Loading...
2022-05-18 Regular City Council Regular Meeting City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Wednesday, May 18, 2022 at 6:00 PM Minutes ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Councilwoman Liz Strader Councilman Treg Bernt Councilwoman Jessica Perreault Councilman Luke Cavener Councilman Joe Borton Councilman Brad Hoaglun ABSENT Mayor Robert E. Simison PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE COMMUNITY INVOCATION ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted PUBLIC FORUM – Future Meeting Topics ACTION ITEMS 1. Public Hearing for McCrea Meadow (SHP-2021-0006) by Russell McCrea, Located at 1028 NE 3rd St. Approved A. Request: Short Plat consisting of two (2) buildable lots on 0.3 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. Motion to approve made by Councilman Borton, Seconded by Councilman Cavener. Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun 2. Public Hearing for Pavilion at Windsong (H-2021-0102) by Kent Brown, Located at the Northwest Corner of W. Ustick Rd. and N. Linder Rd. Approved A. Request: Rezone of 3.42 acres of the subject property from C-C to R-40. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat on the entire 4.77-acre property to allow 33 townhouse lots, 2 lots for vertically-integrated buildings containing a total of 12 residential units, and one commercial lot. C. Request: A Conditional Use Permit to allow townhouses in the R-40 zoning district. D. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to allow the proposed development Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilwoman Perreault. Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun Voting Nay: Councilman Cavener FUTURE MEETING TOPICS ADJOURNMENT 7:25 pm Item#2. Meridian City Council May 18, 2022. A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:02 p.m., Wednesday, May 18, 2022, by Council President Brad Hoaglun. Members Present: Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Treg Bernt, Jessica Perreault, Brad Hoaglun and Liz Strader. Members Absent: Mayor Robert Simison. Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary,Alan Tiefenbach, Brandon Frasier, Kris Blume and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE Liz Strader _X_ Joe Borton _X_ Brad Hoaglun _X_Treg Bernt X Jessica Perreault _X Luke Cavener Mayor Robert E. Simison Hoaglun: I will call this City Council regular meeting to order. For the record today is Wednesday, May 18th, 2022. It is 6:02 p.m. Our first order of business will be roll call attendance. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Hoaglun: Our next order of business is Pledge of Allegiance. Will everyone rise and -- (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) COMMUNITY INVOCATION Hoaglun: And, Mr. Clerk, we don't have anybody available for community invocation tonight. Johnson: That's correct, Mr. President. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Hoaglun: Moving on, we are at the adoption of the agenda. Borton: Mr. President? Simison: Councilman Borton. Page 28 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 2- 28 Borton: There are no changes to the published agenda, so I move that we adopt it without changes. Cavener: Second. Simison: We have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as presented. All those in favor, please, say aye. Any opposed? The ayes have it. We have adopted the agenda. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. PUBLIC FORUM — Future Meeting Topics Hoaglun: Next up is the public forum. Mr. Clerk, do we have anybody signed up? Johnson: Mr. President, we did not. ACTION ITEMS 1. Public Hearing for McCrea Meadow (SHP-2021-0006) by Russell McCrea, Located bat 1028 NE 3rd St. A. Request: Short Plat consisting of two (2) buildable lots on 0.3 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. Hoaglun: All right. All right. Under Action Items, the first item tonight is a public hearing from McRae Meadow, SHP-2021-0006. Allen, I -- you are doing the presenting; correct? Tiefenbach: Yes, sir. Hoaglun: All right. Tiefenbach: Greetings, Council. Alan Tiefenbach, planner with the City of Meridian. This is a request for a short plat. The property is just a little more than a quarter of an acre. It's zoned R-15. It's located -- oh, I always forget to do that. My bad. Sorry about that. Let's see here. Screen sharing and failed to start. Did I get it that time? Okay. Thanks. So, yeah, a quarter acre lot, zoned R-15, located 1028 Northeast 3rd Street. The property is designated for Old Town in our future land use map. There is an existing 1,350 square foot -- so, not quite 1,400 square foot single family residence on the property that was constructed in 1932. This applicant requests a short plat to subdivide this property into two lots. That's what you can see here. That would be containing the existing residence on a lot of about 7,700 square feet and, then, there would be a second lot of about 4,900 square feet for a second residence. The access to the existing residence right now comes from Carlton, which is here. The access to the new residence would come from this alley. Here. There is a street template. We have a downtown Meridian City core street cross- section master plan. That's a lot to say. There is a template of what Northeast 3rd Street should look like. That's here. The -- the -- the template shows -- shows a detached Page 29 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 3-28 sidewalk running along here. In this particular case the -- what the applicant is proposing is not exactly like what's shown on the template. The --the first part is staff is not requiring curb and gutter at this time and the reason why is because Northeast 3rd is going to be reconstructed in the future. We are requiring the applicant to put in sidewalk. The -- the way that the sidewalk is being shown -- what the applicant wants to do is not exactly what's shown on the template and the reason why is that there is a huge tree on the property, which you can see here. We talked to the city arborist -- that would be this tree here and if they were to put in the curb and the gutter and the sidewalk the way that the street template showed, it would kill that tree. We have worked with the applicant probably well over a year to get them to redesign the sidewalk, which is what you can see now and it -- basically it's further out and it goes around the tree to save the tree. In addition to that, as you know, there is a requirement for a landscape buffer and you have to put in one tree per 35 feet. However, the canopy of this tree is 90 feet across. It is a huge tree. So, the applicant requested alternative compliance to not have to put in the landscape buffer. I'm not sure if what -- putting two additional trees within this huge canopy would do when the -- especially when they grew. The planning director did approve that alternative compliance. The only thing I wanted to -- so, staff recommends approval. We have some conditions in the staff report. The only thing I wanted to mention is there was one slight change. In the staff report I made a comment about that there was some discussions regarding the locations of water and sewer on the property. Right now the sewer is coming up from this alley and Carlton Street is being rebuilt and eventually they are going to put in a new water and new sewer main. At the time -- in the staff report I mentioned that it was probably going to be challenging for the applicant to put in the service lines, because you have to have a certain amount of separation and we weren't sure about if they would be able to do it and whether they could do it and whether there -- it would underlay the carport. Since the time of the staff report staff talked to Public Works and their opinion is, well, this is a service line, it's a private line, we are not going to require an easement for that, because, really, it's a private line and the only easement that needs to happen is between the property owner to the south. So, it doesn't matter how the applicant connects in to the -- to the main to the north. They just have to connect in somewhere and figure out how to run the lines. The reason I say that is because there is a condition of approval. Staff is recommending that condition, which is 1-B, just be removed. It's a non-issue now. With that I don't have anything else with my presentation, Council. Hoaglun: Thank you, Alan. Is the applicant here? Come on up and state your name and address for the record. McRae: My name is Russ McRae and I live at 1027 Cameron Street in Boise. But I bought this house when I was young. Hoaglun: And anything you want to add to the -- to the staff report? Anything we should know? McRae: No. No. We love downtown Meridian. That's why we want to keep the old house there. The -- the -- our plans of building another residence there, the single family, Page 30 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 4- 28 we don't want it to be an imposing -- we want it to fit in. So, that's all within our-- we know our neighbors there, partially because we flood irrigated for years and years and if you have ever been in that situation you understand that you get to know those people quite well and so we want to make sure that we are on good terms. So, you know, we don't plan on building the largest structure we can. We want to make sure it fits within kind of what downtown Meridian really is. I grew up on Carlton Street, so -- just about seven houses down from -- from where this house is. Hoaglun: We have a lot in common then, Russell, because I grew up on -- my first four years in Meridian was on Carlton as -- McRae: Oh, really? Hoaglun: Until we moved over on the other side of town, so -- McRae: Oh, that's funny. Hoaglun: Yeah. Great memories of riding my bike all over there. But that was a lot -- many more years before you were there, so -- any other questions, Council? Great. Thank you. This is a public hearing. Do we have anybody in the room that would like to testify on this? Anybody online? Johnson: Nobody online. Nobody signed up. Unless Mr. Wardle is interested. Hoaglun: If not --Alan, any final comments? Are we good to go? Tiefenbach: No, sir. Hoaglun: All right. Council? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Move we close the public hearing on Item 1, SHP-2021-0006. Strader: Second. Hoaglun: We have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. Any nays? The ayes have it. The public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Hoaglun: Councilman Borton. Page 31 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 5-28 Borton: Seems to be well presented. Very straightforward solution for a good downtown resident and wishing your family luck with this project. Sounds fantastic. So, I'm going to make a motion that we approve SHP-2021-0006 as presented in the staff report of May 18th, 2022. Cavener: Second. Hoaglun: We have a motion and a second to approve the application. Had a question, Councilman Borton. Do we need to remove 1-13 from that or is that -- was that in the staff report to remove, Alan? Tiefenbach: Council -- Council Person, Members of the Council, that was in the original staff report. I would recommend your -- your condition be to remove that. Sorry. That your approval motion be to remove condition -- I think I said 1-13. Borton: Mr. President, that's -- the motion was with that intent. Hoaglun: Okay. And the second agrees? Strader: Yes. Hoaglun: All right. Mr. Clerk, will you call the roll? Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. 2. Public Hearing for Pavilion at Windsong (H-2021-0102) by Kent Brown, Located at the Northwest Corner of W. Ustick Rd. and N. Linder Rd. A. Request: Rezone of 3.42 acres of the subject property from C-C to R-40. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat on the entire 4.77-acre property to allow 33 townhouse lots, 2 lots for vertically-integrated buildings containing a total of 12 residential units, and one commercial lot. C. Request: A Conditional Use Permit to allow townhouses in the R-40 zoning district. D. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to allow the proposed development Page 32 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 6 of 28 Hoaglun: Next up we have a public hearing for Pavilion at Windsong. Alan, you get two for two tonight. Tiefenbach: Two for two. All right. So, this is a -- it's -- it's more complicated -- it sounds more complicated than it really is. This is a device -- well, I will see if I can make it more complicated for you. This is a development agreement modification, a rezoning and preliminary plat and a conditional use. The property is a little short of five acres. Presently is zoned C-C. It's located at the northwest corner of North Linder and West Ustick. Surrounding area is comprised of single family detached, a commercial center, a lot of it's building out. That's where the Sawtooth Landing is across the street. A newly developing mixed use residential development is nearby. Some of you may remember this. In 2019 this property was proposed -- so -- so -- let me back up. Originally when this was annexed the development agreement that was done at the time, they didn't know what they were going to do with this property. So, the development agreement that -- that is vesting with it right now says you have to amend this development agreement before you do anything, because they didn't know what was going to happen. Now, in 2019 there was a proposal to amend that development agreement and there was also a conditional use to allow a mix of uses. This included multi-family, a self storage facility, office, and retail uses. The -- originally the Planning Commission did not support the idea of the self storage and they had concerns about the commercial. When this came to the Council, the Council had concerns with the multi-family. There was a lot of concerns from the neighbors about the multi-family, in particular the height of it. Eventually what happened was that the Council approved the conditional use for the self storage, but they said that no multi-family could occur on the site. The conditional use was never -- the conditional use and the development agreement was never recorded. So, it just fell apart. This particular request is to -- is -- is to -- and -- and so on the -- on the right-hand side here is kind of a zoning exhibit to -- to explain to you what's going on. This is rezoning three and a half acres of the property from C-C to R-40. So, the whole property right now is C-C. What you see here in gray is they want to rezone all that to R-40. They also want to do a preliminary plat for 33 townhouse lots. Those are what -- basically everything that you see here is townhouses, with the exception of what you see here on the corner and what you see here. So, this is commercial and I will talk about those in a second. That's vertically integrated. But the rezoning is for the townhouse area, because townhouses are not allowed in C-C. Townhouses are only allowed in R-4 -- by R-40 and they are allowed under a conditional use. So, again, it is a rezoning from C-C to R-40 for most of the site. Preliminary plat for 33 townhouses. It is two lots for two vertically integrated buildings, with six residential units and one commercial lot. As I said, for the townhouses a conditional use permit is required. As mentioned, because specific details were not provided with the annexation, the development agreement modification is also required, basically, for the Comprehensive Plan and the development as noted. This proposal also included a request for private streets. Most of what is being shown here is a private street, with the exception of Crosswinds and Wafting, which are here. The director did approve that request. So, again, the future land use map for this recommends this is mixed use community. This is the allocated area as community serving uses or seamlessly integrated into the fabric. This is a mixed use development. It talks about -- mixed use has different elements. It talks about three types of land uses, high density near Page 33 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page , -28 employment, being centered around public spaces. It also has a percentage on how much residential can occur -- occur. It encourages vertically integrated -- integrated structures, which most will call those mixed use buildings. This application does reflect those three types of uses. The majority of the residential is clustered around a central space as what you can see in the middle here. So, not all of it, but most of it. There are also those mixed use vertically integrated buildings, which you see here to the south and east. Staff does support this and they certainly are excited about the idea of the vertically integrated structures. Our concern, which we have passed on to the applicant -- our biggest concern is that what we were afraid of -- and I will go about -- more about it, but we were afraid that these vertically integrated structures would get approved and, then, eventually get converted into townhouses and I can show you, if you look at the elevations, you will see what I was talking about. That said, as a condition of approval we recommended at the time of building permit that the ground floors of all the vertically integrated buildings -- so, the bottom floors would meet occupancy class requirements for commercial structures. So, they would have to build them with the building permit for a commercial structure, so they wouldn't be able to -- it wouldn't be able to convert them into townhouses without having to go through a building permit process and, then, staff would catch it and say you can't do that. My understanding is that the applicant is amenable to this. I don't believe the applicant has any intentions, but in the future if this got flipped to somebody else, we don't know what those intentions are. So, again, we are trying to preserve that commercial. Staff mentioned in the staff report that originally we thought that the vertically integrated buildings, which is what you see down here, would be more appropriate on the north side. We had a few different reasons for that. We thought it would integrate better with the commercial. It wouldn't bring all the traffic into the southern part of the site. That was our recommendation. Applicant did not like the idea. The Planning Commission also did not like that idea and the Planning Commission is agreeable to the applicant keeping it as it is. This is certainly one staff is not willing to die on the sword for. We are okay with the recommendations. We don't object. At the time of the staff report staff had some concerns about -- you don't see it here, but originally this row of townhouses here was one long wall and there is houses that are newly built here and we were nervous about this long wall in front of the houses and how that would impact them. We recommended that that row of buildings be broken up or done -- something like that. The applicant has subsequently broken these up. We actually recommended a very very specific area where it would be broken up, because there was a house right here and we wanted to make sure that they had a view corridor and they still had some visibility. So, the subject property, again, located at North Linder and Ustick. There is an existing road, which is West Crosswinds. That's what you see here. It -- right now it stubs at the property here. This is what serves as the Windsong neighborhood. This development would close an access off of Linder and it would create a new access on Ustick and it would also connect Windsong to Ustick. This was always intended -- again, it was stubbed here with the idea that this was going to go through. I'm the -- most, if not all, of the public comments that I have heard has been in regard to the connectivity, about not connecting Crosswinds and keeping traffic from going into their neighborhood. Applicant did mention in their narrative that they were proposing a three way stop at Crosswinds and Wafting, which is right here. When we saw ACHD staff report, ACHD talked about traffic calming. When we had ACHD on the line at Planning Page 34 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 8- 28 Commission they also said traffic calming. They didn't see a stop sign. Again, that wasn't a condition of approval for us, but we just encourage the applicant to work with ACHD about traffic calming. I think that was the other issue that the neighbors had expressed. They don't want cars going in too fast. They want to do something that slows them down. When we originally did the staff report what is shown as an alley here did not meet the requirements for alley and it also didn't meet the requirements for a common lot -- or for a common drive. It had too many lot -- too many lots on it for a common drive. Wasn't wide enough for an alley. The applicant has since widened this to 24 feet, which is what's required for a public street, so they are okay there. This one is still 23 feet. They will have to widen that. They know that. I don't think that's an issue. Okay. So, one -- one -- another thing that we talked to the applicant about -- I think it's mostly been resolved -- is with the original drawings you don't see this here. Along Linder here there is a seven foot wide sidewalk. Original versions of the plans, if you looked at the file, there was another pathway that was kind of running parallel with this. It was like two pathways next to each other. We thought that was somewhat redundant. We didn't think that was necessary. We talked to Parks. They agreed. We just said you don't need to put that other pathway there. Just keep the seven foot sidewalk. It's fine. Along the south it was the same situation. They had the seven foot sidewalk along Ustick and, then, they were showing a ten foot wide pathway, which you can still see here. I don't think they have changed this yet. Our recommendation was, you know what, just widen the whole thing to ten feet. You don't need to have this extra trail -- if you see it here. Widen the whole thing ten feet and this is one of our conditions and, then, just connect to the Ten Mile trail once you get to the west of the property. I'm -- I don't -- it's not been changed on this plan. My understanding -- I don't think the applicant has an issue with this. I just don't think it's been on the plan. Again, it's one of the conditions. One concern that parks and trails did have is if you look at the vertically integrated structures here, you will see each of them has an entrance onto the trail. That was kind of like what could go wrong with that, right, when you have every building has six different ways for somebody to get onto the pathway -- with a major pathway. So, Parks said take them off. We shouldn't have more than one connection to each vertically integrated building. Again, they didn't change it on the plans. I don't think the applicant has an issue with that. That's one of our conditions as well. Remove the walkways. Only put one in. So, here is the elevations. These building elevations showed townhouses comprising of rocks, cement board, Hardie board, lap siding. These are great elevations. Staff didn't have any issue with the design of the elevations, but what I talked about earlier, again, is our concern -- if you look at Building G and Building H at the bottom, these are the buildings that were supposed to be the vertically integrated buildings. Now, again, great architecture, but our concern was these -- are these really vertically integrated buildings or are these townhouses or like, you know, a townhouse with a home office. So, that was our concern. If this is going to be a mixed use development and if this is going to be sold aside and if the Council is going to believe that they are approving that, we need to make sure that these vertical -- vertically integrated buildings really are vertically integrated buildings. We have talked to the applicant. Applicant, from what I understand, is fine with having the requirement about the bottom floor being rated for commercial only at time of building permit, so that it can't be turned into an apartment. One comment from the Planning Commission at the time was that the Planning Commission had -- had the same concern. They didn't want to see Page 35 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 9- 28 these converted into just townhouses. They also had some concerns -- they just didn't want to see the whole thing turned into a rental. The Planning Commission added -- actually added a very clever condition that was prior to certificate of zoning compliance that there would be condo plats for at least the commercial portions of these buildings, so that the -- the -- even if somebody lived or owned both buildings, the ability is still there for a separate person to own the airspace for that commercial area. The -- the only thing I would say that's a change on that is that when we looked at what the requirements are for a condo plat -- and I didn't catch this actually until today. The conditions of a condo plat says the building already has to be built. So, it wouldn't work prior to certificate of zoning compliance. All I'm saying is that there would be a recommendation to change for the condition, that the condo plat would occur prior to certificate -- or prior to certificate of occupancy and not CZC. So, that they get their CZC, they apply for the building permits, they get the building permits approved, they have to do the condo plat before they actually get their CO. This would work. So, this is what happened, again, at Planning Commission. This was heard by Planning Commission. They moved to recommend approval for all of this. There were several citizens that were here and they were in the Windsong neighborhood to the west. They had the concerns in regard to density, traffic impacts with connecting the road, which now the name just escaped me. Crosswinds. Whether or not traffic calming could be implemented. The Commission agreed with the applicant, that they thought that the vertically integrated structures where they are showing them was probably the best spot and they were okay with that. As I mentioned, they added a condition that the short plat condominiumize those and that would happen prior to CZC, which I just described to you would not happen. There was an additional condition that I also believe that the applicant was okay with that the exterior facades of the vertical integrated buildings integrate brick or stone and I believe that the attempt behind that was that they -- they wanted to make sure that the bottom floors of these structures look somewhat different from the top floor to represent the idea that this is a commercial portion and it's not -- not all just one townhouse. I believe that was the intent. Again, I believe that the -- the applicant was okay with that. And, as I mentioned, we are recommending that the condition that says that the condo plat happen prior to CZC, just be changed to say prior to the certificate of occupancy. Rather complicated, but it didn't need to be. But if you have any questions I would be happy to answer them. I work for the government, so I make it as complicated as I can. Hoaglun: And that was a joke. Yes? Okay. Council, any questions for Alan? Cavener: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Alan, can you just refresh my memory -- what are -- what's the other developments that are on the other -- kind of three corners that kind of neighbor this property? Tiefenbach: I have them listed here. If I can remember. One of them was the Sawtooth -- Sawtooth commercial across the street to the east. There is -- boy, you caught me off Page 36 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 10 of 28 guard here. I don't know if I can name off -- I don't -- I don't know if I can name off the projects off the top of my head. I could get them and look them up. Hoaglun: We have the Ada County -- Tiefenbach: But I'm not that good. Hoaglun: --Ambulance Paramedics -- Tiefenbach: It looks like the -- it looks like the applicant has it. Maybe they will present this. I don't have it memorized. I'm sorry. Cavener: Thanks, Alan. Nary: Yeah. Mr. President, there is a residential development on the opposite corner that you heard a few months ago with multi -- I think it was multi-family facing Ustick and, then, it was residential behind it. Tiefenbach: So, I have them all here. I will give him the honor of doing it, since he prepared this. Perreault: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. Alan, what -- with the vertically integrated, what are the parking standards? So, if you have a -- if your condo unit is say, you know, 800 feet, how are we figuring out -- you know, if they have clients that come in -- say it's a one person accounting firm or it's a -- you know, a masseuse or -- where are they parking? Tiefenbach: Sure. Parking requirements are one per residential unit, but you have to provide the same amount of parking for the commercial. So, if you have got -- you know, our parking requirements are one parking space per 500 square feet of commercial. If you have got-- if you have got a thousand square foot commercial space, then, you would have to have two parking spaces for that, plus the one for the top. If you look at the site plan that they are showing here, they are actually well over their parking requirements. They have -- if-- they have got parking cut out here for the vertically integrated, they have got parking that's over here and they have also got parking over here, as well as all of the parking for the commercial building. I think -- I did the math on it in the staff report and if I remember correctly I think they were 11 spaces over what they would have been required by the code. Perreault: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Council Woman Perreault. Page 37 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 11 of 28 Perreault: So, the parking spaces that are in the driveway are not being counted towards commercial use; is that correct? Tiefenbach: Yes, ma'am. Those are -- those parking spaces -- they are, actually, again, overparking. They are showing one -- if I believe correctly, it's one parking space in front of the house, one parking space in the garage. That's the -- that's the parking merely for the residential portion of the site. Perreault: Mr. President, a follow up. Hoaglun: Go ahead. Perreault: What are the signage -- what's -- what does code say about them putting up signs regarding their businesses? Tiefenbach: Are you referring to what the sign code is? Perreault: Yeah. And so are they permitted to put signs in the -- in the green space in front of those units or do -- can they put signs on the -- on the building itself or -- I mean -- Tiefenbach: So, they -- Perreault: Go ahead. Tiefenbach: Sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt you, Council Person. They can have a wall sign with their business. I -- I can't give you the exact square footage. It's two square feet per building frontage I think per linear frontage. Again, I'm not as good as Bill is. think it's one square foot per two linear feet of building frontage. As it -- as -- if it's a commercial business they are also allowed to have a monument sign at the entrance. They could not put signs in the -- in the -- the grass. That would be considered an off-site sign. They can't do off-site signage. Hoaglun: Any further questions? All right. Will the applicant come up and state your name and address for the record, please. Amar: Mr. President, Council Members, Jeremy Amar. 1548 Cayuse Creek Drive, Meridian. Appreciate you guys -- you -- you all hearing us tonight for this. We are excited about this project and agree with -- with Alan and appreciate his -- his staff report. We are -- we are proposing, as Alan said, 45 dwelling units, a mix between townhomes and vertically integrated units. The -- the reason for the rezone, as Alan explained, is in the C-C zone vertically integrated units is a principally permitted use, so -- but instead of proposing vertically integrated units for the -- the whole site, which the ones we are proposing are three stories. I think the maximum height is 50 feet for vertically integrated units in C-C, we felt that it was a better compatibility and a better use to add townhomes adjacent to the Windsong neighborhood and keep the vertically integrated at the corner Page 38 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 12 of 28 and on Linder and Ustick, facing those. The townhomes are -- are a mix of -- of three bedroom, two and a half or three bath, as well as a few two bedroom, two bath. The two buildings along the north. And, then, also one additional commercial retail lot. We don't have a use for that. We have hopes and dreams and ideas, but whatever goes there will come back before Planning and Zoning Commission, as -- as well as this body for -- for a conditional use permit for whatever the future use is for that commercial pad. It is community mixed use, which Alan went through very well explaining the -- the projects near us across the street is Eddington Commons, which is 92 -- both attached and detached homes. Sawtooth Landing is the office park with the eight office lots. And, then, Lenin Point is kind of kitty-corner to us. That's also mixed use, with a combination of multi-family and single family. Windsong is our direct neighbor. It is a project that Biltmore completed last year. We developed all -- well, that project was developed long, long ago. We -- we purchased it and built it out and built those 66 homes and it turned out to be a fantastic project. We are close to quite a few amenities. We are close to -- Settlers Park is a mile up Ustick. Close to shopping center. Orchard Park, the -- where the library is going in. Winco. Shopping centers. Costco and Walmart, they are -- everything's very accessible. As Alan explained, we do have a common area, even though it -- it is smaller than the five acre kind of requirement for open space requirement, we -- we still wanted a community feel, a common area for kids to play and so we have the open park in the middle with -- it will have a -- a gazebo and a picnic area. Four parking -- parking is always a concern with us as well. After we -- we had met with staff and kind of gone through a couple of the comments, we did rearrange some things on site a little bit and we were able to find nine more parking spaces to bring -- bring that total up a little more. So, overall right now, not including any driveways or garages, there is -- there is 38 total extra parking spaces, some of which will be for the commercial, others are for guest use, as well as the -- all of the -- the units have a two car garage and all, but the -- the two furthest north buildings have a 20 foot deep driveway for the -- the residents to use as parking as well. We -- as Alan explained, we did -- we did split this building into -- into two buildings, instead of one, to -- just to -- yeah, to -- to break up that wall, to ease the -- that buffer -- that transition between the -- the single family Windsong into the -- the townhome units. At North Wafting and Crosswinds we -- we did provide a three way stop after our neighborhood meeting and -- and traffic coming through there was a concern. ACHD suggested we do a bulb out instead. We are open to that, too. So, we will continue and work through ACHD as -- as we design and -- and finish the -- the plans for-- for that. Alan showed you some example elevations. We want this project to feel compatible, to look compatible to the residential neighbor that it's next to and a transition into our -- our live-work units. Since P&Z we have revisited the -- the live-work units to add some stone or brick on to the front of the commercial areas, as well as more glass -- a glass door with some large windows on each side, so that it -- it does have more of that commercial office feel. The other thing that we have done -- and I think it -- well, you can see it -- we -- we show all the sidewalks coming up. We are agreeable to -- to reduce that. We would prefer to have maybe two kind of at each end or sort of each end, so that way it's not right in the middle. So, we would prefer a little bit of flexibility, but -- but we really don't need six sidewalk connections to Linder or Ustick. And we do agree about removing the -- the additional pathway on Ustick and widening that sidewalk. As traffic is always concerned with a new development, we have -- we agree with ACHD's staff report. Their -- their Page 39 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page —of 28 request and requirement to extend and connect to Crosswind. We believe that it will be a benefit to Windsong. Currently Windsong has to exit either through Watersong to their north or BridgeTower to the west to leave the subdivision. Crosswind will give -- give a -- a direct access to Linder and, then, easy access to Ustick to --to exit the neighborhood. While some of the residents in the townhomes may go out through Windsong, I mean nothing would stop them from doing that, we don't feel that that's really very likely, just because it would be -- it's so much easier just to get onto Linder and, then, jump over to Ustick or head north on Linder and so we believe that the connection to Crosswind will -- will really be a benefit to the -- the residents in -- in Windsong. One of the conditions that Planning and Zoning asked, that Alan went over, is regarding the --the condominium plat. Alan discussed that already, that Planning and Zoning mentioned to tie it to the -- the CZC, but the wording in the -- the code says that the buildings have to be built and so we are okay to tie it to certificate -- certificate -- certificate of occupancy or tie it to after building permit, so that that way we can do it as a short plat and be able to have those so they can be condominium units. The rest of the -- the project are -- I mean are townhome and we will go through the -- the regular plat process and, then, once we have building permits we can apply for the -- the short plat process for these other two buildings. One point of clarification that I -- I would like. In the short plat process code it states that the -- the proposed subdivision does not exceed four lots. This would be 12 lots. I -- I believe it's two different sections where condominium plats are specifically allowed to be processed as a short plat. So, I don't believe that the four plat -- or four lot limit would apply here, but we would like clarification on that and we would be very amenable to do the condominium plat. With that I appreciate your time and I stand for any questions. Hoaglun: Thank you, Jeremy. Any questions for the applicant? Strader: Mr. President? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thank you. Thanks for coming. I was in Pompeii and saw original Roman vertically integrated housing. They had store fronts and, then, they had their housing behind. It was interesting. So, it's an old idea that's been around for a long time. Very successfully. I just wanted to step through this. Where -- if you could show me a picture. Where is the store fronts in the vertically integrated? Amar: Yeah. Mr. President, Council Member, so here on -- on this view the store front would face Linder, as well as Ustick. You can see here where -- where I drew in two sidewalks connecting. So, that way the store front is looking out and facing the two main arterial roads. Strader: Right. So, one concern that I have -- or a question I have -- I think about a store front as a place that I would park and so I wanted you to sort of walk through -- where is the signage? I think along the lines of what Council Woman Perreault was saying. Could you just walk us through like where is the signage? How do customers find the store Page 40 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 14 of 28 front? Where do the customers park? And how does that fit with the concept of it being commercial on the ground floor. Amar: So, the -- the signage would be, as -- as Alan explained, it would be at kind of the -- the front doors. The -- the glass doors of those commercial spaces. Parking we have here in this -- this mouse is a little -- little hard to move. So, we have parking along here that they would be able to -- to park to access along the front or as well down here. There would be a sidewalk that connects to come along the front as well. We have to try to balance what -- what you are mentioning of -- of store front and parking in front of a building versus planning's desire to have parking kind of hidden from the road. Maybe Alan can help me out here. I see a hand raised. Hoaglun: Alan. Tiefenbach: Alan Tiefenbach. Associate planner. I want to clarify -- our specific use standards say that parking cannot be in front of the vertically integrated structures. None of the parking shall be located in front of the structure. It's actually a code requirement. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Hoaglun: Council Woman Strader. Strader: If I could follow up. Alan, could you walk through the -- the thinking behind that a little bit or -- is that because we don't do a lot of vertically integrated? Is that for a specific reason? Like I -- I would think that the vertically integrated commercial would do much better if it had parking in the -- in the front -- store front area. So, it's just a little confusing. Tiefenbach: Council -- Council Person Strader, you are putting me into a tricky position here. I'm telling you what the code says. I -- I think that a lot of times when you are having some kind of mixed use building you are thinking about having some kind of angle parking in front of it. That's not what our code says. Strader: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Sure. No problem. Understood. So, you don't necessarily take a position on the code, it's just code is what it is. There is something there that I -- just to give some feedback. It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me in terms of what you would want to do with a vertically integrated commercial structure. So, maybe we should revisit that at some point. Tiefenbach: Yeah. It's hard to wiggle out of this one. I will leave it up to Mr. Nary about whether the Council can actually waive a requirement for the specific use standards. I Page 41 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page —of 28 can't. I'm not going to make any position at all on whether or not our code is good. I have not been here long enough. Hoaglun: That's probably wise, Alan. Mr. Nary, do you have any comment? Help us out here. Nary: So, yeah, generally no. If it is a code requirement it is a requirement. I have to look -- I was trying to find it while Alan was talking. On some of our codes it says unless approved by Council or unless Council waives or something like that. So, I would have to look if that is allowed, but generally it's not. Strader: Okay. Well, thanks for the feedback. Maybe we could follow up on that later on. Perreault: Mr. President? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, similar to Council Woman Strader, I'm -- I'm thinking through moving around this and access to these buildings. So, can you show me if-- if there was someone that was wheelchair bound or had a disability, how they would get to the store front? Because it looks like there is steps up to each of the units. So, how are they going to -- are they going to access from the back where it's flat or where -- where would someone get into the store front that couldn't use steps. Amar: Sure. Mr. President, Council Member, so parking would be here. It -- I mean there -- there is landscaping here. There would need to be this connection from the parking sidewalk to the sidewalk in front and, then, these -- the buildings -- the -- the -- the door above the steps is what enters into the residence. Then the -- these kind of three glass panels -- again we don't quite have exactly what that -- that would look like, but -- I mean we imagine a full glass door with a couple of large windows on the side. Whether it be the metal store front door or not I -- I don't know yet. We will kind of work through that with our design. But all of those are at ground level and so they would all be ADA accessible. Perreault: Mr. President, follow up? Hoaglun: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, I realize this rendering is that --just that, it's a rendering, but -- so, there is going to be a connection from one of the -- of the -- for the handicap accessible. Amar: Absolutely. Cavener: Mr. President? Page 42 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 16 of 28 Hoaglun: Yes, Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Jeremy, this vertically integrated piece is -- is really interesting to me and -- and I'm kind of fascinated by it. Like Council Member Strader, I -- I'm trying to wrap my head around about how the commercial side is successful with the challenges maybe with our code about access. Can you give us a flavor -- what's -- what's the type of business that is really successful in this type of environment? What do you -- what do you contemplate going into this space that is -- that is a win? Amar: Mr. President, Council Member, we see this --well, we will back up a little bit. Over the last couple of years as we have all gone through the COVID pandemic and had lots and lots of Zoom meetings and had lots of practice with Zoom, as we have worked through the staff report, lots of the -- the meetings that we have had, staff from Meridian and -- and other agencies, are holding these meetings in their kid's bedroom or where ever they can find and so I don't know that this -- the -- so, having this dedicated commercial space allows someone to -- to have an office. Maybe -- maybe an attorney that's working or an accountant. There -- there are some specific uses that are allowed in those. Hair salon. I think one of the uses is a -- a drinking establishment. I don't really see that happening in here, but there are some requirements in the vertical -- vertically integrated code for that. But I see that accountant or lawyer, a person that needs a dedicated office space away from the family area being able to have this that they could bring and meet with clients here and have for -- for their commercial space. Cavener: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Maybe one kind of additional question. And, Jeremy, you touched on this a little bit in your opening remarks, but why the decision to do a limited amount of vertically integrated and really -- put a lot more townhouse product in here? And the reason why I ask that -- without a doubt we have the need for housing in Meridian, but we -- we have been really informed as a Council how much commercial space that we have lost in Meridian over the years and so I'm -- I'm always very hesitant to be supportive of giving up additional land that could do a commercial product for more residential. So, maybe help us understand the business decision around that. Amar: Sure. Mr. President, Council Member, this -- see if I can change my slide again. The main reason that we -- we are asking to do townhomes is for compatibility with -- with our neighbors. If we were to do it all as the vertically integrated units, that's going to put three story buildings up close to -- to the residents, instead of a two story townhome. To be able to have that office on the ground floor with the garage and, then, the living area on the two floors above, it -- it would put much taller buildings closer to the residents. The other reason for -- as you all know that this property has been here for -- for a long time and a variety of uses have been brought before Planning and Zoning and Council. It's -- it's a very very difficult corner to make work for purely commercial offices. There is no access to Ustick at all and so with only the access off of Linder it -- it's difficult to do a Page 43 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 11 of 28 traditional commercial use on this property and so we feel that with the need for alternative housing types, like townhomes or condominiums, that having townhomes and, then, some commercial, what--what we could make work to have the transition from residential to the condominiums was the -- the better use for the property. Cavener: Thank you. Nary: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Mr. Nary. Nary: I was just going to add, I did find the particular code and --and there is no exception for the Council to allow parking. It does say none of the required parking shall be located in front of the structure. The allowed residential uses in a vertically integrated unit also include -- or nonresidential uses are -- it says a variety of things. Arts. Entertainment. Recreation facility. Artist studio. Civic, social, fraternal organizations. Daycare. Drinking establishment. Education institution. Financial institution. Healthcare. Social assistance. Industry craftsman. Laundromat. Nursing. Or residential care facilities. So, there is, obviously, a list of varieties of uses, but it is very specific in code that none of the required parking for the business shall be included in the front of the structure. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you, Bill. So, a question. So, it sounds like what you are trying to do is meet the commercial definition that's required for the property, but at the same time lower the -- the impact in terms of traffic and not have a high volume retail. It just wouldn't fit in those properties. Is that -- is that what your approach is for -- for this development? Amar: Mr. President, yes, that -- that is correct. Perreault: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I want to understand a little bit more about the relationship with the commercial to the residential. So, if your condominiumizing the commercial and they can be sold or leased separately from whoever occupies the residence, then, is there going to be a commercial HOA that's going to keep, you know, the commercial units in line with, you know, noise concerns? Are the -- are these units going to be able to be modified like other commercial retail centers are? For example, some places -- I have a client that's interested in -- in -- in a live-work unit, because she wants to do her own nail salon, but nail salons require certain ventilation. So, she would have to be able to come in and modify that commercial space to have her salon in there, which is why she doesn't have it in her home. So, is -- is that something that's going to be allowed to be done in these like normal -- like other kinds of commercial buildings and how will that affect the residential use above if there are two different operators -- two different owners? Page 44 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 18 of 28 Amar: Mr. President, Council Member, so the vertically integrated units, as we understand them, aren't -- they are not a completely separate commercial space on the ground floor. Those -- those commercial spaces are integrated with the unit and so the -- the garages are located here at the back of the unit. In the front of the -- I mean -- so, on the other side of the garage wall would be the commercial office area, as well as the stairs going up to the residence and so it's -- it is connected and part of the residence above, as a -- as a live-work unit and we believe that that's -- that's how the code reads and requires for the vertically integrated units, that it's -- I believe there is a different code Section 4 live-work, kind of like what's going on across the street where all of that ground floor is purely commercial and, then, above is -- is separate residence. These would be -- would be tied -- so, the condominium plat would -- would split this into 12 individual lots and so each condo would be the -- the residence above and the office below. Whether the person that lived there would be allowed to lease out that office to someone else, I -- I don't know the -- the rules or requirements on that. Hoaglun: And question then -- it might be for Alan, but -- so, the condo plats -- I think that was trying -- the -- the Planning and Zoning Commission was trying to get at preventing those being flipped -- purchased flipped and now we are -- in terms of changing that to just residential -- all residential. Is that -- is that -- Tiefenbach: Mr. President, Members of the Council, the -- the -- the actual language of the Planning Commission said a short plat to condominiumize the vertically integrated building shall be required prior to certificate of zoning compliance. So, yes, the intent was that they didn't want these to turn into be rentals. There was a lot of discussion by the Planning Commission about if we are going to approve this we don't want to have more rental townhouses. That was probably the meat of the discussion. They wanted to make sure that they were going to be some kind of commercial spaces and their intent was that if you condominiumize these commercial spaces and you require those to be built to commercial building standards, that it would be more likely that there would be some kind of nonresidential business occurring in the bottom. So -- so, you -- under the condominiumizing part that you --you could imply that there would be separate ownership -- separate air ownership on the bottom floor versus the ownership on the top floor. Hoaglun: Thank you, Alan. Perreault: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I don't know if you are familiar with the Pine 43 development, but they are attempting -- are in the process of putting in 19 live-work units on Fairview. I don't know if you have had a chance to speak with any of their developers. Curious to see kind of how they are going about it and what success they have had. Amar: Mr. President, Council Member, I -- I am not familiar with it or have not spoken to them, but one -- one of the things that we are doing besides having kind of the large glass Page 45 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 19 of 28 walls that, again, would hinder it becoming a bedroom, that ground floor unit won't have a closet that--that a bedroom would need. We -- we plan on having a bathroom attached down in that commercial space and so it -- again, I -- I don't know that ten years now -- ten years from now if there is anything we can do for someone putting a bed down there. But that's not our intent and we are trying to work with staff to kind of go through and make sure it meets commercial code for that area, that there is not a bedroom closet. That -- that we have an office space with a -- a bathroom in that area, so that it -- it really is set up for -- as an office -- as a commercial space. Strader: President Hoaglun? Hoaglun: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thank you. Not sure if you guys covered this, but wanted to cover the drinking establishment possibilities. I'm just not sure how much sense it would make to end up with a drinking establishment in one of the live-work units. Are you supportive of eliminating that potential use? Amar: Mr. President, Council Member, I am. I -- I don't know how that works. As -- as Mr. Nary read, it's -- there is a whole list of items that are in the code. I don't -- I can't imagine anybody thinking that one of those units is -- is good for a bar. It -- it just -- it's not. It -- it just doesn't fit. I -- I have absolutely no issue with doing that. I don't know how that would work to tie it kind of forever and always to -- Strader: A lease restriction. Amar: We -- we do -- there will be an HOA and a property management company that works for--for the site. I mean for common area landscaping and having that -- that HOA in there, so it -- I have no idea if it could be -- Hoaglun: I will ask Alan to weigh in on this. Amar: Thank you. Tiefenbach: Mr. President, Members of the Council, certainly you have the purview to totally eliminate that, but just --just so you know, he -- he read in the vertically integrated structures language there is like a flavor of -- this is the kind of the idea that's supposed to happen, but it's zoned C-C and C-C zoning allows drinking establishment by conditional use. It's entirely up to you if you want to keep that as conditional use, meaning it would have to go to the Planning Commission, so it would require a public hearing either way. You could not do this by right. If you want to completely eliminate that, then, certainly you could add to the DA that there shall not be any drinking establishment at all. Hoaglun: So, Alan, does that include in my subdivision that one house I suspect on weekends they are a drinking establishment? Page 46 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 20—28 Tiefenbach: Just private drinking establishment for the Super Bowl would be a very different story, sir. Hoaglun: Okay. Okay. I think we will -- Horton: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Councilman Borton. Borton: Let's close the door on that topic though. I think that's the -- the ask would be a condition within the DA that prohibits the use of these live-work for a drinking establishment. Is that -- would that be agreeable? Amar: Mr. -- Mr. President, Council Member, again, I -- I don't think I -- we -- we have any hard time with -- with that condition. As Alan mentioned, it -- it would have to be a conditional use for someone to want it. I -- I don't know how it works with code far as restricting in a DA what could or could not be there. I -- I'm really sorry that I ever brought it up. Hoaglun: Councilman Borton. Borton: Mr. President. So, the ask -- I think what we are saying is the CUP path would be gone, because the DA condition would say you can't do it. You can't even ask for it. It's just gone. So, with that understanding if that would be acceptable. Amar: Sure. Borton: Okay. Hoaglun: And before we move forward I did want to ask Alan -- he talked about the four lot limit clarification. Can you shed some light on that? Tiefenbach: Mr. President, Members of the Council, I don't know if I can. I have read -- was reading the language and it -- the -- the condo plat is under -- the condo plat is under the short plat process and it says that the -- this is a Bill Nary, so I'm kind of looking at Bill. The --the short plat says that it shall be for four lots or less and, then, in that same section it talks about the condo plat and what can be required for the condo plat. I'm almost saying this might be an interpretation or a legal question. I wish Bill was here to help me with that. I would -- my -- my argument would be that that was not the intent of the condo plat, to keep it to four lots. I guess maybe Mr. Nary would probably want to weigh in on that. Hoaglun: Mr. Nary. Nary: Sure. Mr. President, Members of the Council, I agree with Alan. I think they are -- they are separate. I think there is two separate things that -- concepts we are talking Page 47 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 21 of 28 about, because most of the short plat language is really talking about the -- like the earlier one you saw tonight. They are splitting a piece of property. It's to clear the property boundaries. The condominium is a separate process. So, I don't think the limitation of four lots applies to the condo, because most condos are -- often are going to be more than four lots. So, I do think it is a separate process. I don't see a conflict. Hoaglun: Thank you. All right. Mr. Clerk, do we have people signed up to testify? Johnson: Mr. President, only the applicant signed in. We did have one person signed in online, but they are not online. Hoaglun: Do we have anyone in the room who wants to provide testimony? Mr. Brown? Brown: For the record Kent Brown. 3161 East Springwood. I thought it was really interesting the discussion about commercial and parking in front of the building, because Planning Department for at least a decade has been telling us on our commercial you can't park in front of the building and they want the designs to put the building up closer to the street, so that you can see it and, then, you drive around the back and come to the building. My wife had a business in Meridian that -- mostly-- it was a flower and gift shop. She had it for 14 years and that was one of her struggles was that women shoppers didn't like driving around, they wanted to go directly to the front door and that's a difficult thing, especially with this site. I mean I can honestly say, because of the number of mixed use community applications that I have submitted in the last year and a half, I hate it. I hate that Comprehensive Plan designation and the -- and the reason being is the mixture that's required and, then, they are on corners and you have the inability to provide those commercial elements in any meaningful way for it to be commercial and that's been a real challenge. One of the interesting things is that we have -- as we have massaged this multiple times in our design we have met with the neighbors each time with a -- a neighborhood meeting and when Biltmore built all of those houses next door there wasn't any -- you either like your builder or you don't like your builder and they came liking the builder and what Biltmore has tried to do with their townhouses is build at the same level and quality in the townhouse product and make that work and be compatible with a neighbor, hitting a different price point if you will. But being integrated into being able to move, you know, as these people want to move up, maybe sell their townhouse and move next door, because that's -- that's --that's a good design, that's a good plan. The concern from the P&Z and the reason for the short plat was that they were concerned that if you have a commercial user would they want to be a renter. So, they -- they wanted them to be able to own that space. That was -- that was their concern and the -- a condo plat -- the way that you generally do a condo plat is that you divide the land and now you are dividing the space within the building. So, when you understand that, this kind of meets that criteria. I will stand for any questions that you have. Hoaglun: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Thanks, Mr. President. So, Kent, you have been doing this a long time and I guess I'm trying to gauge your expertise, because when I -- when I think of Linder Road Page 48 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 22 of 28 on those hard corners commercial, that -- that's what I see. You know, maybe you have a church here or the EMS center there, but everything else is commercial retail. So, I -- I guess my struggle is that this -- it has been proven that commercial does work along Linder and I'm -- I'm struggling with this particular project on this corner being a better fit than traditional commercial and I'm just -- I'm trying to get you -- your expertise as to why this is a better fit. Brown: It all has to do with the access. I mean if you had better access, a -- a more intense or even a viable use -- I mean when I look at these live-work units, what I envision is -- if I was starting my business and I'm a consultant, I work from home, that this would probably be a place that I could say to someone, hey, you want to come meet with me, I have got all the tools, I can show you the zoning and we can sit down and we can draw out your plans and decide how to -- how to move forward. It -- it is kind of like when people want to start their -- their -- their business why are those flex spaces in -- in the industrial work. This is the same thought process is -- that I see -- I remember we used to call the -- the flex buildings incubators, is that they are -- they are -- they are trying to start a business and -- and -- and this is kind of how they start. Although the concerns that everybody's had about the uses and how the -- how it's going to be maintained, those things are all laid out in the declarations in the condominium act that are required that take care of that and, then, basically, these buildings being lot and blocks in the PA subdivision, the buildings and grounds are all taken care of by them and, then, the condominium act takes care of the building itself and the maintenance of that. Hoaglun: Any other questions for Mr. Brown? All right. Thank you, Kent. Brown: Thanks. Hoaglun: Council, any comments? You want to close the public hearing? Do you need to hear from the applicant or we do have one -- Johnson: No. You have the applicant closing if you -- Hoaglun: Yeah. Does the applicant care to close? Amar: Mr. President, Council Members, again, we -- we do feel that this is -- is the best use for this -- this corner for this area. There has been a lot of discussion about the vertically integrated units tonight. However, I would like to remind Council that what the -- that those vertically integrated units are a principally permitted use. So, they are --they are not really the -- the item that we are bringing forward to Council tonight. I know it's -- it's a part of our project, but tonight it's the -- the development agreement mod, the -- the rezone into R-40, so that we can provide an additional housing type. Those -- the -- the townhomes. That -- that's what we need the conditional use permit for tonight. I have -- I have liked all the discussion about the -- the vertically integrated units. We are really excited to -- to build those and provide those. It's something that's new to Biltmore that we -- we are excited about. However, what we are coming before Council about is -- is Page 49 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page——28 the rezone to have that transition of townhomes into the existing residents that -- that are next to us. And I stand for any additional questions. Cavener: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Yes, Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Jeremy, I want to be kind of up front with where I'm coming from. More my issue is the townhouses. I would -- I would want to see more mixed use. I would want to see more of the vertically integrated. I think this is a little bit of vertically integrated, which I think is contemplated in the mixed use. I'm in the C-C zoning, with a lot more residential being put on top of it and so in my opinion I don't think it -- it meets the criteria. So, I'm -- I'm probably right now not in favor of the rezone request. I just want to be up front with you and I just -- I don't know if that's something that you and your team had -- had talked about, about doing more of that and feeling like that you couldn't. This just -- this feels to me like a bunch of townhouses with a -- a little bit of that vertically integrated put on top. Amar: Mr. President, Council Member, yes, we -- we did consider and looked at doing more. After neighborhood meetings and meetings with staff, this is what it's become, especially as we have addressed -- we have tried to address all of the concerns that -- that our Windsong neighbors have. Again, we -- we built all those homes, we have relationships with them. We --we want them to continue to like and love Biltmore as they live in our homes and so as we work with them building height was a huge concern for them. I believe that the -- the vertically integrated units, we -- we could design 40 to 50 units on this C-C zone that -- as it is and apply for building permits and go and -- and we would probably benefit from more units. But we just -- we don't feel that that's the best for our Windsong neighbors or for -- for Meridian and the -- and the needs that Meridian has for houses. And so we -- we did -- we looked at -- at lots of those options and feel that we are bringing the best -- Hoaglun: Any further question? Strader: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thank you. Did you guys consider at least -- I understood the transition to the neighbors. That makes sense to me. You want to be respectful of your neighbors, get along well. Did you consider, you know, the middle units here, like E and F, creating those as -- as vertically integrated commercial as well? Granted they are right on the open space, but I guess I -- yeah, I just want to understand if you considered expanding that component to get more commercial. Amar: Mr. President, Council Member, we -- we did. That -- that would end up having the -- the commercial store fronts face the park, which, again, with where this is under five acres the -- the open space isn't -- isn't required, but we -- we would like it. We Page 50 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page——28 wanted the feel for the community and so having -- having townhomes and -- and families and children to be able to surround that park we felt was a better use than -- than more commercial offices. Strader: Or, alternatively, perhaps a row -- you know, flip -- flip it; right? So, you could have a long strip of open green space facing the townhomes and, then, you could have had a long strip of additional commercially, you know, integrated buildings facing the first set that you have. Have you guys looked at that configuration? Just to play Devil's advocate, I think there would be a way to get more green space and more vertically integrated space. I'm -- the reason I'm asking that question is it does feel a little bit to me like we are giving up commercial and we are ending up with a development full of townhomes and I do like the vertically integrated commercial residential; right? I love -- I love that idea. I think it's great. I think it solves a lot of issues we have in the city, because people aren't commuting everywhere to get to work. So, I like -- I love that aspect. I think that provides an amazing solution to a lot of the infrastructure issues that we are having in Meridian. You know, I understand being respectful to the neighbor. I -- I actually wish we had more I think is where I'm at. You, know I understand leaving that row of townhomes, you know, kind of on the -- on the west side, but I am concerned that we are giving up a lot of commercial and I understand the access issues, don't get me wrong. Let me mull it over for a bit. Thanks. Hoaglun: Alan, did you want to -- Tiefenbach: Mr. President, Members of the Council, point of clarification. I -- I think it was -- it was an honest -- an honest misstatement. But the C-C doesn't allow townhouses. C-C allows multi-family. Under the present code they could do a conditional use permit to the -- to the city -- excuse me -- to the Planning Commission to do multi-family. Now, it is a little trickier than that, because they would also have to do a development agreement modification, so they would have to come to you. But townhouses are not allowed in C-C. Multi-family is the -- even if you did a development agreement modification there would be some argument about whether or not they could do that. But multi-family, yes, but you still have to do a DA agreement. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you, Alan. Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. So, I -- I'm a real estate broker, so I understand how all of this works from the development piece and the financing piece. So, is there -- because -- because there is a commercial component and a residential component, does that prohibit owners from seeking residential mortgages to finance these? And is that a limitation that also is created from -- from having say 25 of them versus 12 of them? Amar: Mr. President, Council Member, I -- I don't know all of the mortgage answers, but no. So -- so, as townhomes these -- these sell like a single family residence and so they are all individual -- individual townhomes. They are -- they are attached, but they are not multi-family and -- and Alan's clarification was a good one. We -- we weren't coming to Page 51 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 25 of 28 -- seeking to do multi-family apartments, because we --we want the individual townhomes and so that they can be -- I mean single family residences, they are just attached. Perreault: Mr. President, follow up. Hoaglun: Go ahead. Perreault: But if the bank is collateralizing the property and they had --they see the condo plat included, because it would have to be, is that not, then, going to prohibit them from getting residential financing? And is -- is platting that commercial space going to prohibit that? Amar: Mr. President, Council Member, I don't believe it should, because the -- the preliminary plat that we have has the -- the 33 residential lots and, then, three commercial lots. On two of those commercial lots is where the -- the vertically integrated units will go. But in -- in lots of plats there -- there is a mix of residential lots and commercial lots on the plat and so I -- I don't believe it should affect their -- their ability to get financing for -- for their townhome. Hoaglun: Council, any other questions? Amar: Thank you. Hoaglun: Thank you, Jeremy. Council, what's your -- what's your pleasure on this? And I will add my two cents here -- here at the start. I'm -- I'm very familiar with this property. A young lady I was dating back in -- in high school lived out over in this section, a dairy farm, and so I remember the house that existed had an artesian well pumping -- and I used to remember the guy's name and it's -- it's been lost, but when that house was torn down that property has been vacant for a very, very, very long time and it -- it is -- it is -- it is in-fill. It is difficult to access. You have one access point. It's nice that the pathways coming in that -- that will follow Five Mile and -- and come across the road and -- and -- and come up farther and so I -- I see the difficulty. I mean they are -- they are trying to meet our requirements for this site and to do that it -- it's taking a bit of effort and it's -- it's -- it's been a -- a very good effort I think. I -- I just don't see having any intensive retail on that corner. With that one access point I would probably know how to get there from other parts of the subdivision to get to that point, but for people who see it and want to get there, you have one access point and -- and Linder Road carries a lot of traffic. That's going to be difficult to do -- to do the left hand turn. It's not impossible yet, but someday it might be. So, I appreciate the effort to bring commercial to an area, but trying to lower the intensity of it and -- and doing that in a way that fits the -- the -- the neighborhood. Windsong is a fairly new development. That property -- Stubblefields had that forever and -- and was tied up in issues and whatnot, so I appreciate that effort of trying to integrate it and make it fit, because a lot of times, you know, that's the hassle we have is how do you make that fit with what's already there and they have kind of eliminated that issue for us, but it is a matter -- do we -- do we want this? Do we like that? What are the hurdles? I think our Planning and Zoning Commission tried to tackle that with the condo Page 52 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 26 of 28 plats and making sure it's just not going to be pure residential and keeping it to the commercial, but, you know, we -- it's up to us to decide, but I -- I have no idea what would be there if -- if we don't do this. So, it's -- it's -- that's -- that's my -- my two cents on it. Perreault: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, all the time I have been a Planning and Zoning Commissioner and on Council I think this is the -- at least the third application that I have seen on this piece. The one prior was like a 95 unit multi-family that was -- that was denied and the one before that was another multi-family with maybe a commercial pad that was denied. This is the best design that I have seen since I have seen presentations. This is a tough corner, because you have that walkway and, then, you have the drain that goes in front of BridgeTower and so it really also limits the size of the usable space on there. So, kudos to you designing it in a functional way, because I have seen some multiple different designs on this piece and most of them weren't amazing, which is, obviously, why they didn't get approved and I'm usually, you know, one of the first to say, hey, let's definitely not trade some commercial for residential. However, we have approved those office slash -- like they are -- they are really also business condos over there directly to the east. I think there maybe -- there is maybe four units per building and there is four buildings, something like that. There were numerous residential applications for that corner. I think the applicant that -- or the gentleman that owned that had tried to bring four-plexes like three times. So, all of the -- it seems like every single one of those corners has had multiple different groups that have come and presented options and I'm glad to finally see that we are actually seeing some movement and so because there is -- so, in my opinion, because there is a decent amount of -- of restaurants and retail on Linder and Fairview and Linder and McMillan and Linder and Chinden, that we -- there is some pretty good access for owners in that area. Unlike Black Cat and Ten Mile that doesn't have several different major corners that have, you know, neighborhood uses. So, I am in favor of the design as it is. I -- I also love live-work units. I just don't know -- it's a tough market to get people to buy those. They are -- I think they are harder to sell than they seem. They seem like a fantastic idea and that a lot of people would be interested in them, but I think they are -- they are tougher to sell. So, that's my thought. I -- I personally think this is the best that I have seen on this property in all the applications that I have heard. Strader: President Hoaglun? Hoaglun: Council Woman Strader. Strader: All right. I'll go for it. I -- yeah. I think I have been convinced to be in favor of it. I definitely love it so much more than the self storage thing. I'm really grateful that it's not self storage. I -- I think it-- it is very--this is the best case scenario the neighbors certainly could have wanted from a transition standpoint, so I appreciate that. I don't love that we are losing what I think could have been more commercial, but it sounds like this has been a real struggle for a long time, so I appreciate the creativity with the vertically integrated. Page 53 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page— of 28 I hope that it -- that it works and I -- that's an equity risk and I hope you guys market it appropriately and make it happen. I think it could be really interesting. A lot of little cottage industries could come out of this. I think it could be really -- really a cool thing. So, yeah, it's new, let's try something new. I think I'm in favor of it. Thanks. Hoaglun: Any further comments? Council, what's your desire? Strader: President Hoaglun? Strader: Yes, Council Woman Strader. Strader: I move that we close the public hearing. Borton: Second. Hoaglun: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Hoaglun: Council Woman -- Strader: Sure. Yeah. I will go ahead and try to -- I will go ahead and try to make a motion and we'll see where it takes us. Just one -- okay. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number H-2021-0102 as presented in the staff report for today's hearing date with the following modifications. We will have it reflect the discussions about the condo plat, that all of the buildings must be constructed or have building permits for construction -- will change that prior to the CO as we discussed and, then, in addition to that I would like the DA agreement to reflect that the use will not be for drinking establishments. Perreault: Second. Hoaglun: I have a motion and a second for the motion. Is there discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, nay; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea. Hoaglun: All ayes. Motion carries. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE NAY. FUTURE MEETING TOPICS Page 54 Meridian City Council Item#2. May 18,2022 Page 28—28 Simison: All right. With that we come to future meeting topics. Council, anything to bring up there? Strader: Yes. Hoaglun: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thank you. Just one -- one item. I would love to see some follow up on our Community Development Block Grant program about staff coming back to us on how we could modify the way our program is set up in order to be able to finance or contribute forgivable loans to affordable housing projects. I feel like -- I'm -- I'm sensing that there could be some hurdles there in the way our program Is organized and our requirements and also with the Finance Department. I think that they need to weigh in on that and that -- that -- that is it. Except for one tiny thing. Just a tiny pet peeve. But I like Council Woman Strader, if we could go with that. Just for everybody on staff to know. We don't have to dance around with like Council Person or any -- any of that. But it's a tiny -- tiny thing, but -- Hoaglun: Duly noted -- Strader: --just a preference. Hoaglun: -- Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thanks. Hoaglun: With that do we have a motion to adjourn? Perreault: So moved. Hoaglun: And we have a motion to adjourn. All those in favor signify by saying aye. We are adjourned. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7.26 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) COUNCIL PRESIDENT BRAD HOAGLUN 6-7-2022 ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK Page 55 E IDIAN;--- AGENDA ITEM Public Forum - Future Meeting Topics The Public are invited to sign up in advance of the meeting at www.meridiancity.org/forum to address elected officials regarding topics of general interest or concern of public matters. Comments specific to an active land use/development applications are not permitted during this time. By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented at the Public Forum. However, City Counicl may request the topic be added to a future meeting agenda for further discussion or action. The Mayor may also direct staff to provide followup assistance regarding the matter. i i i CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC FORUM SIGN-IN SHEET Date: May 18, 2022 Please sign in below if you wish to address the Mayor and City Council and provide a brief description of your topic. Please observe the following rules of the Public Forum: • DO NOT: o Discuss active applications or proposals pending before Planning and Zoning or City Council o Complain about city staff, individuals, business or private matters • DO o When it is your turn to speak, state your name and address first o Observe a 3-minute time limit (you may be interrupted if your topic is deemed inappropriate for this forum) Name (please print) Brief Description of Discussion Topic E IDIAN.;--- Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline Page 4 Changes to Agenda: Item #1: McCrea Meadow Short Plat (SHP-2021-0006) Application(s):  Short Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of .3 acres of land, zoned R-15, located at 1028 NE 3rd St. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Old-Town Summary of Request: Request for a short plat to create two buildable lots.  There is an existing 1,350 sq. ft. single family residence on the property that was constructed in 1932.  The applicant requests to contain the existing residence on a northern lot of approximately 7,700 sq. ft. and subdivide a second 4,950 sq, ft. southern lot for a future residence.  Access to the existing residence occurs from E. Carlton Ave, a local street. Access to the new residence will occur via an existing alley at the south side of the property.  The Downtown Meridian City Core Street Cross Section Master Plan contains a template of the portion of NE 3rd Street bordering the property. There is already curb, gutter and sidewalk along E. Carlton Ave. NE 3rd St. from E. State Ave to E. Carlton Ave (the vicinity of the subject property) has yet to be reconstructed, so staff is not requiring curb and gutter at this time. rd  There is a very large tree existing on the property frontage along NE 3. This alignment makes it difficult to follow the approved alignment for sidewalk and makes it difficult to plant additional trees as required in the landscape buffer. The City Arborist agreed to the difficulties and supported preservation of the tree. The Director has granted alternative compliance to the applicant.  In the staff report, there was some discussion regarding locations of water and sewer mains in E. Carlton, how the service lines would connect, and staff mentioned due to the existing setback and carport along the east side of the property, running a sewer line along that area might not be feasible.  Staff recommended a condition for a 10 ft. wide easement within the landscape buffer on the west side of the house.  However, after further discussion, it was determined because these would be private service lines, the only easement required would be a private easement between the two lots, and these lines could run under the existing carport if desired since this was a private arrangement. Thus, condition 1.b. can be removed. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number SHP-2021-0006, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 18, 2022: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number SHP-2021-0006, as presented during the hearing on May 18, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number SHP-2021-0006 to the hearing date of \[date\] for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #2: Pavilion at Windsong (H-2021-0102) Application(s):  Development Agreement Modification (no action required from Commission)  Rezone  Preliminary Plat  Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: The subject property is 4.77 acres and is presently zoned C-C. It is located at the northwest corner of N. Linder Rd and W. Ustick Rd. The surrounding area is comprised of single family detached to the south, east and west, a commercial center directly across N. Linder Rd to the east (Sawtooth Landing) and a newly developing mixed density residential development at the southeast corner of N. Linder Rd and W. Ustick Rd (Lennon Pointe). History: In 2019, the property was proposed for a Development Agreement Modification and conditional use to allow a mix of uses including multi-family, a self-service storage facility, office and retail uses. During the City Council meeting, there were concerns discussed with the multi-family component in regard to transition in density, height of buildings (3 stories), overcrowding of schools, traffic, and desire for more neighborhood serving uses to be provided in the area. The Planning Commission did approve the self-storage use but strongly recommended retail uses at the northeast corner of the site. Council approved the development agreement modification only for the self-storage and commercial uses, and prohibited multifamily on the site. The development agreement modification was never recorded and no construction has occurred on the property. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Use Community Summary of Request:  This proposal is to rezone 3.42 acres of the subject property from CC to R-40, and a preliminary plat for 33 townhouse lots, 2 lots for 2 vertically-integrated buildings with 6 residential units each (commercial and residential), and 1 commercial lot.  A conditional use is also required for townhouses in the R-40 zoning district.  As mentioned above, because specific details regarding development were not provided with the annexation, a development agreement modification is required for any development of the site.  This proposal also included a request for private streets because some of the units front on a mew (approved by the Director). Comp Plan and FLUM  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.  Mixed Use is defined by elements such as three types of land uses, higher density near employment, being centered around public spaces, and accessible.  Mixed Use Community additionally defines at least 20% residential, encouraging vertically integrated structures, and limitations to a maximum 30,000 sq. ft. footprint.  Application reflects three types of uses, with the majority of the residential portion of the development clustered around a central open space, and it is on a commercial arterial with a combination of office, commercial and residential.  Staff supports the vertically-integrated (VI) buildings, but is concerned about the loss of additional commercially-viable property if the VI structures build out as townhouses, resulting in the development being only a residential development with a drive-through establishment and not true mixed use.  As a condition of approval, staff recommends a requirement that at time of building permit, the ground floors of all vertically- integrated buildings meet occupancy class requirements for commercial structures. Staff believes the applicant is amenable to this requirement.  Also, staff believes the vertically-integrated structures would be more appropriate on the north side of W. Crosswind St. where Buildings A and B are presently shown. This would better integrate with the commercial pad and reduce the impact of traffic in the townhome portion of this development. Staff recommended at the Planning Commission that the VI structures be moved to this area, OR additional VI buildings be located here. The applicant has not agreed to this recommendation and the Commission agreed they could remain in the area proposed.  At the time of the staff report, staff had concerns with the townhouse row indicated as “Building D” along the western property line being as close as 30 feet from existing residences and the impact of a “wall effect” of these townhomes on the Windsong Subdivision. Staff recommended Building D be broken into at least two groups of buildings. The applicant has submitted updated drawings with this revision. Access  The subject property is located at the northwest corner of N. Linder Rd and W. Ustick Rd., both arterials. There is an existing local road, W. Crosswind St., which serves the adjacent Windsong Subdivision to the west and presently stubs to the subject property.  This development would include closing an existing access on N. Linder Rd and creating a new access from W. Ustick Rd. approximately 250 ft. to the north. There is also a northern stub proposed to the property at the north, which is not presently in the City.  The applicant has mentioned in their narrative that they are proposing a 3-way stop sign at the intersection of W. Crosswinds and N. Wafting Ln, although this is not shown on the plans or mentioned by ACHD. ACHD has commented that traffic calming should be provided in this area by way of a bulb-out. Staff has received a letter from a neighbor also requesting traffic calming in this area. This should be addressed with the final plat.  Except for W. Crosswinds St, which would be a local street built to the typical section, all the remaining roads in this development are proposed to be private roads. The preliminary plat reflects the private roads south of W. Crosswind St. meet the 24 ft. minimum required width.  At the time the staff report was issued, staff mentioned the plat indicated the “alley” at the north side of the site did not meet the requirements for an alley (dead-ends), it did not meet the 24 ft. private street width, and had too many units on it to be a common drive. Staff suggested several solutions, including if Buildings A&B were converted to vertically-integrated residential projects fronting along W. Crosswind St., the alley could be redesigned as a 25-foot wide commercial drive aisle. The applicant has since designed the “alley” to meet the 24’ private street requirement, although N. Puff Ln still does not meet the minimum 24’ width to qualify as a private street.  All parking requirements have been met, although the applicant should submit a shared-parking agreement between the commercial use and the vertically-integrated buildings at time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance. Landscaping  The landscape plan shows a 25- foot wide street buffer as required adjacent to N. Linder Road and W. Ustick Road although it does not appear either landscape buffer meets the minimum landscaping standards of at least one tree per every 35 ft. Also, with the staff report, due to the adjacent residential, staff recommended a 5 ft. wide landscape buffer to provide a better transition. The revised drawings show this buffer. Pathways  There are 7 ft. wide attached sidewalks existing along N. Linder Rd. and W. Ustick Rd. The Five Mile Pathway parallels the creek at the west terminating at the subject property. This proposal initially included 10 ft. wide pathways along both N. Linder Rd and W. Ustick Rd., connecting to the existing Five Mile Pathway.  Staff mentioned in the staff report the configuration as proposed was redundant and unnecessary. Staff recommended the pathway along Linder be removed because there is already 7 foot sidewalk, the sidewalk along W. Ustick Rd be widened to 10 ft. wide with the pathway shown directly south of Building H being eliminated, and the connection between the existing Five Mile Creek Pathway and the W. Ustick Road Pathway being shifted further to the west. Updated drawings do show the pathway along Linder removed but the other revisions do not appear to be made.  Also, staff does not prefer multiple pedestrian accesses from each building and recommends there shall be no more than one walkway per building connecting to the pathways and sidewalks along W. Ustick Rd. and N. Linder Rd. Elevations  Building elevations show townhouses comprised of materials consisting of rock, cement board and hardie board, lap siding, with pitched roofs, exposed timber frame and trellis features, with stone bases. Windows are included on many of the garage doors.  The elevations demonstrate significant fenestration and modulation as well as a variety of roofline variation. Most buildings also include first floor covered porches and second story decks.  Staff finds the elevations as proposed demonstrate high quality design, but as mentioned, the elevations of the vertically-integrated structures reflect a townhouse design rather than a commercial business. If the City Council believes it important for vertically integrated buildings to include at least some portion of commercial use, as already mentioned, staff recommends a condition that at time of building permit, the ground floors of all vertically-integrated units meet occupancy class requirements for commercial structures. Written Testimony: One letter has been received from Mike and Sandi Archibald. Their concern is regarding providing traffic calming for Crosswind Street coming into their neighborhood. Staff Recommendation: Approval with conditions as listed in the staff report. Planning Commission This application was heard by the Planning Commission on April 7, 2022. At this meeting, the Commission moved to recommend approval to the City Council of the subject development agreement modification, rezoning, preliminary plat and conditional use request. Several citizens expressed concerns in regard to density, traffic impacts to the Windsong Neighborhood and whether traffic calming could be implemented along W. Crosswind St. Commission agreed with the applicant that the VI structures were in the most logical location, added a recommendation that a short plat to condominiumize the vertically integrated buildings shall be required prior to certificate of zoning compliance (to reduce the chance of the VI buildings just being used for rental townhouse) and recommended the exterior facades of vertically integrated buildings integrate brick or stone on the bottom level. Staff notes a requirement in the UDC for the condo plat is that all buildings must be constructed or have received building permits for construction. Because of this, the condition regarding “prior to CZC” should be changed to “prior to certificate of occupancy.” Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2021-0102, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 18, 2022, 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-2021-0102, as presented during the hearing on May 18, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0102 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) City Council Meeting May 18 2022 Item #1:McCrea Meadow Short Plat Item #2:PLANNED DEVELOPMENTZONINGFLUM Pavilion at Windsong Planning Commission should be changed to “prior to certificate of occupancy.” construction. Because of this, the condition regarding “prior to CZC” buildings must be constructed or have received building permits for Staff notes a requirement in the UDC for the condo plat is that all or stone on the bottom level.the exterior facades of vertically integrated buildings to integrate brick VI buildings just being used for rental townhouses) and recommended prior to certificate of zoning compliance (to reduce the chance of the condominiumize the vertically integrated buildings shall be required most logical location, added a recommendation that a short plat to Commission agreed with the applicant that the VI structures were in the implemented along W. Crosswind St. to the Windsong Neighborhood and whether traffic calming could be Several citizens expressed concerns in regard to density, traffic impacts rezoning, preliminary plat and conditional use request.City Council of the subject development agreement modification, At this meeting, the Commission moved to recommend approval to the This application was heard by the Planning Commission on April 7, 2022.  7/tem 77 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for McCrea Meadow (SHP-2021-0006) by Russell McCrea, Located at 1028 NE 3rd St. A. Request: Short Plat consisting of two (2) buildable lots on 0.3 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. Page 3 Item#1. E IDIAN IDAHO C� PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Alan Tiefenbach Meeting Date: May 18, 2022 Topic: Public Hearing for McCrea Meadow (SHP-2021-0006) by Russell McCrea, Located at 1028 NE 3rd St. A. Request: Short Plat consisting of two (2) buildable lots on 0.3 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the City Council Public Hearing Page 4 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET { DATE: May 18, 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 1 PROJECT NAME: McCrea Meadow (SHP-2021-0006) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify (Please Print) HOA? (mark X if yes) If yes, please provide HOA name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Item#1. STAFF REPORT E IDIANn-=- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A H O HEARING 5/18/2022 Legend W DATE: r Projeal Luca or TO: Mayor&City Council LI FROM: Alan Tiefenbach,Associate Planner 208-498-0573L L! SUBJECT: SHP-2021-0006 McCrea Meadow Short Plat LOCATION: The site is located at 1028 NE 3rd St. in 1771 01 the S 1/z of the NW 1/4 of Section 7, m FM—] = I I I TF Township 3N,Range IE. RTF ❑ �� LPL'�' ' � FT-FT i IF-1 FFFTT-1 FFFT-n I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant proposes a Short Plat to create two buildable lots on 0.3 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. II. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant/Owner/Representative: Russell McCrea— 1027 S. Cameron St. Boise, ID 83709 III. NOTICING City Council Posting Date Newspaper Notification 05/01/2022 Radius notification mailed to properties within 500 feet 04/27/2022 Page 1 Page 5 Item#1. IV. STAFF ANALYSIS The Applicant proposes a short plat to subdivide the subject property into a new plat consisting of 2 lots to allow an additional single-family residence. The subject property is approximately 0.3 acres,is located at the northeast corner of E. Carlton Ave. and NE 3'St., and is zoned R-15. It is located within the Cottage Home Addition to Meridian Subdivision,which was platted in 1897. There is an existing 1,350 sq. ft. single family residence on the property that was constructed in 1932. The applicant requests to contain the existing residence on a northern lot of approximately 7,700 sq. ft. and subdivide a second 4,950 sq, ft. southern lot for a future residence.Access to the existing residence occurs from E. Carlton Ave, a local street. Access to the new residence will occur via an existing alley at the south side of the property. The Downtown Meridian City Core Street Cross Section Master Plan contains a template of the portion of NE 3'Street bordering the property. There is already curb, gutter and sidewalk along E. Carlton Ave.NE 3'St. from E. State Ave to E. Carlton Ave (the vicinity of the subject property)has yet to be reconstructed, so staff is not requiring curb and gutter at this time. The applicant will be installing a 6 ft.wide detached sidewalk,but the alignment differs from the approved road template. This is to preserve a very large existing tree on the property. The City Arborist submitted a letter supporting this deviation. Existing and future water service for the properties is shown to occur from E. Carlton Ave. The applicant's civil plans indicate sewer for the new residence to connect to an existing main in the alley at the south. However,the City intends to install a sewer main along E Carlton Ave. within the next 5 years and sewer service will be required to connect to this main. Due to an existing carport and tree,it does not appear there is enough room on the east side of the property to run both water and sewer lines. As a condition of approval, staff is recommending the plat be revised to reflect a 10 ft wide sewer easement along the western property line(within the 20 ft. wide landscape easement)to provide sewer from E. Carlton Ave. Alternative Compliance from UDC 11-2A-7. UDC 11-5B-5 allows alternative compliance from landscape requirements when explicit compliance is not feasible or the alternative means is superior to what is required. The applicant has requested alternative compliance from UDC 11-3B-7-C-3b. This requirement pertains to a minimum density within landscape buffers of one tree per 35 linear feet. According to the applicant,the two additional trees cannot be provided due to existing overhead power lines and a 68 ft.high, 60-inch diameter silver maple tree with a canopy of approximately 90 ft. across. Requests for alternative compliance are allowed only when one(1)or more of the following conditions exist: a. Topography, soil, vegetation, or other site conditions are such that full compliance is impossible or impractical; b. The site involves space limitations or an unusually shaped lot; c. Safety considerations make alternative compliance desirable; d. Other regulatory agencies or departments having jurisdiction are requiring design standards that conflict with the requirements of this article; e. The proposed design includes innovative design features based on "new urbanism", "neotraditional design", or other architectural and/or site designs that promote walkable and mixed use neighborhoods; Page 2 Page 6 Item#1. f. Additional environmental quality improvements would result from the alternative compliance. As the request for alternative compliance is a result of vegetation, space limitations, and removing a mature maple tree would be an adverse environmental impact, several of the required conditions exist. In order to grant approval for an alternative compliance application,the Director shall determine the following: 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements are not feasible; or As mentioned,a very large existing tree with a 90 ft.wide canopy makes planting additional trees not practical. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and; The Director finds preserving the mature tree is a preferable means to meeting the intent of the landscape buffer requirements. As a condition of approval,the Director is requiring all unimproved right-of-way along the property line east of the proposed sidewalk,as well as a 20 ft. wide easement as measured from the property line,to be landscaped with lawn or other vegetative cover and maintained by the applicant or as otherwise indicated by a license agreement between the property owner and ACHD. 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 will be less materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of surrounding properties. Staff has reviewed the proposed short plat for substantial compliance with the criteria set forth in UDC 11-6B-5 and deems the short plat to be in substantial compliance with said requirements. V. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed short plat with the conditions noted in Section VII of this report. The director has approved the ALT request per the Findings above. Page 3 Page 7 Item#1. VI. EXHIBITS A. Proposed Short Plat(date: 2/1/22) BEING A REPLAT OF LOTS 7AND 8 AND A PART OFL OT9 OF BLOCK6 OF COTTAGE HOME ADDITION TO MFRIDIAN,LOCATED IN THE S 112 OF THENW 114 OF SECTION7, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST BOISEMERIDIAN,CITYOFMERIDIAN, ADA COLINTr IDAHO 2022 F GIR MN AWMr B - N 6Y�'S/9"E ]OH..SR' N 8H7O'!E f f 3G�� _— — J • 1 1`II 3 a I i - N I` A CY �W x � L znx I � � aaw:••.r;f v n � x a I iM1�'e M 89'3R x5J'E Y99 15' d LW3 ryR Page 4 Page 8 Item#1. B. Proposed Site Plan(date: 1/31/2022) N: .- . '-" V - EP- EP it .99 E:2455973.78 E CARLTON AVENUE EXISTING CURS,GUTTER AND SIDEWALK NY -SD-�r ❑ 1'56- z -- ----- - - ----� j pHP rrc I I_f � 37.00' Rf 22+52-31. PRC,— 11 34-06' PT W � gtirO� 22+45,00, Fi. 3 �1 LL 32.00' FT41 (Y 16 1CO 17 Lu 1.. z SZ a ?s a ? + RIP - * I o I' tli I I t7 9 I I I $ �1 S soMTS- �:r �g +l+-LEY G ry 1��e II I I1 3 13 KEYNOTES .1 I 6 13 O PER CITY SiANDAR SArRECONNER ECT EX. SERVICE LINE ICE WITH NEW ETOALOT TER SERVICE V 1.0 WATER SERVICE LINE TO SERVE LOT 2 NEW SEWER SERVICE TAP TO SERVE LOT 1 OINV, 8"0-2596.69 W. 4"0 TAP-2597.49 4 85 LF 4"0 SEWER SERVICE LINE SLOPE=2.0% CONNECT TO EXISTING SEWER SERVICE LINE 5 NV. 4"=2599.2C t CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY HOR17 &VERT LOCATION AND OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ONEW GAS SERVICE TAP TO SERVE LOT 1 �7 NEW GAS SERVICE LINE TO SERVE LOT 1 ORETAIN EXISTING SEWER SERVICE FROM LOT 1 TO SERVE LOT 2 ORETAIN EXISTING GAS SERVICE FROM LOT 1 TO SERVE LOT 2 (BY GAS CO.) 10 10' WIDE EASEMENT FOR UTIILITY SERVICES TO LOT 1 11 10'WIDE EASEMENT FOR UTILITY SERVICES TO LOT 2 12 15• WIDE EASEMENT FOR UTILITY SERVICES TO LOT 1 13 TYPE 'C' SURFACE RESTORATION (GRAVEL ROADWAY) PER II SD-303 1¢ RELOCATE CHIP TO BURIED LINE TO SERVICE LOTS 1& 2 (BY ID. POWER) 15 RETAIN AND PROTECT EXISTING GRAVITY IRRIGATION PIPE AND ORCHARD VAVLES FOR GRAVITY IRRIGATION DELIVERY TO LOTS I AND 2 16 6' WIDE CONCRETE SIDEWALK PER SD-709 (ACHD SUPP. TO ISPWC) 17 MATCH TO EXISTING SIDEWALK 18 RETAIN AND PROTECT EXISTING TREE AND TREE ROOTS INSTALL TACTILE WARNING SURFACE (TWS) FOR PEDESTRIAN ACCESS PER 19 SD-712 (ACHD SUPP.TO ISPWC) Page 5 Page 9 • SCfE�4}�eY! '` � �P t �-' 'h ill•' ��J' � rl .! •A 7..�s+�+ '� � •.ram.�;� �. Iw _ 4 _ � .r�r 411._.i rl•..* .r Page . Item#1. VII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning Division Site Specific Conditions: 1. The short plat prepared by Kyle Koomler of Civil Survey Consultants,Inc included in Section VI.B shall be revised as follows: a) A 20 ft. landscape easement as measured from the property line shall be indicated along the western property line. Landscape easement shall be vegetated in accord with UDC 11-3B-7 unless alternative compliance has been approved by the Director. b) A 10 ft. wide sewer easement connecting to E. Carlton Ave. shall be reflected within the landscape easement along the western property line. 2. All unimproved right-of-way along the property east of the proposed sidewalk, as well as the 20 ft.wide landscape easement shall be landscaped with lawn or other vegetative cover and maintained by the applicant or as otherwise indicated by a license agreement between the property owner and ACHD. 3. If the City Engineer's signature has not been obtained within two(2)years of the City Council's approval of the short plat,the short plat shall become null and void unless a time extension is obtained,per UDC 11-6B-7. 4. The applicant shall provide underground,pressurized irrigation water as required by UDC 11- 3A-15 or shall submit a waiver request to the City Engineer to retain the existing flood irrigation system prior to signature on the short plat. 5. Per UDC 11-5B-5B2,the Director(at the applicant's request) approved alternative compliance regarding UDC 11-2A-7 to not require additional trees to be planted within the landscape buffer along NE 3rd St. 6. Existing and future development shall comply with the dimensional standards of the R-15 zoning district. 7. Future development shall be consistent with the East 3Rd Street Section of the Downtown Meridian City Core Street Cross Section Master Plan. 8. Staff s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or conditions from the previous approvals as noted in condition 3. above,does not relieve the Applicant of responsibility for compliance. B. Public Works Site Specific Conditions: 1. The sewer line in the alley way will be abandoned and a new sewer main will be constructed in Carlton Ave in the next few years. Due to this,the applicant must install dry sewer main lines for both properties to Carlton for easy connection to the future sewer main. 2. If the dry sewer service is brought along the east side of the property, a 15-foot-wide easement will be required for water and sewer services running parallel. Locate water and sewer services at least 4 feet from the edge of the easement and provide a minimum of 6 feet of separation between services. Alternatively, a sewer service could be run along the west side of the property. In this case, only a 10-foot-wide easement would be needed. Page 7 Page 11 Item#1. 3. Ensure no permanent structures including but not limited to buildings,carports,infiltration trenches, fences,trees, shrubs, etc. are within any City utility easement. 4. A streetlight plan is required to be provided for this project. General Conditions 1. Sanitary sewer service to this development is available via extension of existing mains adjacent to the development. The applicant shall install mains to and through this subdivision; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. 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. Water service to this site is available via extension of existing mains adjacent to the development. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 3. 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. 4. Upon installation of the landscaping and prior to inspection by Planning Department staff, the applicant shall provide a written certificate of completion as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14A. 5. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all incomplete fencing, landscaping, amenities,pressurized irrigation,prior to signature on the final plat. 6. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post with the City a performance surety in the amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water 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 applicant shall be required to enter into a Development Surety Agreement with the City of Meridian. 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. 7. 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, and water infrastructure for a duration of two years.This surety amount will be verified by a line item final cost invoicing 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. 8. In the event that an applicant and/or owner cannot complete non-life, non-safety and non-health improvements,prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat and/or prior to occupancy,a surety agreement may be approved as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3C. 9. 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. 10. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with Page 8 Page 12 Item#1. the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 11. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 12. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 13. All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-14B. 14. 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. 15. The 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. 16. 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. 17. 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. 18. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting (http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272). All street lights shall be installed at developer's expense. Final design shall be submitted as part of the development plan set for approval, which must include the location of any existing street lights. The contractor's work and materials shall conform to the ISPWC and the City of Meridian Supplemental Specifications to the ISPWC. Contact the City of Meridian Transportation and Utility Coordinator at 898-5500 for information on the locations of existing street lighting. 19. The applicant shall provide easement(s)for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility,or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works),a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A)and an 81/2"x 11" map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed,and approved prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. 20. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 21. Any wells that will not continue to be used must be properly abandoned according to Idaho Well Construction Standards Rules administered by the Idaho Department of Water Resources. The Developer's Engineer shall provide a statement addressing whether there are any existing wells in the development, and if so, how they will continue to be used, or provide record of their abandonment. 22. Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact the Central District Health Department for abandonment Page 9 Page 13 Item#1. procedures and inspections. 23. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(MCC 9-1-28.C.1). 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 development plan approval. 24. 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. VIII. REQUIRED FINDINGS FROM THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE In consideration of a short plat,the decision-making body shall make the following findings: A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with the Unified Development Code; The Comprehensive Plan designates the future land use of this property as Old Town. The current zoning district of the site is R-15. The proposed short plat complies with the Comprehensive Plan and is developed in accord with UDC standards. B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds that public services are adequate to serve the site. C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvements program; Staff finds that the development will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds.All required utilities are being provided with the development of the property at the developer's expense. D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff finds that the development will not require major expenditures for providing supporting services. The developer and/or future lot owner(s) will finance improvements for sewer, water, utilities and pressurized irrigation to serve the project. E. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Staff finds the proposed short plat will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. F. The development preserves significant natural,scenic or historic features. Staff is not aware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features associated with the development of this site. Page 10 Page 14 7/tem 77 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Pavilion at Windsong (H-2021-0102) by Kent Brown, Located at the Northwest Corner of W. Ustick Rd. and N. Linder Rd. A. Request: Rezone of 3.42 acres of the subject property from C-C to R-40. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat on the entire 4.77-acre property to allow 33 townhouse lots, 2 lots for vertically-integrated buildings containing a total of 12 residential units, and one commercial lot. C. Request: A Conditional Use Permit to allow townhouses in the R-40 zoning district. D. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to allow the proposed development Page 15 Item#2. E IDIAN:--- IDAHO C� PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Alan Tiefenbach Meeting Date: May 18, 2022 Topic: Public Hearing for Pavilion at Windsong (H-2021-0102) by Kent Brown, Located at the Northwest Corner of W. Ustick Rd. and N. Linder Rd. A. Request: Rezone of 3.42 acres of the subject property from C-C to R-40. B. A Preliminary Plat on the entire 4.77-acre property to allow 33 townhouse lots, 2 lots for vertically-integrated buildings containing a total of 12 residential units, and one commercial lot. C. A Conditional Use Permit to allow townhouses in the R-40 zoning district. D. A Development Agreement Modification to allow the proposed development Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the City Council Public Hearing Page 16 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: May 18, 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 2 PROJECT NAME: Pavilion at Windsong (H-2021-0102) t Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify (Please Print) HOA? (marl(X if yes) If yes, please provide HOA name i 1 ✓- 2 � � ►� I i 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Item#2. STAFF REPORT C:�*%_ W IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 5/18/2022 Legend DATE: lei - -----TO: Mayor&City Council FROM: Alan Tiefenbach,Associate Planner N 208-884-5533 �J z SUBJECT: H-2021-0102 Pavilion atWindsong USf1CWRD -- LOCATION: 1680 W.Ustick Rd. oc _ W Z 'J I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant proposes the following: • Rezone of 3.42 acres of land from the CC zone to R-40 zone; • Preliminary Plat on the entire 4.77-acre property to allow 33 residential lots,2 lots for 2 vertically-integrated buildings containing 12 residential units, and one commercial lot; • Conditional Use Permit to allow townhouses in R-40 zoning district; and, • Development Agreement Modification to enter into a new DA to allow the proposed development. Note: The Applicant is also applying for private streets in a portion of the project. This application is reviewed and approved by the Director, Council action is not required.Analysis of the private street design is provided below in section V. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage IL 4.77 acres Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use Community Existing Land Use(s) Vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Multifamily,Vertically Integrated Residential Project, Commercial Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 33 residential lots,2 lots for 2 vertically-integrated buildings, 1 commercial lot, 10 common lots Phasing Plan(#of phases) One Page 1 Page 17 Item#2. Description Details Page Number of Residential Units(type 33 townhouses, 12 vertically-integrated units. of units) Density(gross&net) 9.4 du/acre Open Space(acres,total 16.1%(0.77 ac) [%]/buffer/qualified) Amenities Neighborhood Park, 10 ft.wide regional pathway Physical Features(waterways, Five-mile creek floodway is at the southwest corner of the hazards,flood plain,hillside) property to the south and west(but not on the property). Creason Lateral traverses a small portion of the site at the southwest corner.The lateral has already been piped in this area Neighborhood meeting date;#of November 29,2021 6—neighbors opposed W. Crosswind attendees: St.being connected. History(previous approvals) AZ-09-005,DA Inst# 11031366,Buyrite Apartments(H- 2018-0096);MDA H-2019-0092(not recorded),CUP H- 2019-0094 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no • Traffic Impact Stud es/no No Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access will occur from N. Linder Rd(arterial),W. Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Crosswind St(local)and N.Wafting Ln(northern stub). Traffic Level of Service Better than"E" Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross A northern stub is provided(N.Wafting Ln) Access Existing Road Network W.Ustick Rd.,N.Linder Rd.,W.Crosswind St. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ N.Linder Rd.and W.Ustick Rd.have 7 ft.wide sidewalk. Buffers Proposed Road Improvements Both W.Ustick Rd and N.Linder Rd are fully improved, although the applicant will be required to install 25 ft.wide landscape buffers. Distance to nearest City Park(+ 115 mile to Settlers Park size Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 1.6 miles from Station 2 • Fire Response Time <5 minutes • Resource Reliability >80% • Risk Identification 2 • Accessibility Acceptable • Special/resource needs Aerial device will be needed • Water Supply — 1,000 gpm per hour • Other Resources Police Service No comments Wastewater • Comments • Flow is committed Page 2 Page 18 Item#2. Description Details Page • Sewer must have at a minimum 3'of cover over top of the pipe.This is not met at manhole SSMH A6. • Water and sewer in parallel require a 30'easement.24' road does not provide adequate space. • Ensure no permanent structures(trees,bushes, buildings,carports,trash receptacle walls,fences, infiltration trenches,light poles,etc.)are built within the utility easement. • Ensure no sewer services pass through infiltration trenches. Water • Distance to Water Services 0 • Pressure Zone 2 • Water Quality No concerns • Project Consistent with Yes Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns • Eliminate the deadend water main in W Wind Gust Ln by ending the water main at N Twister Ln and then running water services to the remaining units off of W Wind Gust Ln. • Eliminate the deadend water main in W Whirl Wind Ln by ending the water main at N Quall Ln and then running water services to the remaining units off of W Whirl Wind Ln. • Eliminate the water main in the"drive through"within the CC zoning. • Eliminate the water main that is cutting through Building B • Connect water to the existing stub off Linder Road. Grocery Store 1.5 mile+/-to grocery store and other goods and services. Page 3 Page 19 r ��ii�■ � a IIII � '. + �,:F. < .} i �� A !';.I�., III II IN I 'I ■■■rH■jam i■I���r� ���i, - �as ��":-_. ., IH '�i f;�o �: ���f.11� �Ira d'�.'���.`� .. .i,,_,• �:— • .. i�' � . ■ ■ ,■.I iY■��� + ��ice„_ ". .. +I�•�._.1 k '�.�. r ■■If�l'.?J■ .ii Yir~Y■r■r■ ■■ ■i� � _ L_ .:� �. '"•�I: ` 11 ■ ■ J C - �=i��� ■ + IIII _ � IIII oil MEN FIRM son JFL IS I .71�.1■ � I� II MINI II iih #Yid mil■ \iia inw;, �1111111 -_ 7ii �" ■ �" ■ IIS+Ia 1111111 ;_ _ • sll5!i' = IIIIIIIIIIIN___ _ 11111.. 1 .,U. N N■YA R■ _ ■�Y�<< ■ rrl��■rr■ ■■■�H■ .iMl (land Imm in I GE ■.�� �Faa ■ �a II��_ �■.!! �� ■s�„■ � III ■ ■ ;iiif ■■■ ;wrw I ;_� ■ ■ ■■NIA r+�n. . ,� ..,,. ■■■ a �+an. ,� ..,, nlirlr■■N to In .'■L'!!■.II■ ■■■�Y■ ■ ■■■ -I. r■r■ .'■L' ■.II■ ■irnlwr■■�■ ■ ■■■ -.—: ■■ ■1'.?M .;; ■■L■■■■■■■ ■■ ■■ � ■■ ■1'.'J■ .;; Yrr~Y■r■Ird ■■ ■■ � — �S._.� �rrr■,�� rll�i■■ ■ :�S._.� �rrr■,�� rll�i■■ ■ .y- 1 Item#2. III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant/Representative: Kent Brown—3161 E. Springwood Dr,Meridian,ID 83642 B. Owner: Rama Group LLC— 1548 W. Cayuse Creek Cr, Ste 100,Meridian,ID 83646 IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Notification published in 3/1/2022 5/1/2022 newspaper Notification mailed to property owners within 500' 3/28/2022 4/27/2022 Applicant posted public hearing notice sign on site 3/7/2022 5/6/2022 Nextdoor posting 2/28/2022 4/27/2022 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The subject property is 4.77 acres and is presently zoned C-C. The property was annexed into the City and zoned to C-C in 2009 (Inst. #110031366,JJA Land,AZ-09-005). At the time of annexation approval, specific details for how the site was to develop were not provided. The recorded development agreement requires those details to be provided when the property is subdivided. In 2019,the property was proposed for a Development Agreement Modification and conditional use to allow a mix of uses including multi-family, a self-service storage facility,office and retail uses. During the October 1,2019 City Council meeting,there were concerns discussed with the multi- family component in regard to transition in density,height of buildings (3 stories),overcrowding of schools,traffic,and desire for more neighborhood serving uses to be provided in the area. The Planning Commission did approve the self-storage use but strongly recommended retail uses at the northeast corner of the site. Council approved the development agreement modification only for the self-storage and commercial uses, and prohibited multifamily on the site. The development agreement modification was never recorded and no construction has occurred on the property. This proposal is to rezone 3.42 acres of the subject property from CC to R-40, and a preliminary plat for 33 townhouse lots,2 lots for 2 vertically-integrated buildings with 6 residential units each (commercial and residential), 1 commercial lot, and 10 common lots. A conditional use is also required for townhouses in the R-40 zoning district. As mentioned above,because specific details regarding development were not provided with the annexation, a development agreement modification is required for any development of the site. This proposal also includes a request for private streets because some of the units front on a mew. Page 5 Page 21 Item#2. A. Development Agreement Modification The existing Development Agreement(DA) (Inst. #110031366,JJA Land,AZ-09-005)was approved in 2009. At the time of annexation approval, specific details for how the site was to develop were not provided. The recorded development agreement requires those details when the property is subdivided. The terms of the existing DA are included below in Section VI.B. A legal description and exhibit map subject to the new DA are included below in Section VI.A. The Applicant desires to enter into a new DA to allow a development consisting of 33 townhouses on 33 lots,2 vertically-integrated buildings on two lots(12 residential units total), and one 18,236 sq. ft. commercial lot with a 2,000 sq. ft. +/-building. The applicant has submitted a preliminary plat,conceptual site plan, landscape plan and building elevations for all proposed buildings. These will be included as part of the new development agreement. B. Zoning The property is presently zoned C-C. The applicant proposes to rezone approximately 3.42 acres at the north and west to R-40 to allow townhomes. Townhomes are allowed in the R-40 zoning district by conditional use. The applicant proposes to retain the remaining 1.28 acres+/-as C-C to construct two 9,200 sq. ft. vertically-integrated buildings, each with 6 residential units as well as commercial uses. The applicant also proposes an approximately 2,000 sq. ft. commercial building at the southwest corner of W. Crosswinds St. and N. Linder Rd. Both of the uses are principally permitted in the C-C zoning district. C. Future Land Use Map Designation(https://www.meridianciU.or /g 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. 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 is 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; • Transitional uses and/or landscaped buffering between commercial and existing low-or medium-density residential development; • 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 Page 6 Page 22 Item#2. 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 are 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 application reflects three types of uses,with the majority of the residential portion of the development clustered around a central open space. Two of the buildings(Buildings G&H) are proposed as vertically-integrated structures. More than 20% of the development area is proposed as residential at a gross density of 9.4 du/acre,A 2,000 sq. ft. commercial building with a drive through establishment is also proposed(shown as a pad site). The development is connected to adjacent neighbors through sidewalks,green spaces and the Five Mile Pathway. Staff supports the inclusion of vertically integrated projects into this development. This is a unique style of housing, is characteristic of a mixed-use development, and would provide employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood. However, staff believes the vertically-integrated structures would be more appropriate on the north side of W. Crosswind St.where Buildings A and B are presently shown. This would better integrate with the commercial pad and reduce the impact of traffic in the townhome portion of this development. Staff does have concerns that the vertically integrated buildings could build out in the future as merely townhouses with no commercial component,resulting in this development being only a residential development with a drive-through establishment. As the property is presently zoned C-C, staff is also concerned about the loss of additional commercially-viable property.As a condition of approval, staff recommends a requirement that at time of building permit,the ground floors of all vertically-integrated buildings meet occupancy class requirements for commercial structures. The concept plans show a townhouse row indicated as"Building D"along the western property line as close as 30 feet from existing residences. Staff does have concerns with the impact of a"wall effect"of these townhomes on the Windsong No 2 Subdivision.As a condition of approval, staff recommends Building D be broken into at least two groups of buildings,with the break occurring approximately in the vicinity of Lot 19,Block 3 of the Windsong Subdivision No 2. D. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https://www.meridiancity.or /g compplan): • Encourage diverse housing options suitable for various income levels,household sizes,and lifestyle preferences. (2.01.01) This development proposes 33 townhouses and 12 residential units within vertically- integrated buildings. This would increase the housing diversity in the area. Page 7 Page 23 Item#2. • 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) This development proposes townhouses and vertically-integrated residential units within an area comprised of a large amount of single family detached to the south, east and west, a commercial center directly across N. Linder Rd to the east(Sawtooth Landing) and a newly developing mixed density residential development at the southeast corner off. Linder Rd and W. Ustick Rd(Lennon Pointe). • Establish and maintain levels of service for public facilities and services,including water, sewer,police,transportation, schools,fire, and parks(3. 02.01G). All public utilities are available for this project site due to existing facilities abutting the site. This project also lies within the Fire Department response time goal of 5 minutes. Linder and Ustick Roads are currently built at their ultimate anticipated widths directly abutting the site. • Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity(2.02.01D). As will be discussed below, sidewalks are included on both sides of the public roads (W. Crosswind Street and the northern stub) but only sections of the private roads include sidewalk. Staff does not object because the development is aligned around a central open space and other green spaces in such a manner that all portions of the development and surrounding neighborhoods can be accessed by foot with a minimum of walking in the private streets. The applicant is also providing a 10 ft. wide pathway connecting to the Five-Mile Pathway. • Encourage infill development. (3.03.01E) The subject property is located on an arterial intersection, and is surrounded by the City of Meridian to the east, west and south. Land uses in the area include detached single family, multifamily (Lennon Point Community to the southeast) and multiple office buildings directly across N. Linder Rd to the east(Sawtooth Landing). This would be considered an infill development. • Encourage and support mixed-use areas that provide the benefits of being able to live, shop, dine,play, and work in close proximity,thereby reducing vehicle trips, and enhancing overall livability and sustainability. (3.06.02B) As this development is comprised of three different uses, including vertically integrated residential buildings, it would be considered a mixed-use development. Numerous commercial uses are within a mile of the property. E. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The property is currently vacant. F. Proposed Use Analysis: Townhouses are allowed by conditional use in the R-40 zoning district and vertically-integrated structures are a principally-permitted use in the C-C zoning district. Although it has not been determined what type of future use would occur on the commercial lot at the southwest corner of W. Crosswinds St and N. Linder Rd,the concept plan suggests a drive through establishment. If this drive-through is proposed in the future, it will require the approval a conditional use permit. Page 8 Page 24 Item#2. G. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): UDC 11-4-3-41 requires vertically integrated residential projects to be at least two stories,with at least 25%of the gross floor area being residential.None of the required parking is to be located in the front of the structure. The minimum footprint is 2,400 sq. ft.,and the specific use standards lists the types of uses that are allowed. The site plan and building elevations reflect two 9,200 sq ft. +/-three-story vertically-integrated buildings fronting W. Ustick Rd. and N. Linder Rd,with parking provided within the development,not in front of the buildings. As mentioned above, staff believes the vertically-integrated buildings would be more appropriate on the north side of W. Crosswind St. verses located at the southwest portion, directly on the intersection. This would allow the mixed-use buildings to provide a better transition between commercial and residential uses,promote better walkability with the residential to the west,and minimize traffic in the townhome area. Also,based on the building elevations submitted, staff is unsure what is being proposed is "vertically integrated residential buildings"as much as additional townhouses or a"work/live" arrangement that could remain entirely residential. As a condition of approval, staff recommends a requirement that at time of building permit,the ground floors of vertically-integrated buildings meet occupancy class requirements for commercial structures. The concept plan suggests a drive through establishment. As it will be within 300 feet of a residential zone district, a drive through establishment in this location will need approval through a conditional use permit per UDC 11-4-3-11. H. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The R-40 zoning district requires a minimum lot size of 1,000 sq. ft.,25 ft. wide landscape buffers along arterial roads(W. Ustick Rd. and N. Linder Rd.)a 10 ft. street setback from local streets(W. Crosswinds St.), internal side setbacks of 3 ft. rear setback of 12 ft. and allows building heights of up to 60 ft. The C-C zoning district has the same landscape buffer requirement and limits building heights to 50 ft. Staff notes it does not appear the 10 ft. landscape buffer requirement is met along W. Crosswind St in the location of the commercial pad. In the area proposed for R-40,the preliminary plat indicates lot sizes of at least 1,600 sq. ft., all setbacks are satisfied,the buffer is shown on the landscape plan, and the heights of the townhouses do not exceed 35 ft. The building elevations of the vertically-integrated buildings appear to be within the 50 ft. height limitation, although it is not specified on the elevations. Design will be assessed in detail at time of design review or certificate of zoning compliance. I. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): The subject property is located at the northwest corner of N. Linder Rd and W. Ustick Rd.,both arterials. There is an existing local road,W. Crosswind St.,which serves the adjacent Windsong Subdivision to the west and presently stubs to the subject property. The sections of N. Linder Road and W. Ustick Rd abutting the subject property are improved with 5-travel lanes, curb, gutter, and 7-foot wide attached concrete sidewalk. Both presently operate at a Level of Service"E",which is considered acceptable.W. Ustick Road is scheduled to be widened to 5-lanes from Ten Mile Road to Linder Road in 2024. Design for widening N. Linder Rd. to 5-lanes from Cherry Road to Ustick Road is planned for 2025, although a Page 9 Page 25 Item#2. construction year is not in the IFYWP at this point. ACHD has noted this development is estimated to generate 341 vehicle trips per day. This development would include closing an existing access on N. Linder Rd and creating a new access from W.Ustick Rd. approximately 250 ft.to the north. This would occur by extending W. Crosswind St. across the subject property to N. Linder Rd.Although ACHD typically discourages new local streets from intersecting arterials,ACHD supports the connection noting it would provide additional access for emergency services and circulation for the site and existing subdivisions located north and west of the site. There is also a northern stub proposed to the property at the north,which is not presently in the City. Except for W. Crosswinds St,which would be a local street built to the typical 33-foot wide local street section, all the remaining roads in this development are proposed to be private roads.The preliminary plat reflects the private roads south of W. Crosswind St.meet the 24 ft. minimum required width. Required findings for private roads are discussed in the findings in Section IX. On the north side of W. Crosswind St.,the plat indicates a private alley(east-west) and N. Puff Ln(north-south).Neither of these roadways meet minimum requirements.Alleys need to connect on both ends to serve as fire lanes,whereas the alley that is shown north of Buildings A&B dead-ends to the east. Also,N. Puff Ln is shown to be 23 ft. in width whereas 24' ft is the minimum. The applicant should revise this portion of the plat to meet the requirements of UDC 11-6C. This could be done by widening the alley and N. Puff Ln to at least 24 ft. in width, or converting the"alley"to a common drive and removing units to comply with the maximum allowed number of units allowed per UDC 11-6C-3-D (4 total,with no more than 3 on one side). The applicant should note if Buildings A&B were converted to vertically-integrated residential projects fronting along W. Crosswind St.,the alley could be redesigned as a 25- foot wide commercial drive aisle as long as it met the requirements of UDC 11-3C-5.This would increase the commercial uses desired in the area. If the applicant is amenable to this request, staff would recommend that the concept plan be modified prior to the City Council hearing. NOTE: If additional Vertically Integrated Residential is proposed at the north,it will require the applicant to submit revised legal description to reduce the proposed R-40 zoned area because vertically-integrated residential projects are a conditional use in this zone. J. Parking(UDC 11-3C): For townhouses of 2 bedrooms or less,2 parking spaces are required, at least 1 in an enclosed garage. For townhouses of 3-4 bedrooms,4 per dwelling unit is required,with two of them being in an enclosed garage. Parking for vertically integrated residential units ranges from 1 to 4 parking spaces depending on the number of bedrooms(not required to be covered)in addition to one space for every five hundred(500) square feet of gross floor area for the commercial portion. The site plan and elevations reflect all townhouse units are wide enough to have 2-car garages, and most have a pad in the front that meets minimum dimensional requirements for 2 cars(20 ft. by 20 ft.). Buildings A and B on the north side of W. Crosswind St. do not have pads that meet the minimum requirement to be counted as parking and therefore should be no more than 2- bedrooms each. There are 8 additional parking spaces shown on either side of the central open space to account for guest parking. The commercial lot indicates a building of approximately 2,000 sq. ft.,which would require 4 parking spaces; 11 parking spaces are provided at the west and south sides of the building. The 12 vertically-integrated units would require at least 12 parking spaces if all residential units were one bedroom,but the commercial spaces will also require parking spaces based on the amount of gross floor area dedicated to commercial. The elevations show all vertically-integrated units Page 10 Page 26 Item#2. contain a two-car garage with 14 additional parking spaces provided directly adjacent to an across from the buildings. A shared-parking agreement between the commercial use and the vertically- integrated buildings should be submitted at time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC). Parking will be reviewed in detail at time of certificate of zoning compliance or building permit. K. Pathways ( UDC 11-3A-8): There are 7 ft.wide attached sidewalks existing along N. Linder Rd. and W.Ustick Rd. The Five Mile Pathway parallels the creek at the west terminating at the subject property. This proposal includes 10 ft. wide pathways along both N. Linder Rd and W. Ustick Rd.,connecting to the existing Five Mile Pathway. Staff supports providing multiuse pathways but finds the configuration as proposed redundant and unnecessary. At the east along N. Linder Rd.,the plans propose a 10 ft. wide pathway directly adjacent to the existing 7 ft.wide sidewalk. Similarly,the applicant proposes to provide a 10 ft. wide pathway slightly offset from the existing sidewalk on W.Ustick Rd. In order to reduce impervious surfacing,unnecessary construction and increase landscaping,staff believes it is unnecessary to provide the additional pathway along N.Linder Rd and that the existing 7 ft.wide attached sidewalk should remain. The sidewalk along W.Ustick Rd should be widened to 10 ft.wide,the pathway shown directly south of Building H should be eliminated, and the connection between the existing Five Mile Creek Pathway and the W. Ustick Road Pathway should be shifted further to the west(this has been red-marked on the concept plan shown in Exhibit IX).Also,staff has concerns with the multiple walkways connecting Buildings G and H to the pathways.For less conflict points,staff recommends the plans be revised to include only one walkway connection to the pathways from each building. L. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): This proposal includes private streets within this development except for W. Crosswind St (collector) and what is shown as an alley at the northern perimeter or the property.UDC 11-3F-4 does not require sidewalks along private street streets in residential areas.Although the concept plan shows only portions of the private streets contain 4 ft. wide sidewalks,the development is clustered in such a way that pedestrian access is possible throughout the development by either pathways, sidewalks or across green space without the need to walk in the street. 5 ft. wide sidewalks are provided along both sides of W. Crosswind St.,and the stub street to the north. As discussed in the pathways section above, 10 ft. wide multi-use pathways are being provided along W. Ustick Rd. and N. Linder Rd. M. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): No parkways are proposed with this development. N. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 25-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to N. Linder Road and W. Ustick Road. Buffers are required to be landscaped per the standards listed in UDC I I-3 B-7C. UDC 11-3B-7 requires all residential subdivision street buffers to be on a common lot,maintained by a homeowners' association. Pathways are required to be landscaped with a landscape strip a minimum of five(5) feet wide along each side of the pathway. It does appear landscape buffers of at least 25 ft. in width are provided along both arterials although they are not dimensioned. However, it does not appear either landscape buffer meets the minimum landscaping standards of at least one tree per every 35 ft. as there are long sections of arterial buffer without trees. It is also ambiguous regarding whether a common lot(s)has been included for the entire length of both landscape buffers,particularly along the N. Linder Rd frontage. Page 11 Page 27 Item#2. The concept plan as submitted indicates an alley or private drive directly abutting the residentially-zoned parcel to the north. To provide buffering and a softer transition,staff recommends a 5 ft.wide landscape buffer in this area,landscaped as required by UDC 11- 313-8. O. Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3G): As the property is less than 5 acres in size,it is exempt from required qualified open space. However,the applicant has provided an open space exhibit, and the plat indicates 16%of qualified open space is provided. This includes a 9,500 sq. ft. central open space with a gazebo, although it appears some of what is shown as"qualified open space"does not meet the minimum dimensional requirements,such as parking spaces included into the exhibit. P. Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G): As mentioned above,the property is less than 5 acres in size so it is exempt from the qualified open space requirements. Townhouses (each unit on an individual lot) are considered single family residential, so the multifamily amenity requirements do not apply. However, an approximately 9,500 sq. ft. central open space is provided with a gazebo.As one of the objectives of the Mixed-Use Community designation is for open spaces to be centered around spaces that are well-designed public and quasi-public centers of activity,at time of CZC or plat public accessibility should be specified in the CC&Rs,maintenance agreement or property owner's association agreement. Q. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-M: The Creason Lateral traverses a small portion of the site at the southwest corner. The lateral has already been piped in this area, and it is within a common lot on the Plat. R. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): Public utilities will be provided from the Windsong Subdivision to the east. A public utilities plan was submitted with this development. The Applicant is required to provide a pressurized irrigation system for the development in accord with 11-3A-15. S. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Building elevations has been submitted with this application. The elevations show townhouses comprised of materials consisting of rock, cement board and hardie board,lap siding,with pitched roofs, exposed timber frame and trellis features,with stone bases.Windows are included on many of the garage doors. The elevations demonstrate significant fenestration and modulation as well as a variety of roofline variation. Most buildings also include first floor covered porches and second story decks. Staff finds the elevations as proposed demonstrate high quality design,but the elevations of the vertically-integrated structures reflect a townhouse design rather than a commercial business. If the Planning Commission and City Council believe it important for vertically integrated buildings to include at least some portion of commercial use, as already mentioned,staff recommends a condition that at time of building permit,the ground floors of all vertically- integrated units meet occupancy class requirements for commercial structures. Page 12 Page 28 Item#2. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested rezone,preliminary plat,development agreement modification and conditional use permit with the provisions as noted in Section VII.A per the findings in Section IX of this staff report. B. This application was originally scheduled for the March 17,2022 Planning Commission meeting.It was continued to April 7,2022 at the request of the applicant so the applicant could address staffs recommendations.At the April 7,2022 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission moved to recommend approval to the City Council of the subiect development agreement modification, rezoning,preliminary plat and conditional use request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Kent Brown,Kevin Amar b. In opposition: Kristen Schiller(citizen),Melinda Akhbari(citizen) c. Commenting: Kent Brown,Kevin Amar d. Written testimony: Mike and Sandi Archibald e. Staff presenting application: Alan Tiefenbach f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s) of public testimony: a. Densi b. Traffic impacts to the Windsong Neighborhood associated with connecting W. Crosswind St. and whether any traffic calming could be implemented. 3. Key issue(s) of discussion by Commission: a. Size of the office space in the vertically integrated buildings b. Whether the vertically integrated buildings were for sale or for rent. c. Whether the commercial spaces have direct access into the house. d. Discussion regarding stacking of the drive through establishment e. Whether the density proposed was appropriate f. Commission decided they preferred the vertically integrated buildings in the locations proposed by applicant. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. A short plat to condominiumize the vertically integrated buildings shall be required prior to certificate of zoning compliance. b. Delete staff s recommendation to move vertically integrated buildings on north side of W. Crosswind St. c. Exterior facades of vertically integrated buildings shall integrate brick or stone on the bottom level. Page 13 Page 29 Item#2. VII. EXHIBITS A. Rezone Legal Description and Exhibit Legal Description PAVE Subdivision Property Rezone—R-40 A parcel located in the SE Yi of the SE'l4 of Section 35, Township 4 North, Range 1 West. Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows; Commencing at a Brass Cap monument marking the southeast corner of said SE '/b of the SE '/.,from which a 518 inch rebar marking the southwest corner of the SE'!.of said Section 35 bears N 89'1445'°W a distance of 2643.35 feet; Thence N 89°1445" W along the southerly boundary of said SE % of the SE 'A a distance of 244.80 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence continuing N 89°14'45" W along the southerly boundary of said SE f4 of the SE 'f a distance of 145.20 feet to a point; Thence leaving said southerly boundary N 0°15'19% E along the easterly boundary and the extension thereof of Windsorig Subdivision No-2 as shown in Book 100 of Plats an Pages 13022 thru 13024, records of Ada County, Idaho, a distance of 657.59 feet to a 518 inch rebar marking the northeast corner of 3ivid Wind3on9 Subdivision No, 2, Thence leaving said easterly boundary S 89°31'02" E a distance of 389.94 feet to a point on the easterly boundary of said SE'!d of the SE Yi; Thence S 0°15'04" W along said easterly boundary a distance of 125.00 feet to a paint; Thence leaving said boundary N 89"31'02"W a distance of 231.94 feet to a point; Thence S 0"28'58"W a distance cf 121.50 feet to a poin#; Thence S 89°31'02" E a distance of 47.21 feet to a point of curvature; Thence a distance of 42.30 feet along the arc of a 27.00 foot radius curve right, said curve having a central angle of 89946'05"and a Iorig chord bearing S 44037'59" E a distance of 38.11 feet to a point of tangency; Thence S 0'15'04"W a distance of 223.18 feet to a point; Thence N 90°00'00"W a distance of 87.16 feet to a point. Thence S 0"DO'00"W a distance of 160.98 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. This parcel contains 3.42 acres and is subject t0 any easements LRVo existing or in use. T Clinton W. Hansen, PLS � n + P(l Land Solutions, PC y � ? December 14,2021 , OF NW Page 14 Page 30 Item#2. PAW SUBDIVISION REZONE EXHIBIT SM5 36 UNPLArED SM'31b2'E IBA4' t3 W. CRDSSOND 5T. 231.94' —-�- 5�93?'flQ'E u 1 1 .1 8 aG 47.2 r_ rv: o �z!I `L1 NM'.31'O2 4 ` OF C-C ZONE ON W. 2.47 Ai,RES 0 I r R-40 ZONE r., 3.42 ACRES o CD I ry o } S S9 'Od'E - 0 a � o i 35 225;,55' T4.2O' 35 36 1 f4 �w USTO< RU NE bl4'45'W 264L35 2 1 PUNT OF 6Egf ING bass OF aEMING POINT DE BE61MIN0 R-40 20W C-C ZONE 0 50 100 200 CURVE TABLE lvnd. lutin CURE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA BEARING I CHORD Survoyfn0 and ConW[ing D1 E 5TH St.SrE A idECI #2.30 27.00' 89'a6W N44'37'S9' 3311' �owra.io- {e76y 8IC-.^'J4i rA9J 2N9@S7EF 1� w,w rpPiA6�6a .. Page 15 Page 31 Item#2. B. Preliminary Plat Legal Description(date: 9/23/2021) Legal Description PAW SLibdlivision A parcel located in the SE'f of the SE '/4 of Section 35,Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows; Commencing at a Brass Cap monument marking the southeast corner of said SE l of the SE %.from which a 51B inch rebar marking the southwest corner of the SE'/,of said Section 35 bears N 89'14'45"VV a distance of 2643.35 feet; Thence along the southerly boundary of said SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 N 89°14'45" W a distance of H0.00 feet to a point; Thence leaving said southerly boundary N 0°15'19A E a distance of 45.00 feet to a paint on the northerly right-of-way of W. Ustick Road and the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence continuing N 0015'19° E along the easterly boundary and the extension thereof of indsong Subdivision No. 2 as shown in Book 100 of Plats on Pages 13022 thru 13024, records of Ada County, Idaho, a distance of 612.60 feet to a 518 inch rebar marking the northeast corner of said Windsong Subdivision No. 2; Thence leaving said easterly boundary S 89°31'02" E a distance of 344.93 feet to a point on the westerly right-of-way of N_ Linder Road; Thence along said westerly right-of-way the following described courses: Thence S 0'15'04'VV along a line being 4 5.00 feet westerly of and parallel to the easterly boundary of said SE Ala of the SE'/¢a distance of 291.46 feet to a paint; Thence S 7°22'34'W a distance of 96.75 feet to a point; Thence 5 0°15'04'W along a line being 57.00 feet westerly of and parallel to the easterly boundary of said SE 1/4 of the SE%a distance of 19 1,66 feet to a point; Thence S 45°30'09'W a distance of 49.28 feet to a point on the northerly right-of-way of VV. Ustick Road; Thence along said northerly right-of-way, being 45.00 feet northerly of and parallel to the southerly boundary of said SE'/+of the SE 'l, N 89'14'45"W a distance of 297.99 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. This parcel contains 4.77 acres and is suhject to any easements gyp L LPL No� existing or in use. &Tj' e- a Clinton W, Hansen, PLS Land Solutions, PG September 23, 2021 TOE VV ,gyp Page 16 Page 32 Item#2. C. Existing Development Agreement 5, CONDITIONS GOVERNING DIE ELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 5.1. Owner/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following special conditions. 1. Future conStruetion and development of the site shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the objectives and guidelines of the Meridian Design Manual in effect at the time of development. 2. Certificate of Zoning Compliance, Design Review and Altemative Compliance applications are rewired if the applicant proposes a change of use for the existing single family home to a non-residential use. 3. One(1)Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC) may be issued for the portion of the property that is located south of the right-in/right-out access point to Linder Road provided the existing home is removed. Additional CZ.C°s shall not be issued until a concept plan is suhrnitted and approved for the subject property.A concept plan shall be reviewed)with a future DEVEWPMENT AGREEMENT—JJA AWFxATKoN(AZ 09-005) PAGE 3 OF I I Page 17 Page 33 Item#2. preliminary plat applicatiorr_ The following requirements shall apply to the development of the parcel: a. coordinate,design and cnnstructthe extension of W. Crossroad Street (public street) to Linder Roars and stub a public street to the undeveloped parcel to the north(# G435449905)with ACHD and the City of Meridian. b. }provide a 5'public accesslreereational casement in favor of the City of Meridian measured from the back edge of 7-foot wide attached sidewalk starting at the western edge of the existing access on Ustick Road and continuing to the east property line, c_ depict a 25-foot wide landscape casement along Ustick road and Linder road. 4. At the time of development for either portion(north or south)of the property, the applicant shall construct a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway beginning on the western edge of the existing access to Ustick Road, proceeding northYnorthwest connecting to the existing service road on A HD°s drainage site located at the weslem boundary_ An easement shall be provided for public access to and maintenance of the pathways; contained within an easerent agreement or noted on the plat. The City will not assume maintenance of the pathway until it connects from one major arterial road to another, unless otherwise agracd to by the Parrs& Recreation Department. 5, The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining a Flocdplain Development Permit and secure approval prior to any construction beginning on the site_ 6. Development of the subject property shall comply with the U-Cr standards listed in UDC 11-2B-3 and the allowed uses in Table 11-2H-2. 7_ All future development of the subject property shall comply with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. 8. The applicant shall be responsible for all cosh associated with sewer and water service installation. 9. The applicant shall construct a 5-foot pathway within the subject property providing int=onnwivity to the 10-foot pathway planned for the party along Ustick ]load, The applicant shall provide a pedestrian circulation plan for review and approval by the planning Department with the submission of a concept plan or the first CZC application. Page 18 Page 34 Item#2. D. Preliminary Plat(date: °"'�z 4/5/2022) }p n w i 4 i 4 u c r a+ =I i I . I Vie - __ �IMIII k�w ,�— . ,Rr _ I OIRUE TWE I I L6JGTX RA.]IJS ]lLTi �VIIFG PI011} i3W LVd 11+P1T �,EY]h-. ]L]Y 1 �m Page 19 Page 35 Item#2. E. Concept Plan—Remarked(date: 12/20/2021) CROSSWINDS STREET CR(J�SWINDS STRE J �+ EDINGTON COMMONS R-15 ZONING E _ only one walkway 1 pathv•:: connection per building ' SAWTOOTH LANDING OFFICE CONDOMINIUMS a Stan recommends this _- pathway segment be tj CC ZONING removed J H Connection be provided here Page 20 Page 36 E. Landscape Plan(date: 9/9,QO21 4/5/2022) E=575.3, + A CCESj PRIVE A ++ 02 03 (D z .775 1.42D 1,74 1.747 1A20 1,12D .42C .420 1.781 imer +++ B LDINO A eulm No A 7. 1 W CROSS WINO ST. . ..... .... BLOCK 3 ++ DRIVETHROUGH EUILDIt G C JI .Ei 1@2 BLUG X Y 1,�7[3 1.72D 72C 3 1 2020 SF ++ 4 14 am ++ PATIO m W MND dUST LN + ++ m % A Ai 1,6211 + 2 + G E 0 +: 2 91 .. + 11 L ++ t rT� Page 21 L.: 4 r9 6 BUILDI J' E 29 d t'4" . ......... Yk. y.t ++ ++ II........ 0 uj . ............ CE LD BUILID NG F r 4 2,90.: .623 1,613 1A23 1,623 2,992 2AU 000 11 + 1 1 WND LN H di Ix A 'nCA INTEG .7ED -*-:J+ HTJCA ESII E X+X% II 11 -------- ----------- -------- ---------- ---------- 7;�w V577CK RD. 7. Page 22 Urn re ff IT-121 1 .� lot LLI II� t u i --- - - r p �ii� L•J � ii L•J _LJ �•ii �� L•J ::� _ "LJ_I,•N':�::'+r �� _ Iloilo !Cl�� --_I'.i'.'. . , _nuuiiiiii_---=••���� III_��-�!I__�I h '.�: �.�� I_� '.'.i'.III iiiiii iiiiii=--_--I::::� fl�l --- °=- -_ I - III e r r r e I � ::::•:::::•:::•:•:1ifPfr�i,�'ir�rr�.� ' -- �, � - - I- ;i���r r'r :•.�: ...,.:,,.� :ee. �� ���=::-::_Ill �� .e.e1.' ..°.°. II`iillliiil - 11I--:.'- 11f11- 1. .. _I11== I`iilllii�l ■■■ .No Item#2. VIA .■ . Off �� room — �� _ Mir- flr� nt� _ r ■■ ■■� - ��ii/milli � � - ■■ ■■ _ rr rM ■�i BUILDING 'C' - i BillAV— m r � ME P _ BUILDING 'DIF I I . Page 24 Page 40 Item#2. Vertically Integrated Building Facing Linder Rd Sol loson 07 ME ue ^' BUILDING Vertically Integrated building facing Ustick. r WIon ll -- �Cl� _y BUILDING 'H' Page 25 Page 41 Item#2. VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. Prior to approval of the rezoning ordinance, a new DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s) at the time of rezone ordinance adoption, and the developer. 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 rezoning and DA modification. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of the site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual site plan, landscape plan, and elevations submitted with the rezone application contained herein. b. At time of building permit,floor plans shall be submitted that indicate the ground floors of all units shown as vertically integrated structures meet occupancy class requirements for commercial structures. c. A short plat to condominiumize the vertically integrated buildings shall be required prior to certificate of zoning compliance. d. Exterior facades of vertically integrated buildings shall integrate brick or stone on the bottom level. e. Buildings oft the fiei4h side of AT. Cr-esswind St. shall be vei4ieally 44egr-a4ed buildings. OR t nh o £ At time of CZC or plat,public accessibility for the central open space shall be specified in the CC&Rs,maintenance agreement or property owner's association agreement. g. At the time of CZC or plat,an executed shared-parking agreement between the commercial lots and the vertically integrated structures shall be submitted. h. Building D along the western property line shall be broken into at least two groups of buildings,with the break occurring approximately in the vicinity of Lot 19,Block 3 of the Windsong Subdivision No 2. 2. All private streets shall meet the requirements of UDC 11-3F-4. 3. All common lots, streets and alleys shall meet the requirements of UDC 11-6C-3. 4. There should be a consistent architectural theme throughout the development. Administrative design review will be required for all new attached residential structures containing two (2) or more dwelling units. Design review and certificate of zoning compliance will be required for any commercial buildings or vertically-integrated buildings. Page 26 Page 42 Item#2. 5. The Director has approved a request for private streets as required per UDC 11-3F-4. 6. The preliminary plat, dated 9/22/2021, shall be revised as follows: a. Per UDC 11-3B-7, all arterial street buffers shall be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer,maintained by the property owner or business owners'association. b. Residential street buffers shall be on a common lot,maintained by a homeowners' association. c. The development table shall be updated to indicate 2 vertically integrated residential lots, verses 12. d. Parking spaces shall be subtracted out of all areas indicated as useable open space. 7. The landscape shall be revised as follows: a. The additional pathway along the south perimeter shall be removed, and the sidewalk along W. Ustick Rd shall be widened to a 10 ft. wide pathway along the property line,with a 10 ft. wide connection to the Five Mile Creek Pathway at the west perimeter of the site. b. The pathway shown along N. Linder Rd shall be revised to include only the existing 7 ft. wide sidewalk. c. There shall be no more than one walkway per building connecting to the pathways and sidewalks along W. Ustick Rd. and N. Linder Rd. d. A landscape buffer of at least 5 ft. in width,meeting the planting requirements of UDC 1I- 3B-9, shall be required along the northern property line or as otherwise required by UDC 1I- 3B. 8. The developer shall comply with the specific use standards for vertically-integrated projects as listed in UDC 11-4-3-41. 9. A conditional use permit shall be required for the drive through establishment shown on the commercial lot. 10. Off-street vehicle parking shall be provided on the site in accord with UDC 11-3C-4 for townhouses,commercial buildings and vertically integrated projects. 11. Direct access to N. Linder Rd. and W.Ustick Rd. is prohibited. All existing curb cuts shall be replaced with curb, gutter and sidewalk. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The Applicant shall have a maximum of two (2)years to commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval listed above. If the use has not begun within two (2)years of approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to operation or a time extension must be requested in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F. 2. The preliminary plat approval shall become null and void if the applicant fails to either: 1) obtain the City Engineer signature on a final plat within two years of the date of the approved findings; or 2)obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 3. Any fencing constructed on the site shall be consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 1I- 3A-6, 11-3A-7. 4. Comply with all bulk,use, and development standards of the applicable district listed in UDC Chapter 2 District regulations. 5. Install lighting consistent with the provisions as set forth in UDC 11-3A- Page 27 Page 43 Item#2. 4. Construct all off-street parking areas consistent with the standards asset 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 11-3B-10. B. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. Easements for combined water/sewer mains outside of right-of-way must be a minimum of 30- foot-wide with the minimum separation between mains; additional width may be required if minimum distance is not maintained. 2. No permanent structures can be placed within a City easement including but not limited to buildings, carports, overhangs/eaves,trees,bushes, light poles, infiltration trenches,trash enclosures, etc. General Conditions of Approval 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. 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. 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 28 Page 44 Item#2. UDC 11-3A-6. hi 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 Standards Rules administered by the Idaho Department of Water Resources. The Developer's Engineer shall provide a statement addressing whether there are any existing wells in the development, and if so,how they will continue to be used, or provide record of their abandonment. 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 29 Page 45 Item#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. 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.oMlpublic_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. C. MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=250947&dbid=0&redo=MeridianC hty D. ACHD https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=253599&dbid=0&redo=MeridianC ity E. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=255718&dbid=0&redo=MeridianC iv F. NMID https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=251526&dbid=0&redo=MeridianC iv G. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY https:llweblink.meridianciN.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=251853&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv Page 30 Page 46 Item#2. IX. 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. ZONING 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; This is a proposal for rezoning of 3.42 acres of subject property from CC to R-40 to allow townhouses. 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; Commission finds the proposed map amendment to R-40 and the development generally complies with the purpose statement of the residential districts in that it will contribute to the range of housing opportunities available in the City consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health,safety,and welfare; Commission 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 on an arterial intersection, sufficient buffering and parking is provided, and the property is surrounded by single family attached, multifamily, and commercial uses. 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 Commission 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 map amendment(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Commission finds the proposed rezoning is in the best interest of the City if the property is developed in accord with the provisions in Section VII. B. PRELIMINARY PLAT In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat,the decision-making body shall make the following findings: (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15- 2005) 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; (Ord.08-1372,7-8-2008,eff.7-8-2008). Page 31 Page 47 Item#2. Commission finds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC if the Applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Section VII. 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Commission finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; Commission finds the proposed plat is in substantial conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's CIP. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health,safety or general welfare; and Commission finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural,scenic or historic features.(Ord.05-1170,8- 30-2005,eff. 9-15-2005) There is an existing floodplain and Five Mile Creek at the southwest portion of the property. These features are shown to be preserved in a common lot. C. CONDITIONAL USE 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: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Commission finds that if the site is designed in accord with the site plan and landscape plan shown in the exhibits and the conditions of approval, the site will be large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet the dimensional and development regulations of the R- 40 zoning district for townhouses. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. As described in the staff report, the proposed multi family residential use in the R-40 zone meets the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and UDC. Page 32 Page 48 Item#2. 3. 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 33 townhouses on an arterial intersection, surrounded by multi family detached and attached, commercial and multifamily uses. Sufficient buffering and landscaping has been provided, there is satisfactory parking, and the elevations reflect high quality design. The general design, construction, operation and maintenance of the 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. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. As mentioned above, Commission finds the proposed townhouses will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets,schools,parks,police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal,water, and sewer. 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. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The 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. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise,smoke,fumes, glare or odors. Commission finds that the proposed development will not involve uses that will create nuisances that would be detrimental to the general welfare of the surrounding area. Commission 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 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. Commission finds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural feature(s)of major importance. Page 33 Page 49 Item#2. D. PRIVATE STREETS (UDC 11-317-5): In order to approve the application,the Director shall find the following: 1. 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. No additional capital facility costs are expected from the City. The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay impact fees. 2. The design of the private street meets the requirements of this article; The private streets meet the design requirements of not connecting to an arterial street, allowing sufficient maneuvering for emergency vehicles, not serving more than 50 units and meeting the minimum width of 24 feet. 3. Granting approval of the private street would not cause damage,hazard, or nuisance, or other detriment to persons,property,or uses in the vicinity As these are private streets internally contained within this development connected to adjacent properties by public streets, there is adequate parking provided and Meridian Fire and Police have not expressed objections, the Director finds approval of the private street would not cause damage, hazard, or nuisance, or other detriment to persons,property, or uses in the vicinity. C. The use and location of the private street shall not conflict with the comprehensive plan and/or the regional transportation plan. As listed above in the Comprehensive Plan analysis, the Director finds the use and location of the private street shall not conflict with the comprehensive plan and/or the regional transportation plan. D. The proposed residential development(if applicable)is a mew or gated development. The majority of the townhouses are clustered around a mew with their entrances facing the open space. This would be considered a mew development. Page 34 Page 50 Item 22 E IDIAN;--- AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: PRESENTATIONS Ll Pavilion At‘PAW’WindsongPavilion At‘PAW’Windsong Development Features1 Commercial/Retail Lot12 of those are Live/Work45 Dwelling units in 8 buildings4.77 AcresDevelopment Features1 Commercial/Retail Lot12 of those are Live/Work45 Dwelling units in 8 buildings4.77 Acres City of MeridianCommunity Mixed UseFuture Land Use Plan DesignationCity of MeridianCommunity Mixed UseFuture Land Use Plan Designation SURROUNDING AREA 128 Single Family Homes-Whitecliffe Estates 8 building Office Park-Sawtooth LandingHunter Elementary SchoolWalmart Supercenter-Regional Library-Orchard Park Linder 66 Biltmore Co. Homes-Windsong Single Familyfamily and -Mixed Use Commercial, Multi-Lennon Pointe (Proposed)Rocky Mountain High School Homes92 Attached and Detached -Edington CommonsPAWSawtooth Middle School DEVELOPEMENTSURROUNDING AREADEVELOPEMENT •Common AreasCommon Areas by 9 spaces (from 12 to 21).Parking was increasedBased on Staff comments, Guest•Community Park & Picnic area•% Open Space16.1•Meridian Greenbelt Connection with 10ft wide Pathways•by 9 spaces (from 12 to 21).Parking was increasedBased on Staff comments, Guest•Community Park & Picnic area•% Open Space16.1•Meridian Greenbelt Connection with 10ft wide Pathways Traffic Calming:staff request.Split into 2 buildings per buffer at Windsong 2 story building transition Additional guest parking has been added throughout the site•neighbor comments and ACHDCrosswind St. and N Wafting Lane intersection per Windsong out’ is proposed to calm traffic at the --A 3•Windsong neighborhoodPavilion At Windsong will have a similar architectural theme to the •Additional Landscape buffer added along North Property Line•Ustickneighborhood to the Live/Work buildings along Linder and 2 story townhome buildings will transition from the Windsong •Neighborhood Compatibility Additional guest parking has been added throughout the site•neighbor comments and ACHDCrosswind St. and N Wafting Lane intersection per Windsong out’ is proposed to calm traffic at the --A 3•Windsong neighborhoodPavilion At Windsong will have a similar architectural theme to the •Additional Landscape buffer added along North Property Line•Ustickneighborhood to the Live/Work buildings along Linder and 2 story townhome buildings will transition from the Windsong •Neighborhood Compatibility out’-‘Bulb-way stop-3- Example HomesExample Homes Example Homes enhance the look of these office spaces.level. Additional glass has also been added to requested to include brick or stone on the bottom At the Vertically Integrated Units, the facades were enhance the look of these office spaces.level. Additional glass has also been added to requested to include brick or stone on the bottom At the Vertically Integrated Units, the facades were Live/Work BuildingsExample HomesLive/Work Buildings Traffic Concerns Crosswind St Traffic Concerns Development Features1 Commercial/Retail Lot12 of those are Live/Work45 Dwelling units in 8 buildings4.77 AcresDevelopment Features1 Commercial/Retail Lot12 of those are Live/Work45 Dwelling units in 8 buildings4.77 Acres DensityDensity