CC - Staff Report and Memo 12-7
Charlene Way
From:Brian McClure
Sent:Monday, November 29, 2021 11:45 AM
To:City Clerk
Cc:Cameron Arial; Caleb Hood
Subject:Fields Memo
Attachments:211129 City Council Memo.pdf; CC - Staff Report 12-7.pdf
Clerks,
Attached is a memo for Council on the H-2021-0047 CPAT application, and also the updated staff report. If you can name
the staff report, “CC – Staff Report 12-7” on laserfiche, to coincide with a reference in the memo, that would be very
helpful. I can also revise the memo if you want to name it something else.
Please note that the memo is the definitive source for consolidated changes as recommended by the Planning and
Zoning Commission. The staff report just has some updated address, dates, and references to the P&Z hearings.
Thanks!
Brian McClure, ASLA, AICP, LEED BD+C | Comprehensive Associate Planner
City of Meridian | Community Development Department
Phone: 208.884.5533
bmcclure@meridiancity.org
Built for Business, Designed for Living
All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law,
in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law.
1
Mayor Robert E. Simison
C� E IDIAN.� pity council Members:
��� Treg Bernt Brad Hoaglun
Joe Borton Jessica Perreault
D A H L, Luke Caverier Liz Strader
November 29,2021
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Robert Simison
Meridian City Council
CC: Cameron Arial, Community Development Director
Caleb Hood,Planning Division Manager
FROM: Brian McClure, Comprehensive Associate Planner
RE: Fields Sub Area Plan,H-2021-0047, Summary of All Planning&Zoning
Commission Recommended Changes
This memorandum is a summary of recommended changes to the Draft Fields Sub Area Plan(Plan).
These changes include those that staff provided as part of the original Staff Report;proposed as a result of
continuing public involvement after the application was submitted,but before the Staff Report was
submitted or the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting(s)held, and others after. For example, several
changes were recommended based on COMPASS feedback, after the Staff Report was submitted,but
before the first Planning&Zoning Commission hearing was held. Additionally, a number of changes
were proposed after the first public hearing.
During the September 16th Planning&Zoning Commission(Commission)hearing,the Commission
voted to continue the public hearing on the Fields Subarea Plan(H-2021-0047)to October 21". The
continuation was made so Staff could consider changes requested as part of public testimony by the Mark
Bottles team representing several property owners, and then to provide the Commission a response to
their requests. Staff met with members of the Bottles team on October I",twice on October 12th, and on
October 14th. Staff recommended several additional changes as a result of these discussions. This included
the addition of a more conceptual bubble diagram for the Star/McMillan Center, on the Southeast corner
of Star and McMillan.
Generally,however,the changes are clarifications to aid in consideration and review of future
applications. For example,the Plan covers a broad area and not all text applies in all conditions. Many of
the changes are to further this point,but are not substantive in that they change the original purpose. The
Commission supported all subsequent staff changes in their recommendation to City Council, and made
no others.
Community Development Department . 33 E. Broadway Avenue,Suite soz, Meridian, ID 83642
Phone 208-884-5533 ■ Fax 208-888-6854 . www.meridiancity.org
Commission Recommended Changes
To aid in review,the following Commission recommended changes are organized by sequential page
numbers of the Draft Fields Sub Area Plan(Plan). Each item is flaged with either a to indicate
whether it was an original Staff Report recommended change, or a to indicate a change that
occurred during the Planning&Zoning Commission element of the public hearing process.Ultimately
staff is supportive all changes,but the indicator may be helpful context. These markers will not occur in
the final Plan. For a detailed description and the context of recommended changes, see the following
documents in the project folder:bit.ly/FieldsPlan.
• CC—Staff Report 12-7.
• PZ—Response to Public Comments and Additional Changes Memo.
Recommended staff changes to the draft Fields Subarea Plan are shown in stfike *h..ough (deleted) and
underline(added or graphic modification)below. Text in italics are descriptions or references, and not
language in the Plan(existing or proposed). Revisions outlined in this memo address all recommended
changes including the original Staff Report and Response to Public Comments.
Page 1-4, Revise map title,
Existing Site Features and underlying Future Land Use Map(at time of adoption)
Page 3-2, Update the legend on the Illustrative Framework:
A note on these changes, since they were omitted in the"PZ—Response to Public Comments and
Additional Changes Memo". These changes were recommended by Staff due to misinterpretation during
the COMPASS review of the Plan. The descriptions are intentionally generic,neither land use or zoning,
but some were still similar and confused for actual typologies. The revisions are intended to be more
generic, and be distinct from actual land use typologies. These changes were supported by the
Commission at the hearing and recommended forward.
=Modifications to the text legend.
General Use Types
• Medium Density Neighbefha& s Residential Neighborhoods
• Medium High Peasit-y .To;,.i.b,,,.1 eels-Higher Density Housing
• Retai 'O ffi e Areas Mixed Use Centers
• Petei#ial Sehool/C4ar-eh Potential Civic Site (school, church, etc.)
Page 3-4, Update the legend on the Transportation Framework:
A note on these changes, since they were omitted in the"PZ—Response to Public Comments and
Additional Changes Memo". These changes were also recommended by COMPASS, as Staff had used
the wrong terminology in referencing planned transit routes. These changes were supported by the
Commission and recommended forward.
Change the following items in the legend:
• Valley Germ.,.2 n Seeond y Route Secondary Transit Route
Valley C meet 2 n Employer>~xpfess RetAe Employer Express Transit Route
[�Add a new note under the legend:
• The transit routes on Star Road and Ustick Road are identified in the 2040 Treasure Valley Public
Transportation System concept of Communities in Motion 2040 2.0
2
Page 3-9, Revise table 4A notes:
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 followingassumptions ssumptions are used within the context of future land
use purpose text and descriptions. 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.
Page 3-91 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 in the development program
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 in 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.
Page 3-15, Revise Text under heading, Center Components:
Main Street-style ,two to three stef -mixed-use buildings fronting an east-west eyed street
with on-street parking. Buildings along the main street,nearer Star Road and at
intersections, should, blend�erinnovative and historical desi;n thematic and
with house include authentic opportunities for retail or office on the ground floor, and wi&residential
and/or-eme office uses above. This area should have a pedestrian-oriented streetscape,with
generously-sized sidewalks that can accommodate outdoor seating, and ground floor building
transparency that enriches the pedestrian experience by allowing people to see activity inside and outside
a building.A centrally-located and highly connected park space is provided with southern exposure that
makes the area more comfortable and usable year-round.
Page 3-16, Revised Graphic:
=Inset of revised map, highlighting area of Change in dashed pink line. The two southern building
were yellow and are now shown as purple. The dashed pink line will not exist on the final graphic.
Star/McMillan Center
Schematic Concept
Use Type INTIAn Aoan_
Yp t Fathom�iong-'��erp"an.,d��eeeoway�
-Commercial Am jW Nat
-Mixed Use(retail,office,and/or housing) Mixed Use Uran Housing I.&
Parking apartments,condos,Idits)
-Housing �-{ �
-Parks,Open Space,and Greenways Anchor parking ►L-'.-.�yl le-�.--.--•�..Jl \\\
Cie PC al _
_Civic(e.g.recreation center,library) Mom 5--- 19 II
■
1
Roadways and Pathways p Co,,,;1^+ 1.! u pan Homing I,g_
Pinking ---i apartments,condos,laf[s)
p Roadways(access control to he determined) '�! yJ��,' ,l`�„-1{ir`��,]
Pathways may-Oriente _
me
("'Potential - s �_ five Mik Creek'!
lalla
Fivic site(e.gr recreation/ Pathway and Greenrvay:_,
communiv center,lihmryi
3
Page 3-17,Additional Graphic:
[�New graphic inserted between the existing page 3-16 and 3-17.
. . I
Star/McMillan Center
Bubble Diagram -
M�Mi-aulA2on
Use Type IMP
OP
Bl♦Commercials ` -
Bli NivN Us'{renil,office,andlcr housing)
Bl,Hero o irk COMM. l LA*-
i E}ouSltL� Ind- _
�irks.open Sp—,a�a sree�.ay:
Roadways and Pathways 1
Roadways{access wnsml m he determined)
—N b..Ys
ctua4 MIR M1114-14161 FWD.
fiii d C"'f
Yuohw,r and Greeuway
ME>7-1}i�lE M.I.R. M.1F A.
p,ESiD• °
V
1,,1ED-14161} FtMD.
0
n461D.
a
This is a new page.
Existing subsequent o
pages in Chapter 3 and
" after 3-16, would all shift. o
r
U
0 WIN 315, 150' H-
www.mericlioncity.erg/planning/fields
Page 4-3, Revise text:
Critical path items are actions that should be abided by the Ci prior to and as development occurs.
These items include the following:
Page 4-11, Revise Action Item:
'. Limit single family developments per-planned land use designations to ensufe suffieien
land for higher density housing as demand maftffes.
Page 4-20, Revise action items:
• =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 into e a s,fuet-,
4
• M Within commercial structures, incorporate stone, cultured stone, or brick masonry;
horizontal lap siding,vertical board and batten siding,beadboard paneling, and taper sawn
shin les; corten and/or wrought iron,or other local thematic materials i ,.,,to mmeia «�.,,.e set -es
• &M 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;
5
STAFF REPORT E IDIA 4
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A H O
HEARING 12/7/2021
DATE: 16 0
TO: Mayor&City Council
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
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
M�U-I/
LDR
m
MU-C
Industrial MHDR -
MDR
Civic MU-N
MU-N'R
MU-RG
Office I ..
Page 2
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
8/27/2021 11/21/2021
newspaper
Notification mailed to property Not applicable, see Not applicable, see
owners within 300' UDC 11-5A-6 UDC 11-5A-6
Applicant posted public hearing Not applicable, see Not applicable, see
notice sign on site UDC 11-5A-6 UDC 11-5A-6
Nextdoor posting 8/26/2021 11/12/2021
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
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
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 —
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 UMdesi 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
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
Y � .
I c �
MEL
7-1 Earthen barrier
Image Above: 2017 Isometric aerial,facing east.
Farm Combine, for
reference scale
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
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 barrier 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 Interchange with a future SH-16 Interchange desi nation
on the FL UM):
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 (https.11www.meridiancity.ormlcompplan):
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.
• 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.
Page 9
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
offollow-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.
• 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
Page 10
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
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.
Page 11
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.
• 4.02.01B, 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.
• 4.02.01 D, 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.
• 4.10.00,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
Page 12
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 t4ough and underline):
List of Adopted Plans by Reference
Plan Lead Agency Link
Fields Subarea Plan(20211� City of Meridian _ hqps:Hmeridiancijy.org/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.
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.
Page 13
3. Proposed Revisions to Draft Fields Subarea Plan
The following proposed revisions were recommended forward by the Planning&Zoning
Commission, alone with others. See section VIII. Decision.B Commission for additional
information.
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 underlying 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. Assuinptiens: 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.
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 in 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 into eenlffler-eial stFd ttffes.
• Within commercial structures,incorporate stone, cultured stone, or brick
masonry;horizontal lap siding,vertical board and batten siding,beadboard
Page 14
paneling, and taper sawn shingles; corten and/or wrought iron,or other local
thematic materials rote o a s«..uet .os
• 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 ,.,,w,me.eia stnaet,-es
• 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 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
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
Page 15
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 investment,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:
The September 16, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting was continued on
until October 21 st, to allow Staff additional time to consider and respond to public
comment and requests. At the October 21, 2021 meeting, staff presented a consolidated
list of recommended changes (included those originally requested above), and which
Commission recommended forward to the Meridian City Council.
See Staff memo dated November 29,2021 for Complete list of changes recommended
forward to Council,by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
C. City Council:
Enter Summary of City Council Decision.
Page 16
IX. EXHIBITS
A. Illustrative Framework Plan
(NOT intended for explicit adherence of development application review)
City of Star Area of City Impact /
Illustrative Framework GIWEX NouunaD/US 2ORd L
Plan
— Aegionil r Interchange Area
Use Type ' shd'Gnol—j comer $� ICommercial
Pedmm Density Neighborhoods
Medmm High Density Neighborhoods Anidential 1leighbarhood�lg West by Sublarcral
Industrial Area Neighborhoods
R<tail/Offirc Areas Resideoml Aesidmtial
Neighborhoods Neighborhoods
Business Park NEW FAUE(WI Aoah ,'P`
Potential School/Church 53'laterzl -
Parks and Greemrays P Potential Chic Si
rcumuon udrTnmition of
Historic Sin Park Potmtial Emting Rural Neighborlwods l(sdod durdr,etc)
Grit Sae(s(6-ooR
durdc-el5-) W_Ledgerwood,En/
Roadways and Pathways —
Hi- vDeosity 7 z
Highnys and Arteruls ` N hb HearingI `- if,
I I�
Collectors Eantuq —} ,
Cemen7 i M(lhuX
Local Sneers e - Rom 1pm'jA
Pathways Higher'Densiry' r Stu/Mdlillin
Fire.MJa-rnk;Padrwal Hosing �Centei
r—1 Rehr to Star/McMillan Schematic Concept for P"eXMdr(eeA v.
L J additional detail /- �FbeSMdecGeek'Pahway
Innrmountain Gas
Note:The Illustrative Framework Plan is -,Facility-
conceptml in nature.Final platting and design ,,r ra•l.,_ I HotelBensity Mdaddm:Padrway _
may differ. ~ / I Futurt-Elementary
NEW CDIlE(mX Rao ' NEw CduE(Aa Aoro School Sae
(Ird-k \gym/� �I n Xeigh wbarheods owyhe
Piik /// � Eigh,.M.1,Pathway Nigh Sduol
o� II
IB�sin ess p^ 1 Neighbo�ho�Park
Mu e�I
" �, a Higher Density O Xing Mang
list
lis ed�ll
r Ce"Xnr%t
� _ Houseg Abng Ustid Haus®` g= .�..
0 1/$mie 1/4 mie 112 mile Nao Units Rocs
City of Nampa Area of City Impact
Page 17
B. Neighborhood Center Concept
(NOT intended for explicit adherence of development review; see Fields Subarea Plan for
described context of needs and conditions)
nan and Greenway
Oriented Housing seg.
Star/McMillan Center Character appjtrsents,condos,lops)
a
� larval co..»n, ,
r
Pod � n�a street
M,��,o Miaedllse , .
M m larking
I � � i • .� Ra at far�mo�to Reside.. `�.
� �. Yir-d Use
NeighEorhxds
rlor
Parke
Anchor
C rdal *,
V
Potennil'lieie
iecrca.tiodwoatilr
center,AMaq)
Flee Nk[reek ,
T � * Patlwa�ad 6ieenwar �
N
Page 18
C. Conceptual Fit and Feel Render of Neighborhood Center
c
--- ✓~
I
D. Conceptual Fit and Feel Render of Neighborhood Center Residential
r �
l
_
77
i
Page 19
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. Staff finds 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.
Staff finds 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.
Staff finds 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.
Staff finds 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.
Staff finds 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
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