistent with the proposed vision. S. The amendment will be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses. Stafffinds the proposed Plan will be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses. No specific uses are proposed and no modifications are proposed to general,future land use designations. 6. The proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities. Stafffinds that the proposed Plan will not burden existing and planned service capabilities. Analysis of the proposed Plan has been considered with existing and planned services to ensure that utilities can be provided and maintained in a sustainable fashion. 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. The proposed Plan, including a new Future Land Use Map (FL UM), is not associated with any particular development; no development is concurrently proposed. The adopted FL UM and specific designations within the Subarea Plan provides for a variety of uses. Development proposals in the future, will need to be consistent with the proposed Map and will be reviewed on a case by case basis in consideration of both immediate neighbors, and of the City's larger portfolio of uses and mix. Page 20 Item 8. ■ 8. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City of Meridian. Staff finds the proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City because it is current, furthers states goals of the adopted Plan, and because its more relevant and has been vetted through public engagement. Page 21 E IDIAN;--- Applicant Presentation Fields Subarea Plan Caleb Hood, Planning Division ManagerMegan Moore, Logan SimpsonBrian McClure, Comprehensive Associate Planner September 16th, 2021Planning and Zoning Commission Presentation Outline(not prescriptive or location specific).Residential look and feel image from the Fields Subarea Plan Questions6.Request5.The Plan4.Process3.Background2.Introduction1. Introduction No proposed Annexations•revisionsNo Future Land Use Map •by referenceSubarea Plan to be adopted –amendmentComprehensive Plan (text) •Councilcontinued funding from City High priority project with –Comprehensive Planfrom the 2019 Direct continuation of work • BACKGROUND Look and feel image from the Fields Subarea Plan (not Facility Map Amendment2017 with Intermountain Gas Solidified planning began in •uncertaintyZero traction, lots of stakeholder –work with BSU, U of I, and ULISeveral planning sessions, including •groupsMultiple local and regional work •Multiple studies, white papers•decadesthe area for nearly two Planning work has occurred in •Background prescriptive or location specific). 2021 photo near Star Road, LNG Tankreference scaleFarm Combine, for agglomeration/location benefits)uses could benefit from it (economic Desire to make use of it; what other •Light, noise abatement•foot safety buffer-1,000•Safety, quality of life–gallons)water reservoir approx. 2 million 7 million gallons (typical City –Natural Gas (LNG) TankIntermountain Gas Liquified •Canal.Intermountain Facility near Phyllis Northwest to southeast alignment –Williams Pipeline•Background: Williams Pipeline & Intermountain Gas at duskfacing east From BoiseDev.com. Aerial view, looking south, south need for service planningIdentified Future Land Uses, and –2019 Comprehensive Plan•No neighborhood services•16-improvements, and SHUncertainty with road •No property acquisition for parks•Utility infrastructure•No fire, long police travel time•New challenges:–School.increased with Owyhee High speculative investments) really Development pressures (not just •Background: Development Pressures east. - Background: Location & Future Land Use LNG Tank Background: Comp Plan Land Use uses/sectors.Center. Each have strengths for within: SW, NE, and Neighborhood Employment opportunities encouraged –residential areas due to market viability-City of Star looking at reducing non–Mixed UseMost adjacent regional land uses are –Additional Context:•planning.corridor analysis, and subarea neighboring cities, citywide allocation, Buildout Analysis considered: • Background: Parks Level of Service Standard Resources MapParks and Recreation Master Plan, Systems SubareaFields .miles per component for walkabilityradius of .5 components within parks and a of Service Standard that considers Additionally, the City should develop a Level •four acres/1,000 persons by 2040.increasing to a Level of Service Standard of land per 1,000 persons with a goal of Service that is three acres of developed park The City of Meridian currently has a Level of •of service goalMaintain existing level –Objective 1.1 –Organizational EfficienciesGoal 1: Continue to Improve •2015 Parks and Recreation Master Plan: PROCESS Process: Public Engagement within Planning AreaIncluded notice to all property owners –Public Hearing Process•Notice to previous participants–hearing)Public review of draft plan (prior to •Included notice to all property owners–Interactive tools and discussion–Online workshop•(those near the Neighborhood Center)professionals, and key stakeholders development and financing Included: partner agencies, City staff, –Discussed concerns and opportunities–person and online-Began with small group interviews, in•Built on previous efforts• Process: Online Workshop Using Mural https://www.mural.co/ THE PLAN The Plan: Overview Actions•Priorities and City Participation•How we get there–Implementation•Star/McMillan Center•Character•Economic•Parks and Pathways•Transportation•Framework sets the stage–The Plan: Our Vision•Public Process•Introduction•4 Chapters The Plan: Star/McMillan Center to supportLand uses (residential rooftops) –synergiesPrimed for partnerships and –locationMain Street style; destination –Aligned on pathway network–Iconic identity–Central to the area–Heart and Focus• The Plan: Star/McMillan Center The Plan: Star/McMillan Center The Plan: Next Steps Additional studies or standards–like ACHD and NMIDContinued work with agency partners –and quality of lifeand working towards service standards Ensuring efficient provision of services –Park Area•Fire Station•Lift Station•Service Improvements–Coordination & Partnerships•Increasing development pressure–Changing land ownership–Planned Fire Station–Owyhee High School–Other continued transportation impacts–SH 16 Improvements–Challenges & Opportunities•A lot of work to be done REQUEST Request: CPAT Modification would be added to the end of the list on page D, and include.Pages C through D of the adopted Comprehensive Plan include a List of Adopted Plans and Studies by Reference. This entry Proposed Comp Plan Text Revisions:.underlineand through-strikeChanges in AS PROPOSED IN STAFF REPORT https://meridiancity.org/fieldsCity of MeridianFields Subarea Plan (2021)LinkLead AgencyPlan Request: Additional Changes enforceable and flexibilityBalance between something that is •requirements.development agreement drive final UDC, other adopted standards, and any •all things apply in all conditionsJust as in the Comprehensive plan, not –we’re doing thisMemorializing how we got here and why •importantstated because they’re regionally Some important elements need to be –are high level–Keep in Mind:•Minor corrections–Reinforce roles–Better indicate context of text–Additional changes:•A few corrections to regional Plans–General clarifications–Concern for prescriptive standards–some sections–What We’ve Heard:• Request: Additional Plan Changes (for clarification)residential uses is essential.-Overall balance of residential and nondemand. term employment -term residential demand and development to preserve opportunities for the lagging, long-monitor neardevelopment proposals and ofthis inthe aggregated commercial impactsin only 15 years. The City should consider ut office uses are expected to take nearly 50 years to fully build out, while industrial and flex space markets could be built oabove, estimated square footage for retail and in the development program As shown intended for case by case review. and balance of uses. Because these are for broad land use areas, and generalized, these are not prescriptive standards The Development Program is intended to provide an estimate for understanding service needs and general allocation •Add text to development program, first paragraph:I assumes 50% office, 30% governmental/other, and 20% flex.-office, 40% office/flex, and 10% other; and MUNR assumes 50% -R assumes 90% commercial and 10% governmental/other; MU-C and MU-broken down as follows: MUcenters assume 20% residential. Commercial uses are ChindenCenter assume 40% residential; UstickCenter and Star/: The Star/McMillan Assumptionsassumptions are used within the context of future land use purpose text and descriptions. based on typical averages from uses supported within designation types. Because mixed use areas vary, the following table reflects residential density ranges adopted within the Comprehensive Plan. Assumptions for commercial values are Notes: The table above is intended to show approximate ranges of land uses that can be anticipated in the area. The •9:-Revise table 4A notes on page 3(at time of adoption)Mapand underlying Future Land useExisting Site Features •4:-Revise map title on page 1AS PROPOSED IN STAFF REPORT Request: Additional Plan Changes (for clarification)within landscape buffers, parking lots, and open space that enhances primary structure architectural features.Incorporate distinct architectural elements into monuments, signage, building addressing, and structural infrastructure •.into commercial structuresboard materials, or composition siding-materials, metal siding, plywood or pressedcast concrete, EIFS, PVC or plastic -iscourage or allow only a very limited use of preWithin commercial structures, d•.into commercial structuresmaterialsand/or wrought iron, or other local thematic cortenbatten siding, beadboard paneling, and taper sawn shingles; ncorporate stone, cultured stone, or brick masonry; horizontal lap siding, vertical board and iWithin commercial structures, •.into commercial structuresboard trim, posts, masonry piers, or other thematic elementsarchitectural hardware, transitional landscape walls, gates, railings, chimneys, dormers, brackets, corbels, belly band ncorporate gabled roofs, exposed trusses and rafters, covered porches, oversized iWithin commercial structures, •commercial structures and public facilities.residential areas, linear park and greenway and regional park, including a contemporary rural thematic throughout design standards for the Star/McMillan Center, adjacent exterior Elevate a distinct community identity by creating •20:-Revise action item on page 4the following:prior to and as development occurs. These items include the City Critical path items are actions that should be abided by •3:-Revise text on page 4AS PROPOSED IN STAFF REPORT Request: Additional Plan Changes (NOT in staff report)System concept of Communities in Motion 2040 2.0Road are identified in the 2040 Treasure Valley Public Transportation UstickThe transit routes on Star Road and •Add a note under the legend: –Employer Express Transit RouteValley Connect 2.0, Employer Express Route –econdary Transit RouteSValley Connect 2.0, Secondary Route –4:-Update the legend on the Transportation Framework, page 3•Potential Civic Site (school, church, etc.)Potential School/Church–Mixed Use CentersRetail/Office Areas–Higher Density HousingHigh Density Neighborhoods-Medium–Residential NeighborhoodsMedium Density Neighborhoods–sUse TypeGeneral –2:-Update the legend on the Illustrative Framework, page 3•COMPASS also provided some comments that we can improve on.IN ADDITION TO STAFF REPORT QUESTIONS Links https://meridiancity.org/compplanComprehensive Planhttps://meridiancity.org/fieldsFields Project Website Implementation Options Funding options could include general fund, CID, other•City ParkPublic partnership around the •Enhanced Participation to Achieve the City’s Vision:3.Funding options could include general fund, CID, other•Greenway and Pathway Mile Creek -FiveFocused and limited City partnership around the •Targeted Participation:2.Limited funding sources and limited City partnership•Star/McMillan CenterFocused on character the •Conventional Plan:1. Example Tool: public property to private parties through competitive bidding)is not allowed to be transferred to private parties in any way (except through sale of TIF•developmentAgencies are prohibited from backing loans or bonds used to finance private •publicowned land, for the benefit of the -Districts can only fund improvements on publicly•Districts typically sunset after 20 years and taxes return to regular taxing entities•availablebonded), with an agreement to be reimbursed once increment revenues become Typically, developers front costs for infrastructure development (which is often, in turn, •invested towards certain infrastructure improvements within the district) can be TIFIncreases in property tax revenue beyond the base levels (tax increment or •property taxes and other taxing entities outside schools and ACHD)Tax rates are frozen for properties within the district for a period of time (including •underdeveloped areasAllows municipalities to undertake redevelopment activities within deteriorating and •)URDUrban Renewal District ( Example Tool: paid in full Creates a lien against individual properties until all assessments are •Assessments may be paid in a lump sum or financed over time•where new developer/owners may enter the district at a later timeowners are not unfairly burdened with infrastructure costs in cases Can include a “latecomer agreement” to ensure that initial property •district landowners)proposed infrastructure facilities can be shown as directly benefiting Alternatively, an LID may be formed by majority vote of Council (if •residence) must sign a petition to create the LID60% of resident owners (or 2/3 of property owners, regardless of •could be used in in conjunction with or in place of CIDs LIDs•May be initiated by property owners or City•Local Improvement District (LID) Example Tool: developers/partnersBonding would be the responsibility of the •contiguous-Geography of a CID may be non•thirds of resident landowners -landowners or twoDistrict can be initiated by petition signed by all district •property owners that benefit from that infrastructure Distributes costs of infrastructure facility construction across •infrastructure costs areas to administer the allocation of shared capital CIDs can be created within city boundaries and impact •Community Infrastructure District (CID) Example Tools: Property tax levyProperty tax levyPoint of Paymentexpenditures)allowed -funding (within list of Statestructure or add categories eligible for May require vote to change fee authority, a separate entity)None (handled by urban renewal assessment bondsHearing required for special assessment bonds)bonds (hearing only for special Must vote if used with GO RequirementsVote/Hearing Council building permits. Other district types can Paid by property owners on issuance of TIF bondsincrement financing (TIF) and -Taxobligation (GO) bondsrevenue bonds, or general Special assessment bonds, Funding Sourcesother types of public improvements.and parks, but state law allows most Meridian currently limits to fire, police, property or ROW.construction but limited to public Wide range of spending and payments.facilities, but excludes DIF Wide range of infrastructure pay DIFs.proceeds may also be used to facilities (excl. irrigation). CID Wide range of infrastructure Use of FundsNot a separate district/entityboardappointed -Council or councilCity councilCity council (3 members only)AdministrationEnabled by State law.Not a district per se, so not applicable. narrative for other details)approved by council (see Findings of deterioration benefits ALL land owners)council (as long as district owners, OR majority vote of owners or 60% of resident Petition of 2/3 of all land option)landowners (no council vote owners or 2/3 of resident Petition of all district land District FormationCity or County (incl. ACHD)City or CountyPlanning Area)City (including Comprehensive City or CountyJurisdiction TypeConstruction of public infrastructureunder certain conditions)districts of primarily open/ag land deteriorating areas (also allows Incentivizing redevelopment of repair) of local infrastructureFinancing construction (or infrastructureFinancing construction of local Typical UseDevelopment Impact Fees Increment/Revenue Allocation)Urban Renewal District (Tax (LID)Local Improvement District District (CID)Community Infrastructure Funding Comparison Other Approaches new approved CIP projectArea could be potentially be expanded westward without having to add a Trail or park improvements already budgeted in Meridian’s CIP east of the Plan –CityExpansion of facilities already eligible for impact fee funding by the 3.or the StateACHDsuch In some cases, can be complex and involve Meridian and other jurisdictions –individual homes or businessesfacilities) and be reimbursed over time as connection fees are paid for and fund certain infrastructure elements (often roadway or water/sewer Through annexation and/or entitlements developers could agree to construct –Development Agreements/Reimbursement Agreements2.through the CIP.The City could potentially fund additional projects or portions of projects –Direct CIP investments1. Key Assets/Amenities 34 City Park3.PathwayGreenway & Mile Creek -52.CenterStar/McMillan 1. Key Assets/Amenities | Integrates residential.5.or office buildings.different than big/mid box or cluster Offers the opportunity for something 4.making.-environment and placeCenter can provide niche 3.2.Vibrant areas. Meets the City’s vision for Livable and 1.Star/McMillan Center Key Assets/Amenities | easement.Improvements on the south side 5..NMIDMile through coordination with -FiveIncludes pathway on the north side of 4.Connects to “Main Street”.3.urban development.neighbo rhood access and to support space, picnic areas, with 2.Mile Pathway.-wide Five-larger cityPathway system to connect into the 1.Mile Creek Greenway & Pathway-5 Key Assets/Amenities | neighborhoods.and employment areas and Serves as a buffer between industrial 3.creating a regional network.Phyllis Canal Pathway system, Pathway system and a potential Mile -Nexus between the Five2.entire Fields Sub Area. service standards, and central to City park would help meet level of 1.City Park Adopted by Resolution # XY-ABCD On Month Day, Year I 2T I :L 160� P-A Nis m 11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Mayor and City Council Sharolyn Ririe, Subarea Property Owners Robert Simison, Mayor Warren Ririe, Subarea Property Owners Treg Bernt, President Kent Rock, Launch Development Finance Advisors Joe Borton Duane Schwisow, Subarea Property Owners Luke Cavener Steve Siddoway, City of Meridian Brad Hoaglun, Vice President Warren Stewart, City of Meridian Jessica Perreault Bob Taunton, Urban Land Institute Liz Strader Clair Waite, Subarea Property Owners Jon Wardle, Brighton Corporation Mike Wardle, Brighton Corporation Planning and Zoning Commission Anne Wescott, Galena Consulting Bill Cassinelli Nick Grove Technical Analysis and Support Team Maria Lorcher Rhonda McCarvel Cameron Arial, Community Development Director Andrew Seal Mike Barton, Parks Superintendent Nate Wheeler Victoria Cleary, Economic Development Administrator Steven Yearsley Caleb Hood, AICP, Planning Division Manager Brian McClure, AICP, Comprehensive Associate Planner Stakeholders Consultant Team Rodney Ashby, City of Nampa Mike Barton, City of Meridian Logan Simpson Jason Boal, Ada County Leland Consulting Group Clay Carley, Old Boise, LLC Doug Critchfield, City of Nampa Greg Curtis, Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District Marci Horner, West Ada School District Tyler Johnson, Launch Development Finance Advisors Justin Lucas, Ada County Highway District Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions Emily Mueller, Mark Bottles Real Estate Deb Peterson, Boise Valley Church of the Brethren www.meridiancity.orgtpIanning/fields CONTENTS Introduction 1-1 ■ Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-1 ■ Plan Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-2 ■ Guide to the Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-2 ■ Background and Site Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-3 Public Process 2-1 ■ Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2-1 ■ Stakeholder Roundtables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2-1 ■ Concept Refinement Charrettes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4 The Plan. our Vision 3-1 ■ Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-1 ■ Illustrative Framework Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-2 ■ Transportation Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-3 ■ Parks and Pathways Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-5 ■ Economic Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-7 ■ Character Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-10 ■ Star/McMillan Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-15 Implementation 4-1 ■ Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-1 ■ Implementation Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-2 ■ Critical Path Items. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3 ■ Implementation Sequencing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4 ■ Implementation Financing Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-5 ■ Available Infrastructure Funding Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-6 ■ Implementation Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-10 www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields INTRODUCTION Overview The Fields Area, bound by Ustick Road, McDermott The recommendations within this Plan add to, but do not Road, Chinden Boulevard and Can-Ada Road, presents replace, those of the Comprehensive Plan and development an incredible opportunity to plan for one of the City's ordinances. Additional coordination and analysis will be last growth areas, in a way that aligns with the Vision necessary to ensure appropriate timing and integration of described in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan; continues development in this area. This chapter discusses some of to grow the employment base; and integrates high-quality the major issues that need to be considered or resolved neighborhoods, parks and pathways, and schools. A central as development proceeds. Any proposed development mixed-use activity center will serve as a hub for surrounding is anticipated to be consistent with this Plan, the neighborhoods, and integrates neighborhood-scale retail Comprehensive Plan, the Unified Development Code, and and services, office, civic, and park space in the very center state/federal regulations. of the Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Below:Birdseye aerial of the existing four square mile Fields Area,looking northwest from approximately the intersection of McDermott and Ustick Roads U hinder.8`0 �t ulev'_ Intermo ` iL xy-j www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields FIELDS SUB REA WA Plan Purpose and Scope OR MT The Fields Subarea Plan builds upon the vision and intent of — NV IDAHOWY the 2019 City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Subsequent M NOTu m ® CA LIT to the Comprehensive Plan adoption, City Council prioritized MIDDLETO© AR EAGLE The Fields Area for detailed planning that would make it more DE EN Am m development-ready. As the City continues to grow, and with CALDWELL fH GARDEN CITY IV the attractiveness of a new high school, planned fire and police AMPA�; BDISE station, and scheduled funding for new sewer infrastructure, investment and development interest in the area has m < aKum accelerated. This Plan will help ensure consistent, integrated development. The Plan builds on the City's Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map and Ada County Highway MELBA District's (ACHD) Master Street Map. The purpose of this Plan is to ensure that The Fields Area implements the vision of the Comprehensive Plan, and . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. is vibrant, self-sufficient, and distinctly Meridian. All of Above:Regional context of The Fields Area the unique location-specific circumstances and challenges Below:Future Land Use for The Fields Area are opportunities when consistently channeled and furthered o a Chinden Rd a within the context of this Plan. j Guide to the Plan The Fields Subarea Plan is structured in four chapters: CIF >> Chapter 1. Introduction outlines the plan purpose and scope, details guiding information, and illustrates key t s _ site features and constraints. ° a> Chapter2. Public Process illustrates the development of McMillan Rd the Plan through coordination with stakeholders and the N community. �� �w oenny ResaeMal >> Chapter3. The Plan describes an overall illustrative plan; °> _ Med-Mph0e.,LyR—denm details land use, transportation, and park frameworks; mdu"�I lays out a possible design scenario for the Star/McMillan PUStIck MbMU-N�hboh-d center, and illustrates the anticipated built character. Mke U-Comm dy >> Chapter 4. Implementation outlines an overall processd i Md�=a ens and next steps, and key funding mechanisms. v Mixen use-Inmrchenpe www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Background and Site Description at the south. Two future interchanges are planned: one at The Fields Area is an approximately four-square mile area Chinden Boulevard and one at Ustick Road. located at the northwest corner of Meridian and bounded The area's only existing collector street, Owyhee Storm by Ustick Road on the south, Can-Ada Road on the west, Avenue, has recently been constructed, from Ustick Road Chinden Boulevard/US Highway 20/26 on the north, and north to the Owyhee High School. This collector is planned McDermott Road/State Highway 16 (SH-16) on the east (see to continue further north to Chinden Boulevard, and is page 1-4). The area abuts the City Impact Areas of Star to anticipated to include a pathway. the north and Nampa to the south and west. Schools and Pathways. Owyhee High School is located Land Use.As shown on the Comprehensive Plan's Future Land at the southeast corner of the Subarea,just south of a future Use Map, the Fields Area is primarily designated for future elementary school site.Two additional school sites have been residential development, with a mixed use community center designated on the Future Land Use Map in this area, in coordi- at the southeast corner of Star and McMillan, and multiple nation with the West Ada School District, but siting has not yet school and park sites. Interchange and regional mixed use been determined.The Five Mile Creek and Feeder, Phyllis Canal, designations are incorporated along both Ustick Road and West Tap Sublateral, and Sky Pilot Drain are all anticipated to Chinden Boulevard, generally from the SH-16 extension to include proposed pathways along their alignments. Star Road. The southwest corner of the Subarea has been reserved for expanded industrial and non-residential mixed Irrigation. Multiple irrigation drains, feeders, and laterals use area within the southwest quadrant, and is aligned with cross the area, most notably the Five Mile Creek, which con- the existing Intermountain Gas Facility, currently located on tinues further east through the City. The numerous ditches Can-Ada Road. Through the Comprehensive Plan, the land and laterals that traverse The Fields Area, create both an o use accommodated a 1,000-foot safety buffer for the facility, opportunity for water-oriented green space and a challenge for U allowing only no-residential uses within that buffer. Lighting, future development due to high ground water.With pathway o and air sirens need to be taken into account for any adjacent improvements, Five Mile Creek has the opportunity to connect development, and open space and pathways should be located The Fields Area to the rest of Meridian, and into a regional to help mitigate these nuisances. system connecting west through Nampa, and north through Star and to the Boise River. Transportation. Star, Ustick,Can-Ada,and McMillan Roads are all owned and maintained by ACHD.The ACHD Transportation Utilities. Currently, the area is only able to be served with and Land Use Integration Plan classifies each of these four sanitary sewer service as far west as Owyhee Storm Avenue. streets as "residential mobility" arterials. Star, Ustick, and Future development located further to the west requires the Can-Ada Roads are proposed for five lanes, and McMillan Can-Ada Lift Station, pressure line, and gravity trunk lines, a� Road for three lanes. anticipated to begin design in the near future. Chinden Boulevard and the SH-16 extension are under Water is available along Ustick and McMillan Roads, west Storm have Owyhee Storm Avenue. Portions of Owyhee Ow Idaho Transportation Department (ITD)jurisdiction. SH-16 is to Ow Y Y � planned to extend south, paralleling McDermott Road, from mainlines installed, though extensions west will be required o its current terminus at Chinden Boulevard, to Interstate 84 to serve additional areas. A future, additional well will be } necessary to serve the four square mile area. v www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields PIK --------------- '1 r r z 5.17 Lateral i �.- MU R qI CD CD A 0 MU-1 1-10, Existing -_ - __ - - Future-Pathway - •�_ f ; Site `TPT.,' �I West Tap Sublateral Features i - Map MDR � MDR _ 5.3 Lateral MDR 2 . ?r Potential Fut rk y Park Area - LDR _ Potential Four '' —4 ► MDR C School Ares Potential future o� 5.5 Lateral T W Ledgerwood Ln School Area r Can-Ada MDR - M-HDR i LDR Lift Station a 3 ��f(uttpre Existing ME 211 Cemetery + y r MU C M HDR Gander Creek . Five Mile Creek/Dratin MDR M-HDR o — r' -lijive Mile Creek/Drain five Mile Feeder Canal Intermountain Gas Potential future; Gander Creek Facility and Safety Buffer 1,6 M-HDR Parlrea I_ _McFadden Drain W 1a2•�Pon' Y Diamon 1 I flor�.pl i rea i Future Elementar.11Wy �!n _ f �♦ CL Eight Mile Lateral School Site Ao MDR fo. Owyhee : ii MDR ♦ ° High School R' ^h A � MU-NR —. a) MU-C >° 0 1/8 mile 114 mile 1/2-- M U PUBLIC PROCESS Overview Stakeholder Roundtables The Fields is a unique area of Meridian's Area of City Impact, As part of the Subarea Plan, the City met in-person, in that it is generally removed from much of the remaining on-site, and at City Hall, and virtually with approximately City. It is an extension of the City bound on three sides by 25 individuals representing a variety of public agencies, other municipalities, and it will be further separated from the development community, and property owners to the City by the future extension of SH-16. While much of review background information and refine preliminary draft the land is controlled by development interests, and many concepts for the area. Since future land uses had been more land owners are interested in selling, meaningful previously discussed with stakeholders in 2017 and again public engagement is still paramount to development and in 2019 as part of the Comprehensive Plan, the focus of adoption of this Plan. these roundtables was to discuss implementation and the more prescriptive design elements within the central Star/ Public engagement for this plan began as the McMillan area. The team reviewed background and guiding Comprehensive Plan was developed, and continued through information from the Comprehensive Plan, and refined the the development of this Subarea Plan. Each phase built concepts with more affected stakeholders prior to broader upon the findings from the prior phase to dive deeper into public engagement. the vision and desires of stakeholders and the community o to mold and shape The Fields Plan. This chapter describes Three concepts (on the following page) focusing on the each phase in detail and discusses the process and the Star/McMillan Center were reviewed to refine opportunities -L) 25 findings from each. and begin the discussion on implementation steps and CL feasibility for the mixed-use activity area. FOCUSCOMPREHENSIVE PLAN STAKEHOLDER DIGITAL WORKSHOPS PUBLIC REVIEW ROUNDTABLES AttendeesAll property owners within expertise partthe four-square mile area broad range of development the four-square mile area of the Subarea Plan adoption invited phases invited process Events and outreach for the Property owners, City Council Property owners,City overall Comprehensive Plan and departments, Nampa, departments, cities of Nampa process A•. County, and Star,ACHD,West A•. N Neighborhood workshops Ada School District, Boise School District :2 to look at the Fields6 more depth financing representatives L developers, real estate and www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields T I. �, Ren• N 0. Fl C� i ���' Lam..- �` - �-}� r�� r. •{ / 4 VV r _ y I ' •--I, 4. utia -------------------- Concept 1: Central Civic Area Concept 2: Interior 'Main Street' Concept 3: Lake Front Retail North-south oriented 'Main » Access from McMillan Road and » Primary access from Star Road, Street' Star Road with visibility from Star Road Focus on usable civic area/park » One main greenway crossing; along greenway and across lake o alongside greenway other access points focus on front Parallel north-south access from usable park space at termini » Secondary access from McMillan L) Star Road, combined into one » Main greenway crossing has an Road boulevard at the south end of off-street pathway; three east- » Opportunity for retail/office to CL the civic area/greenway west street/pathway connections take advantage of direct lake Two greenway crossings to high school and future access Focus on pathways converging in elementary school » 'Main Street' continues from Star the central civic area » Main greenway crossing works Road across greenway and south as a buffer for higher density to Ustick Road v) 'Main Street' from mixed use » Possible secondary roadway area south to the east-west road connection across greenway east between the schools of mixed use area to connect Narrowest greenway, with McMillan Road to east-west road pockets of activity/park space at into future school site key locations along the corridor » Additional park space at the west o side, west of Star Road v www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Key Findings Phase 1 focused on engaging the property owners within neighborhood street feel, including alley-loaded the subarea to garner feedback from those most affected garages, detached sidewalks with parkways, and a by the subarea planning effort. Generally, stakeholders center median favored concepts with a greater amount of open space and connectivity to the surrounding neighborhood areas. Star/McMillan Center: Stakeholders suggested the following enhancements to the » Option three is the most economically viable due to concept plans: the highest traffic counts being on Star Road » Highlight connections to the Five Mile Creek Pathway Placemaking: system » Linear open space for placemaking opportunities » Identify connections into the Nampa pathway system » Focus on recreation activities not found in other (along Phyllis Canal and continuing west) parts of the City such as water activities » Include additional off-street pathway connections to » Build on the area's agricultural history through high school and elementary schools character and design standards, integration of art, or » Capitalize on the visibility from and traffic counts reuse/re-purposing of existing structures along Star Road to ensure viability of the mixed use area Other: Transportation: » Need to identify location of maintained areas, and 0 reenwa responsibilities along g y » Probably feasible for only one roadway crossing at maintenance .� the Five Mile Creek Pathway, between Star Road and Need to identify the location and type of easements required (after-hours lighting will be an issue inside Owyhee easements per ID agreements) » Star Road will remain the principal arterial street; Need to look at access and coordination with ACHD examine distancing requirements for cross streets in on access and spacing between connections to their greater detail » McMillan Road is planned as a three-lane arterial facilities street » Appreciation for the interconnected, grid street network within neighborhoods °' » Consider a connection to Owyhee Storm Avenue C rather than a direct connection south from the Center to Ustick Road » Alternatively, if the street connection is made o to Ustick Road, design the roadway with a } U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Concept Refinement Charrettes the area, ultimately resulting in refinements to the imagery Based off the feedback received and key findings, the three shown within this document. concepts were refined into a single, preferred concept for Changes incorporated into the Illustrative Framework (see the overall subarea, shown as the Illustrative Framework page 3-2) and overall Subarea Plan included: Plan. In addition, the mixed-use area at Star and McMillan Refinements to local-arterial connections Roads was detailed at a higher level. This center concept Location and inclusion of the 1,000-foot buffer on the along with imagery representing character and ideas for Intermountain Gas Facility a 'Main Street', central park space, residential housing Identification of future schools as elementary, as the types and scale, and additional amenities were presented need for another middle or high school is unlikely in digitally in a set of two meetings. Attendees were able to this area offer comments directly into the online platform, and a Incorporation of action items and additional polling exercise was used to select appropriate imagery for discussion of funding and financing options in the Implementation Chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Below:Digital charrettes using MURAL tool How eparrcipetetoday Visual Preference vNi c i ��e•b..nrw w>�, .w-n..: .�.m.m.. s e^. O• T„. ]B.cYywM , U 'au•Md°.rpw.y..°pfr••. rid..wl.sl. O rwrv+r..re wm..s•o=e.lu•a [ IN Su.MtMYe<wnr '" ... )_ Yr••• ,:....�.m......^......n....a, Overall Neighborhood Blocks Concept U .4 gbE-1 (D .w....m.. � , -Q SYrW.— MOM uM:YM roII.'x(O'nmwT..4 ..•+Y.<.ewmwe aw xwn..vrr - Ty— - `n0.✓..^r'•^M.MM ar. w tl w.,.nmwmu wwxnw au �I ► �_o IL �; F,to sP Plrn eny�r°rr»- (3 '--�r wA o•...m mar.ww:nrr^w mmer�a. -:� �':� ^yrM•6lieArnyyµ rl♦ MwYina S s _ CAlllMirttS: SOME SN.uY AN.r.ne. V) _ - ems 1cormnwn: a.r.r..,.,.. a P.M..na cma ® ® + O - U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields THE PLAN: OUR VISION Overview support and activate destination community services for The Fields will accommodate a series of great the center. neighborhoods for the City, focused on a community- The Fields Business Park will serve as a hub for light oriented, mixed-use center and connected by an industrial and flex uses, at the northeast corner of Can-Ada amenitized greenway and pathway system, and and Ustick Roads, with connections to SH-16, and walkable increasing the City's job base through a range of connections into surrounding neighborhoods and along employment areas. regional pathway systems. The Star and McMillan mixed-use center will be focused Additional mixed-use commercial areas along Ustick Road around a traditional Main Street and highly integrated and Chinden Boulevard will provide areas of high visibility, pedestrian-oriented environment. The center will include but lower trips, and are anticipated as uses that would not a central green and connection to the Five Mile Creek compete with the smaller-scale neighborhoods services and Pathway. A variety of residential types including vertically commercial at the core. integrated, live-work, and other medium-high-density residential products will provide the rooftops necessary to c a$r a) 6�a��yR -F� �5:1;, � T;,�,',. � e �,` APie, .£'E•-`. S' �t;:�., ' :r:.. r skre r::, i krflr..rr .d1,a" r5. �::iCs,'_...Sli:liw3syc:'3f i- www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields City of Star Area of City Impact Illustrative Framework CHINDEN BOULEVARD/US 20/26 Plan a onal f; 0 Use Type ' Interchange Area Commercial Medium Density Neighborhoods � Medium-High Density Neighborhoods eiglfbor •b. T'afai ill m�1 • - Industrial Area Nei borhoods Per p° Retail/Office Areas Neigghh orhoo Rhoo ds e h� r I or s 1 Business Park NEW COLLECTOR ROAD Potential School/Church 6 a er Parks and Greenways s ..-� o Preserva�inu..amETTraneition of tential Civic Site Historic Site Pai'I<- Pote Existing Rural Neighb r otods choal,church,etc.' rvic Site (scho Roadways and Pathways - Ig er en Highways and Arterials d I I ou ,rig ws Neig iborhoods Collectors xisting Local Streets C metery MCMI LAN ROAD — o :� .. , — Pathways Hi h Densit Holm r —i Refer to Star/McMillan Schematic Concept for `y` 1� L J additional detail ; �,►! �� s elTwa. 0— i.ti' ti i.Y ITT Hiaw� N ,r At rmohntain G.S. Note:The Illustrative Framework Plan is s arlwadit rOndl-C•it _ conceptual in nature. Final platting and design Prl<`. "`,`: ghe Den ity may differ. d �� °� `�r. Ho sing o;n--Hrfinentary IL N NEW Co LECTOR Ro School Site a� s-- �1nqdqstriaI:' A°r N i hbo hoo Owyhee t 'rk ght-M•e_Pa.t y g s High School s rk Neigl horhood Parl< „ n igher Density Highe Density J 0 u Housing A on Ustick ousing long Usti U 0 1/8 mile 1/4 mile 1/2 mile NORTH USTICK ROAD City of Nampa Area of City Impact n r Abbe-A residential neighborhood streetA. co ector system detailed in the ACHD Master treet ap "" """ rto""' ` "" mid-mile accesses along Chinden, between Can-Ada Further definition for the future local street network and Road and SH-16. connectivity is shown within the Illustrative Framework Plan, » Principal and minor arterials are constructed though final design will likely be different. The Illustrative and maintained by ACHD and include Ustick, Framework Plan is intended to demonstrate character and Star, McMillan, and Can-Ada Roads. All except for connectivity intent regardless of final design. A key goal McMillan are planned to eventually be widened to will be to ensure walkability between neighborhoods and five lanes. McMillan is planned for three lanes. centers, safe routes to schools, and equity in distribution of, » Collectors on-site include the semi-constructed and distance to, parks and recreation amenities. Owyhee Storm Avenue, and multiple planned collectors connecting neighborhoods to the arterials. SH-16 is planned to be extended from its current Generally, the collectors run on a half-mile grid. termination at Chinden Boulevard south to 1-84. » Local streets have been included in the Illustrative The planned, ultimate extension is anticipated to Framework, as potential options but actual be limited access, with interchanges at Chinden development is likely to differ. Local streets Boulevard and Ustick Roads, and an underpass should offer a high level of connectivity between at McMillan Road. The design for this extension neighborhoods and amenities; prioritize access to is completed, but the construction timeline and collector roadways, not arterials; and be coordinated phasing has not yet been identified. with off-street pathway systems. v www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields City of Star Area of City Impact IP HINDEN BOULEVARD/US 20/26 Transportation Framework ZrM,Cx,e o a � o Roadways and Pathways Interchange Area Commercial State Highways (ITD)— Principal and Minor Arterials, 96' ROW (A(HD) ,,,— Minor Arterials, 70' ROW(A(HD) � Collectors, 60 - 90' ROW (ACHD) Primary Local Streets NEW COLLECTOR ROAD — Primary Pathways (Five Mile Creek and Phyllis Canal Pathways) ® Valley Connect 2.0, Secondary Route Existing oncoc Valley Connect 2.0, Employer Express Route Neighborhoods r -1 Refer to Star/McMillan Schematic Concept for L J additional detail Note:The Transportation Framework is conceptual in nature. Final layout and design of _ MCMILLAN ROAD - the street network may differ. Sta McMillan I Five Mike-Ceeede-P.t.l; a n k-cwee.ls.Rathway' CL Existing Intermountain Gas — — — — — — Facility — c _O Future Elementary IL NEW COLLECTOR ROAD NEW COLLECTOR RO D School Site N O Q f � Industrial `Ate Owyhee Park High School Business Park „ Mixed Use Center O 0 I/8 mile I/4 mile I/2 mile NORTH USTICR ROAD ' City of Nampa Area of City Impact PLANNED 5-LANE ROAD www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields MV i•.�' .:r .._ .. Jai _ ••!'.�`"'* r rif'; S �itYf �''.tom' •.. (( ._ Ji ! Y" {�f'•fi s i+� ,: ri 1 L e(1 ✓rr;�9' r3�, iJ�J�'JJ wH ,. 110 ulof the City, the surrounding region, and north to the Boise serving, but may be accommodated in an original River. Secondary proposed pathways run adjacent to many way and include the linear park. The general of the water conveyance facilities within The Fields Area, placement of the park serves as a buffer between the 0 and will require coordination with both Nampa-Meridian Intermountain Gas Facility and neighborhoods. Irrigation District and Settlers Irrigation to determine » A City linear greenway and park run east from the feasibility and/or location of pathways and bridges. Aside regional park, south of the Star/McMillan Center, and from the Five Mile Creek Pathway, pathways are anticipated offer the opportunity for uses within the Center and to be maintained by HOAs, with an easement for public use. supporting residential to build off this open space area along the Five Mile Creek Pathway. In regard to parks, this area of the City is currently under- » Multiple one- to ten-acre neighborhood parks served, there are no planned park capital improvements, will be distributed throughout The Fields Area, and SH-16 improvements will reduce connectivity to public central to neighborhoods, and integrated with parks east of McDermott Road. The nearest existing public proposed pathways where possible. These smaller °' parks are Seasons Neighborhood Park, or Keith Bird Legacy parks will likely be developer-constructed and C Neighborhood Park, and both are far outside a preferred HOA-maintained. Partnerships should be explored half-mile walkability radius. The Illustrative Framework between the City, West Ada School District, or other Plan is intended to demonstrate general size, location, and entities for public uses in co-developed and shared o connectivity of future parks and pathways. spaces. } U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields City of Star Area of City Impact Parks and Pathways 1 oHINDEN BOULEVARD/US 20/26 Framework o m ' Interchange Area YP 3 Use Type o 5.11 Lateral ` ' Commercial ' a _ Parks and Greenways (City) o � yy C Potential Elementary School/Civic Facility Residential r o ` st Tap Sublaterai Parks (HOA) Neighborhoods + Residential ' esidenti I m Neighborhoods Nei hborh ds Roadways and Pathways Off-Street Pathways — On-Street Pathways ' Existing Rural — 1/4-mile walk distance l LDS Neighborhoods 29 1/2-mile walk distance .r5 MW;tl = r —i Refer to Star/McMillan Schematic Concept for Resld Ial �, HrlghtrrDenaty� Housing x L J additional detail Neighborhoods Note:The Parks and Pathways Framework is _ _ _ _ _ MCMI LANrRGAD conceptual in nature. Final location, size, and r P Higher Density design of included parks and pathways may Five Mile reec a w Housing differ. 0— Existing Intermountain as Facility McFadde 0 aiway r_} _O Future Elemen ar IL ool Site O) Industrial , r Owyhee Park ig t ile Pat way � � High School ;� 1 i c 1 � Business Park F211 0 1/8 mile 1/4 mile 1/2 mile NORTH USTICK ROAD City of Nampa Area of City Impact www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields � . NS-r -a': -:,e n.^._ �• .f V -y•,+�� ,k.. � �.1� ,,gg ::.�.' 'a.ti- 3':.. t'�.._ - ,z' :`sir_'• '� ".'p°rK :zz.•,,s..,�;' `vv5�`?..�:�':,.:',. :�;.:� •'.;'��t .,�- —�. -.5,i. Aw s 1 � •iS:.�r-fir,f'' .--�� _ - r�+;�,�.'y ��p- - r +i i .., r. ?.y .,.�'• .. any y f+:�.. - �. integrated.into residential neighborhoods beyond ::.. j.. _ the four square miles are anticipated to be residential neighborhoods, key areas along arterials are anticipated the Phyllis Canal and Pathway system, lies a future to be utilized for mixed-use, industrial, and business areas. Business Park area, intended to accommodate A local supply of family-wage jobs is essential not only for non-residential mixed uses, and serving as a D the City's overall jobs/housing balance, but in preserving transitional area between industrial and residential the transportation network, reducing regional pass-through neighborhoods along Ustick Road. Ancillary food and traffic, and in providing employment opportunities close to retail uses may support the business park employees. homes. If land uses are deemed necessary to change, areas Along both Chinden Boulevard and Ustick Road are two Mixed-Use Areas anticipated to accommodate within the larger area and/or larger City must be identified retail and office space typical to larger arterials within to mitigate that loss of employment area within the Fields Area. the area. These mixed-use areas are anticipated to be much different and must not compete with the N The southwest corner of The Fields Area along Can- Star/McMillan Center, further described later in this Ada Road includes an Industrial Area, building off document. the existing Intermountain Gas Facility, and offering 0 0 } U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields City of Star Are of City Impacta Economic Framework NINDEN BOULEVARD/US 20/26 Use Type Z A Industrial Area Interchange Area m Commercial - Retail/Office Areas Business Park Roadways and Pathways Highways and Arterials NEW COLLECTOR ROAD Collectors — Local Streets Primary Pathways r —1 Refer to Star/McMillan Schematic Concept for L— J additional detail. Note:The Economic framework is conceptual in nature. Final roadway network and connections may differ. __ — — MCMILLAN ROAD — c ' t: Et;f' 's s t la fzaEhwa'y~�I CL Existing �a ii,+ L — — — — — — J Inter oountain Gas ; a facility � .• ~ _O NEW COLLECTOR ROAD NEW COLLECTOR RO D C3 O V) dInidustrial :v 't � t°Parl �J a Q) 1 fr C ss�&ark 0 I/8 mile I/4 mile I/2 mile NORTH USTICK ROAD City of Nampa Area of City Impact www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields TABLE 4A: OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Residential Commercial Land Use Designation Approx. Allowable Density Total Units Range Average Approx. FAR SF Acreage Low High Low High Acreage Medium-High Density Residential 180 8 12 1,440 2,160 1,800 - - - Medium Density Residential 800 3 8 2,400 6,400 4,400 - - - Low Density Residential 70 0 3 40 60 50 - - - Parks & Open Space 225 - - - - - - - - Schools (Civic) 125 - - - - - - - - Mixed-Use Community 30 6 15 180 450 315 40 0.35 610,000 Mixed-Use Regional 10 6 40 60 400 230 40 0.25 436,000 Mixed-Use Interchange - - - - - - 70 0.15 458,000 Mixed-Use Non-Residential - - - - - - 60 0.10 262,000 Industrial - - - - - - 160 0.05 349,000 0- Assumptions: The Star/McMillan Center and Star/Ustick center assume 40% residential; Chinden centers assume 20% residential. Commercial uses are broken down as follows: MU-C and MU-R assumes 90% commercial and 10% — governmental/other; MU-NR assumes 50%office, 40% office/flex, and 10%other; and MU-1 assumes 50%office, 30%governmental/other, and 20%flex. Development Program Absorption Potential t3 As shown in the development program above, estimated Though somewhat dependent on the SH-16 extension, square footage for retail and office uses are expected to economic analysis indicates that the Fields Area could take nearly 50 years to fully build out, while industrial and potentially see the following ten-year demand: a� flex space markets could be built out in only 15 years. The Conservative Aggressive City should consider this in development proposals and Retail 143,000 SF 213,000 SF monitor near-term residential demand and development to preserve opportunities for the lagging, long-term office 77,000 SF 96,000 SF 0 employment demand. Industrial 176,000 SF 220,000 SF } U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields I "MOW that The Fields Area contributes to the City's overall goal of creating high-quality and family-friendly neighborhoods. The character and identity of neighborhoods, commercial areas, and parks and open space areas can allow this area 0- to become a unique destination within the City and the � larger region. ~ 0 a� V) N LL .C� t U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields I .nrr .''�� °f•'..�. : "� One-story,attached patio homes Above=garage accessory dwelling unit - 'i Three-story,open-space oriented apartments/condos Low-density,detached single-family ',� Three-story courtyard apartments/condos •-1 Single-family housing " " Open-space oriented townhomes � � - - Live/work units- ';''` � - � 1 k.. - hree-story apartments r�+. ��• Detached single-family Two-story townhomes with central,shared yard � Alley-loaded,detached single-family 3-11 Festival/market areas " ;=� ,— �, Natural areas restoration 'w�3e „ Natural areas/pedestrian bridges and pathway Agricultural-themed park amenities/playgrounds Amphitheater area • 'i _.nor. §w , Shelters and gathering areasCommunity gardens �; r • •4 �- K. �:,� :ar .—u — _ `"'w ..ate _fi.. _. • _yss..� 4.. 'j• '• At . � ..�._ Sports fields Integrated water play/ natural area Amenitized trailheads Water features/splash pads 3-12 - •�� ��I� .., ..�:•', .�� . . r,rr :'fig� } :a • d M1�Yy,' 4 g �' F ". =}' a:: ' Natural surface trails On street,bike lanes `,tii, • -. ' ,yam .. __�ti,. 1',.. Low-water plants within drainage Swale Enhanced pedestrian crossings/crosswalks � - (urb-separated bike lanes 3 � � Street with bollard lights and street trees ,er Soft-surface pathway � � _'' • a1 ��� y� • • Street with fencing and street trees Painted,on-street bike lanes Wide,paved pathway network Curbless street 3-13 •'�.,� Agri cultural-themed pedestrian areas and plazas Neighborhood center/community space �a�aa WIN miles Two-story market and restaurants � Two-story office Small-scale office • r � mill I Convenience commercial Community facilities/library � �� NMI • 01 .. F r 70 .� Industrial Industrial/flex space Recreation center Agricultural-oriented retail//restaurant - . . . . . . - . 3-14 StariMcMillan Center Center Components Overview The Star/McMillan Center is composed of two major non- residential components: The Star/McMillan Center is envisioned to be a vibrant, Commercial buildings fronting Star and McMillan neighborhood center with destination retail and Roads that take advantage of the higher traffic placemaking uses.The center itself should be internal- Roads and greater visibility along arterial streets. facing, and not a typical commercial development Off-street parking lots are located behind these oriented around arterial-facing, big-box retail and commercial buildings. An anchor user such as a supporting uses. community grocer, farm, lawn and garden store, or While the center itself could be designed and built out other neighborhood supportive user is needed near in many different ways, key concepts should build on the the intersection corner. These users should support central ideas within this plan and frameworks, including: and enhance vibrancy of the Center, and create utilize the Five Mile Creek Pathway and linear parks visibility for other uses by drawing visitors into the space to both integrate and promote adjacent site. commercial; Main Street-style, two- to three-story mixed-use connect the center into neighborhoods in multiple buildings fronting a curved street running east-west, ways to provide the primary users of the center direct with on-street parking, and that would house retail access; or office on the ground floor, and with residential incorporate a density and verticality of uses that and some office uses above. This area will have a create an active pedestrian-oriented environment as pedestrian-oriented streetscape, with generously- a central feature of the center; sized sidewalks that can accommodate outdoor focus pedestrian, bike, and vehicular access internally; seating, and ground floor building transparency D and that enriches the pedestrian experience by allowing a- incorporate a diversity of housing types throughout people to see activity inside and outside a building. the Center, and accommodate both higher and lower Acentrally-located park space is provided with density housing along the Five Mile Creek Pathway southern exposure that makes the area more and linear park; comfortable and usable year-round. create a seamless connection north-south between The balance of uses will be residential rooftops to the linear park, Main Street and central green area, support the Center, with a variety of housing types and the McMillan Road greenway; ranging from townhomes to apartments that have common ensure morning, day, and evening vibrancy and green spaces, oriented north-south and that are connected activity through a combination of office, civic, daily to the Five Mile Creek Pathway. services, niche retail, and numerous restaurants with >> This balance of uses will likely not occur early in multiple, direct neighborhood connections. Shared development stages, but ultimate buildout should public and quasi-public spaces should be featured achieve a balance of commercial and residential units in vibrant, destination site design that are common gathering spaces for all stakeholders. to create a vibrant environment. v www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields A _ V, W Ir Star/McMillan Center �I Schematic Concept Type � M[MILLAN R Use TYPOAD — Commercial - Mixed Use (retail, office, and/or housing) Mixed e Urban Housing (e.g. - Housing Parking apartments,condos,lofts) - Parks, Open Space, and Greenways Anchor Parking =5 I I ommerci�l - Civic(e.g. recreation center, library) !a MA T MI ED E_ I Central EP Roadways and Pathways ommons U Housing (e. . Parking aparttmm ents,condos,lofts) = Roadways (access control to be determined) — Pathways Gr ei r nsit enway-Oriented Housing — Potential - Five Mile Creek ivi Ite (e.g.recreation/ athway and Greenway mmunity center,library) r Higher Density, Higher Density, Higher Density, Greenway-Oriented g y' Greenway-Oriented Housing Greenway-Oriented Housing Housing � CL E LOCAL OAD IMITEEA TAR) 1 Higher Density Housing Higher Density Higher Density HousingCL Housing p N Higher Density _ O Q HousingL McFadden Pathway N NEW COLLECTOR ROAD 0 4) i L.L Medium Density Neighborhoods Higher Density Housing „ Medium Density Neighborhoods O U 0 181.5' 375' 750' NORTH www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields '� ! ti'° � `" �'-'�' ' .� �^1 .•• + Public art/music � Outdoor eating areas and plazas Star/McMillan Center Character -�'�"' .nG a�,1, -... n +�•' �._ +. �`,- Pedestrian oriented Main Street -. Adjacent greenway and pathway Roadway connections across greenway into center .l• •{tr }' I M'f'�1 -' '�l ! i r0— Ir. i, may\ •i` 1 Ae ■ ��� N • Agricultural oriented amenities Agricultural oriented plazas - f • Materials reflect agricultural history Planters/themed landscape Vertical mixed use buildings ^rfy.; Pathway integrated commercial and eating areas www.meridiancify.org/planning/fields3-17 Urban and Greenway- Oriented Housing (e.g. Star/McMillan Center Character apartments,condos,lofts) Mc��\ao E.xQa°aea 6<QePway alp°% ;;..�_. Central Commons �aa Main Street Mixed-Use �(M Parking a � Gateway Roundabout Connection to Residential Mixed Use _ Neighborhoods Parking Anch - Ff Potentials'I r• CL reation/cam enter,libra + Pathway and Greenwa CL D �Y o :_# D LL e= Regional Park Space N _ - O U www.meridiancify.org/planning/fields Suggested building materials and elements Residential units on second floor Colored,textured pedestrian crosswalks Rooftop usage and patio areas Street trees and landscaping areas Retail,restaurants at ground floor Themed wayfinding and signage Themed furnishings (e.g.lighting,benches,and Planted medians planters) .1� IN IQ C: + cc t l CL D ` ILL C } U www.meridiancify.org/planning/fields Street trees and landscaping areas Colored,textured pedestrian crosswalks Thematic elements such as lighting and fencing to Connection to linear park and greenway transition from Main Street Variety of residential housing including apartments, Thematic elements to match Main Street condominiums,and townhomes Corner of Main Street,with outdoor Y eating areas and small-scale commercial i f kA fin - - , I a) k A- ri - - ri •, I N r } U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields I IMPLEMENTATION Overview Before laying out a framework of potential implementation Implementation refers to those actions that the City should steps for The Fields, it is useful to revisit elements from take to promote and shape development until the area is the City's Comprehensive Plan that will help guide future fully built out. Most physical construction in the area will be development. The Comprehensive Plan document includes carried out by the private sector and will take place largely five general focus areas, each with goals, specific objectives, at the time and pace of stakeholder readiness, market and action items. Implementation steps later in this Chapter demand of planned elements, and infrastructure availability. highlight key actions, high-level anticipated costs, and The City's ability to influence desired development potential responsibility. The policies in these tables build on outcomes must come through the use of general categories those within the Comprehensive Plan. This discussion will of partnership/cooperation, policy/regulation, and public help drive recommendations for the selection and timing infrastructure. of potential City actions. Refer to the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan for overall vision, goals, and objectives for each focus area. c 0 _o c a) E T rti Q - E _ _ r agodL c j ITT iv 41 U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Implementation Priorities Enhanced Participation to Achieve the City's Vision At a large-scale, there is a hierarchy of three The last option is inclusive of the prior two, and includes implementation options or packages to ensure the viability expanded City partnership and involvement in funding of the Star/McMillan center, and its success as a vibrant, options for the City Regional Park, including parkland community-oriented place: Conventional Plan, Targeted acquisition, design, construction, and maintenance. This Participation, and Enhanced Participation. option would help increase the City's Level of Service Standards for parks space and proximity to residents, These differing levels of City-involvement have been as well as provide a key amenity and anchor in this highlighted below, including a range of participation disconnected area of Meridian. techniques to be undertaken by the City and its leadership. The City intends to move forward with this option, Conventional Plan exploring all opportunities to secure park space and in The first option focuses on the character of the Star/ supporting a vibrant neighborhood center within the heart McMillan Center, and looks to develop and implement of this Subarea Plan. Without this level of effort, the Fields design and character standards for commercial areas, Area may not achieve the same quality and sense of place streetscapes, and public rights-of-way, including areas that other areas of the City have achieved. along the Five Mile Creek Pathway. c Adopted City standards would be applied during the review o of development submittals within the Star/McMillan area. U This option generally includes limited funding sources and Q) limited City partnership. E Q Targeted Participation E Building on the Conventional Plan option, this option also includes the development of standards for the Center, but increases the level of City partnership around the Five Mile Creek Pathway. Increased City funding options and partnerships would be used to acquire, design, construct, and maintain the Five Mile Creek Pathway and Linear Park between Owyhee Storm Avenue and Star Road. Funding °' options could include general fund allocations, partnership in a CID, or other options. This option preserves the opportunity for commercial areas and green space while residential rooftops build out, and supports the commercial o center in the long-term by providing a destination amenity } for The Fields Area and City as a whole. v www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Critical Path Items Critical path items are actions that should be abided by prior to and as development occurs. These items include the following: Employment/Commercial Areas: access to Star Road, south of the Five Mile Creek 0 Retain the area specified or overall acreage of the Pathway crossing. Industrial, Mixed Use Non-Residential, and the 0 It may take years for area rooftops to fully support Interchange Commercial land use designations to a destination neighborhood center that is critically central to this Plan. If interim residential is proposed ensure continued expansion of the City's economy in the near-term, incorporate for-rent, first floor and job base. residential uses built at commercial standards, and 0 Do not consider any land use change that would utilize as residential in the near-term until the market result in a change to the jobs/housing mix within can support a transition to commercial. these areas unless a comprehensive transportation Parks and Pathways: and market analysis is completed, and a study undertaken to identify where these anticipated jobs 0 Retain the appropriate acreage for a regional park could be located elsewhere within the City and how within this four square miles to help meet the City's the transportation network will be affected. increased level of service standard of four acres 0 Areas identified as mixed use areas along per 1,000 persons, and a radius of.5 miles per Ustick and Chinden are dependent on the component for walkability. timeframe of the SH-16 extension and 0 The park location as identified on the map, could be interchange build out. These areas are likely shifted, however, the location as shown achieves the at least a 20-year build out, and will likely following: , rely on an increasing trade area of at least 0 Buffers residential along Star Road from the • 5,000 homes. Intermountain Gas Facility Star/McMillan Center: 0 Allows access to two potential regional pathway systems including the Phyllis Canal • 0 Ensure that residential or office space are and the Five Mile Creek Pathway incorporated within the center in a mixed use 0 Incorporates existing ponds and low-lying ' capacity, on the 2nd and 3rd stories of mixed use areas which could be used as park amenities buildings. 0 Is located along a potential collector roadway 0 Support local street access from both Star and 0 Allows for heavily lighted fields adjacent to ,• McMillan Roads in order to ensure the circulation commercial and industrial areas instead of necessary for a viable Star/McMillan Center.This residential to mitigate conflicts • includes two local street entrances from McMillan Road, and one from Star Road. Locate collector 4-3 Implementation Sequencing While hard to identify exact timeframe for development and improvements to happen within The Fields Area, it is important to identify the necessary steps involved, and overall progress • the vision includedimplementation steps in regard to setting up funding districts, annexation, and identifying, and implementing key amenities are below. Creation of CID Development Plan Coordination with Annexation of including legal (PUD,Subdivision) property owners description and contiguous property by documentation, review regarding land issuance of bonds (GO either property owners and approval showing provided for park special assessment ors or City and assignment parkland and open open space and trails revenue) of zoning. space dedication • Valuation determined Park or open space Parks,open space and/ through appraisal of dedication on or pathways improved properties within the subdivision plat or by through CID-generated proposed CID. separate instrument. funds. 4-4 Implementation Financing future developments to tie into existing City pathways could Considerations also be considered framework infrastructure elements. Three general categories or scales of infrastructure, listed Because framework infrastructure facilities tend to span below, require different approaches to and sources of multiple ownership entities, entail higher project costs, funding (e.g., City or developer). and may provide benefits that be difficult to quantify and "Local" or "on-site" infrastructure; p y q y apportion, their cost sharing arrangements are usually more "Framework" or "district" infrastructure; and complicated. The structure of funding arrangement can vary "Major off-site" infrastructure. considerably and depends on type of facility, ownership Local or On-Site Infrastructure patterns within the service area of that facility, and goals of the City (or other jurisdiction involved). "Local" or "on-site" infrastructure is located on or adjacent to a development property and largely serves existing or Major Regional or Off-Site Infrastructure proposed development on the site. This infrastructure may In less common cases, there may be infrastructure be of any type, including transportation, sanitary sewer, improvements important to The Fields Area that do not water, stormwater, or parks. Local infrastructure is typically fit neatly into either local or framework infrastructure of the minimum size required by the City for development categories. These could include major regional facilities plan approval. This may include facilities such as local or built within the Plan Area to serve the future needs of collector streets or eight-inch sewer laterals. Planning Area users but that would likely benefit users o Meridian's policy is consistent with most other jurisdictions outside the Area to a substantial degree, such as a large C in that this infrastructure is built and largely paid for by recreation center or a large detention reservoir. Although a) developers. The City may become involved in funding for the Illustrative Framework does not currently include such E some limited 'oversized' components, or where the larger facilities, they may be contemplated in the future. E community benefits; however, these are not common for Similarly, a major off-site infrastructure facility located local infrastructure improvements. near, but not within, The Fields Area (such as interchanges Framework Infrastructure for the SH-16 extension) will be very important to future Fields Area stakeholders, but also serve a broad geography "Framework" or "district" infrastructure is typically larger of diverse regional users. Funding responsibility for than local infrastructure, more costly, and likely to serve these elements tends to be broad-based, only indirectly multiple properties or development projects within drawing on City or developer support. Planning for such the same overall planning area (and same municipal improvements are typically cooperative efforts involving C jurisdiction). For example, a lift station to pump wastewater both the City of Meridian and state or regional bodies (e.g. to an elevation suitable for serving multiple areas IDT, ACHD, COMPASS). The City should work with Planning a, of development would be an example of framework Area developers and other stakeholders to encourage infrastructure—benefitting the overall Plan Area and with participation in those planning processes in ways that benefits unlikely to be confined to a single developer's further The Fields Area vision and goals. v property. A City park or major trail connection allowing www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Available Infrastructure Funding Tools proportionately allocating these costs to new development Appropriate funding strategies for local and framework in order to keep the same level of service set by that infrastructure are relatively straightforward (developer and jurisdiction (e.g., park acres and policing services to overall CIP funding, respectively). For framework infrastructure, population; or a given response time for fire services). the added complexity of balancing concentrated near- In Meridian, DIFs are set forth in a fee schedule that is term costs (e.g., for a park on one developer's property) subject to periodic change. Currently, residential units pay and dispersed, long-term benefits (to property owners, one of five flat fee amounts based on the size of unit, while developers, and future residents throughout the study non-residential developments pay a DIF based on building area), often calls for more nuanced funding mechanisms, square footage, across two categories of uses: commercial such as those described below. (primarily retail and dining) and "other" (office, industrial, Development Impact Fees (DIFs) and other non-residential). The 1992 Idaho Development Impact Fee Act (Impact A new facility must be included in the City's Five-Year Fee Act) introduced a new mechanism for funding Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to be eligible for funding the infrastructure costs of growth, giving cities, towns through DIFs, and any equipment or facility funded must and counties the authority to levy impact fees on new have a functional lifespan of at least ten years. The City development, as a condition of development approval, to has an Impact Fee Advisory Committee which advises City pay for a proportionate share of the cost of the system Council on the subject. o improvements needed to serve that development. Development impact fees (DIFs) are generally defined as Local Improvement Districts one-time assessments used to recover the capital costs A Local Improvement District (LID) is similar to a Community E borne by local governments due to new growth. Infrastructure District (CID, and described below) in that a it is a mechanism by which the cost of infrastructure that E Meridian currently uses impact fees for parks, police, and benefits multiple property owners is divided among those — fire protection-related capital facilities only, although the property owners in an equitable manner and paid by an Impact Fee Act enables the collection of DIFs across a wide assessment. LIDS may be initiated by property owners or e variety of other infrastructure categories, including electric, the City. One or more LIDS could be used in the Plan Area in water, wastewater, storm drainage, and transportation conjunction with or in place of CIDs. facility. Collector and arterial roads in Meridian and V) unincorporated Ada County are built and maintained by the As with CIDs, an LID is often formed with a "latecomer Ada County Highway Department (ACHD), which collects its agreement" formally included to ensure that initial property °' own DIFs from new development to that end. owners are not unfairly burdened with infrastructure costs 0 in cases where new developers/owners may enter the In general, impact fees are calculated by: 1) determining district at a later time. Some key features of LIDs: the anticipated cost of expanded or additional public o facilities and services projected to be required as a result » In Idaho, 60 percent of resident owners (or 2/3 of } of anticipated growth from future development; and 2) property owners, regardless of residence) must sign a v www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields petition in support of initiating the district. Naturally, Community Infrastructure District (CID) this requires the support of property owners, and Since 2008, municipalities in Idaho can establish one outreach and discussion among property owners or more community infrastructure districts (CID) within may require considerable time. their city boundaries (or impact areas) to administer the » Alternatively, an LID may be formed by majority vote allocation of shared capital infrastructure costs. CIDs are of City Council (so long as proposed infrastructure very similar to LIDS and increasingly common in Idaho. facilities can be shown as directly benefiting district Recent Treasure Valley examples include the utilization of landowners). CIDs on Harris Ranch and Avimor. They are intended to » Assessments may be paid in a lump sum or financed distribute the costs of infrastructure facility construction over time at the property owner's discretion. across a number of property owners that stand to benefit Assessments are due upon allocation of costs. from that infrastructure. A district can be initiated by As noted above, fees are typically due later in a petition signed by all district land owners or two-thirds of reimbursement district, when property owners seek resident landowners. The geography of a CID may include public works permits. non-contiguous areas. » The LID creates a lien against each individual's property until all assessments are paid in full. This A key benefit of CIDs is the oversight afforded to local is seen as a negative by lenders, whose strong governments without some the risk that comes with URD preference is that there be no other claims on the and LID. property on which they are making a loan, and often ° by property owners. This is a positive since the lien Urban Renewal/Reimbursement District (URD) o c creates a secure income stream against which the Since the mid-1960s, Idaho State Code has allowed °' City can issue bond debt. Whether an LID is initiated municipalities to undertake redevelopment activities within T by property owners or the City, LID debt is always URDs established in deteriorating and underdeveloped E issued by a government agency, and thus usually areas. When a government agency creates a URD, new take advantage of lower interest rates. tax revenue that would have been distributed to other taxing entities, excluding schools and ACHD, flows to the URD. Increases in property tax revenue beyond the base levels, referred to as tax increment, can be invested ° towards certain infrastructure improvements within those V) districts. Typically, developers are called on to front the cost of infrastructure development (which is often, in U_ turn, bonded), with an agreement to be reimbursed once 0 increment revenues become available. Once a URD sunsets a� (typically after 20 years), taxes return to regular taxing entities. } U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Importantly, urban renewal agencies in Idaho can fund Other Approaches to Framework Infrastructure improvements only on publicly-owned land, for the benefit In addition to the URD, CID and LID funding tools described of the public, and agencies are prohibited from backing above, the following tools often help with the funding of loans or bonds used to finance private development. Unlike framework infrastructure in new growth areas: some other states, Idaho does not allow tax increment proceeds to be transferred to private parties in any way » Direct Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) investments. (except through sale of public property to private parties As described elsewhere, the City could potentially through competitive bidding). fund additional projects or portions of projects through the CIP. An analysis of each infrastructure Meridian already has established several URDs including component may be appropriate to determine if downtown Meridian and a portion of the Ten Mile doing so would require deferring or reprioritizing Road interchange, both administered by the Meridian other projects already on the list. Development Corporation, its local urban renewal authority. Development Agreements/Reimbursement Of the existing Meridian urban renewal districts, the one at Agreements. Like many other municipalities in Idaho Ten Mile and I-84 is most similar to what would be possible and elsewhere, the City of Meridian typically enters for The Fields Area, in that the land in question is primarily into formal development agreements with major rural/agricultural in use. developers seeking annexation and/or entitlements URDs afford municipalities a high degree of influence over for future construction in the City. These negotiated o potentially large areas where future development may legal arrangements may contain agreements wherein occur, with powerful funding mechanisms and abilities a developer agrees to construct and fund certain to aid in land assembly. The primary disadvantages to infrastructure elements (often roadway or water/ E this approach to funding include the relatively onerous sewer facilities) and be reimbursed over time as a) bureaucratic and political steps necessary to establish new connection fees are paid for individual homes or Q urban renewal areas, along with strong political resistance businesses. In some cases, these take the form to the process among some voters and land-owners. Given somewhat complex intergovernmental agreements the relatively recent establishment of the Ten Mile Urban involving Meridian and other jurisdictions such ACHD Renewal District, and the political difficulties associated or the State. a) with its adoption in an area of primarily open land, the use Expansion of the types of facilities that are already of urban renewal for an even further-out area of open/ considered eligible for DIF funding by the City. agricultural land may face heightened political challenges. Trail or park improvements already budgeted in Meridian's CIP east of the Plan Area could potentially U_ be expanded westward without having to add a new 0 approved CIP project. a� 0 } U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields TABLE 4A: COMPARISON OF INFRASTRUCTURE COST-SHARING MECHANISMS Community • . Local Improvement Infrastructure District District(LID) (Tax Increment/Revenue Fees (DIF) (CID) Allocation) Typical Use Financing construction of Financing construction (or Incentivizing redevelopment Construction of public local infrastructure repair) of local infrastructure of deteriorating areas (also infrastructure allows districts of primarily open/ag land under certain conditions) Jurisdiction Type City or County City (including Separate legal entity City or County(including Comprehensive Planning operating within a defined ACHD) Area) district within a city or county District Formation Petition of all district land Petition of 2/3 of all land Findings of deterioration Not a district per se, so not owners or 2/3 of resident owners or 60%of resident approved by council (see applicable. Enabled by State landowners (no council vote owners, OR majority vote of narrative for other details) law. option) council (as long as district benefits ALL land owners) 0 Administration City council (3 members City council Council-appointed board Not a separate district/entity only) Use of Funds Wide range of infrastructure Wide range of infrastructure Wide range of spending and Meridian currently limits o facilities (excluding facilities, but excludes DIF construction typically for to fire, police, and parks, _T irrigation). CID proceeds may payments. public facilities, property or but state law allows most Q_ also be used to pay DIFs. ROW other types of public E improvements. c Funding Sources Special assessment bonds, Special assessment bonds Tax-increment financing (TIF) Paid by property owners on ° revenue bonds, or general and TIF bonds issuance of building permits. t3 obligation (GO) bonds Other district types can be 0 set up to repay DIFs. Council Vote/Hearing Requirements Must vote if used with GO Hearing required for special None (handled by urban May require vote to N bonds (hearing only for assessment bonds renewal authority, a separate change fee structure or special assessment bonds) entity) add categories eligible for U_ funding (within list of State- 0 allowed expenditures) a� Point of Payment Property tax levy Property tax levy Sources: Development Impact Fees: Idaho Code Chapter 82,Title 67; and htt s://meridiancit.or/buildin /fees; Urban Renewal Districts; Idaho Code Chapter 29,Title 50; Local improvement Districts; Idaho Code Chapter 17,Title 50; P P P P Y S S P P P } CIDs; Chapter 31,Title 50 U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Implementation Actions >> Stewardship; Actions outline steps for further implementation of the >> Public Safety; Fields Area until the area is fully built out, and provide >> Character, Design, and Identity; and guidance for both preparation of and in review of >> Transportation and Streets. development submittals. Responsibility and anticipated Because the Comprehensive Plan covers a wide range timeframes are included to help guide continued internal of inter-related topics, there is overlap across goals and work on policy and regulatory changes, coordination objectives. For example, the Housing focus area includes between developers and agencies, and construction of key objectives related to parks and open space, but those topics infrastructure and services. are covered more directly under the Parks and Pathways focus area. Actions are organized by the following elements: • Housing; • Education and Community Services; • Economic Development; • Growth and Population/Future Land Use; • Utilities and Infrastructure; • Paths and Parkways; C: 0 y , 116 r � r N .1 6PSg9k75M1 w _ t U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Housing Canyon and Ada counties. There may be some demand for Housing diversity is a citywide concept that may not be multifamily in mixed use areas until single-family rooftops fully realized in each of the City's subareas. With its edge can support additional commercial opportunities, but the location, housing in The Fields Area will likely skew towards City should seek to limit traffic and density impacts where lower densities, relative to more central Meridian locations. community services are not available. Single-family housing demand will likely be the prevailing Over time, providing a variety of pricing and own/rent market driver until the SH-16 expansion is nearer to housing options, while ensuring the continuation of completion, and the area becomes attractive to prospective high quality development and quality of life amenities renters drawn by convenient access to employment in in The Fields Area will become increasingly important to em to ers considering development in the area. Recommended . . Limit single-family developments per planned land use designations to ensure sufficient land for higher Long-term (4 - 20 Community density housing as market demand matures. years) Development Codify or adopt stronger standards for a maximum percentage of land area dedicated for residential Short-term (1 - 3 Community within mixed use areas, to ensure land is preserved for the City's job base. years) Development o 0 Consider incentives for developers to build workforce affordable housing. Long-term (4 - 20 Community years) Development °' E aT Consider incentives for developers considering neighborhood-integrated, multi-family housing, Long-term (4 - 20 Community Q_ especially in support of future retail around McMillan Road and Star Road intersection, as shown in this years) Development Plan. c 0 Encourage developer dedications of land for park and pathway amenities to support adjacent residential Short-term (1 - 3 Community U uses, consistent with this Plan, and especially in period of high residential demand/profitability. years) to Long- Development U term (4 - 20 years) V) N Ensure that new residential developments enhance and further community identity through Ongoing Community contemporary rural thematic elements. Development C • Include architectural and landscape design features in monuments, signage, fencing, open space, 0 and landscape features that reflect a "modern rural" thematic. • a� Ensure that residential areas are designed around highly visible and accessible open space and pathway elements, and that reinforce view corridors and frame points of interest. o • Integrate new developments adjacent to existing estate homes or commercial uses through } density transitions or separation through purposeful and usable open space buffers. v www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Education and Community Services district, facilities could also be located in Star to the north, The Fields Area includes the recently completed Owyhee and some facilities could be developed in close proximity to High School, a future elementary school site just north of the east. the high school, and potentially two additional school sites. The City should proactively maintain communication with These should be planned and timed in close coordination neighborhood groups to be aware of any desire for private with the West Ada School District. schools, daycares, and preschools, or other specialized In terms of demand timing, the area is likely to require the educational facilities (e.g. seniorjob training), to plan for any elementary school north of the high school first, followed necessary land use regulatory changes. by additional schools after considerable further residential development has taken place. Because the WASD is a larger Recommended . . Plan for neighborhoods within The Fields Area to be conveniently connected and integrated with future Ongoing Community o schools. Development, West Ada School a) District E Q Work with the West Ada School District and developers to identify, and co-locate school and Short-term (1 - 3 Community E neighborhood park spaces. years) and Long- Development, term (4 - 20 years) West Ada School District 0 a� Ensure off-street pathway connections from surrounding neighborhoods connect to park and school Short-term (1 - 3 Community sites. years) and Long- Development, term (4 - 20 years) West Ada School District a) U_ c Work with the West Ada School District to ensure that new school sites aren't developed in areas Ongoing Community planned for commercial and neighborhood supportive uses. Development, West Ada School District ° } U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Economic Development logistics-related businesses requiring a more central The expansion of SH-16 on The Fields' eastern edge location to the greater Treasure Valley market. boosts the potential for this area to provide high-quality The open space and agricultural status of The Fields Area employment. provides an opportunity to accommodate major proposed With the expansion of SH-16, The Fields will naturally destination uses as they arise. Currently, the plan does not emerge as a go-to location for employment in the long- assume any major stand-alone destination-type public term as those areas of town build out. There should also development. Commercial land use designations in the plan be mid-term potential for employment that is sufficiently should be sufficiently large to accommodate private-sector differentiated from Ten Mile and downtown, such as destination tenants. Recommended . . Work with regional cities and BVEP to explore the opportunity to establish an Economic Development Long-term (4 - 20 Community o District. Develop a regional strategy or CEDS to assist with application for future US EDA grants. (See years) Development Meridian Economic Development Strategy) a) » Proactively prepare site information for target industries and share with BVEP to share with E potential businesses. T » Track industry market trends to identify shifting land and space needs for identified target E industries. c Preserve land for the employment areas necessary to support the Fields Sub Area Plan jobs, Short-term (1 - 3 Community transportation, and land use diversity purpose and goals. years) and Long- Development o a� Reserve employment areas southwest of the future SH-16 and Chinden for Mixed Use- term (4 - 20 years) Interchange. Reserve employment areas east of Can-Ada Road, between Ustick and McMillan Roads for industrial and an employment-related mix of commercial uses (NR-MU). ai Reserve employment areas at key arterial intersections for neighborhood- and community- C serving retail and related uses (per this Plan). ° 0 } U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Growth and Population/Future Land Use reluctant to sell. Most of those who engaged with the City, The Fields area is a key asset for accommodating future during the engagement process for the Comprehensive growth. Maintaining level-of-service and quality standards Plan and with this sub-area plan, recognized the area was may present funding challenges as the City expands. The primed for development. Future decisions as to funding City's current policy of fronting costs of major infrastructure mechanisms, especially those requiring the formation of elements may need to be modified through funding special districts, should consider the desires and rights of mechanisms that fairly spread timing and risk of capital costs these segments, in part because different districts have while preserving for and facilitating unique opportunities. different voting and petition requirements with formation. Opening a large fringe area to growth presents efficiency The gas storage facility in the southwest area of The Fields challenges, including potentially undesirable leapfrog presents a potential land use incompatibility. This facility development, and especially given the location of the future presents safety concerns and nuisance impacts such as regional wastewater lift station on the far western edge. noise, light, and visibility extending well beyond the 1,000- Only a small portion of The Fields Area is annexed into the foot safety buffer, generally lessening the quality and sense City, while the remainder is included in the City's Impact of place elements important to Meridian residents. This area Area. Future annexation (appropriately timed) will help to must not be relegated to lesser residential uses, or intended avoid enclave issues in Ada County. for those who can afford less. Mitigation improvements would consume acreage and require improvements at the 0 The Fields currently contains a mix of developer-owners cost of other amenities and features. Focusing this area on actively assembling land, along with long-time resident/ non-residential uses avoids costly improvements, does not owners. Some residents are happy as-is and intending to detract from quality of life, avoids equity issues with some E remain long term, and others are holding out until a later residential product types, and works to balance jobs and T Q time, potentially for optimal pricing or those that are just transportation impacts. E 0 ResponsibilityRecommended Action Items Timing o a� Residential. Consider proximity to community open space and connectivity with adjacent residential Ongoing Community entitlements. Development • Balance open space requirements with new developments by requiring more further from public a� spaces, and less adjacent to or directly interconnected with larger public spaces. • Support open space partnerships between developments or with the City that provide more ° consolidated open spaces. • Support innovative neighborhood serving employment and service uses along arterial roadways • Encourage and support shared or small-scale office spaces along visible residential districts on arterial roadways. } U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields ResponsibilityRecommended Action Items Timing Neighborhood Center. Maintain and support a vibrant neighborhood center by carefully considering Ongoing Community the uses, design, and timing of entitlement approvals. Development • Remain consistent with the purpose and general layout of the neighborhood center • Promote and wait for community supportive commercial uses that reduce the need for more trips at further distances by residents and stakeholders. • Ensure that development requests support the neighborhood center through use siting, layout, enhanced connectivity, centralized shared spaces, and that promote the main street concept. • Explore opportunities to attract and site a community grocer or neighborhood farm/yard store to anchor the neighborhood center. • Enhance and further main street as a destination and community-oriented space for live, work, and play. • Site and design development to make use of shared and highly visible personal and community spaces. Closer to main street, spaces should include hardscape, tree canopy, seating, and places for eating, work, and leisure. • Locate surface parking lots to the sides and rear of structures located along the main street. • Provide open space connections between the Five Mile Creek Pathway and Main Street. 0 Mixed Use Non-residential, Mixed Use Interchange, Industrial. Promote employment areas that Ongoing Community encourage local family-wage jobs and discourage community services and goods. Development Q) • Sustain employment areas by limiting site development which prioritizes encroaching strip and E drive-through commercial uses. Q • Ensure opportunities for economic concentration benefits formed by a diverse array of clustered E employment uses in close proximity. — • Understand all land use decisions, and especially those that may limit or create market pressures that disrupt or devalue employment uses. IL 0 a� Mixed Use Regional/Community (not Neighborhood Center)/Mixed Use Interchange. Support a Ongoing Community diverse range of regional services and employment opportunities. Development Limit large or dense residential density developments absent of supportive services and _0 infrastructure, or that may otherwise limit the provision of future services from developing. °' U_ Support development plans that provide flex use spaces in areas that do not compete with prime, higher visibility commercial opportunities. Consider reduced development standards for site and structural improvements. Support development plans that provide opportunities for uses such as gyms, churches, and other community services in areas that do not compete with prime, higher visibility commercial opportunities. Consider reduced development standards for aesthetic and site and building v improvements. www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Utilities and Infrastructure The City should be cognizant of entitlement impacts Much of the utility infrastructure to be built in The Fields and encourage efficient growth east to west, or provide Area will occur several years in the future, as development the right partnerships to improve the efficiency/benefit. pressure moves westward across Meridian. However, the Leapfrog development closer to the future lift station but area's topography precludes gravity-fed wastewater outflow further from other City services is discouraged. to the City's treatment facilities for all but a small area near Meridian charges developer impact fees (DIFs), as McDermott and Ustick Road. The City is already planning allowed by the state, to pay for public safety and other to construct a new lift station near Can-Ada Road that will infrastructure related to new growth. The enabling be capable of serving most of The Fields Area (along with legislation for DIFs also allows for most other infrastructure a force-main line to pump wastewater eastward towards expenditures to be paid through the same mechanism. existing trunk lines. While this is a necessary addition to the However, because payment of DIFs is an allowed City's wastewater system for any significant development expenditure category for community infrastructure districts to occur in the Fields, it runs the risk of spurring premature (CIDs) and other potential cost-sharing mechanisms, the developer interest further west than would be efficient. two can be overlaid, shifting collection back to property tax levy. c 0 0 Recommended . . Q) E a) Favor development that proceeds east-to-west in approvals and entitlement decisions. Short-term (1 - 3 City Council, Q years) Community Development — c 0 Coordinate with developer groups to assist in creation of a Community Infrastructure District or, Short-term (1 - 3 Community alternatively, a Local Infrastructure District. years) or Long- Development term (4 - 20 years) V) N LL C .C� t U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Parks and Pathways In general, parks and pathways should be implemented to The Fields plan includes a combination of a regional and coincide with, but not precede, private sector development. smaller neighborhood parks, along with linear pathways One possible exception could include City-constructed along creeks and canals, creating connections east to pathway improvements at the eastern edge of the subarea Meridian's existing pathway network, and west and north as an incentive to encourage more efficient westward into surrounding municipalities. progression of overall development. This recreation infrastructure will be an important amenity In Meridian, parks and open space infrastructure spending for residential development throughout the plan area can be paid for through development impact fees (DIFs). and will be particularly important for placemaking efforts Typically, but not always, pathways are either constructed and activating the center early in development of the with new development, or by the City and paid for through Star/McMillan Center. As such, the City should work with the general fund. Developers may also dedicate land for adjacent builders and property owners on land dedications park use and are credited for that through reduced DIF and coordinate on the timing of improvements. amounts. Recommended . . 0 Plan for and work with property owners on funding options and/or land purchase/partnership/ Short-term (1 - 3 Community o c dedication, and incorporate a regional park within The Fields Area. years) and Long- Development, a) » Integrate a variety of park features along the Five Mile Creek Pathway/Greenway system, and term (4 - 20 years) Parks & Q) integrated with the Star/McMillan Center. Recreation Q » Work with developers as neighborhoods are platted to identify specific facilities and uses for each neighborhood park and to ensure diversity. — c 0 Expand the Five Mile Creek Pathway Short-term (1 - 3 Parks & Plan for an integrated pathway through the Star/McMillan center and the regional park, and years) or Long- Recreation a) intersect with the Phyllis Canal regional pathway system to connect with the rest of the Meridian, term (4 - 20 years) adjacent areas, and the Boise River. V) N Improve the Five Mile Creek Pathway in the neighborhood center with a pathway and linear open space. Short-term (1 - 3 Parks & a_ • Explore opportunities to advance construct pathway, open space, and parking improvements for years) Recreation 0 immediate resident use, and to activate and maximize potential for adjacent community centered commercial activities. • Explore opportunities to activate linear open space with passive and recreational amenities. o } U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields ResponsibilityRecommended Action Items Timing Work to identify a future regional City park, centrally located and connected to the City's Five Mile Creek Short-term (1 - 3 Community Pathway. years) Development, Identify funding, partnership, or dedication to preserve for a future City park site Parks & Identify funding or partnership to develop a City park. Consider dedicated funding mechanism or Recreation, City other opportunity to advance construction. Council Consider destination park programming that enhances community identity and supports a vibrant neighborhood center. c 0 c a) E aT Q ;_ c 0 0 a� V) N LL .C� O t U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Stewardship and Public Safety Many implementation considerations relating to stewardship goals and objectives are subsumed in land use and utilities discussions. A few action items are listed below for both elements. Recommended . . Integrate existing water conveyance facilities (i.e. irrigation facilities, drains, laterals, etc.) as part of the Short-term (1 - 3 Community character and parks and pathways system in new development within the area. years) Development, NMID, Pioneer Irrigation District c For life-safety, ensure compatible development types around and within 1,000 feet from the Short-term (1 - 3 Community Intermountain Gas Facility.Areas outside and adjacent to this buffer should appropriately buffer, screen, years) and Long- Development, and generally mitigate for all other off-site impacts, including light, noise, and visual aspects. term (4 - 20 years) Economic a) Development Q) Q E c 0 0 a� V) N LL C .C� t U www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Character, Design, and Identity become a unique destination within the City and the larger Unique character and high-quality design will help ensure region, offering something different from other commercial that The Fields Area contributes to the City's overall goal of areas, and amenities. Refer to the Character Framework in creating high-quality and family-friendly neighborhoods. Chapter 3. The character and identify of the Star/McMillan Center and the parks and open space areas can allow this area to Recommended . . Elevate a distinct community identity by creating design standards for the Star/McMillan Center, Short-term (1 - 3 Community adjacent residential areas, linear park and greenway and regional park, including a contemporary rural years) and Long- Development, thematic throughout commercial structures and public facilities. term (4 - 20 years) Economic • Incorporate gabled roofs, exposed trusses and rafters, covered porches, oversized architectural Development hardware, transitional landscape walls, gates, railings, chimneys, dormers, brackets, corbels, belly band board trim, posts, masonry piers, or other thematic elements into commercial structures. • Incorporate stone, cultured stone, or brick masonry; horizontal lap siding,vertical board and o batten siding, beadboard paneling, and taper sawn shingles; corten and/or wrought iron, or other local thematic materials into commercial structures. a) • Discourage or allow only a very limited use of pre-cast concrete, EIFS, PVC or plastic materials, E metal siding, plywood or pressed-board materials, or composition siding into commercial T structures. E • Incorporate distinct architectural elements into monuments, signage, building addressing, and structural infrastructure within landscape buffers, parking lots, and open space that enhances c primary structure architectural features. 0 a� As development applications are submitted and approved, the City will maintain a repository of Short-term (1 - 3 Community information on design and character that can be used as a resource for future development. years) Development N Integrate open space into all developments to create the appearance of more expansive, deeper spaces. Ongoing Community ai • Integrate usable open spaces into commercial projects such as protected (sheltered) seating Development, C areas, gathering areas, or other flex spaces for shared use and activities. Parks & • Strategically link and join open space between landscape buffers, structures, and developments Recreation to enhance the appearance of more expansive, planned open spaces. • Promote no mow fescues, naturalized plants, dry creek materials, split rail fencing, and other rural landscape elements in landscape buffers and open space. v www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields Recommended . . Encourage partnerships to build and share open spaces. Ongoing Community Explore opportunities with both private development and public institutions to centralize and Development, co-develop shared open spaces. Parks & Recreation Preserve and integrate historic buildings and elements into the design of the Fields Area to celebrate the Ongoing Community area's history and identity. Development c 0 c a) E aT Q E c 0 0 a� V) N U- .C� t CU www.meridiancity.org/planning/fields IDIANI-1-7-1. C E IDIAN�-- Public Presentation(s) i i 1 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS i I. Star/McMillan Center I a. Add the second/alternate concept plan on page 3-16 of the Plan to provide flexibility j and illustrate multiple possibilities for a successful mixed-use center. b. Delete the Center Character rendering on page 3-18 of the Plan. c. Reduce limiting or prescriptive language on page 3-15 of the Plan that may foreclose innovative and market-supported mixed-use development. Specifically: i. Delete the clause that the Main Street will specifically be comprised of"two or three-story mixed-use buildings fronting a curved street running east-west"and replace ivith: "Main Street-style that incorporates innovative design and uses based on market demand, with on-street parking and a pedestrian-oriented streetscape ..." II. Design Standards a. Reduce limiting or prescriptive language on page 4-20 of the Plan that may close the door on a creative discussion about future design standards and material selections. Specifically: i. Preface bullet points one and two with: "Incorporate materials such as,but not limited to ... ; ii. Delete the third bullet point ("Discourage or allow ...")in its entirety. III. Table 4A: Overall Development Program a. Remove Table 4A and instead allow future Development Agreements to set the land use ratios, FAR's, and mix desired to achieve a healthy live and job center balance as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. b. If Table 4A is not removed,then: i. Explain how the Approximate Acreages, Commercial FAR, and Assumptions were reached. ii. Add a statement that Table 4A "reflects estimated ratios of current uses and does not present standards for considering future development applications." IV. Housing Limitations a. Reduce Action Items on page 4-11 of the Plan that do not allow for market shifts and creative new ideas and consequently may limit different job models and future housing options. b. Delete the first two recommended action items from the table on page 4-11 of the Plan. 7 i t i OMj*Wm AYm�! � I �n _ X _ S x 0#4(in I I VPR F w lath I The Fields, Small Area Plan Review, City Planning & Zoning September 16, 2021 September 16, 2021City of Meridian Planning & Zoning 0047-2021-Fields Subarea Plan H The Fields, Small Area Plan Review, City Planning & Zoning September 16, 2021in the Subarea.630 Acres of the Fields Subarea, which constitutes almost 1/3 of the remaining developable ground -Control +/FIELDS SUBAREA MAP The Fields, Small Area Plan Review, City Planning & Zoning September 16, 2021The Fields Subarea Plan Review, Meridian Planning & Zoning September 16, 2021Allow flexibility and creativity in the mix of uses and design standards to respond to market demand. •Encourage development and design standards that support the quality and economic viability of the Center. •STAR & MCMILLAN NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER •OBJECTIVESNeighborhood Amenities•Diversity•Flexibility•Market Strengths•Collaboration •BUILDING THE CENTERAlternativesResidential Density and •AnchorCommercial Corner •AnchorsGreenway and Cultural •ConnectionsPedestrian/Neighborhood Strong Auto and •Mixed Use Principles •Main Street Framework The Fields, Small Area Plan Review, City Planning & Zoning September 16, 2021 CROSSING MODEL BOWNBUILDING ON THE The Fields, Small Area Plan Review, City Planning & Zoning September 16, 202115-Page 3 CENTER TEXTUAL CHANGESMCMILLANSTAR/…”oriented streetscape -street parking and a pedestrian-on market demand, with onstyle that incorporates innovative design and uses based -StreetMain ” and replace with: “west-curved street running eastuse buildings fronting a -story mixed-two or threecomprised of “Delete the clause that the Main Street will specifically be development. use -supported mixed-may foreclose innovative and market15 of the Plan that -Reduce prescriptive language on page 3 The Fields, Small Area Plan Review, City Planning & Zoning September 16, 2021 MAINSTREET The Fields, Small Area Plan Review, City Planning & Zoning September 16, 202120-Page 4 DESIGN STANDARDS .entiretyitsin”)…allowor(“DiscouragepointbulletthirdtheDeleteii.;…tolimitednot butas,suchmaterials“Incorporate:withtwoandonepointsbulletPrefacei.:Specifically.selectionsmaterialandstandardsdesignfutureaboutdiscussioncreativeaondoortheclosemaythatPlantheof20-4pageonlanguagepresc riptiveorlimitingReduce Composite and metal sidingCement BoardMetal siding The Fields, Small Area Plan Review, City Planning & Zoning September 16, 20219-Page 3 TABLE 4A: OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.reachedwereAssumptionsandFAR,CommercialAcreages,Approximat ethehowexplainremoved,notisA4TableIfii..applicationsdevelopmentconsideringwhenconsideredfurtherbenotshouldandonly,”purposes“estimationforisA4Tablethatstatei.:removednotisA4TableIf.PlanComprehensiveth eindefinedasbalancecenterjobandlivehealthyaachievetodesiredmixandFAR’s,ratios,uselandthesettoAgreementsDevelopmentfutureallowinsteadandA4TableRemove The Fields, Small Area Plan Review, City Planning & Zoning September 16, 202111-Page 4 HOUSING LIMITATION LANGUAGE.ItemsActionRecommendedTwoFirstDelete.optionshousingfutureandmodelsj obdifferentlimitmayconsequentlyandideasnewcreativeandshiftsmarketforallownotdothatPlantheof11-4pageonItemsActionReduce The Fields, Small Area Plan Review, City Planning & Zoning September 16, 2021 11 of the Plan.-Delete the first two recommended action items from the table on page 4ii.models and future housing options. it different job 11 of the Plan that do not allow for market shifts and creative new ideas and consequently may lim-Reduce Action Items on page 4i.Housing Limitations 4.applications.”evelopment e dAdd a statement that Table 4A “reflects estimated ratios of current uses and does not present standards for considering futurii.Explain how the Approximate Acreages, Commercial FAR, and Assumptions were reached.i.job center balance as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. If Table 4A is not removed: healthy live and a Remove Table 4A and instead allow future Development Agreements to set the land use ratios, FAR’s, and mix desired to achieveTable 4A: 3.Delete the third bullet point (“Discourage or allow …”) in its entirety. ii.Preface bullet points one and two with: “Incorporate materials such as, but not limited to … ; i.standards and material selections. Specifically:design 20 of the Plan that may close the door on a creative discussion about future -Reduce limiting or prescriptive language on page 4Design Standards: 2.oriented streetscape …”-and a pedestrianeet parking str-style that incorporates innovative design and uses based on market demand, with on-west” and replace with: “Main Street-easted street running use buildings fronting a curv-story mixed-Delete the clause that the Main Street will specifically be comprised of “two or threea.Specifically:evelopment. use d-supported mixed-15 of the Plan that may foreclose innovative and market-Reduce limiting or prescriptive language on page 3iii.18 of the Plan.-Delete the Center Character rendering on page 3ii.center. use -a successful mixed16 of the Plan to provide flexibility and illustrate multiple possibilities for -Add the second/alternate concept plan on page 3i.1. Star/McMillan Center:SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS