Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2022-10-25 Regular
City Council Regular Meeting City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, October 25, 2022 at 6:00 PM Minutes ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT ABSENT Councilwoman Liz Strader Councilman Treg Bernt Councilwoman Jessica Perreault Mayor Robert E. Simison Councilman Luke Cavener Councilman Joe Borton Councilman Brad Hoaglun PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE COMMUNITY INVOCATION ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted PUBLIC FORUM – Future Meeting Topics ACTION ITEMS 1. Public Hearing continued from September 6, 2022 for Overland & Wells II (H- 2022-0030) by Morgan Stonehill Partners, located at 2600 E. Overland Rd. Denied Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0030 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. Motion to deny made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilwoman Perreault. Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton Voting Nay: Councilman Hoaglun 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. Motion to deny made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilwoman Perreault. Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun 2. Public Hearing for Matador Estates Subdivision (H-2022-0043) by Quantum LTD, Inc., located at 1235 E. McMillan Rd. Approved Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0043 A. Request: Annexation of 5.09 acres of land with an R-4 zoning district. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 14 building lots and 2 common lots on 4.84 acres of land in the R-4 zoning district. Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilwoman Strader. Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun EXECUTIVE SESSION 3. Per Idaho Code 74-206(1)(d): To consider records that are exempt from disclosure as provided in chapter 1, title 74, Idaho Code Vacated FUTURE MEETING TOPICS ADJOURNMENT 7:24 p.m. Meridian City Council October 25, 2022. A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:01 p.m., Tuesday, October 25, 2022, by President Brad Hoaglun. Members Present: Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Jessica Perreault, Brad Hoaglun and Liz Strader. Members Absent: Robert Simison and Treg Bernt. Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Sonya Allen, Jamie Leslie, Joe Bongiorno and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE Liz Strader Joe Borton _X_ Brad Hoaglun Treg Bernt Jessica Perreault Luke Cavener Mayor Robert E. Simison Hoaglun: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, let me call this meeting to order. For the record it is Tuesday, October 25th, 2022. You are at our city council regular meeting and to begin this meeting we will start with roll call attendance. So, Mr. Clerk, if you could call the roll. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Hoaglun: All right. Next item of business is the Pledge of Allegiance. Would everyone please rise. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) COMMUNITY INVOCATION Hoaglun- Our next item is the community invocation. We will be led tonight by Pastor Vinnie Hanke and so, please, bow your heads or take this as a moment of personal reflection. Hanke- Good evening, City Council Members. Thank you again for the opportunity to come and pray for you as you begin your meeting. God, we thank you for this evening. We thank you for, God, just the change in seasons. It reminds us of the passing of time and ask that you would help us to acknowledge your control and sovereignty over each and every day. I pray for this Council meeting. Would you help them to listen to what is brought before them with wisdom, with discretion. Would you help them to make decisions that would bring unity and peace and benefit to the citizens of Meridian. And above all, God, we ask that you would help us to be a city full of neighbors that would Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 2 of 28 love one another and ultimately glorify you and I ask this in the name of the Savior, Jesus Christ, amen. Cavener: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Yes, Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Just a quick moment of privilege if I may. I just wanted to thank Pastor Hanke. You know, he has been kind of a fixture of our meetings over the past year attending these on a fairly regular basis and I just wanted to say thank you for your prayers have resonated with me in each of our Council meetings and in -- in my home and I just -- I know it's time away probably from friends and family and your church and I just want to thank you for the commitment to doing it. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Hoaglun: Thank you, Councilman. Our next item is adoption of the agenda. Council Woman Strader. Strader: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Yes. Strader: Move that we -- it looks like there are no changes, so I would move that we adopt the agenda, for you to sign and the Clerk to attest. Perreault: Second. Hoaglun: Just to adopt the agenda as published. Strader: Oh. Sorry. As published. Hoaglun: And we have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as published. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? The agenda has been adopted. MOTION CARRIED- FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. PUBLIC FORUM — Future Meeting Topics Hoaglun- Mr. Clerk, public forum. Do we have anybody signed up? Johnson- Mr. President, we do not. ACTION ITEMS Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 3 of 28 1 Public Hearing continued from September 6, 2022 for Overland & Wells 11 (H2022-0030) 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. Hoaglun: Okay. The next item is the Action Items and tonight's public hearing has been continued from September 6th. This is H-2022-0030. Sonya, you to provide the staff report; correct? Allen: Yes. Hoaglun: All right. Allen: Thank you, Councilman Hoaglun. Council. Just a moment here. Alrighty. The first application before you -- Hoaglun: Sonya, I guess I -- do I need to say-- I think, Chris, that we are officially opening the public hearing on this item, so -- Allen- Thank you. Hoaglun- Now we are official. Allen- Alrighty. So, the first application before you is a request for a modification to the existing development agreement and a conditional use permit. This site consists of 11.65 acres of land, 18.75 for the overall site. It's zoned C-G and is located at 2600 East Overland Road. This property was annexed in 1994 and a development agreement was approved in 2016, which was later amended in 2020. A preliminary plat was approved in 2021, which included the adjacent property to the east. A final plat has not yet been approved for this property. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this site is mixed use regional. The applicant has submitted a modification to the existing development agreement to change the development plan on the northern portion of the site from a retail grocery store, as shown on the left -- so just back up a second. It's everything north of Cinema Drive here that they are proposing to modify and they want to change the development plan to multi-family residential and vertically integrated residential as shown on the right. The multi-family development is proposed to consist of 345 apartment units and the vertically integrated residential as proposed to consist of three commercial workspaces with two dwelling units over each commercial workspace Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 4 of 28 for a total of six units. A conditional use permit is requested for the multi-family residential development, which will include a mix of studio, one and two bedroom units at a gross density of 29.61 units per acre on 11.65 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. The conceptually approved Winco grocery store on this site would have provided a regional draw to this area as desired, whereas residential uses do not, but they do provide housing for workers in the mixed use regional designated area and the general vicinity. A multi- family residential development consisting of 360 units by the same developer was recently approved to develop on the adjacent property to the east. This is proposed to be the second phase of that development. Although the residential uses are not integrated with the adjacent commercial uses as desired in the mixed use regional designation, pathways are proposed for pedestrian connectivity between these uses. Staff is not recommending a mix of integration -- mix -- an integration of uses with this development as is typical in -- in MUR areas, because the property has already been entitled with zoning. Access is proposed from the south via South Wells Avenue to be extended from East Overland Road or mobility corridor with the first phase of the subdivision and from the west via East Cinema Drive, a local street, with the second phase of the subdivision. This site is approximately a half mile west of the Overland and Eagle Road intersection on the south side of the 1-84 off ramp. Transit services are available to serve this site. Overland Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to seven lanes from Locust Grove to Eagle Road between 2036 and 2040. The intersection of Eagle and Overland Roads is listed in the CIP to be widened to seven lanes on the north leg, eight lanes on the south, eight lanes on the east and eight lanes on the west leg and signalized between 2031 and 2035. The ACHD report states the p.m. peak hour level of service is E, which is an acceptable level of service. Although overall the level of service may be acceptable, certain roadway segments and/or intersections, turning movements are currently failing and will be worse with the adjacent multi-family residential development to the east and the proposed development approved. This should be considered when determining if it's appropriate to approve this application prior to the aforementioned improvements planned with the CIP being completed. Off-street parking is proposed for the multi-family residential development in excess of UDC standards. A minimum of 640 spaces are required. Six hundred and forty-three spaces are proposed. Bicycle parking is proposed in accord with the minimum standards. An additional ten spaces are proposed for the vertically integrated residential use as required. A minimum of 3.15 acres of common open space that meets the standards for such is required. Common open space exhibit -- excuse me. Let me grab that here. Right there. Depicts 2.55 acres of common open space consisting of linear open space among the north and west boundaries of the site. A park with grass consisting of 9,803 square feet in area. A large amenity area. Rooftop terraces on the clubhouse and leasing office. And street buffer and additional common area along East Cinema Drive. There is a 20 foot wide sewer easement located along the west boundary of the site, with a 14 foot wide access road that will prohibit landscaping in that area. Therefore, much of that area will not be able to be counted. An alternative compliance application was submitted earlier today to the common open space standards, which has not yet been reviewed or acted on by the director. A clubhouse and swimming pool and other site amenities are proposed for the development that exceed the minimum standards. Conceptual building elevations and perspectives were submitted as shown for the proposed structures. The two northern Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 5 of 28 buildings will be four stories in height. The two southern buildings will be three stories and the clubhouse will be two stories. A modernist vernacular theme of design is proposed with a monochromatic color palette of off whites and shades of grey, with lap siding accents and decorative balcony railings for color and texture. Final design is required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. The Commission recommended denial of the conditional use permit. The Commission was not a recommending body on the development agreement modification request. That's only a city Council decision. And I will go over a summary of the Commission public hearing. Elizabeth -- excuse me for butchering your name. Elizabeth Koeckeritz, Givens Pursley. Jonathan Fragoso. Morgan Stonehill Partners. Ryan Morgan and also Morgan Stonehill partners. No one testified in opposition or commented on the application. Written testimony was received from Greg Goins, Winco Foods. He's in support of the proposed development. He states that they plan to remodel the existing Winco on Progress Avenue and don't intend to build a new store in this location. Through their due diligence they have concluded that this is not a favorable location for another Winco and it's not in their best interest to sell this land to another commercial or retail user. They believe this is the perfect in-fill location for more multi-family residential development. Another letter was received from the applicant's representative Elizabeth Koeckeritz, Givens Pursley, in response to the staff report. In regard to Condition A-3, which requires a final plat to be submitted, approved, and a plat recorded for the second phase of this subdivision in order to create a developable parcel prior to submittal of a CZC and DR application for the proposed development. The applicant requests approval to submit the CZC and DR applications after the final plat for this phase has been approved by Council, but before it is recorded. And just to note that that does not constitute subdivision of property, Council's approval. The findings for the first development agreement amendment and preliminary plat require the property to be subdivided, i.e., a final plat recorded prior to submittal of any CZC and DR applications for the site. Therefore, this request cannot be granted. Condition B-2.9 requires street signs to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system to be approved and activated. Roadbase approved by ACHD and the final plat recorded prior to applying for building permits. The applicant requests this condition is amended, so that they may apply for building permits after the final plat is approved, but not yet recorded. Again, the final plat is required to be recorded first in order to create a parcel that's eligible for development. This request cannot be granted. And, lastly, condition A-2 requires a revised common open space exhibit to be submitted prior to Council that complies with the minimum standards and the -- the applicant, as I mentioned earlier, is proposing -- proposing a request for alternative compliance to these standards. Staff has not acted on that. Key issues of discussion -- discussion by the Commission are as follows. Desire for better pedestrian access and walkability to be provided to adjacent businesses and employment uses within the area from the proposed development. Concern pertaining to the impact on traffic in this area if the proposed development is approved and not in favor of more apartments on this property as the multi-family development to the east was approved largely because a retail grocery store was conceptually approved to develop on this site. The Commission recommended denial of the application for the following reasons- Traffic concerns and the approved development plan for this site is retail space and desire for it not to change. Written testimony has been received since the Commission hearing from Sean Freeman. He is Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 6 of 28 opposed to the proposed modification to the development agreement to allow multi-family development in place of the conceptually approved grocery store. He believes the city's infrastructure cannot support anymore high density residential projects and approval of such will negatively impact the city in the future. And another letter from Greg Goins, Winco Foods, pretty much the same as the first letter. He is in support of the proposed modification to the development agreement and the multi-family development. He states this site was originally purchased to relocate their store at Progress Avenue. Since that time the impact from COVID and the housing growth in the Meridian and the Treasure Valley area made it no longer economically feasible to do so. Instead they plan to remodel the Progress store and eventually build a new store in south Meridian. Outstanding issue for Council tonight is the Council should determine if the Commission's recommendation of denial of the conditional use permit for the multi-family development is appropriate. Staff will stand for any questions. Hoaglun: Thank you, Sonya. Any questions for staff? Strader: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thanks, Sonya. Could you pull up the future land use map or the one that shows kind of all the uses -- yeah. If we look at this overall area of mixed use regional, what percentage have we approved that's -- if you know this -- that's multi-family versus retail versus commercial? Allen- Council Woman Strader, I'm sorry, unfortunately, I do not have those calculations. Strader- Got it. And then -- I mean certainly with these two developments together it's well over 600 units total multi-family. Are you aware of any other multi-family units that we have approved in the last year that come to mind in this area? Allen- Movado to the south. Strader- Yep. Allen- We have more on the east side of Eagle. The BVA-Brighton development. Strader- Uh-huh. I remember that one. Allen- Yeah. Strader- Okay. Yeah. That might be something I will circle back to. I just think with this area, how it's developing, I kind of want like a holistic -- and I apologize, I should have sent this question before the hearing, but I would like a holistic look at the uses that we are getting out of this area. Just really worried we are getting a lot of mixed use regional that's all turning into multi-family and that concerns me. Thanks. Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 7 of 28 Hoaglun: Any other questions for staff? All right. Is the applicant here? And who will be coming up first to speak? Need to give your name and address for the record and we will give you 15 minutes. Fragoso: Jonathan Fragoso with Morgan Stonehill. 2700 East Overland. Morgan Stonehill. Very grateful for the opportunity to present in front of you -- in front of the Council again to present another project for your consideration. A little over a year ago the Council approved phase one, which was 360 units to the east of the subject property. Currently we are on track to pull building permits immediately pending the recording of our final plat, which is with the assessor. We are excited to start work on that project and deliver much needed housing. To give a little background on how this -- this project came about -- in late 2021 we were approached by Winco Foods to acquire this property. After -- as Sonya pointed out in her staff report after performing due diligence and evaluating the performance of some existing -- of some new stores that opened, Winco elected to focus their growth efforts further south consistent with the growth patterns of the City of Meridian. Based on the strong performance that they saw at Chinden and Linder and the existing Meridian Road store, they wanted to find a second -- or third location -- are committed to having three locations in the City of Meridian. Just that their location will be a little further south. Similar to Planning Commission sentiments, we were very shocked and we mourn the loss of the Winco -- next to a Winco was one of the reasons why we loved our site for phase one and it was going to be a great amenity for the residents there. However, we jumped at the opportunity to bring some much needed housing in an area that we believe really merits it and is well equipped to handle additional housing. From the onset when we were first presented with this project we set out to create a unique one of a kind project that's not like anything else and very differentiated from phase one. The ultimate goal of having both projects appealed to all styles of living. Unlike phase one, this project takes influence from more modern and urban design elements and whereas phase one was more driven by a farmhouse contemporary look. But, again, just want to stress that our goal with this project is to offer a variety of housing types that we believe to be the ideal area along 1-84 with close proximity to great jobs. One of the other things in the design element of this project -- we sought out to emphasize and create gathering areas and walking trails that not only connect to phase one, but also highlight the interconnectivity of the proposed apartments and the future retail to the south. Ultimately we envision creating a community anchored by two apartment projects with ancillary retail services on the remaining five acres. The goal is to have -- create a community where someone can grab a meal or dessert, walk back over to the plaza area along Cinema Drive and enjoy a nice conversation and dinner with their family or take their ice cream or food or snack and go on a walk through the interconnected trail system. With that, given a little context, I want to introduce Ryan Morgan to speak a little further on the project. Morgan: Good evening, everyone. Ryan Morgan with Morgan Stonehill. 333 Josephine Street, Denver, Colorado. It's a pleasure to be standing in front of you all again. One thing about being a developer -- what I really enjoy about being a developer is really learning and getting to know our neighbors. So, it was wonderful when we had our neighborhood meeting that those who actually attended were the owners of the -- some of the commercial uses in the area and they had overwhelming support for our project for Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 8 of 28 a number of reasons and, actually, based on that I was able to go and -- probably within a quarter mile walk into every business and talk to the managers, people that worked there and the owners and ask them if residential in this section was something they really wanted to see and everyone jumped at the opportunity, like we love people can walk here. We love the interconnectivity and we love that we can actually have housing for people who can work here. As everyone knows, it's very hard to find people -- or employees to come work in a lot of the businesses that are surrounding this area and not only will we be able to provide housing, but we are providing rooftops for people to actually access and participate in the local businesses. We had a few letters of support that I believe should have been sent to Sonya from a few of the neighbors, including the Cinema and the Hideaway bar, as long as -- and hopefully a few others that had mentioned they were going to send letters, but it's been a wonderful process getting to know the neighbors and hopefully add to their-- their attendees and the neighborhood in general. I will turn it over to Deb Nelson to take it from here. Thank you. Nelson: Thank you. Good evening, Members of the Council. Deborah Nelson. 601 West Bannock Street. I'm here on behalf of the applicant. First want to say thank you to Sonya for her work on this project. We are actually in full agreement with all of her conditions of approval. The applicant withdrew the request to change the conditions that she noted at the Planning and Zoning Commission. So, we accept all of her conditions as stated in the staff report. And as has been noted we are asking for a change in the site plan and the existing development agreement through a DA modification and that's shown here, the old plan and the new plan. There is still future retail shown here on the south in concept that will be along Overland between the proposed apartments and Overland Road. The proposed development is consistent with the mixed use regional designation, which calls for a mix of employment, retail, and residential uses and specific to Council Member Strader's comments, at the opening here you can see this large area. We don't have the percentages that you asked about, but you can at least see by color breakout the retail and hospitality are the purple areas, offices in green, with medical in red, which is similar to office. Single family homes in yellow there. And the blue and multi-family, including our first phase and the other projects that were mentioned with the Movado to the south and the Brighton project, you are still at only a 1.46 density of units per acre. Your plan calls for a range of six to 40 throughout the entire area. So, there still is a need for higher density residential in this area to support the employment opportunities and the concentration of transit and arterial roads. Also the proposed apartments are on an in-fill site that's along the freeway behind the retail and continuing the transition from that single family residential that you can see in the yellow over to the more intense uses with the commercial. So, not only is this consistent with your FLUM, but it's also consistent with other objectives in your Comprehensive Plan, including to focus on areas that are within the city limits that are vacant in-fill properties that would benefit from existing services that don't cause you to extend the boundaries of the city and that also provide higher density housing along transit corridors and provided a mix of housing units. In fact, this is along transit with Valley Regional Transit Line 42 running right along the site providing connectivity all the way from Nampa to Boise and including local businesses, shopping opportunities and employment opportunities. In addition to the DA modification and consistent with the existing zoning, we are asking for the conditional use permit for the Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 9 of 28 multi-family use with 351 apartments and four horseshoe shaped buildings that step back in height from Overland, designed in a way that creates these attractive streetscape perspectives, concealing the parking and internal areas and some tuck under garages creating courtyard style open space areas and several -- the larger open space in the middle, but also several smaller gathering spaces throughout. Got a boulevard feel entrance that -- with the focal point of the -- of the clubhouse as you enter the property, as well as a wide east-west corridor creating that connectivity and view scape, all integrating and connecting to the adjacent commercial uses. This aerial really shows that arrangement and how that creates that urban like block pattern that called for in your Comprehensive Plan for the mixed use regional area. This view also showcases the plaza area that will integrate with the plan retail to the south, providing outdoor seating and gathering to support and integrate both of those uses. Here you can see through some perspectives. The apartments will include a mix of studio and one and two bedroom units and a range of sizes with patios and balconies, open spacious floor plans, large island kitchens that are ideal for entertaining. Large bedrooms with walk-in closets, dual vanities, large showers and ample storage space and all in all quality apartments. And in further keeping with the mixed use regional designation, the project includes three live- work units located along the southwest edge of the plaza where residents can conveniently live and work within their same unit. You can see here that plaza area to the south that I mentioned that is in between the residential and the future retail to the south with landscaped and terraced seating that will integrate the two uses and here are some more views of that plaza area. The architectural theme is that modernist vernacular, really a more urban style and really emphasizes clean lines, simple color scheme, but with punctuations of accents from lap siding and decorative balcony railing for color and texture. This combination of elements and forms and color palettes creates a balanced, soft composition with appropriate depth and human scale and provides something new and unique for the area. Here is some of the concept themes example products. Little more focused on the open space areas here. The project includes this wide perimeter walking path on the north and west sides and it will connect over to phase one to create a larger loop serving both properties. Open space areas include the large -- a large centralized amenity area with the park grassy lawn area, a striking two story clubhouse with rooftop terrace, pool, barbecue, seating and hammock lawn. A second 1,200 square foot rooftop terrace shown there centrally in the purple color will overlook the central amenity space as well. Kind of a unique amenity area for residents. Your significant landscape buffers providing screening along all the perimeter borders and significant amenities here. You can see here the 3,800 square foot clubhouse with game room coffee bar, lockers work classroom stations, event space, 3,500 square foot 24-hour fitness facility with yoga and spin studios. I already mentioned the rooftop gathering spaces. Other outdoor spaces include the large park area, the hammock lawn, courtyards, six separate picnic areas with tables and shade structures and, of course, the striking central pool shown here that will create a nice gathering space for all. ACHD has reviewed and approved the traffic analysis and the proposed access points in conjunction with the first development. This project will also be responsible for constructing Wells Avenue at Overland and we will add a signal at that intersection, which will actually happen here in the near future with phase one and that will include pedestrian crosswalks to provide new pedestrian safety in the area as well and connectivity across Overland. Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 10 of 28 Cinema Drive will be extended as part of this phase two and also I think most importantly to note is that the trips generated by this project are significantly lower than would be associated with the Winco, because that was also studied. Lower at a.m. peak, p.m. peak and Saturdays and a difference of 1 ,600 trips per day versus 7,700 trips per day for the Winco. So, significantly less. Despite staff's recommendation for the project and a split vote as was noted, the Planning and Zoning did recommend denial on the conditional use permit. However, on the conditional use permit itself, the Commission's comments were all positive. They liked the look of the project. They liked the feel of it. The amenities. The open space. The layout. The design. And they were very favorable to it. Some even commented that they liked the value of the apartments in this location, but the concern that was -- was raised was really more growing out of the lack of the Winco. They were -- they were frustrated over the loss of Winco. I mean Commissioner Seal even noted we recognize this isn't the applicant's responsibility, we just think that, you know, this was a good location for a Winco. The applicant didn't have the opportunity to respond in full, because this happened during the deliberations when the hearing was closed, but, hopefully, we have provided some new information tonight from Winco to help explain that, in fact, rather than just relocating their south Meridian store here, Winco has now decided to remodel and expand their existing store on Progress and find a new location and site -- a new location which requires different spacing, still in south Meridian to benefit south Meridian residents. So, there will be additional resources and groceries in this area, not fewer, and not consolidated onto this site and so it's not viable for Winco, Winco has chosen not to proceed, but it does provide a nice opportunity for in-fill residential along the freeway, behind planned retail where you are along a transit line and can fulfill those goals in the Comprehensive Plan that we outlined. All in all within the zoning that exists and creating lower traffic impacts. So, for all of those reasons we are grateful for your attention and would stand for any questions and ask for your approval. Hoaglun- Thank you, Deborah. Council, questions? Strader- Mr. President? Hoaglun- Yes, Council Woman Strader. Strader- So, Deborah, for this mixed use regional area you have the square footage of the office and retail. Do you have the square footage of the multi-family? Nelson: I don't have the square footage of the multi-family, just because they are not tracked that way. They are tracked in unit counts. Strader- I know. Nelson- But I do have that and that's --these are built--or building permit planned square footages. So, not just zoning. Strader: Yeah. I understand. I -- I think -- I think what I -- when I -- I probably alluded to this in discussions with Sonya, but the concern I have is that Meridian does not have a Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 11 of 28 very -- we are starting to finally, but we don't have a very deep job base. Like we are more of a bedroom community that's trying to create stronger employment centers; right? And so this is a key area. It's right along with the interstate. It's in a good location and so part of what I'm struggling with is every time that we take a mixed use area and we flip it into multi-family we are losing precious space for jobs that we will never get back. I agree that multi-family should go along transportation corridors and I'm a big fan of building more housing. In fact, we actually built more multi-family units this year so far than single family residential, but I think what I'm struggling with is I just need a picture of -- for all this space that we have dedicated and what we would expect, you know, how much of this is going to multi-family now, because it looks to me like a much larger percentage than we would have expected is. Nelson: Council Member Strader, I will -- I will do my best to respond. I guess I'm not -- I don't see a lot of multi-family here, if you look at the -- the blue areas are the multi-family relative to the other locations, but I do think it's important for the city to have a strong employment base and part of what makes that employment base is having the right mix. So, I agree that if this were primarily multi-family throughout the 635 acres you wouldn't have the right mix. Your Comprehensive Plan that the city worked on and carefully thought about what would go into these types of designated areas called for six to 40 units per acre. So, you have thought about how much residential is appropriate to balance that out on the whole and -- and you are short still significantly at less than one and a half. So, there is dense development needed and I think it supports it, you know, in the same ways that you heard Mr. Morgan talk about that when he went and visited with businesses they were readily welcoming having not only consumers next door, but employees next door. They were concerned that they didn't have the workforce they need -- I think -- I think everybody knows that people are having trouble getting workforce and if they could have residents come in right next door and fill in some of their labor needs they felt like that could strengthen their business. So, I guess that's part of why we put this slide together is we felt like it does show you that balance you are -- you are seeking. Strader: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. If I could respond a little bit. I think what I'm struggling with is this isn't all filled out-, right? So, some of it still has to be designated and part of approving your property to the east -- or the rationale for that was the Winco and so, you know, these decisions in -- in a one-by-one basis -- we make exceptions and, then, what we end up finding -- and we found it in some areas is we end up getting really overweighted into multi-family and I hear you on the housing for workforce. I think what I'm struggling with, though, is we have a huge lack of affordable housing and this is like a Class A plus gorgeous apartment building, but -- and if you want to comment on it -- I know it's very unusual to comment on rents and I wouldn't expect you to, but, you know, if you can kind of comment on the price point, because, you know, someone that's going to be able to afford a luxury apartment -- I'm just not sure that that fits the exact workforce housing that we all are envisioning and we are out here -- we have had a lot of discussions about Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 12 of 28 affordable housing lately. It's a huge struggle for us. Building housing as a part of a tool to do that overall in the market, but, you know, again, we are -- we have a huge amount of approved Class A plus gorgeous housing coming, but I'm struggling with where are the workers going to live? Nelson: Council Member Strader, I understand that point and we definitely are not trying to say that this is workforce housing and in the category of affordability rankings. I just meant that it can provide workforce for adjacent people living next door. But -- I mean I think as you know, there has been a lot of studies that discuss that quantity of housing overall does feed down the chain to affordable housing. So, yes, this is intended to be a nice market rate apartment building that caters to young professionals that are looking to live and work and establish, you know, their homes in Meridian and that aren't quite finding exactly this product. So, I do think it's great that you are getting more of that in Meridian, but there is still high demand and so the --the demand from the consumers would suggest that there is still more -- more demand for that and more room for that. But it -- yes, it won't cater to every need that you have for housing, but it does continue to fill in some variety -- certainly differentiating from the single family residential that is in excess perhaps in this area. Strader: Thank you. Cavener: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Yes, Councilman Cavener. Cavener- Thanks, Deb. I got to admit I'm kind of tracking a lot with Council Member Strader and perhaps it was Mr. Morgan's comment about the excitement from the movie theater and kind of correlating that to employees living there and a quick calculation on my phone shows that a team member at the movie theater can make at most $13.69 an hour. Would that employee be able to live in this complex? Hoaglun- Ms. Nelson. Nelson- Yeah. Council Member Cavener, fair point. You are right that we aren't going to be able to fill every job with -- with these rents and -- but we also do expect to have dual income folks living here, as many young people start out with that mix and, you know, this area is filled with more than the movie theater jobs. So, I think they are really looking for workforce, but this is also an area that's filled with offices that have employers existing in them as well and that's -- that's part of the -- the benefit of having something that's close by that's walkable, that's serviceable to these homes, as well as being on that transit line. I mean if you are -- if you are a young professional in this day and age, you are accustomed, especially in larger cities, if they have come from different education points, they are accustomed to living in this type of apartment and getting on a transit line and going to their job. That's a desirable mode of transport and lifestyle and we have got other employment bases here that do pay a higher living wage that could support this Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 13 of 28 opportunity here, that this helps to round out whether it's a walking distance or a transit distance, we think there is some nice compatibility there. Cavener: And, Deb, you won't find anybody that's more excited about transit lines and being able to move employees from, you know, where they live to where they work, but that is much different than trying to allude that you could work within the complex and live within the complex and to reference an employer. That I even think if two people lived in the same place -- this -- this is a beautiful complex, but let's also be direct about who it is and who it serves and I -- I -- I guess I am failing to see the connection that when I look at the employers that are around there -- and I live in south Meridian -- that the employers around that area will provide a wage that people would be able to live in this beautiful complex. So, I just -- I just would encourage maybe a little bit more directness and authenticity in your testimony that gives Council a better understanding about who this can serve. Nelson: Council Member Cavener, yes. Noted. I'm sorry if we have overstated that proximity benefit. We are just sharing what the neighbors have shared about the -- their reaction to the proposal. So, certainly not trying to say anything different than those facts. Hoaglun: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you, Mr. President. My fellow Council Members have stated my thoughts very well, so I won't repeat those. We won't kind of continue along that line of thinking, but -- but I am in agreement with them with them on concerns not only of replacing this very needed ground for service type service and retail type opportunities for the -- the many residents that do already live in this area, but I have concern about -- about building more multi-family because we have approved a significant amount of multi- family that hasn't been constructed yet. So, although, you know, the -- you were talking about the --the need for multi-family and -- and that there still is need and there absolutely is. If you go look to rent an apartment in Meridian, unlike what we are seeing happen in Boise and Nampa, it's harder than those two cities to find one in -- in Meridian, but we still have about a year and a half worth of construction that hasn't been built yet and we have an enormous amount of units that have been approved and so we have really accurate data on that, which you can't possibly have yet, of course, and we can't either -- there is -- are constructed, it's -- that's tough for us to say, yeah, this area for sure needs these additional 300 units to make for over 700 units right on this property, including the first phase. So, I just have -- but I have some more specific questions for you, because I don't -- I don't want to end the conversation there and assume that that's what our decision is this evening. So, I'm going to ask some specifics. The first one is did the applicant consider any other designs that would move the -- move the buildings that are farthest to the north towards the interstate a little bit farther south, because from what I understand they are only about 80 feet away from the interstate and I don't know if that 80 feet starts from the building itself and it goes to the centerline of the interstate. I don't -- can you -- can you show me exactly where that 80 -- 80 feet falls? It seems like a very short amount of space. I'm assuming there is going to be balconies on that side, which is not ideal. So, I want to talk about that topic and get some more understanding of that. Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 14 of 28 Fragoso: Council Woman Perreault, so the 80 feet is from the property line. The property line actually sits back from the off ramp, which is actually still set back another -- I don't know the exact distance and I apologize, but that's also set back from the freeway itself. So, I think when we looked at it it was about 200 feet total from the edge of the freeway. Perreault: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Yeah. Let me interrupt one second here, Council. I want to get your input on something. There are two parts to this public hearing and application. Item A is a development agreement modification and if we don't agree to the modification of the development agreement, the conditional use permit is basically not going to pass. So, I don't know how far we want to delve into the CUP before we have some dialogue further on -- on the DA. So, maybe if we -- Cavener: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Yes, Councilman -- Cavener: Yeah. I agree with you and, I apologize, I meant to ask Bill or Sonya kind of a process question at the outset about how we wanted to handle this. I think it's appropriate for us to discuss the DA, likely make a decision on that, and, then, make a decision on the CUP. Hoaglun: So, if I might interject and ask a question of Deborah or whoever is appropriate. In the first letter from Winco it talked about they wanted to sell the property to someone who didn't -- wouldn't -- it wouldn't be a commercial or retail interest. So, in my mind that tells me that if this does not get approved that land is probably -- I don't want to know the details, but I'm assuming there is legal mechanisms where it goes back. They would own it, they would keep it and it would sit until they knew they could sell it to somebody where it would be housing, as opposed to retail, if that's their intent that they don't want commercial or retail entities to purchase -- to have that property, then, it's in their interest to hold it. So, I guess my question to you is there is the front portion, which looks like there is an opportunity for some retail. What type of retail is that? Fragoso: Okay. So, we are currently working through the design of that and, obviously, with retail development it's driven a lot by the users, but we are reaching out to restaurant users. Our main goal is to reach out to large national chains, sit down restaurants. We want to see this anchored by a large sit-down restaurant in the City of Meridian with ancillary uses kind of along with -- for the remaining parcels. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. So, basically, it is an entity that has no competition whatsoever to Winco groceries. Fragoso- That is correct. Hoaglun- Any other questions for the applicant? Yes, Council Woman Strader. Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 15 of 28 Strader: Thank you. Yeah. Just one more -- you know, one of the concerns I have is also -- and if you could -- is there any way you could zoom out to a view that sort of shows all the roads with your property and the adjoining property? One concern I have is we are talking like 700 units, you know, all commuting to work, all leaving at the same time, maybe coming home around the same time and for this area I just want to understand how that's going to work in terms of -- I saw your chart about the comparison, but, yeah, that -- this is helpful. Like something that -- maybe walked me through between both properties together. How is that going to work with that much traffic? Nelson: So, Council Member Strader -- sorry, this isn't as zoomed out as you might have been looking for, but at least it does show the new signalized intersection here and so as this is improved there will be turn lanes added, which will help the flow of traffic that go in and out to Wells here. Wells is getting extended into the site and, then, that will connect and be extended east-west on Cinema that will connect all the way over to the existing movie complex where Cinema Drive ends and so that will create more connectivity off of Overland, serving this -- at least smaller area. The -- the signal and with it -- with the turn lanes and the signal that did meet ACHD's levels of service for this area and that was actually called for by the Winco development originally, but as they looked at it again with background traffic, they said that the signal could still be warranted there, which is beneficial to the area to be able to put that in. Strader: Yeah. And just to make sure I understand -- and so --and I'm trying to remember what Cinema looks like. It's been a while since I have been to this area of Overland. Nelson: We might have a better map that -- I don't know that we have got -- Strader: Yeah. Nelson: You can see it here a little bit. You can see Cinema cutting across and -- yeah, you can see that a little bit there. It goes across. Strader- Yeah. So, I just wanted to understand if there were kind of like multiple ways to get to Overland. It looks like there are. Can you sort of walk me through that? And, then, for your subject property and, then, the adjoining property, are they both going down Wells? Nelson: Right. Yes. So, both of them are served on Wells and -- and would have the connectivity through to Cinema and so currently that east-west Cinema and north-south stub of Wells don't exist. Those are getting built with these projects and -- but it does exist to the west off of the subject property site and so we will create that new connectivity and, yes, there are additional outlets from that area that go down to Overland and so there is --this new project before you now in particularwill have, you know, both directions of travel traffic that are convenient for those trips to exit either way. Strader: Right. Mr. President, if I can continue? Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 16 of 28 Hoaglun: Council Woman Strader, go ahead. Strader: Thanks a lot. But in fairness like most folks I think are going to be trying to get to Eagle Road probably to access the freeway, to be fair, and so most people are going to be turning left. So, there is the one intersection sort of serves that left turn. Am I understanding that right? Whereas -- are there multiple intersections? Nelson: That's correct. The -- the new signal will serve those left turning trips. Strader: Got you. Okay. Okay. Yeah. I don't know -- it's just a concern for me. It just feels like a huge amount of people and human behavior -- like a grocery store -- a grocery store has a lot of traffic, tons of trips, but it's -- it's kind of consistent and we are talking about commuters -- some of them might take, you know, transit. That would be great. But -- but a lot of people are pretty car dependent here. So, you know, it's just a huge concentration of apartments in one area right there side by side. Nelson: Yeah. Council Member Strader, you know, just a comment. Certainly any -- any development of this property is going to add traffic. No doubt. And so it is -- it is part of just working in -- in-fill development into existing infrastructure and so, yeah, we just have to look to see that based on the traffic impact study and ACHID's analysis, while this will continue to impact area roads undoubtedly, it has -- it does still allow for the --for Overland Road to operate at a level of service for this signalized intersection and turn lanes to function and just significantly less than what would be from a large retail store, such as Winco that has a regional draw. So, bringing in trips from a much larger area. Strader- Yeah. But to be fair, ACHID did comment that there are points of failure, right, and so it wasn't -- unfortunately it wasn't just acceptable. Itwas like there are -- there are real concerns. Nelson- There VC ratios at the turn signals on Eagle and Overland have delays and those exist now and those will continue and be exacerbated. The levels of service overall are met and will continue to be met with this development. Strader- Okay. I guess I just had one more, if you guys don't mind. Sorry I'm prattling on here. But has there been any change in your timing? You know, I mean -- I don't know what those -- don't get into the absorption of your other project and all that, but -- right? I mean you are going to very dramatic -- quickly dramatically changing interest rate environment that affects real estate asset prices pretty dramatically. There is a lot of building activity in this area. There is a lot going on. So, what's your timing with this project? Fragoso- To your question, yes, it's a rapidly changing market. We will acknowledge that and, you know, there is some ambiguity in what asset prices are today based on the volatility and interest rates. That being said, we would want to proceed and move as quickly through this process as we could. The rate limiting step will be the final plat recording. We have run into this. I think realistically we would be -- based on our past Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 17 of 28 experience we would be between 12 to 18 -- or 12 to 16 months from starting construction from this point forward. Strader: Thanks. That's really helpful. Hoaglun: Further questions for the applicant? If not -- thank you. We will now ask is there anybody signed up for the public hearing, Mr. Clerk? Johnson: Mr. President, nobody in advance. Hoaglun: Okay. Do we have anybody in the room or online that is wanting to testify on this? If you are online, please, use the raise your hand function and we will bring you in. It doesn't look like we have anybody in that area. All right. Does the applicant want to make any closing comments? Fragoso: I just want to address one of the points that Council Woman Strader and Cavener have brought up, which was who this property will cater to. When we designed this we set out to cater to the workers at the new BVA Ventures facility over there. I think you have about a quarter of a million square feet of office with all high paying jobs. Powers Engineering takes up a whole building. ESI Construction. St. Luke's to the north. This is really the closest apartment site and I think we are catering to those jobs along Eagle Road and also the work from home population. These people seek out -- if you are working from home you choose quality of life. We believe that they will flock to the amenities that we are offering. It might not be appealing to kind of the blue collar workers. You know, someone working at the Cinemark just from a price point perspective. That being said, one of the things we data from our design we sought out to make our units smaller and more thoughtful. If you are renting less square footage typically the price is less. We are still setting the rent process to kind of what I discussed with Councilman Strader. Council Woman Strader. I apologize. We don't know what that is. Pricing has changed. We are working through that process. But, again, we are kind of designing thoughtful, more -- you know, smaller, more thoughtful spaces with great amenities to cater to the widest mix of people -- of renters that we possibly can. Hoaglun- Okay. Perreault- Mr. President? Hoaglun- Council Woman -- Council Woman Perreault. Perreault- Don't run away. So, let's just chat about the point that you made about appealing to individuals that might work in some of the properties over by BVA. Would you walk across that intersection to get to work? Fragoso- No. But I believe -- we believe they would drive. Perreault- You believe what? Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 18 of 28 Fragoso: I would agree with you, Council Woman. I believe they would drive. Perreault: You believe they would -- Fragoso: They would drive. Perreault: Oh, you -- sorry. I apologize. You believe they would drive? Fragoso: Yes. Which adds to the traffic concerns. Perreault: Okay. Thank you. Hoaglun: All right. Thank you. Council, I think discussion on Item A, development agreement modification, is warranted. I think that's where we need to start and -- and, then, we will see where that goes, because, then, there will be discussion on the CUP if that is amenable to the Council for Item A. Just to kind of kick things off, you know, one of my concerns is -- I did -- did some research and I thought, okay, Winco is no longer at this site. Okay. What does that do for our grocery market? And it was surprising how many grocery stores are in the area. When you take the subject property and you go to the new Albertsons at Eagle and Amity it's 2.5 miles. Well, you could head west you go to --you end up on Overland. Walmart is two miles. Well, let's go east. Oh, Fred Meyers, 2.5 miles, Overland and Five Mile. Now, if you cross the freeway, if you want to take Eagle, you can be at the Albertson Marketplace, that's 2.5 miles or-- closer to 2.5 to three miles. Take Locust Grove, another Fred Meyer, two and a half miles. Or if you go to Meridian Road and cross over, Winco is 1.5 to two miles. So, I'm thinking, okay, as far as grocery stores are needed in this area -- I mean you have got -- you have got your choice and right now Kroger and Albertsons, Fred Meyer and Albertsons, are competitors. Who knows what's going to happen in the future. But you have Walmart and you do have an Albertsons to choose from. So -- and the fact that they are not selling to anybody for development for commercial or retail property, what does that mean? Then it's going to sit there. They have control of that site. Now, we have our Comprehensive Plan. We know what we want to develop and we were excited about having this there. We saw that as a -- as a good fit. But at the same time if they choose not to go here and want to go further south, which we all know needs another grocery store, that's why we are excited about this. It's on the south side. Albertsons opened on south side. That's a good thing. So, in my mind I'm like, okay, if not this, then, what? And especially if they control it and are not going to go commercial or retail. Now, how long would they hold on to it? I don't know. It could sit there forever. We have seen property in Meridian at times sit for a very very long time because of competition or what have you. People want a certain price point and they are not going to sell until they meet. There is a number of reasons. So, to me we have to kind of face that issue. If not this, then, what? And we have no control overthatwhat. So, that's --that's one of my arguments to take a --take a look at modifying the development agreement. The -- the trips per day the facts are there. I mean it definitely -- significantly reduces the trips. There are, of course, peak hours when there will be subject -- I liked having wells where you got right turn lanes, straight lanes and left turn lanes, because that's certainly needed. They can also go down to Millennium I Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 19 of 28 believe it is and there is a light there and go out. It will add traffic. Anything we asked for will -- will add traffic. And, finally on the subject about, you know, the price point, I know we want more -- what you call workforce housing, but at the same time -- and I think Council Woman Perreault, you have been -- you have been working on this and doing some research. You know, I think if we want to have workforce housing, affordable housing, however you want to classify that, there are probably going to be incentives that the city needs to -- to be prepared to offer. I don't know what that is. We are not there yet. But right now it's the market that's determining what the price point is and I'm fine with that. This is -- when you look across to the east of Eagle and on the south side of Overland, Top Golf location, those apartments are going to be on -- towards the higher end as well. This one is I would classify as higher end. They are looking at the remote worker and just as I'm in the middle of a hiring process with someone at my work, that remote issue is huge. That is a -- the vast majority of applicants want to work remotely and it's one of those things I think in society today we are having to grapple with and I think this is just in response to that, what does that look like, what -- what amenities are on the site? What makes that attractive to someone who is going to move here and work remotely? So, I think it's a serious consideration we have to give to this in modifying this development agreement. I know I might be the only one who thinks that, but that's just how I'm looking at this going, okay, what is realistic with the -- the requirement that they have as the current owners of this property and, again, there might be legal things in that contract that reverts back. I don't know. I don't want to know. But we have to kind of deal with that -- that issue as -- as that's a possibility and -- and, then, maybe it becomes a car dealership. I don't know. But I think those are an I-L, though. So, some -- something to consider. Other comments? Certainly welcome. Cavener- Mr. President? Hoaglun- Yes, Councilman Cavener. Cavener- I will be -- I will be brief. I appreciate your very diplomatic approach to this whole thing and I think the applicant started this -- their comments were really correct. This was not their choosing. Winco has said, hey, this is not what we want to do. This is not where we want to put a facility and certainly Winco's decision -- business decisions shouldn't be passed on to this applicant or any applicant whoever follows a land use project. The piece that I'm -- I'm wrestling with is -- I believe I was on the Council when this annexation came through and -- and the Council was wise to put the development agreement, because what the Council said when we heard from our community at the time is that we needed more retail and while, yes, we do need grocery and, again, as one who lives in this area we are excited about the Albertsons, but I think our citizens still desire more grocery, more retail. I think that is part of the reason as to why the Council crafted this development agreement and so I was -- I was reluctant when this change came before us a year ago for some multi-family. I think some council touched on this, that we were supportive, because it really supported the mixed use. I'm just struggling to see how more apartments support our mixed use desire and, certainly, I'm a huge proponent of-- of housing and I liked it, but when it was presented to us it was presented with as Seasons. Now we have learned it's Seasons phase one. I think they are great Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 20 of 28 projects, but I just don't think that it is the right type of project that warrants making a change to our development agreement based on what we heard from our citizens at the time of the annexation. Hoaglun: Thank you for that input, Councilman Cavener. Council Woman Strader. Strader: Sure. Yeah. I I agree with Councilman Cavener and I think part of what I'm having a hard time with and we have heard feedback, too. We had like an intern that talked to us a lot about mixed use development. One of the things I really struggle with is that integration of uses and even if I look at the mixed use region overall, you know, I want to see things spread out a bit more. I think it makes sense to have high density housing, but I -- I don't want it all crammed in right together. Seven hundred units just feels like a huge amount of housing to have in such a concentrated area. I have concerns about traffic and I do agree that we have to think about -- you know, we might have to wait. That could be hard. I mean it's hard to see an in-fill piece of property that doesn't develop yet. But, you know, that's -- that's the property owner's decision. I can't control that. You know, as a Council Member we try to set aside land for different uses and one of my biggest concerns is that we are not getting enough of the job creating uses, of the retail, you know, supporting uses of -- especially the commercial uses and so every time that we make this decision to make a trade off it's really hard and I think particularly where with the same developer we -- we have already approved a big multi-family development with the rationale being having this different use right next door and I'm struggling with it, you know, so I'm going to be in favor of denial tonight. That doesn't mean I wouldn't be open minded down the road, you know, in a couple of years if things change and the traffic situation improves and we don't have these failure points that we have heard about from ACHID, you know, maybe then we will look at that. But I just -- I can't in good conscience put this much multi-family together in one spot with those issues and we are losing that trade off forever, so -- my opinion. Hoaglun- Any other comments? And, Mr. Nary, let me ask -- I think item A -- 1-A would be a motion for that instrument number, the 2016, if there is approval or denial motion do that -- change the development agreement? Nary- Yes. That's all you do. Hoaglun- Okay. So, Council, we can close the public hearing. Are there any other questions you want to ask of the applicant? Perreault: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move that we close the public hearing for application H-2022-0030. Strader: Second. Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 21 of 28 Hoaglun: I have a motion and a second to close the public -- public hearing. All those in favor of closing the public hearing, please, say aye. All right. Any nays? The ayes have it. The public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Hoaglun: Council Woman Strader? Strader: Mr. President. Sure. I'm -- I will try to make a motion here. I would move on Item 1-A that we deny the request 2016-060157 for the development agreement modification and the reasoning for the denial is similar to the Planning and Zoning Commission, for the reasons of wanting the current approved development plan for this site, the desire not to change the land use to multi-family residential and because of traffic concerns. Perreault: Mr. President, I second that motion. Hoaglun: All right. We have a motion and a second on that. Mr. Clerk, would you, please, call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, absent; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, nay; Strader, yea. Hoaglun: Four ayes. One no. The development agreement modification is not agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FOURAYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. Hoaglun: So, Mr. Nary, conditional use permit, do we need to take a vote on that or -- Nary: You still need to take a vote on that. Yes. Hoaglun: Okay. Strader: Mr. President? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Just to check with Mr. Nary, I think it would follow, then, that we would deny the conditional use permit. Do I need to give an additional rationale? Nary- Yes. Since the record would be separate, so yeah. I mean the basis can be simply that because there was no amendment to the development agreement, therefore, there is no ability to approve that CUP, since that's not an allowed use. Strader- Thank you. Mr. President? Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 22 of 28 Hoaglun: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I moved to deny Item 1-B, the request for the conditional use permit, because there was no amendment to the DA agreement and so it does not make sense to approve the conditional use permit at this time. Perreault: Mr. President, I second that motion. Hoaglun: We have a motion and a second to deny the conditional use permit on Item 2022-0030. Mr. Clerk, would you, please, call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, absent; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea. Hoaglun: All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 2. Public Hearing for Matador Estates Subdivision (H-2022-0043) by Quantum LTD, Inc., located at 1235 E. McMillan Rd. A. Request:Annexation of 5.09 acres of land with an R-4 zoning district. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 14 building lots and 2 common lots on 4.84 acres of land in the R-4 zoning district. Hoaglun: The next item on the agenda is a public hearing for Matador Estates Subdivision, H-2022-0043, and the staff report will also be given by Sonya Allen. Allen- Thank you, Mr. Chair. The next application before you is a request for annexation and zoning and a preliminary plat. This site consists of 4.84 acres of land. It's zoned RUT in Ada county and is located at 1235 East McMillan Road. This property was previously platted as Lot 5, Crestwood Subdivision No. 1 and a property boundary adjustment was approved in the county to shift the eastern property line to the east an additional five feet. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is low density residential. The applicant is requesting annexation of 5.09 acres of land with an R-4 medium low density residential zoning district and a preliminary plat consisting of 14 building lots for one existing home that is proposed to remain and 13 new single family residential detached homes and two common lots on 4.84 acres of land. The proposed gross density of the subdivision is 2.89 units per acre, which is consistent with the desired density in the low density residential future land use map designation. This property, along with the property to the east, is an enclave surrounded by existing and future single family residential detached homes to the north, south, and west. Development of in-fill properties is supported by the Comprehensive Plan provided it doesn't negatively impact the abutting existing development. Because like uses, single family residential detached residential, are proposed on similar size lots, the proposed development should be Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 23 of 28 compatible with adjacent uses and shouldn't have a negative impact. Access for the subdivision is proposed from the extension of a stub street at the west property boundary. The existing access via McMillan is required to be removed and the existing home is required to take access internally from within the subdivision and be readdressed. A stub street is proposed to the east for future extension and interconnectivity. A 25 foot wide landscape street buffer is required along McMillan Road. A two and a half foot tall rock wall is proposed at the back edge of the street buffer along McMillan Road and a berm is proposed within the buffer. Fencing is not proposed. A micro path connection is proposed to the sidewalk along McMillan Road for pedestrian access from within the subdivision. Typically developments of less than five acres in size are not required to comply with UDC standards for common open space and site amenities. However, because this is an annexation request and the site is just under five acres at 4.84 acres, staff is recommending the applicant provide a minimum of 12 percent or .58 of an acre of qualified open space and -- and a site amenity consisting of a minimum of one point. The reason for staff's recommendation is because when a county subdivision such as this redevelops and the lots are just under five acres in size, a series of new subdivisions could develop without adequate open space overall. The plans currently depict .49 acre of qualified common open space consisting of a 7,080 square foot common -- common area lot, linear open space with a pathway, and half of the street buffer along McMillan Road. A sitting area with a concrete or a paver surface and two benches is proposed as an amenity. Staff is recommending an additional .09 acre of common open space is provided. The applicant has confirmed the proposed parkways comply with UDC standards and provide an additional .19 acre of common open space, which exceeds the requirement. Trees and vegetative ground cover should be provided within the parkways in accord with UDC standards. Staff recommends that shade structure and picnic tables are added to the common area to qualify as a picnic area amenity or the applicant may choose another qualified amenity. Six conceptual building elevation photos were submitted as shown that demonstrate what future homes in this development will look like. A mix of single story with and without bonus rooms and two story homes are proposed with a mix of building materials, including stone veneer accents and architectural elements. The Commission did recommend approval of these applications. Marty Camberlango, the applicant, testified in favor. No one testified in opposition. Randy Spiewak, Parkins North No. 14 Laterals Association, commented on the application and written testimony was received from Neil Wilson. He just stated that he recently put solar panels on the east side of his house facing the subject property and requests the proposed homes are no higher than two stories, which they aren't. So doesn't appear to be any issue there. Key issues of discussion was the surface water delivery, design of the pressurized irrigation system, and plan approval from the lateral association. Key issues of discussion by the Commission was the city's requirements to provide a pressure irrigation system for the proposed subdivision. The Commission did not make any changes to the staff recommendation and there are no outstanding issues for Council tonight. No written testimony has been received since the Commission hearing. Staff will stand for any questions. Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 24 of 28 Hoaglun: Thank you, Sonya. Any questions for staff? Hearing none, is -- is the applicant here to testify? Come on up. State your name and address for the record and you have 15 minutes for your presentation. Camberlango: Marty Camberlango. 1110 North Five Mile Road, Boise. 83713. Sonya did a really good job of explaining the project. I think anything that I would actually add would be already what she's talked about. I might just add that we had a neighborhood meeting and we had one person come and his concern was just that if the developer -- development happens that what that -- that it would -- would be a lot of dust in the area and we told him that we would be sensitive to that. Apparently when they did Silver Spring Subdivision when they excavated the roads they had a system over there where they refined their soil and made it into topsoil and apparently it created a lot of dust. So, we don't plan on doing that. And, then, also in the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting we didn't have anybody that was against the project and so we don't have, as far as I know, anyone that has any problems with it. The only thing I might add is the staff recommended that we have various lot sizes, so that it would lend to a little bit -- a little bit of variety. The smallest lot is 8,132 square feet. The largest lot is 11,219 square feet and the home that will be left there is 32,231 square feet. So, we will have a variety of product in there. And I would like to just add, like Sonya already said, was what we will be doing in there is compatible with the surrounding area and when it's all finished it will look just like the Silver Spring Subdivision, just like it was a phase of that subdivision and so, really, I don't have a lot to add to that and would you stand for any questions that the Council might have. Hoaglun: Thank you, sir. Council, questions? Council Woman Strader. Perreault: Mr. President? Hoaglun: Oh, I'm sorry. Council Woman Perreault, we will go your direction first. Perreault: No worries. Thank you. I -- I just wanted to confirm that -- that you are willing to do the additional small amount of open space that -- from the open space calculation. Camberlango- Well, we don't want to have to do it, but we will. Perreault- Okay. I understand that. Camberlango- What we found out that -- in our research that we are required to have a parkway and they are allowing that to be part of the open space. So, when we calculate that in, we are -- like Sonya said, I think we are over that. So, I think we are okay with it. I think it will work. Perreault: Okay. Thank you. I wanted to get clarification on that, just the way that it was presented this evening I -- I wasn't a hundred percent sure. And, Mr. President, one more question if I may. Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 25 of 28 Hoaglun: Council Woman Perreault, go ahead. Perreault: Thank you. So, to that end have you happened to decide on an amenity? Camberlango: No, we haven't decided on the amenities yet. They have made suggestions in here that you have park benches and -- and even suggested we might do a little pergola type of a cover over the top. We just did a project in Eagle where we have park benches, we have picnic tables, we have some grills that you can use and we will probably follow along those lines. But we will -- it will be nice and it will be something that the people will want to use. I think staff will make sure we don't -- we do something that's workable there. Hoaglun: Yes, sir, they will. Council Woman Strader. Perreault: Uh -- Hoaglun: I'm sorry. Council Woman Perreault. And, then, I will go to Council Woman Strader. Perreault: Can I make just one more comment? Hoaglun: Go ahead. Perreault: I just want to say thank you very much for -- these in-fill projects are tough and they often come before us with challenges and I just really appreciate that you are doing all you can to make it as close to the area around you as possible. Really appreciate that you are trying to stay with the similarity to -- to that neighborhood and that, you know, a lot of times folks come in and it's -- it's hard to do something with five acres. There is really not a lot of options, especially if there is geographic issues that cause the property to be developed in a unique way. So, thank you for keeping it in similar field to what's already there. Camberlango: You are welcome. Hoaglun: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Oh, great minds think alike. So, Council Woman Perreault covered all my questions. Perreault- Mr. President, that's why I didn't say much on the last application, because she just basically read my mind. Hoaglun: Oh, good. And we have a couple Councilmen online. Any -- any questions for the applicant? Heads shaking. Cavener- I have none. Thanks, Mr. President. Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 26 of 28 Hoaglun: Thank you. We will see if there is any public comment. Public testimony. Mr. Clerk. Johnson: Mr. President, nobody was signed in online or in person. Hoaglun: Okay. We don't have anybody signed in. So, do you have any wrap-up comments on this? Camberlango: Not really. I just appreciate the opportunity to come before you and anxious to get this project underway if we can get your approval. Hoaglun: I did have one question and it's really not -- to the property to the west, is that the -- is that Boyd Hill's old place? Camberlango: Uh-huh. Hoaglun: Okay. When I saw the map and looked at the location I thought I know where -- Camberlango: It's kind of interesting all these remaining properties are all landscape companies and I feel -- I think they feel like they are being squeezed out a little bit. Of course one of them that owns this property is already relocated in Meridian out south, so he can continue his business and not be so crowded out with what's going on over there. Hoaglun: Sure. Yeah. Yeah. Great. Well, thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Council, Item 2 is before you for discussion. Perreault- Mr. President, I don't have anything additional to add. My -- Hoaglun- Council Woman Perreault. Perreault- I think you have done a really great job with this and -- and I'm in favor, so I would be happy to make a motion, unless there are other concerns. I move that we approve the Matador Estates Subdivision, H -- oh. We do need to close the public hearing. Thank you. Mr. President, I move that we close the public hearing for H-2022- 0043. Strader- Second. Hoaglun- I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? The ayes have it. The public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Hoaglun: Council Woman Strader -- Council Woman Perreault. Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 27 of 28 Perreault: I'm honored to be confused with her, because she's amazing. You just keep doing that. I'm -- that's my honor. Hoaglun: I do the same with my daughter and my sister. So, it's the same -- Perreault: I haven't heard you do this with Councilman Bernt and Borton yet, so waiting for that one. Okay. Hoaglun: Okay. So, one of you is going to have to grow beard I guess. I don't know. Perreault: Mr. President? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. I move that we approved the application for Matador Estates Subdivision, H-2022-0043, for the -- oh, I better get my little cheat sheet here. Let me restate that motion if I may. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File No. H-2022-0043 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 25th, 2022. Strader: Second. Hoaglun: I have a motion and a second to approve this item. Any discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Clerk please call the roll. Roll call- Borton, yea-, Cavener, yea-, Bernt, absent-, Perreault, yea-, Hoaglun, yea-, Strader, yea. Hoaglun: All ayes. Motion carries. The item is approved. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. EXECUTIVE SESSION 3. Per Idaho Code 74-206(l)(d): To consider records that are exempt from disclosure as provided in chapter 1, title 74, Idaho Code Hoaglun- Our next item is -- we show Executive Session. However, in the work session we were able to accomplish all that we could for tonight, so we don't need to have this Executive Session. I'm sure staff is very excited about that. So, we will vacate that item. FUTURE MEETING TOPICS Hoaglun- And go on to future meeting topics. So, Council, any-- any comments on future meeting topics? Nothing there? Next item adjournment. Meridian City Council October 25,2022 Page 28 of 28 Strader: Mr. President? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I move that we adjourn the meeting. Hoaglun: Motion to adjourn. All those in favor signify by saying aye. All ayes. Motion carries. We are adjourned. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:24 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) MAYOR ROBERT E SIMISON 11-9-2022 ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK 11-9-2022 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. C I Y OF MERID AN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC FORUM SIGWIN SHEET Date : October 25 , 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 is for this forum ) Name ( please print ) Brief Description of Discussion Topic E IDIAN.;--- Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline Page 4 Changes to Agenda: None Item #1: Overland & Wells II (H-2022-0030) Application(s): Development Agreement Modification & Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 11.65 acres of land (18.75 for the overall site), zoned C-G, located at 2600 E. Overland Rd. History: This property was annexed in 1994 & a DA was approved in 2016, which was later amended in 2020. A preliminary plat was approved in 2021, which included the adjacent property to the east – a final plat has not yet been approved for this property. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Use – Regional (MU-R) Summary of Request: The Applicant has submitted an application for a modification to the existing DA to change the development plan on the northern portion of the site from a retail grocery store (as shown on the left) to multi-family residential & vertically integrated residential (as shown on the right). The multi-family development is proposed to consist of 345 apartment units & the vertically integrated residential is proposed to consist of 3 commercial/work spaces with 2 dwelling units over each commercial/work space for a total of 6 units. A CUP is requested for a the MFR development which will contain a mix of studio, 1- and 2-bedroom units at a gross density of 30.13 29.61 units per acre on 11.65 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. The conceptually approved WinCo grocery store on this site would have provided a regional draw to this area as desired, whereas residential uses do not but they do provide housing for workers in the MU-R designated area and the general vicinity. A MFR development consisting of 360 units by the same developer was recently approved to develop on the adjacent property to the east – nd this is proposed to be the 2 phase of the multi-family development. Although the residential uses aren’t integrated with the adjacent commercial uses as desired in MU-R designated areas, pathways are proposed for pedestrian connectivity between these uses. Staff is not recommending a mix & integration of uses with this development as is typical in MU-R areas because the property has already been entitled with zoning. st Access is proposed from the south via S. Wells Ave. to be extended from E. Overland Rd., a mobility corridor, with the 1 phase of the nd subdivision & from the west via E. Cinema Dr., a local street, with the 2 phase of the subdivision. This site is approximately a ½ mile west of the Overland/Eagle Rd. intersection on the south side of the I-84 off-ramp. Transit services are available to serve this site. Overland Rd. is listed in the CIP to be widened to 7-lanes from Locust Grove to Eagle Road between 2036 & 2040. The intersection of Eagle & Overland Roads is listed in the CIP to be widened to 7-lanes on the north leg, 8-lanes on the south, 8-lanes on the east and 8- lanes on the west leg and signalized between 2031 and 2035. The ACHD report states the PM peak hour level of service is “E” which is an “acceptable” LOS. Although overall, the LOS may be “acceptable”, certain roadway segments and/or intersections turning movements are currently failing and will be worse with the adjacent MFR development to the east and the proposed development – this should be considered when determining if it’s appropriate to approve this application prior to the aforementioned improvements planned with the CIP being completed. Off-street parking is proposed for the MFR development in excess of UDC standards. A minimum of 640 spaces are required, 643 spaces are proposed. Bicycle parking is proposed in accord with the minimum standards. An additional 10 spaces are proposed for the vertically integrated residential use as proposed. A minimum of 3.15 acres of common open space that meets the standards for such is required. The common open space exhibit depicts 2.55 acres of common open space consisting of linear open space along the north & west boundaries of the site; a park with grass consisting of 9,803 s.f. in area; a large amenity area; roof-top terraces on the clubhouse and leasing office; and street buffer and additional common area along E. Cinema Dr. There is a 20’ wide sewer easement located along the west boundary of the site with a 14’ wide access road that will prohibit landscaping in that area; therefore, much of that area will not be able to be counted. An Alternative Compliance application was submitted today to the common open space standards, which has not yet been acted on by the Director. A clubhouse/swimming pool and other site amenities are proposed for the development that exceed the minimum standards. Conceptual building elevations & perspectives were submitted for the proposed structures as shown. The 2 northern buildings will be 4- stories, the 2 southern buildings will be 3-stories and the clubhouse will be 2-stories in height. A modernist vernacular theme of design is proposed with a monochromatic color palette of off-whites and shades of gray with lap siding accents and decorative balcony railings for color and texture. Final design is required to comply with the design standards in the ASM. Commission Recommendation: Denial of the CUP (the Commission is not a recommending body on the MDA request) Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Elizabeth Koeckeritz, Givens Pursley; Jonathan Fragoso, Morgan Stonehill Partners; Ryan Morgan, Morgan Stonehill Partners ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Written testimony: Greg Goins, Winco Foods – In support of the proposed development. He states they plan to remodel the existing Winco on Progress Ave. and don’t intend to build a new store in this location. Through their due diligence they’ve concluded that this is not a favorable location for another Winco & it’s not in their best interest to sell this land to another commercial or retail user. They believe this is the perfect infill location for more MFR development. Elizabeth Koeckeritz, Givens Pursley (Applicant’s Representative) – Response to the staff report: o Condition #A.3 requires a final plat to be submitted, approved and a plat recorded for the 2nd phase of this subdivision in order to create a developable parcel prior to submittal of a CZC & DR application for the proposed development. The Applicant requests approval to submit the CZC/DR applications after the final plat for this phase has been approved by Council but before it’s been recorded. The findings for the 1st DA amendment & preliminary plat require the property to be subdivided (i.e. final plat recorded) prior to submittal of any CZC/DR applications for the site. Therefore, this request cannot be granted. o Condition #B.2.9 requires street signs to be in place, sanitary sewer & water system to be approved and activated, road base approved by ACHD & the final plat recorded prior to applying for building permits. The Applicant requests this condition is amended so that they can apply for building permits after the final plat is approved but not yet recorded. Again, the final plat is required to be recorded first in order to create a parcel that’s eligible for development. This request cannot be granted. o Condition #A.2 requires a revised common open space exhibit to be submitted prior to the Council hearing that complies with the minimum standards – the Applicant proposes to request ALT from these standards. Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. Desire for better pedestrian access/walkability to be provided to adjacent businesses and employment uses within the area from the proposed development; ii. Concern pertaining to the impact on traffic in this area if the proposed development is approved; iii. Not in favor of more apartments on this property as the multi-family development to the east was approved largely because a retail grocery store was conceptually approved to develop on this site. Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: The Commission recommended denial of the application for the following reasons: traffic concerns and the approved development plan for this site is retail space and desire for it not to change. Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: Shawn Freeman – Opposed to the proposed modification to the DA to allow a multi-family development in place of the conceptually approved grocery store. He believes the City’s infrastructure cannot support any more HDR projects and approval of such will negatively impact the City in the future. Greg Goins, Winco Foods – In support of the proposed DA modification & MFR development. He states this site was originally purchased to relocate their store at 1050 S. Progress Ave. Since that time, the impact from Covid and the housing growth in Meridian & the Treasure Valley made it no longer economically feasible to do so. Instead, they plan to remodel the Progress store & eventually build a new store in South Meridian. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: The Council should determine if the Commission’s recommendation of denial of the CUP is appropriate. Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2022-0030, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 25, 2022: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2022-0030, as presented during the hearing on October 25, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2022-0030 to the hearing date of October 25, 2022 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #2: Matador Estates (H-2022-0043) Application(s): Annexation Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 4.84 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located at 1235 E. McMillan Rd. History: This property was previously platted as Lot 5, Crestwood Sub. #1 and a PBA was approved in the County to shift the eastern property line to the east an additional 5’. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: LDR Summary of Request: The applicant requests annexation of 5.09 acres of land with an R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) zoning district and a preliminary plat consisting of 14 building lots (for 1 existing home that is proposed to remain & 13 new SFR detached homes) and two (2) common lots on 4.84 acres of land. The proposed gross density of the subdivision is 2.89 units/acre, which is consistent with the desired density in the LDR FLUM designation. This property, along with the property to the east, is an enclave surrounded by existing & future SFR detached homes to the north, south & west. Development of infill properties is supported by the Comp Plan provided it doesn’t negatively impact the abutting, existing development. Because like uses (i.e. SFR detached residential) are proposed on similar size lots, the proposed development should be compatible with adjacent uses and shouldn’t have a negative impact. Access for the subdivision is proposed from the extension of the stub street at the west property boundary; the existing access via McMillan is required to be removed and the existing home is required to take access internally from within the subdivision and be re- addressed. A stub street is proposed to the east for future extension and interconnectivity. A 25’ wide landscaped street buffer is required along McMillan Rd. A 2.5’ tall rock wall is proposed at the back edge of the street buffer along McMillan Rd. and a berm is proposed within the buffer – fencing is not proposed. A micro-path connection is proposed to the sidewalk along McMillan Rd. for pedestrian access from within the subdivision. Typically, developments of less than 5 acres in size are not required to comply with UDC standards for common open space & site amenities. However, because this is an annexation request and the site is just under 5 acres at 4.84 acres, Staff recommends the Applicant provide a minimum of 12% (or 0.58 acre) qualified common open space & site amenity consisting of a minimum of one (1) point. The reason for Staff’s recommendation is because when a County subdivision such as this redevelops and the lots are just under 5 acres in size, a series of new subdivisions could develop without adequate open space overall. The plans currently depict 0.49 acre of qualified common open space consisting of a 7,080 s.f. common area lot, linear open space with a pathway and ½ of the street buffer along McMillan Rd. A sitting area with a concrete or paver surface and 2 benches is proposed as an amenity. Staff recommends an additional 0.09-acre of common open space is provided – the Applicant has confirmed the proposed parkways comply w/UDC standards and provide an additional 0.19 acre of open space which meets the requirement; trees & vegetative groundcover should be provided within the parkways in accord with UDC standards. Staff recommends a shade structure and picnic tables are added to the common area to qualify as a picnic area amenity; or the Applicant may choose another qualified amenity. Six (6) conceptual building elevation photos were submitted that demonstrate what future homes in this development will look like. A mix of single-story (with and without bonus rooms) & 2-story homes are proposed with a mix of building materials, including stone veneer accents, and architectural elements. Commission Recommendation: Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Marty Camberlango, Applicant ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: Randy Spiwak, Parkins-Nourse #14 Lateral Assoc. iv. Written testimony: Neil Wilson v. Key Issue(s): Surface water delivery, design of the pressurized irrigation system, and plan approval from the lateral association. Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: City’s requirements to provide a pressurized irrigation system for the proposed subdivision. Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: None Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: None Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2022-0043, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 25, 2022: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2022-0043, as presented during the hearing on October 25, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2022-0043 to the hearing date of ________ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) City Council Meeting October 25, 2022 Item #1: Overland & Wells II Aerial MapZoning MapFuture Land Use Map Modification & Conditional Use PermitDevelopment Agreement – Existing Conceptual Development PlanProposed Conceptual Development Plan Proposed Landscape PlanProposed Amenities Proposed Common Open Space (not approved) Conceptual Building Elevations Item #2: Matador Estates Annexation & Preliminary Plat– Preliminary PlatLandscape Plan Conceptual Building Elevation Photos w IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing continued from September 6, 2022 for Overland & Wells II (H- 2022-0030) by Morgan Stonehill Partners, Located at 2600 E. Overland Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0030 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. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : October 254 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 1 PROJECT NAME : Overland & Wells II ( H - 20 M030 ) 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 October 25,2022 Legend DATE: Continued from:September 6, 2022 -- -- f lei PFnjec_t Lorca liar ED TO: Mayor&City Council r FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner - ----- 208-884-5533 - SUBJECT: H-2022-0030—Overland&Wells II— f MDA, CUP,ALT t LOCATION: 2600 E. Overland Rd., in the SE 1/4 of Section 17,Township 3N.,Range IE. ' (Parcel#S1117438626) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant has submitted an application for a modification to the existing Development Agreement(H- 2016-0056,Inst. #2016-060157)to change the development plan on the northern portion of the site from a retail grocery store to multi-family residential; and 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 30.13 units per acre. Alternative compliance is also requested to UDC 11-3H-4D,which requires noise abatement to be provided for residential uses adjacent to a state highway,to allow double-paned windows in lieu of a berm/wall. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 18.75 acres(entire site subject to DA); 11.65 acres(DA modification area&multi-family development) Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R) Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped land Proposed Land Use(s) Multi-family development Current Zoning General Retail&Service Commercial(C-G) Proposed Zoning NA Lots(#and type;bldg/common) NA Phasing plan(#of phases) 1 Number of Residential Units(type 351 multi-family units[(7)studio units;(202) 1-bedroom of units) units;and(142)2-bedroom units] Page 1 Density(gross&net 30.13 units/acre(gross) Open Space(acres,total[%]/ 2.07 acres(18%) buffer/qualified) Amenities Clubhouse/lounge with a fitness facility and swimming pool, grills&fire pits,plaza, 10'wide multi-use pathway/trail system,public art,seating areas,pocket library,picnic area& shade structures and charging stations for electric vehicles. Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of 4/6/2022 attendees: History(previous approvals) AZ Ord.#665 (1994,Thomas&Wurst Properties);H-2016- 0056(DA#2016-060157—Volante Investments);H-2020- 0118(MDA)Inst.#2021-119176—Volante Investments/WinCo Foods). B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD No Commission Action (yes/no) Traffic Impact Study Yes es/no Access Access is proposed from Overland Rd.via S.Wells Ave. at the south boundary of the (Arterial/Collectors/State site and via the extension of E.Cinema Dr. at the west boundary of the site. Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Traffic Level of Service Overland Rd.—Better than"E"(acceptable level of service is"E") Stub 0 E. Cinema Dr. stops 50' short of the west boundary of the site—no other stub streets Street/Interconnectivity/ exist to this site. Cinema is required to be extended from the west to S.Wells Ave. Cross Access with the 2"d phase of WinCo Wells subdivision;Wells will be extended from Overland Rd.with the 1 A phase of WinCo Wells subdivision. Existing Road Network There are no existing internal roadways within the site. Existing Arterial A curb,gutter and attached 7'wide sidewalk exists along Overland Rd.;no buffer Sidewalks/Buffers exists. Proposed Road Capital Improvements Plan(CIP`I Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP): Improvements • Overland Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 7-lanes from Locust Grove Road to Eagle Road between 2036 and 2040. ■ The intersection of Overland Road and Locust Grove Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 7-lanes on the north leg, 7-lanes on the south leg,8-lanes on the east leg,and 7-lanes on the west leg,and signalized between 2026 and 2030. • The intersection of Overland Road and Eagle Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 7- lanes on the north leg, 7-lanes on the south leg, Manes on the east leg,and 8-lanes on the west leg,and signalized between 2031 and 2035. Fire Service Page 2 Description I Details I Page • Distance to Fire 1.0 mile from Station#4 Station • Fire Response Time Within 5-minute response time goal • Resource Reliability 78%(goal is 80%or greater) • Risk Identification 2—current resources would not be adequate to supply service to this project. • Accessibility Meets all required access,road widths and turnarounds • Special/resource Will require an aerial device—can meet this need in the required time frame if a needs truck company is required. • Water Supply Requires 2,500 gallons per minute for 2 hours. • Other Police Service • Distance to Police 1.4 miles Station • Police Response 3:21 (Priority 3); 5:50 (Priority 2); 11:10(Priority 1) Time • Calls for Service 3,222(in RD `M75V)—between 5/l/20 and 4/30/22) • %of calls for service %of P3 US 2.6% split by priority %of PZ US 792% %of P1 CF5 16.6% %of PO CPS I,&% • Accessibility • Specialty/resource needs • Crimes 357(RD—M751—between 5/l/20 and 4/30/22) • Crashes 140(RD—M751—between 5/l/20 and 4/30/22) • Other MPD can service this area if approved. For more info,see: https:llweblink.meridianciU.orQlWebLinkIDoeView.awx?id=263854&dbid—0&repo =MeridianCLtE West Ada School District (No comments were received from WASD) Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Directly adjacent in East Overland Road. Services • Sewer Shed Five Mile Trunk Shed • Estimated Project Sewer See Application ERU's • WRRF Declining 14.34 Balance Page 3 • Project Consistent with Yes WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns •No Permanent structures(buildings,carports,trash receptacle walls,fences, infiltration trenches,light poles,etc.)can be built within the utility easement. Water • Distance to Water Directly adjacent in East Overland Road. Services • Pressure Zone 4 Pressure is 71PSI with Firm Well 25 off-line. • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality There are two long dead ends for fire hydrants which may result in poor water quality. • Project Consistent with Yes Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns Offsite waterline to the east must be installed to allow looping before this development is constructed. Water stub into property at the southeast corner of the apartments needs to be abandoned per City Requirements if it is not used. C. Project Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend Legend ffPrnyec+Lacafior. I_. Prat Lacs-or I� MU f - e � i D •n _ idd I {~ = f Page 4 Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend *8" L L-. Le end Project Lncaton L- Project Lao❑=Fon S` RUT City Lima# ----- R — Planned Paroeis CLC f C: R1 - O-C L 1 R-8 1 RR R-4 _ 1 3 R -PME 3 -- III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Kristen McNeill, Givens Pursley 601 W. Bannock St., Boise,ID 83702 B. Owner: WinCo Foods, LLC—PO Box 5756,Boise, ID 83705 C. Agent/Representative: Jonathan Fragoso, Morgan Stonehill Partners—333 Josephine St., Ste. 2, Denver, CO 80206 IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 7/19/2022 8/21/2022 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 7/14/2022 8/18/2022 Public hearing notice sign posted 7/22/2022 8/24/2022 on site Nextdoor posting 7/15/2022 8/18/2022 Page 5 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN(HTTPS://WWW.MERIDIANCITY.ORGICOMPPLAN): Land Use: This property is designated Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R) on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM). The purpose of the MU-R designation is to provide a mix of employment,retail,and residential dwellings and public uses near major arterial intersections. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses together, including residential, and to avoid predominantly single use developments such as a regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses. Developments should be anchored by uses that have a regional draw with the appropriate supporting uses. The developments are encouraged to be designed consistent with the conceptual MU-R plan depicted in Figure 3D(pg. 3-17). The conceptually approved WinCo grocery store on this site would have provided a regional draw to this area as desired,whereas residential uses do not but they do provide housing for workers in the MU-R designated area and the general vicinity. A multi-family development consisting of 360 units was recently approved to develop on the adjacent property to the east(H-2021-0007 Seasons at Meridian). This in part was justified by the plans to develop a grocery store on this site,which now is proposed to be replaced by more apartments. This development proposes to add another 351 units for a total of 711 apartment units in this immediate area; commercial/retail uses are still anticipated to develop on the southern 7.1 acres of the site.Although the residential uses aren't integrated with the adjacent commercial uses as desired in MU-R designated areas,pathways are proposed for pedestrian connectivity between these uses. While some neighborhood and community services are within walking and biking distance,most of the job base, and especially family-wage jobs,will require driving to employment areas. The City generally considers mixed use areas separated by regional corridors as independent areas. It is difficult to justify them as mixed use when they are less walkable and not integrated. Further, connectivity south across Overland and east across Eagle,programmed to be 7 or more lanes, and increasing pedestrian and bicycle activity across such wide facilities will not be appealing,and may exacerbate signal timings challenges. Note:Because this property was annexed and entitled with C-G zoning in 1994 without the requirement of a Development Agreement, Staff is not recommending a mix and integration of uses on this site as-is typically desired in the MU-R designation. Transportation: There are no collector streets planned across this site per the Master Street Map(MSM). This site will be accessed from the south by S. Wells Ave. from E. Overland Rd., a mobility corridor, and from the west by E. Cinema Dr., a local street. This site is approximately a half mile west of the Overland/Eagle Rd. intersection, a major arterial intersection, on the south side of the I-84 off-ramp. Transit services are available to serve this site via Route 42. With the preliminary plat(H-2021-0007—WinCo Wells),ACHD required additional right-of-way to be dedicated for the widening of Overland Rd. to provide a dedicated westbound right-turn lane at Wells Ave. when Wells is constructed to intersect Overland Rd. The Wells/Overland intersection is required to be signalized prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the multi-family development on the adjacent property to the east(H-2021-0007 DA Inst. 2021-119174). If this property develops first, the Applicant should work with the adjacent property to the east to coordinate the off-site construction of a westbound right-turn lane on Overland Rd. at the Wells Ave.intersection and signalize the intersection consistent with the ACHD report. Overland Rd. is listed in the Capital Improvement Plan(CIP)to be widened to 7-lanes from Locust Grove to Eagle Road between 2036 and 2040. The intersection of Eagle and Overland Roads is listed in the CIP to be widened to 7-lanes on the north leg, 8-lanes on the south, 8-lanes on the east and 8-lanes on the west leg and signalized between 2031 and 2035. The proposed multi-family development is estimated to generate 1,607 additional trips/day with 138 additional vehicle trips/hour in the PM peak hour. The grocery store was estimated to generate an Page 6 additional 7,723 trips/day with 555 additional trips/hour in the PM peak hour and 820 additional trips/hour in the Saturday peak hour. The ACHD report states the PM peak hour traffic count for Overland Rd. is estimated at 1,540,which is a PM peak hour level of service of better than"B"; acceptable level of service for a five-lane principal arterial is"E". Although overall,the level of service may be"acceptable", certain roadway segments and/or intersections turning movements are currently failing and will be worse with the adjacent multi- family development to the east and the proposed development. One of the most congested AM peak hour travel movements—eastbound Overland traffic turning north on Eagle—is also operating at an `E' service currently. This travel movement exceeds the desired V/C ratio of 0.8, currently at 0.9,and increase to 1.16 with(or without)this project constructed. One of the mitigation strategies is simply to increase the green signal time of this movement. Other travel directions also suffer from significant congestion,including the northbound Eagle travel lane, a conflicting direction,which in the AM may back up through both Goldstone and Copper Point. With the development to the east,ACHD recommended mitigation measures to lessen the impacts from the development including revisions to the phasing plan to coincide with the District's planning Capital Projects and reducing the scope and/or scale of the project.See ACHD report in Section IX.Hfor more information. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES(hyps://www.meridiancity.or/p lan): Goals,Objectives, &Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics): • "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D) The proposed multi family apartments will contribute to the variety of housing types in the City and specifically in the southern portion of the City. • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F) City water and sewer services are available and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. • "Locate higher density housing near corridors with existing or planned transit,Downtown, and in proximity to employment centers." (2.01.01H) The proposed multi family development is located along I-84 and E. Overland Rd., a mobility arterial, which is a major east/west corridor proposed to be widened to 7-lanes; and in close proximity to neighboring employment centers in the Bonito, Rackham and Silverstone subdivisions at Eagle/Overland. Transit services are available to serve this area. • "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices."(3.07.01A) The proposed apartment buildings will be set back over 100'from the northern property line adjacent to the I-84 off-ramp. A 35'wide landscaped street buffer is proposed along the northern boundary; a 22 foot wide buffer is proposed along the western boundary; and a I 0-foot wide buffer is proposed along the southern boundary adjacent to Cinema Dr. The tallest buildings at 4-stories in height are proposed on the northern portion of the site with 3-story buildings on the southern portion. • "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for diverse housing types throughout the City."(2.01.01 G) Page 7 The proposed multi family apartments will contribute to the mix of housing types available in the City. There is currently a mix of housing types within a mile of this site consisting of single family, townhomes and multi family apartments. • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land." (3.07.00) The proposed multi family apartments should be compatible with future like uses to the east and existing retail, restaurant, service, entertainment and employment uses in the nearby vicinity, which should minimize conflicts and maximize use of land. • "Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development."(3.03.03A) The proposed development will connect to City water and sewer systems;services are required to be provided to and though this development in accord with current City plans. • "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels within the City over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02) The area surrounding this vacant site is part of the City and is almost entirely developed with the exception of the property to the east which is approved for a multi family development(H-2020- 0118;H-2021-0007). Development of this infill property will result in more efficient provision of public services. • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G) Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks is required to be provided with development as proposed. • "Encourage and support mixed-use areas that provide the benefits of being able to live, shop,dine, play, and work in close proximity,thereby reducing vehicle trips, and enhancing overall livability and sustainability."(3.06.02B) The proposed multi family development and future retail development is in close proximity to employment, restaurant, entertainment, office and service uses. This mix of uses will enable residents to shop, dine,play and work in close proximity to their residence, thus reducing vehicle trips and enhancing overall livability and sustainability. • "Slow the outward progression of the City's limits by discouraging fringe area development; encourage development of vacant or underutilized parcels currently within City limits." (4.05.03B) Development of the subject vacant land, currently in the City limits, is encouraged over parcels on the fringe of the City. The development of this property will result in better provision of City services. VI. STAFF ANALYSIS A. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION(MDA) A modification to the existing Development Agreement(DA)(H-2016-0056 Volante Investments—Inst. #2016-0060157)is proposed to change the use and update the conceptual development plan and building elevations for the northern portion of the site. The DA originally included the abutting property to the east at 2700 E. Overland Rd.but was amended in 2021 to exclude that property from the agreement and deleted provision#5.1.3 which pertained to development of that property(H-2020-0118, Inst. #2021- 119176). Page 8 The existing conceptual development plan depicts an 85,000 square foot WinCo Foods grocery store on the northern portion of the site and vacant land on the southern portion of the site planned for retail uses. The proposed plan is for a 351-unit apartment complex(i.e. multi-family development); seven(7)retail building pads are depicted on the southern portion of the site. This is the same developer of the multi- family development to the east that was recently approved for 360 units—this project will be phase II. WinCo has decided not to open a new store in this location and instead is planning to remodel its existing store in Meridian on S. Progress Ave. They feel this is not a favorable location for another store and that it's not in their best interest to sell this land to another commercial or retail user. As discussed above in Section V, Staff believes the proposed plan provides housing for nearby employment uses and contributes to the mix of uses desired in the MU-R designation. The adjacent commercial development to the west provides retail,restaurant and entertainment uses which will be utilized by the residents and are within easy walking distance. Staff is generally supportive of the proposed modification;however,has concerns about the negative impact any development of this property will have on the existing transportation network in this area. Note: When the 1st amendment to the DA and the preliminary_plat was approved with H-2021-0007, Staff had included a provision in the DA,which was approved by Council in the Findings, for the property to be subdivided(i.e. a final plat recorded)prior to submittal of any CZC&DR applications for the site. The Applicant changed the language in the amended DA, it wasn't caught by Staff/Council and the DA was recorded with the incorrect language.As part of the subject amendment, Staff recommends this provision(#5.1e)is amended consistent with Council's approval of the Findings. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT(CUP) Conditional use permit for a multi-family development consisting of 351 residential units [(7) studio units, (202) 1-bedroom&(142)2-bedroom units] on 11.65 acres of land in the C-G zoning district at a gross density of 30.13 units per acre. The two (2)northern buildings (Building 3)will be 4-stories in height,the two (2) southern buildings (Buildings 1 and 2)will be 3-stories in height and the clubhouse will be 2-stories in height.Dwelling units will range in size from 569 to 1,159 square feet. This development is proposed to be constructed in one phase. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): The proposed use is subject to the following standards: (Staff's analysis/comments in italic text) 11-4-3-27: MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT: `B. Site Design: 1. Buildings shall provide a minimum setback of ten feet(10')unless a greater setback is otherwise required by this title and/or title 10 of this Code. Building setbacks shall take into account windows, entrances,porches and patios,and how they impact adjacent properties. The proposed structures appear to comply with this standard except for the garages along the eastern property boundary; the site plan should be revised to reflect a minimum 10 foot wide building setback around the perimeter of the development. 2. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas,waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. The site plan depicts screened trash enclosures not visible from a public street; all proposed transformer/utility vaults and other service areas shall comply with this requirement. 3. A minimum of eighty(80)square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks, and/or enclosed yards. Page 9 Landscaping, entryway and other access ways shall not count toward this requirement. In circumstances where strict adherence to such standard would create inconsistency with the purpose statements of this section,the Director may consider an alternative design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions as set forth in section 11-5B-5 of this title. The Applicant's narrative states a minimum of 80 square feet of private usable open space will be provided for each unit in the form of balconies and patios. Floor plans should be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application that demonstrate compliance with this standard. 4. For the purposes of this section,vehicular circulation areas,parking areas, and private usable open space shall not be considered common open space. These areas were not included in the common open space calculations for the site. 5. No recreational vehicles, snowmobiles,boats or other personal recreation vehicles shall be stored on the site unless provided for in a separate, designated and screened area. The Applicant shall comply with this requirement. 6. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. The proposed parking meets and exceeds UDC standards per the analysis below. Based on(7) studio units; (202) 1-bedroom units; (142)2-bedroom units and a 9,950 square foot clubhouse,a minimum of 629 off-street parking spaces are required, including guest parking, with 344 of those in a covered carport or garage. Accessible parking is required in accord with ADA standards. A total of 653 spaces are proposed,which exceeds the minimum standards by 24 spaces. Based on 653 vehicle parking spaces,a minimum of 27 bicycle parking spaces shall be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C.A total of 27 bicycle spaces are proposed in accord with this standard. 7. Developments with twenty(20)units or more shall provide the following: a. A property management office. b. A maintenance storage area. c. A central mailbox location, including provisions for parcel mail,that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access. d. A directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. (Ord. 18-1773,4-24-2018) The Applicant's narrative states these items will be provided,- the site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should depict the location of these items in accord with this standard C. Common Open Space Design Requirements(UDC 11-4-3-27C): The total baseline land area of all qualified common open space shall equal or exceed ten(10)percent of the gross land area for multi-family developments of five(5)acres or more. Based on 11.65 acres of land, a minimum of 1.17 acres of common open space is required to be provided. In addition to the baseline open space requirement, a minimum area of outdoor common open space shall be provided as follows: a. One hundred fifty(150) square feet for each unit containing five hundred(500) or less square feet of living area.None of the units are below 500 square feet(sf.) of living area. Page 10 b. Two hundred fifty(250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred(500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area.All 351 units are between 500 and 1,200 sf.; therefore, a total of 87,750 sf. (or 2.01 acres) of common open space is required. c. Three hundred fifty(350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area.None of the units are over 1,200 s.f of living area. Per this standard, a total of 87,750 sf. (or 2.01 acres) of common open space is required. Combined with the 1.17 acres noted above for the baseline requirement, a minimum of 3.18 acres of common open space that meets the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C is required to be provided in the proposed development. A total of 110,905 square feet(or 2.55 acres) of common open space is proposed consisting of linear open space along the north &west boundaries of the site with a 10 foot wide multi-use pathway connecting to the pathway in the first phase of the development to the east; a park with grass consisting of 9,803 sf. in area; a large amenity area; roof-top terraces on the clubhouse and leasing office; and street buffer and additional common area along E. Cinema Dr., a local street as depicted on the open space exhibit in Section VIII.D. There is an existing 40 foot wide sewer easement centered on the west property boundary(20' on this site) that contains an access road.A 14 foot wide access road is required to be maintained on this site,lawn and shrubs are allowed outside of the access road area within the easement but trees are not. Staff recommends an additional 5-feet is provided outside of the easement area for trees per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C and 11-3B-12C,or, apply for alternative compliance as set forth in UDC 11-5B-5. (Note:If wheel stops are not proposed to be provided within abutting parking spaces, an additional 2-feet is required to be added to the adjacent buffer to allow for vehicle overhang per UDC 11-3C-5B;the length of parking spaces may be reduced by 2-feet to 17 feet if 2-feet is added to the buffer width.)In order to count toward the open space requirement, the area must not be less than 400 sf. in area and shall have a minimum length and width of 20 feet and be fully landscaped. The non- landscaped area where the maintenance road is located may not count toward the common open space requirement,therefore, the open space exhibit should be revised and additional open space should be provided to meet the minimum 3.18 acres. Also an option would be to request alternative compliance to the common open space standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C per 11-4-3-27C.3b.Note: The allowance for alternative compliance (ALT)was intended to apply to the baseline common open space requirement but was inadvertently placed in the wrong code section with the last amendment—this is being rectified with the next series of code amendments but until then,ALT can be requested. 2. Common open space shall be not less than four hundred(400) square feet in area,and shall have a minimum length and width dimension of twenty feet(20'). The common open space areas depicted on the open space exhibit in Section VIII.E meet this requirement. 3. In phased developments, common open space shall be provided in each phase of the development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units. This project is proposed to develop in one phase. 4. Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process,common open space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets unless separated from the street by a berm or constructed barrier at least four feet(4)in height,with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access. (Ord. 09-1394, 3-3-2009, ef£retroactive to 2-4-2009)None of the common open space is located adjacent to a collector or an arterial street. Page 11 D. Site Development Amenities: All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space, and recreation amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as noted in UDC 11-4-3- 27D. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of the multi-family development based on the number of units. For multi-family developments with 75 units or more, four(4) amenities shall be provided with at least one (1)from each category. For developments with more than 100 units such as this,the decision-making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development. The following amenities are proposed from each of the following categories: 1)Quality of Life— clubhouse/lounge with a game room,24-hour fitness facility, coffee bar and a business center; pocket library; grills and fire pits; and public art space; 2) Open Space—9,620 s.f.grassy courtyard area with six(6) seating areas with benches and shade structures, a hammock lawn, a 3,800 s.f. rooftop terrace, and a pocket library; 3)Recreation: swimming pool and a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway around the west and north boundaries of the site that connects to the perimeter pathway in Phase I; and 4)Multi-Modal: charging stations for electric vehicles. Staff is of the opinion the proposed amenities are commensurate with the size of development proposed. E. Landscaping Requirements: Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts",of this title.Additionally, all street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation that complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27E.2. The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should depict landscaping along the street facing elevations adjacent to E. Cinema Dr. in accord with these standards. Landscaping is required to be provided along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. Street buffer landscaping along the I-84 off- ramp, classified as an entryway corridor, and along E. Cinema Dr., a local street, is required to be installed with the subdivision improvements. F. Maintenance and Ownership Responsibilities: All multi-family developments shall record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development,including,but not limited to, structures,parking,common areas,and other development features." The Applicant shall comply with this requirement;a copy of such shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy within the development. Noise Abatement: Because residential uses are proposed adjacent to 1-84,noise abatement is required to be provided within the buffer along 1-84 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D.Noise abatement in the form of a berm or a berm and wall combination is required to be provided approximately parallel to the freeway. The top of the berm or berm/wall is reuqired to be a minimum of 10-feet higher than the elevation at the centerline of the freeway. The Applicant is not proposing to construct a berm and/or wall as required and requests alternative compliance to this standard. Per UDC 11-3H-4D.4, the Director may approve alternative compliance as set forth in UDC 11-5 where the Applicant has a substitute noise abatement proposal in accord with ITD standards and prepared by a qualified sound engineer. Alternative compliance(ALT)to the noise abatement standards is requested because the buildings along the northern boundary of the site are set back between 110 and 145+/-feet from the 1-84 off-ramp and a berm/wall with landscaping would not adequately buffer a multi-story building. A letter was submitted from Bionomics Environmental, Inc., listed on ITD's website as an acceptable consultant for noise studies,with an alternate recommendation for noise abatement in the form of double-paned windows with an STC rating of 31 for all units facing 1-84 and the off-ramp and minimizing the number of window openings facing 1-84. The letter states that in his opinion, double-paned windows are preferable Page 12 to a noise wall and will provide adequate noise abatement for this site based on the reasons in the letter included in Section VIII.G. Based on this analysis,the Director is supportive of the request for ALT for double-pane windows with an STC rating of 31 to be provided in all units facing 1-84 and the off-ramp. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations and perspectives were submitted for the proposed structures as shown in Section VIII.E. A modernist vernacular theme of design is proposed with a monochromatic color palette of off-whites and shades of gray with lap siding accents and decorative balcony railings for color and texture. Final design of all structures is required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. A final plat application is required to be submitted,approved and a plat recorded for the second phase of WinCo Wells subdivision(H-2021-0007)to create a developable parcel prior to submittal of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application for the proposed development. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed modification to the existing Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit; and the Director has approved the request for Alternative Compliance per the provisions included in Section IX in accord with the Findings in Section X. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on August 4,2022. At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend denial of the subject CUP request. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing_ a. In favor: Elizabeth Koeckeritz, Givens Pursley;Jonathan Fragoso,Morgan Stonehill Partners; Ryan Morgan,Morgan Stonehill Partners b. In opposition:None C. Commenting. None d. Written testimony: Elizabeth Koeckeritz,Givens Pursley e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s) public testimony a. None 3. Ke, ids)of discussion by Commission: a. Desire for better pedestrian access/walkabili , to be provided to adjacent businesses and employment uses within the area from the proposed development; b. Concern pertaining to the impact on traffic in this area if the proposed development is approved; c. Not in favor of more apartments on this property as the multi-family development to the east was approved largely because a retail rrg ocery store was conceptually approved to develop on this site. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. The Commission recommended denial of the application for the following reasons: traffic concerns and the approved development plan for this site is retail space and desire for it not to change. 5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. None Page 13 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Existing Conceptual Development Plan&Building Elevations and Conditions —^'@ ---------f'�...� —�-= �_ '. SITE DATA DATE o4nz zo15 -- -- LOT 1875 ACRES 85,000 S.F.MAJOR 4855TRLL5 5.7011000 ---------- LOT 2 LOT 3 i n TOTALS PARCEL B LEGEND NUMBER OF STANDARD SPACES PARKING SPACES MAJOR A ® CARTCORRAL 85,000 S.F. #TOTAL NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES SINGLE STORY I PER PARCEL PROPERTYlFARCEL LINE P i i D BUILDING LINE ---- EASEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK • wLI 777T7 BICYCLE PARKING APN,S1117438626 FAR:24% a I MAX,BUILDING HEIGHT,32'-4' ZONING',C-G-GENERAL RETAIL AND DESTINATION PLACE SUB. SERVICE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TOTAL SITE AREA',816,2135,F,113,75 ACRES w 1 TOTAL PARKING AREA, 129,388 S.F. p� TOTAL PARKING LANDSCAPE AREA:35,5175.F, PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE PROVIDED:271 OZNi _ TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA:58,5885.F, 04L�Luu� PERCENTAGE OF LANDSCAPE:12% Ow5w PARKING STALLS REQUIRED:170 ZO�� a . PARKING STALLS PROVIDED:405 CINEMA DR $W PARKING STALL SIZE:9,5'x20' ADA STALLB REQUI RED,9 ADA STALLS PROVIDED',10 BICYCLE SPACES REQUIRED,20 �eme,e�ow, BICYCLE SPACES PROVIDED',32 xwmu�.en rwuEwR ___ I nPPLlnnNrOC[n'IR'eIIECT. O BLOCK 2 Q 2—ernavT aLE,o N VACANT LAND w-w'r<IIH co c-�Ax�lamLLUA 'w caNT.�cr.cLea wms NnAa,m�mmem.�RHn,.bmN Q I'I I I 5�;wic�nNCE O I 8'l50 TALLON LN-NE.STE tHO �O OLYMPI.N'A9850E PRONE. 60.353-1465 I CONTACT:SnANIXIN JOxrvSON,PE E-MAIL,bmodovlaMaonTg�ecj.Iliaoce,eom ______ _ LEGAL DESCRIPTION'. _ - - - - - - - - BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL 1,LOCATED IN THE e«w.... SW Y OF THESE Y.OF SECTION 17,T,3M,R,IE„ SHEET TITLE ar Q »s E OVERLAND RD B,M,BOISE,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN �- NORTH SITE PLAN SHEET SCALE:1"=40'-0" -- sc C-1 Page 14 `�xu `ilen,�[Wu a FRONT ELEVATION FALL wuu•�'•W WlnCo A 6 ENLARGED ENTRY/EKR �.m n«GE.ENLARGED FRONT EXIT 1 /OOOF III IF AFAR FI FVATIDN Poro +rtrtnLKM<T R 1 wwu vufc� wllLIwIEL wxu wxeL x�._.nnr_ on sA�bw ¢ ow wccar xnxo oa Fur � � rlrf SDn tact GNV � RIGHT ELEVATION . u '�00� Enr 3rvr er,a treu srnoaax er,� rwn au ssvr ea du � LEFT ELEVATION Page 15 4. USES PERMITTED BY THIS AGREEMENT: 'nis Agreement shall vest the right to develop the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 4.1 The uses allowed pursuant to this Agreement are only those uses allowed under the UDC. 4.2 No change in the uses specified in this Agreement shall be allowed without modification of this Agreement. 5. CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 5.1. Owner/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following special conditions: 1. All development shall comply with City of Meridian ordinances and the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Development of-the west parcel located at 2600 E.Overland Road property shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development plan and building elevations included in Exhibits AA and A.5. 3. Prior to development of the east parcel located at 2700 F. Overland Road, the Development Agreement shall be modified to include a conceptual development plan that is consistent with the MU-R F L U M designation contained in the Comprehensive Plan. 4. With development ofthe subject property,the developer is required to extend sewer k water mains to and through the property. 5. Future development shall comply with the design standards contained iit UDC l l- 3A-19 and the Architectural Standards Manual and/or any updated versions thereof. Note: Provision#5.1.3 was stricken by the 1't Addendum to the DA(H-2020-0118, Inst. #2021-119176). Page 16 B. Proposed Conceptual Development Plan DATE 1-ft Ji i! h 7'ik6 � R ,_ � 'i II ITTIII'',? -ITTI'l IIIIII;II I I Irlli�LL irn rll:alal�ra' �i — - .I•FIIkFFilH I' — y r r'lllllllfl _ trlllllll;r z II �j• L rh } m rr� va i ......... T d r z ! J li Wit' - E.Owing ng 04.(POW Z1 rn r Z Page 17 C. Proposed Landscape Plan, Site Amenity Plan& Site Data(date: 4/27/2022) GFNFPALLA"DSCAPENOTES UND ... PLAH35CHEDULE GROUP •• ''r•••'�,• " Y M-CUUM BOTANESILRAE Eoor SM RAY .. .-. AC AB ALS3ix FREEWXI'.EAfOUM'TM BAB 2CAL 15 CaTISO MENTAL'FAST1GkTA' B86 2CAL 1A ppp-F,y CEOC CEIRS CCC[EITIALIS BB 2CAL 34 a PE cLArnesns EBm1eEA.ramNs RN!' BAB zCAL 11 _ GAG GNM BLEBA'MnM GDLU TL BAB 2CAL 7 LLCA u-LmxFRChnHi eae TCkL 17 _ .. .. . '. .- � �.�v..r• EhRSEBI(REPS BOTANIGYhNE ROOT s� Q1Y ".•-•,.. PI FA PM PU;M FASTIGSTR' BAB fi H-OGM 15 .... ...i n u. .. - - TA B% TAXMKN CMTRt7.N'SR74 UT61 848 C HT. 5 - ve ORNNB47AL TFEfS BOTANC&NAE ROOT SVE RAY ACM ACERTA1AWN'HOTWNLS' BAB 1SC'L 33 A61AB ABANCFER X GRAI DFUX?A'AlIRI1.N MLIWROE B A B C CUJNP 19 u - w�a-ium umma�n.r.. �xr STREET LOr THILR TMSRENJIREO TPE€SPAWIDEH E0RER4DRIA I SLO 15 15 - _ STREET EURERS $ • - - �.-"O"r STREET BUFFER WIDTH REWIRED BUFFER WIDTH PROVIDED - •• .. .. w.iiur na ECINEMA DRIVE IV 4r ~ AUJRCIIET V5E NRERS = y LL� LOCATIONI BUFFERWIDTH REQUIRED SURER WIDTH PROV10E0 U G7 NORTHOUFFER 3S 35' J 2 WEST WFFfR 2R 23' LL G G .. .,I , w.uxoww awmu FAMNR LOT BURERS C3 = _ WIDTH MORARE0 WIDTH PROVIDED 2 - x •. n w-.ixn¢n..a naae vnm svvi riRium onaa xm¢ox LL ..e�om'c�exs INTERAIRI LRIIOfiLPIIIEIfi L7 � -_ TOTAL/Of STALLS TREES REQUIRED TREES PROV1 D a art•'.r... . - �wn+a�n:•x. - - •- nwaviwru Page 18 THE € �_ Lao a J LEGEND - �. � aGWIrTUf J J m� - - - _--- ------- - --_JP a Rum qua �r�. s Nil wcra.wm W �. 1' aa._ THE Lul I i - �ti TRAIL NODE w/POCKEt LIBRARY INTERSTATE I.84 �J» >'nRLl�oesEar TRAIL CONNECTION 1p 7-7TO PHASE 1 PASSIM COURTYARD �e I JW- 10'MULTP-USE TRAIL � CARPORTS - '2 W POVL COII RTYARD x O ,a LEASING PLAZA VJCD ENHANCED INTERS{CTION W C7 PAVING _ C � J s C3 a 1 HAMMCKK LAriH IF C INEMADR.IIRRANEDGE L-3.0�~ Page 19 mro'4 xll� 4�n y.y.�.�q D..pe.�14Ju.rvcw s.Y•Taq >A1Y 6llY ;ar ir'ra_4 pWfr n iolxy Ip}'.Y >Ir`luiva6 sEA r iolnl s4lY � ip�7s1 NtaY _ n a» Ran YviN.lvu.��ry m 1gMn x;low(y e_ •I;umVy 27Pu>uf1 Nf fpolYlE ��� a�llvrea4 Rmn Rrh pl aPu>uf1 ppyr aumF4k� pia�E tmlx uaf� loaf �/ u�umVy {sr yYr y Xoam� yXo� +Xo� n poovE 1par upon {RXZ upoao� loaf a4ul% uP�1 5sn yYY a s-ar vsPx rmmy c;apawy cis _ +n�+w 4n•n n pow [as m Pow ia>< upopwE fA3 R popwE a4�s SITE DATA OVERLAND WELLS II APARTMENTS NG nOpCan SiOHEn I;; 4RRS5 PEwIGI'1 LAND #OTT N#LIMITED-ALL RIO HTS RE SERVE0.THE CO nCE PTY i.nD GRAWIrva3 ARE PROTECTED 11NDER�S :v.D lniE WI A1IOM AL CO WRIO HT AMDINTE LLE CTD�LL Fki1FERTY LAWS AXD CAn nCT BE Il3ED In AnY AWnnER WMH OUT EXPRESS WRITTEn CONSEMi- Page 20 D. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(dated: 4/27/22) Ell M, I r w _ = J OPEN SF3ACE PRa[MED ' ' u.■.wra�[[rerzs stews r amrmraaery-•,—_— geyrc W k x y 2C amrivarona.caw �s p f e wmcsti a a..a w-.,,wn Z J C = Z W LL ! .-•k k•. • 7 •� w�• ....n.. .. r II S4 s ii 4 1 4 I+ L-4.O Page 21 E. Conceptual Building 1 i Renderings fori Clubhouse a o ® ■ o e I Tra 11 11 L11•1•1■1■1•--11 inr ai 11 11■1l.1l.1l.1 711 7 1 1l. CONCEPT ELEVATION A IIIp �11 o �' 11 11' 1 11,1 I- O11 ��� ■1111■■ ■ ■�■: ■■ ..■ ■■ ■ �■ ■u 11 � ■ ■ CONlCEPT ELE VA710N B KEYLEGEND o © ww ® o ; e. ra ® nELEVATIONS OVERLAND LAN 111111 1 11 11 _ If LU As 11 =111 11 11111! n■■u T a]■■ ■ ■■■■ ■ CONCEPT ELEVATION A o e o n ® a o =a 11 11� 1! ■■■. Ills ■� 11 1�- �. ■dr ■: 1111 GONECE PT ELE NATION B KEYLEGEND OVERLAND W.E.L,LS'.11, APARTMENTS LAN 5HORP A. • El n� LL m DI ® = d m ■ ■ m LN, I ir — 0 1 _6 4--��d ■ ■ m L T. low l_LI._ ■ I1J L<LMEMO 6 CONCEPT • KEY LEGEND suoca- snxca. unnuL,so wxcErl�cnr+x �E ❑2 ��� ®�nurroE © i.�raLruiutic ❑8 LtaLoworr BUILDING 3 ELEVATIONS rRe OVERLAND WELLS 11 APARTMENTS NG� 17 NNUKMS D SIGN LANG rr I .. GROUP nERiGiAH. �G]LHG i O O]tl]]LH G'L�Mrt ED•nLL•RLGHiS RESERVED.IHE—C EFT.....ING6 ARE PRGIEC I ED UNDER Y I AND—E-Al.-AL COPTRIGHI AND INI—ECIVAL PRGPERI LAWS AND-.H.1 E E—D-R.HT MANNER WGH-I E%MESS WRIIIEH-.1ENI. Page 23 i # OVERLANDVISION THE i Page 24 Page 25 r VIEW LOOKING POOL,FITNESS.CLUBHOUSE AND ROOF TERRACE 11A 'j" OVERLAND WELLS II APARTMENTS „a Noaws PFSMN i®u"xo°v ...�e�.. re..e 9 ■■ ■ AERIAL PERSPECTIVE VIEW LOOKING NORTH WEST OVERLAND WELLS II APARTMENTS N+ mo '_- NDRUSD IGI ��e�wP .E.rei...ie.we '� i O ■ �I AERIAL PERSPECTIVE VIEW LOOKING NORTHEAST L - Norwe uu�iu+ ineu OVERLAND WELLS o IIo APARTMENTS N+ 11 GROPP Page 26 V 771 VIEW FPOM CROSSROAD LOOKING EAST IIT�- Jl» L�aoo v OVERLAND WFELLSe11 APARTMENTS N+ 12 .00e. NONuso�� pr _ �dl d �-r VIEW FROM URBAN PLAZA LOOKING EAST NowsJourninwn OVERLAND WELLS II APARTMENTS N+ 1Z J VIEW FROM ADJECENT SITE LOOKING NORTHEAST p� P OVERLAND WELLS o IIo APARTMENTS N+ 1 /I `t e, Nouus oesrr cwo°u 0 Page 27 F. Legal Description for Property Subject to Amended Development Agreement UEGAL DESCRIPMON f THE LAND PaVIDF1 0 R 0 U P J UN E 6,2022 PROJECT NO.:122056 2600 EAST OVERLAND ROAD A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATEIF IN A PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTH EAST QUARTER OF SECTION 17,TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH,RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE M E R DIAN,CITY Of MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY, IDAHO,BEING MORE PARTIICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: OOA+MENCING AT THE SOUTH ONE QUARTER ODRNER OF SAID SECTION 17, FROM WHICH THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 17 BEARS NORTH 89P45`00' EAST,7656 84 FEET THENCE NORTH 00-24-W EAST, dSAO FEET,TO THE SOLFTHEAST CORNER OF DESTINATION PLACE SUBD VISION FILED IN BOOK 43 OF PLATS AT PAGE 11190,RECOROSOf ADA COUNTY, IDAMD,SAID POINT BEING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF EAST OVERLAND ROAD AND THE POINT OF BEG INNING; THENCEONTHE EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID DESTINATION PLACE SUEIDIVISION NORTH W2405" EAST, FEET,TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH ERLY RIGHT-0E-WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE 84; THENCE ALONG SAIDSOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE THE FOLLOWING 3 ODUIRSES AND DISTANCES: THENCE NORTH 8:V35'27R EAST,158.13 FEET; THENCE 5 H SWIW23"EAST,471.33 FEET,TO A POINTOF CURVATURE- THENCE 53-33 FEET ALONG THEARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,806J.96 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02'00'17"AND WHOSE LONG CHORD BEARS SOUTH 85'1Q'34" EAST,63.33 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-0E-WAY LINE SOUTH OW24'05" WEST, 1134.59 FEET TO A POINT O N TH E NORTHERLY R IG HT-OF-WAY LINE OF EAST OVERLAND ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIG HT-OF-WAY LINE THE FOLLOWING 4 COURSES AND DISTANCES: THENCE SOUTH SW59'52"WEST,71.96 FEET; THENCE SOUTH OO 24'05"WEST,11.58 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 45'33'34"WEST,28.68 FEET; THENCE SOUTH BW41VW WEST,597.70 FEET TO THE POfITOF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED PARCEL CONTAINS 19.7Al,ACRES MOIRE OR LESS. PREPARED BY:THE LAND GROUP Cf 'L LAjV MICHAEL S.FEMENIA 1 -OF -462€ant Shore Drive,Suter 100.E:a9k.Idaha 8M1e 246.00-4441 thNandgroupmr.00m Page 28 47 TTN81-3527'E 158.13' 2600 E. Overland Rd. _.4= for HJco Winco Foods, LLC a I Situate in a portion o1 the SUM 1:4 of the SE 1;4 of Section 17 Township 3 North,Range 1 East.Boise Meridian City of Meridian.Ada County.Idaho 2022 a I I Curare Table jI I CURVE LENGTH WWU5 DELTA CHORD BEARING CHORD LENGTH G1 Mal 1'W9m 2"DMr SMU3fE e3m N 2600 E OVERLAND RD r F WINCO FOODS LLC APN=S1117438526 co .a Q 18.74 AC± ,�,L L4uo a b a 13 a� c 4� Cc cJ G6.U. G22 sag°5s15zw 71.96 a" SOD124051W 11.58' O go o N04°24�G5'E 45.00' SA5°33'34y4N 28.68' SE C4R.SEC.17 I6 —R+w W SHIWOM 597.7e � 51lA SEC.17�4 — — ! Y" $A$T UVE12�Ax11 R��tD NBs'4fiOU'E 2656.Bd' !! �� S Exhibit "B• Pf]0' 4f�a' N Horizontal Scale_1'=POR p KKo.:120181 ail Page 29 G. Alternative Compliance Details INTERSTATE 1-84 ------------------------ Units on these two(2)buildings facing I-84 and the off-ramp will have - - --- -_-._ windows meeting the following specifications: Alside Fairfield 70 Series r I A571-70 Series Single Hung Frame Color=White Double Glaze,ClimaTech,DS/DS,IE Liners,STC Rating=31 J y. m e 8: N O -- ---------.-.-.--- e,Clnena fr�TUY�c}! r t b, ... ........... .E.---j J'" VI L1l R-'TT E.QK$��Ild Rd PUb C pia _ Page 30 0 Dave Aizpitarte Bionomics Environmental,Inc. 1045 East Winding Creek Eagle ID 83616 208-939-1022 1 visited Phase Two of the Overland Wells proposed site 3/24J2022 and its proximity to 1-84.Similar to Phase One,in my professional opinion,double-paned windows are preferable to a nolse wall and provide adequate noise abatement forthis site, Dave Aizpitarte background David Aizpitarte has performed and supervised all aspects of traffic noise studies,including all field sampling using FHWA procedures for sampling and quality control.He performed and supervised computer modeling using Stamina 20,TNM 1.0,and TNM 2.5 for modeling present and future traffic noise impacts.He has attended classes in traffic noise analysis including seminars presented by Bowlby and Associates and HMMH Inc.(developers of TNM).He is a traffic noise expert witness for the ACHD and the ITD and has served both on an advisory group for the upgrade of TNM and the ITD noise policy. He has performed a wide variety of traffic noise studies throughout Idaho and Montana in support of road design,airports and facilities expansion. 1 The location is relatively far away from the 1-84 centerline.Blonomics designed(non-engineering)the noise walls across from the Boise Airport on the north side of 184.The regulations did not require us to study receptors similar to the Overland Wells Phase Two proposed apartment complex located further away than ones located adjacent to 184.The further a potential sensitive receptor is from a noise source (184)the more community noise becomes a factor. 2.Similar to Phase One,the elevational difference and terrain features cover up the tires of the vehicles both on the eastbound off-ramp and 184.This would be a benefit for the first level(ground floor)of the apartments.At higher speeds tire noise is the predominant noise source and having them obscured by terrain can be sufficient mitigation.From what I observed I feel this is the case at this proposed project location. 3.ITD noise policy does not contemplate any mitigation for second or third floors of receptors in an apartment complex, The noise walls are typically not feasible from an engineering basis(too tall, structurally unsound)and not reasonable from a cost basis.I would recommend mitigation such as double paned windows and minimize the window openings facing the freeway.A Light Frame Ordinary Sash(closed)window will give you a 20 dB reduction in interior sound levels,Storm Windows will give you a 25 dB reduction.This is a cost effective and superior mitigation to noise walls that start a 7 dB reduction per receptor and again,walls only mitigate for the receptors directly behind them. 4.From an esoteric standpoint,walls can be claustrophobic and conflict with the view of the foothills (visual impacts).For example,Bionomics was able to design a wall for the Renaissance apartment complex on Chinden that met both engineering(Feasibility)and cost(Reasonability)criteria set by the FHWA(Federal Highway Administration).The owners felt thatthe wall would disrupt the view and give the apartment complex a"penitentiary"look, They declined(desirability)the wall. The same issue happened on the south east quadrant of the Ten Mile interchange.Similar to this proposed project the terrain features of the off ramp offered noise mitigation and the neighborhood was unanimous in retaining their view of the foothills. I hope this will give you a good case and please review and give me any comments or corrections. Dave Aizpitarte Principal Bionomics Environmental,Inc. Page 31 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION The comments &conditions pertaining to the CUP were stricken due to the Commission's recommendation of denial of the application and change in the development plan. Development Agreement Modification: 1. The conceptual development plan included in Section VIII.B and conceptual building elevations included in Section VIII.E of this report shall replace the conceptual development plan and building elevations included in Section VIII.A and in the existing Development Agreement(DA)(Inst. #2016-060157). Provision#5.1.e of the DA shall also be amended per the analysis in Section VI.A, as follows: "The Property shall be subdivided(preliminary plat.,ppr-,ved) and this Agreement recorded prior to submittal of any Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review applications for the overall site." The amended DA shall be signed by the property owner(s) and returned to the City within six (6) months of City Council granting the subject modification. Conditional Use Permit: 2. Prior to the City Couneil hearing, submit 0 FeViSed eommon open spaee exhibit that eomplies with the minimum standaMs listed in UDC- 114 3 2;ZC—.A minimum of 3.18 aer-es of qu 3. A final plat applieation shall be submitted, approved and a plat FeeOFded for-the seeond phase of the WinCo Wells subdivision preliminary plat(14 2021 0007) to ereate a developable pareel pr4or to submittal of a Cer-fifleate of Zoning Complianee and Design Re-view applieation for-the proposed development. 4. The multi family develepmen4 shall have an ongoing obligation to eemply with the speeifieuse standards listed in UPC-11-4-3-2-7, of eighty(90) square feet foF eaeh tmit ift aeeor-d with UPC 11 4 3 2 7B.3 with the Get4ifieme of 6. The multi family development shall r-eeer-d a legally binding deetiment that states the maioteaanee and ey,,%er-ship responsibilities for-the management of the development,ineluding,but not 5. Submit floor-plans demeastfa4iag eemplianee with the minimum private usable open spaee standar- A r-eeor-ded eopy of said doeument shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior-to issuanee of the first Cer-tifleate of Oeeupaney for-the development. 7. Comply with building eede r-e"ir-efnents for-separ-a4iaa between str-tiettir-es within the development. S. The site andler-!a-adseape plan submittedwith the GeFtifie4e of Zoning Complianee shah be r-evised as f>>,ws. Page 32 location vftiose entering the level or-a with UDC 11 4 3-2 7-B.-7-. b. All transfoFmer-and utility vaults and otheF ser-vice areas shall be loeated in an area not visi 11 UPC —4-3-27-B.2. o. Depiet landseaping along the f9undations of all street facing elevations adjaeent to E. Cinem d. Depiet landseaping along all pathways in aeeot:d with the stafidafds listed in UDG 44 3B 12-CL. e. Pr-ovide a ininimum of 3.18 aer-es of eommon open space that eomplies with the standafds listed n Trrr�-4-3-2-7C—. g. Widen the buff-ef along the west botindafy of the site to ineltide a minifflum of 5 feet outside o the sewer-easement to plant tFees in aeeor-d with the standaMs for-pef:ifnetet:parking lo f-. loelude details for-the proposed amenities (i.e. gi:ills & Afe pits,publie a14, shade stRietiOeS-, ap for-altemative complianee to these standards as set fofth in UDC 11 5B 5. (Note: if wheel stops afe not proposed to be pfovidedwithin abutting pafking spaoes, an additional 2 feet is required to be added to the adj aeent bugat:to allow for-vehiele over-hang pef UDG 11 3 G 5B; the lepigth of par-king spaees may be feduced by 2 feet to 17 feet if 2 feet is added to the buffer—width.) A 14 footwide maintenance road should be depieted within the easement and any landscaping within the area where the maif4enafiee road is loeated should be r-emoved f+ofn the plan; the 6 foot wide area within the easement outside of the maif4efianee road area may be !a-ndseaped with �,l bushes. 9. The Applieant's fequest fof Altemative Complianee to the noise abatement standards listed in UDG B. PUBLIC--+WORKS light poles e , . ,� be built within the„ y o .mot � t \ t;l;t i.2 Sewer-easement N,afies depending on sewef depth. Sewer-0 15 ft deep re"ire a 20 ft easement, o o 1 3 Sewer- 18 Aor-deeper feqttir-e ., tine manhole. 1.4 For-wa4er-and sewer in pafallel, if sewer-depth is gr-ea4er-than 15', loea4er wa4er main 5 ft ffo edge of easement and eenter-the sewer-main between the water-main and other-edge of easement. i.5 Utility Plan shows southem main eefineetifig to existing sewer-main on Giflema-Dr. There is owFent no existing sewer-stub im tha4 loeation. Sewer-will need to be bFought ffam the stub 40 > Over-1,,...,a Rd. i.7 Off-site watei:lime to the east must be installed to allow looping before this developmen eonstnieted, Page 33 i.8 Watef stub ifito pr-opeAy at the southeast eofoer-of the apaAments fieeds to be abandoned per- City Requifements if it is not used. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.i Applieafit shall eoor-dinate water-and sewer-main size and r-otitifig with the Ptiblie W ent, and execute standard forms of easements for-an),mains that are r-equir-ed to pr-ovide sel=Viee outside of a ptiblie right of way. N4ifiimi:tm eoveF ove . 3 is three feet, if eove ffom top of pipe to sub gt:ade is less than three feet than altemate materials shall be used in 2.2 Per-Mer-idian City Code (MCC),the applieant sliall be responsible to install sevvef and water- mains to and thr-ough this development. Applieant may be eligible fof a r-eimbwsefnefit agr-eeinent for-;.,f-astF,,ct -e 0,,1,.,,,..o, ent pef MCC C 4 6 G 2.3 The applicant shall pfovide easement(s) for-all public water/sewer-mains outside of publie right a single utility, or-30 feet wide foF t--wo. The easements shall not be dediea4ed via the plat,but r-atlief dedieated oiitside the plat proeess using the City of Mefidian's standard f6fms. The Lioensed Professional Land Sufveyof,whieh must include the area of the easement(mafke EXHIBIT A) and an o » feview. Both e*hibits ffmst be sealed, signed and dated by a Wofessional Land Sun,eyor, NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat fefer-encing this doeument. All easements must reviewed, or-well vvatef for-the p e. if a suffaee or-well sour-ee is not available, a single poffit the developer will be fesponsible fof the payment of assessments fof the eommon areas prior to eeeiving development plan approval. 2.5 All e * I* - I I wes that are r-evir-ed to be r-emoved shall be prior-to sigfia4tir-e on the f4tial plat by the City Engineer, Any stfuettires that are allowed to remain shall be subjeet to evaltia and possible reassignment of street aEldfessing to be in eomplianepe, AIAC,�-. . -or-laying adjaeent and eentigtiotts to the area being subdivided shall be aElElressed-pef and any othet:applieable!a-,,A,of fegulation. 2.8 Any systems within this projeet shall be femoved ffem sefviee pef Gity Page 34 r-oad base appfoveEl by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for-this subdivision shall be feeor-ded,prior- o 0 will be r-e"ir-ed for-all tineempleted feneing, landseaping, amenities, @te.,pr4vi=t6 Sigfiutttre on 2.11 All impfovements related to publie life, safety and health shall be completed pfior-to oeettpancy rf^oFtl' ; r� 11 5C 3$ 2.12 Applicant shall be FeqUiFed to paY Public Works development plan review, and constfuetion appFoval letter, 2.13 it shall be the fesponsibility of the applioant to ensufe that all development fi2atur-es comply with the Amer-ieans with Disabilities Aet a-ad the Fair Housing Aet. - .., ,be required by the A,-my r''or-ps of Engi ee fs 2.15 Developef shall eoofdinate mailbox locations with the Mer-idian Post 0 i.1T6Y-Yll gfadingof the site shall ve-peffvmred in eery oFfnafiee-with G 1 1 12 314.. 2.17 Co results shall be submitted to the Mefidian Building Depaftment for-all building pads r-ee baekfill,where footing would sit atop fill mater-ia 2.18 The design efigineer-shall be r-e"iFed to eer-tify that the street eenteFlifie elevations are set a- . . i of 3 feet above the highest established peak gf:otifidwa4ef:elevation. This is to e that the bottofn elevation of the efawl spaces of homes is at least 1 f6ot abo 2.19 The applieants de i- -. shall be responsible for inspeetion of all irrigation and drainage faeilit-y within this pr-ojeet that do not fall tindef the jttfisdietion of am ir-rigation Elistriet or-AG14D. The design efigineer-shall pr-ovide eet4ifioation that the faoilities have been installed in aeeor-dafioo with the appt:oved Elesign plans. This oet4if4ea4ion will bO fe"ir-ftl bOfOr-e a proj t. eats afe listed in seetion 6 5 of the impr-ovement Standafds for-Stfeet Lighting. A eoff ean be found at http:,4'www.fnefidianeity.or-g�p4lie-wor-!Es.asp�i?id-272. of 2.21 A street light plan will need to be ifieltided in the eivil oonsti:uotion plans. St+eet lig4t plan pfiof to final plat signattife. This sttfety�will be ver-ified by a line item eost estimate provided* mofe «.f.,fmation at 447 22l l 0 Page 35 dtir-eAien of two yeafs. This stifet-y will be ver-ified by a line item eest estim4e-PFE)Vided by t owner to the City. The surety ean be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of eredit, eash deposit or bond. Appheant must file an appheation for-surety,Whieh ean be found on the more infefm4ion a4 98':7 2 2 Il QFInE ilr,n A mm�ar,T wrT No n ents were „l.mitte E. !''lln.iMUNITY P16ANNING A SSOC-T A TION or,SOUTwAIEST 11T A II0(COMPASS) SS) f ...//,.,..l,link,,.,.,ridi,,nei /Td7 AT in /T eeV;e,., ,P_,1 4,7;,,,,.1';y /i.,.t in , ridi,.nei 'W- Li kIDoeV4,.,., , ?;a—2649-30.v at a—n,v_U —Air,ridi,,,� No eemments were submitted, t //,..e1 1i b, idi,gnei /TT7 1 i 1 4PeeV4ei. ?id— 66385.P bid—0&, —Tkr4 T r/1T,imumT-i1 DEyE 11nA ENT-DEPARTMENT nTMENT SCHOOL l,ilOO 1AW A CT TABLE nT T X. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit(UDC 11-5B-6E) The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit requests upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The Commission finds that the subject property may not be large enough to accommodate the proposed use and dimensional and development regulations of the C-G district, while providing the required amount of common open space for the development. Units may need to be reduced in order to comply with the minimum open space standards (see Analysis, Section V for more information). 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. The Commission finds that the proposed use is not entirely consistent with the Comprehensive Plan although it's allowed as a conditional use in the C-G zoning district per UDC Table 11-2B-2. The Commission finds the currently entitled retail use of the property more appropriate than the Page 36 proposed multi family use in order to provide a mix of uses in this area with services to support existing and approved residential uses in the area. 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The Commission finds the existing entitled retail use of the property more appropriate and compatible with other uses in the vicinity and the intended character of the area rather than additional multi family uses. The adjacent multi family development to the east(Seasons at Meridian) was largely approved because a retail grocery store was entitled to development on this site, which would provide a needed service in this area. The Commission finds the replacement of retail with more multi family uses would adversely change the character of the area. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The Commission has recommended denial of the proposed CUP;therefore, conditions of approval are not included. 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. The Commission finds that although the proposed multi family development could be served by existing public facilities, approval of the proposed development would worsen traffic issues in this area. Therefore, the Commission is recommending denial of the proposed CUP to the City Council. Comments were not received from WASD. The school impact table provided by the Community Development Dept. in Section IX.I shows that the elementary and middle school enrollment was under capacity and the high school enrollment was over capacity as of September 2021; development since that time and/or a change in the school boundaries will alter these calculations. B. Alternative Compliance(UDC 11-513-5): In order to grant approval of an alternative compliance application,the Director shall determine the following: 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements is not feasible; OR The Director finds strict adherence to the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D is feasible although not entirely effective due to the height of the proposed structures. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and The Director finds the proposed alternative means of compliance of providing double pane windows on all units in the two (2) northern structures that face I-84 and the off-ramp as noise abatement to the traffic noise provides a superior means for meeting the requirements in UDC 11-3H-4D. 3. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of the surrounding properties. The Director finds that the proposed alternative means will not be detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended use%haracter of the surrounding properties. Page 37 E IDIAN.;--- Applicant's Presentation Page 4 SEASONS AT Meridian and DA ModificationSeasons at CUP for -0030 -2022-H MERIDIAN, Phase II Change to Site Plan FLUM Comp Plan Compliance development of vacant or underutilized parcels currently within City limits.” “Slow the outward progression of the City's limits by discouraging fringe area development; encourage 4.05.03Bwithin the City over parcels on the fringe.” “Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels 2.02.02Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development.” extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian “Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the 3.03.03Ahousing types throughout the City.” “Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area; provide for diverse 2.01.01Gproximity to employment centers.” “Locate higher density housing near corridors with existing or planned transit, Downtown, and in 2.01.01Hand services.” services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities “Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban 3.03.03F Transit Route 42 Traffic - SEASONS AT MERIDIAN Phase II– PROJECT SOUTH WELLS AVENUE SITE Zoning PROJECT SITE Map Pathways and Connectivity “In my opinion, doubleabatement for this site.”wall and provide adequate noise windows are preferable to a noise paned - Parking W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Matador Estates Subdivision (H-2022-0043) by Quantum LTD, Inc., located at 1235 E. McMillan Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0043 A. Request: Annexation of 5.09 acres of land with an R-4 zoning district. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 14 building lots and 2 common lots on 4.84 acres of land in the R-4 zoning district. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : October 25 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 2 PROJECT NAME : Matador Estates Subdivision ( W2022 - 0043 ) 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 E IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1,H p HEARING October 25,2022 Legend DATE: 0 I�Pro�c- Laca'or k TO: Mayor&City Council - FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner ' E 208-884-5533 -- - E SUBJECT: Matador Estates IE H-2022-0043 LOCATION: 1235 E. McMillan Rd.,in the NE 1/4 of Section 31,TAN.,R.IE. (Parcel #R1608650122) FFF EEI PR I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation of 5.09 acres of land with an R-4 zoning district; and preliminary plat consisting of 14 building lots and two(2) common lots on 4.84 acres of land in the R-4 zoning district for Matador Estates Subdivision. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 4.84 acres Future Land Use Designation Low Density Residential(LDR) Existing Land Use Single-family rural residential(SFR) Proposed Land Use(s) SFR Current Zoning Rural Urban Transition(RUT)in Ada County Proposed Zoning R-4(Medium Low-Density Residential) Lots(#and type;bldg/common) 14 building/2 common Phasing plan(#of phases) NA(not proposed to be phased) Number of Residential Units(type 14 single-family detached units of units) Density(gross&net) 2.89 units/acre(gross) Open Space(acres,total[%]/ 0.33 acre(or 7%) buffer/qualified) Page 1 Amenities Sitting area with a concrete or paver surface with benches Physical Features(waterways, NA hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting 4/12/22 date History(previous None(Lot 5,Crestwood Subdivision No. 1;property boundary adjustment approvals) —ROS#12793 in Ada County) B. Community Metric Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report Yes (yes/no) • Requires No ACHD Commission Action es/no • Existing There is one(1)existing stub street(E.Territory St.)to this property at the Conditions project's west boundary. • CIP/IFYWP Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)!Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP): • The North Meridian Community improvement project,is scheduled in the IFYWP,constr enhanced pedestrian facilities on the north side of McMillan Road, on McMillan Row Red Horse Way to Locust Grove Road,construction in 2026. • Bike Signage Community improvement project,is scheduled In the IFYWP,establishin bike way corridors, per the Bike Master Plan, including wayfinding and bike signage Horse Way,crossing McMillan Road from Fairview Avenue to Joshua Tree Drive,constr in 2026. • McMillan Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 3-lanes from Meridian Road to Grove Road between 2031 and 2035. • Locust Grove Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 3-lanes from Ustick Road to M Road between 2036 and 2040. • Locust Grove Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 3-lanes from McMillan R Chinden Boulevard(SH20126)between 2036 and 2040. Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Existing access is provided via two(2)driveways from E. Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) McMillan Rd.,an arterial street.Proposed access is via the extension of an existing stub street(E.Territory St.)at the west boundary of the site;the existing driveways will be closed with redevelopment of the site. Proposed Road Improvements ACHD is requiring McMillan Rd.to be widened to 17' from centerline,with a 3' wide gravel shoulder abutting the site. Territory St.is required to be extended into the site&Matador Ct.constructed as a 33'wide local street section with curb, gutter,a detached 5'wide sidewalk and a landscape strip. Fire Service No comments received. Police Service No comments received. West Ada School District No comments received. Distance(elem,ins,hs) Capacity of Schools Page 2 #of Students Enrolled Wastewater - • Distance to Sewer Services Directly adjacent • Sewer Shed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance • Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns • Flow is committed • See Public Works Site Specific Conditions Water • Distance to Services Directly adjacent • Pressure Zone • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality Concerns None • Project Consistent with Yes Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns See Public Works' Site-Specific Conditions C. Project Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend Legend Prnjeot Lncatm � Prc je-_t L=v-an a E mcq„ A- R� E-M - ` • '� RDA^�- aiftdtitidl Low ty � ~ Ell rid M am Page 3 Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend ti Legend Project Lucafkm Ku it Prcjeot Luca tar $ J,_i Cfi{u n-at ' S, - — Planned Pamee, ---` i RUT RUT i iii -RD r -� �p - - RUT - R: R1 __ IH --- `-- I I I I M.I., T F 11 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Marty Camberlango, Quantum LTD., Inc. — 1110 N.Five Mile Rd., Boise,ID 83713 B. Owner: Nicholas Gifford— 1235 E.McMillan Rd.,Meridian, ID 83642 C. Representative: Marty Camberlango, Quantum LTD., Inc. — 1110 N. Five Mile Rd.,Boise,ID 83713 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 8/31/2022 10/9/2022 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 8/25/2022 10/6/2022 Public hearing notice sign posted 9/4/2022 10/13/2022 on site Nextdoor posting 8/25/2022 10/5/2022 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS LAND USE: This property is designated as Low Density Residential(LDR)on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan. This designation allows for the development of single-family homes on large and estate lots at gross densities of three(3)dwelling units or less per acre. The subject property is an enclave surrounded by City annexed land developed with single-family residential homes on land designated LDR and Medium Density Residential(MDR) on the FLUM. The Applicant Page 4 proposes a 14-lot subdivision for single-family residential detached homes at a gross density of 2.89 units per acre,which is within the desired density range of the LDR designation. TRANSPORTATION: The Master Street Map(MSM)does not depict any collector streets across this property. Local streets are proposed internally for access to the proposed lots. Goals,Objectives, &Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics): • "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D) The proposed single-family detached dwellings on larger lots than typical will contribute to the variety of single family residential properties in the City. • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F) City water and sewer service is available and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. • "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for diverse housing types throughout the City."(2.01.01 G) This area consists primarily of single family detached homes with some variety in lot sizes between the LDR and MDR designated areas. The proposed development offers a variety of lot sizes from 8,132 to 11,219 square feet, not including the 32,231 square foot lot where the existing home is proposed to remain. • "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices."(3.07.01A) The proposed development incorporates lot sizes consistent with those to the west and south, which should be compatible with surrounding uses and densities. • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land." (3.07.00) The proposed single-family residential use should be compatible with other single-family residential uses abutting this site. The proposed site design should also be compatible with adjacent uses as lots are similar in size. • "Support infill development that does not negatively impact the abutting, existing development. Infill projects in downtown should develop at higher densities, irrespective of existing development." (2.02.02C) The proposed infill development shouldn't negatively impact adjacent properties as the residential use and lot sizes are compatible. • "Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development."(3.03.03A) The proposed development will connect to City water and sewer systems with development of the subdivision;services are required to be provided to and though this development in accord with current City plans. The existing home that is proposed to remain on a lot in the proposed subdivision is required to connect to City water and sewer service. Page 5 • "Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity."(2.02.01D) There are no multi-use pathways designated on the Pathways Master Plan for this site, nor are any pathways stubbed to this property other than the sidewalk along E. Territory St.A micro path connection is proposed from the internal sidewalk along Matador Ct. to the sidewalk along McMillan Rd. • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G) Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks are required to be provided with development of the subdivision. • "Eliminate existing private treatment and septic systems on properties annexed into the City and instead connect users to the City wastewater system; discourage the prolonged use of private treatment septic systems for enclave properties." If annexed, the existing home will be required to abandon the existing septic system and connect to the City wastewater system. • "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels within the City over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02) Development of the subject infill parcel will maximize public services. VI. STAFF ANALYSIS A. ANNEXATION(AZ) The Applicant proposes to annex 5.09 acres of land with an R-4 zoning district. A legal description and exhibit map for the annexation area is included in Section VIII.A. This property is within the City's Area of City Impact boundary. A property boundary adjustment application was tentatively approved by Ada County in 2021 to shift the common lot line between Lots 5 and 6,Crestwood Subdivision,5-feet to the east. The Applicant should obtain final approval of this application prior to City Council approval of the proposed annexation. A preliminary plat and conceptual building elevations were submitted showing how the property is proposed to be subdivided into 14 building lots for 13 new single-family residential detached dwelling units;the existing home is proposed to remain on Lot 6,Block 4(see Sections VIII.B,D). The proposed use and density of the development is consistent with the LDR FLUM designation. Single-family detached dwellings are listed as a principal permitted use in the R-4 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. Future development is subject to the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-5 for the R-4 zoning district. This property, along with the property to the east, is an enclave surrounded by existing and future single- family residential detached homes to the north(Tustin), south(Havasu Creek) and west(Silver Springs). As noted above in Section V, development of infill properties is supported provided it doesn't negatively impact the abutting, existing development. Because like uses(i.e. single-family detached residential) are proposed on similar size lots,the proposed development should be compatible with adjacent uses and shouldn't negatively impact them. The City may require a development agreement(DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. If this property is annexed, Staff recommends a DA is required with the provisions discussed herein and included in Section IX.A. Page 6 B. PRELIMINARY PLAT(PP): The proposed preliminary plat consists of 14 building lots and 2 common lots on 4.84 acres of land in the proposed R-4 zoning district. Proposed lots range in size from 8,132 to 11,219 square feet(s.£)with a 32,231 square feet lot where the existing home is proposed to remain. The subdivision is proposed to develop in one phase as shown on the preliminary plat in Section VIII.B. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is an existing home and several outbuildings on the property that currently takes access via McMillan Rd. The existing home is proposed to remain on Lot 6, Block 4 and access will be taken internally from within the subdivision.Prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat, all existing structures that do not conform to the setbacks of the district are required to be removed. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2A-3 and Table 11-2A-5 for the R-4 zoning district. The proposed plat appears to comply with the dimensional standards of the district,except for the street frontage of Lot 8,Block 4 which should be a minimum of 30 feet; the plans should be revised accordingly. Access: Access is proposed via internal local streets. E. Territory St. is proposed to be extended from the west to the east boundary for future extension to the east. The existing access via McMillan Rd. is required to be removed. The address for the existing home is required to change since access will no longer be provided from McMillan Rd.; the new address will be off Matador Ct. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 25-foot wide street buffer is required to be provided along E. McMillan Rd., an arterial street,per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. A 25-foot wide buffer with a berm is proposed along McMillan with 10 shade trees, shrubs and groundcover. A detailed landscape plan should be submitted with the final plat that complies with the aforementioned standards; detail#5 on Sheet L-1 should include the proposed berm along E.McMillan Rd.; and the location of the edge of paving should be depicted on the plan.If the unimproved street right-of-way is ten(10) feet or greater from the edge of pavement to edge of sidewalk or property line,the developer shall maintain a ten-foot compacted shoulder meeting the construction standards of the transportation authority and landscape the remainder with lawn or other vegetative ground cover per UDC 11-3B-7C.5a. A total of six(6)trees are proposed to be removed from the site(and possibly another one) as depicted on the landscape plan. Mitigation is required to be provided per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B- 10C.5. The Applicant should coordinate with the City Arborist(Kyle Yorita kyorita(&meridiancity.org)to determine mitigation requirements prior to removal of existing trees from the site. Landscaping is required along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C; the landscape plan should be revised to include shrubs,along with the proposed trees and vegetative groundcover along the pathway on Lot 7,Block 4.A minimum of 5-feet should be provided outside of the easement area for trees; widen the lot if necessary to accomplish this. Common Open Space& Site Amenities(UDC 11-3G-3): Common open space and site amenities are required to be provided with development for properties of 5 acres or more in area per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3. This site consists of 4.84 acres of land—the annexation boundary is 5.09 acres.Although not required by the UDC, Staff recommends as a provision of annexation in the DA that a minimum of 12% (or 0.58 acre) common open space is provided with development.The landscape plan depicts 21,218.87 s.f. (or 0.49 acre) of common open space consisting of a 7,080 s.f. common area lot(Lot 2,Block 4), 2,840.74 s.f. of linear open space with a pathway(Lot 7,Block 4), and 50%of the street buffer along McMillan Rd. consisting of 4,178.13 s.f. The plans should be revised to include an additional 0.09 acre of qualified common open space. If 8-foot wide parkways Page 7 are proposed,they could count toward this requirement; parkways must comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17 and 11-3G-3B.4. As a provision of annexation, Staff recommends a site amenity totaling a minimum of one(1)point is provided within the development.A sitting area with a concrete or paver surface with two(2) benches in Lot 7,Block 4.If a structure for shade and picnic tables are added to this area,it could qualify as a picnic area,which is two(2)points; or,the Applicant may choose another qualified amenity from UDC Table 11-3G-4. Pathways: The Pathways Master Plan does not depict a multi-use pathway on this site. A micro-path is proposed on Lot 7,Block 4 for access from the internal sidewalk to the sidewalk along McMillan Rd. The pathway should be constructed per the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8. Sidewalks(11-3A-17): A 5-foot wide detached sidewalk is required along McMillan Rd., an arterial street as proposed. Waterways:No waterways of significant size cross this site. Fencing: A 2.5-foot tall rock wall is proposed at the back edge of the street buffer along McMillan Rd. Fencing is not proposed. Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is required in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. The existing home proposed to remain on Lot 6,Block 4 is required to connect to City water and sewer service within 60 days of it becoming available as set forth in MCC 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Pressurized Irrigation System (UDC 11-3A-I5): Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided to each lot within the subdivision as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. Storm Drainage(UDC 11-3A-18):An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances.Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. A geotechnical resort was submitted with this subdivision. Building Elevations: Six(6)conceptual building elevation photos were submitted that demonstrate what future homes in this development will look like(see Section VIII.F). A mix of single-story(with and without bonus rooms)and 2-story homes are proposed with a mix of building materials, including stone veneer accents, and architectural elements. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed annexation with the requirement of a Development Agreement, and preliminary plat per the provisions in Section IX in accord with the Findings in Section X. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on September 15,2022. At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject AZ and PP requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing_ a. In favor: Marty Camberlango b. In opposition:None C. Commenting. Randy Spiwak,Parkins-Nourse#14 Lateral Association d. Written testimony: Neil Wilson Page 8 e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s) testimony a. Surface water delivery, design of the pressurized irrigation system, and plan approval from the lateral association. 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. City's requirements to provide a pressurized irrigation system for the proposed subdivision. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None 5. Outstandin issue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. None Page 9 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit Map + LAND SURVEYING PLLC r Client:Ma rty Comberla ngo Date:June 24,2022 Job No,;1422 ANNEXATION DESCRIPTION A parcel of land being a portion of Lot 5 of Crestwood Subdivision No. 1 and lorated in the NE 114 NE 1M of Section 31.Township 4 North,Range 1 East,Boise Meridian,Ada County,Idaho,more partleularly descrfhed as follows; Commencing at a found zinc Cap monument stanrped'PLS 7043'marking the NE Corner of said NE IM NE 114,(Sectlon corner common to Sections 29.3a,31,and 32),Bald comer hears S.89`46'04'E.,a distance of 2632.391eet from a found Aluminum Cap marking the N U4 of sold Section 31; Thence along the Northem Coundary line of said NE 114 NE 114 also being the Centerline of E.McMillan Road. N.89146'04"W.,a distance of 930.52 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNIrV ,, Thence leaving said Northern Boundary,5.09 13'35"W.,a distance of 33.00 to a polnt on the Southern Right-of-Way of said E.McMillan Road; Thence along a line that is 6.00 feet west of and parallel with the Easterly boundary of said Lot 5,S_ 00°34'28-W..a distance of 629.45 feet to a point on the Northern Boundary of Havasu Creek Subdivision No_1,Book 66,Page 0737; Thence along said Northern Boundary of Hava$U Creek No. 1,and the Northern Boundary of Havasu Creek Subdivision No.2,Book 87,Page 9875. N.89°56'32`W„a distance of 334.40 feetlo a found 518 inch iron on stamped`PLS 4116'; Thence leavi ng said Northern Bound dry of Havasu Creek Subdivisions No.1 and 2 along ttra Wesiedy Boundary of said 1-of 5.N 00'34'25"E.,a d Istance of 630.47 feet to a point on said Soulhem Bight-of-Way of E-McMillan Read ma rked by a found beat 112 inch iron pin without a cap; Thence N.00'13'56"E,,adiistenee of 33_00 boa point on said Northern Boundary line of said NE 114 NE 114 of Section 31; Thence along 4ald Northern Boundary line,S.89°46'04"E.,a distance of.334.39 fear 1h e POIN f OF BEGINNING, This parcel coc lains 5.09 acres(221.685 square feat)more or lei s. a lg F k%V 623 11 th Avt South,Nampa,ID 83651 -T.(21N)44?0115'C,(208)608-2510'rgrsy.c1KR gmil.com Page 10 ANNEYATION EXHIBIT BEING IN LOT 5, BLOCK 1, CRESTWOOD SUBDIVISION NO. 1, LOCATED IN THE NE1/4 NE114OF SECTION 31, T. 4 N., R. 1 E., B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO Sec 31f E.MCMI LLAN RI7. 'FLS 7443' �-- _ N W4 '04'W 2M.3l1' Sec.ail Sec.29 al N1A C2�r, � N OV13'5T E �' � �0 - ��` etc 31 ec.32 CP&F I n5L No.241+MI .3IM _ _ 33 40' CPaF Inst No-11199M (legible No Cap Beni E f IQ0 CRES (MOD StrBDIViTS10K 110.1 I 'o 4 1 BOOT{ 28 PACE I'T57-1758 41 r ° LEGEND f I Calculalwl polnk ® Found zinc cap manumit Found alumlrrum cap monument Found 5M inch 6L iron pin i I 1) Found 1P2 inch dia.Iran pin . Block number I Lal number I -- Boundary line - - - - - - - PrcmrtY ir9 See.31 Sec.32 - - Sedlon Ilree 'MF Ins[.Ni)-XQ2-0194M Illagihle G 50 100 200 I� Seale :l 'PL S411B• N89"5fi 3Ci4 HAVA.517 CREEK SVBDJVL5hM NQ.2 HAVASU CREEK SUBDIVISION NQ.I 300K 87 PACE 9875 bOOK SU PACE 9737 COMPASS LAND SURVEYING, P L L 62311 th Avenue South Nampa, ID 93651 JN 1422 Mce:(208)442.011S Page 11 B. Preliminary Plat(dated: 5/12/22) Lu 1 p` S k S I � a u, r 1116MMI Mai Fj I � t VIAf �l 44 I II s � � ..... �'•II;��.. ` I III 4 r I [ I'rw6u wfF r.l■i •r Page 12 C. Landscape Plan(dated: 7/15/2021) G i,94 NOISIAiagn5 53iViS3 uoav- vw �f :1h'R2+ NY77+FY�W s y r. -o s • Y � FYF�s •�' � �� �� i I ° � � ��', I Jy :r .1e -•2 's �y„ "Y• ra _ _ I j } ��rt• � �1 1 4 F Ilk i � F•i k�• 'i IIIIf iti- ,p I 15 _ 7 4 ~ � �-YM1%.•� � i• r I ■� J .�it .�,� r ti •4 Page 13 D. Conceptual Building Elevation Photos t - moo Page 14 r- Page 15 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS The Appheant shall obtain final approval of the property boundary adjustment application(ROS#12793) from Ada County prior to City Couneil approval of the proposed annexation-.A final approval letter for the PBA application was submitted. A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s)at the time of annexation ordinance adoption,and the developer. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat, landscape plan and conceptual building elevations included in Section VIII and the provisions contained herein. b. The existing home proposed to remain on Lot 6,Block 4 shall be required to connect to City water and sewer service within 60 days of it becoming available and disconnect from private service, as set forth in MCC 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. 2. The final plat shall include the following revisions: a. The minimum street frontage of Lot 8,Block 4 shall be a minimum of 30 feet as set forth in UDC 11-2A-3 and Table 11-2A-5 for the R-4 zoning district. b. Graphically depict a 20-foot wide easement for the City of Meridian water main line on Lot 7, Block 4. Also,include a note with the recorded instrument number of the easement; a separate easement will be required. c. Provide a minimum 5-foot wide strip of land outside of the water main line easement noted above for landscaping along the pathway on Lot 7,Block 4. d. Correct the spelling of Matador Ct. (if spelled wrong). 3. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall include the following revisions: a. The minimum street frontage of Lot 8,Block 4 shall be a minimum of 30 feet as set forth in UDC 11-2A-3 and Table 11-2A-5 for the R-4 zoning district. b. Include mitigation calculations on the plan for existing trees that are proposed to be removed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-IOCS. The Applicant shall coordinate with the City Arborist(Kyle Yorita kyorita(c-r�,meridiancity.org)to determine mitigation requirements prior to removal of existing trees from the site. c. Modify detail#5 on Sheet L-1 to include the proposed berm along E. McMillan Rd. d. Depict location of the edge of paving on the plan. If the unimproved street right-of-way is ten (10)feet or greater from the edge of pavement to edge of sidewalk or property line,the developer shall maintain a ten-foot compacted shoulder meeting the construction standards of the transportation authority and landscape the remainder with lawn or other vegetative ground cover per UDC 11-3B-7C.5a. e. Depict street buffer landscaping in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. Page 16 f. Depict landscaping(i.e. shrubs along with the trees and vegetative groundcover) along the pathway on Lot 7,Block 4 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. g. Include an additional 0.09-acre of qualified common open space per the standards in UDC 11- 3G-3.If parkways are provided toward this requirement, they must comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17 and 11-3G-3B.4; amend the plat if needed. h. Provide a minimum 5-foot wide strip of land outside of the water main line easement noted above for trees to be planted along the pathway on Lot 7,Block 4. i. Depict a site amenity totaling a minimum of one(1)point.If a structure for shade and picnic tables are added to the sitting area proposed on Lot 7, Block 4, this area could qualify as a picnic area, which is two (2)points; or, the Applicant may choose another qualified amenity from UDC Table 11-3G-4. If a shade structures is proposed,provide a detail with the final plat application. 4. Prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat, all existing structures that do not conform to the setbacks of the R-4 zoning district shall be removed. 5. The address for the existing home is required to change since access will no longer be provided from McMillan Rd. The Applicant should coordinate the new address with the Land Development Dept. (tricks ckmeridiancity.org or mamador&meridiancity.orQ). B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 Must provide to and through to R1608650155. 1.2 Locate sewer manhole E-8 on property boundary. 1.3 Ensure no sewer services pass through infiltration trenches. 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 F map with bearings and distances(marked EXHIBIT B)for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. Page 17 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(MCC 9-1-28.C). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 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 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.17 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. Page 18 2.18 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.19 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.20 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting.A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.21 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by 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 No comments were submitted. D. POLICE DEPARTMENT No comments were submitted. E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT No comments were submitted. F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:llweblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=269801&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitE&cr =1 G. SETTLER'S IRRIGATION DISTRICT(SID) https://weblink.m eridia n c i ty.org/WeUink/Doc View.aspx?id=2 69192&db id=0&rep o=Meridia n City Page 19 H. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) No comments were submitted. I. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridianciN.ofglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=268719&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU X. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Commission finds the Applicant's request to annex the subject property with R-4 zoning and develop single-family detached dwellings on the site at a gross density of 2.89 units per acre is consistent with the density desired in the LDR designation for this property. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment to R-4 and development generally complies with the purpose statement of the residential districts in that it will contribute to the range of housing opportunities available in the City consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed residential uses should be compatible with adjacent single-family residential homes/uses in the area. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and The Commission finds City services are available to be provided to this development. Comments were not received from WASD on this application so the Commission is unable to determine impacts to the school district. 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. B. Preliminary Plat(UDC 11-613-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat,the decision- making body shall make the following findings: (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; (Ord. 08-1372, 7-8-2008, eff. 7-8-2008) The Commission finds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC and the Comprehensive Plan. Page 20 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The Commission finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; The Commission finds the plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements for this area in accord with the City's CIP. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The Commission finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, ef£ 9-15-2005) The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be preserved with this development. Page 21