Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2022-09-06 Regular
1 � 0 DIAN - 3 City Council Regular Meeting City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, September 06, 2022 at 6:00 PM Minutes ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Councilwoman Liz Strader Councilman Treg Bernt Councilwoman Jessica Perreault Councilman Luke Cavener (left at 7:55 p.m.) Councilman Joe Borton Mayor Robert E. Simison ABSENT Councilman Brad Hoaglun PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE COMMUNITY INVOCATION ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted as Amended (Item 10 vacated) PUBLIC FORUM - Future Meeting Topics ACTION ITEMS 1. Public Hearing for Ordinance No. 22-1992: Approval of Proposed Fiscal Year 2022 Amended Budget Approved for Ordinance 2. Public Hearing for Overland&Wells II (H-2022-0030) by Morgan Stonehill Partners,located at 2600 E. Overland Rd. Continued to October 25, 2022 A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to change the existing development plan (Inst. #2016-060157) on the northern portion of the site from a retail grocery store to multi-family residential. B. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 351 apartment units on 11.65 acres of land in the C-G zoning district at a gross density of 3 0.2 1 units per acre. Motion to continue to October 15, 2022 made by Councilman Bernt, Seconded by Councilman Cavener, Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton 3. Public Hearing for Hill's Century Farm Commercial Subdivision No. 2 (TECC- 2022-0002) by Brighton Development, Inc., generally located on the south side of E.Amity Rd., 1/4 mile east of S. Eagle Rd.Approved A. Request: A One-Year Time Extension on the preliminary plat (H-2016- 0092) for Hill's Century Farm Commercial Subdivision in order to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the second phase final plat. Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilwoman Perreault. Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener Abstaining: Councilman Borton 4. Public Hearing for Brundage Estates Subdivision (TECC-2022-0001) by Engineering Solutions, LLP, generally located 1/4 mile south of W.Victory Rd. on the east side of S. Linder Rd. in the west half of Section 25, T.3N., RAW.Approved A. Request: A Two-Year Time Extension on the preliminary plat (H-2021- 0061) in order to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the first phase final plat for Brundage Estates Subdivision. Motion to approve made by Councilman Borton,Seconded by Councilman Cavener. Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton 5. Public Hearing for Regency at River Valley Phase 3 (H-2022-0057) by Bach Homes, located at 2480, 3270, 3280 E. River Valley St. Denied A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to change the development plan (Bach Storage - Inst.#2020-062947 for 2480 and 3280 E. River Valley St.) for the site from self-service storage to multi-family apartments and include an additional 0.65 acre of land at 3270 E. River Valley St. that is currently governed by the Development Agreement (SGI-AZ-12-010, Inst. #113005608) Motion to deny made by Councilman Borton, Seconded by Councilman Cavener. Voting Yea: Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton Voting Nay: Councilwoman Strader 6. Public Hearing for Torino Locust Grove Subdivision (H-2022-0038) by Jeremy Rausch, located at 870 S. Locust Grove Rd. Continued to September 13, 2022 A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 1.03 acres of land from R-1 in Ada County to the R-8 zoning district. Motion to continue to September 13,2022 made by Councilman Cavener, Seconded by Councilman Bernt. Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton 7. Public Hearing for Lavender Place Subdivision (H-2022-0036) by Breckon Land Design, located at 2160 E. Lake Hazel Rd. Approved A. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of four (4) single-family attached building lots and 26 single-family townhome lots on approximately 3.79 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. B. Request: Conditional Use Permit to construct the requested 26 townhome lots within the R-40 zoning district. Motion to approve made by Councilman Borton,Seconded by Councilman Bernt. Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Borton ORDINANCES [Action Item] 8. Ordinance 22-1990: An Ordinance Adding Meridian City Code Section 9-2-2-10(E), Regarding Requiring Installation and Maintenance of Water Recycling Systems for Commercial Car Washes; Adopting a Savings Clause; and Providing an Effective Date Approved Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilwoman Strader. Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Borton 9. Ordinance 22-1991: An Ordinance Amending Meridian City Code Section 9-4-34, Regarding Point of Liability for Maintenance of Sewer Service Line; Repealing Conflicting Ordinances; and Providing an Effective Date Approved Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilwoman Strader. Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Borton 10. Ordinance No. 22-1992: An Ordinance of the City of Meridian, Idaho Amending Ordinance No. 21-1945, the Appropriation Ordinance for the Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2021 and Ending September 30, 2022 (FY2022),Appropriating Monies That are to be Allocated by the City of Meridian, Idaho in the Sum of$(72,671,298); and Providing an Effective Date Vacated (to be scheduled September 13, 2022) 11. Ordinance No. 22-1993: An Ordinance, Pursuant to Idaho Code §50-1002 and §50- 1003, Providing for a Title and Findings, Providing for the Adoption of a Budget and the Appropriation of$219,724,039 to Defray the Necessary Expenses and Liabilities of the City of Meridian, in Accordance with the Object and Purposes and in the Certain Amounts Herein Specified for the Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2022 and Ending on September 30, 2023; to Levy All Such Appropriate Taxes and Levies as Authorized by Law Upon Taxable Property; and to Collect All Authorized Revenue; to Provide for a Waiver of the 2nd and 3rd Readings Pursuant to Idaho Code §50-902; and Providing for an Effective Date and the Filing of a Certified Copy of This Ordinance with the Secretary of State Approved Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilwoman Strader. Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Borton FUTURE MEETING TOPICS ADJOURNMENT 8:50 p.m. Meridian City Council September 6, 2022. A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:02 p.m., Tuesday, September 6, 2022, by Mayor Robert Simison. Members Present: Robert Simison, Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Treg Bernt, Jessica Perreault, and Liz Strader. Members Absent: Brad Hoaglun. Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Jaime Del Barrio, Brad Purser, Sonya Allen, Joe Dodson, Shawn Harper, Joe Bongiorno and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE X Liz Strader _X_ Joe Borton Brad Hoaglun _X_Treg Bernt X Jessica Perreault _X_ Luke Cavener X_ Mayor Robert E. Simison Simison: Council, we will call the meeting to order. For the record it is September 6, 2022, at 6:02 p.m. We will begin tonight's City Council regular meeting with roll call attendance. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Simison: Next up is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you would all, please, rise and join us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) COMMUNITY INVOCATION Simison: Our next item is the community invocation, which tonight will be given by Christopher Ellis of Capital Church. If you would all, please, join us in the community invocation or take this as a moment of silence and reflection. Mr. Ellis. Ellis- Thank you, Mayor. Mayor Simison, Council Members, if you could join me in the invocation. Lord, we just -- in common we just spend a little bit of time just looking at the beauty of the -- the environment that you have created around us. Lord, we just marvel in -- in not only the heat wave that we have, but in all the beauty of the mountain ranges that -- the rivers and everything that you provided to the great state of Idaho and, Lord, just take this time to -- to recognize your authority, Lord, as all authority is given by you, so we just focus on you and we thank you for the authority given to this Council and to the -- to the Mayor and be able to guide this community into a bright and prosperous future and, Lord, we just lift you up and we thank you for this time and we pray that wisdom Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 2 of 55 would just be given to everyone and, Lord, I pray that you would continue to guide and direct all of us, in Jesus' name, amen. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Simison: Thank you. Appreciate it. Next item up is adoption of the agenda. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Item 10 on the agenda will be removed. That's the only change. There is going to be a couple of continuances when we get into the public hearing. So, with the removal of Item 10, 1 move that we adopt the amended agenda. Cavener: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to adopt the amended agenda. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the agenda is adopted as amended. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. PUBLIC FORUM — Future Meeting Topics Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone signed up under public forum? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we do. First is -- well, the only person signed up for public forum is Kevin Johnson. Simison: Yeah. Johnson: Come up to the podium, Mr. Johnson. Simison: Mr. Johnson -- do we need -- do we need an address? I don't think we need the address, do we, for any purpose? Johnson: I don't believe so. Simison: So you are recognized for three minutes. K.Johnson: I would just like to talk about maybe where I'm coming from and I can give you a reference right now. We just said the Pledge of Allegiance and there was a line in there, one nation under God. My father was directly responsible for putting that in under Dwight Eisenhower and my dad was head of the VA in Washington DC. He served on the Civil Rights Commission with Martin Luther King and I would just like to honor him a Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 3 of 55 little bit so you know where I'm coming from. I wanted to talk about the housing and just how much there is a need and I think this is a responsibility of the community to try to prevent housing -- or try to provide housing and I'm really having a hard time getting housing right now with the service dog and I want to tell you how many veterans are trying to get housing. I know three veterans that have committed suicide under this problem. It's a real need. And I got put into some housing here in Meridian and I just don't know how a home like that could ever be rented. It was so filthy dirty. Violations everywhere. I just wanted to let you know there is a real problem with housing here and I -- I'm refusing to take this house that was given to me in Meridian to live in, because it was so filthy and dirty and violation after violation and I have talked to plumbing inspectors and other people and it's just really is a problem in this community to find housing. Thank you. ACTION ITEMS 1. Public Hearing for Ordinance No. 22-1992: Approval of Proposed Fiscal Year 2022 Amended Budget Simison: Thank you. Appreciate you providing that perspective. So, with that, Council, we will move into our action items this evening. First item up is Item 1, a public hearing for Ordinance No. 22-1992, approval of the proposed fiscal year 2022 amended budget. We will open this public hearing with comments from Mr. Purser. Purser: Mayor, Council, I have a riveting PowerPoint for you guys. I know you are excited. So, I'm here today to talk about the FY-22 budget -- the final FY-22 budget. The agenda is really simple. Not asking for anything really new. This is really our formal process where we inform the state and our citizens where we ended up with the FY-22 budget. So, this is the finalized budget. We -- we ended up at 194,955,456 dollars. In the coming slides I will break down by fund, you know, what that is and it's really the result of the last ten months of different budget amendments as the departments came to you requesting additional funding for like a fire station or fire truck or -- or whatnot. But -- so we will go through that. Looking for your approval of the FY-22 amended budget and, then, we will come to you with a finalized budget ordinance for your approval. So, looking at the -- the final amount, as I mentioned it's about 194.9 million dollars. We a year ago began with a budget of 185.2 rounding dollars. That's a 5.27 percent increase over what was originally approved. You can see the majority of that was with our capital. I will break down exactly what that is. So, beginning point last year was 185.1 . We ended with a 194.9 million dollar budget. When we look at that, that's made up of about 37 budget amendments, totaling 9.7 million dollars. You can see that was really made-up in our governmental funds and our capital improvement funds made-up the difference there. As you can see governmental funds was increased by 6.3 million or about 6.16 percent. Government -- or capital improvement fund, a little over five million dollars or 51 percent. I will go into some more detail. Our Enterprise Fund overall was down versus what was originally approved by 1.57 million. So, beginning with our -- our governmental funds, we began the year at 102.3 million. We ended with a 108.6 million dollar finalized budget. Up 6.16 percent. You can see the majority of that is in -- in capital. We were down on -- on carry forward. So, what makes up that -- that -- that amount? That makes up about Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 4 of 55 29 budget amendments made up the 6.3 million dollars. The top four amendments that we saw affecting the governmental funds were the Lakeview Golf Course capital improvements. The -- the ladder truck that we originally had in '23, but moved into '22. We received -- were awarded 1.8 million dollars in -- in various grants and we received 1.5 million dollars in funding from award for the golf course and pool funding. So, high level, the governmental funds increased by 6.3 million dollars. Those are your -- the top four and by far-- by far the largest increases there. Our capital improvement budget, you know, that was up 51 percent. The reason for that was due to the North Precinct, Fire Station 7 and 8. We -- there was budget amendments to increase funding for -- for those projects. The total funding increase 5.3 million overall with everything involved. The largest contributing factor were those three projects for the Capital Improvement Fund. Now, our Enterprise Fund, we began last year at 73 million dollars and we ended at 71.4. So, we reduced the budget. A lot of that was due to our -- our carry forward and the way we handle carry forward. So, carry forward is just simply projects from prior years that we carry forward in the next year. When we adjust that that's what reduced our budget down -- as you can see 15 percent for the Enterprise Fund, so -- and this is very high level, but that gives you an idea of over the last ten months what has been approved, what is the impact of the -- the budget amendments, what were they and what were the amounts associated with those things. As you can see, here is a breakdown of our Enterprise Fund. Overall we were down 1.5 million. However, you can see between the carry forward and we had several different budget amendments. You can see how -- kind of how that played out, between having the well, water line extensions, and a biosolid truck offsetting the overall adjustment for the carry forward. With that I guess next steps, we need your approval for the FY-22 finalized budget. The total amount for that will -- will need to be 194,955,456 dollars. With your approval we will come back with an ordinance for you to review and approve to make that official. With that do I have any questions? Any -- Council or Mayor? Simison: Thank you, Brad. Council, any questions? Thank you very much. Purser: Thank you. Simison: This is a public hearing. Mr. Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to provide testimony on this item? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, nobody signed up in advance. Simison: Okay. Well, if there is anybody here that would like to provide testimony on last year's budget as we work to finalize this process, feel free to come forward or use the raise your hand feature on Zoom and we are happy to give you the opportunity to speak on the budget from last year or the year we are in. Seeing no one coming forward at this time, do I have a motion to close the public hearing? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 5 of 55 Borton: Move we close the public hearing on the proposed fiscal year 2022 amended budget. Cavener: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 2. Public Hearing for Overland & Wells II (H-2022-0030) by Morgan Stonehill Partners, located at 2600 E. Overland Rd. A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to change the existing development plan (Inst. #2016-060157) on the northern portion of the site from a retail grocery store to multi-family residential. B. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 351 apartment units on 11.65 acres of land in the C-G zoning district at a gross density of 30.21 units per acre. Simison: Okay. Thank you very much. Anything else that you would like to discuss on that -- okay. We will look forward to seeing that back in the near future. Okay. All right. Next item up is Item 2, public hearing for Overland Wells II, H-2022-0030. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Allen: Sorry. Give me just a minute here, Mr. Mayor. All righty. The first development application before you tonight is a request for a preliminary plat time extension. This site consists of 6.12 acres of land, zoned R-15 and C-N, generally located on the south side of East Amity Road, a quarter mile east of South Eagle Road. The preliminary plat was approved back in 2016. The first phase final plat was signed by the city engineer and recorded in 2018. A two year time extension was approved by the director in 2020 and expired on August 29th, 2022. Oh, I'm so sorry, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Chris. Simison: Thank you, Chris. Allen: We just forwarded -- fast forwarded right away. Yeah. The -- the Item No. 2, Overland and Wells, the applicant is requesting continuance to August 25th -- October 25th in order to have adequate time to consider the comments from the Commission hearing and evaluate the project design as it relates to open space and traffic prior to the Council hearing. It's been a Monday for me all the way around since I woke up this morning, so apologies. Simison: Technically this is Monday'ish. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 6 of 55 Allen: It is, man. Simison: Okay. Thank you. Council, any questions for Sonya on Item 2, the Overland Wells time extension -- or continuance? Okay. Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone signed up to -- to provide testimony on this item? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not have a sign-up sheet for it, since we did not plan for the applicant to be here. Simison: Okay. And this is requested to continue until October 25th, 2022. Is there anybody that was here for this item that cannot be here on that date that would like to make any comments regarding this public hearing? Okay. Seeing no one, do I have a motion to continue this item? Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: I move that we continue Item No. 2, Item H-2022-0030 to October 25th, 2022. Cavener: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to continue this item. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the item is continued. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. 3. Public Hearing for Hill's Century Farm Commercial Subdivision No. 2 (TECC-2022-0002) by Brighton Development, Inc., generally located on the south side of E. Amity Rd., 114 mile east of S. Eagle Rd. A. Request: A One-Year Time Extension on the preliminary plat (H- 2016-0092) for Hill's Century Farm Commercial Subdivision in order to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the second phase final plat. Simison: Next up is Item 3, a public hearing for Hill's Century Farm Commercial Subdivision No. 2, TECC-2022-0002. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. As I was saying, this is a preliminary plat time extension. This site consists of 6.12 acres of land. It's zoned R-15 and C-N generally located on the south side of East Amity Road, quarter mile east of South Eagle Road. The preliminary plat was approved in 2016. The first phase final plat was signed by the city engineer and recorded in 2018. A two year time extension was approved by the director in 2020 and expired on August 29th, 2022. The time extension Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 7 of 55 was requested prior to the expiration date as required. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is mixed-use neighborhood. The applicant is requesting a one year time extension on the preliminary plat in order to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat for the second phase of development, which consists of four building lots on 2.79 acres of land. The applicant won't be able to get the plat signed by the city engine in the required time frame due to delays pertaining to market conditions. The applicant plans to complete the subdivision improvements in the next phase in the fall of this year. Approval of the subject time extension will allow the applicant to obtain the city engineer's signature on a final plat for the second phase of development and proceed with development of the property. If City Council does not approve the requested time extension, the preliminary plat will expire and a new preliminary plat will be required for the remaining area that has not yet been subdivided. With all extensions the director or Council may require the final plat to comply with the current provisions of this title. Staff is not recommending any additional conditions of approval with this extension. Written testimony was received from David Palumbo, request for Amity Road between Cloverdale and Eagle to be expanded prior to any further development occurring on Amity between Cloverdale and Meridian Roads. His full letter is in the public comments section in the public record. Staff is recommending approval of the requested time extension to expire on August 29th, 2023. Staff will stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions for staff? Okay. Is the applicant here? Beach: Good evening, Mayor, Members of the Council. Josh Beach with Brighton Development, 2929 West Navigator Drive, Suite 400, in Meridian. I don't have a lot to add, so if you have any specific questions for me I would be happy to answer those. We are, as Sonya mentioned, at most a couple months away from having this plat recorded. It's been under construction and we don't have much left to do, honestly, so -- I'm happy to answer any questions and I will just sit down. Simison: Thank you, Josh. And nice to see you. Council, any questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you. Mr. Clerk, did we have anyone signed up to provide testimony? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not. Simison: Okay. Well, if there is any present -- anybody present that would like to provide testimony on this item if you would like to come forward at this time or if you are online use the raise your hand feature on Zoom. Seeing no one coming forward or no one raising their hand, would the applicant like to make any final comments? And they are waiving their right to final comments. Then do I have a motion? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I move that we close the public hearing. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 8 of 55 Cavener: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: It seems like a pretty straightforward request for a time extension. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number TECC- 2022-0002 as presented in the staff report for today's hearing date. Perreault: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve this item. Is there any discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, absent; Strader, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 4. Public Hearing for Brundage Estates Subdivision (TECC-2022-0001) by Engineering Solutions, LLP, generally located 1/4 mile south of W. Victory Rd. on the east side of S. Linder Rd. in the west half of Section 25, UN., RAW. A. Request: A Two-Year Time Extension on the preliminary plat (H- 2021-0061) in order to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the first phase final plat for Brundage Estates Subdivision Simison: Next item up is Item 4, a public hearing for Brundage Estates Subdivision, TECC -2022-0001. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. The next application is also a request for a time extension on a preliminary plat. This site consists of 136.63 acres of land. It's zoned R-4 and is generally located on the east side of South Linder Road, a quarter mile south of West Victory Road. The preliminary plat was approved in 2016, consisting of 366 buildable lots, 20 common lots and one other lot on 136.63 acres of land in the R-4 zoning district. A two year time extension was approved by the director in 2018 Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 9 of 55 and a subsequent two year time extension was approved by Council in 2020, which expired on July 26th of this year. The subject time extension was requested prior to the expiration date as required. The reason for the previous time extensions was due to incomplete sewer and water line extensions, as well as upcoming improvements to Harris Street. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this property is low density residential, which is approximately 64 acres of the site, and medium density residential, which is approximately 73 acres of the site. The applicant is requesting a third two year time extension on the preliminary plat in order to obtain the city engineer's signature on a final plat. The reason for the subject request is that the developer has been focusing on development of the adjacent Biltmore Estates and Graycliff Estates Subdivisions and needs additional time to submit a final plat application for Brundage Estates. Construction plans are in the process of being completed for phase one and the applicant anticipates design completion of the first phase later this year. Sewer and water lines have been extended to Linder Road to serve this property and improvements to Harris Street with turn lanes on State Highway 69 are currently under construction. With all extensions the City Council may require the preliminary plat to comply with current UDC provisions. Since the preliminary plat and previous time extensions were pre- approved, the qualified open space and site amenity standards have been updated in the UDC to require a minimum of 12 percent qualified open space. That's up from ten percent. And a minimum of 27 points of site amenities. Six site amenities were previously required. We have since changed to the point system as you know. A total of 14.99 percent or 20.48 acres of qualified open space was provided with the preliminary plat consisting of an 8.24 acre city neighborhood park, two pocket parks consisting of .8 and 1.3 acres, a linear open space area where the Williams Pipeline is located, containing a multi-use pathway, half the street buffer along South Linder Road. All of the street buffers along collector streets and parkways along internal local streets within the development, which exceeds the current standards. Amenities approved with the preliminary plat consist of the following. A tot lot with children's play structure and seating area, multi-use pathways within the Williams Pipeline easement and along the Calkins Lateral. Open space commons, including a city park, a gazebo shelter, a basketball court with benches, which total 40 points, which exceeds the current standards. Approval of the subject time extension will allow the applicant to obtain the city engineer's signature on a final plat and proceed with development of the property. If City Council does not approve the requested time extension the preliminary plat will expire and a new preliminary plat application will be required. Written testimony has been received from David Palumbo. His letter is in the public comments section of our public record on this application. Staff is recommending approval for the subject time extension to expire on July 26th, 2024. Staff will stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions for staff? Okay. Is the applicant here? Good evening, Becky. McKay: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Becky McKay. Engineering Solutions. 1029 North Rosario. I'm representing the applicant on this particular application. To kind of give you a little bit of history of this particular project, Mr. Centers owned a large area within the center of this section. He had us plan and get preliminary Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 10 of 55 plat approval for Biltmore Estates, then Graycliff Estates and, then, Brundage Estates was the third component that completes kind of that area there and gets us out to Linder Road. We have -- we have been focusing on Biltmore and Graycliff and now his focus is -- is on Brundage, so we have started our design of phase one civil plans and I know, you know, this is an additional time extension, but I want to assure the Council that even though this was approved back in 2016, what we have approved still meets the Comprehensive Plan and exceeds the open space and amenity requirements under the ordinance as it stands now. The project includes an extension of West Harris all the way -- so, it will go from Highway 69 out to Linder. That's the mid mile collector. We also have a southern collector in this property that will go to our south boundary. Is this working? Is this working, Sonya? Allen: Should be. McKay: Oh, there I am. Okay. So, you can -- you can see -- so, if you -- if you look at this, we have a collector roadway that goes -- that goes out to Linder Road and, then, one that goes to the south. I think Sonya's running it now. That will eventually go out to Amity. So, this particular piece of property provides for a portion of the southern mid mile collector and the east-west collector. As you know, State Highway 69 and Harris is intended to be signalized. The Stapleton Subdivision has been making the improvements and widening there, which is necessary prior to signalization. One of the other things that was part of this particular project was a new regional well was required to support this service area and that well was put down a few years ago. We did donate the property. Another thing within the Comprehensive Plan was a neighborhood park was designated on this property, so we do have 8.24 acres of a neighborhood park. We still need to sit down and meet with the Parks Department. Mr. Centers had previously -- we went before the Parks Commission, he agreed to install sprinklers and the appropriate sod and get it greened up and get it kind of going when once we get to that area, so that -- that that park can get under way sooner than later. This particular development, as Sonya indicated, we are low density and medium density. We are at 2.68 dwelling units per acre. So, overall if we were just at three across the board on the entire property that would be 411 lots. We are at 366. The other thing this property incorporated was the multi-use pathway along the Williams Pipeline and the Calkins Lateral, which is still starting -- a part of your pathway plan. So, we still are in compliance with the master street map of ACHD and the south Meridian master street plan. The R-4, the density that was approved on this particular property, we felt was appropriate. We have an average lot size of over 10,000 square feet. It's all single family and we are starting over on Linder first and starting to build that collector and when we get that collector built as it moves eastward and get the signal in at Meridian Road, obviously, that will help provide another interconnection for vehicles and take some heat off of the Victory and Linder intersection and the Amity and Linder intersections. Do you have any questions? Simison: Thank you, Becky. Council, any questions? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 11 of 55 Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Becky, I'm glad that you guys -- even though it's been -- will be six years, you are meeting the open space and the amenities that are updated. Are there any other notable areas of the UDC that this project wouldn't meet? Like, you know, we have changed our common driveways now, things like that. McKay: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, no, we -- we did not delineate any common drives, because they weren't allowed at the time. We don't -- we don't have any three foot setbacks in here, because it's all R-4. We meet all of the collector buffers, arterial buffers and plus we also check those if -- if an arterial gets upgraded when we go into design we make sure that we meet whatever the current buffer requirement is, because that will be caught when we submit plans and final plats. So -- so, this -- this -- what's before you, obviously, complies, like I said, with the UDC as it is in its current state and the Comprehensive Plan and I don't think I would do anything different than -- other than probably add more density if I were to bring it through. Well, you know -- Strader: Everybody's got to try. McKay: It was kind of low at the time and I like it, but the clients sometimes don't like it. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thanks, Becky, for answering that. Appreciate it. Simison: Council, any additional questions for the applicant? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Just to comment, I'm supportive of the request. I think the fact that you comply with the current UDC provisions, obviously, I think that's a good policy that we always require compliance with the updated most current UDC provisions as a condition of giving an extension. You would have no objection to that here. I think it's a great practice. So, I appreciate you doing that. McKay: Thank you. Thank you. This one's held up to the test of time. I know some don't. Simison: Council, any additional questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you, Becky. Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone signed up under this item? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 12 of 55 Simison: Okay. Is there anybody present that would like to provide testimony on this item? If you would like to come forward at this time or use your raise your hand feature on Zoom? Seeing no one coming forward or raising their hand, does the applicant waive any final comments? Applicant waives final comments. So, Council? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: I move that we close the public hearing on Item 4, TECC-2022-0001. Cavener: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: With the applicant ensuring that they will -- the preliminary plat will comply with all current UDC provisions as a requirement for the time extension, I move that we approve TECC-2022-0001 as presented. Cavener: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 4. Is there any discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, absent; Strader, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 5. Public Hearing for Regency at River Valley Phase 3 (H-2022-0057) by Bach Homes, located at 2480, 3270, 3280 E. River Valley St. A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to change the development plan (Bach Storage - Inst.#2020-062947 for 2480 and 3280 E. River Valley St.)for the site from self-service storage to multi- family apartments and include an additional 0.65 acre of land at 3270 E. River Valley St. that is currently governed by the Development Agreement (SGI-AZ-12-010, Inst. #11300560 Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 13 of 55 Simison: Next item up is Item 5, a public hearing for Regency at River Valley Phase 3, H-2022-0057. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. The next application before you is a request for a development agreement modification. This site is located at 3270 and 3280 East River Valley Street and 2480 North Eagle Road, midway between Ustick and Fairview and north of East River Valley Street in the C-G zoning district. An application for a modification to the existing development agreement for a box storage was submitted in 2021 to change the development plan from a self-service storage facility to a multi- family development. City Council denied the request due to the following reasons: They felt access with some of the contiguous properties to the north had not been adequately flushed out and issues with traffic circulation and parking. They felt it wasn't the right time for the city to approve the modification. Since that time a new development agreement was approved for the abutting property to the north, the Copper Canary, that removed the requirement for a cross-access easement to be provided to the subject property and, instead, required only an emergency access easement be provided if the subject property developed with residential uses as planned. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this property is mixed-use regional. A modification to the development agreement for a box storage for 2480 and 3280 East River Valley Street to change the development plan for the site from self-service storage to multi-family apartments and include an additional .65 of an acre of land at 3270 East River Valley Street that's currently governed by the SGI Development Agreement, which is entitled to develop with a multi-tenant retail store or a restaurant with a drive-through to allow a multi- family development. The proposed modification would allow the applicant to develop the site with apartments as a third phase of the existing multi-family development to the east at Regency at River Valley. The reason the applicant hasn't developed the property with the storage facility is that after completing the development agreement and the design process construction costs rose such that it wasn't feasible for them to move forward with the project. A conceptual -- so, the -- the plans before you are what I just described. There are the existing conceptual development plans in the existing agreements. The one on the left is the box storage facility and the one in the middle is the southern property that was -- had two different concept plans for retail and a restaurant drive-through. The concept plan that's shown here is what is proposed. This was submitted for a five story multi-family structure with parking on the ground floor and four stories of apartments above containing 128 units. Rooftop amenities consisting of fire pits, hot tubs, a pavilion, multiple barbecue areas and lounge seating are proposed. Additionally, residents will have access to the existing amenities in phases one and two, which include a large swimming pool area with a hot tub, barbecue areas, activity room, outdoor pavilions, game room, fitness center and common open space. Two driveway accesses are proposed for interconnectivity with the first two phases of the multi-family development to the east and here are some concept elevations of the proposed structure. High density residential apartment uses are desired in the mixed-use regional future land use designation, especially when located adjacent to State Highway 55 and Eagle Road. An employment destination -- destination center, such as those along the Eagle Road corridor. The proposed high density residential development at 43.69 units per acre will contribute to the mix of commercial, retail restaurants, et cetera, office and civic, Kleiner Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 14 of 55 Park Senior Center uses in the area. Further it will contribute to the variety of housing options in this area in close proximity to employment uses and Kleiner Park. For this reason staff is supportive of the proposed amendment and has included recommended provisions for the new development agreement in the staff report. If the subject amendment is approved, a subsequent conditional use permit application is required to be submitted and approved for the proposed multi-family development in the C-C and C- G zoning districts. Development is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11- 4-327 for multi-family developments. A detailed review will take place with the conditional use permit application to determine consistency with the specific use standards and other UDC standards. Written testimony was received from Shawn Freeman. He is against approval of the amendment to the development agreement to allow more multi-family residential projects in this area that will impact the infrastructure of Meridian. Staff is recommending approval. Staff will stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions for staff? Okay. Thank you very much. Is the applicant here? Good evening. If you would state your name and address for the record. Ames: A little taller than the previous applicant. Brandon Ames. 270 North 2250 East, Layton, Utah. I would like to thank you for your time and thank you for your comments. The previous time that we were here it did force us to reconsider some of the design, the site layout, and also be more active in our communication with the development to the north, as well as review the traffic study and just make -- essentially what we decided as well was to make more connection points between this development and our previous two phases and we feel like we have been able to come up with a better product based upon your previous comments. So, thank you for that. I don't have -- I -- I really feel like I would just like to be open to questions if you have any questions for me. Simison: Council, any questions for the applicant? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: One design that -- at least when I look at this, the proposed parking on the east side of this phase and the parking garages to the east of it, there is just a gray strip. I don't -- I'm not sure how to exactly ask the question I guess, but between the two rows of parking garages that go north and south are parking -- covered parking? Ames: Yeah. Those are currently garages. Borton: Is that -- is the -- the garage -- are the garages on the east side abutting the garages to the east? I was just curious when I looked at it. If you could put your cursor where I'm talking. Yeah. That -- that vertical gray space, are those -- Simison- The one just to the right of it? Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 15 of 55 Ames: Correct. Those are garages for the previous phases. Borton: Right. But are we talking garages in this phase would abut and touch the garages on the other or is there a spite strip in between or what? Ames: No, there are no garages in this phase. It is -- it's the first-- it's the podium building is -- Borton: Bad question. Garage is the wrong word. There is covered parking on this phase as you propose on the east side; right? No? What am I missing? Allen: I'm not sure what -- Strader: Mr. Mayor? Ames: I think those are existing -- Allen: Right here. Ames: -- Councilman Borton. Borton: And just to the east of it -- Allen: It is a driveway. Borton: Okay. Allen: On the adjacent side. Ames: That's a drive aisle -- an existing drive aisle on the previous phases. Borton: Okay. So -- Ames: So, there is a garage on each side of that drive aisle that pertain to the previous phase. Borton: Okay. And is that a drive aisle that -- how -- I'm just curious, because it looked really funky that -- is it a two car wide drive aisle? Allen: I would guess it's 26 feet wide, but I'm not sure. Borton: Yeah. Ames: I'm not certain, but I -- that would be my guess as well is 26. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 16 of 55 Allen: The -- the development to these has already been approved by Fire and Planning, so it's -- it's -- it's done. But the boundaries of this side is where the -- the red line is here. Borton: Okay. Got it. Ames: One -- one thing I would like to point out is that I know that there were some parking concerns in addition to traffic flow. We with this design are currently overparked beyond city code and so it may alleviate some of the parking within our current phases as well. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Do you have covered parking within the building itself? I'm assuming it's on the ground floor. I mean how many -- so, how many parking spaces, could you remind me, are within the building footprint? Ames: I will see if I can -- if that's on my notes. I'm not certain that it is. Let me see. One hundred and twenty-four. Strader: Got it. Okay. And so -- and, then, you have got the additional I guess guest parking as additional parking here. Could you walk through the connectivity from a pedestrian perspective toward the other amenities in your previous phases? So, I see that you have some -- I guess they are like little crosswalks. Ames: Yes. Strader: And will people be able to access a -- it looks like they are kind of-- one of them runs into a carport it looks like. Maybe the other one hits a pathway. If you can kind of walk us through that. Ames: So, on the -- on the north side we have the crosswalk coming into our existing phase. I'm not certain -- one thing that I want to be careful of is this is a really really preliminary drawing. So, the connection points we would plan on doing the exact location of crosswalks are roughly this, but as far as whether it goes into an existing garage I don't think we would do that, but I -- I -- this really is illustrative right now. We would plan on going through a much more thorough and detailed evaluation of the site with staff if we are able to obtain approval on the DA modification, which is -- I -- I don't mean to deflect your question, but that really is our main goal today. We have not gone really far down the design of this site yet until we know we have a DA modification approval. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 17 of 55 Perreault: Thank you. So, can you talk to us about how you have improved circulation? So, the entrance on the south side was there before, that's -- that comes from River and -- River Valley and that -- there is -- that's a right-in -- or, excuse me, that is a -- yeah, that's a right-in, right-out only; right? Ames: Correct. Perreault: So, that really hasn't changed. There was a connection there on the very south side with the -- the drive aisle from the west to the property to the east, that -- that hasn't really changed. That was already connected in the last -- the last rendering. There is the new pedestrian connection and, then, to the north there is a new cross-access connection. But I don't see anything -- I mean I'm still kind of struggling with how, obviously, a majority of the residents are still going to use the eastern main access to Regency to get to this area; correct? I mean they are going to be directed to use the main entrance to the site to the east. Ames: Yes. And -- and that's typically common, because that's where the clubhouse is, the main amenities. I -- I don't know what the percentage of people will be that go to that entrance versus coming in off of a -- directly from the south or how many might go all the way to the east if traffic is heavy on -- I'm not sure what the percentages will be, but -- Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Is there a way to access this? This whole project off of Records directly or is it just coming in off of River Valley? Is there an access to the east--very eastern boundary of the whole Regency project from Records that would flow around to the northern entrance on this? Ames: I can -- I can look. Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Perreault, there is an access on Records. There is also one on River Valley Street. There will be a right-in access as well. Perreault: Thank you. Ames: It looks like it aligns with Tahiti Drive. Simison: Council, additional questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you very much. Ames: Thank you. Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to provide testimony on this item? Johnson: Mr. Mayor. Yes. Perry Coles. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 18 of 55 Simison: When you come forward if you can state your name and address for the record and you will be recognized for three minutes. Coles: Yeah. My name is Perry Coles. Simison: Just make sure you get in front of that microphone. Coles: My name is Perry Coles. Thank you, Mayor and Council Members, for allowing me to speak. I am the owner of the property directly to the north, Copper Canary, and -- of this -- of this residential modification plan and -- and, of course, the apartments, the phase three they want to put in. I wanted to mention that I really appreciate Bach Homes working with us to develop the traffic flow going to the south to East River Valley Street. As you know on April 12th we came forward to you and were approved to establish the emergency road exit and gate to be established on the eastern part of our property. This stops all traffic from the apartment complex and the development that's going into the north of us right now going through the -- the -- the center of our parking lot. So, we really appreciate the fact that we did get approval, so that we could basically not destroy our property and our-- and our parking ability on our -- on our lot. So, really really appreciate that. I -- we have looked at the plans with Bach Homes. We think it's just a wonderful design. We like what they are doing. They have worked well with us and we are definitely -- definitely in favor of allowing it to go residential. We think it's a -- a great asset to -- to the area and, again, I like the amenities, the design. I did -- when I first came to Meridian and I saw the -- the first couple phases when we were looking to purchase the property and that's -- you know, one of the comments I made to my wife is I really liked, you know, what -- how the apartments looked and the design effort that they made to make them, you know, really nice. So, again, we are very very much in favor and we are very excited to be in Meridian. My family-- my -- my kids are all here and we are really looking forward to being part of the city here as Copper Canary. Thank you. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? You are good. Mr. Clerk, do we have anybody else signed up? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, that was the only sign in. Simison: Okay. If there is anybody else that would like to provide testimony on this item if you would like to come forward at this time or use the raise your hand feature on Zoom. Seeing no one else coming forward, would the applicant like to make any final comments? Applicant is waiving any final comments. So, Council, turn this over to you for additional questions, comments, discussion, motions. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: If the applicant would come forward again. I'm sorry to keep going over this. I just -- I have been in this complex many times and every time I have been there it's Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 19 of 55 absolutely packed. There is like no place to park. I have been there mostly in the evening. There is hardly any spots to find. So, I really do want to understand more about the flow of traffic, because I can very easily see, having been in there, that it would be difficult not to get hit with somebody backing out of the covered stalls and so I'm wondering if maybe Sonya could pull up just a Google Maps or an aerial of the entire Regency project. It's just going to show this as an empty lot, but I want to take a look at how the traffic will flow around the entire complex, because I'm -- I'm just not convinced that the -- the right-in, right-out to the south should be the area where most of the vehicles would be coming in and out. Simison: So, Council Woman Perreault, it -- it took me a second to find it. Did you see that there is an access -- cross-access right above that right-in, right-out? Perreault: Where is that? It's right at the very southern portion of the application. Allen: Yep. Simison: Okay. I -- I didn't see that, because I thought that was referencing your question earlier about where the cross-access points were. Okay. Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bert. Bernt: Question for the applicant. I -- I remember in previous discussions regarding the previous applications there was a conversation about whether or not these buildings would all be able to be sold individually if you decide to do so in the future and how that would impact the amenities and, you know, the usage of those amenities. What are your -- what are your thoughts on that? Ames: Are you asking if this new phase three would be on its own lot and be able to be sold as an individual building? It is on its own lot because of the way that everything was platted. We did combine two lots into one in order to be able to fit one building, so, technically, it could be sold. I'm not typically involved in our sales. Bach, as long as I have been there -- or as far as I have known very rarely sells apartment buildings. We have our own property management company and we manage over 3,000 apartment units right now and it's just something that's in our business plan is to keep them. However, technically, it could be, because it's on its own phase. If I were to speak kind of off the cuff a little I would say selling that with the ability to use amenities, that brings a higher value than selling it and saying you cannot use amenities, you know, in the adjacent property. I -- but I -- I'm typically not involved in that. Bernt: Mr. Mayor, follow up. Simison: Councilman Bernt. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 20 of 55 Bernt: Just to confirm, is -- is there enough -- and do you meet all of the code requirements for this one project to be a standalone project without having to use other amenities and have open space to be considered for approval? Ames: We have not -- our intentions are to work with staff to meet all of the code and -- and to work through that, especially, you know, after we have obtained this -- until we have obtained this I -- you know, we have put a lot of resources into it, but we didn't want to go too far down that road yet. So, again, I'm not trying to not answer that question, but that's where we are right now is we read through the code, we designed the building and we felt like we are really close. Bernt: Mr. Mayor, follow up. I -- you know -- and this one -- and I get this is just a DA mod and we are asking you a bunch of questions that are detailed and I think that -- the reason for those questions are just to create some clarity of -- or, you know, what this approval will look like going forward and so -- and -- and I don't know -- this is more of a comment and truly nothing to do with your development specifically, but it just seems like a lot lately there is -- we have -- we have -- we have had a lot of applications come before us that are zoned C-G or whatever, plan to be, you know, office or retail, whatever, et cetera, but -- but because those projects don't pencil, you know, let's build some apartments. Ames: Well, in -- I can address that and for ten years we did have this for sale and we were under contract at least four times and I -- I believe more than that and I can -- I can pull proof of that. I -- I just didn't work for Bach at the time. But the -- the owners were -- have expressed to me a number of times and they started listing them that we were under contract to sell that. But once the due diligence phase was completed with the potential buyers they all backed out. They -- they wanted access off of the -- off of Eagle and if they didn't have that they weren't buying the property. So, we -- we were under contract and trying to sell the property for almost ten years and, then, maybe more history than you would like, but, you know, one of our employees who was our development manager thought it would be a good idea for us to get into some storage units, not just here, but in other locations that we have and he kind of really started to run with that, but once we got down to actually talking to companies to construct those and build those and what that looked like, it was not looking very good and we felt like -- we started looking at our -- our occupancy rates and -- and what the area was needing. We talked to our property managers, we talked to other property managers around the area and we felt like this is the best use for this property. We -- we attempted to make it work commercially, but residential is what we know, it's what we are the best at. We -- we do a good job of it. We manage all of our own properties. We put a lot of money into rehabbing our own properties, because we do keep them for a long time and everything started to point towards let's do what we know how to do and let's do what the -- really the people are telling us and that is that this is a -- this is a highly sought after area to live. It's a great area to live in. Simison: Council Woman Perreault, back to your -- you got the map up. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 21 of 55 Perreault: Thank you. Are we able to zoom in just a little bit? So, on the very east side there is a street coming off of Records, Tahiti Drive. It looks like there is supposed to be a connection. Is that on -- is that part of the Regency property and is that going to flow around to the north side or is there a connection there -- yeah, that -- that -- where -- where Sonya -- it looks like that section dead ends. So, where is the connection off of Records going to -- where is the -- the connection off of Records in relationship to this loop and -- and how would -- would they take the down -- the area where it says Downey sub lateral, so, essentially, that's what a majority of the residents are going to do, they are going to come in through this main entrance there on the south side and come around through all of these garages and carports to access that third phase; correct? Ames: I don't know. I can't speak for what I think -- I -- I -- I can probably tell you what I would do and I feel like I would drive down to the main road and, then, turn in as close as I can to my apartment building. But I -- I don't know what -- I don't know how many people would come off Records, drive around through the apartments and, then, enter in. Probably some would. I -- I don't know that. Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Well, they can't make a left from there -- this -- this map is old. It says Stokesberry, but that's River Valley. They can't make a left from River Valley if they are coming off of Eagle Road into the -- into the first entrance they cannot make a left. It's blocked. So, they have to go further down east on River Valley to access the development. Simison: It's the main entrance right there -- that first main one is where you can turn left into. Ames: Correct. Perreault: Right. My concern is that that main entrance was not designed for a whole other phase. Ames: I -- I don't have an answer to that. Simison: Council, any additional questions, comments, action? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Strader. Strader: I have a question. You don't have to answer it. I want to give you an opportunity to answer it just because we are researching housing affordability in our community. Do you have any idea of what kind of rent ranges you were expecting or you are getting in your other phases ballpark? Just -- is it more affordable than the mean? Is it average? Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 22 of 55 Any insight you can -- you don't have to. It doesn't have to do with your approval, but it's a big topic right now and -- Ames: Sure. Strader: -- part of that is increasing supply. We are wondering if that's helping, but I'm -- I'm worried that we are just approving a lot of Class A highly amenitized beautiful apartments, but it's not really moving the needle on affordability. Ames: Sure. And I -- I -- I appreciate your question, because we -- you know, like I said, we -- we manage apartments in a lot of different cities and we are still developing and that's something that we have talked to a number of city councils about and -- and so I understand where you are coming from. I don't -- and I -- I -- I hesitate to answer this to a degree, because I don't know yet, like I said, but I -- in speaking with our, you know, property managers at Regency and at Kensington and other areas that we have, we are realizing that one of the things that we need to do more frequently and especially in this building we have considered is having a lot more studio one bedroom units. It just -- it cuts down on vehicles, it cuts down on traffic and it allows us to provide a more affordable living unit and that is something we have discussed, but I don't -- I don't want to be held to any unit counts or anything yet. We are -- we are doing that in a number of places where we are filling in additional phases, because we are realizing our three and four bedroom units are getting too cost prohibitive. They are creating too many vehicles and so that's a direction that we are heading in general. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thanks. No. I appreciate that and I understand, you know, you are running a business and you can't get into specific rents, but just those kind of anecdotes I think are helpful for us. Thank you. Ames: Thanks. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: One of the concerns that came up last time this concept was discussed was queuing on River Valley trying to exit if a project like this, heading to Eagle Rd to go north -- or south most likely. A hundred and twenty-eight units. Any new information you have gathered about the previously expressed concern that you can have cars stacked? Ames: We did -- we did a traffic study and I -- was that presented last time with Mr. Carlyle? Sonya, have you seen a traffic study? Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 23 of 55 Allen: I do not recall if he submitted one with the last one. I doubt it, as it was only a DA modification as well, so it's not required. Ames: I apologize for that. Mr. Carlyle, who was working on this and has very recently moved on to another firm and so I'm -- there are some things I'm not fully capable of answering. I -- that is something that we -- I know he was in talks with Ryan Hales, traffic engineer. I believe Ryan attended one of the meetings here and I know that we have the study and my -- I know that Ryan said that he didn't feel like this was anything that was causing major changes to traffic queues, but I don't have the numbers or the data to support that right now. I apologize. Borton: Okay. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Candidly that's one of my two main concerns with this type of use. Storage, obviously, much less intense from a -- from a total usage, but also a time of day usage. Ames: Sure. Borton: About the -- the other challenge being this is truly so disconnected from the other two phases in all respects, it's -- it would never have been designed if it was built as three phases in the way this would ultimately be laid out with two rows of parking separating this third building. So, that was one of the challenges and -- and the queueing issue with folks trying to get onto Eagle Road from this potential phase three is a real struggle with this type of request. Ames: Yeah. Borton: So, just wanted to let you know some of the concerns. Ames: Sure. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. So, I -- I mean I think you are improving -- like you are heading in the right direction. So, I -- I appreciate that. I -- I feel like you are much closer to showing you have adequate parking. I think the pedestrian connectivity is helpful in going part of the way toward -- toward overcoming that kind of like design challenge that Councilman Borton just mentioned. I think the -- I think when we are talking about the flow of traffic and the site overall and the concern about queuing to get out and especially to get onto Eagle Road to go south, I think that is still the main hurdle and understanding that there Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 24 of 55 has been kind of a change in personnel, I mean would you -- do you feel like you have new information to present from a traffic perspective and you would like to do that at a later meeting? Did you want to ask for a decision today? I just wanted to try to understand kind of how you are thinking about that aspect, because I think that concern about the queuing is -- is still pretty important to me, although you have done I think well in addressing some of the other concerns. Ames: I think that that's a good question. I -- so, may I ask if we seek a decision today what are our options regard -- with both outcomes? Is there a time frame that we have to wait to come back? Is there a -- are we able to come back in the next meeting if we can send the traffic report or what --what are our options depending on the results today? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: I -- I don't know if I'm going to answer that question direct, but I will tell you my -- from my -- my concern is I think -- I mean you can stack it looks like about six cars in that -- in that turn lane, you know, and you got 128 units, so you got folks trying to head south on Eagle Road from phase one and two and, then, add 128 units -- you know, traffic study will talk about general traffic counts and trips and average daily trips and I don't know if that answers the question that might -- it appears obvious in front of us, which isn't necessarily your fault at all, but it -- it's just going to be stacks of cars piled up trying to get out of this. It just is. Ames: Yeah. I -- Borton- They can go north. Ames: Of course -- of course units are going to have vehicles. I -- I want to fall back on, though, I feel like this is -- I feel like this is the best use for the property. I know it -- I know it brings challenges. I don't know very many that don't, especially when you are trying to build within the city. I -- I think if it's commercial it brings challenges. It's own set of commercials. If it's retail or -- or restaurants it brings its own set of challenges. It brings its own set of vehicle queues and times and I -- this is something that we have done elsewhere and it's -- it's proven really successful. We are able to provide a product that's a little different on property that we already own. We can manage. We maintain. We take care of. We know it really well. And we can offer -- we are doing this -- something similar, actually, in our plans in American Fork where we are building one building and across the street we are building another building that's similar and, then, we are planning on building this exact building off to the corner. It just is -- allows us to provide more like one bedroom and studio and a different -- it appeals to a different group of people who want to live in the area. The amenities are there. Most of the amenities that most people use will be there. Just the pool. We will have the mail room in there. You know, we are trying to keep -- we are just allowing access to those who want to go swim can go swim. I -- I don't anticipate a tremendous amount of foot traffic constantly, you know, through the Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 25 of 55 site. So, I -- I know it has challenges, but, again, we are seeking the development modification, because I don't think that storage units is the best use for this site. We don't -- we don't believe that and all of your questions are very valid and we plan on vetting those out following code, working with staff and working through -- this site plan may change a little. It likely does once you get through the actual, you know, code requirements that you have to hit in making sure that everything works. So, I -- I know that you are trying to look forward a little bit, but I don't want to get too hung up on a -- on a conceptual site plan. My main goal is to try to present that I -- I really believe strongly that this is the best use for the property. We -- we have been unable to sell it as commercial, retail or restaurant. We have had all three approach us. They fall out every time. So, after that is it -- is storage units really the best use? I don't -- I don't think so. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Just my two cents on -- in my opinion there is --this has some of the best access this area as we have in the city. We actually do have a backage road with Records. You have three different access points where if there is a stacking queuing issue people can continue to drive east in order to come out on Records and -- but my bigger point is I know you have to look at this application. We probably have another thousand units that are going to come in through this part of the community and if these 128 are, again, the -- breaking the camel's back with access to this -- to River Valley, you know, I don't know what that means for the future of this area, because not everyone's going to go out the one that's closest to them. You know, it depends on where you are going to go. You might take Records around and go left up onto -- to head to Boise or you might go out on Records to go out to Ustick, depending upon where you go. This -- this area has unique access, some challenges. It is close to the intersection right there. But there are a few other locations. Whether or not this is the right use, I think that's a different -- different question for Council to consider now or in the future, but as far as I'm concerned this area has a lot of challenges, but a lot of opportunities for the area and it is -- you know, traffic is like a -- water that gets run down and finds the cracks, people are going to go where it's going to take them the least amount of time through the development, not through the development, all the way around Records if they can't make exits out onto the right area right there, but, you know, when those things -- when -- when does the -- the entrance into the main entrance, when does that become not viable? I don't know the answer. Neither does Council Woman Perreault. I mean could that handle ten thousand units going through that or could it handle 500? 1 don't know when those type of questions are answered in traffic impact studies for access points into these places. So, just my two cents and my opinion, but thank you. Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you very much. So, you would need to go through the CUP process after this. Our Planning and Zoning Commission is even tougher than we are. So, these questions that we are asking -- we won't be the last ones asking them. So, just -- I know you are taking notes to kind of prepare for that next step, because they will -- they will really even look at this at a much -- in a much more detailed eye, especially with parking. They love to talk about parking on our Commission. But to the Mayor's point, there -- there are -- there is a project that's been approved at the corner of Fairview and Records, Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 26 of 55 that's all flowing traffic northward on Records as well. The way that was designed was to -- to kind of try to keep it off of heading south onto Fairview because of how the exits are within that complex. So, that's coming and that's a significant -- it's a four -- several four story buildings and, then, there is additional units that are coming in on the -- the north side of Records. So, this isn't just -- as -- this isn't just about these 128 units, although we can't make a decision about this based on those, we do have to look at the bigger picture. I -- you know, concern of it as well. So, that's also why I have concerns about where vehicles are exiting and entering on that entire south side. I'm going to assume that when this -- when Regency was designed that those entrances were designed to include the phases that are existing, because there wasn't an intention for there to be housing in this section originally. So, I'm going to assume that they weren't designed to handle the additional capacity. Simison: What makes an entrance not -- I'm -- I'm just curious. Can anybody can answer that question? What makes -- we have some people here that do commercial development. When does an entrance no longer operate past its ability to handle traffic? Anybody have a standard that they can share from the audience? Or planning? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: This -- in my opinion this entrance is unique, because when you enter in you go around this center fountain I think is what it is and you -- you circle around and -- so there is more conflict points on this, because of how it's designed. So, you -- instead of just going straight and making a left, you kind of circle around this -- this center area and, then, people that are coming out from the clubhouse have to cross over that. So, there is just a lot more conflict points. If -- if you were -- if you were to drive it you would see what I mean. Simison: It sounds like a roundabout. Ames: It is a roundabout. Simison: Sorry. Perreault: What's that? Simison: I won't go down the roundabout -- I say it sounds like a roundabout. I thought they were safer and can move more traffic. Perreault: No, it's -- yeah. I found it challenging. There is not directional signs that say, hey, go around the center area. It's very confusing. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 27 of 55 Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Can we just zoom out of the Google images slightly, just so I can sort of see what's going on. Okay. So, that's where the co-op is. Got it. And, then, if we zoom back in -- sorry. Where is the actual connection exactly to Records? Okay. Right there. So, that goes through and -- and I'm assuming it connects with this loop -- not all the way to the south, but there is an independent connection; right? Ames: There are -- there are three connections. Strader: Can you point to them? Ames: I can show you roughly where they are without the site plan. Strader: Yeah. That's fine. Allen: Mr. Mayor, would you like me to put the concept plan back up? Simison: Sure. Whatever works. Or you can -- he can direct--you can move your cursor around to show where the exits -- Allen: It's right here on Records. Strader: Okay. Allen: You can go up here. This is stubbing to the Village apartments that's in the development process to the north and will eventually have an access through to the commercial development here. You can go down to the south and west and this will stub in -- have a driveway access to the third phase that they are proposing and, then, there is also an access up here in the third phase that will also tie into this development. Strader: Right. Allen: Have an access on East River Valley Street right here. Strader: Uh-huh. Allen: And, then, Council recently approved the Copper Canary development agreement modification that allowed an emergency only access easement to this property, whereas previously these -- all of these properties had a cross-access easement requirement for a backage road in this location. Strader: Okay. Yeah. I remember. I wasn't totally sold on that. So -- but from the whole complex -- I mean from the entire thing really to get out of here, you really just have the main entrance that goes onto Stokesberry Place or you have this connection onto Records. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 28 of 55 Ames: There is a -- is there another connection onto Stokesberry. And, then, also if you -- once there is connection over to the third phase there is another access there as well, too. Strader: Stokesberry? Ames: Yes. Strader: Right. Through the south. Ames: Correct. Strader: Okay. Okay. Simison: Council, further questions? Motions? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Last question, Sonya. So, we have heard the -- the concern expressed on circulation and -- and queuing and stacking. Is there some validity or are we missing something from your perspective that you think this adequately disperses traffic throughout? Allen: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Borton, Council, there -- there is definitely a traffic concern. I mean that's a lot of units, but there are -- there are three ways in and out of this development. I'm not a traffic engineer. I don't know how that will all play out. Hopefully they analyze that as part of their conditional use permit application. Ames: I would like to reiterate that our -- we plan on going through that process and we know it will be -- it will have its own challenges. We feel like the first hurdle is tonight, though, and that's to even have the ability to consider going to CUP or consider working with the Planning Commission and that's by modifying the DAfrom storage units to multi- family. Borton: But the -- the challenge I guess is -- Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Mr. Mayor. That we face is if the DA approval changes, there is nothing with any CUP condition that can address that particular issue, that change in use as you have conceptually provided. Simison: Warren -- you are unmuted, Warren. Mr. Stewart. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 29 of 55 Borton: So, that -- that's just some of the concern that -- that makes me ask it. Simison: So, Council, is there a preferred process that you would see done -- done differently for this -- to have a comfort level? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilmen Borton. Borton: Just candidly I'm not supportive of the application. I'm just -- I'm not. I think those -- this is a problem that we have described that I don't think a CUP condition can -- can address and resolve. So, for the reasons stated I have not heard enough to make me support the change in use. Just my perspective on it. Ames: Sure. And, like I said, there -- will there be a traffic problem? Possibly. But one thing I feel like there is a need of is housing and I feel like there is a need of housing that does not use a lot of water. There is a need of housing that is affordable to people and there has been a general shift in the market that we are dealing with where people are far more likely to rent, even throughout -- throughout their lives than they are to buy and there is -- there is just a mentality shift and so I -- is there a greater need for storage units than living space? I don't think so. But we will deal with those problems the best that we can, but the -- I -- I feel like the -- the two wouldn't even compare to each other. There is a tremendous need for living space and there is a tremendous need for living space that is not four bedrooms and three bedrooms and -- and -- more so than there is storage units and I feel like that's not even close. That's not even in question. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Argue a little bit with you. I don't think that's necessarily the question -- the same way of the questions were addressed. All of that be true, but we also have to take into account the location of it. So, housing over storage in a vacuum, I don't think anyone would disagree, but -- but that doesn't mean at every location without exception that is true and that's kind of what we wrestled with, because there has been some instances where mistakes have been made at prior-- at other locations where, you know, short term solution, but long term we created and cemented challenges in. That's what gives us some pause at a particular location. So, I'm not disagreeing with the underlying principle, but just trying to give some context to the -- Ames: Right. And I -- I see what you are saying, but I'm -- I am talking about this particular area, because of our occupancy rates. They are -- they are crazy. There is a need here for housing at this location. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 30 of 55 Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I thought the last time that -- that there was a -- that there was this request that we were really clear on our concerns and this doesn't for me duly address what we discussed last time. So, I don't know how we are seeing something that -- there are definite improvements to this, don't get me wrong, as Council Woman Strader said, this is a better version than the last version. We are still asking the same questions we were asking last time. So, this doesn't -- there is not enough changes to make me -- for me to be comfortable in approving this tonight. I -- I don't know how many more times we can express the concerns that we have. I know you have -- don't have control over how many -- you know, how much stacking there is. That's -- that's not anything that you guys have control over, but I think this is our third meeting about this and I don't know that we have really truly addressed the main concerns that have been presented. So, thank you. Ames: So, we had two concerns and one was to flush out connection to the north, which we -- we did that. So, the other concern was traffic flow. What other traffic flow options would you like to see when we have one off Records, one that will be going north when that development goes through and three off of Stokesberry? That's five entrances into one apartment complex. I'm not sure -- I feel like you are asking for something that is unattainable. Bongiorno: Mr. -- Mr. Mayor? Simison: Deputy Chief. Bongiorno: Thank you. Mr. Mayor and Council, I know we -- we kind of-- I -- I made it to one of the other meetings. Chief covered the -- the last meeting for me. So, this is one of those -- can we service it? Yes. Is it going to be difficult to service? Yes. The Mayor brought up concerns two meetings ago about access. Access is going to be a challenge for the Fire Department. I was just looking back in the last -- since January 1st of 2000 we have been to that apartment complex 50 times and I know one of them was for a fire. The rest of them were for medical calls. So, yes, there is five different entrances into this complex, but we have to wind through to get to this particular place. Engine 33, which is the closest station, doesn't have a direct access. They are going to have to come all the way down to Records, come up Records to come into the apartment complex, other than going through -- like Councilman Perreault stated, trying to get through that traffic circle and that traffic circle -- I have been there when I have been doing my inspections, it's -- it gets clogged because of people going to get their mail. That's where the mail is collected. So, if you go there at 5:30 at night that traffic circle is full of cars. And so for the Fire Department that this is going to be a challenging project. Yes, there is accesses, but just the way the flow is it's going to be a challenge for us to get to it. So, just some thoughts from the Fire Department. Simison: Yeah. And, Council, I'm trying to help the applicant, too, because I'm -- we did take an action to the property to the north, which now has altered options for this property, at least in -- in a lot of ways. Without having a north-south connection for what may want Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 31 of 55 to exist there, which is fine, but, you know I -- I don't know what you put in here ever. And maybe it does become a City Park, you know, it's -- it's right-in, right-out. You know, that we--we have effectively created a right-in, right-out location that's only accessible coming from Records. You know, you -- there is really no other way to get into the -- if this is a standalone property, you know, you -- I don't know what you will expect long term for this property, but I'm sure any -- any property I would love to hear what your expectations might be if you don't want to change it based upon the access challenges and restrictions that have been placed upon it at this time. Ames: If we sell the property we are not going to grant additional accesses into our apartments. So, is that a better traffic situation than what we are currently offering? Because, then, there really is one and the emergency. So, I know it isn't perfect, but it's five. If we sell it where there is -- why would we ever grant access? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Is it safe to assume that the commercial contracts that you negotiated fell out because of access issues? Ames: They wanted access onto North Eagle. Perreault: And I would have preferred -- I would have preferred to not have just emergency access to the north, but I understand the property owners concerns to the north not wanting traffic to consistently be flowing through there. That would have really, however, resolved a lot of my concerns if there was a way to exit to Eagle to the north. But there -- there was not a desire to put in -- to -- to have vehicles exit out of the existing exit where the restaurant was and so that's -- that's what -- it is what it is. I mean I would have rather seen it happen that way. I -- but that's how it went and -- and had that been the case I would have been more inclined to consider the application. So, I can tell you that much. I know that probably doesn't help, but I -- I can't tell you what to do with your property, but I can say that there are some very unique concerns in this particular area. Now, if you are -- if your traffic consultant had looked at the entrance -- the main entrance to this and can somehow show that it can handle that capacity, I would be happy to take a look at it, but I -- I'm -- I don't believe that's the case based on my experience and apparently the Fire Department's experience. Ames: So, again, do you think it's going to improve if we don't develop access to that site with one right-in, right-out? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 32 of 55 Borton: I think we have vetted the discussion. I think your point is well taken. Who knows? You don't know. We don't know. Ames: Well, I -- I -- I feel like five accesses are better than one. I'm pretty confident in that. Perreault: Mr. Mayor, just one more point if I may. Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Something that makes this particular project unique, Regency, the existing buildings, is that they have covered parking on both sides of the drive aisles. That's not something that we see that frequently and that creates, in my opinion, additional concern. You have got narrow drive aisles and you have vehicles backing out potentially from covered parking on both sides or vehicles accessing garages on both sides of that drive aisle. If it was one side I might be a little less concerned about conflicting traffic, but it's on both sides. So, if you are driving through there and you already have a narrow lane to begin with and you have one vehicle backing out from covered parking on one side, another vehicle backing out on the other side at the same time and, then, you would have a fire truck go through there, I don't know if that's going to work, unfortunately. It's already a challenge as it is without adding additional units. Ames: Yeah. I can't go back in time when that was approved. I -- Perreault: Sir, I understand. I'm just trying to further explain and share with you the justification for the decision that I'm choosing to make this evening, so that there isn't any doubt. Simison: Well, based on what the deputy chief told me, if they are coming off of Records that are going to come in at that far last right-in, right-out, they are going to avoid the traffic circle, they are going to go right straight in, they are going to avoid all the covered parking lots and, then, they are going to exit out to the north through the emergency access into the building to the north and take the emergency access onto Eagle Road to avoid servicing this phase, compared to the entire rest of the development. I'm not a fire captain, engineer, or firefighter, but that's -- based on what I have seen with the flow design creation, that it actually avoids the issue of the entrance as that. That being said now I'm -- I will -- I will -- I have been trying to follow -- think back over the last three meetings and the other applications and I thought this is where Council was trying to get us to go there. Maybe I misread the tea leaves, as did the applicant, that I felt like they were trying to get them to put this all into one -- one concept. It is -- you know, is it just the number? If it was 50 would that be better? Worse? When do -- when would that feather out into this conversation or is it the fact that it's residential altogether and that's now the issue that is -- you know, again, I'm just trying to piece together my memory of many different topics, because I felt like the point of half the issue with the property to the north was to prevent -- to allow connectivity, so you didn't have people driving through, Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 33 of 55 so, it could be more connected to the other property to the east. That's what my memory to the dialogue was. I could be wrong, but -- Ames: Those are the two things we tried to change on the site plan. We felt like we did the best that we could with what we had to work with to address your two previous comments. So, if you are feeling like we are not moving forward, I would really -- I feel like we would be owed some avenue to move forward. And -- and I feel like it would be something achievable physically. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: I'm being quiet, because I'm thinking about -- you brought up -- brought up some good points, as has the Mayor, concerning the history of this -- this parcel and what it's struggled with. Ames: And I believe when we bought it, which was some time ago, it -- we thought that the access off of North Eagle was there through the other -- through the neighboring property of the north. That is -- we are, basically, trying to do the best we can with what we have and we did not create the right-in, right-out, we are using what was there. We are trying to add as many access points as we can into our property, which we can do that. We own that property and we can make more if that's what would make this easier -- make everyone feel better, but I can only do -- I can only work with what I have and I feel like we are trying to do that. We are trying to work with you on it. Simison: So -- so, Council, will -- I don't know the applicant would want to do this. Would having someone come back with a more defined traffic impact be helpful? I know that's normally reserved for a different point in time in the process, but -- or -- or not. Continuation for that -- for that -- for them the opportunity to go try to bring back data or up or down and move on? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Where did that come from? Strader: Liz. Simison: Oh. Council Woman Strader. Strader: I -- I may be the only one -- I feel like I'm on the fence leaning toward a no and the traffic analysis might help me get over it. I think the main thing I want to figure out is is this creating a problem for the entire area and all the neighboring properties as well or is this going to be like your self-imposed traffic nightmare where people can decide and vote with their feet if they want to live in your apartment complex or not? If that's -- if it's -- if it -- if it feels like the impact is confined to your property specifically, then, that might Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 34 of 55 -- that might help me, but if I feel like it's going to affect this whole corridor, you know, that -- that's more of an issue for me. I was not a fan, from what I recall, of the connection to the north being created as emergency access only and -- and believe that it should have been connected and so I -- I -- I understand we took collective action on that, but I really felt like you -- you guys were backing yourselves into a corner, committing to one specific use by doing that and here we are. You know, it -- and maybe if you have further information about future connect -- other connections to the north, if there are future connections to the north somehow through here where -- where -- you know, not -- not through that property that's emergency access only, but if there are other connections coming in the future, if you have information about that and the timing of that, that might help as well to give another avenue out. But, yeah, I mean that -- that might help me. But I'm kind of on the fence to a no. I -- I think having apartments is -- is -- is additive over all, but have major still concerns about circulation and the queuing. So, that's just one person, but -- Ames: I -- I would generally appreciate everyone's feedback, even if it's individually, so we know -- I don't feel like I have a lot of options right now in order to address your concerns. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: We have discussed this at length. We have. I mean in fairness to you I think we have described it, so it's probably-- it's time for us to act. We have shared the perspective on this, so -- Ames: So, can I -- can I ask again. If we seek a continuation to bring back a traffic study is that a viable option? Is that a -- a legal option for us tonight, as opposed to a definitive vote, or if we do vote and it's an -- and it's a nay, what are our options after that? Simison: Yeah. I will let Mr. Nary answer the second question. Nary: So, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, so since this is a DA modification I don't believe there is a time restriction, like an application for annexation. So, you could either -- again, if the Council wants to grant a continuance to get more information, that's fine. If the Council wants to move forward and if the vote were to deny the project, you can go get the traffic study and come back in two months. Ames: Okay. So, it's just -- we have some options. Nary: Yeah. So, yes. You are not barred like you would be in an initial application, like for annexation, where you are barred for a year from bringing back the same project, but it does cost noticing fees, refiling fees, all of the fees have to get repaid. So, there is that expense that it's added to it and, again, the noticing takes around a month or six weeks. So, that would be the one -- the biggest difference. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 35 of 55 Ames: But under a continuation we could continue under the previous notice that we have done, the fees that we have paid -- Nary: Yes. Ames: -- et cetera. Nary: Yes. Ames: So, reading the room, I'm not a doctor, but I'm not that dumb either. I feel like we should seek a continuation if that's appropriate or acceptable by the Council and bring back traffic information. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I have been quiet all night. I haven't been supportive of this request and I am a terrible poker player. You can see it on my face. I feel like that this has been an ongoing conversation. I think the Council has been really clear. I will just be very clear with you. Probably for the first time in my career I wouldn't support a continuance request. Just being clear. Ames: Yeah. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: I move that we close the public hearing on H-22 -- 2022-0057. Cavener: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: We have had lengthy discussion on this, the existing entitlements for the property and the -- the pluses and minuses of how it's designed and laid out. I think the Council, staff, and the applicant have provided us ample information to support a -- to support Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 36 of 55 some action right now without a continuance. For the reasons stated on the record today, I move that we deny H-2022-0057. Cavener: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to deny Item H-2022-0057. Is there discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, absent; Strader, nay. Simison: Four ayes. One no. Did I get that right? Just want to make sure. Okay. And the item is denied. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. 6. Public Hearing for Torino Locust Grove Subdivision (H-2022-0038) by Jeremy Rausch, located at 870 S. Locust Grove Rd. A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 1 .03 acres of land from R-1 in Ada County to the R-8 zoning district Simison: Next item up is Item 6, public hearing for Torino Locust Grove Subdivision, H- 2022-0038. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Dodson: Mr. Mayor, that application is the one that's supposed to be continued? Simison: It is. We still have to open it and are those the staff comments that we are making, that the applicant is requesting for continuance? Dodson: It surely is. They are due to a clerical error of noticing on our half -- on our behalf. We need to continue it to next week. Simison: Okay. Thank you. Council, any questions for staff? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Mr. Nary. Nary: I was just going to add for the record -- so, the notice that was mailed to the neighbors is correct and the signs on the property are also correct. The notice on the agenda neglected to add additional -- the preliminary plat, I believe, was what didn't get noticed on the agenda. So, it was noticed to the public. So, most of the noticing was done that wasn't this, so we are asking for a continuance, but that's why we can open the hearing. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 37 of 55 Simison: Thank you for that clarification, Mr. Nary. Is there -- is the applicant here? I assume not. Was there everybody here that came here for the purpose of providing testimony on this item this evening? Okay. Seeing no one, Council, do I have a motion to continue this item? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Move we continue Item No. 6, H-2022-0038, to September 13th. Bernt: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve this item to September 13th. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the item is continued to the 13th. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Simison: Council, do you want to take a quick break before this last item or you want to move forward? Okay. Let's go ahead and take a ten minute break and we will reconvene at 8:00 p.m. (Recess: 7:50 p.m. to 8:04 p.m.) 7. Public Hearing for Lavender Place Subdivision (H-2022-0036) by Breckon Land Design, located at 2160 E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of four (4) single-family attached building lots and 26 single-family townhome lots on approximately 3.79 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. B. Request: Conditional Use Permit to construct the requested 26 townhome lots within the R-40 zoning district Simison: All right. We will -- we will go ahead and come back from recess. Next item on the agenda is a public hearing for Lavender Place Subdivision, H-2022-0036. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Dodson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council. Good evening. As noted this next application is for Lavender Place. It was part of Lavender Heights Subdivision, which was approved in 2020. It was probably my first big plat with the city. This is just an extension of that. You also heard a development agreement modification for this portion of Lavender Heights Subdivision earlier this year. The site consists of approximately 3.8 acres, currently zoned R-40, located directly north of Discovery Park on the north side of East Lake Hazel, approximately a quarter mile east of Locust Grove. It is designated as Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 38 of 55 medium density residential on the future land use map, which they are complying with the overall density through both projects -- or I should say through the whole project. The preliminary plat proposed -- or requested consists of four single family attached building lots and 26 single family townhome lots on 3.8 acres in the existing R-40, for a total of 30 units. Conditional use permit is being requested to construct the townhome lots within the R-40 zoning district. The applicant has also requested private street for the proposed single family development, as well as three alternative compliance requests, one to the common drive standards, private street standards, and off-street parking standards. Lavender Place Subdivision was annexed in the city in 2020 as noted. The subject site was approved with the R-40 zoning district at that time. The applicant's proposing this project to be largely alley loaded with all but two of the proposed units fronting on green space to comply with the private street standards. Subsequently, multiple detached sidewalks are included for added pedestrian access throughout the site. So, the private street is, essentially, acting as the, quote, unquote, alley. With the proposed plat of 30 residential units and the requested land use of alley loaded single family attached and townhome units, the applicant is introducing a new housing type to this Lavender Heights development, as well as the immediate area. In addition, the proposed placement and site design offered great pedestrian connectivity to the nearby Discovery Park, which is, again, directly to the south across Lake Hazel and it also has good access to the remaining open space and amenities within Lavender Heights to the north. Going to the submitted concept elevations, the applicant is proposing to construct homes within this project of similar style to those within the parent development, Lavender Heights. This further staff's belief that the proposed subdivision complies with the comp plan, as well as previous approvals. Per the submitted parking exhibit, the applicant originally proposed to alternatively comply with the off-street parking standards by providing 18 parking spaces that will be designated for each unit. Each of the proposed residential units as shown is a two car tuck-under garage providing -- required for the two bedroom units, but -- and meets the requirement of a two car garage for a three bedroom unit. However, due to the odd shape of the parcel there is no room for the required driveway basically. The parking pad. Instead, the applicant placed the parking spaces directly across the private street from each unit to minimize the distance homeowners would have to traverse to access their additional parking spaces. In addition to the 18 parking spaces designated for the residents, the applicant showed seven additional guest parking spaces. Note that parking is prohibited on the private street due to its width, as well as along Lake Hazel, because it's arterial and along Bloomerang to the west, the collector street. So, there is no local street available parking in and around this development. Staff found that the proposal alternative for the parking was one option to meet the intent of the off-street parking requirements when accounting for the required density of the development agreement site constraints and limited access for the site. However, staff did recommend a modification to that ALT request. Staff recommends that one parking space, instead of two, is allocated for each three bedroom unit. It is difficult to predict the number of cars each unit will produce, so staff finds it more prudent to offer the additional spaces as guest spaces for more flexibility. Again it would increase the guest spaces from what was originally seven up to 16, which would allow for more appropriate flexibility and their use for residents or future guests. One of the outcomes of the Commission hearing was the recommendation by the Commission to limit the number of bedrooms Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 39 of 55 per unit for the whole plat to two bedrooms and keep all of the off-street parking spaces as guest spaces. The applicant has not agreed with this recommendation and is requesting to comply with staff's recommended ALT alternative as well as say instead of three or four bedroom as the plat previously noted, that all of the -- I guess the units noted with a color would be three bedroom at max. Staff's other recommended site design was in regard to adding a micro path lot into the development to further the north-south connection through the project. Per this recommendation the applicant did modify the plat to show this. You can see it really well here. They added this micro path lot here, as well as modified some of the sidewalk connections here to create a more direct path to the arterial sidewalk and, then, the multi-use pathway connection that is going to be over by the future collector road to the east. Staff also had concerns with the placement of the driveways for Lots 32 and 33 here at the entrance of the site. Staff was concerned that these substandard driveways would encourage residents to park in these areas, which would prohibit safe vehicular movement on the private street. The applicant revised the private street to add this little street knuckle here and reduce those driveways to five -- five feet and, then, I believe this one is a six and a half, which, again, should help prohibit and not incentivize people to park in those areas. Staff does support this revision, as well as the micro path addition. Commission heard these items on August 4th. There was no written testimony then. There has only been one piece of written testimony since from Mr. Palumbo, who is actually a Boise resident and noted concerns with Meridian development around Amity Road in south Meridian and just noted a lack of planning foresight for a number of different projects that was not -- his comments did not seem very specific to this project. At the hearing the key issues discussed by the Commission were this parking alternative and whether the unit should be limited to two bedroom, as well as safe access to Discovery Park and the concept of trash service within the private street. Again, the Commission recommended removing the parking in the hammerhead, which was not done, as well as limit all units to no more than two bedrooms to help with the parking and increased guest parking, which the applicant, again, would -- is requesting to comply with staff's amended alternative compliance recommendation, instead of the Commission's. Those are the only two outstanding issues for Council. With that, again, Commission did recommend approval with those changes and staff had previously recommended approval as well. I will stand for any questions should you have them. Simison: Thank you, Joe. Council, any questions for staff? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I'm just curious in the staff report you had the parking plan and it was like kind of color-coded. Was that meant to just keep track of how many parking there were per -- per three bedroom or what -- what was the -- is there any rhyme or reason to that? Dodson: Council Woman Strader, yes, ma'am. The -- it's color-coded, so the -- the teal dot -- this would be the parking space for that unit. Orange that unit. Yellow that unit. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 40 of 55 Per-- the one in the staff report is the original, which was two per and so they were color- coded to that specific unit, which they are still showing here, but they are proposing it per my recommendation, which was one per -- basically one per bedroom. Strader: Right. And, then, just so I understand the -- the 48 by 25 unit, ones that are further to the left, are -- that don't correspond to the dots, do those have adequate driveways to support parking or what -- what's going on there? Dodson: Council Woman Strader, you are talking about all of these? Strader: Yeah. Dodson: Those are all two bedrooms, so they have a tuck under garage. So they comply with the off-street parking standards for single family with two bedrooms. Strader: Mr. Mayor, if it's okay, if I just sort of ramble? Simison: Keep going, Council Woman Strader. Great job. Strader: All right. So, those -- so, those ones are like self-contained. So, you feel good that those ones have enough parking within the garage and they are I guess two bedroom. Okay. And so the three bedroom have the extra. I'm -- I'm -- I'm tracking it, I'm just trying to make sure I'm really accounting for each one. And, then, I see it's the three extra parking on the access drive and so do those two-bedroom units there have enough room in a garage as well? Dodson: Council Woman Strader, I don't have the floor plans, but that's something that we would review at building permit submittal if this were to be approved, would verify that there are no more than two bedrooms and that the garage measures 20 by 20 per our code. Strader: Uh-huh. Dodson: That would be it. Strader: Okay. All right. Thanks for walking me through that. I appreciate it. Dodson: Yes, ma'am. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, along those same lines with the common drive, if a vehicle were to go down there accidentally how would they turn around and get -- I mean is it wide enough for say a 22 foot long dually to get stuck down there and turn around? If there is three Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 41 of 55 vehicles parked in that -- in those spots, do they have to back up? Can they -- what's the width of that common drive? Dodson: Council Woman Perreault, it's 20 feet per code. So, that this would be like any other common drive in the city that is 20 feet wide and there is no turnaround at the end if it's less than 150 feet in length, which this is not. So anywhere in the city with a common drive that's -- that's what they are going to do, they are going to have to back up. Perreault: Mr. Mayor, one more question. Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. So, what happens if there is a delivery truck from RC Willey parked? How -- how wide is that private drive and -- I mean, you know, moving trucks, delivery trucks, where would they go if they are trying to access the garage to not be in the way? Dodson: Council Woman Perreault, probably more of a question for the applicant, but it is 30 feet to -- sorry. What is it? The private drive is 24 feet wide and, then, there is five feet of apron. That's what our private street standards are. So, that's why they are complying with that. So, whatever that is --34 feet from building garage face to the garage face, so if a delivery truck drove in and parked somewhere around there, then, yeah, you -- you are going to have half the private street to go around, which, frankly, on some of our local streets that are 30 plus feet wide you have the same issue. Bongiorno: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Deputy Chief. Bongiorno: Council Woman -- Mr. Mayor and Council Woman Perreault, that -- that is a turnaround down there. I required it. So, down where the three dots are parallel with the -- with the Lake Hazel, yeah, that is a Fire Department approved turnaround. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I was talking about on the common drive. Bongiorno: Oh. Perreault: If a large vehicle went down -- yeah. Where would they turn around? Bongiorno: Sorry. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 42 of 55 Perreault: You know, if you had a -- if you have a big dually that's 23 feet long, you know, and the road is 20 foot wide, how are they going to turn around? Simison: Council, any additional questions for staff? Okay. Then would the applicant like to come forward? If you could state your name and address for the record, please. Breckon: Jon Breckon. Breckon Land Design. 6661 North Glenwood Street, Garden City. I have a short presentation. Should help answer some questions about access and widths and so forth. So, this is the last phase of Lavender Heights. Phase four. Phase three is just wrapping up construction and final plat approval and -- are you clicking the slides, Joe or am I? Thank you. So, just for reference here, you can see the future fire station there and the -- off to the southeast corner of the property and Discovery Park to the south and how this odd shaped triangle piece lays in between that and the previous phases of Lavender Heights. This is an overall plan for reference and I greatly appreciate staff's efforts to work with us on this project. I have put in a lot of hours with Joe -- well, Joe and Joe, actually, to help us -- particularly on this phase, but also with the previous phases. You may recall when we first started this project it was only about 90 lots and much larger lots and it is now changed to what is before you and we are about 191 lots overall. So, I worked with the city on achieving its density requirements and that really plays into this final phase. Next slide, please. And here is just a -- an overall -- one thing -- one way we are -- we are meeting those density requirements and some of the challenges to the site is that triangle shape and a good portion of the site is part of the Farr Lateral. Overall property size is 3.79 acres and the Farr Lateral piece there on the north is 1.36 acres and so, you know, depending on how you include that or not, we are either -- you know, gross density is 7.92 or if you don't count the -- the Farr Lateral piece we are at a density of 12.34. In any -- any case, got the 30 units and that's -- it's really kind of a unique layout with the regional pathway along the north, along the -- the Farr Lateral there that extends over to the park on the south on the other side of Lake Hazel. We have got good connectivity throughout. Lots of open space and pedestrian routes. The unique design of these units is that the front door actually faces outward towards the open space. Provides a much more appealing street view and so the -- the private street is -- really functions as a -- as an alley as far as access and so it's -- it's really -- it's -- it's very compact and efficient, but functional. So, this shows how we have complied with some of the previous requests and you can see that -- that private street coming in is 25 feet wide. We do meet all of the dimensional standards coming in and through -- at one point on the previous concept we had a big round turnaround at the end there where we are showing the hammerhead and, actually, it was Mr. Bongiorno that came up with the suggestion to do the hammerhead turnaround, so that we could maximize our density. At -- well, Joe helped us out quite a bit, too, for sure with the parking. But, anyway, we appreciate these guys. They are -- they are good team players. Anyway, one thing I would like to clarify here, too, that this image clearly shows is how many units -- or how many bedrooms are in each unit and that was -- that was an item that came up during P&Z and it wasn't very clear and -- and some of the previous conversations there was discussion of three or four bedroom units and I think that was -- that wasn't very clear. So, anyway, this is a graphic to help explain that, because those number of bedrooms is directly tied to the parking and the parking, obviously, is -- is a concern and I think it's a Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 43 of 55 concern for all of us, but the two-bedroom units are all designed -- actually, all these -- all these units are designed to have a two-car garage. So, the two-bedroom units meet the parking requirement by having that -- that two-car garage and, then, the three-bedroom units, which we only have two and three bedroom units, there are no four bedroom units. The three bedroom units have a two-car garage and, then, in addition, we are proposing one extra designated stall -- and I have got another graphic that kind of -- it's -- it's much more clear than that one that we had previously. So, each three bedroom has a two-car garage and, then, a designated parking stall across the street and what that -- and just by having just the one designated stall across the street, you end up with one parking stall per bedroom throughout. Now, the two that are off on their own on the east side there at the end of the hammerhead turnaround, those have a two-car garage and also your standard driveway in front. So, they actually have an extra parking stall right in front. Here is a little graphic that shows how the hammerhead fits in there to meet those dimensional requirements. After looking at that I think we could fine tune that for construction documents to make it a little bit better and, then, this is -- this is I think very helpful, too, to understand the dimensions, answers some of the -- you know, what does that look like, that alleyway, you know, how constrained is that, because looking at a plan view it's kind of hard to tell, but you can see in the middle there we have got the townhomes laid out, the buildings, and, then, there is actually 35 feet door to door in front of the -- from garage to garage. So, we have got the 25 foot roadway, with a five foot concrete apron out in front of -- of all those and that's consistent pretty much throughout, except for the two units at the end of the hammerhead turnaround. Next slide, please. Okay. So, here is -- this is an updated graphic here to hopefully clear up any questions regarding parking and so forth, but this is where we -- we -- we agreed with Joe and -- and, you know, what he had proposed was instead of having two designated parking stalls for each of the three-bedroom units, just have one and you can see that the red dots signify the three bedroom units and the associated designated parking stall across the drive and, then, all the yellow dots would be guest parking or just open -- open parking, essentially, right, for whomever and that gives us more guest parking stalls. It also in my mind gives you plenty of parking, because you have a parking stall for each bedroom and that leaves us -- so, that leaves us with 16 parking stalls as guests -- or flexible guest parking. Also, you know, just for clarification, we did want to keep the three parallel parking stalls there on the -- on the hammerhead turnaround, because they don't conflict with that turnaround in any way, shape, or form and why wouldn't you want three more parking stalls? So, we are proposing just to keep those in there. Here is an elevation of the units for reference. That shows -- that shows what they would look like from the alley with the garage facing the alley and that is -- that's all I have. I will stand for questions. Simison: Thank you. Council, questions for the applicant? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 44 of 55 Strader: A few questions. Thank you. Okay. Two-car garage. Two parking spaces. Are we talking about like truly enough space for two cars? Are you talking tandem -- like I hope not. Two regular sized cars can fit in these garages? I just want to make sure -- Breckon: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, no, these are two side by side parking -- or garages and -- you know. And that was another thing that came up during P&Z, you know, where do the --where do the rollaway trash cans go? Well, those go in the garage, too. Strader: Yeah. Breckon: It's supposed to be clean. Strader: Just a couple more quick questions. Thank you. Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Okay. Just want to double check. I'm assuming there is no parking on this little main road to the main entry, because I could see that being a big issue. Breckon: Correct. Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, the -- the -- where it says main entry to the private drive, that would additionally be signed as no parking. Strader: Got it. Okay. And then -- I actually think that -- that answers my questions for now. Thank you. I can tell you have put a lot of -- there is -- it's a tough shaped spot; right? I can tell you put a lot into this. Simison: Council, additional questions for the applicant? Dodson: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Yes, Joe. Dodson: I did just want to clarify on the parking a couple things. Originally when we had come through and thought about this site, it was going to be multi-family from my understanding. That's hence why we did the DA mod and even then at the time of the DA mod that we saw earlier this year, the applicant wasn't a hundred percent sold on doing single family or not. If they weren't planning this they would exceed the multi-family parking standard by quite a bit of spaces and it would -- they could do exactly the same building footprints. So, that's where the parking alternative compliance is pretty much only because the -- they are choosing to sell off the units and add a truly townhome product in this area of the city. So, that's where our staff is supporting the alternative compliance request, because it is going to be essentially live like a multi-family project, but be a single family product. So, that's why the parking wasn't that big of an issue for staff, because of those similarities between the multi-family and the detached single -- or I should say single family. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 45 of 55 Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: Hey, Jon, walk me through -- or at least provide some clarity with regard to these extra parking stalls across from these three bedroom units and where I need you to focus is how you are going to guarantee that these three bedroom or these extra parking stalls will be available to these homeowners -- or to the folks who will be living in these individual units. Breckon: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Bernt, the parking stalls that are designated for the unit would have signage. So, it's, you know, a sign that says this is a designated parking stall for one of the homeowners and if -- Bernt: So -- sorry, Jon. Associated with the individual unit that, you know, pertains to the parking stall? Like this is for this house. Breckon: Correct. Yes. And I don't know that we have talked through the details of what would be that -- on that sign specifically, but the intent certainly -- and what I plan on is that it would be a very specific sign. It would -- you know, would probably say if you -- you know, if you are not -- similar to what we see in other parking locations -- if you are not supposed to be parking there you are going to get towed -- Bernt: Right. Breckon: -- and that this unit is specifically for -- and give -- list the address, so that everybody knows -- Bernt: Okay. Breckon: -- who exactly that's for. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Follow up on that question. So, these units will be sold and privately owned; is that right? Breckon: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Perreault, yes, they -- they would be -- so, they are -- they are all individual lots and so a single -- similar to a single family home sold and -- but they are a townhome product, so they -- they are -- they are kind of like this -- shown on there on the plan, we have got four units touching each other wall to wall, so very compact. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 46 of 55 Perreault: So, unlike an apartment complex where you have a property management company that's kind of regulating some of these parking challenges, the individual owner now doesn't have any other entity to call or any recourse if somebody keeps parking in their spot. So, how will the towing work, since there is not going to be any sort of management company that's kind of overseeing that? I mean that doesn't leave the homeowner with much recourse if it's a repeat offender. I mean who is going to pay for the towing? Hopefully, the person who is poorly parked, but I mean, you know, I'm not -- I'm not trying to borrow trouble here, but that these are the kind of concerns we regularly hear. So, just curious. Breckon: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Perreault, I -- I can only speak to my experiences, you know, parking in big cities and where there is parking that's heavily regulated I -- and, you know, this phase will be part of the rest of the subdivision, you know, so I think this would be something that would be detailed out in the CC&Rs. I expect that we could make that happen, so that if there is a parking issue there is a -- there is someone under contract to do the towing and if someone has a problem they call the towing company and say, hey, somebody's in my parking spot, can you tow them. I don't -- I don't expect that to be -- I can't imagine that's a big issue,just something that needs to be clarified and included in the CC&Rs. Simison: Council, additional questions for the applicant? Bongiorno: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Yes, Joe. Bongiorno: This Joe. Simison: Oh. Bongiorno: Sorry. One more quick comment. I wanted to -- Mr. Mayor, I wanted to comment on Council Woman Strader's question. By city code private lanes are to be marked no parking fire lane. So, this whole section where there is not parking stalls will be signed no parking fire lane. So, we --we as a city can ticket against that sign, so that's another recourse also. So, if you have people that park in front of their garage and, then, just go into the house, we can --we can ticket against that. So, there -- there will be signs from the main entry all the way through to that hammerhead no parking fire lane. So, we -- we have that option as well. Simison: All right. Thank you very much. Breckon: Thank you. Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone signed up to provide testimony on this item? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, nobody that indicated they wished to speak. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 47 of 55 Simison: Okay. Is there anybody present, if you would like to come forward at this time, you will be recognized for three minutes. Just state your name and address and if you are online and want to provide testimony, please, use the raise your hand feature. McDermott: They both work? Simison: Yep. Either one. McDermott: 2015 East -- oh, sorry. Thank you. Todd McDermott. And my wife Mindy. 2015 East Phenomenal Street in Meridian and our property backs up to this development, so we will see the front doors of this development. So, anyway, I appreciate you giving me some time to speak and I will just say this is the fourth -- the fourth meeting we have been to for this development and I appreciate the -- the -- the rigor and the questions and the discovery that you guys put into, yeah, all this to make sure this is a great city to live in. I think -- we -- so, we have watched the developer make changes -- those changes were required what's best for the city and what the -- the Council here has recommended. So, we are very supportive of the project. I know parking was an issue. I have watched them change and adapt and add parking spaces. So, I guess my major concern as a homeowner is I don't want to see something else go back here. I know this is in-fill, it's tough -- it's a tough shape and it's -- it's tough to do these, but from what I have heard in -- in past meetings that these --these types of housing products are needed and so where it may not be perfect, it's -- in my view it's better than a -- a storage unit or something like that. So, we are in support of the -- of the project. Thank you. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Okay. You are good. Thank you. Anybody else like to provide testimony? Okay. Seeing nobody online or in the audience, would the applicant like to make any finals comments? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Mayor, could I ask the applicant one question, mostly for the CUP, just to make sure we can get it right and help planning. On these -- on these spaces that are going to be dedicated to the individual townhomes, are they going to be owned by the HOA or are they owned by the townhome? Breckon: Well, I -- I don't know, Mr. Nary. I think we are open to city's preference. Nary: And here is why I raised that. If-- if it's owned by the HOA and it's part of the CUP and that is -- basically it's like a common area maintenance that's going to be maintained by the HOA, enforced by the HOA and those kind of things, that's something the CUP can use an enforcement tool to say you need to be doing this, it's in your CUP. If it's private property we are not going to do anything with it, because now it belongs to that property owner, so they can -- they can pile up their storage out there or whatever. So, I mean I Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 48 of 55 guess that's the -- I -- I don't know how to make it clear. Yes, CC&Rs can say no storage there, I get that. Breckon: Well, based on -- based on the plat, the way it's laid out, the -- the parking stalls would be part of the common area. Nary: Okay. Yeah. I think that would be easier from the Planning side if they were to get complaints. Like it's my neighbor that keeps parking in the parking space, not -- not a stranger, not a visitor, it's my neighbor that keeps encroaching, there is a method to enforce that and that's why I asked, so thank you. I think that would be better. Breckon: Yes. We have talked about having that as part of the HOA and CC&Rs and -- Nary: Okay. Simison: Thank you. Dodson: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Yes, Joe. Dodson: Just quickly confirm that. Looking at the plat right here, yeah, the -- the parking spaces are part of the private street, so it's not private property. Simison: Council, discussion? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Joe, was there any unresolved language in the alternate compliance provisions of your staff report? Has that been worked out? Dodson: Councilman Borton, I did not modify -- hold on. I'm trying to think now. apologize. I believe I included the Commission recommendation, which was the added condition for the two-bedroom limit. So, if Council wants to strike that you can just say strike that condition. I don't remember the number off the top of my head, but I -- I can strike that and, then, that would be the only one. Regarding the alternative compliance, staff already approved that -- our version of it, which is one per bedroom, basically, and that's already in there. So, there is nothing outstanding. Borton: There is not a provision where there is disagreement between the applicant and staff? Dodson: Correct. There is not. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 49 of 55 Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I don't know if this is something the applicant will want to respond to, but we heard applications in the past where there is conversation about, you know -- usually in multi-family developments about using garages for storage, instead of using them for parking and there are not many storage unit facilities close to this. Maybe a couple near the freeway. Probably a few on Eagle Road. Overland. But that's -- if -- if there were storage units closer to this I maybe would be less concerned, but that's another added element to the -- how tight all of this is, is that there is not even -- you know, if -- if the HOA had folks that were using the guest parking, because they had personal items in their garage, there is not even anyplace really close for them to take them as an enforcement measure. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. I think what I -- at least what -- one thing that makes me comfortable with this one -- like this parking is super defined, so if you are a homeowner, you put yourself in that situation, you don't really have alternatives. I mean, you know, you are going to put yourself in a situation where you don't have parking. So, I -- I don't know, I'm -- I'm kind of sympathetic to it. I feel like it's in people's best interest to make sure their garage is clear, because they are going to know, like this is the exact parking you have. I -- think considering the dimensions of the site, I mean to staff's point we could have had a multi-family project here. Like this to me is so much better than anything else we could get here. I'm -- I'm pretty supportive of it. I think this is -- they beat this parking to death and we just have to have faith that the homeowners are going to use their garages. If they don't they are creating a huge problem for themselves. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: We have received all public, applicant comment? Simison: Yes. Borton: I move we close the public hearing on H-2022-0036. Bernt: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 50 of 55 MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Move that we approve Item 7, H-2022-0036, to include all staff comments and conditions, including the alternative compliance conditions as set forth in the staff report, September 6th, 2022. Bernt: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there discussion on the motion? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Does that include striking the Commission's condition for the limitation on bedrooms per unit? Borton: Mr. Mayor, it does. I believe staff was comfortable with that as well. Dodson: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Yes, Joe. Dodson: Sorry. I just wanted to clarify to Council Woman Perreault's point, are we going to add a plat condition or the CUP condition to add the towing piece into the CC&Rs or no? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: So, I hadn't contemplated that, but I see a head nod, so we -- some quick discussion on that particular point. What exactly would be added in? Simison: Are we allowed to dictate CC&Rs? Perreault: Mr. Mayor, are you asking me? Simison: I'm looking at Mr. Nary, asking that question. Nary: So, no, but we -- it is a conditional use permit, so if-- if one of the conditions to use this is that there be enforcement of those designated parking spaces for those designated Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 51 of 55 residents, then, they can work out with Planning what does that look like, because the HOA may decide some other form of enforcement or something else. I don't know. So, think we just want some level of enforcement as part of the conditional use permit. Simison: I just want to clarify that -- because that's a whole other world that I don't think we have gone in -- Nary: Right. Yeah. We were not -- we cannot -- yeah, we cannot create conditions for CC&Rs, but we can create a condition for the conditional use. Simison: Okay. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: The motion would include that principle. Simison: Second agree? Bernt: Yeah. Simison: Second agrees. Is there further discussion on the motion with the two second agreeings? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, absent; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, absent; Strader, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. ORDINANCES [Action Item] 8. Ordinance 22-1990: An Ordinance Adding Meridian City Code Section 9-2-2-10(E), Regarding Requiring Installation and Maintenance of Water Recycling Systems for Commercial Car Washes; Adopting a Savings Clause; and Providing an Effective Date Simison: That moves us on to Item 8, our Ordinances. First item up is Ordinance No. 22-1990. 1 would ask the Clerk to read this ordinance by title. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's an ordinance adding Meridian City Code Section 9- 2-2-10(E), regarding requiring installation and maintenance of water recycling systems for commercial car washes; adopting a savings clause; and providing an effective Date. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 52 of 55 Simison: Council, you have heard this ordinance read by title. Is there anybody that would like it read in its entirety? Seeing none, do I have a motion? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 22-1990. Simison: With suspension or no on this one? Nary: I would just note on the record that, yeah, with -- with the -- with the suspension of rules. We don't have to put it in the title, but it would be good for the record to be clear that that was the intent. Simison: Okay. Perreault: Mr. Mayor, I will repeat that. Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move that we approve Ordinance 22-1990 with the suspension -- suspension of rules. Strader: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8, Ordinance No. 22-1990, with suspension of rules. Is there any discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, absent; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the ordinance is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. 9. Ordinance 22-1991: An Ordinance Amending Meridian City Code Section 9-4-34, Regarding Point of Liability for Maintenance of Sewer Service Line; Repealing Conflicting Ordinances; and Providing an Effective Date Simison: Next item up is Item 9, Ordinance 22-1991. Ask the Clerk to read this ordinance by title. Johnson: Thank you, Mayor. It's an ordinance amending Meridian City Code Section 9- 4-34, regarding point of liability for maintenance of sewer service line; repealing Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 53 of 55 conflicting ordinances; and providing an effective date. Simison: Council, you have heard this ordinance ready by title. Is there anybody that would like it read in its entirety? Seeing none, do I have a motion? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move to approve Ordinance 22-1991 with the suspension of rules. Strader: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve Ordinance 22-1991 under suspension of rules. Is there any discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, absent; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, absent; Strader, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the ordinance is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. 10. Ordinance No. 22-1992: An Ordinance of the City of Meridian, Idaho Amending Ordinance No. 21-1945, the Appropriation Ordinance for the Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2021 and Ending September 30, 2022 (FY2022), Appropriating Monies That are to be Allocated by the City of Meridian, Idaho in the Sum of$(72,671,298); and Providing an Effective Date Simison: Item 10 was vacated. 11. Ordinance No. 22-1993: An Ordinance, Pursuant to Idaho Code §50- 1002 and §50-1003, Providing for a Title and Findings, Providing for the Adoption of a Budget and the Appropriation of $219,724,039 to Defray the Necessary Expenses and Liabilities of the City of Meridian, in Accordance with the Object and Purposes and in the Certain Amounts Herein Specified for the Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2022 and Ending on September 30, 2023; to Levy All Such Appropriate Taxes and Levies as Authorized by Law Upon Taxable Property; and to Collect All Authorized Revenue; to Provide for a Waiver of the 2nd and 3rd Readings Pursuant to Idaho Code §50-902; and Providing for an Effective Date and the Filing of a Certified Copy of This Ordinance with the Secretary of State Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 54 of 55 Simison: So we will move on to Item 11, which is Ordinance No. 22-1993. Ask the Clerk to read this ordinance by title. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ordinance pursuant Idaho -- Idaho Code Section 50 1002 and 50-1003 providing for a title and findings, providing for the adoption of a budget and the appropriation of$219,724,039 to defray the necessary expenses and liabilities of the City of Meridian, in accordance with the object and purposes and in the certain amounts herein specified for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2022, and ending on September 30, 2023; to levy all such appropriate taxes and levies as authorized by law upon taxable property; and to collect all authorized revenue; to provide for a waiver of the 2nd and 3rd readings pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-902; and providing for an effective date and the filing of a certified copy of this ordinance with the Secretary of State. Simison: Thank you. Council, you have heard this ordinance read by title. Is there anybody that would like it read in its entirety? Nary: Mr. Mayor, I don't want it read in its entirety, but I just want to make note for the record that the reason that the waivers in this particular ordinance is because it is the budget ordinance and it's required by statute, so -- Simison: Okay. With that do I have a motion? Perreault: Mr. Mayor, continuing with the 1990s it was a great decade. Ordinance No. 2 -- I move that we approve Ordinance No. 22-1993. Simison: Okay. I have a motion to approve Ordinance No. 22-1993. Is there a second? Strader: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, absent; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, absent; Strader, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the ordinance is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. FUTURE MEETING TOPICS Simison: Council, anything under Future Meeting Topics? Do I have a motion to adjourn? Borton: Move we adjourn. Meridian City Council September 6,2022 Page 55 of 55 Simison: Motion to adjourn. All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it. We are adjourned. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:50 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) 9 / 27 2022 MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK 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. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC FORUM SIGN - IN SHEET Date : September 6 , 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 L4 A. r Vin dcw le ffo- o 4 5 e Gg�,) c- 1 p ` "ems , ) E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Ordinance No. 22-1992: Approval of Proposed Fiscal Year 2022 Amended Budget C� fIEN .D L4,, MEMO TO CITY COUNCIL Request to Include Topic on the City Council Agenda From: Brad Purser, Finance Meeting Date: September, 6 2022 Presenter: Brad Purser Estimated Time: 5 Min Topic: Approval of Proposed FY2022 Budget Recommended Council Action: Seeking final approval of the Amended FY2022 Budget Background: Seeking approval of the amended FY2022 budget. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : September 6 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 1 PROJECT NAME : Ordinance No . 22 - 1992 : Approval of Proposed Fiscal Year 2022 Amended Budget 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 i 9 10 11 12 I 13 f 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 22-1992 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 21- 1945, THE APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2021 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2022 (FY2022),APPROPRIATING MONIES THAT ARE TO BE ALLOCATED BY THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO IN THE SUM OF $(72,671,298); AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY, STATE OF IDAHO: Section 1. That Ordinance No. 21-1945, the appropriation ordinance for the City of Meridian, Idaho, for the fiscal year commencing October 1, 2021 and ending September 30, 2022 be and the same is hereby amended as follows: Capital Improvement Fund - 55 FY2022 FY2022 FY2022 Original Budget Amendments Final Budget Revenues Total Revenue $ - $ - Expenditures Operating Administration $ - $ - Fire $ - $ - Police $ - $ - Parks $ - $ - TotalOperating $ - $ - $ - Capital Administration $ - $ - $ - Fire $ 7,322,334 $ 2,229,240 $ 9,551,574 Police $ - $ 2,320,775 $ 2,320,775 Parks $ - $ - $ - Total Capital $ 7,322,334 $ 4,550,015 $ 11,872,349 Carryforward - Operating Administration $ - Fire $ - Police $ - Parks $ - Carryforward - Operating $ - $ - $ - AMENDMENT TO BUDGET ORDINANCE NO.21-1945—FY2022 Budget-Page 1 of 6 Carryforward - Capital Administration $ - $ - Fire $ - $ - Police $ 2,661,520 $ 480,685 $ 3,142,205 Parks $ 24,077 $ 24,077 Carryforward -Capital $ 2,685,597 $ 480,685 $ 3,166,282 Total Carryforward $ 2,685,597 $ 480,685 $ 3,166,282 Total Expenditures $ 10,007,931 $ 5,030,700 $ 15,038,631 Transfers $ (196,412) $ - $ (196,412) Total Expenditures with Transfers $ 9,811,519 $ 5,030,700 $ 14,842,219 (Use)/Addition of Fund Balance $ (9,811,519) $ (14,842,219) Enterprise Fund - 60 - 65 FY2022 FY2022 FY2022 Original Budget Amendments Final Budget Revenues Water/Sewer Sales $ 28,034,077 $ 28,034,077 Other Sources $ 18,502,663 $ 18,502,663 Total Revenue $ 46,536,740 $ - $ 46,536,740 Expenditures Personnel Utility Billing $ 557,712 $ (1,647) $ 556,065 Public Works $ 4,852,683.45 $ 34,343 $ 4,887,026 Water $ 2,674,812 $ 21,107 $ 2,695,920 Wastewater $ 4,084,597 $ 26,083 $ 4,110,680 Total Personnel $ 12,169,805 $ 79,886 $ 12,249,691 Operating Utility Billing $ 754,440 $ (0) $ 754,440 Public Works $ 702,174 $ 357,382 $ 1,059,556 Water $ 3,902,271 $ (50,001) $ 3,852,271 Wastewater $ 4,238,515 $ (325,000) $ 3,913,515 Total Operating $ 9,597,400 $ (17,619) $ 9,579,782 Total Personnel and Operating $ 21,767,205 $ 62,267 $ 21,829,473 Capital Utility Billing $ - $ - Public Works $ - $ 17,618 $ 17,618 Water $ 5,674,000 $ 2,372,352 $ 8,046,352 Wastewater $ 13,575,000 $ 304,001 $ 13,879,001 Total Capital $ 19,249,000 $ 2,693,970 $ 21,942,970 AMENDMENT TO BUDGET ORDINANCE NO. 21-1945—FY2022 Budget-Page 2 of 6 Carryforward - Capital Utility Billing $ - $ - Public Works $ 17,619 $ - $ 17,619 Water $ 6,807,204 $ (1,456,515) $ 5,350,689 Wastewater $ 20,959,974 $ (2,372,683) $ 18,587,291 Total Carryforward - Capital $ 27,784,797 $ (3,829,198) $ 23,955,599 Total Carryforward $ 28,707,538 $ (4,331,491) $ 24,376,047 Total Expenditures $ 69,723,743 $ (1,575,253) $ 68,148,490 Transfers $ 3,326,340 $ - $ 3,326,340 Total Expenditures with Transfers $ 73,050,083 $ (1,575,253) $ 71,474,829 (Use)/Addition of Fund Balance $ (26,513,343) $ 1,575,253 $ (24,938,089) Governmental Funds (01 ,07,08,20,50) (01,07,08,20,50) (01,07,08,20,50) (01,07,08,20,50) FY2022 FY2022 FY2022 Original Budget Amendments Final Budget Revenues Property Taxes $ 42,424,938 $ - $ 42,424,938 Other Revenue $ 29,873,116 $ 3,449,364 $ 33,322,480 Total Revenue $ 72,298,054 $ 3,449,364 $ 75,747,418 Expenditures Personnel Administration $ 6,913,332 $ (139,285) $ 6,774,047 Fire $ 13,704,683 $ 216,656 $ 13,921,339 Police $ 22,230,167 $ 247,536 $ 22,477,703 Parks $ 4,135,351 $ 108,596 $ 4,243,947 Community Development $ 4,746,790 $ 28,806 $ 4,775,596 Total Personnel $ 51,730,323 $ 462,310 $ 52,192,633 Operating Administration $ 3,942,618 $ 892,902 $ 4,835,520 Fire $ 2,242,632 $ 284,637 $ 2,527,269 Police $ 3,584,034 $ 311,463 $ 3,895,497 Parks $ 2,879,033 $ 1,197,346 $ 4,076,379 Community Development $ 2,052,618 $ 82,088 $ 2,134,706 Total Operating $ 14,700,935 $ 2,768,437 $ 17,469,372 Total Personnel and Operating $ 66,431,258 $ 3,230,747 $ 69,662,005 Capital Administration $ 150,000 $ - $ 150,000 Fire $ 8,100,079 $ 1,533,405 $ 9,633,484 Police $ 5,399,300 $ (46,300) $ 5,353,000 Parks $ 18,222,255 $ 3,404,029 $ 21,626,284 Community Development $ - $ - $ - Total Capital $ 31,871,634 $ 4,891,134 $ 36,762,768 AMENDMENT TO BUDGET ORDINANCE NO. 21-1945—FY2022 Budget-Page 3 of 6 Carryforward - Personnel Administration $ - $ - $ - Fire $ - $ - $ - Police $ - $ - $ - Parks $ - $ - $ - Community Development $ - $ - $ - Total Carryforward - Personnel $ - $ - $ - Carryforward -Operating Administration $ 692,451 $ (76,827) $ 615,624 Fire $ - $ 19,000 $ 19,000 Police $ - $ 71,572 $ 71,572 Parks $ - $ 31,000 $ 31,000 Community Development $ - $ - $ - Total Carryforward - Operating $ 692,451 $ 44,746 $ 737,197 Carryforward -Capital Administration $ 362,194 $ (41,580) $ 320,614 Fire $ 2,585,093 $ (332,763) $ 2,252,330 Police $ 1,575,795 $ (1,083,429) $ 492,366 Parks $ 1,906,501 $ (396,833) $ 1,509,668 Community Development $ 42,367 $ (10,980) $ 31,387 Total Carryforward - Capital $ 6,471,950 $ (1,865,586) $ 4,606,364 Carryforward Administration $ 1,054,645 $ (118,406) $ 936,239 Fire $ 2,585,093 $ (313,763) $ 2,271,330 Police $ 1,575,795 $ (1,011,857) $ 563,938 Parks $ 1,906,501 $ (365,833) $ 1,540,668 Community Development $ 42,367 $ (10,980) $ 31,387 Total Carryforward $ 7,164,401 $ (1,820,840) $ 5,343,561 Total Expenditures $ 105,467,293 $ 6,301,041 $ 111,768,334 Transfers $ (3,129,926) $ - $ (3,129,926) Total Expenditures with Transfers $ 102,337,367 $ 6,301,041 $ 108,638,408 (Use)/Addition of Fund Balance $ (30,039,313) $ (2,851,676) $ (32,890,990) AMENDMENT TO BUDGET ORDINANCE NO. 21-1945—FY2022 Budget-Page 4 of 6 Total Budget - All Funds FY2022 FY2022 FY2022 Original Budget Amendments Final Budget Revenues Total Revenue $ 118,834,794 $ 3,449,364 $ 122,284,158 Expenditures Total Personnel and Operating $ 88,198,464 $ 3,293,014 $ 91,491,478 Total Capital $ 58,442,968 $ 12,135,120 $ 70,578,088 Total Carryforward $ 38,557,536 $ (5,671,647) $ 32,885,890 Total Expenditures $ 185,198,968 $ 9,756,487 $ 194,955,455 Transfers $ 2 $ - $ 2 Total Expenditures with Transfers $ 185,198,969 $ 9,756,487 $ 194,955,456 (Use)/Addition of Fund Balance $ (66,364,175) $ (6,307,123) $ (72,671,298) That the sum of$(72,671,298)be allocated for use of authorized activities. Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 6th day of September, 2022. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 61h day of September, 2022. APPROVED: Robert E. Simison, Mayor ATTEST: Chris Johnson, City Clerk STATE OF IDAHO ) AMENDMENT TO BUDGET ORDINANCE NO. 21-1945—FY2022 Budget-Page 5 of 6 ) ss. County of Ada ) On this 6th day of September,2022,before me,the undersigned,a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Robert E. Simison and Chris Johnson, known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively,of the CITY of Meridian,Idaho, and who executed the within instrument,and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. (SEAL) Notary Public My Commission Expires: CERTIFICATION OF SUMMARY: William L.M.Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that the summary below is true and complete and upon its publication will provide adequate notice to the public. William L. M. Nary, City Attorney SUMMARY OF CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 22 -1992 An Ordinance of the City of Meridian, Idaho amending Ordinance No. 21-1945, the Appropriation Ordinance for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2021 and ending September 30, 2022 (FY2022), appropriating monies that are to be allocated by the City of Meridian, Idaho in the sum of$(72,671,298);to provide for a waiver of the 2nd and 3rd readings pursuant to Idaho Code §50-902; and providing an effective date. AMENDMENT TO BUDGET ORDINANCE NO.21-1945—FY2022 Budget-Page 6 of 6 E IDIAN.;--- Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline Page 4 Changes to Agenda: th Item #2: Overland & Wells II (H-2022-0030) – Applicant requests continuance to Oct. 25in order to have adequate time to consider the comments from the Commission hearing & evaluate the project design as it relates to open space & traffic prior to the City Council hearing. Item #6: Torino Locust Grove Subdivision (H-2022-0038) – Request for continuance due to clerical error (the short plat application was inadvertently left off the agenda & Staff prefers the annexation & short plat applications to run concurrently). Item #3: Hill’s Century Farm Commercial (TECC-2022-0002) Application(s): Preliminary plat time extension Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 6.12 acres of land, zoned R-15 & C-N, generally located on the south side of E. Amity Rd., ¼ mile east of S. Eagle Rd. st History: The preliminary plat was approved in 2016. The 1 phase final plat was signed by the City Engineer & recorded in 2018. A 2- th year time extension was approved by the Director in 2020 and expired on Aug. 29, 2022; the time extension was requested prior to the expiration date as required. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-N Summary of Request: The Applicant requests a 1-year time extension on the preliminary plat in order to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the final plat for the 2nd phase of development, which consists of 4 building lots on 2.79 acres of land. The Applicant won’t be able to get the plat signed by the City Engineer within the required time frame due to delays pertaining to market conditions. The Applicant plans to complete the subdivision improvements for the next phase in the Fall of this year. Approval of the subject time extension will allow the Applicant to obtain the City Engineer’s signature on a final plat for the second phase of development and proceed with development of the property. If City Council does not approve the requested time extension, the preliminary plat will expire and a new preliminary plat application will be required for the remaining area that has not yet been subdivided. With all extensions, the Director may require the final plat to comply with the current provisions of this title. Staff is not recommending any additional conditions of approval for this extension. Written Testimony: David Palumbo – Request for Amity Rd. between Cloverdale & Eagle to be expanded prior to any further development occurring on Amity between Cloverland & Meridian Rds. Staff Recommendation: Approval (to expire on Aug. 29, 2023) Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number TECC-2022-0002, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 6, 2022: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number TECC-2022-0002, as presented during the hearing on September 6, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number TECC-2022-0002 to the hearing date of __________ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #4: Brundage Estates (TECC-2022-0001) Application(s): Preliminary plat time extension Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 136.63 acres of land, zoned R-4, generally located on the east side of S. Linder Rd., ¼ mile south of W. Victory Rd. History: The preliminary plat was approved in 2016 consisting of 366 buildable lots, 20 common lots & 1 other lot on 136.63 acres of land in the R-4 zoning district. A 2-yr. time extension was approved by the Director in 2018 and a subsequent 2-yr. time extension was th approved by Council in 2020, which expired on July 26 of this year – the subject time extension was requested prior to the expiration date, as required. The reason for the previous time extensions was due to incomplete sewer and water line extensions as well as upcoming improvements to Harris Street. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: LDR (64+/- acres) & MDR (73+/- acres) Summary of Request: The Applicant requests a third 2-year time extension on the preliminary plat in order to obtain the City Engineer's signature on a final plat. The reason for the subject request is that the Developer has been focusing on development of the adjacent Biltmore Estates & Graycliff Estates subdivisions and needs additional time to submit a final plat application for Brundage Estates. Construction plans are in the process of being completed for Phase I and the Applicant anticipates design completion of the first phase later this year. Sewer and water lines have been extended in Linder Road to serve this property and improvements to Harris St. with turn lanes on SH-69 are currently under construction. With all extensions, the City Council may require the preliminary plat to comply with current UDC provisions. Since the preliminary plat and previous time extensions were approved, the qualified open space & site amenity standards have been updated in the UDC to require a minimum of 12% qualified open space (up from 10%) and a minimum of 27 points (pts.) of site amenities (6 site amenities were previously required). A total of 14.99% (or 20.48 acres) qualified open space was provided with the preliminary plat consisting of an 8.24-acre City neighborhood park, 2 pocket parks consisting of 0.8 and 1.3 acres, a linear open space area where the William’s Pipeline is located containing a multi-use pathway, ½ the street buffer along S. Linder Rd., all of the street buffers along collector streets (Harris, Oakbriar and Smokey Lake), and parkways along internal streets within the development, which exceeds the current standards. Amenities approved with the preliminary plat consist of the following: a tot lot with a children’s play structure and seating area (4 pts.); multi-use pathways within the William’s pipeline easement and along the Calkins Lateral (0.8+/- miles = 6 pts.); open space commons, including a City park (450,410+/- s,f. = 23 pts.); a gazebo/shelter (3 pts.); and a basketball court with benches (4 pts.), which total 40 pts., which exceeds the current standards. Approval of the subject time extension will allow the Applicant to obtain the City Engineer’s signature on a final plat and proceed with development of the property. If City Council does not approve the requested time extension, the preliminary plat will expire and a new preliminary plat application will be required. Written Testimony: David Palumbo Staff Recommendation: Approval (to expire on July 26, 2024) Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number TECC-2022-0001, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 6, 2022: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number TECC-2022-0001, as presented during the hearing on September 6, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number TECC-2022-0001 to the hearing date of __________ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #5: Regency at River Valley Phase 3 (H-2022-0057) Application(s): Development Agreement Modification Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site is located at 3270 & 3280 E. River Valley St. & 2480 N. Eagle Rd., midway between Ustick & Fairview, north of E. River Valley St., in the C-G zoning district. History: An application for a modification to the existing DA for Bach Storage was submitted in 2021 to change the development plan from a self-service storage facility to a multi-family development. City Council denied the request due to the following reasons: they felt access with some of the contiguous properties to the north had not been adequately “flushed out”; and issues with traffic circulation and parking – they felt it wasn’t the right time for the City to approve the modification. Since that time, a new DA was approved for the abutting property to the north (Copper Canary) that removed the requirement for a cross-access easement to be provided to the subject property and instead required only an emergency access easement be provided if the subject property developed with residential uses as planned. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-R Summary of Request: Modification to the Development Agreement (Bach Storage) for 2480 & 3280 E. River Valley St. to change the development plan for the site from self-service storage to multi-family apartments and include an additional 0.65-acre of land at 3270 E. River Valley St. that's currently governed by the SGI DA, which is entitled to develop with a multi-tenant retail store or a restaurant with a drive-through to allow a multi-family development. The proposed modification would allow the Applicant to develop the site with apartments as a third phase of the existing multi-family development to the east (i.e. Regency at River Valley). The reason the Applicant hasn’t developed the property with a storage facility is that after completing the DA and design process, construction costs rose such that it wasn’t feasible for them to move forward with the project. A conceptual development plan & building elevations were submitted for a 5-story multi-family structure with parking on the ground floor and four (4) stories of apartments above containing 128 units. Rooftop amenities consisting of fire pits, hot tubs, a pavilion, multiple BBQ areas and lounge seating are proposed. Additionally, residents will have access to the existing amenities in Phases I and II, which include a large swimming pool area with a hot tub, BBQ areas, activity room, outdoor pavilions, game room, fitness center and common open space. Two (2) driveway accesses are proposed for interconnectivity with the first 2 phases of the multi-family development to the east. High density residential (i.e. apartments) uses are desired in the MU-R FLUM designation especially when located adjacent to SH- 55/Eagle Rd. and employment destination centers such as those along the Eagle Road corridor. The proposed HDR development (43.69 units/acre) will contribute to the mix of commercial (retail, restaurants, etc.), office and civic (Kleiner Park, Senior Center) uses in the area. Further, it will contribute to the variety of housing options in this area in close proximity to employment uses and Kleiner Park. For this reason, Staff is supportive of the proposed DA modification and has included recommended provisions for the new DA in the staff report. If the subject amendment is approved, a subsequent CUP application is required to be submitted and approved for the proposed multi- family development in the C-C & C-G zoning districts. Development is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 for multi-family developments. A detailed review will take place with the CUP application to determine consistency with the specific use standards and other UDC standards. Written Testimony: Shawn Freeman – against approval of the MDA to allow more multi-family residential projects in this area that will impact the infrastructure of Meridian. Staff Recommendation: Approval Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2022-0057, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 6, 2022: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2022-0057, as presented during the hearing on September 6, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2022-0057 to the hearing date of __________ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #7: Lavender Place Subdivision (H-2022-0036) Application(s): Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of approximately 3.79 acres of land, zoned R-40, located at 2160 E. Lake Hazel, approximately 1/4 mile east of S. Locust Grove on the north side of Lake Hazel. History: H-2020-0004 (Lavender Heights Sub., AZ, PP); H-2022-0017 (MDA) Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium-High Density Residential (MHDR) Summary of Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of four (4) single-family attached building lots and 26 single-family townhome lots on approximately 3.79 acres of land in the existing R-40 zoning district; Conditional Use Permit to construct 26 townhome lots within the R-40 zoning district; Private Street application for proposed single-family development. Application also includes three (3) Alternative Compliance requests—Common Drive standards, Private Street standards, Off-street parking standards. Lavender Place subdivision is approximately 3.8 acres and was annexed into the City in 2020 as part of Lavender Heights Subdivision. As part of this annexation, the subject site was approved with the R-40 zoning district. Applicant is proposing the project to be largely “alley” loaded with all but two of the proposed units fronting on green space to comply with the Private Street applicability standards; subsequently, multiple detached sidewalks are included for added pedestrian access through the site. With the proposed plat of 30 residential units and requested land use of alley-loaded single-family attached and townhome units, the Applicant is introducing a new housing type to the overall Lavender Heights development. In addition, the proposed placement and site design offer great pedestrian connectivity to the nearby Discovery Park (across the street) to the south and to the remaining open space and amenities within Lavender Heights. According to the submitted conceptual elevations, the Applicant is proposing to construct the homes within this project of similar style to those within the parent development, Lavender Heights. This furthers Staff’s belief that the proposed Lavender Place Subdivision complies with the comprehensive plan and previous approvals. Project complies with all UDC requirements except for those related to the Alternative Compliance requests. The Applicant is requesting Alternative Compliance (ALT) to the Private Street standard that prohibits a common drive taking access from the private street, to the off-street parking standards for the parking pad requirement for homes with 3 bedrooms, and to the common drive standards requiring no more than 3 homes on one side of a common drive. Staff/Director have approved these requests but has offered an alternative solution to the requested off-street parking ALT request. Per the submitted parking exhibit (see snip below), the Applicant originally proposed to alternatively comply with the off-street parking standards by providing 18 parking spaces that will be designated for each specific unit. Each of the proposed residential units is shown with a 2-car tuck under garage providing the required off-street parking for 2-bedroom homes and meets the requirement of a 2-car garage for 3-bedroom units. However, due to the odd-shape of the parcel that creates a constrained building area, the Applicant proposed private streets and an alley-loaded product that does not readily allow for the required 20’ by 20’ parking pad for the nine (9) 3 and 4-bedroom homes. The Applicant placed the parking spaces directly across the private street from each unit to minimize the distance homeowners would have to traverse to access their additional parking spaces. In addition to the 18 parking spaces designated for the residents, the Applicant showed 7 additional guest parking spaces. NOTE: Parking is prohibited on the private street as well as along Lake Hazel and Bloomerang, the collector street where the private street takes access from. Staff found the proposed alternative as one option to meet the intent of the off-street parking requirements when accounting for the required density of the existing Development Agreement, site constraints, and limited access for the site. However, upon further review, Staff is recommending a modification to the ALT request: Staff recommends one parking space is allocated for each 3 bedroom unit instead of two spaces. It is difficult to predict the number of cars each unit will produce so Staff finds it more prudent to offer additional spaces for the entire development and not just the units with more bedrooms. Staff’s recommendation would increase the number of guest spaces from seven (7) up to 16 spaces which should allow for more appropriate flexibility in their use for future residents and guests of this development. One of the outcomes of the Commission hearing, was a recommendation by the Commission to limit the number of bedrooms per unit to no more than 2-bedrooms, as a plat condition. The Applicant does not agree with this recommendation and is requesting to comply with Staff’s recommended ALT alternative. Staff’s other recommended site design revision was in regard to adding a micro-path lot into the development to further the north-south connection through the project. Per this recommendation, the Applicant modified the plat to show this new micro-path located between Lots 24 and 25, Block 11 (the two 4-plex buildings shown along Lake Hazel) and modified the sidewalk design around the plaza for better pedestrian connectivity for this project. Staff supports these changes. Staff also had concerns with the placement and design of the driveways for Lots 32 and 33 due to the design of the private street. Staff was concerned these sub-standard driveways would encourage residents to park in these areas and would prohibit safe vehicular movement on the private street near the entrance of the project. The Applicant revised the private street design to address this concern as well and Staff supports the proposed revision. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on August 4, 2022. At the public hearing, the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Jon Breckon, Applicant Representative; Taylor Merrill, Applicant. b. In opposition: None c. Commenting: Jon Breckon; Taylor Merrill; d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Joseph Dodson, Associate Planner f. Other Staff commenting on application: Bill Parsons, Planning Supervisor 2. Key issue(s) of public testimony: a. Applicant – desire for project to be approved as conditioned by Staff and for Commission to keep 3- bedroom units and parking alternative as proposed. 3. Key issue(s) of discussion by Commission: a. Parking Alternative and whether units should be limited to 2-bedroom throughout the entire site due to parking constraints of private street and adjacent public roads; b. Safe access to Discovery Park due to location being so close to park; c. Concept of trash service with proposed private street and design; 4. Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation: a. Remove parking in hammerhead turnaround; b. Limit all units to no more than 2-bedrooms to help with parking and increase guest parking; 5. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council: a. Applicant has not removed parking in hammerhead in an effort to keep 3 additional guest parking spaces; b. Applicant has revised parking exhibit per Staff’s revised Alternative Compliance approval but requests to strike Commission’s added condition regarding number of bedrooms per unit – Applicant has alternatively proposed to limit noted units to no more than 3-bedrooms and essentially provide 1 space per bedroom. Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: David Palumbo (Boise resident) – noted overarching concerns with Meridian development around Amity Road and South Meridian and notes a lack of planning foresight. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2022-0036, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 6, 2022: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2022-0036, as presented during the hearing on September 6, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2022-0036 to the hearing date of \[date\] for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) City Council Meeting September 6, 2022 Item #3: Hill’s Century Farm CommercialPreliminary Plat Time Extension Item #4: Brundage EstatesPreliminary Plat Time Extension Item #5: Regency at River Valley Phase 3 Development PlansExisting Conceptual Development Agreement Modification Proposed Conceptual Development Plan Proposed Conceptual Building Elevations Item #7: Lavender Place Sub. PP, CUP, PS PLANNED DEVELOPMENTZONING MAP Revised Preliminary Plat Revised Landscape Plan Conceptual Elevations Revised Color Plan Revised Parking Exhibit w IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Hill's Century Farm Commercial Subdivision No. 2 (TECC- 2022-0002) by Brighton Development, Inc., generally located on the south side of E. Amity Rd., 1/4 mile east of S. Eagle Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/TECC-2022-0002 A. Request: A One-Year Time Extension on the preliminary plat (H-2016-0092) for Hill's Century Farm Commercial Subdivision in order to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the second phase final plat. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : September 6 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 3 PROJECT NAME : Hill ' s Century Farm Commercial Subdivision No . 2 (TECG2022 - 0002 ) 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 STAFF REPORT C�I w IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING 9/6/2022 Legendi_LfW2o DATE: Project Lorca far TO: Mayor&City Council FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: TECC-2022-0002 Ll El Hill's Century Farm Commercial LOCATION: Generally located on the south side of E. Amity Rd., 1/4 mile east of S. Eagle Rd., in the NW 1/4 of Section 33,T.3N.,R.IE. lllf rrrrrrrri rrrrrrrm I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Request for a one-year time extension on the preliminary plat in order to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the final plat for the second phase of development. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 6.12 acres yet to be platted Existing/Proposed Zoning Neighborhood Business(C-N)&Medium High Density Residential(R-15) Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Neighborhood(MU-N) Existing Land Use(s) Agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial Neighborhood meeting date;#of 8/9/2022 attendees: History(previous approvals) AZ-15-004(DA Inst.#2015-061375);H-2016-0092(11 Addendum Inst.#2016-119080);H-2018-0127(MDA 2°d Addednum Inst.#2019-033207);TED-2020-0004 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Josh Beach,Brighton Development,Inc.—2929 W.Navigator Dr., Ste. 400,Meridian,ID 83642 Page 1 B. Owner: Robert Phillips,DWT Investments,LLC—2929 W.Navigator Dr., Ste. 400,Meridian,ID 83642 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING City Council Posting Date Notification published in newspaper 8/21/2022 Notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 8/18/2022 Applicant posted public hearing notice on site 8/26/2022 Nextdoor posting 8/18/2022 V. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS(UDC Per UDC 11-613-7C, "Upon written request and filing by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with subsections A and B of this section, the director may authorize a single extension of time to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat not to exceed two (2)years. Additional time extensions up to two (2)years as determined and approved by the City Council may be granted. With all extensions, the director or city council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of this title." VI. STAFF ANALYSIS The Applicant requests approval of a 1-year time extension on the preliminary plat in order to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the final plat for the second phase of development. The preliminary plat(H-2016-0092)consists of 20 building lots and 2 common lots on 19.73 acres of land in the C-N and R-15 zoning districts and was approved by City Council on October 11,2016. The final plat(H-2017-0051) for the first phase of development consisted of 10 building lots and one (1)common lot on 10.82 acres of land and was signed by the City Engineer on August 29,2018 and recorded on October 4,2018. A 2-year time extension(TED-2020-0004)on the preliminary plat was approved by the Director on August 28,2020 and expired on August 29, 2022;the time extension was requested prior to the expiration date, as required. The final plat(FP-2021-0055) for the second phase of development consists of four(4)building lots on 2.79 acres of land and won't be able to be signed by the City Engineer within the required time frame. There are four(4)remaining building lots on 6.12 acres of land for the last phase of development. The reason for the previous time extension and the subject time extension request is the final plat was delayed due to market conditions.No new conditions were placed on the application with the time extension. The Applicant plans to complete the subdivision improvements for the next phase in the Fall of this year. Approval of the subject time extension will allow the Applicant to obtain the City Engineer's signature on a final plat for the second and last phase of development and proceed with development of the property. If City Council does not approve the requested time extension,the preliminary plat Page 2 will expire and a new preliminary plat application will be required for the remaining area that has not yet been subdivided. With all extensions,the Director may require the final plat to comply with the current provisions of this title. Staff is not recommending any additional conditions of approval for this extension. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed time extension for a time period of 1-year as requested,to expire on August 29, 2023. Page 3 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Preliminary Plat(date: 7/14/2016) HILL'S CENTURY FARM COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT 5gUATEo 0 A PORTIOM1 OF THE M]i6 OF sE[Tlon 39. TOYRIEI/F%WRTH•PANGE 1 PAW,0M MERIVAN. _f1 C"OF MEMMIAH,AM ODUry ,IOWIO JULY 2016 __ ......,.b.«.....ti.........ti.n. �t i i �....'m"�.. ____ . I W1C�'�'f� ❑ f ��L ry ru HILL'5 CD"FffnFAFM COMMERCIAL SuR•Ila '``�Cr�n�A7J''�Y PPS.O� Page 4 B. Approved Final Plat for Phase II(FP-2021-0055) PLATOF BOON—PAGE HiLI'S CENTURY FARM COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION No.2 APORTZd OF THE WOMILAST 114 d 7ML NOURMSE Lei Of Sk nOk EL 1-1115 HIP 3 NCHO7 .RANGE L EAST,I O M MERIDIAN. i CITY W ME.NbM.ADA COUNTY,WAH O EI.Rr ,CfPIFA 14Tu11J M21 fYIrk 1'•iP r.4,tl+lwryY 4/rya oyr r•i I�Wlk! 1.AMITY AOL " '�'x'0 � m 79 71 Rlac rf Ror,Iac ,n.w!Mm bV��.9t d iE R.eiPS�,l: er.[•,-•..rmft AUT ]5 A-w i-E;RE w'L OF QlwU:s u'x4 9 33 ]l[Q S-RMPtN[I r0 NPRPKS 70A1- we,eR,.o(x1 nen£r 1 IfIWENC($ _ %LS"13� !+e 19' 1[F retalon x.mir�lo�EE �yy�11 NlS7P`ISM „ T 1, S1b•IF 9Do4.to I,Rr 9DSDRD[6 LCk O]WY.dfF. i * IP.i,' _ _ ``.� _f A M _Z -_ __f!6 W_T _.. •i aLpC Rr P/1{,'b.I I0 1•[Coo[v kp t�Pv oud Y� \ i, r �Ta $ � �.o���on�- i It1 !w Rv ruDESf1r[r'��rkiEi�Yw+�a,er.owr¢r�`inu.0 RF PIw'4 Aa PSxS--_ I[CLA6 P lG4 cauAY.aww IEGFtIP MCFA lLI�SRSV W.✓r WR➢ 10.0 WM W.ASIM 6 y I fw a 4CRNh �1 ,oAo 516-N[x NEYYr[FIH,�[lYT[f1P IYIYrl1 Iw I PP k�[L�MFI��&I�`� � MJ � H!�9aW irR[e•[�ananr H1k'S L�NE41tN FARM '� I wr,e'nT ,r.r' I a �.A�P NORM 51!lL11RISION ilPIYIER rm.m' � • \,ltuM1E'�,�'"an�c II ____ ___----___- r� WLL'SCENTl1RV FARM �V�RES' •RH Pv-IC CW—ID -� I (gYREEEIAI SIIBONILiON N CR•tl ICIL w I mIBk`n8 F.�R 1bIPr,la 44 wnVtl_'_...�...Pgbrt NP 7 • [aaCwYCD aC14.IiTP11Ii[qIp P 1ETI EU�1l.aiM•N 1ak••%m1i M 11�INW11 w I � u0r RYBFR I .Q uol®M o�E1R•vR �I - Q IL � �I iitnN 4.nC III 7 ` - Y �� 44MLE�C EdJR4►!IIa •cw,SgwFpp��IpPnn �� 4.� i -———-VRR16C,RL IyrtEa 46€WR rso 7 �l�•-______________1•_F_IM_E_ia W sa_t-_l E•__ _ HLLS€EH7RYfAM NaH N�ul1 ______ , t Y6 2 SNKAYe.LrYl�fPFYPa ER�6illr,r O\amti,lMr a�a�(iESr9P mAI,�E wVlr�E x wn E ri "r•nab up DEVELOPER BRIGHTON CORPORATION IIiSd' EIK rnW MPJEaYN uw' I�AN,b EI01ES : u E4aEc a[,er[fi uo xa SaPdrY b ML m11YM11 b}Yq A M1E 1WArFY fW,f[T,ii M ILUM riw r•-^ i ,rr arnm�P micnwl 4 a,^•waawi d•f w1trA1 ru.[,Ta�s u,1r m'aE laaw`n ne Tnk V 1w•.+.r ff A r.NtPo ,aY[1w 4RFkT wf^..aq:wwEa E«u.aH k1v:P C ixE ur �.Rare,�i•WS-"r EN[naso».'rw�eea..a.uae EI[w�a. 1E.yn Dkr,eo-rs E1 SYC u¢11err WPE1 n1c rs s�ca+!a �,r•,ac+1m a••�,�,q[�m,v[.,,.,,�w.�s...,.a..a�a a T �F:4URT��4V UHF cn OF WIP�1!w i�`rliL,Rt ir�i[r� f uT�se�NE HR:R�[SG�fG�M�1TCV nWW r�RP4,M�r KMry lII�L KKmCMM�r*.MRF�SI`![rP•Vi4,'S,RSUFp�wFM,s w�R M M�n K YrwpW 1 n14,'�w r4,I il•4 ECLA wEpl[o]f111P r4'k m11 u�pn�opl[p�m�[[�1� MGroY,R[w£4T'MOFR ffR[S fNLL RF�KT4:iY 6[rPG T,i r,[a "i,�e��yyr��e��mdTurS N Twt cFIN,M�rM M�CMY�ad ZPOSY�m n+EP1!!�M�FeRIXN PRGI,M 1�io1xr&10 111rwo T 9RRY WIEI�M T1F S�W4�Rr�,HCrmfl tl1ElSE wwRaw w�R�hrtrr':,a.e.M Wrr..-rww myI[d m,.aa m><nm ��-!u W i41•M,�ry]oo¢w[ .Ow ! hH•[nC[i4 w•➢[i0 Txr r,Aif�Esir:R<r<w•V[rs�WHe,t-0E'n,u i��n,,w ew sin.••e�[[VS oRUY�4 k w aE.MGM�+4r nllu-a.rsrar Mr:rr+uw,i!�*erw :r• xmrnna _ • r�N.iPKX'11[,cw.�,[[Tw IT-,W V ncgiWao�iM�yS..,��o[nR-,o r n ni.diln w!w+GAO.YhTif'.4£[ChIR•crc[wa. r 0[M•mx ocr.[xwlc voY[RF � ram S,TFS r[URS1A„AN mDlETok 14W1C R MLC Ee� wslW�itl•r]CLO-IGEf9 Of,M�lh aERYQS � �rNa��".�S�ti�r*IR np. x f%+,M1P'MJIFn1 5�•.�EE O,BE[pN,,IJrMKI ![9 :n[rti r�s n h4�/w+Ft.e[Grp py E 11 C I N E 1 i I M C Lwtl'4!M Oi y-AT RIF Wo0}YF RY,r 'o�T�r wpe�i i.a.nl�[I nl�n ap�•noI�n[aws[-n•awa,cri,r�i:�n[r. �F W�r-�+,'r5 we m,rf 4•TNr[5 N'F�P wYs RRt�F OFER[e0N fS MTr iNW P�[I 1M R 1[E[w osb[ai0.�R A�[i[i�n6M£�'M�N%��'Y.BRW,;k fCS�MIiaW��+� Ian [rE O�ElATtlk F,fif•tl,4kri.\EIE•1 P.l wT�kl}YRY W¢t r+n[r�s Nr �,�Ir •0y1I�0,ol:TON,RRIm'iC MdtlOYc R.,W.iL'rG!M[ll fP Yyr[[[ ap yp[ b �I "Ir[R[9•bbp_Rr M EW11[lib SIN��f��/nd.V�•.w S{.Mm N u6. 9�I Fn[fw rGfC.i,Ru'Y4SR.I a.iMHTAa•�+RLIr``�`REa'ARYi T[NR� r�[ARarf lEw IIL]oCxk P bRiNSv9tl rK F Pm M mono.m¢mmrt rc ��@ `! fAAi9lr�1,M i1F.w.wx HIRrGIy Rdr[MNr'cai 4 oY•llga s S6[L�r5 a Yr b[Ellr/.4LLRl5.a ia,lraii X.M.M,p aPlirt• Page 5 IX. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Applicant shall comply with all terms of the annexation, associated development agreement provisions and the preliminary plat approved for this property(AZ-15-004(DA Inst.#2015-061375); H-2016-0092(1st Addendum Inst.#2016-119080);H-2018-0127(MDA 2'Addendum Inst.#2019- 033207);TED-2020-0004). 2. The applicant shall obtain the City Engineer's signature on the final plat for Hill's Century Farm Commercial Subdivision No. 2 by August 29, 2023 in accord with UDC 11-6B-7 in order for the preliminary plat to remain valid; or, another time extension may be requested. Page 6 W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Brundage Estates Subdivision (TECC-2022-0001) by Engineering Solutions, LLP, generally located 1/4 mile south of W. Victory Rd. on the east side of S. Linder Rd. in the west half of Section 25, T.3N.,R.1W. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/TECC-2022-0001 A. Request: A Two-Year Time Extension on the preliminary plat (H-2021-0061) in order to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the first phase final plat for Brundage Estates Subdivision. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : September 6 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 4 PROJECT NAME : Brundage Estates Subdivision ( TECC - 20 M001 ) 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 STAFF REPORT C�I w IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING 9/6/2020 Legend DATE: TO: Mayor&City Council Project Lacfltan R1 R-� � FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner RI R RUT 208-884-5533 R- R T� SUBJECT: TECC-2022-0001 Brundage Estates R-40 LOCATION: East of S. Linder Rd.between W. R-S R-1 S Victory Rd. &W.Amity Rd., in the west RUT '/z of Section 25,T.3N.,R.1 W. R7 RUT R- ��� . RigA I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Request for a 2-year time extension on the preliminary plat in order to obtain the City Engineer's signature on a final plat. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 136.63 Existing/Proposed Zoning R-4 Future Land Use Designation Low Density Residential(LDR)64+/-acres&Medium Density Residential(MDR)73+/-acres Existing Land Use(s) Rural residential/agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family residential Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 366 buildable lots,20 common lots and 1 other lot Phasing Plan(#of phases) 11 Number of Residential Units(type 366 single-family detached of units) Density(gross&net) 2.68 units/acre(gross)/3.5 units/acre(net) Open Space(acres,total 20.48 acres(or 14.99%)consisting of an 8.24 acre City [%]/buffer/qualified) neighborhood park,2 pocket parks,a linear open space area where the William's Pipeline is located, 'h the street buffer along Linder Rd., street buffers along collector streets and parkways along internal streets. Amenities Tot lot with children's play structure and a park bench, a multi-use pathway within the William's pipeline easement and along the Calkins Lateral,micro-paths and a gazebo. Page 1 Description Details Page Physical Features(waterways, The Williams Northwest Gas Pipeline crosses this site& hazards,flood plain,hillside) lies within a 75' wide easement;the Calkins Lateral runs along the southwest corner of the site&the Sundall Lateral runs along the northeast corner of the site;another small irrigation ditch also crosses the site. Neighborhood meeting date: 7/11/22 History(previous approvals) AZ-13-014(Ord. 14-1594)Victory South; H-2016- 0001 (PP); A-2018-0231 (TED);TECC-2020-0001 A Development Agreement is required to be executed prior to submittal of the first final plat application; the specific provisions of the DA are included in the Findings for the preliminary plat. B. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend LEI a Legend ��Pro}eciLflcaTiar I/el1 I ,= J T lad r _ _ ', - 70!oi -' ig ��Fx7//`A Residential 1Gleawm uensity "sidekal . - s, MU-C III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Shari Stiles, Engineering Solutions— 1029 N. Rosario St., Ste. 100,Meridian, ID 83642 B. Owner: Centers Farm,LLC—PO Box 518,Meridian,ID 83680 C. Representative: Same as Applicant Page 2 IV. NOTICING City Council Posting Date Notification published in newspaper 8/21/2022 Notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 8/18/2022 Applicant posted public hearing notice on site 8/27/2022 Nextdoor posting 8/18/2022 V. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS UD Per UDC 11-6B-7C, "Upon written request and filing by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with subsections A and B of this section, the director may authorize a single extension of time to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat not to exceed two (2)years. Additional time extensions up to two (2)years as determined and approved by the city council may be granted. With all extensions, the director or city council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of this title." The preliminary plat for this project was approved by City Council on July 26, 2016 and was valid for 2 years. Prior to the expiration date, an administrative time extension(A-2018-0231)was requested and approved by the Director on July 16,2018,which granted an additional 2 year period of time until July 26, 2020 in order to obtain the City Engineer's signature on a final plat. The reason for the time extension was due to incomplete sewer and water line extensions as well as upcoming improvements to Harris Street.No new conditions were placed on the application with the time extension. Another 2-year time extension was approved by City Council on September 8,2020,which expired on July 26,2022; the subject time extension request was received prior to the expiration date. The reason for the request per the Applicant's narrative, is that the Developer has been focusing on development of the adjacent Biltmore Estates and Graycliff Estates and needs additional time to submit a final plat application for Brundage Estates. Construction plans are in the process of being completed for Phase I and the Applicant anticipates design completion of the first phase later this year. Sewer and water lines have been extended in Linder Road to serve this property and improvements to Harris St.with turn lanes on SH-69 are currently under construction. With all extensions,the City Council may require the preliminary plat to comply with current UDC provisions as set forth in UDC 11-6B-7C. Since the preliminary plat and previous time extensions were approved,the qualified open space& site amenity standards have been updated in the UDC to require a minimum of 12%qualified open space (up from 10%) and a minimum of 27 points (pts.) of site amenities (6 site amenities were previously required).See UDC 11-3G-3 for more information. A total of 14.99%(or 20.48 acres)qualified open space was provided with the preliminary plat consisting of an 8.24-acre City neighborhood park, 2 pocket parks consisting of 0.8 and 1.3 acres, a linear open space area where the William's Pipeline is located containing a multi-use pathway, 1/2 the street buffer along S. Linder Rd., all of the street buffers along collector streets(Harris, Oakbriar and Smokey Lake),and the parkways along internal streets within the development. Amenities approved with the preliminary plat consist of the following: a tot lot with a children's play structure and seating area(4 pts.); multi-use pathways within the William's pipeline easement and along the Calkins Lateral(0.8+/-miles=6 pts.); open space commons, including a City park Page 3 (450,410+/-s,f. =23 pts.); a gazebo/shelter(3 pts.); and a basketball court with benches (4 pts.), which total 40 pts.,which meet and exceed the updated standards. Approval of the subject time extension will allow the Applicant to obtain the City Engineer's signature on a final plat and proceed with development of the property. If City Council does not approve the requested time extension,the preliminary plat will expire and a new preliminary plat application will be required. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed time extension for a time period of 2 years as requested to expire on July 26,2024. The Applicant is still required to comply with all previous conditions of approval for this project. VII. EXHIBITS A. Preliminary Plat(date: 1/6/2016) WE= _ p k uFT•�i£r E^EiP II TI W'R NE1'E y�y{cl 6 'S iTs..�a..s'lfRlr-.S'euEr- -Em-u-¢civ 'EUI- L-1 -r' i. 4 ` Y«L rI ITIc'M Ir?ITo-F JIF'ITI iIn"' To u`T R i'wir[ss Y '%I_u In le 1 nil III nXIL EIc•LL LiT LI I�LIi`I`IT'li`Tl.�`LT�LLI E. {I'r..wm p'AR9:ra.E14R=1 d --77-77 :w rECE- - 16E v• , I + Sr'S' raj II I I�` _._._._ . .mac w! _- ICI - �r v �\ . � •.,1Y�lJ1„ .. r I'-- +, , arc �.,• Y ��.. C. � -�--�- VVV _ AF k dye' LW 'I e s.. h.e. s n � Y � � •--� mu:+'wnil P9 rS x✓ E i I w. • . ... +.a aim __ -_ __ � ,�--_.- - _— - � .\ _ ,,h 11�• PRE2 Page 4 E2 / \�; �xm eo o n z I esn a ZT I � m� +1R � w�°�� 10`, II _ r� s p I s �' z$ � � '- ��✓ 1— n � ` le _I - �e � � yI - �_ rz �®ems o , r i R , � I LDN� ` ,.,,s e�rzEr olXON waw,[o _ aaeEcc cauwssCN— uaxwcnLlH - �,__ Rusr I I — ICI w o, ,5oeoe 1 IV 1—CO LLECIOR S-tREEf SECTION(50 R.O.W.) E TYPICAL RESIDEMINL WI"'—SECTION(56 R.O.W.) a nore.st m¢r or,rve wawa rrorcs a vre wm e ' PRE Page 5 w IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Regency at River Valley Phase 3 (H-2022-0057) by Bach Homes, Located at 2480, 3270, 3280 E. River Valley St. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0057 A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to change the development plan( Bach Storage - Inst.#2020-062947 for 2480 and 3280 E. River Valley St.) for the site from self-service storage to multi-family apartments and include an additional 0.65 acre of land at 3270 E. River Valley St. that is currently governed by the Development Agreement (SGI-AZ-12-010, Inst. #113005608) PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : September 6 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 5 PROJECT NAME : Regency at River Valley Phase 3 ( H - 20 M057 ) 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 lec Coles 2 3 4 5 6 7 I 8 9 10 11 12 i 13 14 STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT f D A H 0 HEARING 9/6/2022 Legend �1___)ffLi DATE: fTO: Mayor&City Council FROAM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner ML18E 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2022-0057 Regency at River Valley Phase 3 � I LOCATION: 3270&3280 E. River Valley St. &2480 N. Eagle Rd., in the NW 1/4 of Section 4, Township 3N.,Range IE. I I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Modification to the Development Agreement(H-2019-0121,Bach Storage-Inst. #2020-062947) for 2480 &3280 E. River Valley St. to change the development plan for the site from self-service storage to multi-family apartments and include an additional 0.65-acre of land at 3270 E. River Valley St. that's currently governed by Development Agreement(SGI AZ-12-010, Inst. #113005608). II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Applicant: Brian Carlisle,Bach Homes— 11650 State St., Ste. 300,Draper,UT 84020 B. Owners: Bach Investments, LLC— 11650 South State Street, Ste. 300,Draper,UT 84020 Meridian Self Storage,LLC— 11650 South State Street, Ste. 300,Draper,UT 84020 C. Representative: Same as Applicant III. STAFF ANALYSIS History:An application for a modification to the Development Agreement(DA) was submitted in 2021 (H-2021-0059) that was essentially the same as the subject application. City Council denied the request due to the following reasons: they felt access with some of the contiguous properties to the north had not been adequately 'flushed out"; and issues with traffic and parking and associated traffic circulation—they felt it wasn't the right time for the City to approve the modification. Page 1 Since that time, a new DA was approved for the abutting property to the north (Copper Canary H- 2022-0009, Inst. #2022-048293) that removed the requirement for a cross-access easement to be provided to the subject property and instead required only an emergency access easement be provided if the subject property developed with residential uses as planned.Another driveway access was also added to the east near the southern boundary of the site, in addition to the one at the north boundary,for interconnectivity with the first phase of the development. The existing Development Agreements for the subject property requires the two(2)northern parcels to develop with a self-service storage facility(H-2019-0121,Bach Storage-Inst. #2020-062947)and the southern parcel to develop with a 10,150 square foot multi-tenant retail store (Option A) or a 2,879 square foot restaurant with a drive-through(Option B)(SGI AZ-12-010, Inst. #113005608). The proposed modification would allow the Applicant to develop the site with apartments as a third phase of the existing multi-family development to the east (i.e. Regency at River Valley). The reason the Applicant hasn't developed the property with a storage facility is that after completing the Development Agreement(DA) and design process, construction costs rose such that it wasn't feasible for them to move forward with the project. The proposed multi-family development consists of a 5-story structure with parking on the ground floor and four(4)stories of apartments above containing 128 units.Rooftop amenities consisting of fire pits, hot tubs, a pavilion, multiple BBQ areas and lounge seating are proposed. Additionally,residents will have access to the existing amenities in Phases I and II, which include a large swimming pool area with a hot tub, BBQ areas, activity room, outdoor pavilions, game room, fitness center and common open space. High density residential (i.e. apartments) uses are desired in the Mixed Use —Regional Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation especially when located adjacent to SH-55/Eagle Rd. and employment destination centers such as those along the Eagle Road corridor. The proposed high-density residential development(43.69 units/acre)will contribute to the mix of commercial(retail,restaurants,etc.),office and civic (Kleiner Park, Senior Center) uses in the area. Further, it will contribute to the variety of housing options in this area in close proximity to employment uses and Kleiner Park. For this reason, Staff is supportive of the proposed DA modification and has included recommended provisions for the new DA in Section VI. If the subject amendment is approved, a subsequent conditional use permit (CUP) application is required to be submitted and approved for the proposed multi-family development in the C-C and C-G zoning districts.Development is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 for multi- family developments. A detailed review will take place with the CUP application to determine consistency with the specific use standards and other UDC standards. IV. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the modification to the DA as proposed by the Applicant. Page 2 V. EXHIBITS A. Existing Approved Conceptual Development Plans(dated: 12/13/18) t 0 0 � I I P to MV . I I n,un al. m �I 1 I i a w eft �iiiiigll iuiiuiiuii � � - _ � — \ __ r Nl91 YAeEYBIiffI F /'RIIIIIIII III / -� ! 5 Op4on A-Single 81dg C'-D1 SGI Approved Option A or B I I I I r ra � 5;I I ' Retail Bldg: ! I I 7a r 72' : I I e 5.040 d.. _ a I 1 rrve n. �I ---------------------------------- - -- - - imp LA ����� �� IIIIIIIIIIIII ♦ _ { RM VALLEY STF&7 { Dnve-Thru Allemate °® xlwnaw r-a Page 3 Bach Storage Approved Conceptual Development Plan J _ L�5y9 SITE INFO- 1 / SI"L AkEA B3,41$$F 11.91 ACRESI — W NDRIH BUILCING:5=0 SF LARGEBUILDING-100,WO5F SOUTH BUILDING&2COSF PARKING REQUIRED: STORAGE FACILITY--90.13W SF-O STALLS rnur - - j •. / O.-ICESPACE-IOWSF-2STALLS j ! FARKING P ROVI DED.5STALL.S(l ADA) W, � a�Oi1.�Ncus�r PIC-YCCLE$TALL$REQURC-0'1 1&I am S - qmF ' BIGYGIE STALLS PROVIDED,1 V> I I 1 r L---J L i suk x --- I E Tn BulldingA BACH STORAGE - 2500 N Eagle Rd. Meridian, ID 1 Q1-2010 SCALE:1" Page 4 B. Proposed Conceptual Development Plan&Elevations _ EMERGENCY ONLY SITE INFO: FIRE DEPT_ACCESS SIZE AREA:03,415 SF(2S6 ACRES( — UNITS:25 STACKED: 52 1 111 1S STACK®: 64 PEDESTRIAN W TRAIL NEW CROSS ACCESS STUDIO: 12 ALONG EAGLE RD_ - AND PEDESTRIAN TOTAL 126(50/ACI CONNECTION , PARKING STALLS: 106 SURFACE s 1 124 PODIUM(41,000 SF(- 1-AC H — 230 rorALS •� (225 REQUIRED) STAL[5 REQUIRED( f 6 UND REDUCING WINDOWS I -� ALONG EAGLE ROAD WITH SOUND INSULATED WALLS AND FLOORS IN ALL UNITS. NEW LARGE HOT HIGH END FINISHES IN ALL '61 _ TUB,FIREPIT BBQ, UNITS, AND LOUNG AREAS W 2 ELEVATORS ACCESS ALL A��II' m O Eli ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR 1 w CORRIDOR UN€TS. o =g� EXTERIOR BALCONIES r PROVIDED ON ALL UNITS { NEW PAVIL I N, BBQ,FIRE PIT,TURF AMPLE COVERED PARKING GAME AREA WITH PODIUM GARAGE AT 1 ST LEVEL -�- -- NEW PEDEGTRIAN CONNECTION J IZ k W M �- >LU 71 Q� Q U z w LU n NEW CROSS ACCESS DC f JT j PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO RIVER VALLEY RD.AND JULIUS M.KLEINER PARK RIVER VALLEY PH. 3 - 2500 N Eagle Rd. Meridian, ID e SCALE:1"-30LO" Page 5 w 1 � y •s..� ��' �` 'ill �.. • r , Page 6 q� _ � �•Mom._ _ ' w���`yf .�� r.• �1�`.'��rl* �� -�� .•i�• i a�. • � �:.-max�- - '� C. Legal Description for Property Subject to New Development Agreement &am E N 0 1 N E E R I N G August 9,2021 Project No.21-159 Bach Investments, LLC Condtional Use Permit Legal Description Exhibit A A parcel of land being Lot 2, Block 1 of Rlvervalley Retail Subdivision(Book 105 of plats,pages 14591- 14593)and a portion of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 4,Township 3 North, Range 1 East,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County,Idaho and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a found brass cap markingthe West 1/4 cornerof said Section 4,which bears 500°36'00"W a distance of 2,611.39 feet from a found brass cap markingthe Northwest corner of said Section 4,thence following the westerly line of said Section 4,N00'36'00"E a distance of 180.44 feet; Thence leaving said westerly line,S89'24'00"E a distance of 70.00 feet to a found 1/2-inch rebar marking the Northwest corner of said Rivervalley Retail Subdivision,an the easterly right-of-way line of North Eagle Road and beingthe POINT OF BEGINNING. Thence following said easterly right-of-way line,N00'36'00"E a distance of 363.50 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar; Thence leaving said easterly right-of-way line,589"23'52"E a distance of 230.02 feet to a found aluminum cap on the westerly boundary line of Bach Subdivision (Book 113 of plats,pages 16608- 16611); Thence fallowing said westerly subdivision boundary line the following four(4)courses: 1. S00'33'50"W a distance of 217.06 feet to a found aluminum cap; 2. 500'36'08"W a distance of 145.00 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar on the northerly boundary line of Rivervalley Retail Subdivision; 3. S89°45'23"E a distance of49.86feet; 4, S00'36'08"W a distance of 180.00 feet to the northerly right-of-way line of East River Valley Street; Thence leaving said westerly subdivision boundary line and following said northerly right-of-way line, N89`45'23"W a distance of 129,75 feet to the westerly boundary line of said Lot 2; Thence leaving said northerly right-of-way line and following the westerly boundary line of said Lot 2 the followingthree(3)courses: 1. N00"14'37"E a distance of 51.69 feet; 2 N89°39'28"W a distance of 39.00 feet; 3. N00"08'13"E a distance of 128,24 feetto the northerly boundary line of said Rivervalley Retail Subdivision; 5725 North Discovery Way•Boise,Idaho 93713 •M&G39.6939• kmengllp.com Page 8 Thence leaving the westerly boundary fine of said Lot 2 and following said northerly subdivision boundary line,N89°45'23"W a distance of 109.88 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 2,570 acres,more or less,and is subject to all existing easements and/or rights- of-way of record. All subdivisions,deeds,records of surveys,and other instruments of record referenced herein are recorded documents of the county in which these described lands are situated in. Attached hereto is Exhibit B and by this reference is made a part hereof. pL LANo �y`' �tiC E N S� s� Z1P6 9 � 662 A n Page 9 32 33 TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH 5 TOWh- - �N Ti- LINE TABLE FOUND BRASS CAP, LINE BEARING DISTANCE NW CORNER: SECTION 4 L' SB9'24'00"E 70.00 JNPL4:IED L2 SU'35'08"W 145,00 I S89`23'52"L 230.02' L3 S89'45'23E 49.86 I L4 S938'08"W 180.00 LO L5 N89'45'23W 129.75 74' L6 ND'14'37.1E 51.69 L7 N89'39'28"W 39.00 0 ul o L8 NO'08'13"E 128.24 cti L9 399'45'23"W 109.88 w � 0 kL LANO LOT 1,B L6CK 1 y �C L N Sf SC1,� r� BACH SUBDIVISION 'v , p D i a 6662 Lri o o�I LnOF in- fi r K� C4POINT OF BEGINMNG (Ij L1 L3 do (TIE) L9 Lu LOT 2,BLOCK 1 of°p I RIVERVALLEY RETAIL SUBDIVdSION LOT 1,BLOCK 1 L7 LD 5 LOT3.BLOC4(1,BACH SUBDIVISION 4 L5 POiN7 OF COMMF-NCEMENT E. River Valley Street FOUND BRASS CAP, W 1 f4 CORNER. SECTION 4 him 0 50 100 200 Plan Scale E N G I N E E R I N G 3725 NORTH OISCOVERY WAY PFminiz i�9i 63¢6919 EXHIBIT B kmmgflp,cnm CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT- CITY OF MERIDIAN PATE' e19,12021 PROJECT: 2:-155 SHEET; LOT 2, BLOCK 1 RIVERVALLEY RETAIL SUBDIVISION AND A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE 1 OF 1 NW 1/4,SEC.4,T.8 N.,R. 1 E.,B.M.,CITY OF MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,ID Page 10 VI. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PROVISIONS 1. Development of the subject property shall no longer be subject to the terms of the Development Agreements for Bach Storage(H-2019-0121, Inst. #2020-062947)and SGI(AZ-12-010, Inst. #113005608). 2. Development of the subject property shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development plan shown in Section V.B. 3. Direct access to the site via N. Eagle Rd./SH-55 is prohibited per UDC 11-3H-4B.2. 4. An emergency access easement shall be granted to the property to the north(Parcel #S 110423 3 802).A copy of the recorded easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for this site. 5. A cross-access/ingress-egress easement shall be granted to the property to the east(Parcel #R0748300100) and south(Parcel#R7476320010) for access via E. River Valley Street. A copy of the recorded easements shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for this site. 5. A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway shall be constructed along N. Eagle Rd. and E.River Valley St. within a public use easement;pedestrian lighting and landscaping shall be installed along the pathway consistent with the Eagle Road Corridor Study per the standards listed in UDC 11-3H- 4C.3. 6. A public pedestrian easement for the multi-use pathway shall be submitted to the City, approved by City Council, and recorded prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy on this site as set forth in UDC 11-3H-4C.3. 7. Noise abatement shall be provided for residential uses adjoining State Highway 55/N. Eagle Rd. as set forth in UDC 11-3H-4D; or,alternative compliance may be requested if the Applicant has a substitute noise abatement proposal in accord with ITD standards and prepared by a qualified sound engineer as set forth in UDC 11-3H-4D.4. 8. Future development shall comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. 9. A property boundary adjustment application shall be submitted to combine the three(3)existing parcels into one(1)parcel. 10. A conditional use permit is required to be submitted and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission for the proposed multi-family development in the C-C and C-G zoning districts as set forth in UDC Table 11-2B-2. The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 Multi-Family Development. 11. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and administrative Design Review applications shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division after approval of the conditional use permit and prior to submittal of a building permit application(s). Page 11 W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Torino Locust Grove Subdivision (H-2022-0038) by Jeremy Rausch, Located at 870 S. Locust Grove Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0038 A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 1.03 acres of land from R-1 in Ada County to the R-8 zoning district. STAFF REPORT C:�*%- W IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 9/6/2022 Legend LL DATE: c 0 leiProject Lflca i�ar � TO: Mayor&City Council FROM: Alan Tiefenbach,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2022-0038 and SHP-2022-0008 � 1'-A Torino Locust Grove Subdivision LOCATION: 870 S. Locust Grove Rd. J I 00 I I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation of 1.03 acres of land with the R-8 zoning district,and short plat consisting of 4 residential building lots. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Pa e Acreage 1.03 Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residential(MDR) Existing Land Use(s) Vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Single Family Residential Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 4 Lots Phasing Plan(#of phases) One phase Physical Features(waterways, No significant physical features. , hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of March 17,2022 attendees: History(previous approvals) None Page 1 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Access(Arterial/Collectors/State S.Locust Grove provides the only access to this property. Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross This proposal includes a 30 ft.wide common driveway Access from S.Locust Grove to serve the four lots. Staff recommends an easement beyond the end of this driveway to the eastern property line. Existing Road Network S.Locust Grove Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ There is an existing 7 ft wide sidewalk along the property Buffers frontage.A 25 ft wide landscape buffer will be required as a condition of approval. Proposed Road Improvements None. Fire Service The common driveway shall be signed"No Parking Fire Lane".When required by the Fire Marshall,"No Parking Fire Lane"signs shall be used per appendix D of the 2018 IFC. Signs shall be installed per ACHD standards. The bottom of the sign(s)should be 7' above the road/sidewalk surface shall not be in the travel way. The sign(s)shall be installed about 6"— 1'behind the curbing or edge of pavement on a Tels ar post. Police Service No Issues Wastewater • Flow is committed • Due to proximity of sewer service to infiltration trench,sleeve both service two feet past each side of the infiltration trench. Water • Due to proximity of water service to infiltration trench, sleeve both service 10 feet past each side for the infiltration trench. Page 2 C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map LL Legend o LegendtMI s� IPralect Lcoatinn ( Project Locailor 1�=Fis�ae All-N ..+�.l►.R�_y�i J J # Civic ry i_ Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend 0 Legend o r f 0 Pro1ec- Lorca=or R-4M I Prefect Laca-fion O soak - P4 — Planned Parcels R- � R1 J J 1A{ VI{ I I - --- "Rol- �-L Page 3 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant/Representative/Owner(s): Jeremy Rausch— 1684 E Borzoi Ct,Meridian,ID 83642 IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Notification published in 7/19/2022 8/21/2022 newspaper Notification mailed to property owners within 500' 7/14/2022 8/18/2022 Applicant posted public hearing n 7/25/2022 8/14/2022 notice sign on site Nextdoor posting 7/15/2022 8/18/2022 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Annexation and Zoning The proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property and is within the Area of City Impact Boundary. To ensure the site develops as proposed by the applicant, staff is recommending a development agreement as part of the annexation approval. The submitted legal description and boundary exhibit to appear to encompass the area of annexation. However,the exhibit also includes a previous lot configuration of three lots. Prior to recordation of the annexation ordinance,the applicant shall submit a revised boundary exhibit which correctly matches the legal description. B. Future Land Use Map Designation(hgps://www.meridianeity.org/eompplan) This property is designated as Medium Density Residential on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM) contained in the Comprehensive Plan. This designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as a park, school, or land dedicated for public services. The annexation area is near existing public services and is adjacent to the city limits. The majority of the properties in this area east of S. Locust Grove Road and north of 1-84 are rural residential,although there is land to the south of the subject property is recommended for commercial uses. The proposed density of 3.7 du/acre is well within the density range designation of the Plan. The City may require a development agreement(DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. In order to ensure the site develops as proposed with this application, staff recommends a DA as a provision of annexation with the provisions included in Section VIIL.A. The DA is required to be signed by the property owner(s)/developer and returned to the City within 6 months of the Council granting the annexation for approval by City Council and subsequent recordation. C. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridianciiy.or /g compplan): The applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are cited below with Staff analysis in italics. Page 4 • Encourage infill development. (3.03.01E) Infill development is described as "development of vacant, skipped-over parcels of land in otherwise built-up areas."The subject property is within an area surrounded by City-zoned property; commercial property to the west(across S. Locust Grove Rd)and south (across I- 84), the Snorting Bull Subdivision (aka— Woodbridge) to the north (in the City), and rural residential in unincorporated Ada County to the east.Although the property is within a larger unincorporated area, these unincorporated properties are surrounded by the City limits. This would be considered an infill area. • "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs,preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D) The proposed medium density single-family detached homes will contribute to the variety of residential categories in the City; however, there is no variety in housing types proposed within the development or in the general vicinity. R-8 zoning and detached single-family homes in unincorporated Ada County are abundant in this immediate area. • Plan for connectivity between annexed parcels and county enclaves that may develop at a higher intensity. (3.03.04A) The property proposes to take access from S. Locust Grove, a principal arterial, via a common driveway within a 30 ft. wide easement. Per UDC 11-3A-3,for any property that takes direct access to an arterial and/or collector roadway, where access to a local street is available, the applicant shall reconfigure the site circulation plan to take access from such local street. Where access to a local street is not available, the property owner shall be required to grant cross-access/ingress-egress easements to adjoining properties. A new single-family residence has been built on the property to the north (820 S. Locust) and due to the position of the new structures there is not feasible access between it and the subject property. However, the house on the 0.92-acre property directly to the east(903 S. Tornio Ave) takes access directly from S. Torino Ave, a local road.As this property is within an unincorporated area characterized by houses constructed in the 1970s and is designated for medium density residential, annexation and redevelopment of this area could occur in the future. As a condition of approval,staff recommends the common drive extend to the eastern property line within a 30 ft. easement, so when the properties to the east are annexed into the city for redevelopment, access to the subject property can occur(via a private road) from S. Torino Ave and the S.Locust Grove access can be closed. • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval,and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F) City water and sewer service is available along S. Locust Grove Rd. and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Staff finds this development to be generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. D. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The property is presently vacant. Page 5 E. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed use would be single family residential. This is a permitted use in the R-8 zoning district. F. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): All proposed lots appear to meet UDC dimensional standards per the submitted preliminary plat. This includes property sizes,required street frontages, and road widths.Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design and improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3,including but not limited to streets,common driveways and block face. In addition, all subdivision developments are also required to comply with Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards(UDC 11-6C-3)regarding common driveways. A perpetual ingress/egress easement shall be filed with the Ada County Recorder,which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. Address signage should be provided at the public street for homes accessed via common driveways for emergency wayfinding purposes. G. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): As required,only one(1) single-family dwelling is proposed per property. H. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): As this subdivision is only for four lots,the applicant has not submitted building elevations. However, due to the proximity to S.Locust Grove and visibility of the lots,staff recommends a development agreement provision that requires building elevations visible from S.Locust Grove Rd to incorporate a variety of building materials and articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation(e.g.projections,recesses, step-backs,pop-outs),bays,banding,porches,balconies,material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement.Planning approval will be required at time of building permit. I. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): The subject lot presently takes access from S. Locust Grove Rd. As already mentioned in the Comprehensive Plan analysis above,per UDC 11-3A-3, for any property that takes direct access to an arterial and/or collector roadway,where access to a local street is available,the applicant shall reconfigure the site circulation plan to take access from such local street.Where access to a local street is not available,the property owner shall be required to grant cross-access/ingress-egress easements to adjoining properties.As the properties directly to the east(as well as numerous other properties)are within unincorporated Ada County and could annex and redevelop in the future, Staff is recommending the common driveway shown in the short plat be extended to the eastern property line in a 30 ft wide easement. If the property to the east develops, access to the subject property shall occur(via a private road)from S. Torino Ave and the S. Locust Grove access be closed or used for emergency access only. J. Parking(UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11- 3C-6 for single-family detached dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. Future development should comply with these standards. Page 6 K. Sidewalks/Parkways(UDC 11-3A-17): Sidewalk already exists along the S. Locust Grove Rd property frontage. L. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): The applicant will be required to install a 25' wide buffer along S. Locust Grove Rd. as is required for arterial streets. Per UDC 11-3B-7, all street landscape buffers shall be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer easement,maintained by the property owner,homeowner's association or business owners'association. This is not reflected as such on the plat. Staff has added this as a condition of approval prior to City Engineer signature. The landscape plan does not indicate whether there are any existing trees on the property that meet the preservation requirements of UDC 11-313-10. This should be reflected on the landscape plan prior to City Engineer signature. M. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing will be required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation and zoning with the requirement of a Development Agreement and the provisions noted in Section VII.A per the findings in Section IX of this staff report. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on August 4,2022.At the public hearing,the Commission voted to recommend approval of the subject AZ and SHP request. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing_ a. In favor: Jeremy Rausch b. In opposition: Stan and Elaine Sears,Patricia Christensen,Jeanette Tanner and Ryan and Glenna Newby c. Commenting. None d. Written testimony: See above in the opposition section. e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony a. None 3. key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. Extension of the common driveway to the eastern boundary. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. Commission modified DA provision b. 5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. None Page 7 VII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation and Zoning Legal Description and Exhibit AAINEXATION PROPERTY DESCRIPTION FOR JBI ELEMENTAL 870 S. Locust Grove A parcel ofIand lying in the NW1A SW114 of Section 17, Township 3 North,Range I East,Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho,said parcel being more particularly described as follows! Commencing at a Brass Cap marking the South West corner of said Section 17, from which a Brass Crap marking the West 1/4 corner bears N.00°30'32"E. 2659.49 feet; thence along the West line of said Section 17 N.00°30'32"E. 2359.49 feet to a point,said point being the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence continuing N.00"30'32"E. 150.00 feet to a point; Thence S.89°58'54"E. 300.00 feet to a 112 inch iroii pin; Thence S.00°30'32"W. 150.00 feet to a 112 inch iron pin; Thence N.89°58'54"W. 300.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 1.63 acres,more or less, and is subject to all existing easements and right-of;ways of record or implied. 16 15758 Page 8 8 C rwrr of ocowNw LNPLATTm See'Sa'S+'[ SnB-9E 31�E_YJY.W 2 �UL 83.47 94.09` 61,SC 3 4. RM T a a g n . a I 6' I'g ¢ �L9�509 96 pA1 4 I 54 Sr -F'� 1L� ~ C7 SA9-53' ;a'E V • B7 Sr � �e _y __—_ _____ � —._.5._._._-- B.l 11, 31.0if '# n 118i'S6 'JF'7f I _ — +, Sr 1 PfiVAIE Oi1NE1nkY S6']7rfI S__— k---� ,cars' I� 05' "E 0.7Y 8472' aL—+ ----..._----B4.08' __.----- ----------81.20•_--d 0Qb'J_ ITT®N W'w 549R 96200' — — — � 41p9� pp• I E= 1 B 1? cF — — ba mibmy Lmr NOTES SMI"LNE REFEOKC IS MACt lv AL tOLLOw Page 9 B. Short Plat(date: 5/20/2022) 2• I 10' IARICAnon EASEMENT I LOT 2 LOT 3 8775 ISF 8775 SF LOT F 'I LOT 4 17 ' 10124 SF -CCESS, DRAINAr,E. �Nd UT1UTY EASNENT tSEIAEl1T Y? Lw LH J SCAFE .• ❑C •� EXISTNG SIOEWALK - � I ' - ;h S LOCUST GROVE ROAD' sa+ - ,,, . LOCUST GROVE STA;24t34.,M - $I - SHARED DRIwEwAY STA; 'WQ.00 ' Page 10 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 1. A Development Agreement(DA)is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian and the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development plan included in Section VII,Unified Development Code standards, and the provisions contained herein. b. The 20-foot common driveway shown in the short plat shall be extended to the eastern property line in a 30 ft wide ease me common lot and receive Fire Marshall approval to exceed 150 feet in accord with UDC 11-6C-3D. When the property to the east annexes into the City and develops,access to the subject property shall occur from S. Torino Ave. and the existing S. Locust Grove Road access shall be closed or used for emergency access purposes only. c. Building elevations visible from S. Locust Grove Rd shall incorporate a variety of building materials and articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation(e.g. projections,recesses, step-backs,pop-outs),bays,banding,porches,balconies,material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. Planning approval will be required at time of building permit. 2. Prior to City Engineer signature,the short plat shall be revised to indicate the street landscape buffers on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer easement,maintained by a property owner, or homeowner's association per UDC 11-3B-7. 3. Prior to recordation of the annexation ordinance,the applicant shall submit a revised annexation boundary exhibit. 4. The applicant shall construct all proposed fencing and/or any fencing required by the UDC, consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7 and 11-3A-6B, as applicable. 5. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for all buildable lots. 6. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 1I- 3C-6 for single-family detached dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 7. An exhibit shall be submitted with the short plat application that depicts the setbacks, fencing, building envelope, and orientation of the lots and structures accessed via the common driveway; if a property abuts a common driveway but has the required minimum street frontage and is taking access via the public street,the driveway shall be depicted on the opposite side of the shared property line from the common driveway as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3D. 8. For the common driveway that serves a dual purpose(i.e. driveway/emergency access), signage shall be provided to notify residents that the common driveway is a no parking zone. Page 11 9. The applicant shall comply with all provisions of 11-3A-3 with regard to access to streets. 10. The development shall comply with standards and installation for landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-3B-5 and maintenance thereof as set forth in UDC 11-3B-13. 11. The Applicant shall comply with all conditions of ACHD. B. PUBLIC WORKS SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS: 1. Due to proximity of water service to the infiltration trench services must be sleeved for 10 feet past the trench on each side. 2. Due to proximity of sewer service to the infiltration trench services must be sleeved for 2 feet past the trench on each side. 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 11-313-14A. 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 Page 12 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 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 11-1-413. 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. Page 13 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 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. C. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=266244&dbid=0&redo=MeridianCit V&cr=1 D. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=266773&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X E. NMID https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=266212&dbid=0&redo=MeridianCit X Page 14 IX. FINDINGS A. ANNEXATION AND ZONING Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Commission finds annexation of the subject site with an R-8 zoning designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan MDR FLUM designation for this property if the Applicant complies with the provisions in Section VIII. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The Commission finds the lot sizes proposed combined with the housing types proposed will be consistent with the purpose statement of the residential districts in that a range of housing opportunities will be provided consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health,safety, and welfare; The Commission finds that the proposed zoning map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. The Commission and Council should consider any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this finding. 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 The proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city The Commission finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City if the property is developed in accord with the provisions in Section VII. B. SHORT PLAT 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 Medium Density Residential with a density range of 3-8 du/acre. 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; The Commission 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; Page 15 The Commission 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; The Commission 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 The Commission 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. The Commission is not aware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features associated with the development of this site. Page 16 W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Lavender Place Subdivision (H-2022-0036) by Breckon Land Design, Located at 2160 E. Lake Hazel Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0036 A. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of four (4) single-family attached building lots and 26 single-family townhome lots on approximately 3.79 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. B. Request: Conditional Use Permit to construct the requested 26 townhome lots within the R-40 zoning district. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : September 6 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 7 PROJECT NAME : Lavender Place Subdivision ( H - 2022 - 0036 ) 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 _ 'TOD D 4 K N 0 ' WVFM0011 2 3 4 5 6 7 ' 8 i 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT C:�*%_ W IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 9/6/2022 Legend DATE: 0 LetProjectLocation TO: Mayor&City Council ��� FROM: Joe Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 ®� SUBJECT: H-2022-0036 Lavender Place Subdivision , LOCATION: The site is located at 2160 E. Lake Hazel ' Road, approximately 1/4 mile east of S. Locust Grove on the north side of Lake ` Hazel, in the SE 1/4 of SW 1/4 of Section,' r' ; 32, Township 3N,Range IE. _a I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Preliminary Plat consisting of four(4) single-family attached building lots and 26 single-family townhome lots on approximately 3.79 acres of land in the existing R-40 zoning district; • Conditional Use Permit to construct 26 townhome lots within the R-40 zoning district; • Private Street application for proposed single-family development requiring administrative approval only,by Breckon Land Design on behalf of LH Development,LLC. NOTE: Application also includes three(3)Alternative Compliance requests, discussed in subsequent sections of the staff report. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 3.79 acres Future Land Use Designation Medium-High Density Residential 8-12 du/ac Existing Land Uses Vacant land Proposed Land Use(s) Attached Single-family Residential and Townhome Residential Lots #and e;bldg./common) 26 townhome lots and four 4 single-family attached lots. Number of Residential Units 30 residential units Density Gross—7.92 du/ac Open Space(acres,total Open Space was approved as part of previous Lavender /buffer/ ualified) Heights approvals. Amenity Seating area. Page 1 Description Details Page Physical Features(waterways, Farr Lateral is adjacent to the site along the entire north hazards,flood plain,hillside) boundary. Neighborhood meeting date;#of March 2,2022—No attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) H-2020-0004(Lavender Heights Sub.,AZ,PP);H-2022- 0017(MDA) B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no • Traffic Impact Study No es/no Access No direct access to Lake Hazel. (Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via a new private street connection to S.Bloomerang Hwy/Local)(Existing and Avenue,an existing collector street abutting the west property boundary. Proposed) Stub No stub streets are proposed or required as there are no existing stub streets. Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Access Existing Road Network- Lake Hazel and Bloomerang are existing public streets. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ Through previous approvals(H-2020-0004),arterial sidewalks and buffer Buffers have been constructed. Proposed Road New private street for access to all proposed lots. Improvements Fire Service • Distance to Fire 4.1 miles from Fire Station#4(Approximately 600 feet from approved fire Station station#7 on Lake Hazel;response time will fall within the 5-minute response time goal area). • Fire Response Time Project currently does not reside within the Meridian Fire 5-minute response time goal area. • Resource Reliability Fire Station#4 reliability is 77%(below the goal of 80%) • Risk Identification Risk Factor 2—Residential with hazards(open waterway—Farr Lateral) • Accessibility • Proposed project meets all required road widths,access,and turnaround dimensions. Police Service No Comment Wastewater • Distance to Sewer N/A Services • Sewer Shed Black Cat Trunkshed • Estimated Project See application Sewer ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance • Project Consistent Yes with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan Page 2 Description Details Page • Impacts/Concerns • Flow is committed • Sewer main and manhole must be centered along easement. • Utility easement not listed on Declaration St. 30' easement is required for sewer and water running in parallel. Water • Pressure Zone 5 • Estimated Project See application Water ERU's • Water Quality None Concerns • Project Consistent Yes with Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns • Per the Pre-application notes applicant to connect to Lake Hazel Road in addition to Bloomerang connection. Connect at the eastern side of the site. • Max length for one-inch lines feeding two lots is 80' from main to water meter vaults. Service to lot 19 and 20 appear longer than 80.Address if line is one-inch. • 20'easement needed up water meter vault and past as space allows. Page 3 �1111 �'�; jdlll _MEMO _ _ �I�G1111111 _ IM11�6�!�lillF 1`r� - • - e III � .._� ;Y�v�E. �I �� Yi :l l i I/��'•'_ mm�rin ' I �-�_ Ii1111Iv','i; ,�'` L-AKE HAZEL LAk� HAZEL - - --- == INS ul un � wit i • ���-�I - �� ■�Imo"111 r■\1 Il��q ���rt■ 11� 1 ��■_■■■:'_�� 1 1111111 ' ' -' •. - ��■■_■■:■_�� 1 1111111 - IAPLICJ _ �p-�i �111111 111111111111 _ —'�71'�"Tr: ��= - ,__ sue_■-: � `-,�- ___= 1`n sl r.. ir., illllllll n LAKE_HAZEL =- - L--Ake=ri�rlEL G71111 = IIIIII: � C71111:�� 11111� =Iiy�'�� � � p 1111 Illlli� _ �1111111 � -11111111111111" C � j C 1111111 1111111 ■ fit!���� '�- IIIII 11 - � 11 IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 7/5/2022 8/21/2022 Radius notification mailed to properties within 500 feet 6/30/2022 8/18/2022 Site Posting 7/22/2022 8/24/2022 Nextdoor posting 6/30/2022 8/18/2022 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https:llwww.meridianciu.or /e compplan) Medium-High Density Residential(MHDR)—This designation allows for a mix of dwelling types including townhouses, condominiums, and apartments. Residential gross densities should range from eight to twelve dwelling units per acre. These areas are relatively compact within the context of larger neighborhoods and are typically located around or near mixed use commercial or employment areas to provide convenient access to services and jobs for residents. Developments need to incorporate high quality architectural design and materials and thoughtful site design to ensure quality of place and should also incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and area pathways,attractive landscaping and a project identity. Lavender Place subdivision is approximately 3.8 acres and was annexed into the City in 2020 as part of Lavender Heights Subdivision.As part of this annexation, the subject site was approved with the R-40 zoning district and was anticipated for a future multi family development. Since these approvals, the Applicant has received a development agreement modification (H-2022- 0017) to change the presumed land use on the subject site from multi family to single-family attached and single-family townhome units. In addition, the subject site and its future use does not require a minimum amount of open space and amenities because it is part of the Lavender Heights development and will share the approved open space and amenity package with the rest of the residents. However, the Applicant is proposing a plaza area with seating to provide an amenity within this specific area of the project. Further, the Applicant is proposing the project to be largely "alley"loaded with all but two of the proposed units fronting on green space to comply with the Private Street applicability standards;subsequently, multiple detached sidewalks are included for added pedestrian access through the site. With the proposed plat of 30 residential units and requested land use of alley-loaded single- family attached and townhome units, the Applicant is proposing its densest product(almost 8 units per acre) along Lake Hazel and introducing a new housing type to the overall Lavender Heights development. Both of these factors help the proposed project further comply with the MHDR future land use designation and the comprehensive plan overall. In addition, the proposed placement and site design offer great pedestrian connectivity to the nearby Discovery Park (across the street) to the south and to the remaining open space and amenities within Lavender Heights. According to the submitted conceptual elevations, the Applicant is proposing to construct the homes within this project of similar style to those within the parent development, Lavender Heights. This furthers Staff's belief that the proposed Lavender Place Subdivision complies with the comprehensive plan and previous approvals. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridianciU.or /�compplan): The applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are cited below with Staff analysis in italics. Page 5 "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area; provide for diverse housing types throughout the City" (2.01.01G).As discussed above, the subject project is proposed with a housing type not seen within the parent development of Lavender Heights nor within nearby developments. Staff finds the addition of single family townhomes and single-family attached units add to the diversity of housing available in this area of the City. "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 the Lavender Heights development currently under construction to the north. The abutting public roadways are constructed to their full widths at this time (Lake Hazel is planned for widening in the future) with additional right-of-way dedicated with previous applications. This project does not currently lay within the Fire Department response time goal of 5-minutes but will once Fire Station 7 is constructed and staffed directly south of the property, anticipated in late Summer 2023. Further, the proposed project meets all Fire required turnarounds, road widths, and meets the maximum number of units allowed off of a singular access, 30 homes. West Ada School District has not made comments on this application but an additional 30 homes are expected to generate approximately 24 school aged children. Staff finds that the existing and planned development of the immediate area create conditions for levels of service to and for this proposed project that meet code requirements. "Preserve,protect,and provide open space for recreation, conservation, and aesthetics" (4.05.01F). The subject property is less than 5 acres in size so code does not require a minimum amount of open space. Furthermore, the subject property is already annexed into the City and is part of a larger development(Lavender Heights) that contains open space and amenities in excess of code requirements at the time of approval. The Applicant is proposing a relatively small area of open space in this project in the form of a plaza with benches for seating and includes other accessory landscape areas in the project for aesthetics and quality of life. Because the subject project will be part of the overall Lavender Heights HOA and is proposed with easy access to a multi-use pathway segment and open space directly to the north, Staff finds the subject site provides appropriate open space for the proposed project in the larger context of the development and the immediate area. "With new subdivision plats,require the design and construction of pathways connections, easy pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, safe routes to schools, and the incorporation of usable open space with quality amenities" (2.02.01A). This new subdivision is located between E. Lake Hazel Road, an arterial street, and the Farr Lateral that is proposed with a segment of multi-use pathway previously approved with the Lavender Heights development to the north. The previous approvals included approximately 7 acres of usable open space that interconnects with internal sidewalks and a large multi-use pathway segment throughout the development; the subject project continues this design element while introducing a new housing type to the area. In addition, the proposed development will continue to preserve opportunities for residents to get to Discovery Park;Discovery Park lies across E. Lake Hazel Road, directly south of this project. Staff is recommending slight modifications to the plat to accommodate a more direct path north- south through the site to allow for even easier, more direct access to the park. "Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity." (2.02.01D). The proposed project includes multiple detached sidewalks and micro paths throughout the site and fronts nearly half of the units towards a new segment of multi-use pathway offering ample pedestrian facilities that connect to the adjacent parent subdivision to the north, Lavender Heights, and to the arterial sidewalk along Lake Hazel. Staff finds the proposed site design and proposed pedestrian facilities will link the Page 6 project to existing and planned development in the area, specifically to Lavender Heights to the north and Discovery Park to the south. "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval,and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F). Urban services include services and uses beyond that of utilities and emergency response;gas stations, grocery stores,public parks, and other retail/office uses are essential for a good quality of life. The subject site is relatively far removed from commercial services at this time but the new Albertson's grocery store approximately I and a half miles to the northeast and planned commercial approximately % mile to the west will help fill the urban services gap currently existing in this area of the City. Furthermore, the City's soon-to-be largest public park is located directly south of the subject site, Discovery Park. Therefore, despite commercial services not currently being within walking distance of the subject site, Stafffinds the planned development in vicinity of the project site constitutes adequate urban services for this project. In addition, Lavender Place Subdivision is an extension of the already under construction Lavender Heights Subdivision to the north and is adjacent to multiple other developments in this area of the City. These facts further Staffs belief the subject site will be adequately served by public and urban services in the near-term future. Staff finds this development to be generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as discussed throughout the above sections and comprehensive plan policies. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are no existing structures on the subject site. However,a segment of the Farr Lateral lays within the subject site and runs along the entire north boundary. This waterway is proposed to remain open and was previously approved to do so. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed uses within this project are all residential—single-family attached(2 units connected)and single-family townhomes (3 or more attached units). The proposed single-family attached residential use is a permitted use within the existing R-40 zoning district but the proposed townhouse dwellings require Conditional Use Permit(CUP) approval within the R-40 zoning district,per UDC Table 11-2A-2. The Applicant has submitted a CUP with the preliminary plat application for this purpose. The submitted Lavender Place plat is proposed to be constructed in one(1)phase but is essentially phase 4 of the parent development,Lavender Heights Subdivision. Staff supports the residential uses proposed within the Lavender Place Subdivision because they help the project meet the minimum density requirements of the overall Lavender Heights project and will add two additional housing types to this project and to the immediate area. This is supported by our comprehensive plan as discussed above. Therefore, Staff recommends approval of the subject CUP request for townhomes within the existing R-40 zoning district. The required findings can be found in Section IX at the end of this report. E. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The submitted preliminary plat is proposed within existing R-40 zoning district area and requires compliance with the dimensional standards within UDC Table 11-2A-8. Specifically,the plat should depict compliance with the minimum lot size requirement of 1,000 square feet. Because home placement on the building lot is not yet known at the time of preliminary plat submittal, setbacks cannot generally be reviewed at this time. However,per the submitted plat,the Applicant is showing the building envelope on each lot including the proposed zero lot-lines for the attached units. In addition, all subdivision developments are also required to comply with Page 7 Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards(UDC 11-6C-3). The proposed preliminary plat and submitted plans appear to meet all UDC requirements of the R-40 zoning district including minimum building lot size and building setbacks based on the depicted building envelopes shown. Further, the submitted plat appears to meet all UDC standards outlined in UDC 11-6C-3 except for the Common Drive standards and the maximum length allowed for a dead-end street. The Applicant is requesting Alternative Compliance to the common drive standards—Staff analysis on this is in the below Access section (Section V.G). In addition, the Applicant requires Council approval for the proposed dead end street that exceeds 500 linear feet but is less than 750 feet(approximately 680 linear feet),per UDC 11-6C- 3B.4b. Per the allowances noted within this code section, Staff recommends approval of the proposed street length as there is no opportunity for connectivity to the north due to the Farr Lateral abutting the entire north boundary and because staff does not support an additional access to Lake Hazel to the south, an arterial street. F. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): The Applicant submitted conceptual building elevations for the proposed residential dwellings. Note that attached single-family and townhomes require Design Review approval before building permit submittal. Therefore, Staff will review each set of elevations for compliance with the single-family residential architectural standards. Staff recommends the Design Review application be submitted with the final plat application. The submitted elevations depict two-story homes with two-car garages for each unit. As discussed above, the proposed homes are "alley"loaded and therefore have the garage facades facing the internal private street and the pedestrian access for each home entrance faces green spaces throughout the site. The elevations depict varying color choices with lap siding as the main field material and varying accent materials including stone and architectural wood material(see snip below). ME AN G. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Access to Lavender Place is proposed via construction of a new private street(depicted as E. Declaration Street)that connects to S. Bloomerang Avenue(a collector street)at the west property boundary. The private street is proposed at a width of 25 feet measured to the back of the rolled curb,with no sidewalk. Private streets are governed by the standards outlined in UDC 11-3F-4 and the findings in UDC 11-3F-5. Further,vehicular access to each residential building lot is proposed from this private street and provides 5' of concrete beyond the edge of the private Page 8 street to delineate the driving surface from the building lots.NOTE: Two of the homes are depicted with driveways at least 20 feet in depth and width per code and two are shown with driveways less than 20 feet deep but deeper than 5 feet. More analysis on this is below. According to the submitted plat, the proposed private street complies with all UDC standards except for the common lot requirement and the prohibition that a common drive takes access from the private street.According to submitted plat, the Applicant has noted the private street is on a common lot(Lot 2, Block 11) but this common lot encompasses other common area as well. UDC 11-3F-4A requires the private street be on its on singular common lot. Therefore, the Applicant is required to revise the plat to add an additional common lot solely for the private street. The Applicant is requesting Alternative Compliance(ALT) to the Private Street standard that prohibits a common drive taking access from the private street, as allowed per UDC 11-5B-5B. In order to meet the City's desired density in this area and within the Lavender Heights overall development, the Applicant is proposing a common drive off of the private street to serve 4 building lots on its west side. Further, the Applicant is proposing 3 off-street parking spaces at the end of the common drive. Staff supports the inclusion of the common drive within this development to allow additional building lots that increase the overall gross density as envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan and to meet the minimum number of units required within the existing Development Agreement. Therefore, Staff supports the Applicant's Alternative Compliance request to the UDC 11-3F-4A.6 standard. See the required findings in Section IX below. However, Staff does have concerns with the placement and design of the driveways for Lots 32 and 33. Due to the design of the private street, both of these driveways are deeper than 5 feet (minimum garage alley setback) but are not 20 feet deep to accommodate an off-street parking space. Staff is concerned these sub-standard driveways will encourage residents to park in these areas and would prohibit safe vehicular movement on the private street near the entrance of the project. Staff does not have a specific revision but wants to point out this probable conflict so the Applicant can make revisions to the plat and design to mitigate this issue. With the submittal of the final plat,provide an exhibit either showing that the distance between the face of garage and the private street is 20'or 5'. Parking in front of a garage less than 20 feet deep is prohibited. In addition to the ALT needed for the common drive off of a private street, an additional ALT request is being made for an alternative to the common drive standards (UDC 11-6C-3D) to allow four(4) lots to take access from the same side of the common drive where code allows only three (3) lots. As shown on the submitted plat, the Applicant has proposed 4 lots to take access from the west side of the common drive and a 4 plex building directly east of the common drive that takes access from the private street. Stafffinds it is feasible to modify the layout of the plat to comply with the common drive standards but finds this would be more wasteful in the overall layout of the proposed plat and would likely reduce the density within the project. Due to its location and future land use designation of medium-high density residential, the City does not envision a reduction in density along this Lake Hazel corridor. So, Stafffinds the proposed site design is an efficient use of the subject area and offers an equal means for meeting the common drive standards. Further, Public Works does not have concerns with the common lot and conflicts with services, which is one of the main reasons for this provision in code. See the required findings in Section IX below. H. Parking(UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11- 3C-6 for single-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. The Applicant has submitted an Alternative Compliance request to these standards per their allowance in UDC 11- Page 9 5B-5. Per the submitted parking exhibit(see snip below), the Applicant is proposing to alternatively comply with the off-street parking standards by providing 18 parking spaces that will be designated for each specific unit. Each of the proposed residential units is shown with a 2-car tuck under garage providing the required off-street parking for 2-bedroom homes and meets the requirement of a 2-car garage for 3-bedroom units. However, due to the odd-shape of the parcel that creates a constrained building area, the Applicant proposed private streets and an alley- loaded product that does not readily allow for the required 20'by 20'parking pad for the nine (9) 3 and 4-bedroom homes. The Applicant placed the parking spaces directly across the private street from each unit to minimize the distance homeowners would have to traverse to access their additional parking spaces. In addition to the 18 parking spaces designated for the residents, the Applicant is also showing 7 additional guest parking spaces. NOTE:Parking is prohibited on the private street as well as along Lake Hazel and Bloomerang, the collector street where the private street takes access from. r r ENTPAN[E CA4MON LUT PA 440 gat NIOZS t . j. EP LW LQW18 a �UEBrf9] . V conuoN UWF rw r U�0'T ew1MER �o o ar � !a) PMIQNG RI PI.NIC TP9LEA Ca4l�T(al t LD C—.-LOr rW0 Nc-4s CpNNgWIQr •• T -- :f i mtnnvacuEeLsren -- [ ---- ----- -- -- ---- ----- Staff finds the proposed alternative as one option to meet the intent of the off-street parking requirements when accounting for the required density of the existing Development Agreement, site constraints, and limited access for the site. However, upon further review,Staff is recommending a modification to the ALT request:Staff recommends one parking space is allocated for each 3 or 4-bedroom unit instead of two spaces.It is difficult to predict the number of cars each unit will produce so Staff finds it more prudent to offer additional spaces for the entire development and not just the units with more bedrooms.Staffs recommendation would increase the number of guest spaces from seven (7) up to 16 spaces which should allow for more appropriate flexibility in their use for future residents and guests of this development. An additional option, should Commission or Council find the amount of off-street parking is not adequate overall, is to limit the number of units containing 3 or 4 bedrooms as a plat condition. Staffs Alternative Compliance findings for this request are below in Section LYat the end of this report. I. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17)&Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): 5-foot wide detached sidewalks are proposed throughout the development that provide the main Page 10 — pedestrian access for all of the building lots. In addition,the project includes the final 750 feet of multi-use pathway conceptually approved with the Lavender Heights development that runs along the north of the project and provides pedestrian access for half of the proposed units. As part of the previous approvals,there is an existing 5-foot wide pathway connection from this property to the north that crosses the Farr Lateral via a pedestrian bridge and provides interconnectivity between Lavender Heights phase one and the proposed Lavender Place subdivision. This 5-foot pathway connects to the multi-use pathway segment and leads into a 20' wide paved area near the north portion of the site that is required as access for the public sewer main(see blue marked area below). The proposed sidewalks and multi-use pathway meet UDC standards and comply with previous approvals of this site. �fY 6P _ 4 1 3 EN!} 3 - sa 1 I sr,M 3 END -- f f 5TA T 4 f �3} f Q O E + � 2 � s. .... .. - - �._--- 5 Because of the clear north-south connection from the subject site to the open space within phase I to the north over the pedestrian bridge and the sewer easement, Staff finds it applicable to help maintain this north-south movement. With the proposed design, two 4 plex buildings impede this natural pedestrian flow and no additional sidewalks are shown to help connect this noted area to the sidewalk along Lake Hazel. As depicted in red above, Staff is recommending a new 5-foot wide micro path is located between Lots 24 and 25, Block 11 (the two 4 plex buildings shown along Lake Hazel) and for the Applicant to add an additional sidewalk segment around the plaza to for better pedestrian connectivity—Staff is open to more than one design to accomplish the goal of increasing pedestrian connectivity in this area. The new common lot need only be 10 feet Page 11 wide to accommodate the 5-foot micro path and approximately 2.5 feet of landscaping on each side;Staff does not find it necessary to provide a tree along this new micro path lot for shade as its purpose is simply to be a cut-through between the two buildings where no other convenient north-south pedestrian access currently exists. This appears to be possible by shifting the eastern 4 plex 10 feet to the east and closer to the guest parking spaces (building would be approximately 8 feet from parking space instead of 18 feet). Staff will work with the Applicant to determine the best possible design for this recommendation. J. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): The required landscaping regulated by code within the proposed development is landscaping along the multi-use pathway segment(UDC 11-313-12). The required street buffers to Lake Hazel (arterial) and S. Bloomerang(collector)were constructed with phase 1 of the Lavender Heights Subdivision. The submitted landscape plans do not show landscaping along the pathway as this was shown on the previously approved plans for Lavender Heights. Because the subject plat contains this pathway within its property boundary,the Applicant should revise the landscape plans to depict the existing/proposed landscaping along the multi-use pathway to ensure code compliance. The Applicant is proposing a number of trees and landscape beds within the development to offer shade and additional aesthetics to the development. This includes shrubs and other vegetative ground cover within landscape beds along the perimeter of the building lots and trees around the proposed plaza area and adjacent to the proposed parking spaces. In accord with Staff's recommended revision to the plat to include an additional north-south micro path between Lots 24 and 25, Block 11, the Applicant should add some shrubs and vegetative ground cover adjacent to this new micro path. With the final plat application, the Applicant should make these revisions. K. Qualified Open Space and Amenities (UDC 11-3G): The subject plat is less than 5 acres(approximately 3.8 acres) so no minimum open space or amenities are technically required in order to comply with City Code. Despite not being required, the Applicant is proposing a plaza area along the southern property boundary that includes two benches and a picnic table to add an amenity within this project area. Furthermore, future residents of this plat will be part of the larger Lavender Heights Subdivision HOA currently under development to the north and will share in the approved open space and amenities of the larger project(approximately 7.7 acres of open space,multi-use pathway segment, and a swimming pool). In addition,the subject site is directly north of the City's Discovery Park that is currently constructing phase 2 of its planned development and will contain a total of approximately 70 acres of public park and amenity space. Staff finds the proposed and planned open space and amenities of the Lavender Place and Lavender Heights Subdivisions and the adjacent Discovery Park provide adequate open space and amenities for aesthetic and recreational opportunities. L. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-61 I1-3A-7): All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. 4-foot steel tube fencing is proposed as shown on the landscape plan and appears to meet UDC standards.No fencing is shown on the submitted landscape plans within the Farr Lateral easement area. M. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-6): The subject site contains a segment of the Farr Lateral, an irrigation lateral maintained by Boise Project Board of Control(BPBC). Through the previous Lavender Heights Subdivision approvals,the Applicant was allowed to keep this waterway open and was required to construct a Page 12 10-foot multi-use pathway along its length for a regional pathway connection through this area of the City. With the subject plat and proposed development,the waterway is still proposed to remain open and the multi-use pathway will be installed per the original approvals for this site. Any proposed fencing will have to comply with those standards outlined in UDC 11-3A-6 & 11- 3A-7. N. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-I5): The Applicant is required to provide a pressurized irrigation system for the development in accord with 11-3A-15. Land Development will review pressurized irrigation plans in more detail when specific plans are submitted with the future Final Plat application. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit per the Findings in Section IX of this staff report. The Director and Staff have approved the requested administrative applications associated with this project(Private Streets and Alternative Compliance requests). B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on August 4,2022.At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit requests. I. Summary of Commission public hearing a. In favor: Jon Breckon,Applicant Representative; Taylor Merrill,Applicant. b. In opposition: None C. Commenting: Jon Breckon; Taylor Merrill; d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Joseph Dodson,Associate Planner f Other Staff commenting on application: Bill Parsons,Planning Supervisor 2. Key issue(s) public testimony A. Applicant—desire for project to be approved as conditioned by Staff and for Commission to keep 3-bedroom units and parking alternative as proposed. 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. Parking Alternative and whether units should be limited to 2-bedroom throughout the entire site due to parking constraints of private street and adjacent public roads; b. Safe access to Discovery Park due to location being so close to park; c. Concept of trash service with proposed private street and design; 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. Remove parking in hammerhead turnaround; b. Limit all units to no more than 2-bedrooms to help with parking and increase Ruest parking; 5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s)for City Council: a. Applicant has not removed parking in hammerhead in an effort to keep 3 additional .guest parking,spaces; b. Applicant has revised parking exhibit per Staffs revised Alternative Compliance approval but requests to strike Commission's added condition regarding number of bedrooms per unit—Applicant has alternatively proposed to limit noted units to no more than 3-bedrooms and essentially provide 1 space per bedroom. Page 13 C. City Council: To be heard at future date. Page 14 VII. EXHIBITS A. Preliminary Plat Legal Description and Exhibit Map LAVENDER PLACE SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT - EXHIBIT LOCATED IN THESE 114 OF THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 32,73N., RAE., B.M. CITY OF MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY, IDAHO W 1/4 31 32 w E. PHENOMENAL ST. OLd — C 1 - 5119pNI51pN N�• � CD DER HEIG��S VgCErV z s?a0;'o so�E sr o z I I VS 61?8 E NO'09'52 W N 72.23' N 37g 33•08'� �� Q © rn CD— C L 3.79 ACRES a N909'52'W POINT OF Q 86.95' BEGINNING o N89'58'24"W 696.48' 1331.91'a o �589'58'24'E LAVENDER HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION NO. 1 31 32 S89'5701 E z r 78.00' _ _ S89'58'24"E 1331_96 _ _ — 32 6 5 W 1/16 E. LAKE HAZEL RD. s 1/45 S \oNpL LA NHS 0' 75' 150, 300, STER p� a. 118 X A05;Z-517-z k. 2 C�/yTf OF tiroN w NPR CURVE TABLE CURVE # LENGTH RADIUS DELTA BEARING CHORD Lan�i 0 ut on C1 21.65' 90.00' 6'31'41" N3'25'42"W 21.64' Land Surveying and Consulting C2 16.41' 144.00' 6'31'41" N3'25'42"W 16.40' 23t E.5TH sr.,STE.A MERIDIAN,ID 83642 {20ap 2M2040 (208)208-2557 fax Page 15 Leqal Description Lavender Place Subdivision — Preliminary Plat A parcel of land located in the SE '%of the SW%of Section 32, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at an Aluminum Cap monument marking the southwest corner of the SW'/4 of said Section 32, from which an Aluminum cap monument marking the northwest corner of said SW'%bears N 0'32'17"W a distance of 2700.11 feet; Thence S 89°57'01" E along the southerly boundary of said SW'/4 a distance of 1331.91 feet to a 5/8 inch iron pin monument marking the southwest corner of the SE%of said SW'/4; Thence N 0°09'52"W along the westerly boundary of said SE '/4 of the SW'/4 a distance of 75.00 feet to a point; Thence leaving said boundary S 89°58'24"E a distance of 78.00 feet to an angle point on the southeasterly boundary of Lavender Heights Subdivision No. 1, as shown in Book 122 of Plats on Pages 19137-19140, records of Ada County, Idaho being the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence along the boundary of said Lavender Heights Subdivision No. 1 the following courses and distances: Thence N 0°09'52"W a distance of 86.95 feet to a point of curvature; Thence a distance of 21.65 feet along the arc of a 190.00 foot radius curve left, said curve having a central angle of 6°31'41" and a long chord bearing N 3°25'42" W a distance of 21.64 feet to a point of tangency; Thence N 6°41'33"W a distance of 139.28 feet to a point of curvature; Thence a distance of 16.41 feet along the arc of a 144.00 foot radius curve right, said curve having a central angle of 6°31'41" and a long chord bearing N 3°25'42" W a distance of 16.40 feet to a point of tangency; Thence N 0°09'52"W a distance of 72.23 feet to a point; Thence S 70°56'08" E a distance of 107.09 feet to a point; Thence continuing along the boundary of said Lavender Heights Subdivision No. 1 and extending along the boundary of Lavender Heights Subdivision No. 2, as shown in Book 122 of Plats on Pages 19344-19346, records of Ada County, Idaho S 75°33'08" E a distance of 634.36 feet to an angle point on the westerly boundary of said Lavender Heights Subdivision No. 2; La-n—dSolu tAons Lavender Place Subdivision �i-d S1WVF19 I'd ConSUIV1g Preliminary Plat Job No.17-55 Page 1 of 2 Page 16 Thence continuing along the boundary of said Lavender Heights Subdivision No. 2 and extending along the boundary of said Lavender Heights Subdivision No. 1 S 0°01'36" W a distance of 142.55 feet to an angle point on the boundary of said Lavender Heights Subdivision No. 1; Thence along the boundary of said Lavender Heights Subdivision No. 1 N 89°58'24" W a distance of 696.48 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. This parcel contains 3.79 acres more or less. \ONPL LA NOS Clinton W. Hansen, PLS 55 T E Gp Land Solutions, PC F m May 25, 2022 a. 11118 05(25 �jG9TF 0 F TAN W. NP �.ain-dSolutlons Lavender Place Subdivision Preliminary Plat iana surveying ana consmnnq Job NO.17-55 Page 2 of 2 Page 17 B. Preliminary Plat(dated: 3/30/2022 8/19/2022) LAVENDER PLACE SUBDIVISION-2022 PRELIMINARY PLAT Q 4 r E-HEET N-ION v Kp,1T. Iv '71 - Iwj JI ------------ - �--=---------- ------ ------------------ ------------------ PRE Page 18 EXISTING PARK r 1 rr - wF GLAVEN DER HEIGHTS �__ �rJI _�I r PHASE DNS i rrl LAVENDER HEIGHTS C r _� Cr PHASLTWO p < MAIN 2 i 1 pp RR L w 3 4 o 32 __ -_-_. -_ 7 10 11 } I k I 33 �, fi I 27 8 17 30 12 --a.PL f -..-. 1 l - r AIy 18 l 25 23 24 �ZA/PiOJIC � MMEMEACCESS - HAMMERHEAN 211EXISTING LANDSCAPE BUFFER EXISTING LANDSCAPE 6VFFER --_- _�I w.«. LAKE HAZEL ROAD W FUTVRE FIRE STATION DISCOVERY PARK - � DISCOVERY PARK LAVENDER PLACE SUBDIVISIONin 2160 E.LAKE HAZEL ROAD pµ MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Page 19 C. Landscape Plans(date: Z11n�0/2022 8/22/2022) O g CA�UT LEGEND a HFOUIREMENTS a '� L2 2 i, Q ® b` `` -r�i't wterr�nwn __ 4 ,m on oa.arc. Cn¢N s >Q W T PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN ❑S d ,„,,,„,.,,„M,"•,.h.,,,,,.„,,,.;'„..... m J ro Q LANDSCAPE NOTES, LANDSCAPE PLAN NOTES TOPSOIL NOTES U=a Z J W-Q Q a} PLANT SGHLDULE Q ��.. r �....�. D u1 Z E t,..twM.�.�._.- - �..a.,•�. a� _V UMLU��J W �N s, IRRIGATION NOTES: -.= 1 .,a:;:,..a -».,,,.,.w...w :�,.ran ,,.,���,.b� g d- - t tea, TURF AREA PREPARATION NOTES: WEED ABATEMENT NOTES - Y, } r u. �..... r L1.0 Page 20 4 r _ ILD I .............. - % � _% - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - t Page 21 D. REVISED Parking Exhibit(NOT APPROVED): 1 ; 1 I 1 1 I � m C _ e Ef 00 I I ----- --- -- -- -- - = GlU[S+ �cKdno�C�10 1 LAVENDER PLACE PARKING EXHIBIT 2 oer�•90 vy Vri1 T S Page 22 E. Conceptual Building 1 _l. 0001,, Page 23 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. The preliminary plat included in Section VII.B, dated March 30, 2022, shall be revised as follows prior to the City Council hearing: a. Revise the plat to add a new common,micro-path lot between Lots 24&25,Block 11 and an additional sidewalk connection near the plaza area for added pedestrian connectivity through the project to the existing arterial sidewalk along E. Lake Hazel Road,per the analysis in Section V.I. b. Add an additional common lot solely for the proposed private street per UDC 11-3F- 4A and revise plat note#8 to reflect the new common lot. c. Revise the placement and design of the driveways for Lots 32 and 33,Block I I showing that the distance between the face of garage and the private street is 20' or 5' to help mitigate any conflicts of off-street parking and the proposed intersection of the common drive and private street,per the analysis in Section V.G. Parking in front of a garage less than 20 feet deep is prohibited. d. Revise the Alternative Compliance Parking Exhibit(Exhibit VILD)to depict one(1) open parking space per 3 or 4-bedroom unit instead of two (2) consistent with Staff s analysis in Section V.H. e. Revise the plat to remove the parking shown within the hammerhead turnaround at the terminus of the private street. 2. The landscape plan included in Section VII.C, dated March 30,2022, shall be revised as follows prior to the City Council hearing: a. Revise the landscape plan to match the plat revisions noted in VIII.AI above. b. Add shrubs and other vegetative ground cover adjacent to the recommended new micro-path between Lots 24&25,Block 11. 3. Future homes within this development shall contain no more than 2-bedrooms per residential unit. 4. City Council approved the submitted preliminary plat with a dead end street greater than 500 feet in length(approximately 680 feet),per provisions in UDC I I-6C-3B.4b. 5. Future development shall be consistent with the previous approvals of the subject site: H- 2020-0009(Lavender Heights Subdivision),DA Inst.#2020-106343; and H-2022-0017 (MDA). 6. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2A-8 for the R-40 zoning district. 7. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit except for those lots noted within the approved Alternative Compliance request and the attached parking exhibit(Exhibit VII.D) 8. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. 9. Provide a pressurized irrigation system consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 1I- 3A-15,UDC 11-313-6 and MCC 9-1-28. Page 24 10. Prior to the first Final Plat submittal,the Applicant shall obtain Administrative Design Review(DES) approval for the single-family attached and single-family townhomes in this development. 11. Prior to signature on a final plat,the applicant shall submit a public access easement for the multi-use pathway segment along the Farr Lateral to the Planning Division for approval by City Council and subsequent recordation. The easement shall be a minimum of 14' in width (10' pathway and 2' shoulder on each side). 12. Upon completion of the landscape installation, a written Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Division verifying all landscape improvements are in substantial compliance with the approved landscape plan as set forth in UDC 11-313-14. 13. 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 I 1-613-7. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 Flow is committed. 1.2 Sewer main and manhole must be centered along easement. 1.3 Utility easement not listed on Declaration St. 30'easement required for sewer and water running in parallel. 1.4 Per the Pre-application notes, applicant is required to connect to Lake Hazel Road in addition to Bloomerang connection. Connect at the eastern side of the site. 1.5 20'easement needed up to water meter vault and past,as space allows. 1.6 Due to E. Declaration St being private, streetlighting will be up to the developer. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code(MCC),the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility,or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2"x I V 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 Page 25 document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42- 1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.7 Any 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. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all Page 26 building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.21 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.22 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. FIRE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=265660&dbid=0&redo=MeridianC Lty D. BOISE PROJECT BOARD OF CONTROL(BPBC) https:llweblink.meridiancity.or zlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=266645&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty- E. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancitE.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=266650&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Ry IX. FINDINGS A. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Page 27 Commission finds that the proposed plat is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density, transportation, and pedestrian connectivity. (Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies in, Section V of this report for more information) 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Commission finds that public services will be provided to the subject property with development. (See Section VIII of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at their own cost, Commission finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 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 based upon comments from the public service providers(i.e.,Police,Fire,ACHD, etc). (See Section VII for more information) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and, Commission is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the platting of this property. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis and has offered their support of the proposed development with the proposed road layout in mind. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. B. Conditional Use Permit findings: The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Commission finds that the submitted site plan shows compliance with all dimensional and development regulations in the R-40 zoning district in which it resides except for those noted and required to be revised. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Commission finds the proposed use of single family townhome residential is in accord with the comprehensive plan designation of Medium-High Density Residential within the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of this title. 3. That the design,construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of Page 28 the same area. Commission finds the design, construction, and proposed operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and should not adversely change the essential character of the same area, if all conditions of approval are met. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Commission finds the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways,streets,schools,parks,police and fire protection,drainage structures,refuse disposal,water, and sewer. Commission finds the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services if all conditions of approval are met. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. All public facilities and services are readily available for the subject site so Commission finds that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community or create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise,smoke,fumes,glare or odors. Although traffic will slightly increase in the vicinity with the approval of any additional residential units, the proposed layout offers the best opportunity for safe circulation and provides opportunity for a new housing type within this area of the City. Therefore, Commission finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons,property, or the general welfare. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction,loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170,8-30- 2005,eff.9-15-2005) The Applicant is preserving the existing Farr Lateral along the north property boundary and no other such features are known; therefore, Commission finds the proposed use should not result in damage of any such features. C. Private Street Findings: In order to approve the application,the Director shall find the following: 1. The design of the private street meets the requirements of this Article; The design of the proposed private streets complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F- 4. See analysis in Section Vfor more information. 2. Granting approval of the private street would not cause damage hazard,or nuisance,or other detriment to persons,property, or uses in the vicinity; and Staff does not anticipate the proposed private street would cause any hazard, nuisance or other detriment to persons,property or uses in the vicinity if the street is designed as proposed and constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4B. Page 29 3. The use and location of the private street shall not conflict with the comprehensive plan and/or the regional transportation plan. The location of the private street does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and/or the regional transportation plan as it is proposed to connect to a collector street consistent with private street standards. With the constraints detailed and analyzed for this development, the Director finds that local street access has been provided via a private street. 4. The proposed residential development(if applicable)is a mew or gated development. Despite a literal mew not being proposed with the Lavender Place project, the proposed residential development depicts all 30 units to front on green space meeting the intent of this standard. If the conditions of approval are adhered to, the Director finds this development in compliance with this finding. D. Alternative Compliance findings (Common Drive standards UDC 11-6C-3D.1): The Director has approved your request for alternative compliance to Unified Development Code (UDC) 11-6C-3D.1 for the subject property,based on the required Findings listed in UDC 11-5B- 5E, as follows: 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements are not feasible; or The Director finds it is feasible to meet the UDC requirement referenced above but it is not the best use of the subject development area as discussed in Section V.G above. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and The Director finds the Applicant's proposed alternative means of complying with the intent of the UDC as proposed in the attached preliminary plat provides an equal means of meeting the requirement. 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 that the alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended use and/or character of surrounding residential properties nor the adjacent public roads. E. Alternative Compliance findings (Private Street standards UDC 11-3F-4A.6): The Director has approved your request for alternative compliance to Unified Development Code (UDC) 11-3F-4A.6 for the subject property,based on the required Findings listed in UDC 11-5B- 5E, as follows: 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements are not feasible; or The Director finds it is not feasible to meet the UDC requirement to not include a common drive off of a private street due to the existing requirements of the DA (minimum number of units and only single-family residential) as discussed above in Section V.G above. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and The Director finds the Applicant's proposed alternative means of complying with the intent of the UDC as proposed in the attached preliminary plat provides an equal means of meeting the requirement. Page 30 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 that the alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended use and/or character of surrounding residential properties nor the adjacent public roads. F. Alternative Compliance findings (Off-Street Parking standards UDC 11-3C-6A): The Director has approved your request for alternative compliance to Unified Development Code (UDC) 11-3C-6A for the subject property,based on the required Findings listed in UDC 11-5B- 5E, as follows: 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements are not feasible; or The Director finds it is feasible to meet the UDC requirement for the number of off-street parking spaces if the Applicant was limited to no more than 2-bedroom homes for all units taking access from the alley as noted. Staff is not recommending this but the Council may require it. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and Per the provisions outlined in code, the Director finds that Staffs revision to the Applicant's proposed alternative compliance request is an equal or superior means for meeting the off- street parking requirements as proposed on the preliminary plat and submitted parking exhibit(Exhibit HID above). 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 that the alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended use and/or character of surrounding residential properties if the proposed conditions of approval are maintained. Page 31 E IDIAN.;--- Applicant's Presentation Page 4 LAVENDER PLACE MERIDIAN, IDAHO PRIVATE STREET APPLICATIONSCONDITIONAL USE PERMITALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCEPRELIMINARY PLAT •acres)the South (70 Discovery Park to •Plaza/picnic area•pathway10’ regional •swimming poolpathway and space, regional acres of open and will share 7.7 Subdivision HOA Lavender Heights of the larger The project is part •30 total units•individually soldHomes built to be •acre)dwelling units per 12 -Residential (8high -Medium–FLUM designation •one unit per lot–townhome units family -Single •One Common Driveway off Private Street, Common Drive & Private Street:repairsmaintenance & assess fees for require HOA to CC&R’s will •HOAmaintained by Street owned and •vehicle laneemergency Provides clear •Maintains MEW•constraintsdue to site common drive on one side of Dwellings located •emergency accessFire Marshal, for and approved by Layout reviewed •desired densityproperty for City Allows full use of A A-SECTION A A Alternative Compliance Three Bedrooms (2) | 2 Garage Stalls, 2 Driveway SpacesThree Bedrooms (9) | 2 Garage Stalls, 1 Designated SpaceTwo Bedrooms (19) | 2 Garage StallsGuest Parking | 16 Spaces bedroom units-space provided for nine of the 3 within 50’ of the structure they serve. lot they are intended to serve, but Allow parking to be located off the Alternative Compliance Request: •be more than 300’ from the structure. intended to serve. Parking shall not shall be on the same lot that they are Parking spaces Code Requirement: •Parking:– •3 bedrooms).-varies per unit (2–Unit bedroom count •Faces pathways and open space to north of site.•facing façade.-Front-Attached Townhome •Two car garage parking, 5’ driveways. Street parking also provided.•Access from private street.•facing façade.-Rear-Attached Townhome E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance 22-1990: An Ordinance Adding Meridian City Code Section 9-2-2- 10(E), Regarding Requiring Installation and Maintenance of Water Recycling Systems for Commercial Car Washes; Adopting a Savings Clause; and Providing an Effective Date CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 22-1990 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER AN ORDINANCE ADDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 9-2-2-10(E), REGARDING REQUIRING INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF WATER RECYCLING SYSTEMS FOR COMMERCIAL CAR WASHES; ADOPTING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS,by installing water recycling systems, owners of car wash facilities will use less water, thereby saving money on assessments for water and wastewater connections, and experiencing lower monthly billing for water use; WHEREAS,by installing and maintaining water recycling systems, car wash facilities will reduce water use, thereby conserving domestic water for other uses; WHEREAS,by recycling water for reuse, car wash facilities will reduce the volume of wastewater entering the City of Meridian Wastewater Resource Recovery Facility, thereby reducing demand on the WRRF and freeing capacity; WHEREAS,water recycling systems in car washes reduce impacts on the environment by using less water and producing less waste; and WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Meridian finds this ordinance to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare; NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO: Section 1. That Meridian City Code section 9-2-2-10 shall be amended by the addition of subsection (E), to read as follows: E. All new commercial car wash facilities shall install and maintain a water recycling system. The applicant shall provide plans and other information as deemed necessary the City, to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer or their designee. Section 2. That all City of Meridian ordinances, or resolutions, or parts thereof,which are in conflict herewith, are hereby repealed. Section 3. That this ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 6th day of September, 2022. CARWASH WATER RECYCLING SYSTEMS ORDINANCE PAGE 1 APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 6th day of September, 2022. APPROVED: ATTEST: Robert E. Simison, Mayor Chris Johnson, City Clerk CARWASH WATER RECYCLING SYSTEMS ORDINANCE PAGE 2 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance 22-1991: An Ordinance Amending Meridian City Code Section 9-4- 34, Regarding Point of Liability for Maintenance of Sewer Service Line; Repealing Conflicting Ordinances; and Providing an Effective Date CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 22-1991 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 9-4-34, REGARDING POINT OF LIABILITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF SEWER SERVICE LINE; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS,the City is authorized by Idaho Code section 50-332 to operate and maintain a domestic sewer system, and the City does exercise such authority, including by the adoption and enforcement of Title 9, Chapter 4, Meridian City Code; WHEREAS,the City is responsible for maintenance and repair of sewer infrastructure within the public right-of-way, and the private sewer system user is responsible for maintaining sewer infrastructure from the public right-of-way to the building connected to the City sewer system; WHEREAS, it is necessary to clarify this point of liability as it is described in Meridian City Code; WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Meridian finds the following ordinance to serve the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare; NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO: Section 1. Meridian City Code section 9-4-34 shall be amended to read as follows: 9-4-34: POINT OF LIABILITY FOR MAINTENANCE: A. User Responsibility: All users shall have the responsibility of, and be liable for, and shall pay for, all costs and expenses of maintaining their own sewer lines extending from their property improvement(i.e., house or building)until such sewer lines pass the vertical plane of the public right-of-way. This maintenance liability of the user includes ensuring that the entire sewer service line to the public right-of-way-is clear and free from obstructions. The city shall be responsible for the structural repair of the portion of the sewer service line located in the public right of way. If a sewer easement specifies maintenance liability other than as set forth in this provision, the provisions of the sewer easement shall prevail. Section 2. That all City of Meridian ordinances, or resolutions, or parts thereof, which are in conflict herewith, are hereby repealed. Section 3. That this ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. ORDINANCE:POINT OF LIABILITY FOR SEWER MAINTENANCE PAGE I PASSED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 61h day of September, 2022. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 61h day of September, 2022. APPROVED: ATTEST: Robert E. Simison, Mayor Chris Johnson, City Clerk ORDINANCE:POINT OF LIABILITY FOR SEWER MAINTENANCE PAGE 2 w IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 22-1992: An Ordinance of the City of Meridian, Idaho Amending Ordinance No. 21-1945, the Appropriation Ordinance for the Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2021 and Ending September 30, 2022 (FY2022), Appropriating Monies That are to be Allocated by the City of Meridian, Idaho in the Sum of$(72,671,298); and Providing an Effective Date CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 22-1992 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 21- 1945, THE APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2021 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2022 (FY2022),APPROPRIATING MONIES THAT ARE TO BE ALLOCATED BY THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO IN THE SUM OF $(72,671,298); AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY, STATE OF IDAHO: Section 1. That Ordinance No. 21-1945, the appropriation ordinance for the City of Meridian, Idaho, for the fiscal year commencing October 1, 2021 and ending September 30, 2022 be and the same is hereby amended as follows: Capital Improvement Fund - 55 FY2022 FY2022 FY2022 Original Budget Amendments Final Budget Revenues Total Revenue $ - $ - Expenditures Operating Administration $ - $ - Fire $ - $ - Police $ - $ - Parks $ - $ - TotalOperating $ - $ - $ - Capital Administration $ - $ - $ - Fire $ 7,322,334 $ 2,229,240 $ 9,551,574 Police $ - $ 2,320,775 $ 2,320,775 Parks $ - $ - $ - Total Capital $ 7,322,334 $ 4,550,015 $ 11,872,349 Carryforward - Operating Administration $ - Fire $ - Police $ - Parks $ - Carryforward - Operating $ - $ - $ - AMENDMENT TO BUDGET ORDINANCE NO.21-1945—FY2022 Budget-Page 1 of 6 Carryforward - Capital Administration $ - $ - Fire $ - $ - Police $ 2,661,520 $ 480,685 $ 3,142,205 Parks $ 24,077 $ 24,077 Carryforward -Capital $ 2,685,597 $ 480,685 $ 3,166,282 Total Carryforward $ 2,685,597 $ 480,685 $ 3,166,282 Total Expenditures $ 10,007,931 $ 5,030,700 $ 15,038,631 Transfers $ (196,412) $ - $ (196,412) Total Expenditures with Transfers $ 9,811,519 $ 5,030,700 $ 14,842,219 (Use)/Addition of Fund Balance $ (9,811,519) $ (14,842,219) Enterprise Fund - 60 - 65 FY2022 FY2022 FY2022 Original Budget Amendments Final Budget Revenues Water/Sewer Sales $ 28,034,077 $ 28,034,077 Other Sources $ 18,502,663 $ 18,502,663 Total Revenue $ 46,536,740 $ - $ 46,536,740 Expenditures Personnel Utility Billing $ 557,712 $ (1,647) $ 556,065 Public Works $ 4,852,683.45 $ 34,343 $ 4,887,026 Water $ 2,674,812 $ 21,107 $ 2,695,920 Wastewater $ 4,084,597 $ 26,083 $ 4,110,680 Total Personnel $ 12,169,805 $ 79,886 $ 12,249,691 Operating Utility Billing $ 754,440 $ (0) $ 754,440 Public Works $ 702,174 $ 357,382 $ 1,059,556 Water $ 3,902,271 $ (50,001) $ 3,852,271 Wastewater $ 4,238,515 $ (325,000) $ 3,913,515 Total Operating $ 9,597,400 $ (17,619) $ 9,579,782 Total Personnel and Operating $ 21,767,205 $ 62,267 $ 21,829,473 Capital Utility Billing $ - $ - Public Works $ - $ 17,618 $ 17,618 Water $ 5,674,000 $ 2,372,352 $ 8,046,352 Wastewater $ 13,575,000 $ 304,001 $ 13,879,001 Total Capital $ 19,249,000 $ 2,693,970 $ 21,942,970 AMENDMENT TO BUDGET ORDINANCE NO. 21-1945—FY2022 Budget-Page 2 of 6 Carryforward - Capital Utility Billing $ - $ - Public Works $ 17,619 $ - $ 17,619 Water $ 6,807,204 $ (1,456,515) $ 5,350,689 Wastewater $ 20,959,974 $ (2,372,683) $ 18,587,291 Total Carryforward - Capital $ 27,784,797 $ (3,829,198) $ 23,955,599 Total Carryforward $ 28,707,538 $ (4,331,491) $ 24,376,047 Total Expenditures $ 69,723,743 $ (1,575,253) $ 68,148,490 Transfers $ 3,326,340 $ - $ 3,326,340 Total Expenditures with Transfers $ 73,050,083 $ (1,575,253) $ 71,474,829 (Use)/Addition of Fund Balance $ (26,513,343) $ 1,575,253 $ (24,938,089) Governmental Funds (01 ,07,08,20,50) (01,07,08,20,50) (01,07,08,20,50) (01,07,08,20,50) FY2022 FY2022 FY2022 Original Budget Amendments Final Budget Revenues Property Taxes $ 42,424,938 $ - $ 42,424,938 Other Revenue $ 29,873,116 $ 3,449,364 $ 33,322,480 Total Revenue $ 72,298,054 $ 3,449,364 $ 75,747,418 Expenditures Personnel Administration $ 6,913,332 $ (139,285) $ 6,774,047 Fire $ 13,704,683 $ 216,656 $ 13,921,339 Police $ 22,230,167 $ 247,536 $ 22,477,703 Parks $ 4,135,351 $ 108,596 $ 4,243,947 Community Development $ 4,746,790 $ 28,806 $ 4,775,596 Total Personnel $ 51,730,323 $ 462,310 $ 52,192,633 Operating Administration $ 3,942,618 $ 892,902 $ 4,835,520 Fire $ 2,242,632 $ 284,637 $ 2,527,269 Police $ 3,584,034 $ 311,463 $ 3,895,497 Parks $ 2,879,033 $ 1,197,346 $ 4,076,379 Community Development $ 2,052,618 $ 82,088 $ 2,134,706 Total Operating $ 14,700,935 $ 2,768,437 $ 17,469,372 Total Personnel and Operating $ 66,431,258 $ 3,230,747 $ 69,662,005 Capital Administration $ 150,000 $ - $ 150,000 Fire $ 8,100,079 $ 1,533,405 $ 9,633,484 Police $ 5,399,300 $ (46,300) $ 5,353,000 Parks $ 18,222,255 $ 3,404,029 $ 21,626,284 Community Development $ - $ - $ - Total Capital $ 31,871,634 $ 4,891,134 $ 36,762,768 AMENDMENT TO BUDGET ORDINANCE NO. 21-1945—FY2022 Budget-Page 3 of 6 Carryforward - Personnel Administration $ - $ - $ - Fire $ - $ - $ - Police $ - $ - $ - Parks $ - $ - $ - Community Development $ - $ - $ - Total Carryforward - Personnel $ - $ - $ - Carryforward -Operating Administration $ 692,451 $ (76,827) $ 615,624 Fire $ - $ 19,000 $ 19,000 Police $ - $ 71,572 $ 71,572 Parks $ - $ 31,000 $ 31,000 Community Development $ - $ - $ - Total Carryforward - Operating $ 692,451 $ 44,746 $ 737,197 Carryforward -Capital Administration $ 362,194 $ (41,580) $ 320,614 Fire $ 2,585,093 $ (332,763) $ 2,252,330 Police $ 1,575,795 $ (1,083,429) $ 492,366 Parks $ 1,906,501 $ (396,833) $ 1,509,668 Community Development $ 42,367 $ (10,980) $ 31,387 Total Carryforward - Capital $ 6,471,950 $ (1,865,586) $ 4,606,364 Carryforward Administration $ 1,054,645 $ (118,406) $ 936,239 Fire $ 2,585,093 $ (313,763) $ 2,271,330 Police $ 1,575,795 $ (1,011,857) $ 563,938 Parks $ 1,906,501 $ (365,833) $ 1,540,668 Community Development $ 42,367 $ (10,980) $ 31,387 Total Carryforward $ 7,164,401 $ (1,820,840) $ 5,343,561 Total Expenditures $ 105,467,293 $ 6,301,041 $ 111,768,334 Transfers $ (3,129,926) $ - $ (3,129,926) Total Expenditures with Transfers $ 102,337,367 $ 6,301,041 $ 108,638,408 (Use)/Addition of Fund Balance $ (30,039,313) $ (2,851,676) $ (32,890,990) AMENDMENT TO BUDGET ORDINANCE NO. 21-1945—FY2022 Budget-Page 4 of 6 Total Budget - All Funds FY2022 FY2022 FY2022 Original Budget Amendments Final Budget Revenues Total Revenue $ 118,834,794 $ 3,449,364 $ 122,284,158 Expenditures Total Personnel and Operating $ 88,198,464 $ 3,293,014 $ 91,491,478 Total Capital $ 58,442,968 $ 12,135,120 $ 70,578,088 Total Carryforward $ 38,557,536 $ (5,671,647) $ 32,885,890 Total Expenditures $ 185,198,968 $ 9,756,487 $ 194,955,455 Transfers $ 2 $ - $ 2 Total Expenditures with Transfers $ 185,198,969 $ 9,756,487 $ 194,955,456 (Use)/Addition of Fund Balance $ (66,364,175) $ (6,307,123) $ (72,671,298) That the sum of$(72,671,298)be allocated for use of authorized activities. Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 6th day of September, 2022. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 61h day of September, 2022. APPROVED: Robert E. Simison, Mayor ATTEST: Chris Johnson, City Clerk State of Idaho ) ss. County of Ada ) On this 6th day of September,2022,before me,the undersigned,a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Robert E. Simison and Chris Johnson, known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively,of the CITY of Meridian,Idaho,and who executed the within instrument,and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. Notary Public My Commission Expires: 3-28-2028 CERTIFICATION OF SUMMARY: William L.M.Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that the summary below is true and complete and upon its publication will provide adequate notice to the public. William L. M. Nary, City Attorney SUMMARY OF CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 22 -1992 An Ordinance of the City of Meridian, Idaho amending Ordinance No. 21-1945, the Appropriation Ordinance for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2021 and ending September 30, 2022 (FY2022), appropriating monies that are to be allocated by the City of Meridian, Idaho in the sum of$(72,671,298);to provide for a waiver of the 2nd and 3rd readings pursuant to Idaho Code §50-902; and providing an effective date. AMENDMENT TO BUDGET ORDINANCE NO.21-1945—FY2022 Budget-Page 6 of 6 V IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 22-1993: An Ordinance, Pursuant to Idaho Code §50-1002 and §50-1003, Providing for a Title and Findings, Providing for the Adoption of a Budget and the Appropriation of$219,724,039 to Defray the Necessary Expenses and Liabilities of the City of Meridian, in Accordance with the Object and Purposes and in the Certain Amounts Herein Specified for the Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2022 and Ending on September 30, 2023; to Levy All Such Appropriate Taxes and Levies as Authorized by Law Upon Taxable Property; and to Collect All Authorized Revenue; to Provide for a Waiver of the 2nd and 3rd Readings Pursuant to Idaho Code §50-902; and Providing for an Effective Date and the Filing of a Certified Copy of This Ordinance with the Secretary of State CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 22-1993 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER AN ORDINANCE, PURSUANT TO IDAHO CODE §50-1002 AND §50-1003,PROVIDING FOR A TITLE AND FINDINGS, PROVIDING FOR THE ADOPTION OF A BUDGET AND THE APPROPRIATION OF $219,724,039 TO DEFRAY THE NECESSARY EXPENSES AND LIABILITIES OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OBJECT AND PURPOSES AND IN THE CERTAIN AMOUNTS HEREIN SPECIFIED FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2022 AND ENDING ON SEPTEMBER 30, 2023; TO LEVY ALL SUCH APPROPRIATE TAXES AND LEVIES AS AUTHORIZED BY LAW UPON TAXABLE PROPERTY;AND TO COLLECT ALL AUTHORIZED REVENUE; TO PROVIDE FOR A WAIVER OF THE 2ND AND 3" READINGS PURSUANT TO IDAHO CODE §50-902; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND THE FILING OF A CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, STATE OF IDAHO: Section 1. TITLE: This Ordinance shall be entitled and cited as the"2022-2023 Fiscal Year Annual Appropriation Ordinance of the City of Meridian." Section 2. FINDINGS: The City Council finds: A. That it has duly Noticed and held a Public Hearing on the 16th day of August, 2022 for a Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 (FY2023)City of Meridian, Idaho; and B. That the total revenue anticipated to be available to the City of Meridian during Fiscal Year 2022-2023 is correctly stated in the Adopted Budget which is herein set forth in Section 3; and C. The appropriations and sums of money as hereinafter set forth in Section 3 are deemed necessary to defray all the necessary expenses and liabilities of the City of Meridian for Fiscal Year 2022-2023. Section 3. ADOPTION OF BUDGET AND APPROPRIATION OF EXPENDITURE: The City Council does hereby adopt as and for the budget and the appropriation of expenditure for the City of Meridian for Fiscal Year commencing October 1, 2022 and ending on September 30, 2023 the following: ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FY2022-2023 - Page 1 of 7 FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 Actual Original Budget Original Budget Capital Improvement Fund - 55 FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 Actual Original Budget Original Budget Revenues Total Revenue $ 59,321 Expenditures Operating Administration Fire Police Parks Total Operating $ - $ - $ - Capital Administration $ - Fire $ 7,322,334 Police $ 1,977,476 $ - Parks $ - Total Capital $ 1,977,476 $ 7,322,334 $ - Carryforward - Operating Administration Fire Police Parks Carryforward - Operating $ - $ - $ - Carryforward - Capital Administration $ - Fire $ - $ 9,551,574 Police $ 2,661,520 $ 4,773,665 Parks $ 24,077 $ 24,076 Carryforward - Capital-$ - $ 2,685,597 $ 14,349,315 Total Carryforward $ - $ 2,685,597 $ 14,349,315 Total Expenditures $ 1,977,476 $ 10,007,931 $ 14,349,315 Transfers $ (3,646,860) $ (196,412) $ - Total Expenditures with Transfers $ (1,669,385) $ 9,811,519 $ 14,349,315 (Use)/Addition of Fund Balance $ 1,728,706 $ (9,811,519) $ (14,349,315) ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FY2022-2023 - Page 2 of 7 Enterprise Fund - 60 - 65 FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 Actual Original Budget Original Budget Revenues Water/Sewer Sales $ 27,917,452 $ 28,034,077 $ 29,247,953 Other Sources $ 22,047,053 $ 18,502,663 $ 20,461,056 Total Revenue $ 49,964,505 $ 46,536,740 $ 49,709,009 Expenditures Personnel Utility Billing $ 465,325 $ 557,712 $ 573,640 Public Works $ 4,015,431 $ 4,852,683.45 $ 5,096,175.47 Water $ 2,289,797 $ 2,674,812 $ 2,859,585 Wastewater $ 3,374,999 $ 4,084,597 $ 5,389,155 Total Personnel $ 10,145,553 $ 12,169,805 $ 13,918,555 Operating Utility Billing $ 714,674 $ 754,440 $ 795,418 Public Works $ 852,900 $ 702,174 $ 1,080,794 Water $ 3,074,636 $ 3,902,271 $ 2,852,576 Wastewater $ 3,732,013 $ 4,238,515 $ 4,612,684 Total Operating $ 8,374,222 $ 9,597,400 $ 9,341,472 Total Personnel and Operating $ 18,519,775 $ 21,767,205 $ 23,260,027 Capital Utility Billing $ - $ - Public Works $ - $ - Water $ 2,802,953 $ 5,674,000 $ 9,928,000 Wastewater $ 4,049,250 $ 13,575,000 $ 12,678,000 Total Capital $ 6,852,203 $ 19,249,000 $ 22,606,000 Carryforward - Operating Utility Billing $ - Public Works $ 307,854 $ 536,178 Water $ 232,362 $ 254,048 Wastewater $ 382,525 $ 470,256 Total Carryforward - Operating $ - $ 922,741 $ 1,260,482 Carryforward - Capital Utility Billing $ - Public Works $ 17,619 $ 7,487 Water $ 6,807,204 $ 9,785,407 Wastewater $ 20,959,974 $ 26,356,159 Total Carryforward - Capital $ - $ 27,784,797 $ 36,149,053 Total Carryforward $ - $ 28,707,538 $ 37,409,535 Total Expenditures $ 25,371,978 $ 69,723,743 $ 83,275,563 Transfers $ 2,733,024 $ 3,326,340 $ 3,490,600 Total Expenditures with Transfers $ 28,105,002 $ 73,050,083 $ 86,766,163 (Use)/Addition of Fund Balance $ 21,859,503 $ (26,513,343) $ (37,057,154) ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FY2022-2023 - Page 3 of 7 Governmental Funds (01 ,07,08,20,50) (01,07,08,20,50) (01,07,08,20,50) (01,07,08,20,50) FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 Actual Original Budget Original Budget Revenues Property Taxes $ 30,617,436 $ 42,424,938 $ 45,556,044 Other Revenue $ 50,326,465 $ 29,873,116 $ 41,363,527 Total Revenue $ 80,943,900 $ 72,298,054 $ 86,919,571 Expenditures Personnel Administration $ 5,812,223 $ 6,913,332 $ 7,115,490 Fire $ 12,536,582 $ 13,704,683 $ 16,622,414 Police $ 19,116,254 $ 22,230,167 $ 25,030,255 Parks $ 3,892,147 $ 4,135,351 $ 5,222,622 Community Development $ 3,630,889 $ 4,746,790 $ 4,877,309 Total Personnel $ 44,988,095 $ 51,730,323 $ 58,868,090 Operating Administration $ 4,071,360 $ 3,942,618 $ 4,266,251 Fire $ 1,856,501 $ 2,242,632 $ 2,740,517 Police $ 3,258,454 $ 3,584,034 $ 4,889,646 Parks $ 3,475,395 $ 2,879,033 $ 3,877,288 Community Development $ 3,318,284 $ 2,052,618 $ 3,956,884 Total Operating $ 15,979,993 $ 14,700,935 $ 19,730,587 Total Personnel and Operating $ 60,968,089 $ 66,431,258 $ 78,598,676 Capital Administration $ 357,004 $ 150,000 $ 116,735 Fire $ 779,458 $ 8,100,079 $ 1,050,927 Police $ 1,514,521 $ 5,399,300 $ 581,935 Parks $ 1,345,974 $ 18,222,255 $ 1,636,000 Community Development $ 34,310 $ - $ - Total Capital $ 4,031,268 $ 31,871,634 $ 3,385,597 Carryforward - Personnel Administration $ - $ - $ - Fire $ - $ - $ - Police $ - $ - $ - Parks $ - $ - $ - Community Development $ - $ - $ - Total Carryforward - Personnel $ - $ - $ - Carryforward - Operating Administration $ - $ 692,451 $ 3,495,170 Fire $ - $ - $ 443,506 Police $ - $ - $ 44,366 Parks $ - $ - $ 904,890 Community Development $ - $ - $ 49,115 Total Carryforward - Operating $ - $ 692,451 $ 4,937,047 ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FY2022-2023 - Page 4 of 7 Carryforward - Capital Administration $ - $ 362,194 $ 327,251 Fire $ - $ 2,585,093 $ 10,060,007 Police $ - $ 1,575,795 $ 5,502,846 Parks $ - $ 1,906,501 $ 19,287,737 Community Development $ - $ 42,367 $ - Total Carryforward - Capital $ - $ 6,471,950 $ 35,177,842 Carryforward Administration $ - $ 1,054,645 $ 3,822,421 Fire $ - $ 2,585,093 $ 10,503,512 Police $ - $ 1,575,795 $ 5,547,212 Parks $ - $ 1,906,501 $ 20,192,627 Community Development $ - $ 42,367 $ 49,115 Total Carryforward $ - $ 7,164,401 $ 40,114,888 Total Expenditures $ 64,999,356 $ 105,467,293 $ 122,099,161 Transfers $ 913,836 $ (3,129,926) $ (3,490,600) Total Expenditures with Transfers $ 65,913,192 $ 102,337,367 $ 118,608,561 (Use)/Addition of Fund Balance $ 15,030,708 $ (30,039,313) $ (31,688,990) Total Budget - All Funds FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 Actual Original Budget Original Budget Revenues Total Revenue $ 130,967,726 $ 118,834,794 $ 136,628,580 Expenditures Total Personnel and Operating $ 79,487,864 $ 88,198,464 $ 101,858,704 Total Capital $ 12,860,946 $ 58,442,968 $ 25,991,597 Total Carryforward $ - $ 38,557,536 $ 91,873,739 Total Expenditures $ 92,348,810 $ 185,198,968 $ 219,724,039 Transfers $ - $ 2 $ - Total Expenditures with Transfers $ 92,348,810 $ 185,198,969 $ 219,724,039 (Use)/Addition of Fund Balance $ 38,618,916 $ (66,364,175) $ (83,095,459) Section 4. That the general tax levy and all appropriate taxes and levies be imposed as authorized by law and all authorized revenue is collected. Section 5. That the 2nd and 3rd readings of this ordinance are waived by suspension of the Rule as allowed pursuant to Idaho Code §50-902. ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FY2022-2023 - Page 5 of 7 Section 6. The City Clerk is directed to forthwith publish this Ordinance and file a certified copy of the same with the office of the Secretary of State of Idaho as provided in Idaho Code §50- 1003 and the same shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 6th day of September, 2022. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 6th day of September, 2022. APPROVED: Robert E Simison, Mayor ATTEST: Chris Johnson, City Clerk STATE OF IDAHO ) ) ss. County of Ada ) On this 6th day of September, 2022,before me,the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State,personally appeared Robert E. Simison and Chris Johnson,known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. Notary Public Commission Expiration: 3-28-2028 ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FY2022-2023 - Page 6 of 7