2022-12-13 Regular
City Council Regular Meeting
City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho
Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 6:00 PM
Minutes
ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE
PRESENT
Councilwoman Liz Strader
Councilman Treg Bernt
Councilwoman Jessica Perreault
Councilman Luke Cavener (left at 8:02 PM)
Councilman Joe Borton
Councilman Brad Hoaglun
Mayor Robert E. Simison
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
COMMUNITY INVOCATION
ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted as Amended (Items Renumbered)
DEPARTMENT / COMMISSION REPORTS \[Action Item\]
1. City Council: Recognition of Councilman Treg Bernt
PUBLIC FORUM – Future Meeting Topics
ACTION ITEMS
2. Public Hearing for Sessions Parkway (H-2022-0046) by KM Engineering, LLP.
located at 2700 N. Eagle Rd. Continued to January 3, 2023
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0046Sessions
A. Request: Development Agreement Modification on the existing
Development Agreement (Inst.#104129529) to remove the subject property
from the agreement in order to enter into a new Development Agreement for
the proposed project.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 5 building lots on 5.32 acres of land
in the C-G zoning district with a request for City Council approval of an access
via N. Eagle Rd./SH-55.
Motion to continue to January 3, 2023 made by Councilman Hoaglun, Seconded by
Councilman Borton.
Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman
Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun
3. Request for Reconsideration of Bridgetower Multi-Family (CUP-2022-0047/CR-
2022-0006) by Paul Elam Denied
Motion to deny made by Councilman Hoaglun, Seconded by Councilwoman Perreault.
Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman
Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun
4. Public Hearing for Prairiefire Subdivision (H-2022-0053) by Patrick Connor,
located at 3539 N Locust Grove Rd., near the northwest corner of E. Ustick Rd. and
N. Locust Grove Rd. Approved
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0053
A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 3.16 acres of land from RUT in Ada
County to the R-8 zoning district.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 22 building lots and 1 common lot.
Motion to approve made by Councilman Cavener, Seconded by Councilwoman Perreault.
Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman
Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun
5. Public Hearing for Turin Plaza (H-2022-0063) by 12.15 Design, located at 3169
W. Belltower Dr. Approved
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0063
A. Request: Rezone of 1.80 acres of land from the R-4 (Medium Low-Density
Residential) to the L-O (Limited Office) zoning district.
Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilwoman Perreault.
Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener,
Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun
Abstaining: Councilman Bernt
6. Public Hearing for Turin Plaza (SHP-2022-0013) by 12.15 Design, located at 3169
Belltower Drive. Approved
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/SHP-2022-0013
A. Request: Short Plat consisting of four (4) building lots on 1.62 acres of land
in the proposed L-O zoning district.
Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilwoman Perreault.
Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener,
Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun
Abstaining: Councilman Bernt
7. Public Hearing for West Valley Emergency Center (H-2022-0065) by Fulmer
Lucas Engineering, LLC., located at Southwest corner of N. Levi Ln. and N. Rustic
Oak Way Approved
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0065
A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to the existing development
agreement for Prescott Ridge (Hospital Portion) (Inst.#2021-132724) to
update the phasing plan and modify the provision requiring noise abatement
to be provided along W. Chinden Blvd./State Highway 20-26 to allow for
alternative compliance.
B. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a hospital in the C-G zoning district.
Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilman Borton.
Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman
Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun
8. Public Hearing for McDermott Village (H-2022-0056) by Boise Hunter Homes,
located at 3235 N. McDermott Rd., at the northwest corner of W. Ustick Rd. and N.
McDermott Rd. Approved
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0056
A. Request: Annexation of 40.05 acres of land with R-15, R-40 and C-G zoning
districts.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 85 building lots (81 townhome, 1
multi-family, 3 commercial lots) and 8 common lots on 40.05 acres of land in
the R-15, R-40 and C-G zoning districts.
C. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family residential development
consisting of 250 dwelling units on 12.19 acres of land in the R-40 zoning
district.
Motion to approve made by Councilman Bernt, Seconded by Councilman Borton.
Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman
Borton, Councilman Hoaglun
9. Public Hearing for McDermott Village Variance (VAR-2022-0004) by Boise
Hunter Homes, located at 3235 N. McDermott Rd., at the northwest corner of W.
Ustick Rd. and N. McDermott Rd.
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/VAR-2022-0004
A. Request: Variance to reduce the minimum lot size in the R-15 zoning
district from 2,000 square feet to 1,694 square feet.
Motion to approve made by Councilman Bernt, Seconded by Councilman Borton.
Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman
Borton, Councilman Hoaglun
FUTURE MEETING TOPICS
ADJOURNMENT 10:02 PM
Meridian City Council December 13, 2022.
A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:01 p.m., Tuesday,
December 13, 2022, by Mayor Robert Simison.
Members Present: Robert Simison, Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Treg Bernt, Jessica
Perreault, Brad Hoaglun and Liz Strader.
Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Joy Hall, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Stacy Hersh,
Jamie Leslie, Joe Bongiorno and Dean Willis.
ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE
Liz Strader _X_ Joe Borton
_X_ Brad Hoaglun _X_Treg Bernt
X Jessica Perreault _X_ Luke Cave ner (Left at 8:02 p.m.)
X_ Mayor Robert E. Simison
Simison: Okay. Council, we will call the meeting to order. For the record it is Tuesday,
December 13th, 2022, at 6:01 p.m. We will begin this evening's regular City Council
agenda with roll call attendance.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Simison: Next item will be the Pledge of Allegiance, which will be led tonight by Will with
Scout Troop 1. If you could all, please, rise and join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Simison: Thank you, Will, and thank you to all the members of Troop 1 who are with us
this evening for the first part of our meeting.
COMMUNITY INVOCATION
Simison: Next up will be the community invocation, which will be delivered this evening
by Pastor Vinnie Hanke of Valley Life Community Church. If you would all, please, join
us in the community invocation or take this as a moment of silence and reflection. Pastor.
Hanke: Mayor, Members of City Council, season's greetings. Merry Christmas to you.
Thank you for the opportunity to come and pray for you.
Cavener: Before you begin, Mr. Mayor, just a quick moment of privilege. We have got a
-- a colleague who is departing for greener pastures tonight and I guess maybe I humbly
request that you add an additional prayer for Council Member Bernt and his family and
-- he's got some challenges ahead of him and we are excited for him, but I think an extra
special prayer of protection for him and his family is warranted.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 2 of 72
Hanke: Yeah. It's a big hill, but I imagine he can climb it. Let's pray. Thank you,
Councilman Cavener. God, we thank you for the opportunity to gather tonight as free
citizens in a free country. We pray for the City Council, God, that you would grant them
wisdom and discernment. We pray for the City of Meridian, God, as we think of Christmas
time and your message of goodwill and peace. We pray for those things in our city and,
God, we pray for those things in our state and we pray for Councilman as he makes his
journey, Father, to greater levels of leadership. We ask that you would continue to grant
him a sense of humility and awe and privilege as he serves those in his constituency. We
ask a protection upon him and his family as he serves and, ultimately, God, that the City
of Meridian would be a place where neighbors love one another and that your name would
be glorified. I ask this through your son, Jesus Christ, amen. God bless you all. Thank
you.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Simison: Thank you, pastor. Okay. All right. Next up is adoption of the agenda.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: On our agenda tonight Item 7, a public hearing for Sessions Parkway, the
applicant's going to request a continuance to -- to January 3rd. So, I would like to move
that to number one, so we can dispense with that and that way if anybody is here for that
hearing for Sessions Parkway we will know that we have taken action and when the date
will be that it's continued to. So, with that, Mr. Mayor, I move adoption of the agenda with
the modification of Item 7 being heard first in the public hearing action items tonight.
Borton: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor
signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the agenda is adopted.
MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES.
DEPARTMENT / COMMISSION REPORTS [Action Item]
1. City Council: Recognition of Councilman Treg Bernt
Simison: So, first item up is under Department/Commission Reports. The City Council
recognition of Councilman Treg Bernt. Do I have any volunteers to go first? Councilman
Cavener.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor, I'm happy to start off, but I -- I'm noticing that there is very few
tissues up here and I think that was probably poor planning on our part, so as I was --
some of you know I have been ill and this date has been on my calendar, because
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 3 of 72
wanted to wish my very good colleague well. When I think of Treg I think of -- of three
words. Gregarious. He is so kind. But most importantly he is passionate about
everything. He is passionate about the little things. He is passionate about the big things.
He is passionate about playgrounds and park spaces and pathways. In my time on the
Council I never thought that we were going to have to break up a fight because somebody
wanted to come to our community that wasn't doing best for Meridian and Council
Member Bernt let them know it. It's because he cares. And so I'm happy to be here. He
had a real tough job when he came in as Council President and led our Council during a
time of COVID, working with the Mayor to scale up so we could take testimony virtually,
both in person, how we separate the room, how we could continue to serve our community
to the best of our ability it was under your leadership and I know we don't like to initially
jump back into 2020-2021 , but you and the Mayor working together really set us apart,
so that we could continue to serve our community. Treg works hard, but he also shows
that he balances that with having a lot of fun and you have made these five years on the
Council a lot of fun. I sometimes take our work a little too serious and the levity that you
bring shows that we can work hard on behalf of our citizens, but still have a lot of fun and
enjoy our time doing it. And, then, the last thing that I just -- I want to share that you --
that you taught me. We as Council have tremendous appreciation for our city employees.
We don't always appreciate our city employees and every time I see you, whether it's
you're walking -- you probably plan to come to a meeting an hour early so that you have
opportunity to go talk to all of our employees about what's going on with them and their
family and their family's family and how their kids are doing in sports. There has been
one only other person who did that as well. That was Keith. And I just think that you have
embodied that spirit of caring about our employees and making them feel appreciated.
That's taught me I need to do a better job and I just wanted to thank you for this five years.
It's been a real trip and just because you won't be on the Council and you won't be on the
payroll, there is always a seat here for you and look forward to you coming in and telling
us what we are doing wrong and I look forward to bumping into you in the capital and tell
you what you are doing wrong and we really wish you well in this next endeavor.
Bernt: Thank you, Councilman Cavener.
Simison: Thank you, Councilman.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I don't want to get emotional about it, but he's not just a colleague, he's a friend,
and I just so appreciate Treg. Treg is the first person who really gave me advice when I
joined City Council. He really took me under his wing and I could ask him questions --
stupid questions, hard questions, and he's just a caring person like that and I'm sad that
he is leaving, because I think it's a huge loss and it -- I don't know if we can fill his shoes,
to be honest. I'm sure the Mayor and everybody are going to try our best. But we do
need a fighter to go to the legislature from Meridian and I know he is going to do that for
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 4 of 72
us and I'm really proud of him for stepping up to run and I'm just happy to call him not just
a colleague anymore, but a friend.
Bernt: Thank you, Liz. Okay. Let's go home.
Perreault: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Thank you. I was joking around with Treg one day that he's cried more on the
dais than I have. And here I am.
Bernt: It's just -- I wouldn't call it crying.
Perreault: For good reason. He's taught me a lot about having a sensitivity in what we
do and that it's -- that it's okay to -- to have all of these decisions be as personally
important to us as they are important to us as decision makers and this morning I was
thinking -- it's going to be really different not having you sit over there and how glad you
must be that you sit far from me, because I would probably be elbowing you the entire
time. Treg and I served on Planning and Zoning together before he was elected and he
used to love to ham it up on Planning and Zoning and it was a really serious Commission
and so we would all come and everybody was really, you know, digging into -- into the
decisions and the details and trying kind of sit there for a while and he's -- he's really
doing a much better job now of -- of keeping his expressions. But you would -- always
used to be able to read what --what he thought and at first I would think, oh, my goodness,
this guy's like a class clown and, then, I -- and, then, as time went on I -- I just completely
appreciated the -- the great energy that he brought to the Planning and Zoning
Commission and the uniqueness with which he approached things and the way he
challenged us to make decisions in ways that we hadn't and he was so different than the
-- than the rest of us in a very very good way and I really appreciate it -- have appreciated
the friendship and all the ways that he has challenged me to -- to think more big picture
and -- but the thing I admire about him most is his commitment. He is everywhere all the
time. I have no idea how you do it. I'm always asking him how do you do everything?
How do you get this done? And he's committed to being up early and going to bed late
and -- and so long as the community knows that he is committed to what he does and
that has taught me a huge amount about service and how to serve Meridian well and how
to love this community well. Thank you.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I don't think I will shed any tears, because Treg is going to the Idaho State
Senate and I'm going what in the world are you thinking. It's your own fault. Actually, no.
It -- it -- it's fantastic that -- that Treg is going there. He is going to do very very well. I
met Trey -- I don't know, it's been ten, 12 years ago. You were on Parks -- Parks
Commission and I was on Council previously and -- and that's where we got to know each
other and -- and -- and, then, from there he -- I think you did the impact fee committee
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 5 of 72
and, then, the Planning and Zoning and -- and what's interesting, you think, oh, you know
-- you know, Councilman Bernt and, yeah, he's on City Council and now he's a state
senator, boy, he's climbing the ladder. The interesting thing about Treg is, yeah, he's
gregarious, he's outgoing, he's funny, he's committed. These are all true. But each of
these jobs, City Council, and so far the State Senate -- we will see where it goes from
there -- is Trey didn't seek those positions. It's people who saw his potential and what he
could do for our community and they said, hey, would you do this and that's the neat thing.
It's not someone who wants to climb a ladder and make a name for himself, it's people
who recognize talent and commitment and hard work and go, hey, that's what we need in
our elected officials. So, I think that's just fantastic that he's doing this, even though I --
there will be times I kind of -- I will be laughing at him going, oh, yeah, you wanted it, so
-- but that's just the way it works. But there is someone else that needs recognition
tonight, too, because she had to give up a lot of evenings with you not home -- I had to
think about this, honestly. Maybe she was glad about that. I'm -- I'm not entirely sure.
But his wife Tiffany. You know, there is a lot of meetings, there is lots of phone calls, there
is the packet to go through in preparation for meetings, all these different things. So, you
know, I don't know if the Mayor is going to give you anything, like a medal of honor from
the city or something -- I don't know. But I -- I thought I had to do something for your wife,
because she really is the one who stood behind you to make sure things on the home
front kept going and no matter what you said or did she would stand by you, which
sometimes we went, whoa, we don't know this guy, but she's the one who was always
there. So, Tiffany, you are going to get recognized. So, you know, but no -- I won't make
you give a speech, so -- this is for Treg's better half.
Borton: That's fantastic. Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Let me just provide a few more comments. I'm not going to also get emotional,
I'm -- I'm a mean old man. But what's interesting, right, is you get a chance every so often
-- maybe I will -- just to recognize folks who have an impact and honesty and empathy
are probably how I describe Treg in his service and those in the community who have
been involved and had a chance to meet him know that's true. It's not a complicated
formula to be successful and to be a good man and that's -- those are the traits that he
brings to the city and to his family and to his friends. So, I'm blessed to -- to call him a
friend -- dear dear friend and it's interesting -- it's times like this when we take a moment
and say -- I'm breaking my own rule. You take a moment to say what someone means.
We don't do it enough. So, I appreciate the chance to say it now. You don't have to work
-- you know, be on Council for five years to hear about it. Could tell you every day how
much you mean and there is folks in your life that mean a lot to you. Go tell them. Tell
them today. Just really appreciative of-- of what Treg's done for the city and it's no shock
that people have a tough time talking about him leaving. He's got a big impact on our
community and he means the world to me. I know you are going to do great stuff and
you are not going to be a stranger, but -- and you won't change those core principles
which make you a great husband, great dad, great council member, great member of our
community. So, I love you, man.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 6 of 72
Nary: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Bernt, I guess on
behalf of the staff -- I'm not the staff spokesman, but I have been here a long time. I will
echo what Council Member Cavener said, is there is not an employee that I have ever
talked to in the city that didn't believe you truly genuinely cared about the people that work
here and truly cared about them. Not just their job or what they do or how they could do
it better, but them and that's -- that's a genuine character that is not evident in everyone
and it's clearly who you are and -- and I know -- I -- my employee friends would all say
the exact same thing. You and I got to know each other from watching Breaking Bad and
I so enjoyed our times over the years when you were on parks and on P&Z and, then, on
Council and just talking about stuff that had nothing to do with the work, the government,
or any of those things, but just about life and the city and trying to do the right things for
the people here, both that worked in the city and that live in our city and that come to our
city and you always had the -- your heart in the right place and I guess the -- the -- the
biggest thank you and praise I can give you is I have sat up here for a very long time in a
lot of different seats in this city and the last person who sat in Seat 4, there is no better
person that could have succeeded him except you and I don't know anybody -- I don't
know that the next person could come close. I hope they do. But no one could have
followed Keith Bird's footsteps better than you. Thank you.
Simison: Thank you, Mr. Nary. So, people may not know it, but Treg's a poet. If you
follow him on Facebook every now and then he will -- he will drop a little ditty on Facebook.
His rhymes are sometimes off the hook. I had to go and watch an interview he gave, you
know, early in his career to understand that not every word has to rhyme. Sometimes it's
how you say it to get the rhyming effect, but -- but -- but your lyrics are always on point
and succinct and I don't know where you got that talent. That being said, I thought I would
take a -- take my own shot, because I didn't know really how to encompass all my -- what
I would want to say in these, because, you know, you really were the -- you know, my --
my right-hand helper, you know, when I came on and I really appreciate and value that
and, you know, who would have thought that, you know, two kids from Pokey could be
here helping a community grow and prosper from -- from where we were. So, here is my
words, best I could come up with, so don't -- don't judge, but, hopefully, they tell a little of
the name Treg. There once was a man from Pokey, who bled red and blue. Flooring was
his business, but his public service was true. He met with Mayor Tammy, who saw
something in his heart. She put him on parks and rec, that's where Treg Bernt got his
start. He gave his time and talents. Soon he climbed the ladder. Planning and Zoning
was a fit and his vote started to matter. City Council was his next stop. Here he found a
home. He served with distinction, that's where I got to know-him. As Mayor and Council
President together we set a path. We may have had a few words, but sometimes brothers
spat. He stayed focused on our services. He left politics at the door. He built relationships
with others. Then it was time for more. Now he's in the Senate, Meridian's blue and gold
rang true. The future is bright for Teggy. He will be in leadership before he's through. His
hearts as big as his head. It's okay because he wears a hat. There is a little more gray
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 7 of 72
in his beard and Tiff is all right with that. Everywhere he goes he always makes new
friends. King of the bro hug, he will back you to the end. He loves his family deeply.
Family first is his motto. His kiddos are number one. With Tiff he hit the Lotto. Pickleball's
a new hobby. Fishing is in his blood. His crew is a bunch of ice holes, but he is really a
stud. We have enjoyed the pal Tamarack. Chambers has been a pleasure. All my best
to Senator Treg Bernt, you truly are a treasure. Senator, the floor is yours.
Bernt: Geez. Geez. What a poem, Mayor. That caught me off guard a little bit. You do
have a little in your blood. What a ride. What a ride. What an awesome ride. You know,
serving the citizens of Meridian for the past five years on the City Council has been
probably -- it is one of the -- it is the greatest honor that I have -- that I have had in my life
and it's really interesting, because, you know, I feel like I have just had a small little piece
of it, you know, because what we do is really important and it's grand and I -- and I'm
really grateful for the little piece that I had to do with it, because -- you know. And it's not
just -- and it's just not us, you know, there -- there -- there were folks that came before us,
whether -- you have heard a lot tonight about Keith Bird. The -- Mr. Rountree. Mr.
Zaremba. Those who came before us set the path and so as we make decisions on the
dais, whether it be the budget, whether it be land use, whether it be setting policy, for me
it's never been incredibly difficult, because that path has already been set. There were
greats who -- who came before us who put us in a position where these decisions were
a little easier. So, hats off to those who came before us and I'm really grateful for Meridian
heritage and those who really truly made a difference. Some thank yous. So, first off I
want to -- I just want to thank the citizens of Meridian. You elected me twice to sit in this
seat and -- but -- but the most important thing is all of the friendships and all of the -- all
-- all of those who I have met over the years, whether it was over coffee, whether it was
over club on wheats at Kahootz, whatever the case may be, truly grateful for all of the
meaningful relationships in this city that I have been able to have over this -- this -- these
five years. But, you know, it doesn't stop now. You know, I -- I feel like -- you know, I --
feel like this is a huge goodbye, which it sort of is, but I'm not going anywhere. All right?
I live less than a mile or two down the street and there is going to be a time in June when
sessions is over in the capital and there is going to be a weird name on the public forum
that's going to -- you know, that signed to testify and that's going to be me, Chris, and
will -- I will -- I will come by and say hi. Promise. I'm not going anywhere. I'm always
close. And those who know me best know that I'm always available. I'm always available.
Those who know me best know that I'm -- I'm here to serve and I'm here to make a
difference and I truly care. We talk -- we talk about this brotherhood or the sisterhood
that we have up here on Council and we -- and we -- we have a mantra and, again, Keith
Bird's name comes up, but it's absolutely true, we call it the Keith Bird rule. Recently
was talking to a gentleman -- I was -- he was from a different part of the state during our
Senate organizational session that happened a couple of weeks ago and he is like why
is it that the City of Meridian is never in the news? I mean you are like the second biggest
city and no one ever hears anything about you and I'm like that's the biggest compliment
I think I have ever heard in my entire life and I think that the reason for it is because we
get along. We -- we -- we -- we rarely always agree, but the Keith Bird rule says that you
leave it on the dais. You respect. You respect one another with civility and I believe in
public discourse, especially in politics. This is something that's lacking and it's something
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 8 of 72
that I promise each and everyone of you and those who are listening that I'm going to
take this Keith Bird rule to the Senate and you will continue to see civility, you will continue
to see respectful discourse and we will get stuff done. I want to thank Liz Strader, Joe
Borton, fellow ice hole. Brad Hoaglun. Luke Cavener. Jessica Perreault. Genesis Milam.
Ty Palmer and Ann Little Roberts. I also want to thank former Mayor Tammy de Weerd
and Mayor Robert Simison. Knowing you and working with you shoulder to shoulder has,
again, been a huge honor and it's -- it's been a pleasure and you have taught me so much.
Last, but not least, Tiff, my family. I didn't know that you were going to get a little present
tonight. Thanks, Brad. That was so sweet. Like you shouldn't have, Brad. Geez, you
are such a nice guy. But, you know, Tiff -- if you know Tiff, she -- she's -- she's the -- the
best wing man that I could ever have, not only in public service, but in life and, you know,
when you are -- when you are in public service, when you get into politics, it's a lot of time
and we are -- and I'm not complaining, it just is what it is and we do it with -- with a smile
on their faces and we are absolutely -- it's -- it's -- it's a huge blessing. But I know that
my wife is -- she's over the years sacrificed a lot of things that professionally and
personally that for -- for me in my public service and I think I -- I don't know if I could do
that. I don't know if there is a lot of people that would be able to do that. So, thank you,
Tiff. I love you so much. My kiddos -- two are working. One's at school at the University
of Utah and, hopefully, they will watch this recording a little bit later, but my -- thank you
to my kiddos. I love you greatly. If there is one thing that I always talk to my kiddos about
-- I don't care if you get into politics. I honestly could care less. I just want-- I have always
taught my kiddos to get engaged. Get involved. Make a difference. I don't -- you all
know that I love this city and I love this state. It's -- I -- I'm so grateful and honored to
serve you as your Meridian City Councilman for the last five years, but I'm super excited
to get to the statehouse and to -- to serve you as your Idaho State Senator in District 21.
1 can't thank each and everyone of you enough. I appreciate your support. Thank you to
the Mayor for allowing me to, you know, express my thoughts and -- and -- and to thank
Tiff, my family, Meridian city staff and all those who have truly made a difference. Thank
you so much. God bless.
Simison: I know there is some people that came here for Treg, so we will go ahead and
take a short five to eight minute recess, just to allow those that maybe came to say
goodbye and clear house, so -- we will recess for -- reconvene at 6:40.
(Recess: 6:32 p.m. to 6:39 p.m.)
PUBLIC FORUM — Future Meeting Topics
Simison: All right. We will go ahead and come back from recess. Next item up is public
forum. Mr. Clerk, did we have anyone sign up?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, there is no sign-ups.
ACTION ITEMS
7. Public Hearing for Sessions Parkway(H-2022-0046) by KM Engineering, LLP.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 9 of 72
located at 2700 N. Eagle Rd.
A. Request: Development Agreement Modification on the existing
Development Agreement (Inst.#104129529) to remove the subject property
from the agreement in order to enter into a new Development Agreement
for the proposed project.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 5 building lots on 5.32 acres of land
in the C-G zoning district with a request for City Council approval of an
access via N. Eagle Rd./SH-55.
Simison: Okay. Then we will go into Action Items and our first Action Item is on the former
Item No. 7, which is a public hearing for Sessions Parkway, H-2022-0046, by KM
Engineering, LLP. Do we want to open the public hearing --
Nary: Mr. Mayor, I think -- I think it was noticed properly. I think they are requesting a
continuance, so, yeah, we can --
Simison: Okay. So, I will go ahead and open the public hearing for this item. As we
noted, we do not have the applicant here. Would staff like to make any further comments
at this time related to that? Okay. Do we have anyone that was here for the purpose of
testifying on this item this evening? Okay. I see nobody. Then do I have a motion?
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I move that we continue H-2022-0046 to January 3rd, 2023.
Borton: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to continue this item. Is there any discussion? If
not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public
hearing is continued.
MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES.
2. Request for Reconsideration of Bridgetower Multi-Family (CUP-2022-
0047/CR2022-0006) by Paul Elam
Simison: So, we will go back to Item 2 on our agenda, which is a request for
reconsideration of Bridgetower Multi-Family, CUP-2022-0047 by Paul Elam. Mr. Nary.
Nary: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. So, before you is a request
for reconsideration. It has been filed properly by Paul Elam and requesting a review of
your decision from a prior hearing of November 15th when you basically overturned the
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 10 of 72
Planning and Zoning Commission's denial of the conditional use permit for the
Bridgetower Multi-Family Apartments. It has been filed. Again you have it in front of you.
As you know, there is no testimony here. Your decision point -- unless you have questions
of staff, your decision point is either to uphold your decision, reverse your decision, or
modify your decision. If-- if the decision is to -- to -- to reverse your prior decision, a new
public hearing will have to be held. We would have to re-notice that a future date and,
then, we would take public testimony. But, otherwise, there is no additional testimony or
evidence tonight, unless you need clarification on any question.
Simison: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Council, questions, comments, actions?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Just a piece for discussion. I read Mr. Elam's letter and I -- I think it's important
to clarify a little bit -- at least to clarify my own vote. I thought it might help him kind of
understand where I was coming from. It's not a fear of the city going to court over a
decision, it's that the legal basis that we cannot provide adequate services did not exist
sufficiently for me to oppose that application. It's one of the yes votes that I had the most
mixed feelings about. I did not want to vote for this one, but I did and the reason is that
this is entitled property, they were following the original concept plan and, ultimately,
ACHD proved that there was an adequate level of service off McMillan and they are the
road authority, as flawed as their analysis may be, and in addition, while the West Ada
School District is overcrowded in some respects, we took a pause even on some
development applications to work with them and ask them what we could do further to
assist them and whether they needed us to pause development or do something
differently as a city to support them and they were emphatic in saying that they were ready
to support additional students. So, considering that the -- you know, main providers of
the services that were in question had both affirmed that they could provide those services
and because it wasn't an annexation, this was entitled property, already annexed into the
city, that -- that is to say that there was not a sufficient legal basis to deny the application.
It's not fear of a lawsuit. I'm never afraid of us going to court over something if we feel
we have an adequate legal basis. But I didn't feel that we did and that's why I had to vote
for that application. Just wanted to clarify for Mr. Elam. Thanks, Mayor.
Simison: Thank you.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I appreciate Council Woman Strader explaining that so well. When we receive
letters like this my heart really goes out to -- to the public, because these decisions -- we
-- we feel what your concerns are. We -- we understand the concerns. We understand
the impacts of this development and, like Council Woman Strader said, I was also
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 11 of 72
incredibly conflicted and -- and not entirely in favor of voting for that, but there are
limitations that are upon us in that particular situation, because the decision to allow this
type of development and density was established in 2005. It was annexed and zoned
and a development agreement, which is a contract with the city that the city will provide
services to that landowner, was signed and agreed to in 2005 and we don't have the
ability to just turn that over and -- and start making independent changes of that contract
that -- you know, with -- without -- without a request from the landowner and without
sufficient basis. So, the only thing we were considering in that hearing -- it was very
narrow and very specific -- was that -- was -- was really just a change to some designs of
the buildings and the concept plan. As Council Woman Strader explained, the
transportation and schooling piece was not a topic of our conversation. There was a
delay in -- excuse me. The -- the -- the delay in them building the original concept plan
from 2005 -- it -- it doesn't, again, allow us to change any of what they were originally
permitted to do. So, our choice was to either -- to either continue with what they had --
had agreed to with the prior Council from 2005 had -- had voted on or to agree to the
changes that they recommended. That was the extent of our decision that evening.
There wasn't anything else that we could change. So, I just wanted to clarify that even
further, because it certainly didn't have anything to do with not taking the concerns and
the impacts into account. We--we absolutely would if we could. If this was an annexation
that was before us we could have done so. Planning and Zoning Commission, they --
they are volunteers, they do an amazing job, they made a bit of an error in not looking at
this application in the -- in the context in which we did and that is not the developer's fault.
So, I personally don't see any cause to reconsider -- any legal basis to reconsider the
decision.
Simison: Thank you.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: After reviewing the request for reconsideration from Mr. Elam on Bridgetower
Multi-Family CUP-2022-0047 and 2022-0006, I have reviewed the decision, the findings
and the minutes of the approval and do not find any error that would cause me to
reconsider or remand this decision. Therefore, I move to deny the request for
reconsideration.
Perreault: Second.
Simison: We have a motion and a second. Is there discussion?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 12 of 72
Cavener: I will be brief. I wasn't present for this particular agenda item, but have watched
it online and agree with the -- with the motion maker.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: Same. Thank you.
Simison: All right. Is there any further discussion? All right. Clerk will call the roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader,
yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the request for reconsideration is not approved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES.
4. Public Hearing for Prairiefire Subdivision (H-2022-0053) by Patrick
Connor, located at 3539 N. Locust Grove Rd., near the northwest
corner of E. Ustick Rd. and N. Locust Grove Rd.
A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 3.16 acres of land from RUT in
Ada County to the R-8 zoning district.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 22 building lots and 1
common lot.
Simison: With that we will move on to Item 3, which is a public hearing for Prairiefire
Subdivision, H-2022-0053. We will open this public hearing with staff comments.
Hersh: Good evening, Mayor and City Council. The applicant is here to talk about their
proposed project for Prairiefire Subdivision. The applications submitted are annexation
and zoning and preliminary plat. The site of the property consists of 3.16 acres of land,
zoned RUT in Ada county, located at 3539 North Locust Grove Road. There is no prior
history on the property. The applicant proposes to annex the 3.16 acres of land with an
R-8 zoning district. This property is designated as medium density residential on the
future land use map contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The designation allows for
units at a gross density of three to eight dwelling units per acre. A preliminary plat was
submitted showing how the property is proposed to be subdivided and developed with 22
single family residential detached dwelling units at a gross density of 6.96 units per acre,
which is within the desired density range of the median density residential designation.
The subject property is an enclave surrounded by existing single family residential
detached homes to the north, which is Quenzer Commons. The west is Heritage Grove.
East is Summerfield. There is a church to the south and an office park to the north. This
development is proposed to be an age restricted -- restricted 55 plus community and the
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 13 of 72
applicant's narrative states that they have an agreement in place to merge with -- this
development with the Heritage Grove HOA. Access is proposed from the extension of
existing local stub street, which is West Prairiefire Street from the west. Access is
prohibited from North Locust Grove Road, which is to the east. ACHD is requiring that
the applicant increase the radius of the cul-de-sac from 47 feet to 50 feet per district
standards. The project is conditioned to comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. A
25 foot wide landscape buffer is required along North Locust Grove Road. Because the
site is below five acres in size open space and site amenities are not required per the
UDC 11-3-3A. However, the applicant is providing 0.37 acres of common area to provide
pedestrian access to the commercial properties located to the north and Locust Grove to
the east. This area will be landscaped with trees, shrubs, and include a five foot micro
path. Staff recommends that the applicant remove Lot 11, Block 1, to the north along the
northern property boundary. The micro path connection of the northern portion of the
common law adjacent to the commercial development is hidden behind Lot 11 , Block 1,
creating a potential safety issue for pedestrians and pedestrian pathways on common lots
shall be designed to reduce the incidence of crime and improve the quality of life. So,
four conceptual building elevations were submitted that demonstrate the style of homes
proposed for this development as you can see on the slide to the right. A mix of single
story and single story bonus room homes are proposed. Staff believes the proposed --
proposed elevations are consistent with the Heritage Commons Subdivision development
and staff has included a sample elevation that demonstrates the style of homes in the
Heritage Grove development on the left. Planning staff did recommend approval at the
Commission hearing with the requirement of the DA that contains the provisions in the
staff report and Commission recommendation was approval at the November 3rd, 2022,
Commission hearing. Summary of Commission public hearing. In favor was Patrick
Connor was the applicant and Michael Rusnack was the -- is the president of the HOA for
Heritage Grove Subdivision. In opposition we had Judie Dietzler, Kevin Emery, Willie
Uhrig, Moscelene Sunderland, Doug Brown and Gerard Gladu. Commenting was Patrick
Connor and Michael Rusnack. And written testimony was Doug Sayers. Concerns
pertaining to excess traffic through the Heritage Grove Subdivision. Key issues at the
meeting were single story with a loft will essentially create a second story causing privacy
issues. Contractors use a temporary construction entrance off of Locust Grove during
the subdivision construction. Concerns over Heritage Grove HOA's ability to provide
enough irrigation water. Consistent with the home elevations in Heritage Grove
Subdivision and whether the proposed homes fit on the lots. And these actual ones that
I have in the slide the -- are the new elevations that were proposed that we had asked for
in the Commission's staff report. And, then, also removing Lot 11, Block 1, to create a
better transition on the northern boundary. And, then, key issues of discussion by
Commission were HOA responsible for maintaining the landscaping in the front and back
yards. Concerns about ensuring the elevations are compatible with the Heritage Grove
Subdivision. The pathway to the north is a requirement as part of a conditional use permit
approved with the commercial business park to the north. Proposed homes will fit on lots
with removal of Lot 11, Block 1 -- and I could go back to that slide. I have an X on it. And,
then, Commission changes to staff recommendation. The applicant shall work with ACHD
to try to obtain a construction entrance off Locust Grove during construction of the
subdivision to minimize all that traffic through Heritage Grove -- Heritage Grove
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 14 of 72
Subdivision. And outstanding issues for City Council. The applicant shall provide revised
plans that are more consistent in style with the Heritage Grove Subdivision homes prior
to the City Council hearing, in which they have done so. And written testimony since the
Commission hearing, we have not had any. Thank you. And that concludes the
presentation.
Simison: Thank you, Stacy.
Hersh: You are welcome.
Simison: Council, any questions for staff?
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Thank you, Stacy. In regard to a construction entrance off of Locust Grove,
where -- can you bring them the -- the plat back up and show where that would be? I
assume it would be through what we are seeing as land -- the landscaped area. Does
that mean the applicant would not be landscaping that area until after all the homes are
constructed?
Hersh: Mayor, Council Woman Perreault, yes, that would be correct. So, on the east
side of Locust Grove -- so, that would be the last part, they would -- they would get
approval from ACHD to enter to build the subdivision from the east off of Locust Grove
and, then, that would be the last part completed.
Simison: Council, any additional questions for staff? Okay. Then would the applicant
like to come forward? And if you could state your name and address and be recognized
for 15 minutes.
Connor: Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. My name is Patrick Connor. My address is
701 South Allen Street, Meridian, Idaho. Can you press the -- perfect. Thank you. Good
evening, everyone. Thank you for having me tonight. As Stacy said, this is the Prairiefire
Subdivision. Tonight we are requesting annexation of 3.16 acres from RUT to the R-8
zone. We are also requesting approval of the preliminary plat, 22 single family lots and
one common lot. The project is located on the west side of Locust Grove, just north of
the Ustick intersection. Just south of the project is a church. North is an L-O office area
with a pediatric clinic and Fire Station No. 3 is located just to the east and we border
Heritage Grove, a 55 plus age restricted community to our west. The project is
surrounded by medium density residential and the zoning directly adjacent to the property
is R-15 to our west, R-8 to our north, and, then, office to the north and south. So, what
we are proposing tonight is the R-8 zone. Initially when we first started looking at this
project and this in-fill project -- and it's -- it's pretty rare in my job that I get to present an
in-fill project. Usually I'm doing kind of the larger stuff on the fringes of town. So, I'm
really happy to present this to you all. We are looking at a number of possibilities for this,
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 15 of 72
whether we are looking at attached townhomes or potentially a mixture of townhomes
and single family. We had a very large showing at our neighborhood meeting where it
was overwhelmingly in favor of single family. So, that is the route that we went with our
application. So, we are proposing 22 single family lots with one common lot and we do
have some open space. There is a micro pathway to the commercial property to our north
and, then, an access to Locust Grove to the east. During the neighborhood meeting we
had a large showing, like I said, and we started conversations with the HOA board of the
Heritage Grove community that we would take access from and from the very start in
working with Michael and his team, they are trying to find win-win solutions to a number
of problems that -- and -- and different areas that we found conflict. The first thing is we
didn't want to create an island community within this kind of 55 plus community. So,
Michael and his team came forward with the idea to -- potentially we could annex and be
part of their HOA and age restrict our community and effectively become the last phase
of their community. Talking without -- with -- with our company and working through it is
something that we are open to and that we are excited about bringing forward. Like I
said, another part of the problem was there was concern about increased traffic and
children in the community of 55 plus and so in restricting the age restriction we were able
to kind of alleviate some of those concerns. Architectural styles, making sure that if we
do annex into the community and making sure that our homes match and it's -- and it
feels like a seamless community and so we have worked through a lot of the items of
architectural compatibility and that was also a standard that was brought forth by the city,
making sure that our homes that we can bring forward fit in well. Again, the PI system
that we would need to connect to is within Heritage Grove. We have water rights, but the
water rights come just about once a week as kind of a flood irrigation and we would be
able to dedicate that water to their storage system for the PI system and we can easily
connect to the PI system. So, we are committed to upgrading the -- the pump and
anything that needs to be done to ensure the PI system works for our 22 homes. The two
conditions that -- what's shown before you on the left is what we have proposed and
what's in for you on the right is the project with that Lot 11 taken out. So, as you can see
the green space gets a little bit bigger and those lots on the north side also get wider. So,
it's a better transition from the -- the lots on the north. So, we are okay with -- and we are
-- and we are willing to comply with that first condition. The second condition is to have
the house renderings. Like Stacy said, we submitted these new renderings. Our team is
still working on the architectural elements of it. The floor plans, making sure they fit. The
55 plus housing market is a little bit different. There is different needs and demands of
those buyers compared to what we typically see with the single family and so we are
working through some of the elements of that. So, again, thank you for having me tonight
and this is an in-fill project surrounded by R-15 and R-8 zone. What our project is trying
to accomplish here and what we have tried to show with -- working with the HOA board
is moving forward together with finding an agreement and -- and, hopefully, after tonight,
if we have a positive outcome, we continue to work with them and annex into their
community. The item about connecting to the Locust Grove with the construction traffic,
I'm really glad that you brought that point up, because a lot of times all that landscaping
needs to get done before we have a recorded plat and if we are going to be running
construction traffic along there it won't happen. So, that's something that we would need
to work with ACHD on and with staff on to -- to make sure it happens. I think it would
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 16 of 72
alleviate a lot of the distractions of home construction for our neighbors. So, it's
something that we are committed to do, but there needs to be some sort of working with
staff as well to alleviate that -- that landscaping until all the construction is done. We are
complying with all the zoning parameters of the R-8 zone and, like I said, it's -- it's been
really good working with Michael and his team and -- and trying to make this a seamless
transition. I know we are kind of the outsiders trying to join in, but we are trying to make
it a win-win project for everybody. So, with that I would stand for any questions you all
may have.
Simison: Thank you. Council, questions for the applicant?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Thanks, Mr. Connor, for coming and I want to start by complimenting you. I don't
think we see very often that an applicant really tries so hard to integrate with the
surrounding neighborhood and even going to the level of annexing into the HOA. That
really speaks to part of our Comprehensive Plan. So, I appreciate you doing that. My
question for you is with these revised elevations is there a bonus room? How are you
thinking about that transition if there is one? Are there going to be windows overlooking
the neighbors? There aren't a ton of properties it looks like that -- that border, but could
you just sort of talk us through that, since these are new elevations.
Connor: Thank you, Council Member -- Council Member Strader. Yes. So, most of our
plans we want to have the option to have a bonus room or a loft and the way that those
are designed is they are within the trusses of the home. So, it looks from the front and
from -- compared to a single family home the same height and elevation. The windows
are -- typically face the front of the house. So, the best example is going to be the top
two that you see those -- the dormer windows and these range probably around 300
square feet and they are really just spaces for a craft room or if grandkids need a play
area or if someone just needs to get away and watch a soccer game, it's just another
space within that home. Given that these lots are a little bit smaller, we just wanted to
have the opportunity to have a little bit more space in there. Sometimes 55 plus homes
are just two bedrooms, given the -- the demographic and so we are just trying to have
another opportunity to have that space up there. In talking with the HOA board they don't
want the spaces on that second floor to be bedrooms, which we completely understand
and that's not the intent of those. So, they are -- they are just an option for a loft or a
bonus room up there. None of the ones that we have designed have windows that -- that
face the neighbor to the sides. So, as far as privacy of looming -- looking in the backyard,
something like that, it's -- it's a non-issue with these designs.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 17 of 72
Strader: Got it. So, would it be accurate to say that the height of these homes is typical
for a single story home, just that you are integrating a bonus room into where the roof line
is and, then, it sounds like you just confirmed there wouldn't be any windows facing the
homes from the side. There wouldn't be any side windows. So, they all face forward.
That's how the layout is of all your properties. Really this privacy concern shouldn't be
an issue?
Connor: That -- that is correct.
Strader: Okay. That's helpful. Thank you.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I'm just going to ask a what if question here. If, for some reason, you are not
able to work things out with the current homeowners association to everybody's
satisfaction, what's your plan?
Connor: I -- I have -- Council Woman Perreault, I have a lot of confidence that we will
and we -- we really want to join. They want us to join. We are -- like I said, we are just
working through some final items. Tonight -- tonight's outcome is a big part of that. I -- I
know that we can get there and if it doesn't work out, I think we just keep trying again. I
mean we want to be a good neighbor, we want to build the right thing here, and I think
this -- there is no reason why I don't think it -- it should. The -- and I will let him speak as
I know he signed up to speak, but -- but Michael, the HOA board president, they had a
vote of 92 or 93 percent of the neighbors did vote in favor for annexation and so they
have everything in their wheelhouse to -- to work with us and negotiate and make sure
they have the ability to do it. So, it's basically done. It's really just up to us and them
coming to a final annexation agreement with the architectural items. Yeah.
Simison: Council, any additional questions for the applicant? All right. Thank you very
much. Mr. Clerk, do we have anybody signed up on this item?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did. First is Judie Dietzler -- Dietzler.
Simison: If your name is called if you would come forward and be recognized for three
minutes. Or do we have anyone here who is representing an HOA? Okay. So, an HOA
representative is over there. Okay. Recognized for three minutes.
Dietzler: Yes. I'm Judie Dietzler. I live at 1318 East Prairiefire, Meridian. My house was
the one you were showing on the screen and before I start I would like to say,
Congressman Treg, I'm sorry I didn't have the opportunity to know you, because you
sound like a wonderful person. Very caring and -- and compassionate and by hearing
your interaction I think that the entire city--the City Council is the same way, which means
that that will go over into our communities with that same compassion and love. So, we
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 18 of 72
appreciate you. Okay. I had a couple of questions. One of them was the -- Hubble is
proposing the -- the loft and it's -- they said a couple of things that sounded okay, but the
problem is you are doing an over 55 community. Most of us that moved to an over 55
community are on the higher end of the over 55 and we moved there because we didn't
want stairs in our homes. So, I'm not sure how easily it will be to sell a home that's got
the loft, unless it's just used mainly for storage, then, it makes sense. So, that's one thing.
Also, the Heritage Grove board has -- had a contract with -- I guess with Hubble, but none
of the residents have seen it and since we are all obligated to whatever that contract says,
it would be wonderful if we could see what we are -- what we are obligated to. Also you
have already addressed the entrance off of Locust Grove, so that's great. There will also
be a huge impact -- when we have 22 additional homes in our community on our
clubhouse -- our clubhouse is already stressed to the maximum. I don't know if our HOA
board has talked to Hubble about the potential for enclosing our patio, so that it will help
accommodate the additional residents or not, but that would be another concern that we
have. Okay. Thank you.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? All right. Thank you.
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, I'm not sure -- Mr. Dietzler, were you signing up as well? Okay.
Thank you. So, Michael Rusnack.
Simison: Thank you, Michael. And you will be recognized for up to ten minutes.
Rusnack: Good evening, Council and Mr. Mayor. As a community when we became
aware of the plans for Hubble taking over that area, our board immediately crafted the
thought of an annexation. As stated by Patrick we put this -- we put together terms and
conditions for this, that -- how it would integrate into our community for the best -- best
means for both parties and, indeed, we put it before the community. The community has
given us the authority to negotiate on behalf of the committee. Ninety-two percent of the
community within -- and, in fact, it was a majority of the community who voted -- 92
percent giving us, the board, the opportunity to negotiate and work with Hubble in this
case. We do have two homes in our community that have lofts and, in fact, I was not
aware of the second one until after the first meeting when I was informed that we do have
two. So, it's not something new in our community. With respect to the use of the
clubhouse, indeed, it is not at capacity. We monitor the use. The clubhouse is one -- it's
an extension of a living room and that's what its intent was. We do have a Friday fun
night that occasionally spills out into the patio. But, again, it's something for general use.
It is not something that we consider expanding at this time or into the future as we have
discussed it in the past. Questions about the water usage and the capacity of our system
and providing that pressurized irrigation. Our landscape contractor Perma Green has
noted that, indeed, we do have the ability to provide that water. It's all fully automated. It
is done in a manner that is consistent for conservation and we feel very comfortable in
the agreement of allowing us to be the reservoir for the water that comes off of the land
from the adjacent property, the Prairiefire. We would, indeed, provide the irrigation
process as we do now. So, again, the community has given us as a board the opportunity
to negotiate and then -- and, indeed, we are very very comfortable working with Patrick.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 19 of 72
To answer the question what if, we don't want a what if. We want to make it work and
that is our honest approach. We feel it's the best win-win. We don't want a multi-level
apartment complex in there. We don't want a lot of -- a lot more traffic than we would
have and with respect to the stairs, I think that's up to the buyer and we will leave it at
that.
Simison: Thank you. Council, questions?
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Thank you for being here. It's really refreshing to see the neighbors working
together with the applicant and having really reasonable conversations. We don't see
that as much as we would like to. So, thank you on behalf of yourself and the board for
just having such a good attitude about this change that's going to come to your
neighborhood. Does your -- do your CC&Rs currently have a limitation on how many
folks can live or visit and for how long in -- that are under the age of 55? Like some 55
communities permit family to stay for so much time, but the concern is that they will have
grandchildren that will come and live there on a permanent basis or something along
those lines. I know that's been expressed to us by other 55 plus communities where there
might be a loft or whatnot. Is that a conversation that your board has had and is that a
concern with having the second story?
Rusnack: In fact, our initial CC&Rs as written were a bit loose in that area and, in fact,
we amended them with the community vote -- an overwhelming community vote that we
amended the CC&Rs --A, we will only permit someone to be there on a temporary basis,
90 days in a calendar year. That 90 days includes any family member under the age of
55 at that point. And, indeed, we enforce that. So, it is, indeed, in the CC&Rs and the
very very first thing we provided Hubble team was a copy of the ACC documents and the
CC&Rs.
Simison: Council, any additional questions? All right. Thank you very much.
Rusnack: Thank you.
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, next is Willie Uhrig.
Simison: Good evening. If you could state your name and address for the record.
Uhrig: My name is Willie Uhrig and I live at-- I live at 1421 East Summer Place in Heritage
Grove. I had several questions, but most of them have been answered in the -- the
presentations. But I still have one -- one thing that I'm concerned about and that is, okay,
with the elimination of Lot 11 that does give Hubble more room on the -- I guess it's the
north side of the subdivision and they may be able to get the -- the type of houses they
are showing up here to fit on their lots with that. I don't think they will fit on the other side.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 20 of 72
They don't have the -- they don't have the footprint to build those kind of houses on -- on
that side of the street. They don't have the width to build them. And I don't think anyone's
looking at that. They are showing -- they are showing something that they can't do. But
when they showed the original design that they were planning to build, they were planning
to build very narrow -- and we have seen -- you see them around -- very narrow
apartments, because they had to fit them on the lot and they are still going to have that
issue with the footprint on the houses on the other side of the street. You know, they may
be okay on the north side once you get rid of Lot 11 . The other thing I would like to say
is I would -- I would like to stand up here and say I -- I wholeheartedly support this, but I
don't know what this is. We were given a list of bullet points to vote on, which we voted
on. They were very broad bullet points. People -- residents in -- in Heritage Grove have
asked to see the agreement between Hubble and our board, just so we know what the
agreement is, because, as you know, the devil usually is in the detail. It's not in the broad
points. So, we don't know what we are agreeing to. And those are my points. Thanks.
Simison: Thank you, Willie. Council, any questions? All right. Thank you.
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, Gerard Gladu.
Gladu: Mr. Mayor. Good evening, everyone.
Simison: Good evening.
Gladu: Excuse me. Sorry. My name is Gerard Gladu. I live at 1461 East Legacy View
Drive and it's in the Quenzer Commons Subdivision. It's on the north side of -- of their
proposal. A lot of my-- actually I want to thank Patrick also for, you know, his concessions
that he's done with the -- with his proposals and stuff like that really helped. But my
concern with the lots -- I'm going to have four of them along my property line and so with
what he said, as long as the houses that are proposed with the lofts and the windows,
you know, face the front, don't face the back. Also another concern that I have is the
traffic and nobody's brought this up, but the traffic going through the Quenzer Commons
Subdivision as well. So, that's just another concern as well. And my fence -- I don't know
-- I have never had to deal with anything like this before, so I don't know what to expect.
But like my fence line, I would like to keep my fence, as opposed to having a -- a vinyl
fence put up and mine taken down, because of the way my backyard is it just -- it just
wouldn't look right. So, I don't -- I don't know how that works as far as that goes. So,
that's also a concern of mine.
Simison: Those would be great questions for Patrick that we will have him address if --
in his comments.
Gladu: Yeah.
Simison: Council, any questions? All right. Thank you.
Gladu: All right. Thank you, guys. Have a good evening.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 21 of 72
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, there is several other names, but no one else marked that they
wanted to speak.
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Strader: Just to those last two questions. Take yours. To the last two questions, our
planning staff or the applicant is taking notes with regards to the fence requirements, what
may or may not happen with the fence. Lot dimensions for that zone and how a property
can or can't fit on a lot that's got a set street frontage width and, then, certain side yard
setbacks, which allow for a lot to be of a certain size. So, if the applicant doesn't address
it our staff can address it and provide answers on how things can fit and what happens to
-- to fencing on a project like this.
Simison: All right. Is there anybody else who would like to provide testimony on this item,
either in the room or online? If you are online use the raise your hand feature and if you
are in the room if you want to come forward. Okay. Seeing no one coming forward or no
one raising their hand, I will ask the applicant to come forward to provide comments and
close.
Connor: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Again, Patrick Connor. Just to address -- I thought
Michael did a good job answering some of the questions about the -- the question about
the loft. Again, it is an option. It's kind of left up to the buyer if they want it. Anecdotally,
my parents live in an age restricted townhouse community and they have a second story
loft that they actually do use mainly for storage. So, it is kind of -- just an option like we
said to have there and we are trying to satisfy some of the concerns about privacy and
just having that -- the windows face the front. Mr. Uhrig brought up -- Mr. Uhrig brought
up his concern about the houses not fitting on those lots. So, the lots as they are drawn
are 40 feet to 50 feet wide and our product as we are designing it is a 30 foot wide product.
In this zone the side setback is five feet, the front is 20 feet, and the rear is 12 and so the
homes that we are designing will fit on the lots within the city code of the setbacks. Some
of the lots are typical -- are a little bit wider, so we could put a wider home on there if
needed.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Just real quick to close the loop on that point -- on that point, the -- the -- the
dimensions -- or the examples that you have shown are examples of lots that are of the
dimensions that you are describing? Thirty feet?
Connor: That's correct. Yeah. The -- the homes that were shown that we submitted to
City Council are 30 foot wide homes. There is one home on there that a 40 foot wide
home that would fit on a 50 foot lot.
Strader: Good. Thanks.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 22 of 72
Connor: And to answer Mr. Gladu's question about the fence, definitely with a -- with an
in-fill project like this we like to look on it on a case-by-case basis. We would like to keep
the fence in place. There is no need to replace a fence or take -- tear a fence out. That
doesn't need to do that. We never want to do a double fence. We never want to have
fences back-to-back, because it's a maintenance issue. So, when we get there we can
work with --with the neighbor on --on making sure that that transition is done well, making
sure that also -- if there is any grading that needs to get done, we don't want to have a
grading issue between the two properties. During site visits I think actually the adjoining
properties are a couple feet higher than this property. It's -- it's a bit in a hole. So, there
will be some grading that we will have to do. And, again, I know it was brought up about
potential upgrades to the clubhouse. We are -- a part of our negotiations and -- and with
this annexation agreement is -- is find stuff like the developer contribution that we need
to give as we join the HOA. So, we have identified an amount that they would receive
once the final plat is done -- is recorded and so what they choose to do with that money
is an HOA decision. I don't know if it's enough to rebuild a clubhouse or do any sort of
additions like that, but that's going to be an HOA decision. And, again, the homeowners
that will live in this community will be paying fees and dues to go into the general fund. I
think that I covered any questions that were posed tonight. If there is anything else that
-- that I did not, please, let me know.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Thank you. Would you be willing to have a DA condition that would tie you to
what you just promised, which is that the windows on the second story will face the front
of the home?
Connor: Yeah. I don't see a problem with that.
Strader: That's fantastic. I think that would give a lot of the neighbors comfort around
that. Thanks.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Are -- are the current residents going to be invited and encouraged to use the
-- the green space, then, that's going to come in with this next phase and -- and is there
a clear-- I assume that the sidewalks connect and there is a clear path for them to access
that and use that. You know.
Connor: Yeah. Council Woman Perreault. Yes. Of course. The -- the green space will
be deeded to the HOA, so it will be HOA property and the micro pathway will connect to
Locust Grove and, then, to the public street sidewalk and, then, to their community. So,
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 23 of 72
we will provide a pedestrian access -- a quicker pedestrian access to Locust Grove and
-- and the micro path that goes to the north to the pediatric, St. Al's and the daycare.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Staff is showing the outstanding issue for City Council is the question regarding
the style of the homes. The elevations. And we can see from the two staff reports that
there is definitely a distinct difference between what was originally proposed and what's
currently being proposed. What other specifics were discussed? I -- I read that -- that
front porches was an element that currently exists. I don't see that in the elevations that
you have presented. Are there any other elements besides that that were discussed that
we should be thinking about or considering?
Connor: Yes, Council Woman Perreault. So, the -- the advice given to us by staff was
focused mainly on the garages, making sure the garages were not the front of the house.
So, either a front porch or a living space in the front there. On the four ones that
submitted I think either -- I think two out of four or three out of four did have a front porch.
Maybe it was a covered stoop and the other one had a larger front porch step protruded
in front of the -- the garage. So, the idea was that it wasn't -- it's not a snout house sort
of look and it's not a garage dominated front. So, that -- that's what -- what we drew and
that was the recommendations from staff, as we were asking them like what exactly are
you looking for to make it look more like Heritage Grove. And -- and also in -- and in the
architectural standards of the HOA that is also within the architectural standards that we
are working through is a nongarage dominated architectural design.
Simison: Council, additional questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you very much.
Hersh: Mr. Mayor, I do have one other thing to add in regards to the lot sizes. So, these
lot sizes met the R-8 zoning dimensions and they were 40 feet wide and now he's lost --
removed a lot, so some of them will be 50 feet. So, they meet the dimensions required
for the R-8 zoning district.
Simison: Thank you.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: I move that we close the public hearing on -- what now?
Simison: You are good.
Cavener: Okay. All right. Move that we close the public hearing on Item No. 3, Prairiefire
Subdivision, H-2022-0053.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 24 of 72
Strader: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any
discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it
and the public hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: This is a -- I think a really good use of an in-fill project -- some of the other
Council Members points. Appreciate the applicant being proactive with the neighbors and
kind of matriculate -- kind of build one kind of global concept. The only outstanding issue
for me is not one for us to -- to contemplate and that's between the current HOA and the
board and I have been on HOAs and worked with HOAs and know -- I don't think there is
more of a thankless job in government than serving on the homeowners association. If
there is one thing an HOA board can agree on is that nobody wants to do the job and so
I appreciate your work to the board and perhaps maybe just some further communication
with your residents about what's included will probably resolve that. So, Mr. Mayor, after
considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File No. H-2022-
0053 as presented in the staff report for the date of December 13th, 2022. To include all
staff, applicant, and public testimony.
Perreault: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there discussion on the motion?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Sorry.
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: To -- to clarify on that, I know Council Member Strader brought up a DA for the
way the windows are facing. That's inclusive of my motion as well.
Simison: Second agree?
Perreault: Second agrees.
Simison: Okay. Is there further discussion on the motion? Clerk will call the roll then.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader,
yea.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 25 of 72
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. Best of luck getting your
final agreements in order and working these things out. So, thank you very much for
being here.
MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES.
4. Public Hearing for Turin Plaza (H-2022-0063) by 12.15 Design, located
at 3169 W. Belltower Dr.
A. Request: Rezone of 1.80 acres of land from the R-4 (Medium Low-
Density Residential) to the L-O (Limited Office) zoning district.
5. Public Hearing for Turin Plaza (SHP-2022-0013) by 12.15 Design,
located at 3169 Belltower Drive.
A. Request: Short Plat consisting of four (4) building lots on 1.62 acres
of land in the proposed L-O zoning district.
Simison: Next item up is Items 4 and 5, public hearing for Turin Plaza, H-2022-0063, and
public hearing for Turin Plaza, SHP-2022-0013. We will open both of these public
hearings together and begin with staff comments.
Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council. The next application before you is a request for a
rezone and a short plat. This site consists of 1.62 acres of land. It's zoned R-4 and is
located at 3169 West Belltower Drive on the east side of North Ten Mile Road, just south
of Belltower Drive. This property was annexed back in 2001 and platted as a lot in
Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision. A development agreement was required as a
provision of annexation. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is
office. The applicant proposes to rezone 1 .8 acres of land, including land of the section
line of Ten Mile Road, from an R-4, medium low density residential, to the L-O, limited
office zoning district, consistent with the future land use map designation of office and in
accord with the development agreement, which requires the property to be rezoned to L-
O prior to issuance of any building permits. A short plat consisting of four building lots is
also proposed. This property is an undeveloped enclave surrounded by developed
properties in the city. An assisted living facility exists directly to the south. Office uses
exist to the north and single family residential properties exist to the east. A conceptual
development plan was submitted as shown that depicts four 3,550 to 3,600 square foot
office buildings with associated parking. Access is proposed via the existing backage
road along Ten Mile Road from West Belltower Drive. The street buffer associated
landscaping and sidewalk along Ten Mile Road was installed with the Bridgetower
Crossing Subdivision improvements. The Commission recommended approval of the
proposed rezone. I will go over the summary of the Commission hearing. Jessica Petty
and David Moorhouse testified in favor. No one testified in opposition or commented.
Written testimony was received from Jessica Petty 12.15 Design, the applicant's
representative, in agreement with the staff report. There were no real issues of discussion
by the Commission and no changes to the staff recommendation and no outstanding
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 26 of 72
issues for Council tonight. No written testimony has been submitted since the
Commission hearing and staff will stand for any questions.
Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions for staff? Okay. Is the applicant
here? If you would like to come forward and state your name and address for the record.
Be recognized for 15 minutes.
Johnson: And, Mr. Mayor, it looks like Jessica Petty is online as well. I think she's
speaking for the applicant.
Simison: Okay.
Petty: Hi. This is Jessica Petty with 12.15 Design.
Simison: We can hear you.
Petty: My address is 1897 South Satellite Lane, Boise, Idaho. And, yes, I'm the architect
on the project and speaking on behalf of the owner and we are just requesting a rezone
from R-4 to the L-O zone. We feel that the L-O zone district is fitting for the neighborhood
and consistent with the properties to the north. The L-O zone would allow us to provide
new services to the surrounding neighbors and community and we are excited to bring
some new businesses into the Meridian area. We would appreciate your support on the
rezone request and I'm here for any questions you have.
Simison: Thank you, Jessica. Council, any questions for the applicant?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: You don't have to disclose, but I was just curious if the folks that are living in the
area if you have any indication on the kind of users that you expect to come into the
development?
Petty: We don't know for sure yet, but we would anticipate just small businesses, you
know a dental office, a CPA office, something along those lines.
Strader: Perfect. Thank you.
Simison: Council, any additional questions for the applicant? Okay. Do we have anyone
signed up to provide testimony on this item?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, only somebody with the applicant team marked they wanted to
speak.
Simison: Okay. So, plenty of time, so go ahead.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 27 of 72
Moorhouse;: I'm David Moorhouse. 3536 West Ryder Cup Drive. I'm the owner of the
property and I'm only here to answer any questions if-- if there is any additional questions.
Simison: Okay. Council, any additional questions for the property owner? All right.
Perfect. Is there anybody present who would like to provide testimony on this item at this
time or anybody online that would like to provide testimony, please, use the raise your
hand feature. Seeing no one raising their hand and no one coming forward, would the
applicant like to make any final comments? Jessica?
Petty: No, I don't have anything else to add. Thank you.
Simison: Okay. Then, Council, what's your pleasure?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I move that we close the public hearing.
Borton: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing -- on both items?
Strader: Yes.
Simison: Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed
nay? The ayes have it and the public hearings are closed.
MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Strader.
Strader: It looks like a great, you know, kind of neighborhood office serving type of use.
I think these types of scale businesses work really well in this type of location. So,
considering that, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to
approve files number H-2022-0063 and SHP-2022-0013 as presented in the staff report
for today's hearing date.
Perreault: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second and a request from counsel and -- do we want to
separate those, Mr. Nary? Okay. If -- if we can have the withdraw of that motion.
Strader: Happy to withdraw the motion.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 28 of 72
Simison: Second agree?
Perreault: Second agrees.
Simison: And we will let you go again.
Strader: Okay. Will do. Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file
number H-2022-0063 as presented in the staff report for today's hearing date.
Perreault: Second.
Simison: Motion and second and just for clarification, 0053? Just for the record. Oh,
have 53 on my -- I must have an old one. Oh. We are doing that one. I apologize. I am
incorrect. Have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? If not, Clerk will call
the roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, absent; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader,
yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file
number SHP-2022-0013 as presented in the staff report for today's hearing date.
Perreault: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve Item SHP-2022-0013. Is there any
discussion?
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I would like to just say I think this is a great -- a great rezone moving from
residential to office in this -- in this specific area. I think this is a really wise move,
considering how much -- how much residential has come out to this area. We really need
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 29 of 72
those services nearby and the opportunities for residents in this area to have their
businesses near their home.
Simison: Any further questions -- or comments on the motion? If not, Clerk will call the
roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, absent; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader,
yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. Thank you very much.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
6. Public Hearing for West Valley Emergency Center (H-2022-0065) by
Fulmer Lucas Engineering, LLC., located at Southwest corner of N.
Levi Ln. and N. Rustic Oak Way
A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to the existing
development agreement for Prescott Ridge (Hospital Portion)
(Inst.#2021-132724) to update the phasing plan and modify the
provision requiring noise abatement to be provided along W.
Chinden Blvd./State Highway 20-26 to allow for alternative
compliance.
B. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a hospital in the C-G zoning
district.
Simison: Okay. Next item up is Item 6, public hearing for West Valley Emergency Center,
H-2022-0065. We will open this public hearing with staff comments.
Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. The next applications before you
are a request for a development agreement modification and a conditional use permit.
This site consists of 16.46 acres of land. It's zoned C-G and located at the southwest
corner of North Levi Lane and North -- aka North Rustic Oak Way. This property was
annexed in 2021 with Prescott Ridge Subdivision with the requirement of a development
agreement. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is mixed-use
regional and medium density residential. A modification of the existing development
agreement for Prescott Ridge, the hospital portion, is proposed to update the phasing
plan and modify the provision requiring noise abatement to be provided along Chinden
Boulevard, State Highway 20-26, to allow for alternative compliance. This application
does not require action from the Council. A conditional use permit is requested for an
11,241 square foot emergency medical facility on 2.4 acres of land, ultimately planned to
be part of a hospital campus on a total of 16.46 acres of land in the C-G district. A
modification of the conditional use permit will be required with future development of the
hospital in phase three. The City Council previously deemed the access for the
emergency room via Rustic Oak a collector street, meets the intent of the specific use
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 30 of 72
standards that requires hospitals that provide emergency care to have direct access on
an arterial street as noted in the development agreement. Access is proposed from two
access driveways from Rustic Oak Way, a future collector street along the east boundary
of the site. An emergency only access driveway is proposed from the west via Serenity
Lane, a private street. Direct access via Chinden Boulevard and State Highway 20-26 is
prohibited. An access easement is required to be obtained for the emergency access via
Serenity Lane. If not attained, emergency access shall be provided from the south from
the cul-de-sac, North Backcountry Place, between Lots 5 and 7, Block 12, in Prescott
Ridge No. 3 and a barrier prohibiting access shall be erected at the west end of the
frontage road. This is the frontage road we are talking about right here. That is a
requirement per our code -- per the Unified Development Code to be constructed. I just
wanted to clarify that and say that if they don't have an access easement from Serenity,
this private street right here, that they will have to barricade this off until they do have
access sometime down the road in the future. The emergency access is not required
with the emergency center. However, it will be required with the hospital if the overall
area of the building exceeds 124,000 square feet or is three or more stories in height. A
35 foot wide landscape street buffer is required along US 20-26. A request for alternative
compliance to UDC 11.3HAD, which requires noise abatement to be provided for
residential and other noise sensitive uses, including hospitals adjoining state highways,
was approved by the director based on the noise study submitted by the applicant. A
condition was added for a three foot tall berm to be provided within the street buffer for
aesthetic reasons. The building will be located over 400 feet to the south of the state
highway. A 25 foot wide buffer is required to adjacent residential uses to the west and
south. Landscape per the standards listed in the UDC as proposed. A 30 foot wide buffer
is proposed with an eight foot tall wall, landscaped with a mix of evergreen and deciduous
trees, shrubs, and lawn, which should result in a barrier that allows trees to touch at the
time of maturity. Parking is proposed in excess of UDC standards. Twenty-two spaces
are required, 47 are proposed. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the
proposed structure. It does not look like I got those in the presentation. I apologize. It is
in the staff report. Building materials consist of EIFS, thin stone veneer and corrugated
roof screen wall panels. Final design is required to comply with the design standards in
the architectural standards manual. Commission did recommend approval of the
proposed conditional use permit. Nancy Hunsicker testified in favor. That is the applicant.
No one testified in opposition. Cory Coltrin commented on the application. And written
testimony was received from Val Stack and Paul Hoyer. Key issues were as follows: An
access easement has not been granted via Serenity Lane, a private street, for the
proposed emergency access at the northwest corner of the site. Therefore, emergency
access should be provided from the south from the cul-de-sac in Prescott Ridge
Subdivision. If a frontage road isn't provided to Serenity Lane there would be adequate
room to construct a sound attenuation berm and a wall and the applicant could comply
with UDC standards for noise abatement for the hospital. There were no changes to the
staff recommendation and there were no real key issues of discussion by the
Commission. The only outstanding issue for Council tonight is Condition No. 8 in Section
9. It incorrectly states a four foot tall berm is required. It should read a three foot tall
berm is required, consistent with Condition No. 3-B. Staff request Council make this
correction. There has been no written testimony received since the Commission hearing.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 31 of 72
Staff is recommending approval of the proposed development agreement modification.
Staff will stand for any questions.
Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions for staff? Okay. Is the applicant
here? Good evening.
Hunsicker: Good evening. Hi, my name is Betsy Hunsicker. It's not quite spelled correctly
in the notes, but it's -- my address is 1717 Arlington Avenue, Caldwell, Idaho. Thank you
all, Mayor and Council Members. I appreciate you hearing our project again. We have
the architect and the civil engineers and others available online if you have technical
questions. So, I will be phoning a friend if you all have some -- if you go too deep on me,
but I just -- you all are aware this project was previously approved as part of the master
development, so we are just back, as Sonya said, for some -- I think fairly--some changes
to the development agreement, but nothing material in my opinion. We are really excited
to bring this project to this part of the City of Meridian. You all know better than anyone
this is probably one of the most rapidly growing areas in the country and with minimal
healthcare services and we are excited to partner with the City of Meridian to be able to
support growth and health of the community. As HCA West Valley is a tax paying
organization, so we want to remind you all that this property will generate property taxes
and income taxes for the city, thereby supporting growth and infrastructure really well
beyond what our own use will be. We are proud of 19 consecutive leapfrog in grades and
healthgrades patient safety awards five years in a row and I'm really proud of the quality
of care that we provide and we look forward to serving the people of Meridian. So, I would
like to thank the planning staff for working with us so closely. We are comfortable with all
of their recommendations and I will stand for any questions you might have.
Simison: Thank you, Betsy. Council, any questions for the applicant?
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Thank you. Good evening, Betsy. Betsy -- is that right?
Hunsicker: Yes.
Perreault: Could you speak to the two key issues that Sonya just presented regarding
the -- the neighbors not being willing to grant access to Serenity Lane? And, then, also if
there wasn't a frontage road to Serenity Lane, the room to construct a sound berm.
Hunsicker: The frontage road is required by the city, so -- so, they will have to answer
any questions. So, really, not doing the frontage road -- you know, we would be happy to
not have to construct a frontage road, but that's a requirement by the city and because of
the -- so, I will just leave it at that. You know, we can't not build it. The -- there are --
Ross, who is our civil engineer, can speak better to -- there is some pinch points in there
with -- in terms of the size and the easements with several different entities for water and
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 32 of 72
user -- user groups that make constructing a wall or a higher -- even a higher berm really
not feasible, with the road and the pinch points and the other easements. So, hopefully,
that's adequate. Our plan -- and we have talked with Hubble, who is the master developer
on the project, is to do the emergency access through the south -- through the -- through
that Prescott Ridge development. So, that is our plan, regardless of what the Serenity
Lane neighbors choose to do with the easement -- or granting us access. Our plan is to
use that south -- south access. That's not required for this phase of our project. That
would be required in a future phase. So, at this time -- correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't
believe that emergency access is required until a future phase. I hope that answers your
question.
Simison: Ross is in -- in the room now if you would like him to answer or if he has anything
to add.
Lucas: Yes. Thank you. Ross Lucas here and, hopefully, everyone can hear me okay.
We -- I will just add to what Betsy said. The -- the -- the -- the space constraint in terms
of building a wall or berm and wall combo, because of the need to construct the frontage
road, that doesn't go away. The road has to be constructed regardless of the -- of the --
of its use for emergency access. So, that constraint is still there. I will just reiterate what
-- what planning staff had -- had stated in that, you know, a noise abatement study was
-- was conducted by an acoustical engineer and the -- the hospital and -- in phase one,
FSR here, are sufficiently far away from the road that noise will not be an issue for -- for
our patients or users of the facility.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I have a question for staff if you don't mind, but you may want to stay up here.
So, for -- oh. Sorry. Lieutenant Leslie. Well, we will get -- we can go to you first or we
can go to Deputy Chief Bongiorno. But my question for you -- for both of you guys would
be is it an issue to have the emergency access to the south? Like does that impact our
response time? Is that problematic? Could you just both, please, comment on -- on --
you know, it's obviously a big change.
Bongiorno: Mr. Mayor and Council, the -- as we discussed with that last project across
the street, literally, the access time -- again, Station 5 is going to be the closest. It's going
to come straight down Chinden and up Rustic Oak. Station 8 will do that cut through, like
we talked about, to come to Rustic Oak. They can cut through The Oaks and through the
Hubble development to get to this point. So, there is two points -- two directions this way.
The problem they get is in the future when the -- when the building is larger, they have to
have, by the fire code, a separate entrance by code and that's that half the diagonal of
the property apart. The access out to Serenity Lane at this point is the -- is the easiest
way to do it and that gives us very two distinct access points to the property. I did look at
the cul-de-sac and I -- I said that is acceptable as well, because it will also meet that half
the diagonal rule. So, either one is fine for the fire department.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 33 of 72
Strader: Perfect. Thank you. Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: If the police department wouldn't mind if -- if they have a similar take on it or
anything different to add.
Leslie: And, Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, we don't have a concern over the
entrances where ever they are at. Our response is, obviously, a little bit different than the
fire and the apparatus. So, we are -- we are good with either of them.
Strader: Perfect. Thanks.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any additional questions for the applicant? All right. Thank
you very much.
Hunsicker: Thank you.
Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to provide testimony?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not.
Simison: Okay. Is there anybody in the audience that would like to provide testimony on
this item? Or online if you would like to provide testimonies use the raise your hand.
Seeing no one coming forward or no one raising their hand, would the applicant like to
make any final comments now that she sat down. Okay. We are -- we are waiving final
comments. Okay.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I do have a question for staff.
Simison: Okay.
Perreault: So, under the conditional use permit section in the staff report, under the
specific use standards, letter B, it says accessory retail uses, including but not limited to
retail shops, food or beverage service, personal service shops, may be allowed if
designated to serve patrons of the hospital and their visitors only. Is that applicable to the
hospital and emergency services buildings only or is that -- does that apply to the -- the
building that's going to be in phase two?
Allen: Just one -- one moment here. That applies specifically to the hospital use. The
building in phase two is a medical office building. It -- it does have -- it's -- I won't speak
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 34 of 72
to that. It's not part of this application. But to answer your question, it just applies to the
hospital.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Just one more question about phase two if I may. That is a lot of parking and
I don't know what-- I don't know if that's something that is handled at a later time, because
we don't know who the user is going to be, but how -- how will that work? I mean this is
just a concept plan at this point; right? But it seems like that's a significant amount of
parking, whether it's a restaurant, whether it's a medical office use. I don't know how
large that building is in comparison, because it's not to scale. So, I'm just wondering,
since we have this DA modification open, how that is intended to play out and -- and I did
-- wanted to ask that question before the public hearing was over in case the applicant
could come speak to it.
Allen: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Perreault, Council, yeah, it is -- I hate to muddy
the waters with another part that's not part of this application, but it is -- it is proposed and
approved in the concept plan to be a medical office building. There are proposed to be
and required to be retail and restaurant uses on the ground floor. The hospital building
-- most of the -- most of the parking is for the medical office building and the hospital that
will come in in the future.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: So, that parking will --the --the -- all the buildings will utilize the parking jointly.
The parking won't be separated?
Allen: No.
Perreault: Okay. Thank you.
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, there is a hand raised.
Simison: I see that. We -- I don't know if the person is related to the applicant. Doug
Haneborg. Is that part of your -- so, I will leave it up to Council if you want to hear
additional testimony or not and, then, give the applicant an opportunity again after that.
Okay. Then we will reopen -- or it hasn't been closed, but continue the public testimony.
If you want to bring in Doug.
Johnson: You are able to speak now, Doug.
Haneborg: Can you guys hear me okay?
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 35 of 72
Simison: Yeah. Speak up a little bit.
Haneborg: Okay. Yeah. This is Doug Haneborg. I'm at 6002 North Serenity Lane. I'm
the HOA president of Peregrine Heights, which is the owner of Serenity Lane there. So,
I just -- I didn't -- I don't really have a lot to say. I just -- I think I heard one of the Council
Members ask like what some of the concerns were. So, with that lane connecting to
Serenity Lane, the emergency lane -- so, I don't know if you guys wanted me to answer
that or not.
Simison: I mean if you have something to add I would go ahead and do it.
Haneborg: I just-- I think with most of the neighbors there our--one of the major concerns
is is that this is a private lane and it's not as wide as most roads and so we are just
concerned with the access point there being the first right-hand turn in off of Chinden
coming from the west, which we are going to be, you know, very close to the intersection
of Highway 16 and so if there is, you know, connection point there and signage and things
like that, it -- it concerns us, because we have kids and things and our road is not very
wide. I think we addressed a lot of this earlier in the other meetings, but I didn't know if I
needed to, you know, expand on that or -- or help answer that question, because it
sounded like some of the Council Members maybe weren't sure, you know, why we have
those concerns.
Simison: Council, any questions? No questions. Thank you.
Haneborg: Okay. Thank you.
Simison: Would the applicant like to come forward and provide final comments?
Hunsicker: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council. I just -- yeah. We understand the
neighbors concerns and -- and so that's why we will -- you know, but we are required to
build the road. We will put barricades, so it can't be used. We won't have signage at that
location. So, you know, we will do our best to deter any usage of that road, since it's not
-- and there is also going to be a barrier on the -- on the -- the building end of the road.
So, you can't have a person drive all the way up there and get stuck kind of at the end.
So, we will have it barricaded, basically, on each side, which seems a little silly, but that's
what we are going to do. The other thing I just want to clarify, just to make sure, because
I wasn't clear in terms of the response. I'm just going to clarify. The phase one is an
emergency room only. There is no retail in phase one. Okay. Then phase two -- and --
and the parking would be just a fraction of the total parking, so -- and, then, the MOB
would have the retail stage. So, I just wanted to make sure that was clear to everyone.
So, thank you all very much again. If there is any other questions I'm happy to answer
those. Otherwise I will sit down.
Simison: Council, any questions?
Hunsicker: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 36 of 72
Simison: All right. Thank you.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I move that we close the public hearing for West Valley Emergency Center,
H-2022-0065.
Borton: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any
discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it
and the public hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I would like to make a motion, but I do have a quick question for staff first.
Simison: Okay.
Perreault: Given the mention in the staff report about the access easement and whether
-- which -- which access the applicant will use, do we need to modify the staff report in
the motion to specifically state that the city is asking the applicant to use the access to
the south?
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Perreault, Council, no. The staff report accounts for
that.
Perreault: Okay. Thank you. Sorry about that.
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I move that -- excuse me. After considering all staff, applicant, and public
testimony, I move to approve File No. H-2022-0065 as presented in the staff report for the
hearing date of December 13th, 2002, with one correction to Condition 8, in Section 9.A,
which incorrectly states a four foot tall berm is required, it should say a three foot tall
berm, which is consistent with condition 3-13.
Borton: Second.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 37 of 72
Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there discussion on the motion? If not, Clerk
will call the roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader,
yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES.
Simison: Thank you very much and good luck. With that we are going to go ahead and
take a five to ten minute break and so we will reconvene here shortly.
(Recess 8:00 p.m. to 8:10 p.m.)
8. Public Hearing for McDermott Village (H-2022-0056) by Boise Hunter
Homes, located at 3235 N. McDermott Rd., at the northwest corner of
W. Ustick Rd. and N. McDermott Rd.
A. Request: Annexation of 40.05 acres of land with R-15, R-40 and C-
G zoning districts.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 85 building lots (81
townhome, 1 multi-family, 3 commercial lots) and 8 common lots on
40.05 acres of land in the R-15, R-40 and C-G zoning districts.
C. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family residential
development consisting of 250 dwelling units on 12.19 acres of land
in the R-40 zoning district.
9. Public Hearing for McDermott Village Variance (VAR-2022-0004) by
Boise Hunter Homes, located at 3235 N. McDermott Rd., at the
northwest corner of W. Ustick Rd. and N. McDermott Rd.
A. Request: Variance to reduce the minimum lot size in the R-15 zoning
district from 2,000 square feet to 1,694 square feet.
Simison: All right. Well, we will go ahead and come back from recess. Next item on the
agenda, since we did dispense with Item 7 earlier, we will move on to Items 8 and 9, which
is a public hearing for McDermott Village, H-2022-0056 and public hearing for McDermott
Village Variance, VAR-2022-0004. We will open both these public hearings with staff
comments.
Allen: Thank you. Just a moment here. All righty. So, the next applications before you
have a request for annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, conditional use permit and a
variance. This site consists of 40.05 acres of land. It's zoned RUT in Ada county and it's
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 38 of 72
located at the southwest corner of North McDermott Road and West Ustick Road at 3235
North McDermott Road. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is
mixed-use regional. The annexation request consists of 40.05 acres of land with R-15,
which consists of 17.12 acres. R-40, which consists of 15.85 acres. And C-G zoning,
which consists of 7.08 acres. A conceptual development plan was submitted with the
annexation request that depicts how the site is proposed to develop with the extension of
State Highway 16 through the site. An interchange is also planned at Ustick Road. Two
types of land uses are proposed. Commercial, a fuel sales facility and convenience store,
and flex commercial office uses and residential, multi-family and townhomes. No
employment or public uses are proposed and it's unlikely any of the proposed uses will
have a regional draw. The site is designed with the commercial uses along Ustick Road,
with an integrated plaza area between the two northern buildings and multi-family
residential to the north along future State Highway 16. Townhomes are proposed on the
east side of future State Highway 16 along McDermott Road. This is the only property in
this area with a mixed-use regional designation. This designation was requested by the
applicant with the 2019 Comprehensive Plan update. That, along with the property being
bisected by the State Highway 16 extension, which reduces the size of the property from
40 acres to 26.5 acres, makes it difficult to develop entirely consistent with the mixed-use
regional designation. Because an interchange is planned in this area and access is
limited, the Comprehensive Plan states retail and auto generated services should be
minimized and transition rapidly from the interchange to residential uses near the county
line, which the plan proposes. For these reasons staff is amenable to only two land uses,
instead of three, as typically desired and called for in the comp plan and the lower intensity
of uses, primarily residential, rather than more intense commercial uses as is typically
desired in the mixed-use regional designation. Additionally, interconnectivity and a full
integration of uses within the overall site is not possible due the State Highway 16
extension, as typically desired in mixed-use designated areas. Therefore, staff finds the
proposed annexation, zoning and development is generally consistent with the mixed-use
regional designation and appropriate for this site. The proposed preliminary plat consists
of 85 building lots, 81 townhome, one multi-family and three commercial and eight
common lots on 40.05 acres of land in the R-15, R-40 and C-G zoning districts.
Conceptual development -- or excuse me. A conceptual phasing plan was submitted that
depicts the site developing in three phases, with the multi-family residential developing
first, townhomes second and commercial last and that is the plan up in the upper right-
hand corner of the screen there. Access is proposed to the portion of the site west of
future State Highway 16 extension via public street from Ustick Road. A stub street is
proposed to connect to the future development to the north, Aviator Springs, and a stub
street is proposed to the school property to the west for future extension and connection
to North Owyhee Storm Avenue, a collector street. Private streets are required within the
multi-family residential development for addressing purposes. Cross-access and ingress-
egress easements should be provided between all C-G zoned commercial lots. Two
accesses are proposed via McDermott Road, a collector street, for the townhome portion
of the development east of future State Highway 16. McDermott Road is planned to dead
end in a cul-de-sac just north of Ustick Road when the interchange is constructed. An
emergency only access is proposed via Ustick Road. Alleys are proposed for access to
some of the townhome units as depicted on the plat. Some of the townhome lots do not
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 39 of 72
meet the minimum lot size standards of 2,000 square feet and will need to be revised or
Council may approve the variance application that was recently submitted for that
dimensional standard and I will go into that a little bit later in my presentation. A ten foot
wide multi-use pathway is proposed along Ustick Road consistent with the pathways
master plan and another ten foot wide north-south pathway is proposed along the west
side of future State Highway 16, consistent with the pathway location in the developments
to the north. A 35 foot wide landscape street buffer is required along future State Highway
16 and McDermott Road, both designated entryway corridors. Noise abatement is
required within the buffers along State Highway 16 that abut residential uses in accord
with UDC standards, which require a minimum ten foot tall berm or berm-wall combination
that's a minimum of ten feet higher than the elevation at the center line of the state
highway. An open space exhibit was submitted as shown for the townhome portion of the
development that depicts qualified open space in excess of UDC standards. A minimum
of 1.8 acres is required. A total of 3.3 acres is proposed, which consists of open grassy
areas of at least 5,000 square feet and linear open space. A minimum of two points of
site amenities are required per the UDC point value table. The applicant submitted an
exhibit depicting two pickleball courts, at four points each, which exceeds UDC standards.
The Skypilot Drain crosses the southern portion of the site within a one hundred foot wide
easement. The Eight Mile Lateral crosses the northeast corner of the site within a 50 foot
wide easement and the Noble Lateral runs along the east boundary of the site within a 40
foot wide easement, 20 feet from center line each side. All waterways are proposed to
be piped. This project is not within the floodplain. A conditional use permit is requested
for a multi-family development, consisting of 250 dwelling units on 12.19 acres of land in
the R-40 zoning district. The proposed development will have 12 three story multi-family
structures and a 9,055 square foot amenity building centrally located within the complex.
Six different floor plans are proposed with a mix of units consisting of one, two and three
bedroom units, ranging from 712 to 1 ,278 square feet in size. Private open space is
proposed in accord with UDC standards. Qualified open space is proposed in accord
with UDC standards. A minimum of 2.74 acres is required. A total of 3.35 acres is
proposed, which consists of central common and amenity areas in a pedestrian corridor
where a multi-use pathway is planned in excess of UDC standards. Proposed amenities
include a clubhouse with a fitness facility, a swimming pool and a spa, with cabanas and
an outdoor lounge area. Ten foot wide multi-use pathways and internal walking trails, a
plaza, a pickleball sports court and a bike repair station. A barbecue area is depicted on
the site plan. Staff recommends this area is constructed as a commercial outdoor kitchen.
An outdoor seating area is also depicted on the plan. Staff recommends this area is
constructed as a picnic area with tables, benches, landscaping and a shade structure.
Staff also recommends that a children's play structure is provided. Staff is of the opinion
these upgrades and addition of an amenity, the play structure, is commensurate with the
number of units proposed. Just as a side note, the Commission did change that and did
strike Commission -- or staff's recommendation on that. So, that is reflected in the
conditions of approval. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed
structures as shown. The townhomes are proposed to be two to three stories in height.
The multi-family residential structures are proposed to be three stories in height and the
clubhouse is proposed to be -- is proposed to be a single family -- excuse me -- single
story in height. Building materials consist of a mix of vertical board and batten, fiber
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 40 of 72
cement siding and horizontal lap siding with brick veneer siding and wood ridge beam
accents. Metal awnings and asphalt shingle roofing. No elevations were submitted for
the commercial portion of the development. The final design of all buildings on the site
are required to become consistent with the design standards in the architectural
standards manual. A variance is requested, as I mentioned earlier, to UDC Table 11-2A-
7 to allow 44 of the 81 townhouse lots on the eastern portion of the development to be
reduced from 2,000 to 1 ,694 square feet. In order to grant a variance City Council must
make the findings for such, which state the variance relieves an undue hardship because
of characteristics of the site and the variance shall not be detrimental to the public, health,
safety and welfare. And that is -- the townhome lots are right here on the east side you
can see. The applicant's narrative states that there are several characteristics of the site
that create an undue hardship and I'm sure the applicant will go into those. They are in
the staff report I'm sure you have reviewed as well. Although these characteristics do
exist, staff finds they do not prevent the applicant from reducing the number of lots within
the development in order to comply with the minimum lot size standard. If a variance is
approved, alternative compliance will also be necessary to reduce the street buffer along
McDermott Road, an entryway corridor, in order to accommodate the proposed layout.
Reducing the number of building lots will allow compliance with the minimum lot size
standards, as well as the street buffers. Therefore, staff is not supportive of the proposed
variance request. The Commission recommended approval of these applications, except
for the variance. That's a Council only decision. Summary of the Commission hearing is
as follows. Travis Hunter, Josh Evarts and Todd Tucker testified in favor of the
applications. There was no testimony in opposition. Ron Hopper, Rod Green and Paul
Elam commented on the application. Written testimony was received from Todd Tucker,
Boise Hunter Homes, and a Meridian resident. Key issues are as follows: Additional
traffic on Ustick and McDermott Roads. Transition of the McDermott Village development
to the rural residential in the area. Amount of development occurring in the area. And
schools and businesses are overcrowded and more large residential developments are
being approved without additional services. Key issues of discussion by the Commission
was the timing of the construction of State Highway 16 and the commencement --
completion of phase one construction. Impacts of increased traffic on Ustick Road. The
Commission made the following change to the staff recommendation. The Commission
modified DA provision A-1-F to read a ten foot wide multi-use pathway shall be provided
within the street buffers along Glassford Avenue adjacent to State Highway 16 within a
14 foot wide public use easement and they modified condition of approval 10-K to replace
the commercial outdoor kitchen with an outdoor barbecue. The outstanding issues for
Council tonight -- the applicant requests Council waive Condition A-1-C in Section 8 that
requires a 25 foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to the Flowers' property along the west
boundary of the proposed development. This request was supported by the Commission
and staff took a little closer look at that and this requirement does not apply because of
the right of way, which will separate the subject property from the residential property. So,
staff is supportive of removal of this condition. There has been no written testimony since
the Commission hearing. And, again, staff is recommending denial of the proposed
variance application. Staff will stand for any questions.
Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, questions for staff?
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 41 of 72
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Yeah. Mr. Mayor. Sonya, I had a quick question on that --where you talk about
the alternative compliance will be necessary to reduce a street buffer along McDermott
Road, an entryway corridor, in order to accommodate the proposed layout and when
think -- when I heard the term entryway corridor I'm thinking -- but doesn't that dead end?
Is it the entryway corridor to the development? Is that how you are using it or what --
what does that mean, it's an entryway corridor?
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, Council, I -- I'm -- I'm afraid it's probably a little
outdated, but it is on our plan as an entryway corridor and that was prior to the current
design and -- and plan for it to dead end. But, nevertheless, it is designated as an
entryway corridor. Thank you.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: I think Councilman Borton wants to follow up on that.
Borton: Yeah. Just to close the loop on that. So, that -- that reference -- either it's
incorrect or it's not helpful to us in making the decision on the variance. Would you agree?
I mean it isn't -- it isn't an entryway corridor for the purpose of that determination.
Allen: Do you mean the alternative compliance?
Borton: Yeah.
Allen: That's a staff level director decision on that that would be required to submit -- be
submitted later. That application has not been submitted.
Borton: But was that something to alleviate the -- the problem caused by it being an
entryway corridor?
Allen: I don't know. The applicant has not submitted that application.
Borton: Okay.
Allen: But it just doesn't meet our standards, so that's why it's called out.
Borton: Okay.
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 42 of 72
Perreault: Thank you. So, there is no pedestrian access between the two residential
areas. Are the townhomes going to be permitted to access the clubhouse and would they
be driving to that location and was that taken into account with parking spaces?
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Perreault, I -- I think the applicant could probably
answer those questions for you in their presentation. Thank you.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I was just curious if we have Kristy from ACHD tonight regarding Ustick
specifically.
Simison: I did not see her earlier.
Strader: Okay.
Simison: We have one listener with a number which I am not familiar with.
Strader: Okay.
Simison: So, probably not.
Strader: Okay.
Simison: Council, any additional questions? All right. Then ask the applicant to, please,
come forward.
Hunter: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council. Travis Hunter. 923 South
Bridgeway Place. Thank you for your attention tonight. The project we are bringing
before you is a property that my family's owned for over a decade. When we originally
bought this property our thought was to do high quality single family detached, which is
kind of the bread and butter of what we do everywhere around the valley, but as we watch
Meridian grow and evolve it became clear that this property is unique and our plan had to
be dynamic. So, about eight years ago we learned that the freeway intersection was
coming through the middle of the property. Then four years ago we learned that our
neighbors were Owyhee High School and, then, in the last few years our valley has really
been hit with the reality of housing types and -- and the affordability of housing. So, what
we are bringing before you tonight -- it's a product of assembling the right team. The team
being ourselves, the Pacific Companies, who we have partnered with, who are some of
the best multi-family developers around the country. The architecture has been done by
Pivot North and the landscape design by GGLO, both who produce fantastic product
region wide. We have worked with staff for a while -- for about two years now on the plan
and we thank them for all their effort they have put into this. With that I will turn the
presentation over to Josh with the Pacific Companies.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 43 of 72
Evarts: Good evening. Josh Evarts. 303 East State Avenue, Old Town, Meridian. 83642.
Yeah. So, I am the development manager on this for the Pacific Companies. Do we have
the presentation up here? Thank you, Sonya. Yeah. So, I'm going to walk through. I --
I get the -- I get the distinct pleasure of representing sort of the whole team here and
being able to kind of share the two year journey that we have been on that led us to a
staff recommendation and a P&Z approval -- or at least a P&Z approval for you guys to
consider tonight. So, a lot of hard work went into this. So, let's get into it. So, this is the
McDermott Village project. The team is great. It really is. When Caleb asked me last
summer to get involved with this I said who are the people that are working on this. He
is like, well, do you know Jim and Jan Hunter? I'm like they are good friends. And that's
the kind of people that we should be doing projects with. So, great team. We are going
to -- we are going to tell some stories tonight. We are going to make an ask of you. We
are going to look at the impact of Highway 16 and I hope that by the end of the night we
are going to come to a conclusion of doing a great development here that's aligned with
the Meridian comp plan. So, the property. Forty acres. Acquired in 2006. Again, like
Travis said, with the goal of -- of single family housing development. Strategic corner.
Path of growth. 2017 ITD redefined the final five miles of Highway 16, which forced us to
look at how we tackle a site like this. Development justification. The product that we are
looking to bring is already identified as mixed-use regional, as asked for in 2019 on the
future land use map. Our proposed development aligns with the proximity. We really did
look at this entire site and treated Owyhee High School as that regional draw element
and, then, our development wanting to come alongside and provide a great transition to
the adjacent land uses. So, the ask that we have is, number one, an annexation request.
The property is at the Meridian area of impact and adjacent to city limits along the
northwestern property lines. Mixed-use regional does give us some guidelines. A mix of
employment, retail, residential dwellings in a range of four -- or six to 40 dwelling units
per acre. We are on the low side of that at 12 -- 12 and a half units per acre on this site
and I think you are going to see that as a recurring theme of open space, green space,
and -- and -- and looking to make something that's very transitional. We have a rezoning
request to support this. R-40 for the mixed family. R-15 for the townhomes and
commercial C-G down alongside the southern part of this property. So, the ask that we
have is a preliminary plat request also. In the R-40 we have 250 dwellings, the multi-
family R-15, 81 townhomes, and, then, the commercial. We have been pretty excited
about the commercial. We have probably got more questions about that. People have
seen what happens outside of Rocky Mountain High School and the activation that
happens along that side and currently there is nothing around Owyhee High School. So,
we have seen that as -- as something that's been pretty exciting to talk about as part of
this project. We have a conditional use permit that's required per Unified Development
Code for the R-40 as well. So, let's talk about the challenge. Highway 16 effort was
initiated in 2006. Phase one was completed in 2014. Phase two design finished in 2020.
It's currently funded. And what does this really look like? So, this is data that we have
compiled from ACHD and ITD. We wanted to get some details to you guys. So, the
construction on this is already taking place. So, there will be a highway that bisects the
property that -- that we are talking about tonight is the yellow property. But you can see
the two pink dots of McDermott Road, that that's been cul-de-sac'd ultimately and they
have a new McDermott Road that's going to wrap around and all this work -- this is one
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 44 of 72
of the questions that we got by P&Z is when it was going to be completed and how does
that align with ours. This will be done before our project is done. Even the phase one
multi-family. So, all of this infrastructure and -- and road and -- and -- and the
improvements to Ustick beyond our property is all going to be improved before our product
comes online. So, our approach to this, as we looked at the impact of Highway 16, was
to, number one, conduct an assessment. Look at this mixed-use regional draw, look at
Owyhee High School, look at the things that were going on out there and -- and really
assess things and -- and -- and approach this site comprehensively. It's a challenge when
you look at this mixed-use regional designation and you have a property that's cut in half.
So, we wanted to look at it comprehensively. I really applaud Jim and Jan Hunter for
making that pivot away from single family homes and saying, hey, we -- we need to look
at a product that fits in this space and assemble a great team and, then, the Hunter family
in general has just been a great partner. So, things that we have already done to the site
in preparation for Highway 16 is we have gone through the cost and installation of the
north sewer main, south sewer main that's going to serve everything on either side of
Highway 16, as well as we have granted a water line easement to the City of Meridian
across the front of this property. So, our solution, then, to this problem is McDermott
Village. A mixed-use regional development. Mixed-use regional programming that's in
line with the comp plan. Leveraging the regional draw of Owyhee High School. A multi-
family lifestyle community, single family townhomes, retail, office and amenities for the
region and a lot of integrated green space and the common goal really as we met as a
team to shape this, was meeting a really really big Meridian housing need. So, this is,
obviously, the passion of Pacific Companies. You know, we are still sitting at a median
house price that's north of -- of a half a million dollars and if you are a banker that means
that you have to have an income of 165 to 200 thousand dollars to be able to afford to
buy that. So, we have a problem right now. And so as we looked at this project we said,
look, not only can we provide a multi-family apartment option, but we can also provide
some townhomes that allow those first time home buyers to get into something that they
maybe can afford, because, frankly, the people that work for me, bartenders, tobacconist,
things like that at The Vault, teachers that are going to be working literally across the
parking lot from this project, they are not making 165 to 200 thousand dollars a year, so
it's not an option for them to be a homeowner. So, we have to have some products like
this that we can bring online. So, the comp plan. This is the -- the -- the mixed-use
regional sample that's provided in the comp plan. We did our own kind of colored
derivative of this for this project. So, if we look at the actual data overlay here, the brown,
which is the townhomes over on the east side of the project, we have got 81 townhomes
in there. The yellow is the 250 apartments. We have got 15,000 square feet of -- of
proposed or-- or planned for retail office space. Thirty-two percent of this project is open
space, including plazas, pickleball courts, walking paths that connect the multi-family to
the commercial, to Owyhee High School. We were given very specific instructions as we
worked with staff about providing easements directly into Owyhee High School and
activating that. We provided that. And site amenities, 9,000 square foot clubhouse, with
an indoor kitchen, including all those great things. Bicycle repair. Like very very cool
stuff. Outdoor barbecue and pool and spa. So, pretty -- pretty exciting project that I think
that even though it's divided I think provides a -- a great product for this mixed-use
designation. So, as we look at some elevations, this is looking north at the multi-family,
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 45 of 72
but we are taking into account some of the commercial elements. I think of interest is our
goal with the commercial. This will be part of the things that I work on is looking at things
that, number one, are -- are tied very very closely with the regional draw, which is Owyhee
High School, so we are looking at physical therapy offices, we are looking at dentists, we
are looking at things -- potential daycare, things that are --things that are very very closely
tied to the mixed family -- mixed-use family or multi-family and the high school. We
certainly think there is opportunities for food options here. There could be an opportunity
to put fuel service on the site. Just exciting things that -- that tie with that regional draw.
As we look west at the multi-family, you are going to see just some of that -- that green
space that we are looking to provide. Look at the commercial public plaza. This is a lot
of GGLO's work. We wanted this to be beautiful and places that people were really proud
of and places where people wanted to live. Some of the townhome elevations are
included in here and so when we get to the staff comments, I'm going to kind of drill down
on two -- the two main issues that I think will be of discussion and concern for you guys.
So, we, first of all, have this 35 foot wide buffer along Highway 16. So, I have got these
two sections highlighted here. I'm going to talk about each of them independently. So,
on the west side of Highway 16 we have a 33 foot wide buffer. So, we are not concerned
about this side. Code allows for a ten percent reduction, which can be supported with --
with our current buffer. So, we are not terribly concerned about that side of the highway.
When we get over to the other side of the highway, on the east side, at the very north part
of the property we have one little pinch area that gets down to 26 feet. So, one of the
things that we are going to be looking for is an alternative compliance on this. So, the
spirit of this code, this 35 foot, is that we are 35 foot off of this highway. The reality is is
when you take into account the buffer that's provided -- and we are talking about a buffer
to the on ramp and, then, we are talking about the sound walls and, then, the 26 feet that
we provide, we actually have 76 feet between the edge of the on ramp and this one little
corner of the building at the top, this last lot, and the reason these individual lots actually
-- and kind of why we are asking for the variance and the considerations is every lot that
we lose --we are only talking about 81 lots. The -- the cost of developing the site is going
to be the same regardless of how many lots we get and so we are trying to keep the cost
down on these things, because we are trying to make sure that the product is, in fact,
meeting the affordability needs that we are trying to attack here. So, that's our -- that's
our 35 foot alternative -- excuse me -- alternative compliance that we are looking to
address. The other challenge that we have where we are looking for a variance is the
2,000 square feet. So, per code, as staff talked about, it must relieve an undue hardship,
because of the characteristics of the site. It must not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, welfare. We are certainly -- I don't think we are -- we are suggesting something
that's detrimental to health, safety and welfare, but we do have an undue hardship. We
have got a -- we have got a number of things happening on this site and -- and part of
them have been I think in good faith with us working with staff over two years. So, for
example, if we look at the -- we -- we have the obvious of number one on that -- on that
little bubble diagram, we have Highway 16. We have got the pinch of McDermott on the
other side. We have the buffer that we have to do on the south. We have this hundred
foot wide Skypilot Drain that we can't do any development on that we have to maintain,
that we turned into green space. But we also made an additional consideration on the
north part of the property. Based on staff's good recommendation to put pickleball courts
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 46 of 72
and provide some more buffers. So, we have -- everything in here is pinched and so in
order to make what we thought would be the right number of lots, we had to take 44 of
the 81 lots, which were the ones that are in yellow on the far right of your screen and
those are the ones that we took from 2,000 square feet down to roughly 1 ,700 or 1 ,694.
So, that's our ask. Now, what I will tell you is this is not a hill we are going to die on. So,
if you guys decide not to award that variance we are not -- we are not not building this
project. We would just look -- if you look at the stack here we have got nine sections of
townhomes. We would be taking one lot out of each of those to get to that 2,000 square
feet. The net impact of that is a ten percent increase, then, in those lot costs for ultimately
the homeowners that are going to be on there and that's really the decision that's -- that's
before you. If we talk about first time home buyers, I think we have seen it in the last six
months that one to two thousand dollars, you know, these --these interest rate increases,
have bumped people out of their loans and so we have really been fighting to make sure
that, hey, can we get -- can we take this site -- can we take the -- the -- the hardship that
-- that -- that -- that was kind of transacted and -- and presented to us and can we turn it
into a win on this site. So, that is the variance that we are asking for here and with that I
will open it up for questions.
Simison: Thank you, Josh. Council, questions for the applicant?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Questions about two topics. Ustick and affordability. So, my understanding was
that Ustick wouldn't be widened until 2026. So, could you talk about that a little bit? I
wish we had ACHD on. We usually do, but I think they are really jammed right now. If
you guys could just talk about how the timing of the connection off of Ustick is going to
align with the development plan.
Tucker: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Strader, Todd Tucker, Boise Hunter Homes. 923
South Bridgeway Place in Eagle, Idaho. So, you are correct, a portion of Ustick Road
won't be improved until 2026. But as far as the -- the stuff that you see highlighted in pink
on the screen right now that is directly adjacent to our property, that -- everything that you
see in pink is being constructed with the extension of Highway 16 that's going on right
now. So, if you go to ITD's website, that's where we pulled this general description from.
So, basically from the new McDermott Road that the -- the bypass road that goes to the
east past our property and almost to Owyhee Storm, all of that section of Ustick Road,
according to ITD's website, will be constructed with the extension of Highway 16 that's
going on right now. So, I believe the portion of Ustick Road that goes further to the east
from this, that is in a later section to be widened in 2026, but this section immediately
adjacent to our property is to be constructed with this extension.
Strader: Got it. Mr. Mayor, if you don't mind if I just --
Simison- Council Woman Strader.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 47 of 72
Strader: Thank you. No. That's helpful. I mean -- so, look, to the extent that an individual
is commuting, you know, to Boise or something, hopefully they are taking Highway 16.
That's good. To the extent that they are commuting more within Meridian it's a little
problematic where we are at right now today with Ustick. You guys brought up
affordability. It's really interesting timing. We are having a discussion with our Planning
Department right now about relaxing some of our standards for housing to encourage
affordability. Can you either speak to the affordability you are providing, either like a range
of price points or as a percentage of market? You guys are asking for a variance. It will
increase your available units by ten percent. Would you be willing to set aside a portion
of your housing at a certain percentage of the median income in exchange for that
variance? How are you thinking about this? Just to have an open discussion, because
they aren't talking a lot about relaxing our typical standards for affordable housing.
Evarts: Yeah. Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, I think it's a great question. I
think it's -- I think it's a little bit premature. We have been throwing numbers around
anywhere from 20 to 30 percent. We think we are going to be under comparable products
as we looked at some of the pricing in some of the developments around it. Obviously,
we are at the end of a cul-de-sac. We have 2,000 to 1,700 square foot lots. Even though
there are some great green spaces and pickleball courts and some people might like to,
you know, be at the end of a cul-de-sac that's a little bit quieter, we know that it's -- you
-- you have to drive, you know, all the way around in a big circle to get -- so -- so, we think
the product is going to be -- it -- it's not going to be the typical home that Boise Hunter
Homes builds, which are typically second, third homes that people buy. This will be a first
home kind of purchase. But we haven't -- we haven't settled on any kind of numbers and
we are starting to see like construction costs flatten a little bit. You know, ultimately the
desire would be -- because this is phase three or phase two, depending on how fast the
commercial moves. Hopefully we see some -- some -- some settling of some of those
costs that would drive it down further. But our goal with this product is that it is going to
be housing that is going to be below market and below averages. I think it would be
inappropriate for us to -- as part of an agreement, you know, agree to some kind of
percentage of something. But our whole goal with this project is to create things --
especially on the townhome side, first time home buyers in being able to have a product
that, you know -- and even though the square footage of these -- of these sites are
between 2,000 and 1,700 square feet, that's not the size of the townhomes; right? You
know, if they are multiple stories and stuff. That's just the lot sizes.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Yeah. I mean that gives me something to chew on I guess. You know, do you
-- you know, do you require that variance -- at what -- at what phase do you require that
variance decision? I mean a lot of the rationale besides hardship for -- at least from my
perspective in terms of what you are saying is -- is an affordability rationale. So, I guess
I'm wondering is there a later point where we could have that discussion in terms of, you
know, either what you guys are targeting or setting aside units for affordable housing or
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 48 of 72
something along those lines. I'm just trying to think creatively, because this is a holistic
discussion we have been having in the city and we are taking a look I think maybe next
week at looking at changing some of our standards, like even setbacks, you know,
minimum lot sizes, et cetera, for just this type of housing. So, it's just fortuitous timing. I
guess I was just curious when you need that decision.
Evarts: You know, I want it tonight, because I just want it tonight. But what I would offer
is that there really is -- this isn't just a standard variance ask, you know, for -- for size.
Like this is a really -- this is a -- this is a tough tough deal to deal with a highway going
through the middle of your property. I think the track record of -- of the Hunter family and
-- and certainly Pacific Companies as well has been, you know, trying to bring housing to
Meridian, as well as other sites in -- in the Treasure Valley. If you are telling me that it
would be more comfortable to have a conversation later, it sounds to me like you guys
are moving in that direction regardless. So, I don't know that necessarily -- first of all, the
project's not at risk. If you guys decide not to do a variance we are -- we are -- we will --
we will -- we will go build and we will do 80 -- or 72 lots, instead of 81. But we do think
it's an opportunity to -- to end this crisis, do something that's strategic on a site that just
screams for it. Like this is of -- of anything that I have seen, this is -- this is a little bit of a
no brainer.
Strader: Thanks.
Simison: Todd, since you are there, just curious, the improvements that are shown on
the ITD -- are these subject to any of the funding that still needed to go to ACHD or will
these be covered by ITD, their costs part of the project, don't need to worry about the
ACHD fix in the legislation?
Tucker: Mr. Mayor, great question. That -- that came up at the Planning and Zoning
Commission as well. Yeah. According to ITD's website, this project -- phase two of the
project, which that's what they are calling this -- it gets kind of confusing, because phase
three is another section where they are actually going to do the overpasses, but phase
two of the project, according to ITD's website, is fully funded with -- with funds and all of
the improvements that you see on the screen here are intended to be completed with the
Highway 16 extension of phase two, what they are calling, which is literally happening
right now. They are -- as you probably all know, they are starting at both ends of the -- of
the -- the spectrum and, then, kind of meet in the middle almost at this property. But --
but, yeah, everything you see in pink is to be completed by 2024 with the funds that they
have right now.
Simison: Okay. Thank you. Council, additional questions for the applicant?
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 49 of 72
Hoaglun: Yes, gentleman. It's been a while since I looked at the Highway 16 project
specifically, but is -- and I know Ustick is one of the entryway corridors to get on and off.
Does that -- 16, does it have an overpass over Ustick? I -- I'm trying to remember what
that design was going to be for Ustick. Do you recall?
Tucker: Sure. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Hoaglun. So -- so, there -- so, there will be
an actual interchange here. So -- so, there -- this will be one of the -- the -- the off ramps,
one of the intersections where you will actually be able to get on and off Highway 16. The
other -- the -- the places that are just overpasses I believe are McMillan and Cherry and,
then, Ustick and Franklin will have the -- the -- the interchanges where you can actually
get on and off the freeway.
Hoaglun: I didn't think McMillan was going to have one, Mr. Mayor, but -- so, there is -- I
was trying to remember how they were designing that, though, for the on and off.
Tucker: So -- sure. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Hoaglun, Ustick will stay at grade and
the freeway will go over it.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Just to follow up on that, that -- that makes this project even more interesting,
because you have elevation and lots of cars and you are going to have noise and there
will be some retaining -- the wall -- sound walls and different things like that. So, just --
just something to take in. It's just one of those things that -- how does that change what
would normally be if it just stayed as a normal intersection. If -- if you have a slide, what
-- I -- I wanted to look at -- especially on the -- the multi-family side of what -- what are the
access points to come into that -- that facility and -- have to move all our faces here -- to
the north you are going to be going through the development that's been approved
already and, then, it looks like you have something going out to the west behind the
commercial.
Evarts: So, that's not in yet. So, the property that's directly to the west of this, there is --
what's the name of the street? It's --
Tucker: Oh. Endeavor.
Evarts: Yeah. Endeavor Street. So, ultimately, once that -- once that west property gets
transacted, there is a call for a street that will go all the way out to the main artery that
feeds Owyhee High School and, then, we have a right-in, right-out off of Ustick. So, that's
what ACHD granted us on Ustick Road, so that we wouldn't be causing any left-hand turn
traffic in -- across to get back on the highway. So, it is a right-in, right-out.
Hoaglun: Okay. Mr. Mayor, I got one more.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 50 of 72
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Width of the lots. What will they be with the variance? We talk about, you
know, the square footage going down to 1 ,695 or whatever it is. What does that make
the width?
Tucker: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Hoaglun, the interior lots -- these are all townhome
lots, so they are zero lot line. They are -- they are 21 feet wide. The -- the exterior lots,
the ones that are on the ends, let's say, of -- of the -- the grouping of townhomes, those
are a little bit wider. So, it's really just the interior lots that we need the variance for. That's
why it's not all of the lots, because some of them do comply with it. It's the interior lots
that are 21 feet wide.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
Simison: Council, additional questions for the applicant?
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I have four or five questions. Would it be okay if I just interact with the applicant
directly?
Simison: Please.
Perreault: Thank you. Speaking of the townhomes, I kind of had in my mind before I saw
the elevations that it would be more of the two-story duplex style. You can't tell from the
site plan that this is going to be buildings that have four or five townhomes in one
structure. So, it feels a little bit more like an apartment style, even though it's being called
a townhome and certainly being sold off as individual units. So, can you help me
understand why that design element versus the feel of it more just being, you know, two
-- two townhomes together and it has a little bit more of a single family feel to it? This --
just help me understand the -- the thought process behind that. Was it an economic
decision? Was it -- that's what you truly believe the demand will be? Did it have to do
with this lot width conversation?
Tucker: Sure. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Strader. I think a lot of those things came into
-- oh, sorry. Got it wrong. Well, you just asked me --
Perreault: No. We are laughing, because our own team does this to us all the time. Poor
Council President Hoaglun, bless his heart. But I'm very honored to be confused with
her.
Tucker: Sorry. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Perreault. So, I think a lot of those things
came into play. We -- we really just -- we think it's a great design. Again, it is somewhat
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 51 of 72
of a -- of a larger -- larger structure than you would think maybe just two townhome
buildings together. It does allow us to -- to get a little bit more on there. So, every time
you separate buildings, then, that takes up a little bit more space. With fire code and
building codes we are going to have to separate those by even more if we -- if we don't
put them all together. So, that kind of plays into it. We just -- we -- we think it's a great
design. We -- we think it's a great product. We also like that it provides some diversity
as far as entry into the -- into the structures. A lot of them are to be alley loaded. So,
there won't be any garages on the front, they will be in the rear. Some of them, just the
way that the property is configured, it -- it didn't accommodate that. So -- so, some of
them will be front loaded. But a good portion of them are rear loaded and we -- you know,
in discussions with staff, also just liking the idea that we can provide some rear-loaded
units through alleys, that it won't be garage dominated. We just really like the -- the
product and the design of it and so that's -- that's kind of what -- what we went with is --
is just our own discussions internally of what we think would be good and marketable and
what we could -- what we could sell.
Perreault: So, thank you for bringing up the access conversation. I assume we have 20
foot driveways, because that is what we are now requiring. What are the street widths
between those driveways?
Tucker: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Perreault, ACHD's requiring all of our streets to be
33 feet wide.
Perreault: Okay. So, they are not trying to do private streets in that section. We have
lots of issues with people backing out, trash cans, furniture moving trucks, everything you
can imagine we discuss when it comes to these alley loads. You answered -- Josh
answered the question about the entrance to the west with the commercial access, that
it's right-in, right-out and so it sounds like there will be another public road that will come
in from the main entrance to the west; is that correct?
Tucker: Correct. Mr. Mayor and Council Member Perreault, when Owyhee High School
was approved we actually came and testified at that hearing. We were trying to fight to
require both ACHD and the City of Meridian to require Endeavor Street to be extended all
the way to our property line. In the end that didn't happen. It stubs at the end. There is
a -- there is a gentleman that owns a piece of property between us named Mr. Flowers.
The -- the Endeavor, which is a public street, dead ends right at the corner of his property
and so whenever that property redevelops there will be an opportunity for Endeavor to
continue on and then -- and, then, connect with our property. We have tried to design it
in such a way that it aligns and -- and -- and that access could -- could function and get
you out to Owyhee Storm, which is where the light will be.
Perreault: Okay. So, we don't know for sure that you will have -- that -- we don't know
for sure the timing of when you will have access, other than the right-in, right-out?
Tucker: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Perreault, the -- the other option -- it's a little bit of a
longer route, but the development directly to the north of us, Aviator Springs, our street
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 52 of 72
connects with them. That street, then, actually -- I believe it's called Achievement, which
runs north of Owyhee High School, goes out to Owyhee Storm. So, there will be another
access out to Owyhee Storm, which is the collector, until -- before Mr. Flowers' property
develops or that Endeavor Street is connected. It's just a little bit of a longer route, but
there is two points of access out -- out of the development.
Perreault: How do you anticipate that affecting the commercial properties, especially if
you want to put like a C store or something in there?
Evarts: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Perreault, I -- I -- I think that's to be determined;
right? So, as we have talked about it on -- on the commercial team at Pacific Companies,
we -- we -- we feel that the things that we are looking for that go in there, I think -- I think
the convenience store, like a C store, fueling, I think that's tougher without Endeavor being
in play and what we think are going to be the things that really work there are going to be
things that are in walking distance to the high school. So -- or walking distance to the
multi-family. They are going to be services that support those two things. We think those
are going to be the things that ultimately go in there until the Endeavor thing. Now, when
Endeavor gets done we have designed it to connect in -- directly into the commercial area
and I think that could open up an opportunity. But the -- the reality is -- is we -- we don't
-- we don't know what a -- what a C store would look like there with a right-in, right-out.
You know, is it reasonable to think that somebody who is racing to get to school on time
is going to pull right-in to fill up and right-out and they are not going to be happy leaving
school, you know, where they don't have an easy way to get in there; right? It becomes
problematic. So -- yeah. So, I -- I think that the products that are going to scream in there
are going to be the things that are in walking distance -- and -- and -- and Todd and I were
-- so, Todd's daughter goes to Owyhee High School and her -- her friends are literally
driving all the way to Walmart at lunch to do cool high school lunch things. So, we think
that there -- it -- we -- we think it's going to be -- it's going to be fun to actually program
some stuff in that commercial space.
Perreault: Thank you. I appreciate that. So, speaking of the commercial and this design,
mixed-use regional --
Evarts: Yeah.
Perreault: -- staff talked a lot about this not having the mixed-use regional feel, because
of the -- the limitations -- the geograph -- geographical limitations. Where do you
anticipate the residents will be going to get their commercial services? Are they going to
go -- do you anticipate they are going to go down to Ten Mile and McMillan? Do you
anticipate they are going to go into Nampa? What -- had you look at -- had you looked at
where you anticipate folks driving to when you were deciding how much commercial to
use versus residential and whatnot?
Tucker: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Perreault, just because we are so pro Meridian we
are going to actually put in the CC&Rs they cannot shop in Nampa. They have to go to
Meridian to do all of their transactions. No. We --
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 53 of 72
Perreault: I wish sales tax works that way, but it doesn't.
Tucker: We actually -- we actually think the majority of the -- the -- the commuting or the
-- the traveling to do, the -- the -- the shopping or the -- the -- the commercial stuff is -- is
going to be towards the east into Meridian, probably until The Fields sub area plan that
you guys have approved, which is just a little west of this -- I think once that actually
comes online and it's got a more robust commercial element to it than what we are
providing, I think that's probably going to be where the majority of these people go is to
that commercial element in the heart of The Fields sub area plan. But until that comes
online my guess is, you are right, they are going to be traveling to Ustick and -- or-- yeah.
Sorry. To -- to McMillan and Ten Mile, to the Walmart, to the Costco, to the Winco that's
in that area. That's probably where the majority of that commercial activity is going to
happen. Probably until we see what goes on in The Fields.
Perreault: The reason I ask is because we are already having conversation with residents
in that area of Ten -- Ten Mile and McMillan about them feeling like that intersection is
already stressed and now we are adding housing for four -- four square miles -- I mean,
what, three miles? Maybe four miles from that intersection?
Tucker: Three miles.
Perreault: Yeah. And so, you know, we are having a lot of those conversations with
projects that are being discussed in that area. Now we bring people from three miles
away from -- from the -- the west and so many new housing units in this area already that
were not anticipated. So, this being the only mixed-use regional parcel in this area, that's
just a really significant factor for me is your commercial to residential ratio, because of
where it sits, because we don't know when The Fields plan is going to come about,
because we don't know which way people are going to go with our commercial, and, you
know, I'm always trying to look at these in a long-term way, so -- and Josh mentioned
interest rates. They are going to be different by the time you guys have this built. Our
housing need may be different by the time you guys have this. But we can't make that --
those decisions about housing that's going to last decades over a current economic
variable, because it may look entirely different. Hopefully it will look entirely different by
the time yours is done. So, I don't take that into account when we look at housing
inventory, what's happening with our interest rates currently. I appreciate that that's the
goal, because we want developers to have the goal of making Meridian fantastic for
housing. We really do. But we have many many applicants that have come before us
with that same goal in the -- in the recent past and we really appreciate it, but we are --
we are falling short on the commercial side in this area in my opinion and every applicant
has come and said, hey, let's talk about greater density and we are having those
conversations and I'm glad we are. I did -- I didn't think two years ago when I started on
Council where none of those conversations we are having, that they would even happen
this quickly. I'm very excited about that. Not because I love density, but because I want
places for residents to own homes. Home ownership is at its lowest percentage in 35
years or so in our country. So, it's hugely important to us that there is those opportunities.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 54 of 72
But for me not at the risk of this constant traffic issue that's created by not having access
to commercial services in the area.
Tucker: One thing I wanted to -- to add on that, Mr. Mayor, Council Member Perreault, is
we -- we actually did think about initially putting a little bit more commercial and having it
on the east side of Highway 16 at that intersection of McDermott and Ustick. However,
with -- with McDermott Road -- when we found out that McDermott Road was going to be
cul-de-sac'd in that area, that just -- that just kills commercial developments and so that's
one of the reasons why we kind of pivoted and went with townhomes on that side is
because -- because of that cul-de-sac and just not being a viable commercial element
with there not -- being really zero access where you have to drive, you know, a mile to get
to it, it just isn't feasible and so trying to put it up -- putting it on the -- on the west side
where we did -- and also we have -- we have the Skypilot Drain that runs through the
middle of our property and it's a hundred foot wide easement that we can't put any
structures in and so that also makes it a little bit more difficult on the west side to make
that commercial element larger than it is, just because we would have commercial
development and, then, a large green space and, then, more commercial development
and it just really cuts it up. The way we designed it is in -- in a way that the commercial
really flows in. We tried to align the entryway to the -- to the apartments with that plaza
and entryway into the commercial, so it felt like one big development. It had a cohesive
feel to it. And so that -- that -- that Skypilot Drain that runs through the middle of it also
really is a hindrance to us doing more commercial there, just because it -- we can't put
any structures in that location.
Perreault: Thank you. I appreciate you all not shying away from the incredible amount
of geographical challenges on this property. There is not very many groups that would
want to take this on and have the appetite for it, because it's really tough. So, thank you
for that. I just have one more quick question and that is the question I had asked earlier,
which is are the residents of the townhomes going to have access to the clubhouse
through the HOA and what does that look like for them to drive around and park at that
location?
Evarts: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Perreault. No. So, the -- the -- the -- the
lifestyle multi-family community is a separate thing. So, we provided -- and, actually,
think I have got a picture of it here -- kind of, again, taking advantage of that, you know,
lemon and turning it into lemonade. But we -- this is the side view and the amenities that
we are providing on the townhome side, which will be -- so, the pickleball courts in the
north and, then, this open space, parkway, tables and everything that we are trying to
leverage up and make that whole Skypilot drainage area, you know, kind of an amenity
on this side. So, no, there is --we are not expecting people -- certainly you are not walking
across the highway and we are not trying to drive people over and park them. So, no,
separate -- separate things. Just given --just given the highway.
Simison: All right. Thank you very much. Council, any additional questions for the
applicant?
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 55 of 72
Evarts: Thank you.
Simison: Thank you.
Evarts: Thank you, staff.
Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have people signed up for this item?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we have two people signed up. First is Rod Green.
Simison: Good evening. If you could state your name and address for the record, please.
Green: Yes. Is this good?
Simison: Yes.
Green: Yes. Mr. Mayor and Council, my name is Rod Green. I'm at 3560 North
McDermott. I'm directly to the east of this applicant's request and we have lived there for
a long time, my wife and I. Obviously, we -- we don't care to see all of the higher density
development out in that area of Meridian. You know, it's been farm, it's been open space,
and we have enjoyed that a lot. Maybe our time is coming to an end. I'm kind of an old
timer. But -- so, I have to go on record and say I'm not in favor of much of this at all. But
I think -- I think staff and I think the -- the developers have done a lot of work here. I
appreciate that. I am still concerned about the traffic along with McDermott. When, you
know, it's going to work time or coming home time and -- there is going to be a lot of traffic
in and out of that 81 units. I don't know exactly now what the traffic study actually
indicated. I know I read it. I didn't -- at the time I didn't think I agreed with it, but that's
just my own personal opinion I guess. I know my wife and I are very concerned about
coming out of our driveway, which aligns fairly closely with the north access to the east
side of this development. There is -- there is two access points, the north one and the
south one, and I'm talking again about the -- the sliver, if you will, right next to McDermott
Road. Anyway, our driveway comes almost directly in line with that north access point.
What I would like to suggest -- and I know this will probably fall on deaf ears, but I would
-- I would suggest that that open area that they have designed in the south part, for that
to maybe be expanded a little bit and take away the pickleball courts at the north and
make that north access, then, align with the realignment of McDermott Road. You saw it
there in the pink, you know, how McDermott is going to jog around. Okay. Make that
access point for their -- for their northern part of their development, again, along -- on
McDermott, align with that realignment of McDermott. If that makes any sense. It makes
sense to me and I think it would make sense to our neighbors as well. That would be my
recommendation there. Appreciate the time. So, do you have any questions of me or --
I wanted -- excuse me. Council Member Perreault, I wanted to mention -- you had asked
about where do folks travel for commercial. Well, we have lived there for 18 years. There
is nothing until you get to Ten Mile -- there is a little bit -- not really, but I mean if you -- if
you go down to Cherry Lane and -- and Ten Mile there is some there. But you really got
to go further east or you have got to go almost clear to Nampa -- I mean to Garrity and it
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 56 of 72
has always seemed to us like why isn't there more commercial in that area. There is a
lot of homes there and a lot of people and a lot of traffic. Why is there no good restaurant
to go to? I'm not talking about a -- a drive-through. I'm talking about something where
you can sit down and have a nice meal. Or some shopping. Anyway, just wanted to
reinforce that. You are right on.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Green: Anything else?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: I just have a statement for you, sir.
Green: Sure.
Bernt: I -- I -- I get where you are coming from with -- with this density. There is no doubt
about it. As a -- as a family that's lived in that area for 18 years -- I -- I know other folks
who have lived out there in that area for even longer. That's a long time. And you guys
have just seen pheasants and birds and --
Green: Yeah.
Bernt: -- you know, you -- you haven't seen anything for many miles in either direction. I
just got to -- I'm just going to be honest with you, Highway 16 is completely changed that
region.
Green: Oh, yeah.
Bernt: Completely changed. And whether it's our city, whether it's other cities, you are
going to see density all down this corridor.
Green: Sure.
Bernt: And that's just how planning works. You know, along high density-- or along these
type of highways you -- you find high density, just because it provides an opportunity for
folks to get on the freeway and to commute a lot easier and it keeps that traffic out -- you
know, off of streets like Ten Mile. So, I get what you are saying, man. But I just --
Green: I know.
Bernt: I'm sorry. It's just -- it's just -- I'm just being real with you. It's just -- it's reality in
that area. It's just -- it's going to be dense not only here, but north and south on both
sides of the road.
Simison: And commercial's coming, but it's going to come with a lot of other things.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 57 of 72
Green: I know that's the case, Mr. Mayor. I just hate to see it.
Bernt: And I appreciate you making that comment. I really do. I feel for you. But it --
just don't think there is any way of getting around it.
Green: Councilman Bernt, yeah. My wife has lived on McDermott Road all of her life.
Bernt: That's crazy.
Green: Even from when she was born. Just further to the south from where we are now,
but -- yeah. We have seen a lot of change. Okay. Anything else?
Simison: Council, any further questions? Okay.
Green: Thank you.
Simison: Thank you.
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, next is Randi Wood-Bussert.
Simison: Good evening.
Wood-Bussert: Good evening. My name is Randi Wood-Bussert. I live at 6066 West
Becky Drive. So -- and I'm here with a couple of my neighbors that also live -- we live in
the Apple Valley Subdivision. It's called a subdivision, but we all have acreage. So, this
is a huge concern for us. We are all in opposition of this. We are kind of feeling as though
those of us who have lived in this area -- and for me it's an excess of 20 years. We have
had a lot of soul crushing change. But our main concerns, as with everyone else, is the
traffic. But also for us being their exact demographic that they are after is going to really
have an impact on our -- our property value for one and, then, most of us are still
agriculture in this area and I can tell you this type of development -- my horses and cattle
and our way of life, it's a huge crash. I just can't see it working well for -- for any of us.
So, that's a huge concern for us and we kind of need some answers about how everyone
making these decisions for us is going to try to sustain our value of life and our value of
how we live our day to day. I can tell you just in what has happened with all of the
development with Owyhee School, the noise is devastating. The lights of that high school
are devastating and I -- and we have known for years that 16 was going to go through.
So, I -- I know you are telling us that there is --we knew that was coming. We didn't know
the rest of this was coming. We were first approached with the change in McDermott as
being nothing more than an access road and, then, we get broadsided in the face of how
this was really meant to be and we weren't really told the truth. So, we are all very
concerned about this. We still would like some more answers about how -- how everyone
involved in this expects all of this to work well together or if those of us who own acreage
are just expected to leave. That's kind of how we are feeling. Crime, too, is a worry for
all of us with -- with what's coming in.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 58 of 72
Simison: Council, questions?
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I really feel for you. I have lived off of Black Cat, which for the longest time
was the very west side of Meridian and not much past that and have seen it -- I have lived
there for 12 years and have seen it grow and expand and there is multiple acre plus
properties around me and I -- I -- I totally understand where you are coming from. I want
to share a couple things I think hopefully will encourage you. First, I think when they dead
end McDermott it's really going to help you with not having as much traffic, because the
only people that should be coming down there are the folks that live in that area, at least
the section between McMillan and Ustick. Hopefully that will just be being accessed by
the folks that live there. The second thing I wanted to say is I was a Planning and Zoning
Commissioner when Owyhee High School went in and that was not a decision the city
was excited about and -- and we really did not have -- it was tough. The school district
went out and bought that land without maybe having the consultation with us that we
would have preferred and so can't do anything about it now; right? It's there. But I just
wanted to share that with you, because you were asking, basically, like who has made
these decisions? How did this come about? Is everybody on the same page. If I'm
understanding correctly what you are asking. And, then, who is going to protect our way
of life. Your properties are in the county is my understanding. You are in --
Wood-Bussert: We are for now. We are on the island and we do not wish to be annexed
in.
Perreault: Yeah.
Wood-Bussert: But in terms of -- for me being able to get in and out of my own property
-- I have a 42 foot horse trailer. Once I hook that to my truck I am 61 feet long. As things
are now in just how it's changed, it's hard for me to get in and out of -- well, I can't leave
Ustick -- or leave McDermott and turn right onto Ustick. It's impossible with the way they
put in that light and how tight they made all of the access, they created a turn lane where
there wasn't room for there to be a turn lane. The wrecks are multiple. So, once all of
this changes it's going to be even harder for me to leave and get out, whether I'm going
right or left. One way I have nothing but subdivisions, developments, a roundabout to
deal with. So, I just -- yeah. We are feeling pretty stifled here.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Yeah. I feel for you and I think the --the biggest issue is that when the legislators
-- legislature started pushing for Highway 16 and funded it, that sort of sealed the fate of
this whole corridor, because it -- it is going to be the quickest access, you know, to the
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 59 of 72
interstate. There will be dense housing along this corridor. Councilman Bernt is correct.
Soon to be Senator Bernt. On your comment about property values, consolation I think.
My honest opinion this development to me looks like a class a type of development. It
looks very high-end. The developers behind it are better than most. I think you are going
to get the best case scenario compared to others we could see and -- and there -- there
is really nothing that -- there is nothing that -- that can protect your way of life in terms of
the whole region along this corridor. The one thing I will tell you is that the City of Meridian
is not forcing people to annex into our city. If you live in Canyon county -- or near the city
limits of Nampa -- I don't know what their policies are, but we won't force you into the city
of Meridian. You know, you own your land and -- and Meridian is not doing that. I wish
there was more I could tell you. You know, there is -- it's kind of like these things take on
a momentum of their own and so as soon as this state highway was planned and paid for
and now these on ramps and stuff we are here, there is nothing that will undo that and so
that's tough.
Wood-Bussert: Yeah. The neighbor just to the east of me sold their property for just shy
of a million dollars. So, this development really does -- it really gives all of us where we
are at a huge pause for concern.
Strader: Yeah. So, it -- it's -- it's hard, because the -- it -- it -- it threatens your way of life
and it threatens the lifestyle you have been used to and what -- what you have enjoyed
this whole time. You know, it -- it -- it will also increase the, you know, value of the
surrounding lands and it sort of creates a momentum of its own and I -- you know, I don't
want to sit here and tell you that like it's going to be okay and -- because it's -- it's not.
Like if I were you I -- I would not think that there is anything that -- that's going to fix this.
Like the -- the highway being there -- there is an unstoppable momentum behind that just
being there. I think if you and your neighbors band together and, you know, are aligned
on, you know, staying in the county and -- I mean you can -- you can -- you can protect
your area, if that makes sense, but it's like really hard to stop everything that's going to
be happening around this thing. It's just happening.
Wood-Bussert: This is right against us. Right against us, so -- thank you for your time.
Strader: Thank you.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Can I share one more thing?
Simison: Uh-huh.
Perreault: Ma'am, I'm a real estate broker and what I have seen about one acre properties
in little pockets like this -- because they are all over Meridian. We have three or four
others I can think of off the top of my head. And, then, the south Boise went through the
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 60 of 72
same thing where there was this dense development around these pockets of one, two
acre parcels. It really increased the values of those larger parcels and instead of -- you
would think that it would decrease them, because you have density surrounding you, but
it increases them, because the fewer large parcels that we have in our city the more
valuable they become. So, I -- I would be surprised if it would -- yes, the -- the highway
is close, but there is two other similar neighborhoods to yours that have -- that Interstate
84 runs right by one. There is a huge development going into that one -- next door to that
one and another one I can think of and from what I can tell it's not hugely devaluing their
properties. Now, I'm not saying that as -- I'm not guaranteeing that. I'm just saying the
other ones that I have seen, both in my role as a Council Member and my role in real
estate, it's -- it's not devaluing in the way that you would think it would off the top of your
head.
Simison: Thank you. Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone else signed up to provide testimony?
Johnson: That was everyone that signed in.
Simison: Okay. Is there anybody else who would like to come forward and provide
testimony at this time? Or anybody online that would like to provide testimony you can
use the raise your hand feature. Okay. So, we do have someone online raising their
hand.
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, I'm not seeing that. What's the name?
Simison: Sue Waggoner.
Johnson: Okay. Ms. Waggoner, you should be able to unmute yourself.
Wagonner: Hi. Can you hear me?
Simison: Yes, we can. If you can state your name and address for the record, please.
Waggoner: Oh, thank you. Thank you so much. It's Sue Waggoner. W-a-g-g-o-n-e-r.
And I reside at 6096 West Becky Drive. I also have adjacent property on McDermott.
That would be 3950 North McDermott Road. It's just -- my property just kind of wraps
around onto McDermott Road. So, I wanted to just state that -- it was either Mr. Hunter
or Mr. Tucker -- I'm sorry, I don't know which one, indicated that there was a crisis that
they were trying to solve and I was speculating as to what that meant. If that meant
affordable housing crisis or just housing in general. But I -- what I would like to do is let
you guys know that we are having a crisis of our own on McDermott Road and Becky
Drive where I also reside in the Apple Valley Subdivision, where we have 16 homes with
four to five acres each and we are right in the middle of that high impact that you have all
been discussing. We have got a freeway coming in next to us, which my neighbor
mentioned. We were originally told that that was going to be an access road and, then,
suddenly it's now changed into an actual freeway. So, we have got the high school
coming in -- or that came in, which my neighbor mentioned. Blasting lights. Blasting
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 61 of 72
music. I have cows in my pasture right there on McDermott Road that have to look at the
lights and listen to the music every time there is a football game. So, I'm just kind of
questioning when do -- I understand that we need housing for people that are moving in
and whatnot, but at what point does anybody become concerned about the crisis that
those of us who already live there, who have invested our life savings into our properties,
when does somebody think about the crisis that we are facing?
Simison: Thank you, Ms. Waggoner. Council, any questions? Thank you. Is there
anybody else who would like to provide testimony on this item? Then I will ask the
applicant to come forward to close.
Tucker: Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. I just wanted to address a few items
that were brought up. As far as shifting of the access, Mr. Green's testimony as far as the
-- the way the -- the street aligns with his driveway, I went back and -- and rechecked
ACHD's reports earlier today just to make sure I wasn't missing anything. They have
approved that access where it is. Removing the pickleball courts to the north and shifting
everything to the north -- that property directly to the north of us is a light industrial use
that is owned by the Aclima Corporation and the proposed use there is -- is a light
industrial use and so working with staff, one of their suggestions was, hey, why don't we
shift some of those units a little bit farther away from -- from that northern property line,
provide a nice landscape buffer there, and so we have provided a landscape buffer and
some pickleball courts to provide that buffer from the light industrial use to the residential
use that we are providing and just, again, ACHD has approved that drive -- or that street
intersection with McDermott where it -- where it is located. As far as the -- the -- the -- the
property values, I think you are right, Council Member Perreault. I think property values
probably will increase a little bit based on the amount of development going on and also
just pointing out, even though those properties are not located in the county -- in the City
of Meridian, they are covered by the City of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan, which
believe -- I don't know if it goes up that far -- is classified as mixed-use interchange. I
don't know if that's these properties. But I know directly to the -- to the east of us it's
mixed-use interchange. So, the -- the redevelopment potential of that property is -- is
fairly high. As far as the --the horse trailers and the --the --the getting --the maneuvering
around, we are required to widen McDermott Road as it abuts our property, so we will be
widening that, making that section a little bit easier to navigate. As far as access to Ustick
Road, though, that's going away altogether when -- when McDermott Road gets cul-de-
sac'd. So, that's going away altogether. There will be no access from McDermott to
Ustick Road to try to make those maneuvers. One thing that I thought of-- not necessarily
a rebuttal to -- to testimony that was given, but just -- I have still been trying to think
through the commercial aspect and to try to address some of your -- your concerns,
Council Member Perreault. The properties directly to the north of us -- if you head north
on McDermott Road where the hospital is that we just had right before this, that -- that
intersection will have commercial development as well. Not just the hospital, but in that
area there will be commercial and, then, also I just wanted to point out directly to the west
of us, the properties that abut Ustick Road, that are basically between Ustick Road and
the high school, those are classified as mixed-use community, I believe. More than likely
those are going to be developed as commercial properties as well. So, the properties
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 62 of 72
directly to the west of us, Mr. Flowers' property and, then, the property that is owned by
the school district, those are all going to be redeveloped commercial. So, that will be
another infusion of commercial development in the -- in this area. Again, we can't control
when that happens, but we think with -- with the construction of Highway 16 and the
construction of our development bringing in the developments to the north of us, bringing
the activity -- you have all seen the development that's going on in this area, more than
likely that -- those properties will -- will redevelop fairly soon as well and I think will
redevelop as commercial to bring more commercial area -- or uses into this area to
support not only the high school, but the multi-family and the townhomes that we are
providing. So, I think that's all that I had to offer. Again, just wanted to thank staff for all
of the work that they have done on this. We have gone -- we have been working with
them for about two years on this and I think we have really landed on something that is a
really spectacular project that -- that all of us involved are going to be really happy to -- to
put our names on. And so just again want to express thanks to them and encouragement
to -- to support that variance request that we are asking for, just to reduce a few of the
townhomes by 300 square feet, those lots, and so that concludes our testimony.
Simison: Thank you. Council, questions?
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Could we bring up the slide that shows the road network? There we go. Can
you quickly --just so we have a visual and for our residents here -- show us where -- how
someone who lives to the east of McDermott, north of Ustick, will get on the interchange.
Will they need to drive all the way around to McDermott Road, come back south, head
west on Ustick? So, they are going to need to go around, what, three-quarters of a mile
to get on to 16? Or they could get on by going north on McDermott to the McMillan
Interchange -- or McMillan won't have an interchange.
Tucker: Chinden.
Perreault: It will -- it will be -- they -- oh, bless. Okay. And -- but the section of Ustick on
either side of 16 is going to widen -- I mean that will -- that will be, what, five lanes --
Tucker: Correct.
Perreault: -- with this phase two. Okay.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I will just throw out some -- some thoughts, having heard all of the testimony from
the applicant and the public and in preparation review of the materials for tonight. I think
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 63 of 72
Ms. Waggoner's comment about having a crisis and some of the neighbors here a crisis
-- the -- the conflict between development and -- and historical use, it exists here and
elsewhere in our -- in our community and it's real and it feels very real. The value of your
property doesn't matter if you don't intend to sell it. So, whether it's worth a thousand or
a million is irrelevant, because you have a way of life you want to protect. So, one of the
things that we can do -- one of the few things we can do is try and orderly plan our
community as a whole and be consistent with it. So, for your properties that are in the
county, what we can do is -- is through a public process create what we have as a
Comprehensive Plan full of policy statements and a future land use map and with your
input try to give you a heads up on how your properties are going to be developed. Give
you some insurance as to what the rules of the road are going to be for the type of use
that might one day in the future happen to your property and, then, also give you some
assurance that the properties around you are going to be stuck with the same plan and
-- and the same rules. Maybe some different uses, but -- so, there is some -- some
certainty in how properties are going to be developed and, then, we got to be consistent
in how we apply our long-term Comprehensive Plan. This is just another example of the
real conflict that exists when cities grow. So, for those that -- and the one element that
we don't control, like Council Woman Strader had said, we don't annex properties unless
a landowner comes to us and makes a request and say -- says I would like my land to
come into the city and I would like to do so consistent with your long-term plan that we
just talked about and the thing we don't control is the order and we see the greatest
conflict and crisis when the order which is dictated by the land owners who choose to
come in at their own pace, come in at an order that causes certain crisis for those
adjacent. I mean we will never really control that. But do know that we think about and
are concerned about that conflict every time an application like this comes in. This area
is one of the more complex areas the City of Meridian has seen since Eagle Road was
widened. That's probably the best example. I mean this is a generational changer. So,
the difficulty in marrying up the land uses is extremely real. So, some of the things with
this application that I found very favorable, because of these challenges the applicant is
one who does excellent work. This team that they described I think it carries some weight.
It should give the neighbors some level of comfort that they do what they say and they
say what they do. The fact that it was planned to be mixed-use regional, that we -- that
we created a plan, which told all of these property owners here the type of uses we want
you to do with your property, it fits long term with our road network and with our public
services, integrating residential and commercial. It might not be in the perfect order, but
it fits the plan. So, when McDermott Road became a cul-de-sac adjacent to this property,
It really did basically eliminate McDermott Road as a useful arterial. That, coupled with
this type of use, these type of properties adjacent to it, creates -- it won't feel like minimal
traffic, because anything more than what you have feels like a lot and it will, but compared
to a more dense residential on this east side or a commercial, all of those carry more
traffic than this. So, this type of product with McDermott stubbing really seemed to be to
me a thoughtful design to create minimal traffic that -- that just realistically will never be
zero. So, that to me mitigated some of that real concern that the neighbors have raised.
I thought with regards to the variance request, I -- I viewed it as some proportionality. I
thought the challenges, the site design -- or, excuse me, the site constraints are so unique
and so enormous that in relation to the -- to the variance that was requested, it wasn't a
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 64 of 72
fiscal solution that I thought warranted it. I just thought the site constraints warranted the
adjustment that's being requested. I think it's reasonable and proportional. The alternate
compliance that was referenced, I know that's at a later date and done with -- with staff
seemed to make sense as well under these unique circumstances. So, I'm -- I'm
supportive of the application. I think long-term when these adjacent properties all develop
consistent with our plan, perhaps one day maybe some of your properties as well, that
this region as a whole will be designed right and be very successful. It doesn't mean it's
not challenging in the short term, but I feel like our responsibility is to review and approve
and decide based upon long term and I think long term this application warrants approval.
I think it's the right thing to do.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: You know, I'm going to really miss these--these explanations given by Councilman
Borton. The -- he has a gift of explaining, you know, the -- the -- the pros and cons of
land use, because he's been doing it for so long. I hope that that made sense to you
guys, because there is no one up here on this dais that probably could have done a better
job. Completely agree. I do believe that there is going to be a time that the property
directly west of the commercial aspect of this -- of this project will be commercial. There
is -- there is absolutely no doubt about it and -- and so that will alleviate some -- I think
Council Woman Perreault's concerns. So, I'm in favor. I -- I just think that this was just
-- I -- I can't imagine buying 40 acres of land, fast forward ten years and finding out that
there is a gigantor highway running right through the middle of it and still finding a way to
develop it. I -- I don't think I have ever seen it done. Truly. I mean this is a new project
and, unfortunately, there is probably going to be much more coming to us that are going
to have similar challenges. So, thank you.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, as you deliberate and discuss, I just want to
-- to maybe clarify on the variance piece. I do think Council Member Borton is spot on to
say the challenges of the site in relation to both Highway 16 and that lateral that runs
through the property, that easement, does make it challenging, because the case law and
courts in this state have focused on the site, not the surrounding economics, not the
surrounding period that you are in in regards to housing and all those types of factors,
that are, obviously, relevant to this Council, but they aren't relevant to a variance. So, I
-- I wouldn't steer anywhere near that piece of that earlier discussion, but, certainly, it is
within your discretion to decide whether or not removing the parcels as planning had
suggested is one alternative versus the diminishing the -- some of the lot sizes, some of
the parcels. I think that's -- and it's within your discretion. I think the constraints on the
site between the highway and the lateral certainly could support that. So, I just wanted
to make sure you stated that -- that side of the conversation and not to the other, that
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 65 of 72
although, again, as important as that might be, from a policy standpoint it doesn't really
apply to a variance.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Mr. Nary will tell me to steer away and I'm going to steer right into it. You know,
look, I -- I do think it's relevant, because I was hoping we would have some really great
timing with a program that we are trying to set up to change some of our standards, but,
unfortunately, it's not ready yet and I don't think it's fair to hold the applicant, you know, to
a new program that encourages housing affordability if it hasn't been stood up yet. So,
I'm not going to hold you guys to that. I do know that you are a man of your word and if
you are trying to approach things at a discount to where the market is right now for single
family housing, I believe in you guys. I think you can do it. So, I'm just going to have trust
that that's the market you are trying to attack, that's your business plan, that's what you
are going to go after and -- and -- and I am encouraged that we are providing that kind of
missing middle housing that we have been talking about and I do think in the future, you
know, when we have more discussions with the Community Development Department,
we could try to work on, you know, different rationale besides site conditions to relax some
of our standards to encourage that affordable housing that we need. So, I will put that to
the side. The things I like about the project -- I love the team. I agree that this is really
-- if I were a neighbor I would be very upset also, but I think that this for me would be best
case scenario in terms of what would end up here. It's going to be beautiful. The
townhomes are -- are beautifully rendered. I know it's going to be gorgeous. I'm -- I'm
not -- I'm not concerned about the variance. I do agree that, you know, the state highway
and the site conditions also separately warrant that variance. So, I'm with you on that.
The commercial is not there yet. That's a tough piece. But they were really -- I mean by
virtue of how McDermott developed, it pretty much sealed the fate of what could go here.
So, I'm supportive of it. You know, I think -- I think the commercial will come in this area,
you know, as it's needed down the road. So, yeah, I mean I think they made a good case.
The -- the one thing that gives me pause -- I -- I really wish that the full Ustick Road
widening was going to happen. It's just not. 20-26 is not that far. We have a lot of bigger
challenges when we talk about places like McMillan where we are talking like 2034. At
least this isn't like a case like that. So, I'm there on it.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: May I ask the applicant a question?
Simison: The public hearing is not closed, so yeah.
Perreault: With the variance -- I'm surprisingly the one that's hesitant about it and my
hesitancy comes with, you know, anytime we grant -- even with site conditions, anytime
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 66 of 72
we grant a variance -- and this is a pretty -- this is a pretty specific one -- we kind of open
up that whole, well, you did it for them, can you do it for us kind of thing. So, we take it
really -- really seriously. So, my question -- two questions. One, is it possible to lessen
the amount of lots on which we -- that variance would be required? Right now it's 44. Is
it possible to lessen that based on design or where you are placing the townhomes or
would that require a whole new redesign of all of the lots in that section? That's the first
question. Second one is did -- did you -- did you do some -- some platting with all of the
lots being 2,000 square feet and how did that change the size of the building and number
of units that were in each building? So, it looks to me like you kind of have like a -- a two
or three unit and, then, like a four or five unit and, then, a two or three unit. Did that look
entirely different when you -- when you put those on 2,000 square feet versus 1 ,700
square feet?
Tucker: Sure. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Perreault, yeah, we --we actually, the amazing
-- surprisingly -- well, maybe not surprisingly enough. The townhome side of this was
much more difficult to design than the -- the west side of this, just because it is so narrow
and it's got an angle there. So, we actually designed or had several different layouts of
the townhomes. We had one design where they actually all kind of faced east and west
going up and down, instead of north and south. One of the things -- one of the things that
we really like about this design is that the units do face north and south and so you don't
have some of that -- that harsh sun coming in in the -- in the evenings. Also, because the
freeway is there that runs, you know, parallel with this, the size of the units, you don't have
backyards next to the freeway, you have got the sides of units and we have got a little bit
of the buffer and the road there. So, that buff-- that street adds some buffer as well. So,
another thing that's great about this -- if you notice running through the middle of the
project is we didn't just put all of the units together, we actually broke them into two,
sometimes I think -- I don't think there is any three, but two -- two separate units, so that
we can actually have pedestrian walking paths that traverse north and south through the
middle of the units as well. So, you don't have to walk all the way to the end. There is
actually pedestrian paths that go through the middle. If we took out all of those elements,
then -- then we probably could make the units wider. We just think it's a much better
design the way it is now. We would -- as Josh explained, we would probably need to
remove nine units, one out of each kind of bank of lots there to make them all wider to
meet that standard and, again, it's not necessarily -- because we are building townhomes
on the -- on these lots, the size of the units is probably not going to change. It's just the
size of the lot. And so the size of the home being constructed --the floor plan of the home
is not really going to change, it's just an increase of the lot size of 306 square feet
basically. And so, yes, we could remove some of the lots and make it work. Just the way
we have it designed now we think it's the best--the --the best design for the project. But,
again, it's not necessarily a -- a hill where we are going to die on if -- if we don't get the
variance. We are still going to move forward with the project. It will just have less
townhomes on that side.
Evarts: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Perreault, I would like to add one other thing, because
we have talked about this word affordability and stuff like that. First of all, we will do what
we say we are going to do. But I would say in general a matrix to keep in mind is since
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 67 of 72
1960 -- and this is irregardless of interest rates, because we have had a lot since 1960.
Housing prices -- median housing prices have gone up 121 percent. Wages have gone
up 29 percent. So, there is no solution to this; right? Like we just have a gap that exists
and it really does take developers, kind of like our team, to go here is an opportunity to
put a right sized project into -- into an area that it's been called for and that's what we are
passionate about and -- and -- and while we would go ahead and do this, minus the nine
lots, it -- it matters. That's -- that's a ten percent impact of this that can be a savings that
can get past on to a first time home buyer. So, I think it's important.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Real quick. Just to speak to the neighbors. Firstly, I guess. I -- I truly -- truly
understand what you are going through. My -- my -- my in-laws. Dairy farm. North of
Ustick Road between Linder and Ten mile. There since 1961. You know, I moved to
Meridian with my family in 1970 and, then, I got married to my beautiful wife and -- and
lived on the farm and it went away. Now, it's the original Bridgetower location. We kept
an acre. So, I completely get how hard change is. It really is hard. And every now and
then I hear it from my wife. She misses the sound of the baler. She misses the view of
the mountains on both sides that she could see at one time. So, it -- it -- change is hard.
So, I -- I feel for you. The good news is you can survive it. You know, you heard the
comments by Council Members that, you know, we don't force annexations upon people.
We are not going to make you change. Yes, the area around you will change and what
you want to do is make sure that you hold developers accountable. You want to make
sure the people going in are doing the right thing and as -- as has been mentioned up
here, you have got good developers. We know the good ones and we know the not -- not
so good ones. So, you are -- you are fortunate there, because you have got people who
-- who -- who do the right thing. But it is change. It is hard. And like you, when I first
looked at Highway 16 and heard what they are doing, oh, it's going to be kind of parallel.
McDermott is just going to continue on, be a -- the side road and, then, there will be
another highway and everything will be fine and -- because we had friends out there and
-- and that has changed as well. So, I -- I get it. So, it's -- it -- it is hard, but if -- if you
make sure you are -- you are dealing with the right people it -- it can -- it can work and
what you do is you make your home your oasis. I mean, yes, it may be lots of -- it's not
open ground anymore, but lots of houses, but it becomes your oasis. It's still a wonderful
place that you want to be. So, it is a challenge, but it can be done. So, just to speak,
then, to the development, it -- it was interesting. I was intrigued. Council Woman
Strader's comment about affordable housing and what we can do and agree, yeah, we
are -- we are not there yet on how we do that and make it. But really in many cases the
market is going to determine that and -- and that's something that I think is in play here.
Not everyone is going to want to live next to that. Others will see, oh, that's great. I can
get on that and get to 84 and be gone. Oh, that's perfect. So, it's one of those decision
points that people will make. I -- I doubt -- it's going to be very nice, but it's probably going
to be people who are buying their first home and say, hey, this is our starter home, this is
where we start and I think most of us have been there. You know, you don't start off with
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 68 of 72
your dream home right away, at least unless you win the lottery. But you -- you start there
and -- and, then, you work your way up. But they are homeowners. They are going to
invest in it and keep it nice and -- and I certainly understand the request for the variance.
That -- that is a challenging site. The -- with the road, with the drainage, you have got
two drainages, you have got industrial on the north side, that--that makes it really difficult
and -- and so I have no problem granting the variance. The -- the sizes, I -- and -- and,
Josh, I don't -- I can't remember if you have 710 foot apartments over here or not. I mean
that's -- and that's out there and so that gives that affordability factor to people who want
a smaller place. They are single, they want a place to start out, up to 1,300 square feet.
So, that gives that variety of people saying, hey, that's going to be -- that's a nice
development, it's something I can afford, and that's -- that's -- and I found your comment,
Josh, about medium income of 165 to 200 thousand to afford a 500,000 dollar home is
-- is a huge hurdle and I -- I think this -- this will fit that need and -- and I know Council
Members who have been here longer up here, that Owyhee High School decision was a
tough one, because it's a school. They knew growth. They had to leapfrog growth. But
we don't like doing leapfrog development, because this is what happens, because now
it's a central area, it's going to grow, you prefer that expansion out. It's more orderly. But
it is what it is. The high school had to go there. It was a tough decision Council made
and now development is going to be there around this new central area. So, I get it. You
guys have done a good job with it. I certainly support it and the fact that you are not going
to be done before the -- the highway is completed and those types of things I think are
good factors that enter into this. So, again, I appreciate your hard work and I -- my
sympathies. I get it. But I don't -- don't totally despair. It's -- it's -- someday they will have
the roads wide enough you can turn that long trailer on, so -- but it does take time.
Simison: So, question for staff or the applicant. Just intellectual curiosity. The end cap
units, are the ones that are left at 2,000 feet under the variance, is that because the
dimensional standards needs something different there, as compared to saying 1 ,850 for
every lot throughout -- you know, in terms of size proportion. I know it doesn't change the
size of the -- what's going to be built. I'm just intellectually curious on the rationale.
Tucker: Sure. Mr. Mayor. The -- the -- yeah. The end units -- when you do townhomes
the -- the end lots are -- are usually a little bit wider because of the setbacks. So, to build
the same unit to have that setback on the end unit, they have zero lines on the middle,
but you have a setback on the exterior unit, so they need to be a little bit wider.
Simison: And that's for roadway and pathway requirements? Okay. Thanks. Council,
any additional questions, comments, or motions? Treg turns into Cinderella at 10.00
o'clock.
Bernt: Is that my attitude or something else?
Simison: Your slipper. It just falls off.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 69 of 72
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor, I move that we close the public hearing.
Simison: A motion to close the public hearing.
Borton: Second.
Simison: And a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The
ayes have it and the public hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: If there is no more discussion, I move that we approve File No. VAR-2022-0004,
including approval for the request of a variance to reduce the minimum lot size in the R-
15 zoning district from 2,000 square feet to 1,6194 square feet.
Simison: Before there is a second, do we need to do the annexation before we can do
the variance?
Nary: Yes, sir. We should do the annexation first.
Simison: So, we will have to do Item 8 first.
Bernt: I quit.
Nary: I just wanted to hear you one more time.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: I move that we approve Item No. H-2022-0056, including the -- the annexation,
the preliminary plat and the conditional use permit.
Borton: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there discussion or anything that staff needs
further?
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 70 of 72
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I think inclusive in that motion is the waiver of Condition A-1-C in Section 8,
referencing the 25 foot landscape buffer.
Bernt: Yes, sir.
Borton: Okay.
Simison: Beachfront Avenue. I had to say it. There is no -- no way. Second agree --first
and second both agree?
Borton: Yes.
Simison: Okay. Is there further discussion?
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I just wanted to say that I'm -- I'm still not in favor of the variance. However, I
understand you have the votes for it, so I'm not going to vote against the entire project for
that reason. But just wanted to put that on record that I would rather not open that up to
have a multiplicity of developers asking for similar requests, because it -- it will
significantly change the intention of our planning and -- if that becomes a regular request.
So, that -- I hate to say that, because I would hope it wouldn't be the case, but I just think
keeping consistency in those -- in things like lot sizes and --and minimum square footages
is really important for us.
Simison: Is there further discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, absent; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader,
yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Bernt: Are we ready?
Simison: Yeah, we are ready.
Bernt: Ready to roll now.
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 71 of 72
Bernt: I move -- do we have to close the public hearing for this one, too?
Simison: They were both closed.
Bernt: Okay. Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve Item No. VAR-2022-0004, including the
request for variance to reduce the minimum lot size in the R-15 zoning district from 2,000
square feet to 1,6194 square feet.
Borton: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve this final item. Is there any discussion?
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Council Member Bernt, is the basis and the findings that you want Planning to
prepare is based on the challenge and hardship created by the roadway of Highway 16,
as well as the hundred foot easement of the drain that crosses -- bisects the property as
well.
Bernt: Exactly. Yes, sir. That's --
Nary: Thank you.
Simison: Second agree?
Borton: Yes.
Simison: Okay. Is there further discussion on the motion? If not, Clerk will call the roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, absent; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader,
yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
FUTURE MEETING TOPICS
Simison: Is there anything under future meeting topics or do I have a motion?
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Meridian City Council
December 13,2022
Page 72 of 72
Bernt: My final request. I move that we adjourn the meeting.
Simison: I have a motion to adjourn. All those in favor signify by saying aye. The ayes
have it. We are adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:02 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON 1-3-2023
ATTEST:
CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK 1-3-2023
E IDIAN;---
AGENDA ITEM
Public Forum - Future Meeting Topics
The Public are invited to sign up in advance of the meeting at
www.meridiancity.org/forum to address elected officials regarding topics of
general interest or concern of public matters. Comments specific to an active
land use/development applications are not permitted during this time.
By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented at the Public
Forum. However, City Counicl may request the topic be added to a future
meeting agenda for further discussion or action. The Mayor may also direct
staff to provide followup assistance regarding the matter.
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC FORUM SIGN - IN SHEET
Date : December 13 , 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
I
i
E IDIAN
'aAHO
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Request for Reconsideration of Bridgetower Multi-Family (CUP-2022-
0047/CR-2022-0006) by Paul Elam
December 6, 2022
Attn: City Council for the City of Meridian
This request for reconsideration of the findings of fact, conclusions of law and orders made in CR 2022-
0006(H2O22-0047) is submitted pursuant to Meridian Code of Ordinances 1-7-10 on behalf of the
undersigned and every other person who opposed the subject application for a conditional use permit
to build a multi-family apartment project of 235 (+/-) units near the intersection of McMillan Road and
Ten Mile Road. This request for reconsideration is submitted by email pursuant to instructions of the
City Clerk.
Many in our community are very troubled by you lack of sincerity in reviewing the data and
testimony submitted in opposition to the proposed Bridgetower Multi-Family CUP CR-2022-
0006 application.
During the Hearing with the Planning and Zoning Commission on Sept. 1st, there was close to 4
hours of testimony of local area residents as well as over 100 emails were submitted as public
testimony, articulating why the proposed apartments are wrong for that location. The factors
described in that testimony included:
• Significant traffic counts and concerns with homes already built, under construction or
already approved but not yet built
• Safety related to the nearby Pleasant View Elementary
• Overcrowded Schools
• Response times by Police, Fire and other agencies
• ACHD planning related to not widening McMillian until 2032— 2035
• Home Values being affected by building apartments directly next to a highend
community
• Home Values - People in the nearby Bridgetower West community not even being able
to sell their home due to the increased road traffic with homes adjacent to McMillian
Rd.
For these reasons and others, the Planning and Zoning Commission declined the apartment
application on Sept. 1, 2022.
Then after the developer, Alpha Development Group appealed the rejecting of their
application, an additional hearing was held on Nov. 15, 2022. During this hearing, another 3+
hours of testimony were heard plus over 60 emails had been submitted for review.
During this hearing only one member of the City Council even seemed to ask direct questions of
the developer. This council member stated that based on what they had heard, they were
against the project and would question allowing future projects on McMillian. But in the end,
even that City Council member voted against their conscience and caved to the will of the
developer and their attorney whom had implied during the hearing that they would sue the city
if their application wasn't approved.
At the hearing on Sept. 1, 2022, the Deputy City Attorney, Kurt Starman, articulated that for
only the reasons in City Code— 11-5B-6E Conditional Uses— Findings. These Finding weren't
even addressed by the City Council and include:
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.
4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not
adversely affect other property in the area.
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.
6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general
welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
For the reasons listed below, I hearby submit this Request for Reconsideration:
• The City Council abdicated their legal responsibility to make findings because all they did
was adopt the report of the planning staff. It's the City Council's responsibility to make
findings, not the responsibility of the staff.
• In turn, all the staff did was incorporate the applicant's narrative of September 29, 2002
(the appeal from the decision of the Planning Commission); see memorandum dated
October 28, 2022, from Associate Planner Joseph Dodson to the Mayor and City Council,
who apparently felt beholden to the Applicant.
• If the City Council had done its job, there is no way the Council could have in good faith
made the required findings, certainly not finding#5 about sufficient infrastructure,
specifically regarding schools and traffic on McMillan Road. Substantial and compelling
factual evidence presented at the hearing and in the record proved clearly and
convincingly, beyond a doubt, that finding#5 could not be supported or made. The
statements by the City Council and their findings, conclusions, and orders to the
contrary constitutes a clear abuse of discretion.
• The principal motivation of the City Council was not to make the necessary findings, as
required by City Ordinances, but to deter a lawsuit threatened by the Applicant. There
was no explanation or sufficient discussion of what the merits of such a lawsuit might
have been, if any, or why any threat of a lawsuit should override the City Council's
responsibility to ensure the safety and welfare of Meridian's citizens.
As an affected party and one who testified at the Hearing, I formally submit this Request for
Reconsideration on behalf of myself and all those that testified against the application on both
9/1//2022 and 11/15/2022.
Sincerely,
Paul Elam
5127 N. Asissi Ave.
Meridian, ID. 83646
E IDIAN.;---
Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline
Page 4
Changes to Agenda:
rd
Item #7: Sessions Parkway (H-2022-0046) – Applicant requests continuance to Jan. 3 in order to further refine the
concept plan associated with the development agreement modification request.
Item #3: Prairiefire Subdivision (H-2022-0053)
Application(s):
Annexation & Zoning
Preliminary Plat
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 3.16 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located at 3539
N. Locust Grove Road.
History: None
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium Density Residential (MDR)
Summary of Request: The Applicant proposes to annex 3.16 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district. This property is designated as
Medium Density Residential (MDR) on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) contained in the Comprehensive Plan. This designation
allows for dwelling units at gross densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre.
A preliminary plat was submitted showing how the property is proposed to be subdivided and developed with 22 single-family
residential detached dwelling units at a gross density of 6.96 units per acre, which is within the desired density range of the MDR
designation.
The subject property is an enclave surrounded by existing single-family residential detached homes to the north (Quenzer Commons),
west (Heritage Grove), east (Summerfield), church to the south and office park to the north. This development is proposed to be an
age-restricted 55+ community and the applicant’s narrative states they have an agreement in place to merge this development with the
Heritage Grove HOA.
Access is proposed from the extension of existing local stub street (i.e. W. Prairiefire St.) from the west. Access is prohibited from N.
Locust Grove Road. ACHD is requiring the applicant to increase the radius of the cul-de-sac from 47 feet to 50 feet per district
standards. The project is conditioned to comply with all ACHD’s conditions of approval.
A 25-foot wide buffer is required along N. Locust Grove Road.
Because this site is below 5 acres in size, open space and site amenities are not required per UDC 11-3G-3A. However, the Applicant
is providing 0.37 acres (16,117.20 square feet) of common area to provide pedestrian access to the commercial properties located to
the north and N. Locust Grove Road to the east. This area will be landscaped with trees, shrubs, and include a 5-foot micropath.
Staff recommends that the applicant remove Lot 11, Block 1 along the northern property boundary. The micropath connection
on the northern portion of the common lot adjacent to the commercial development is hidden behind Lot 11, Block 1 creating
a potential safety issue for pedestrians. Pedestrian pathways on common lots shall be designed to reduce the incidence of
crime and improve the quality of life.
Four (4) conceptual building elevations were submitted that demonstrate the style of homes proposed for this development. A mix of
single-story and single-story with a bonus room homes are proposed. Staff believes the proposed elevations are consistent with the
Heritage Commons Subdivision development. Staff has included a sample elevation that demonstrates the style of the homes in the
Heritage Grove development.
Planning Staff recommended approval w/the requirement of a DA that contains the provisions in the staff report.
Commission Recommendation: Approval at the 11/03/2022 Commission Hearing
Summary of Commission Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Patrick Connor, Applicant and Michael Rusnack, President of Heritage Grove HOA
ii. In opposition: Judie Dietzler, Kevin Emery, Willie Uhrig, Moscelene Sunderland, Doug Brown, Gerard Gladu
iii. Commenting: Patrick Connor and Michael Rusnack
iv. Written testimony: Doug Sayers - Concerns pertaining to excess traffic through the Heritage Grove Subdivision
v. Key Issue(s):
Single-story with a loft will essentially create a second story causing privacy issues.
Contractors use a temporary construction entrance off of Locust Grove during subdivision construction.
Concerns over Heritage Grove HOA’s ability to provide enough irrigation water.
Consistent with home elevations in the Heritage Grove Subdivision and whether the proposed homes fit on the lots.
Removing Lot 11, Block 1 to create a better transition on the northern boundary.
Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission:
HOA responsible for maintaining the landscaping in the front/back yards.
Concerns about ensuring that the elevations are compatible with the Heritage Grove.
The pathway to the north is a requirement as part of the Conditional Use Permit approved with the commercial business
park to the north.
Proposed homes will fit on the lots with the removal of Lot 11, Block 1.
Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation:
The Applicant shall work with ACHD to try to obtain a construction entrance off of Locust Grove during construction of the
subdivision.
Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council:
The Applicant shall provide revised elevations that are more consistent in style with the Heritage Grove Subdivision
homes prior to the City Council Hearing.
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-2022-0053, as presented in the staff
report for the hearing date of December 13, 2022: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2022-0053, as presented during the
hearing on December 13, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2022-0053 to the hearing date of December 13, 2022 for the following reason(s): (You should
state specific reason(s) for continuance.)
Item #4 & #5: Turin Plaza (H-2022-0063; SHP-2022-0013)
Application(s):
Rezone & Short Plat
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.62 acres of land, zoned R-4, located at 3169 W. Belltower
Dr., on the east side of N. Ten Mile Rd., just south of Belltower Dr.
History: This property was annexed in 2001 & platted as a lot in Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision. A DA was required as a provision
of annexation.
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Office
Summary of Request: The applicant proposes to rezone 1.80 acres of land (including land to the section line of Ten Mile Rd.) from the
R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) to the L-O (Limited Office) zoning district consistent with the FLUM designation of Office and in
accord with the DA, which requires the property to be rezoned to L-O prior to issuance of any building permits. A Short Plat consisting
of four (4) building lots is also proposed.
This property is an undeveloped enclave surrounded by developed properties in the City. An assisted living facility exists directly to the
south, office uses exist to the north and SFR properties exist to the east. A conceptual development plan was submitted that depicts (4)
3,550 to 3,600 s.f. office buildings with associated parking.
Access is proposed via the existing backage road along Ten Mile Rd. from W. Belltower Dr.
The street buffer, associated landscaping & sidewalk along Ten Mile Rd. was installed with the Bridgetower Crossing subdivision
improvements.
Commission Recommendation: Approval
Summary of Commission Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Jessica Petty and David Moorhouse
ii. In opposition: None
iii. Commenting: None
iv. Written testimony: Jessica Petty, 1215 Design (Applicant’s Representative) – in agreement with staff report
v. Key Issue(s):
Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: None
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-2022-0063; SHP-2022-0013, as
presented in the staff report for the hearing date of December 13, 2022: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2022-0063; SHP-2022-0013, as
presented during the hearing on December 13, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2022-0063; SHP-2022-0013 to the hearing date of __________ for the following reason(s): (You
should state specific reason(s) for continuance.)
Item #6: West Valley Emergency Center (H-2022-0065)
Development Agreement Modification
Conditional Use Permit
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 16.46 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at the SWC of N. Levi
Ln./N. Rustic Oak Way.
History: This property was annexed in 2021 with Prescott Ridge Subdivision with the requirement of a DA.
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-R & MDR
Summary of Request: A modification to the existing DA for Prescott Ridge (Hospital Portion) is proposed to update the phasing plan
and modify the provision requiring noise abatement to be provided along W. Chinden Blvd./State Highway 20-26 to allow for alternative
compliance – this application does not require action from the Commission.
A CUP is requested for a 11,241 s.f. emergency medical facility on 2.4 acres of land, ultimately planned to be part of a hospital
campus, on a total of 16.46 acres of land in the C-G district. A modification to the CUP will be required with future development of the
hospital in Phase 3. The City Council previously deemed the access for the emergency room via Rustic Oak, a collector
street, meets the intent of the specific use standard that requires hospitals that provide emergency care to have direct
access on an arterial street, as noted in the DA.
Access is proposed from two (2) access driveways via Rustic Oak Way, a future collector street along the east boundary of the site; an
emergency only access driveway is proposed from the west via Serenity Ln., a private street. Direct access via Chinden Blvd./SH 20-
26 is prohibited. An access easement is required to be obtained for the emergency access via Serenity Ln.; if not attained, emergency
access shall be provided from the south from the cul-de-sac (N. Backcountry Pl.) between Lot 5 & 7, Block 12 in Prescott Ridge #3 & a
barrier prohibiting access shall be erected at the west end of the frontage road. The emergency access is not required with the
emergency center; however, it will be required with the hospital if the overall area of the building exceeds 124,000 square feet or 3+
stories in height. Note: The Peregrine Heights subdivision plat note #6 states all lots except Lots 18 and 19 have an interest in Lot 10,
the private street lot for Serenity Ln.; note #7 states direct access to W. Chinden Blvd. is limited to Lots 18 and 19 – therefore, the
subject property has no interest or right to access Serenity Ln. unless an access easement is obtained.
A 35’ wide landscaped street buffer is required along US 20-26. A request for alternative compliance to UDC 11-3H-4D, which requires
noise abatement to be provided for residential and other noise sensitive uses, including hospitals, adjoining state highways, was
approved by the Director based on the noise study submitted by the applicant. A condition was added for a 3’ tall berm to be provided
within the street buffer for aesthetic reasons. The building will be located 400+’ to the south of US 20-26.
A 25-foot wide buffer is required to adjacent residential uses to the west and south, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-
9C as proposed. A 30-foot wide buffer is proposed with an 8-foot tall wall, landscaped with a mix of evergreen and deciduous trees,
shrubs and lawn, which should result in a barrier that allows trees to touch at the time of maturity.
Parking is proposed in excess of UDC standards; 22 spaces are required, 47 are proposed.
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed structure as shown. Building materials consist of EIFS, thin stone
veneer and corrugated roof screen wall panels. Final design is required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural
Standards Manual.
Commission Recommendation: Approval
Summary of Commission Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Nancy Hunseeker
ii. In opposition: None
iii. Commenting: Cory Coltrin
iv. Written testimony: Val Stack & Paul Hoyer
v. Key Issue(s):
An access easement hasn’t been granted via Serenity Ln., a private street, for the proposed emergency access at the
northwest corner of the site; therefore, emergency access should be provided from the south from the cul-de-sac in Prescott
Ridge Subdivision.
If a frontage road isn’t provided to Serenity Ln., there would be adequate room to construct a sound attenuation berm and
wall and the Applicant could comply with UDC standards for noise abatement for the hospital.
Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: None
Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: None
Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: Condition #8 in Section IX.A incorrectly states a 4-foot tall berm is required. It should be a 3-
foot tall berm consistent with condition #3b – Staff requests Council make this correction.
Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2022-0065, as presented in the staff
report for the hearing date of December 13, 2022: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2022-0065, as presented during the
hearing on December 13, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2022-0065 to the hearing date of _________ for the following reason(s): (You should state
specific reason(s) for continuance.)
Item #8 & #9: McDermott Village (H-2022-0056)
Application(s):
Annexation & Zoning
Preliminary Plat
Conditional Use Permit
Variance
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 40.05 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada county, located at the
SWC of N. McDermott Rd. & W. Ustick Rd. at 3235 N. McDermott Rd.
History: None
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Use – Regional (MU-R)
Summary of Request: The annexation request consists of 40.05 acres of land with R-15 (17.12 acres), R-40 (15.85 acres) and C-G
zoning (7.08 acres). A conceptual development plan was submitted with the annexation request that depicts how the site is proposed to
develop with the extension of State Highway 16 through the site. An interchange is also planned at Ustick Rd.
Two (2) land use types are proposed – commercial (a fuel sales facility & convenience store and flex commercial/office uses) &
residential (i.e. multi-family & townhomes). No employment or public uses are proposed and it’s unlikely any of the proposed uses will
have a regional draw. The site is designed with the commercial uses along Ustick Rd. with an integrated plaza area between the two
northern buildings & MFR development to the north along future SH-16. Townhomes are proposed on the east side of future SH-16
along N. McDermott Rd.
This is the only property in this area with a MU-R designation – this designation was requested by the Applicant with the 2019 Comp
Plan update. That, along with the property being bisected by the SH-16 extension, which reduces the size of the property from 40 acres
to 26.5 acres, makes it difficult to develop entirely consistent with the MU-R designation. Because an interchange is planned in this
area and access is limited, the Comprehensive Plan states retail and auto-generated services should be minimized and transition
rapidly from the interchange to residential uses near the County line, which the plan proposes. For these reasons, Staff is amenable to
only two (2) land uses instead of three (3) as typically desired, and the lower intensity of uses (i.e. primarily residential) rather than
more intense commercial uses as is typically desired in the MU-R designation. Additionally, interconnectivity and a full integration of
uses within the overall site is not possible due to the SH-16 extension as typically desired in mixed use designated areas. Therefore,
Staff finds the proposed annexation, zoning & development is generally consistent with the MU-R designation and appropriate for this
site.
The proposed preliminary plat consists of 85 building lots (81 townhome, 1 multi-family & 3 commercial) & 8 common lots on 40.05
acres of land in the R-15, R-40 & C-G zoning districts. A conceptual phasing plan was submitted that depicts the site developing in (3)
nd
phases with the MFR development first, townhomes 2 and commercial last.
Access is proposed to the portion of the site west of the future SH-16 extension via a public street from Ustick Rd. A stub street is
proposed to connect to the future development to the north (Aviator Springs) and a stub street is proposed to the school property to the
west for future extension & connection to N. Owyhee Storm Ave., a collector street. Private streets are required within the MFR
development for addressing purposes. Cross-access/ingress-egress easements should be provided between all C-G zoned
commercial lots. Two (2) accesses are proposed via McDermott Rd., a collector street, for the townhome portion of the development
east of future SH-16. McDermott Rd. is planned to dead-end in a cul-de-sac just north of Ustick Rd. when the interchange is
constructed. An emergency only access is proposed via Ustick Rd. Alleys are proposed for access to some of the townhome units as
depicted on the plat. Some of the townhomes lots do not meet the minimum lot size standard of 2,000 s.f. and will need to be revised.
A 10’ wide multi-use pathway is proposed along Ustick Rd., consistent with the PMP and another 10’ north/south pathway is proposed
along the west side of future SH-16, consistent with the pathway location in the developments to the north.
A 35’ wide landscaped street buffer is required along future SH-16 & McDermott Rd., both designated entryway corridors. Noise
abatement is required within the buffers along SH-16 that abut residential uses in accord with UDC standards, which require a
minimum 10’ tall berm or berm/wall combination that’s a minimum 10’ higher than the elevation at the centerline of the state highway.
An open space exhibit was submitted for the townhome portion of the development that depicts qualified open space in excess of UDC
standards – a minimum of 1.58 acres is required, a total of 3.33 acres is proposed, which consists of open grassy areas of at least
5,000 s.f. & linear open space. A minimum of 2 points of site amenities are required per the UDC point value table – the Applicant
submitted an exhibit depicting (2) pickleball courts at 4 points each, which exceeds UDC standards.
The Sky Pilot Drain crosses the southern portion of this site within a 100’ wide easement; the Eight Mile Lateral crosses the NEC of the
site within a 50’ wide easement; and the Noble Lateral runs along the east boundary of the site within a 40’ wide easement (20-feet
from centerline each side). All waterways are proposed to be piped. This project is not within the flood plain.
A CUP is requested for a MFR development consisting of 250 dwelling units on 12.19 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. The
proposed development will have (12) 3-story multi-family structures & a 9,055 square foot amenity building centrally located within the
complex. Six (6) different floor plans are proposed with a mix of units consisting of 1- (97), 2- (114) and 3- (39) bedroom units ranging
from 712 to 1,278 square feet in size.
Private open space is proposed in accord with UDC standards. Qualified common open space is also proposed in accord with UDC
standards – a minimum of 2.74 acres is required, a total of 3.35 acres is proposed, which consists of central common/amenity areas &
a pedestrian corridor where a multi-use pathway is planned, in excess of UDC standards.
Proposed amenities include a clubhouse with a fitness facility, a swimming pool and spa with cabanas and an outdoor lounge area, 10-
foot wide multi-use pathways and internal walking trails, a plaza, a pickleball sports court, and a bike repair station. A BBQ area is
depicted on the site plan; Staff recommends this area is constructed as a commercial outdoor kitchen. An outdoor seating area is also
depicted on the site plan; Staff recommends this area is constructed as a picnic area with tables, benches, landscaping and a shade
structure. Staff also recommends a children’s play structure is provided. Staff is of the opinion these upgrades and addition of an
amenity (i.e. play structure) is commensurate with the number of units proposed.
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed structures. The townhomes are proposed to be 2- or 3-stories in
height, the MFR structures are proposed to be 3-stories in height, and the clubhouse if proposed to be a single-story in height; building
materials consist of a mix of vertical board & batten fiber cement siding and horizontal lap siding with brick veneer siding and wood
ridge beam accents, metal awnings and asphalt shingle roofing. No elevations were submitted for the commercial portion of the
development. The final design of all buildings on the site are required to be comply with the design standards in the Architectural
Standards Manual.
A Variance is requested to UDC Table 11-2A-7 to allow 44 of the 81 townhome lots on the eastern portion of the development to be
reduced from 2,000 to 1,694 square feet. In order to grant a variance, City Council must make the findings for such, which state the
variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; and the variance shall not be detrimental to the public
health, safety and welfare per UDC 11-5B-4E.
The Applicant’s narrative states there are several characteristics of the site that create an undue hardship - although these
characteristics do exist, Staff finds they do not prevent the Applicant from reducing the number of lots within the development in order
to comply with the minimum lot size standard. If a variance is approved, alternative compliance will also be necessary to reduce the
street buffer along McDermott Road, an entryway corridor, in order to accommodate the proposed layout. Reducing the number of
building lots will allow compliance with the minimum lot size standards as well as street buffers. Therefore, Staff is not supportive of the
proposed variance request.
Commission Recommendation: Approval
Summary of Commission Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Travis Hunter, Josh Evarts, and Todd Tucker
ii. In opposition: None
iii. Commenting: Ron Hopper, Rod Green, and Paul Elam
iv. Written testimony: Todd Tucker, Boise Hunter Homes; Meridian Resident
v. Key Issue(s):
Additional traffic on Ustick and McDermott Roads.
Transition of the McDermott Village development to the rural residential in the area.
Amount of development occurring in the area.
Schools and businesses are overcrowded and more large residential developments are being approved without additional
services
Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission:
Timing for the construction of SH 16 and the commencement/completion of phase 1 construction.
Impacts of increased traffic on Ustick Road.
Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation:
At Staff’s recommendation, Commission modified DA provision #A.1f to read, “A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway shall be
provided within the street buffers along N. Glassford Ave. adjacent to SH-16 within a 14-foot wide public use easement.
Commission modified condition of approval #10k. to replace commercial outdoor kitchen with outdoor BBQ.
Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: Applicant requests Council waive condition #A1.c in Section VIII that requires a 25-foot
landscape buffer adjacent to the Flowers property along the west boundary of the proposed development. This request was supported
by the Commission. The requirement does not apply because right-of-way will separate the subject property from the residential
property – Staff is supportive of removal of this condition.
Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None
Notes:
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers H-2022-0056 & VAR-2022-0004, as
presented in the staff report for the hearing date of December 13, 2022: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers H-2022-0056 & VAR-2022-0004, as
presented during the hearing on December 13, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Numbers H-2022-0056 & VAR-2022-0004 to the hearing date of ______________for the following
reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.)
City Council Meeting December 13, 2022
Item #2: Bridge at The Village at Meridian Conditional Use Permit
Item #3 ZONING MAPFUTURE LAND USE MAP Annexation and Preliminary Plat–Subdivision Prairiefire:
Annexation Exhibit
Preliminary Plat
Landscape Plan
Conceptual Building Elevations Heritage Grove Subdivision Elevations
Items #4 & #5: Turin Plaza ZONING MAPFUTURE LAND USE MAP Rezone & Short Plat–
Rezone Exhibit REVISED-Conceptual Development Plan
Short Plat
Item #6: West Valley Emergency Center AERIAL MAPZONING MAPFUTURE LAND USE MAP(Development Agreement Modification and) Conditional Use Permit
LegendLegendLegend
\[\[\[
Project LocationProject LocationProject Location
RUT
R-3
RUT
66
Low Density
R-4
11
Residential
YY
R1
R-8
WW
HH
M1
R-15
MU-C
C-G
R1
C-C
C2
Mixed Use -
CHINDENCHINDEN
CHINDEN
Interchange
L-O
MU-RG
T
RUT
T
R-15
O
RUT
R-8
M
R-8
R
BLACK CAT
R-4
BLACK CAT
R-4
E
MCDERMOTT
D
R-15
Medium Density
C
MCDERMOTT R-8
R-8
M
R-4
Residential
R-8
R-4
R-15
R-8
R-15
R-15
RUT
Existing Phasing Planfor Hospital/Medical Center SiteProposed Phasing Plan
Site PlanLandscape Plan
Items #8 & #9: McDermott Village PLANNED DEVELOPMENTZONING MAPFUTURE LAND USE MAP Preliminary Plat & Conditional Use PermitAnnexation & Zoning, –
ANNEXATION & ZONING EXHIBIT G-C15-R40-R
PRELIMINARY PLAT& CONCEPTUAL PHASING PLAN
PRELIMINARY PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN
Open Space Exhibit PlanSite Amenity For Townhomes
SITE PLAN FOR MULTIDEVELOPMENT (CUP)FAMILY -
QUALIFIED OPEN SPACE & SITE AMENITY EXHIBITS
Conceptual Building Elevations
W IDIAN�
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Prairiefire Subdivision (H-2022-0053) by Patrick Connor,
located at 3539 N Locust Grove Rd., near the northwest corner of E. Ustick Rd. and N. Locust
Grove Rd.
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0053
A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 3.16 acres of land from RUT in Ada County to the R-8
zoning district.B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 22 building lots and 1 common lot.
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET
DATE : December 13 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 3
PROJECT NAME : Prairiefire Subdivision ( W2022 - 0053 )
Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify
( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes )
If yes, please
provide HOA name
0� 'gym k Tj � ► C V r � 71
2 >302 t 0 W � Pefhca
c 1 us <, � OK LK
3 a sC4V%e, ,� Q V�
4
it
6
1
9
�� 7v
10
12
13
14
STAFF REPORT C� fE IIaIAN --
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I D A H O
HEARING December 13,2022 Legend � L
DATE: E C
Project Location
TO: Mayor&City Council — - ----- ------
FROM: Bill Parsons, Current Planning OED
Supervisor ®® M�
208-884-5533 0
SUBJECT: Prairiefire ® � a
H-2022-0053
LOCATION: 3539 N. Locust Grove Rd.,near the ® 0
northwest corner of E.Ustick Rd. and N.
Locust Grove Rd., in the SE 1/4 of the SE
1/4 of Section 31,Township 4N, Range
1 E. (Parcel#S0531449500)
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Annexation of 3.16 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district; and preliminary plat consisting of 22 building
lots and 1 common lot on 3.16 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district for Prairefire Subdivision.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details Page
Acreage 3.16 acres
Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residential(MDR)
Existing Land Use g Single-family residential(SFR)/ag
Proposed Land Use(s) SFR
Current Zoning Rural Urban Transition(RUT)in Ada County
Proposed Zoning R-8(Medium Density Residential)
Lots(#and type;bldg/common) 22 building/1 common
Phasing plan(#of phases) 1
Number of Residential Units(type 22 single-family detached units
of units)
Density(gross&net) 6.96 units/acre(gross)
Open Space(acres,total [%]/ 0.37 acres
buffer/qualified)
Pagel
Amenities 0.37 acres of common area with a 5' micropathway providing
pedestrian access to the commercial property and Locust
Grove
Physical Features(waterways, None
hazards,flood plain,hillside)
B. Community Metrics
Description Details Page
Ada County Highway
District
• Staff report Yes
(yes/no)
• Requires No
ACHD
Commission
Action
es/no
• Existing There is(1)existing stub street to this property from the west(i.e.E.Prairiefire
Conditions Street).
• CIP/IFYWP • Locust Grove Road is listed in the IFYWP and CIP to be widened to 34anes from Ustick Road
to McMillan Road with design in 2025 and construction in the future.
• McMillan Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 34anes from Meridian Road to Locust
Grove Road between 2031 and 2035.
• Meridian Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 3-lanes from McMillan Road to Ustick
Road between 2026 and 2030.
• The intersection of Locust Grove Road and Ustick Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to
7-lanes on the north leg,6-lanes on the south,6-lanes east.and 6-lanes on the west leg,and
signalized between 2026 and 20X
Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via the extension of existing stub street from the
H /Local)(Existin and Proposed) adjacent neighborhood.
Proposed Road Improvements None
Fire Service See Section IX.C
Police Service No comments received.
West Ada School District No comments received.
Distance(elem,ms,hs)
Capacity of Schools
#of Students Enrolled
Wastewater ■
• Distance to Sewer Services As per Master Plan,sewer must connect to the east from Locust Grove Road
• Sewer Shed JOPPME
• Estimated Project Sewer Additional 1224 gpd committed to model.
ERU's
• WRRF Declining Balance WRRF decline balance is 14.42 MGD.
• Project Consistent with WW Yes
Master Plan/Facility Plan
• Impacts/Concerns See Public Works' Site-Specific Conditions in Section IX
Water
• Distance to Services Connect water to existing main at fire station instead of connecting to North
Locust Grove Road.
Page 2
1 1 1
1
11111111111111 ��� •■•��u � 11w -Ol
A A�►r � _-+'{loss
nnnnn ii I /i►�Ir i��jr�uno1► �,
�� iiin:m i�L �irlrr��1►�1„i ii A
��,�iiin m W11111I \I►����i� r :. c - W
-
son
�agr■r.-In.m_,�\IIII �fff■7r►���Iii ~'�'
���•i illllllll �i no��f`�I�f�11��•�r�i■ O fY
USLCK=C7- _ U'
1:�IIII1 Il�lr�%rr STICK1�'�`
InnPq ■q�1100:.ur.�� ► Ilr�rur�t-nlummmnumunnum��lumn u
��►�� ►��pr r/fnlr.� ___=nun=nml lnum m
Ii.�■nM
1�r r/1i.n::an■�:�I♦�
1 . .�Irr11O��► . m rrrr11111111r■■�
��u�■■■Olpllll\����fO;InHio
.0 OBI/���.IIIIIIIIIIIIIIr�I IIIIIIplllllln���r� hf .�. z .,
�1 �l
Rpmr�
.11111111��� ��.11111111���
��� �� �.C��11111111111�■ � • -• '• - IIIIII■
aI�Iom/�r���11111111111�
I.o.I1111►�♦ ����p�V I�• p�■II�� Ir rr a11111M�� �•iOo'��` III�A `f■IIr►�
111111111111111\������IIIII ■■■A�� I� 1'�,�1\►:�i�� a::elel•e�el:e:C��s��IIfIrI►,•,���7 Imo: 1'���f*�►:�i��
muwuir . 1� /�►�Ir.r��j�onn� WAN Ilrnnlll �pR r1■n�
""�I.I�� �wUo.� 1 ■��� tin .-�. ��Urr��I 1 ■�.�
� I IIIIIII 1\ 1�ii r � �amuu- V j11111I�\I\��1AO��r
i ar jlll�1� .ill =WN\NEI�������r►�j��i Its a jfi�li,illlllllli-�i A��I��h��ri►�j��is
rrr r_ a ♦II�i , u
�i ■��f� �M11/i�1� ��or. iiil �• ■��f/l\���1/i����q
�►. �� Ir .rrr�� ►. ��
f1�1RE
`�Ir■ � la�r��+ �•�gm4�7(rJl�1II11I IIl II\�Ilrr�'
USTICK=� � USTICK-
' ■r� 11• mollr�u■r�'�Ilam.- .�wTol �Irnv�,j■KgiViu■► ��r��uw�Hnnnnnnnnnnuumnnl.�lunm d
�■■��►��_ ���III r f/III� .,___ _ �.W w-� �
��rlr��r�Ir.r■rrll■���r r L►PU .�1��_.r■rrllf���.ram_=____=IIIIII=IIIIIII•u•
�ram-=___-_ . II �■r ♦�I■ �,
1ri �Vr.o::m■ �I� 'Innnm nuumr� .II 1 N �.nnP��I j rUelnnnm nnnm■rr�`-- nlnm
11 .�..Irrr• .►♦ Ui rrr■rrrr1111111■■ Ir 1 �i:�■::Irrrlr�::►♦ . rrr rllrr1111111■■l�rilll
11,�,��'�j1I�rrr1�Ulllll\Q�`O�I�rrrrrrr I� 11tr,�,����jlr�rrr1�1111111\Q�l �I�rrrrrrr 1::���,
In:r. �iI/fit:1111111111111� a 'JIImI111111n��_ .... iil/��/.1111111111111�`�I Illv■nlllllu■=__�.�
B. Owner:
Providence Properties,LLC—701 S. Allen Street,#104,Meridian,ID 83642
C. Representative:
Same as Applicant
IV. NOTICING
Planning& Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Newspaper notification
published in newspaper 9/21/2022 11/27/2022
Radius notification mailed to
property owners within 500 feet 9/15/2022 11/13/2022
Public hearing notice sign posted
10/18/2022 11/25/2022
on site
Nextdoor posting 9/15/2022 11/28/2022
V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS
LAND USE: This property is designated as Medium Density Residential(MDR) on the Future Land Use Map
(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan. This designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities
of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre.
The subject property is an enclave surrounded by single-family residential properties to the west and north
and a church to the south with limited office to the east,located on land also designated MDR on the FLUM.
The Applicant proposes a 22-lot subdivision for single-family residential detached homes at a gross density
of 6.96 dwelling units per acre,which is within the desired density range of the MDR designation.
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 will contribute to the variety of housing options in this
area and within the City as desired. Single-family detached homes currently exist to the north and
west, commercial is located to the north, a church is located to the south, and a Meridian Fire Station
#3 is located directly to the east. This development is proposed to be an age-restricted 55+ community
and the applicant's narrative states they have an agreement in place to merge this development with
the Heritage Grove HOA.
• "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.
• "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through
buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices."(3.07.01A)
Page 4
The proposed medium-density single-family homes contribute the variety of residential categories
within the surrounding area as desired. However, staff finds a better transition could be achieved
along the north boundary.
Staff recommends that the applicant remove Lot 11,Block I along the northern property
boundary so the lots can be widened for a better transition and provide more visibility on the
pathway connection to the commercial development.
• "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 will likely not impact the existing abutting homeowners to the west
and north in this development; although, there could be some incremental impacts associated with
lot sizes proposed along the north, the impacts associated with this development are already
primarily established and there would be negligible impacts on the single family residential to the
west.
"Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote
neighborhood connectivity."(2.02.011))
A 5-foot wide sidewalk is required along both sides of E. Prairiefire Street to provide a link between
Prairiefire Subdivision and Heritage Grove Subdivisions. Additionally, a 5-foot wide micro-
pathway is proposed on the west side of the development providing access to the commercial
subdivision to the north and N. Locust Grove Road.
• "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 and other outbuildings 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 3.16 acres of land with an R-8 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 preliminary plat was submitted showing how the property is proposed to be subdivided and developed
with 22 single-family residential detached dwelling units at a gross density of 6.96 units per acre(see
Sections VIII.B,E).
Page 5
Single-family detached dwellings are listed as a principal permitted use in the R-8 zoning district per
UDC Table 11-2A-2. Future development is subject to the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table
11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district.
The subject property is an enclave surrounded by existing single-family residential detached homes to
the north(Quenzer Commons),west(Heritage Grove),east(Summerfield), church to the south and
office park to the north. As noted above in Section V,development of infill properties is supported
provided it doesn't negatively impact the abutting, existing development.
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.
B. PRELIMINARY PLAT(PP):
The proposed preliminary plat consists of 22 building lots and 6 common lots on 3.16 acres of land in
the proposed R-8 zoning district. Proposed lots range in size from 4,002 to 4,938 square feet(s.£)(or
0.091 to 0.113 acres). The proposed gross density of the subdivision is 6.96 units per acre. The
subdivision is proposed to develop in a single phase as shown in Section VIII.B.
Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is an existing home and several outbuildings on the
property that are proposed to be removed with the development. 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 Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district. The
proposed plat appears to comply with the dimensional standards of the district.
Access: Access is proposed from the extension of the existing local stub street(i.e.W. Prairiefire St.)
from the west. Access is prohibited from N.Locust Grove Road.
Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 25-foot wide buffer is required along material roads per UDC Table II-
2A-6. Common open space landscaping is proposed as shown on the landscape plan in Section VIII.C.
All micro-pathways shall meet the requirements of UDC 11-313 including landscape strips of at least 5-
feet in width on either side and one tree per 100 linear feet per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C;
the landscape plan should be revised accordingly.
A Tree Mitigation Plan shall be submitted with the final plat detailing all existing trees and
methods of mitigation outlined by the City Arborist before any trees are to be removed as set forth
in UDC 11-3B-10C.5.
Common Open Space& Site Amenities(UDC 11-3G-3): Because this site is below 5 acres in size,
open space and site amenities are not required per UDC 11-3G-3A. However,the Applicant is providing
0.37 acres(16,117.20 square feet)of common area to provide pedestrian access to the commercial
properties located to the north and N. Locust Grove Road to the east. This area will be landscaped with
trees, shrubs, and include a 5-foot micropath.
Staff recommends that the applicant remove Lot 11,Block 1 along the northern property
boundary.The mircopath connection on the northern portion of the common lot adjacent to the
commercial development is hidden behind Lot 11,Block 1 creating a potential safety issue for
Page 6
pedestrians. Pedestrian pathways on common lots shall be designed to reduce the incidence of
crime and improve the quality of life.
Sidewalks(11-3A-17): Five-foot wide attached sidewalks are proposed along E. Prairiefire Street cul-
de-sac and a detached sidewalk along N. Locust Grove Road within the development in accord with
UDC standards.
Fencing: The landscape plan includes a fencing plan. The plan includes 6-foot-high solid vinyl fencing
along the western periphery of the site along the east side of common lot 12 adjacent to the adjoining
commercial property; 6-foot tan vinyl fencing with 2-feet of open vision screening is depicted on one
side of the common open space along the micro-pathway. The fencing appears to meet the requirements
of 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7.
Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is required in accord with UDC
11-3A-21. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City's adopted standards,
specifications and ordinances.
Pressurized Irrigation System (UDC 11-3A-15): Underground pressurized irrigation water is required
to be provided to each lot within the subdivision as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. The applicant intends on
connecting to the existing pressurized irrigation system developed with the Heritage Grove Subdivision.
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.
Building Elevations: Six(6) conceptual building elevations were submitted that demonstrate the
style of homes proposed for this development(see Section VIILF). A mix of single-story and
single-story with a bonus room homes are proposed; however,staff believes the proposed
elevations are not consistent with the Heritage Commons Subdivision development. Staff has
included a few sample elevations below that demonstrate the style of the homes in the Heritage
Grove development.Therefore, Staff recommends the Applicant submit revised elevations that are
consistent with the homes within the Heritage Commons Subdivision prior to the Council hearing.
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 November 3,2022.At the public
hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject Annexation and
Preliminary Plat request.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing
a. In favor: Patrick Connor,Applicant/Developer;Michael Rusnack,President of Heritage
Grove HOA
b. In opposition: Judie Dietzler,Kevin Emery,Willie Uhrig, Moscelene Sunderland,Doug
Brown, Gerard Gladu
C. Commenting: Patrick Connor,Michael Rusnack
d. Written testimony: Doug Sayers
e. Staff presenting application: Stacy Hersh,Associate Planner
f Other Staff commenting on the application: Bill Parsons,Planning Supervisor
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony
a. Sin lg a-story with a loft will essentially create a second story causing privacy issues;
Page 7
b. Contractors use a temporay construction entrance off of Locust Grove during
subdivision construction;
c. Concerns over Heritiage Grove HOA's ability provide enough irrigation water;
d. Consistent with home elevations in the Heritage Grove Subdivision and whether the
proposed homes fit on the lots;
e. Removing Lot 11, Block 1 to create a better transition on the northern boundary
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
a. HOA responsible for maintaining the landscaping in the front/back yards;
Concerns about ensuring that the elevations are compatible with the Heritage Grove
Subdivision;
b. The pathway to the north is a requirement as part of the Conditional Use Permit
approved with the commercial business park to the north;
c. Propsoed homes will fit on the lots with the removal of Lot 11,Block.
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. The Applicant shall work with ACHD to try to obtain a construction entrance off of
Locust Grove during construction of the subdivision.
5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council:
a. The Applicant shall provide revised elevations that are more consistent in style with the
Heritage Grove Subdivision homes prior to the City Council Hearing_.
Page 8
VIII. EXHIBITS
A. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit Map
IDAH11 9955 w Emerald St
$LAVEY false, ID 23704
i I 1.1 P Phone. 42080 84-d570
Fad (mi) MA-5399
Rrakk4lire s„bdlvls,on
Anneolat`on
$4unlAirV Gd?54ipfi4n
Pre�eCth4,mbew 22-165 Mayo,1022
A parcel of lend situated in the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 31,
Township q North. FtafW 1 East,Boise MeridUn,Ada{ou my,Idaho more par[ioularfr descr%ed
as fol4ews;
CAmmencirr6 at the 3ourtheast corner of Section 31, TowmWp 4 %orllh, Range 1 last Mkse
fdefkM n which deers 500'31'12'Wt',H59.04 lkeel."m isle east quarter- iUn 00rner;
Th erKe NO0031'1VF,105946 feet along the east line i f We southeast quarle+r of the southeast
quirttr 9FS 14n 31 t4 the Poi T OF C"m iNG:
Thence fl$Y4Fi'iF r,60.34 Fret to the east boundary o4 Fkritege Grove Sub&&ion
ND.4(Bo4M.111 of Plats at Rages 15913 throlgh 15915,records of Ada CoLimy,Idahral,
rhCnGC Nt VJW07"J.37OA4fgq1#I4ngtih+c#st boom#rygFHw"eGRpm Subdh�ipum
No.4 to the myth hourKbiry of Quenaer Commons 5ubdiuisiors No.6 I$aok 91 of Plans at
Pules IWO blrmuo 1071Z,records W Ada Couray.Idahm;
Thence!SW45'174E,474,39 feetalartg the south'me of QoenrerCornwmsSubdNislon
t+o.6 pnd 9rpditn SvWivisipn(R44k 93 4pf Plats at P2ge5.111U1 pnd 11 IM.r1cor4s of
Ado Countq,IdAhbl;
Thence50U`31'1l''SIf,2I4.V feet;
ThenceSW46'17"E,126.715 feel to the east line of tlhc ywutheastquart4r4yithC
southeam quarter;
Ttlerlce50Q'3f'11V,50A4 feet alone the east line of Mesuctheast quarter of the
southm;!t quarter to the F'DINIT CIF&WHINING.
TM ab&ve-destrihedpereel contd9n6 3.16artres,more orksa.
Pnge 1 of] C
E' j y
Page 9
Q k • ,
NM'¥ 2 .2n:� - -
L • —
f
t I
—
� � 7
n ' � • .
,
{
« o ■ ■ z
? M S |
4k �.
D | § LA
■
Nil
cn
�
k
|
K
| �
T- ?-
• ƒ a
5�21'1� 2214� Ar,
M a C
;t
i
f �# R .
E E / m ■
VC
/ & ) 1.3
i
In
� r
.�-- - CL+lr m 2 :2 e
N. Locust Grove Rd. EA
- ¥
®
2 E | ■| ����'§krG�
Page 10
B. Preliminary Plat(dated: 6/15/22)
PRELIMINARY PLAT SNOWING 4a�`
p�Mw o- P1�.p 4RIEF'IRE SUBDIVISION N . R
PARCEL OF LAND TEl)BFING LDCA �IN ME IN C
SE}C THE BE} SECTION 31,43N_,R IE_,B.M_, i
MERIDIAN,ANA CWN§Y,IDANO 2022
G
.�.... S orq u. xa..orw $i
G �r�
- 3
Al • ^•"'• '• '• 'a 'ra :. -° •-NSF.L� ...-,�... .�..d n.
9.7 2.71
Inj
�y S
96V.2
��P1.r7
Page 11
C. Landscape Plan(dated: 6/16/2022)
E' y
� p• II g gg
VICINITY MAP
- ``� ,_ EPRNRIE♦IRE 9T.� � � � �� YaappapyYrrre�91Y .
LANDSCAPE LEGEND ,� 10 $ yq
0 .
PLANT SCHEDULE
e LANDSCAPE PLAN —_r °L_� �•.... •••• ��• '••• Zi
LANDSCAPE NOTES IRRIGATION NOTES: SITE DEVELOPMENT FEATURES
�..�...................._...,. ��, LANDSCAPING INFORMATION
CALLOUT LEGEND
- .. . DISCLAIMER
Oaf...:«.
n..,...y .w...��,m..,...�.roi..r "^'wrwum •••.-•4w••••P SEE SXEET L3.R FOR iAN06GPPE OEf�IL3 L�•a
ij
�P WJTERm�eEO C�UTEsOGE
Will
n PERENNIAL&GROUNDCOVER
PLANTING ..,,._-. l•.w-.;.....�........, - ___
77
�}SHRUB PLANTING �OEOI OVOUS YREEPLWJYINGr 8
Page 12
D. Conceptual Building Elevations(NOT APPROVED)
Preliminary Prairiefire Nome Elevation Examples
Page 13
IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
1. A Development Agreement(DA)is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to
approval of the annexation ordinance,a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the
property owner(s)at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer.
Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to
commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the
Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall,
at minimum,incorporate the following provisions IF City Council determines annexation is in the
best interest of the City:
a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat,landscape
plan, common open space/site amenity exhibit and conceptual building elevations included in
Section VIII and the provisions contained herein.
2. The final plat shall include the following revisions:
a. Remove Lot 11,Block 1 to increase the size of all lots along the northern property boundary to
provide a better-quality transition with the existing homes in the Quenzer Commons Subdivision
and increase visibility on the micropath connection to the commercial development to the north.
3. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall include the following revisions:
a. Depict landscaping along the micropath in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C.
b. Remove Lot 11,Block 1 along the northern property boundary so the lots can be widened for a
better transition and provide more visibility on the pathway connection to the commercial
development.
c. 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-IOC.S. The Applicant shall coordinate with the
City Arborist(Kyle Yorita kyoritakmeridiancj0L!2 g)to determine mitigation requirements
prior to removal of existing trees from the site.
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-8 zoning district shall be removed.
5. The proposed plat and subsequent development are required to comply with the dimensional
standards listed in UDC Table 11-2a-6 for the R-8 zoning district.
6. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 1I-
3C-6 for single-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit.
7. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval.
8. Direct lot access to N.Locust Grove Road is prohibited in accord with UDC 11-3A-3.
9. The applicant shall construct all proposed fencing and/or any fencing required by the UDC,
consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7 and 11-3A-6B.
10. The Applicant shall submit revised elevations that are consistent with the homes within the Heritage
Commons Subdivision prior to the Council hearing.
11. The applicant and/or assigns shall have the continuing obligation to provide irrigation that meets the
standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-6 and to install and maintain all landscaping as set forth in
UDC 11-3B-5,UDC 11-3B-13 and UDC 11-3B-14.
Page 14
13. The preliminary plat approval shall become null and void if the applicant fails to either: 1) obtain the
City Engineer's signature on a final plat within two years of the date of the approved findings; or 20
obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-613-7.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval
2. General Conditions of Approval
2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works
Department,and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide
service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet,if cover
from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in
conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications.
2.2 Per Meridian City Code(MCC),the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water
mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement
agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5.
2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s)for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right
of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for
a single utility,or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but
rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The
easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed
easement(on the form available from Public Works),a legal description prepared by an Idaho
Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked
EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2"x 11"map with bearings and distances(marked EXHIBIT B) for
review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO
NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be
submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval.
2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water(MCC 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.
Page 15
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.
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.
Page 16
2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of
20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for
duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the
owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash
deposit or bond.Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the
Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for
more information at 887-2211.
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT
https:11weblink.meridianciV.orglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=2 70452&dbid=0&repo=Meridian QV I%2
0
D. POLICE DEPARTMENT
No comments at this time.
E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT
No pathway requirements
F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID)
NMID Comments
G. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES(ACDS)
https://weblink.meridianciV.ore/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=269136&dbid=0&repo=Meridian CitX
H. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD)
No comments were received from WASD.
I. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https://weblink.meridianciU.or,g/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=26913 7&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City&cr
=1
X. FINDINGS
A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-5B-3E)
Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full
investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation
and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
Commision finds the Applicant's request to annex the subject property with R-8 zoning and develop
single-family detached dwellings on the site at a gross density of 6.96 units per acre is consistent with
Page 17
the density desired in the MDR designation for this property; the preliminary plat and site design is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, if all conditions of approval are met.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
Commision finds the proposed map amendment to R-8 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;
Commision 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
Commision finds City services are available to be provided to this development. Comments were not
received from WASD on this application so Staff is unable to determine impacts to the school
district.
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
Commision finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the city if revisions are made to
the development plan as recommended.
B. Preliminary Plat(UDC 11-6B-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)
Commision finds the proposed plat is in conformance with the UDC and the Comprehensive Plan.
2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed
development;
Commision 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;
Commision finds there are no roadways, bridges or intersections in the general vicinity that are in
the IFYWP or the CIP.
4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development;
Commision finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed
development.
Page 18
5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and
Commision finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
general welfare.
6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005,
eff. 9-15-2005)
Commision is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be
preserved with this development.
Page 19
Item 22
E IDIAN;---
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: PRESENTATIONS
Ll
a.-.
7F' ai
�F• • \�.
Ile
Prairiefi re . : - rAV
_
Subdivision
City of Meridian
City Council
December 13, 2022
44
Prairiefire �- .
4 n J
NI-
• • • .�. ` r
Subdivision
dAWW
t
lift
Annexation of 3 . 16 Acres
from RUT in Ada County todPp _rr - F l _ } -
. =
R-8 Zone = - =` = _ . .� _
F
Preliminary Plat consisting
of 22 single y le family lots and � � � �- �`
- '
j
1 common lot.
Prairiefire Subdivision - Vicinity Map
I I �- - JD
` .-. s hFonrse Lstetal '
Et rigs 1. 6r ot.- Ei igh i ldrOr .
me
ilia
Z1�I v�ri 7
-
,}q E Layeltyaw ;
�# 40 E �dl i' I i
tit ry w _ ante EjLreigh�F,ld'Dr
+-' `vim t � 1 .°�EtVillaye Green St y �+•
� Q9ar. -,:, � �• �� '.a_ .� t#.
ear
E+Washakie r f 'I;,+ ` , } ,� - tr
y T
i t:,P4rairie#ire•St .� � , i Dangua r
,a� Cilnstln2 M.DV n m
r .'z i �• ray
¢
E SUrr�rrrer �'
4
► w .� tri . fie a- }
`. r'i1 Y D
h Church of + - r•y ;y�Quality
Je us CfirM of Lattef , ! 2 E
E$ummerneighttss� �R. a
E�Surr�mcrli�F rka =�• j' Meridian Cc
Stir a
c - Malls
m S,[}ilow
_ , y Bois: imOusine Servi-e
z, {
+
x;,
1p
RL
E-Ustick+Rd E Ustick Rd
x
xk St n neck Llr -•F— -T _E Ringneck+S4 e _ ,tgneck.
Prairiefire Subdivision - Vicinity Map
- � � - �- _ sow_• � � k-- �� �
._.�sy�4 s + Nonrse LStefai
EtVe�Oe 6r + ot.- Ei igh i 3dlDr .
'+ r
fl �55-
E'L°Y
• • x; Ej5ighlF.ln'Dr
fEIVOIage Green St { • , • • a
lk
Fire Station #3
t.
r R
i E Prain _ 5t ' " 'Dongua.
_J. + Fat flStlne MOW�ft
i �
m.
y+ Surnmerfield' • � . j
y T church of ' ■ - { QGality D
•ve + e uR Ch7ist d. La`tter 2 • • • v
.+F
Jk- -' - ElSummerfieights A.• `
c.
ElSumm rhea-- Meridian Cc
W.
r,`'a
`� 9f�
r' I _ yy• 3ois irnousine Servl•e ,;� ' y } ,-
tF AA.
fjL
i .r l�
IF
- E UStisk+Rd E tlstick Rd
Late al
xk St "ty neck Llr ° E RingneckxSt mr er tgneck'
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation
Subject
� Illlilll� � i ���■
FFTMn
Medium Densily
LL hesidential
��� 11111111117 ►�i'r�
Zoning Map —M
irl
Medium-Low Density Residential [R-4] _F}, E+ D TIIN
Medium Density Residential [R-8]
PUS
QIPENUIL,_ N
■ Medium-High Density Residential [R-15] X MM N ' QUENZJ�R.
i NCOMM NS i '7 I.11 IMEl ELD N
------ UMMERFI"
H RIT G No jt
R �t -_�=_
�
L=O
R-8 Proposed ERIT GE _
HEI IT GE1
►CE NO 03 i � � FIELD
I GROVE � �.
� NIS , .
14EADO
IN
HERI
�FAG ICI k
Prairiefire Subdivision - Zoning Map
` _ ik Nonrse LStefal ._
EtV4 ige Dr r r ��- E Leigh Fid Dr — --
Al - i` - ifr� 1
,'01 ' - 2 CN V1
ey -
+'46 ;. ! .F} x� J t�1► ' '� - al a r. o
+dp: dt b l ry o+ _ _ 'x*%w'E'Lnya4)Si" k ter, lr� —O
e. i3 f�c, ,L��r
_• 51 � cant _�* rr Pal
art r �` _ciir:-�� •,
lQ_Lk
�Et1fi11arye Green St]-y TT- � +� � _•
4.
-
#' E Sr�m
, ei T c[ dg tar
E�Wa h ie 5t { e awl s� # , rct` e , ■ . -,
mm
h - ,IL k
E Prairie ire•st _ * Donc�ua '
• - - �i Chrnstine.Mo; n > m r -
WL
Z. I I' �' �Surrnraeri� s
8r# n- A
.J
�+' � r — ENO church of ,i t s r. _ uality D
el; S Chri`t a La-tt f-- E .
_4,
r E Summerheights Dt , _ ' E .,. '
ti EiSumine`rhPr�h it ;�: n - _ '1 Mefithan Cc
t�ll N iS f
rtnm all th • �L12.
- E Ustiek�Rd E Omick Rd-
NMIal
xk•St n neck Llr -E Ringnecki$t - e tgneck'
Prairiefire Subdivision - Evolution of Housing Product
' ram`
Prairiefire Subdivision - Evolution of Housing Product MA All
Prairiefire Subdivision - Evolution of Housing Product MA All
LILI `
u .
Craftsman
- — � F 'w_ _ - ,►
Prairiefire Subdivision - Preliminary Plat
11.7% open space
(none is required)
ib
,I
• 22 Single Family Lots --
• 1 Common Lot
• 6.96 units/acre
(gross)
Prairiefire Subdivision - Partnership with Neighbors
Finding a Win-Win
Problem: Creation of an "Island Community", disconnected from existing subdivision
Solution: We are working with the HOA Board to annex Prairiefire Subdivision as Phase 5 of
the Heritage Grove HOA.
Problem: Increased kids and traffic adjacent to a 55+ community
Solution: Prairiefire is planned to be deed-restricted 55+ community (per Housing for Older
Persons Act of 1995)
Problem: Potential incongruent architectural styles
Solution: Prairiefire homes will have HOA enforced architectural restrictions to ensure the
homes meet similar architectural criteria to the existing community.
Problem: Prairiefire's water rights (flood irrigation) do not convert well to a PI system
Solution: Working towards a connection to the Heritage Grove Pressure Irrigation System,
cede water rights to the existing system and provide upgrades if needed.
Prairiefire Subdivision - Staff Recommended ConditioiL!f Approval
Condition: Eliminate a lot on the north side of the street to make the micropath to
the commercial property to the north more visible. Use additional width to make
lots along the north half of the project wider.
w,
" ;;fit
I
4� � 1,2VM4 µ1]S, I.WB S,A161 ff, AI ff, AA1 S,�101 S,AMI S� IA31 S [ I.GA!ff r,
i�. � + � I ntOM i AIOM i OOM i M i AIOM i M i A,AM 10.10M €�pABM I
�'t O O -
h�+ O O O O O
JW1
9A AI,BB 34,
A,OM = I- I I .1Ipw AAn m
�• �0..veff AA09� 6,AM 0.10M IQVMI FOAIM bm n i�S
i A1®� A11n� AId �..M 91 I.AI SI At11 ff� A13 S
I ATO 91
� f =
I
Prairiefire Subdivision — Staff Recommended Conditions of Approval
Condition: House elevation - . - homes.
garage dominated exteriors.
Craftsrr�an �r _
..3
ti
,N •'-air
f4 -
- J r
Prairief*ire # i n , rxx_
Subdivision -# 00�
Thank you for considering thisAV
application for Annexation and
Preliminary Plat. -�
. _
er
• Infill project matches adjacent _ ,� = 4
land uses, smart growth
• Provides new pedestrian =- i
connections to N. Locust Grove
�r � i 4 ♦ t
and adjacent parcels ; n -• k -y: - {
, *
• Alleviates neighbor concerns by �. . `:
working to join the HOA with
r
a
architectural and age restrictions
•�ti,, r' r � r ?a F � 4 � r
• Follows all zoning parameters of ` //1 f 3 I
the R-8 zone and City ordinances. r
-
.
v IDIAN�
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Turin Plaza (H-2022-0063) by 12.15 Design, located at
3169 W. Belltower Dr.
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0063
A. Request: Rezone of 1.80 acres of land from the R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) to the
L-0 (Limited Office) zoning district.
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET
DATE : December 13 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 4 & 5
PROJECT NAME : Turin Plaza ( H = 2022 - 0063 ) & ( SHP - 2022 - 0013 )
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 t!� � vr>P rtc i c� 3453c. w R yoEQ Luw b v" ifckl
lw � �
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
STAFF REPORT
E IDIAN --
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1,H p
HEARING December 13,2022 Legend
DATE: 0
Project Luca tor.
TO: Mayor&City Council
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner
208-884-5533
SUBJECT: Turin Plaza—RZ, SHP
H-2022-0063; SHP-2022-0013
LOCATION: 3169 W. Belltower Dr., in the NW 1/4 of
Section 35,TAN.,R.1W. (Parcel
#R1079860290)
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Rezone of 1.80 acres of land from the R-4(Medium Low-Density Residential)to the L-O(Limited Office)
zoning district; and Short Plat consisting of four(4)building lots on 1.62 acres of land in the proposed L-O
zoning district for Turin Plaza Subdivision.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details
Acreage 1.62 acres(Short Plat)& 1.80 acres(Rezone)
Future Land Use Designation Office
Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped
Proposed Land Use(s) Office
Current Zoning R-4(Medium Low-Density Residential)
Proposed Zoning L-O(Limited Office)
Lots(#and type;bldg/common) 4 building lots PM
Phasing plan(#of phases) NA(not proposed to be phased)
Number of Residential Units(type 0
of units)
Density(gross&net) NA
Open Space(acres,total[%]/ NA
buffer/qualified)
Amenities NA
Physical Features(waterways, NA
hazards,flood plain,hillside)
Page 1
Neighborhood meeting 7/11/22
date
History(previous Lot 2,Block 6,Bridgetower Crossing Sub.2;AZ-01-003 (Ord.#01-930),DA Inst.
approvals) #101117652.
B. Community Metric
Description Details
Ada County
Highway District
• Staff report Yes
(yes/no)
• Requires No
ACHD
Commission
Action
es/no
• Existing N. Ten Mile Rd.,an arterial street runs along the street buffer on the west side of this property.
Conditions
• CIP/IFYWP
Access(Arterial/Collectors/State A backage road exists along the east boundary of the site for access via W.
Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Belltower Dr., a residential collector street.
Proposed Road Improvements None proposed,none required.
Fire Service No comments received.
Police Service - No comments received.
West Ada School District No comments received.
Distance(elem,ms,hs)
Capacity of Schools
#of Students Enrolled
Wastewater
• Distance to Sewer Services Sewer is available to the east.
• Sewer Shed
• Estimated Project Sewer
ERU's
• WRRF Declining Balance
• Project Consistent with WW Ycs
Master Plan/Facility Plan
• Impacts/Concems
Water
• Distance to Services Water is stubbed to the site.
• Pressure Zone
• Estimated Project Water
ERU's
• Water Quality Concerns
• Project Consistent with
Water Master Plan
• Impacts/Concerns
Page 2
1 1 1
F _
` M CM ILLA+ '` 1.4 Cm IiL'
41
rail
RZ
■ mill
_ in mill
11
11■� •11 1111 I 11■
f.. W
IF
,ik-
loom
MI
LILn-x IIIIIIILr Z 11 r F`- I
}} LW 11 IIIIIIII F
+=� LLLL
I NI NOloll
■III ■■■N■■u :0 .. r
= i■III
2zz •• IIIr
NII
IN uw - ' 11 =+• II 111 II == L��II 111
�11111111 =��-I� ulrrll I�I ulrru p' III
1 uul -2 1111 Ir III 11 •LImill
�1111111 -- 111■11 ■LL 111 �LL 1111
mw
Olin all all
mono
1 u 11 mill :I ■ —.I
II 111
IGI�1l1 1 �i1 11 Igs�l Ilxl 111
_IIIrII_r IIIN L Irlrll_�IIINr1+IL
- LILN-2 111111 rI 11 IIIN-2 IIIIIIIII 11
11 uuul � �I�1 11 uuw �
11 1111111 I 11 1111111
mill Ill
MEN IN I
mill . IMI- ■
_■1 1 wu 1
rI IIIIIImoms ■III IIIIIIIIIN
i■III son no :■I i■IIL on "No■� ;;■I
i
IV. NOTICING
Planning&Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Newspaper notification
published in newspaper 10/19/2022 11/27/2022
Radius notification mailed to
property owners within 300 feet 10/13/2022 11/13/2022
Public hearing notice sign posted
on site 10/20/2022 11/28/2022
Nextdoor posting 10/13/2022 11/28/2022
V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS
LAND USE: This property is designated as Office on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM) contained in the
Comprehensive Plan. This designation will provide opportunities for low-impact business areas. These uses
would include professional offices,technology and resource centers; ancillary commercial uses may be
considered(particularly within research and development centers or technological parks). Sample zoning
include L-O.
The subject property is an enclave in the City surrounded by office and residentially developed properties.
The Applicant proposes to rezone the subject property from the R-4(Medium Low-Density Residential)to
the L-O(Limited Office)zoning district and re-subdivide the property into four(4)building lots for the
development of four(4) 3,550 to 3,600 square foot office buildings, consistent with the Office FLUM
designation for this property.
TRANSPORTATION: The Master Street Map(MSM)does not depict any collector streets across this
property. A collector street,W. Belltower Dr., exists to the north for access via N. Ten Mile Rd.; a backage
road from Belltower provides access to the subject property.
Goals,Objectives,&Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable
to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics):
• "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and
urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for
public facilities and services."(3.03.03F)
City water and sewer service has been stubbed to this lot and is available to be extended by the
developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21.
• "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land."
(3.07.00)
The site design for the proposed development should be compatible with the adjacent office uses to
the north and the senior living center to the south.A backage road exists along the east boundary of
the site and a 50 foot wide landscape buffer exists on the east side of the backage road with sight-
obscuring fencing which provides screening for adjacent single-family residential uses to the east,
which should reduce conflicts.
• "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 should be consistent with existing adjacent uses and shouldn't
Page 4
negatively impact adjacent properties.
• "Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote
neighborhood connectivity."(2.02.01D)
With lot development, a pedestrian connection should be provided from the sidewalk along N. Ten
Mile Rd. to the main building entrances in accord with UDC 11-3A-19B.4.
• "Locate smaller-scale,neighborhood-serving commercial and office use clusters so they complement
and provide convenient access from nearby residential areas, limiting access to arterial roadways and
multi-modal corridors."(3.07.02B)
The proposed office uses are smaller-scale and will have convenient access from nearby residential
areas. No access is proposed or approved to N. Ten Mile Rd., an arterial street.
• "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. REZONE(RZ)
The Applicant proposes to rezone 1.80 acres of land from the R-4(Medium Low-Density Residential)to
the L-O(Limited Office)zoning district. A legal description and exhibit map for the rezone area is
included in Section VIII.A. This property is within the City's Area of City Impact boundary.
There is an existing Development Agreement(DA) for Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision recorded in
2001 as Instrument No. 1011]7652,that governs future development of this property. It requires the
subject property to be rezoned to L-O prior to issuance of any building permits.
The Applicant proposes to develop the property with four(4) 3,550 to 3,600 square foot office buildings,
consistent with the Office FLUM designation for this property.
Professional services,which include,but are not limited to, architects,landscape architects and other
design services; graphic designers, consultants,lawyers,media advisors,photography studios, and
general offices, are listed as a principal permitted use in the L-O zoning district per UDC Table 11-2B-2.
Future development is subject to the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table I1-2B-3 for the L-O
zoning district.
This property is an undeveloped enclave that was previously annexed into the City surrounded by
developed properties. As noted above in Section V,the proposed development and use of the property
should be compatible with the scale and use of adjacent properties.
The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with a rezone pursuant to
Idaho Code section 67-6511A.Because there is already an existing DA in effect for this property
and the proposed development is in compliance with the DA, Staff does not recommend a new DA
or changes to the DA with this application.If the Commission and/or City Council would like to tie
future development to the conceptual development plan submitted with this application included
in Section VIII.B below,an amendment to the DA should be required to do so.
B. SHORT PLAT(SHP):
The proposed short plat is a re-subdivision of Lot 2,Block 6,Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision No. 2,
consisting of four(4)building lots on 1.62 acres of land in the proposed L-O zoning district. Each of the
four(4)lots are 17,686 square feet in area.
Page 5
The existing plat for Bridgetower Crossing No. 2 depicts the following easements applicable to this
property: a 35-foot wide landscape easement along N. Ten Mile Rd. with a note prohibiting vehicle
access across the easement; a 33-foot wide Idaho Power easement also Long N. Ten Mile Rd.; and a 25-
foot wide cross-access and City of Meridian sewer easement along the east boundary of the site where
the backage road is located. These easement have been carried over to the proposed plat.
Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are no existing structures on this site. There is an
existing landscaped street buffer with a detached sidewalk along N. Ten Mile Rd.that was constructed
with the subdivision improvements for Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision No. 2.A backage road exists
along the east boundary of this site and adjacent lots to the north and south for access via W. Belltower
Dr., a collector street to the north.
Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to
comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the L-O zoning district,which
require a minimum 10-foot interior side setback—the front and rear setbacks are zero (0). Buildings may
not encroach within the street buffer along Ten Mile Rd. Changes may be needed to the building
placement shown on the conceptual development plan to comply with the side setback standard or
lot lines may need to be adjusted accordingly.
Access: Access is proposed via an existing backage road along the east boundary of the site from W.
Belltower Dr., a collector street to the north, from N. Ten Mile Rd.,an arterial street along the west
boundary of the site. Direct access via Ten Mile Rd. is prohibited. A cross-access/cross-parking
easement should be granted between all of the proposed lots for internal access from the backage
road and because some of the parking for each building appears to be located on adjacent lots; this
may be done via a note on the plat.
Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 35-foot wide street buffer exists along N. Ten Mile Rd., an arterial
street,in accord with UDC Table 11-2B-3, as depicted on the plat.No landscaping is proposed with this
application. With future development of each lot,parking lot landscaping will be required in accord with
the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C.
Sidewalks(11-3A-17): A 5-foot wide detached sidewalk exists within the street buffer along N. Ten
Mile Rd.,an arterial street.
Waterways:No waterways cross this site.
Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is required in accord with UDC
11-3A-21.
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 Storm
Drainage Master was submitted with this subdivision.
Certificate of Zoning Compliance&Design Review: No conceptual building elevations were
submitted with this application. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is
required to be approved for each of the structures and associated site improvements prior to submittal of
building permit applications.All structures shall comply with the design standards in the Architectural
Standards Manual.Note: One CZC/DR application could be submitted for the entire development.
Page 6
VII. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed rezone and short plat with the provisions in Section IX in
accord with the Findings in Section X.
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on November 3, 2022. At the
public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject RZ request.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing_
a. In favor: Jessica Petty and David Moorhouse
b. In opposition:None
C. Commenting. None
d. Written testimony: Jessica Petty, 1215 Design(Applicant's Representative
agreement with staff report
e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons
f. Other Staff commenting on application:None
2. Key issue(s) testimony
a. None
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
a. None^
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. None
5. Outstandin issue(s)ssue(s) for City Council:
a. None
Page 7
VIII. EXHIBITS
A. Rezone Legal Description and Exhibit Map
Professional Engineers,Land Surveyors and Planners
Masc>n 924 3-St.So. Nampa, ID 83551
AS,5�Cla AC,5 lr;c Ph (20t1)454-W56 Fax(208)467-4130
o-mail:dhoWicrftcaa2onan4Lg 4
FOR: McCarter-Moorhousc
JOB NO.:MR0622
DATE: August 23,2021
REZONE DESCRIPTION
A parcel of land being all of Lot 2,Block 6,Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision No.2 in
the Ada County Recorder's Office in Book86 at Pages 9641-9643 situated in the SW114
NW 114 of Section 35,Township 4 North,Range 1 West,Boise Meridian, Meridian,Ada
County Idaho,more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the northwest corner of Section 35;
Thence S 00'52' 50"W.,2630.% feet along the west boundary of the NW114 to the
southwest corner of the NW1l4;
'thence N 00*52'50"E_,218.84 fcct along the west boundary of the NWI14 the POINT
OF BEGINNING;
Thence N 00'52' 50"E., 197.62 feet along the west boundary of the NW IA;
7-hence S 89°07' 10"E.,40.00 feet of Lot 2 to the northwest comer of Lot 2;
Thence 5 89°07' 10"E_,358.00 feet along the north boundary of Lot 2 to the northeast
comer of Lot 2;
Thence S Ot)°52'50"W., 197.62 feet along the east boundary of Lot 2 to the southeast
corner of Lot 2;
Thence N 89'07' IV'W.,358.00 feet ab[rng the south boundary of Lot 2 to the southwest
comer of Lot 2;
Thence N 890 07' 10"W.,40.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGIN KING.
This rezone description contains 1.80 acres more or less.
a 42
Page i-of i
Page 8
LOT2 BLOCK 6 OFBRIDGETOVVFR CROSSING Su9DIVISIONNO.2
IN THE SW114 N'W114 OF SECTION 35 TOVVNSHIP 4 IVORTH
COMER RANGE 7 NEST CE THE SUSE MERUAN ADA COUNTYIDAHO
SEC.35 2022
I
d :I,
C3
m
50'07 WE
358.00
J
rr
z
REZONE
' f.80AC-p-
mw or row —
ao.Wmoo — — —
wily
SEC.m
LQT 2 BLOCK
8MCCEFOWER ORDSBING sLWDIWWON NO s
LEGEND ,gym, rNRM22
F e a r Mason�, — ''a',�. � f•�sa g �
oFr ay,ro�rz
Page 9
B. Conceptual Development Plan
Tr
----------
-'ffi
U
__III 11T I
71
M t I
------------------- -------------------- --------------------4- --�----7-- ----
K MM
O
III I I E
Ad Of
IIIII HIT', --IE 0
III III III
ii- "a LLI I
O
o
O
1 002
Page 10
C. Short Plat(dated: 8/11/22)
TURIM PLAZA u^I.IBDIVISIOIV
- m-a LOT 2.BLOCK 6,BRIDOETONER CROSSING SUBDIVISION NO.2,
A PART OF THE sW 114 NW'A sECTION 35, L 4 N.,R. T W.,B-M-.
MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO
2022
�a
i
ws
_ ssenrior ,mar
f I Q m.e aaal. 1
ii ° Ts 3o an
f ��T
f lid~ M I].ead 1�8 i I LMEND
�.F.
8 sa Fr. i cALcuurEL Pair
FO / /LUMIMUL CAP YONUYENT
FCUNLUND A BRA55 CAP NQVUMFNT
RnTT W 5 rRCM
� 8"MON PIN
oils $ii I� W/PLASRL LAP PLS 9%fi
amhp'P C FOUND 0/v-PMI
'� IxM semlet m wa aerl SET 1/2-X 24-OW PIN
N,ppp W/PLASNL LAP PLS 936fi
R'.Opf NUMBER
BPINCART LINE
i
for[EASBUE LaYE
II 'i IJ,696 i� 1NE
s4.Fr. 17 BBB s AC.GL£NT LUT 1 NF
BE LIME/l.EABER
j ii i 1
II ii I� ' NO?E9
1 N£
TIIIE nAAF o�9� > - =rs Trxs r CC�u-l.r vM niE Aw1wv9L IEACAIwrS M
� i Q i iFiFCT A lIF AL-4JANNYm[
i II�ifG ' IxAY ' i 1
._�.__ __�__�_ IxN IMP tltVM1 � 2 NnRc°MmWSF A^P110VEO BY TM flIY CI�YeRY1'AX All BLWLYNL SIBAq'S SHALL
PONTR00' ____ x µx[AuwwC+Is uT axe rwWlc ptnYlAN4£M FFFCCT M1r wE IMF ff ftwA'MC PWMI/PONT OF 38BDTIB'E
. i BETA a°i,,awf s rAr xuw.amn ''ry1 �
m A4 n,F MI dHOIS A°�A'o s �1�mr£m AS¢mmlrs Fla[Y.tiln£AS YtRXalnv w91NICT m
i' eApE Ta THE w�lc IAEAlIIr BE WPIALL®YVNS!ME WA2T SYSRiI
NARRATfME RLCORD oaTA uwmNn a Tr¢srnrARr xswcrtal PnFAg
iP yky n a:.IA2Laa4flVC 9.adlmM An 4
� i KSM+�'°lKFE°N. rA1HN AS SiA]XN NIO i�J
Mason ,
i 93$B ssociates m�QB�»,.°�'
,��rry/�� seeaA� I�.MIn
!Igry, w7auzzaoz m/n/zazz
SHEET i of 3
Page 11
IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
1. The short plat shall include the following revisions:
a. Note#4: "Lots shall not be reduced in size without prior approval from the health authority and
the City of Meridian."
b. Include a note stating all lots within the proposed subdivision are subject to a cross-access/cross-
parking easement.
c. Include a note prohibiting access via N. Ten Mile Road.
2. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be approved for
each of the structures and associated site improvements prior to submittal of building permit
applications. All structures shall comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards
Manual.Note: One CZC/DR application may be submitted for the entire development if desired.
3. Approval of the short plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to obtain the City
Engineer's signature on the final plat within two(2)years of the approval of the short plat, as set
forth in UDC 11-6B-7A.Upon written request prior to the expiration of the final plat,the Applicant
may request an extension of time to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the final plat as set forth
in UDC 11-6B-7C.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.1 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.
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
Page 12
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.
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
Page 13
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. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD)
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=278191&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiiy
D. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID)
https://weblink.meridiancity.oEgj ebLink/DocView.aspx?id=278762&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiiy
E. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=275948&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX
X. FINDINGS
A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-5B-3E)
Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full
investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation
and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
The Commission finds the Applicant's request to rezone the subject property from the R-4 to the L-O
zoning district and develop the site with office uses is consistent with the Office FLUM designation
for this property.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the
purpose statement;
Page 14
The Commission finds the proposed map amendment to L-O and development generally complies
with the purpose statement of the commercial districts in that it will provide for the service needs of
the community in accord 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 office uses should be compatible with adjacent office, residential
care facility and 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 this property and will be provided with
development.
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
This finding not applicable as the request is for a rezone, not annexation. The Commission finds the
proposed rezone is in the best interest of the city.
B. Short Plat(UDC 11-6B-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)
Stafffinds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC and the Comprehensive
Plan.
2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the
proposed development;
Stafffinds public services are 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;
Stafffinds 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;
Stafffinds there is public financial capability ofsupporting services for the proposed development.
5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and
Stafffinds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general
welfare.
6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005,
eff. 9-15-2005)
Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be preserved
with this development.
Page 15
w IDIAN�
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Turin Plaza (SHP-2022-0013) by 12.15 Design, located at
3169 Belltower Drive.
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/SHP-2022-0013
A. Request: Short Plat consisting of four (4) building lots on 1.62 acres of land in the proposed L-
0 zoning district.
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET
DATE : December 13 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 4 & 5
PROJECT NAME : Turin Plaza ( H = 2022 - 0063 ) & ( SHP - 2022 - 0013 )
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 t!� � vr>P rtc i c� 3453c. w R yoEQ Luw b v" ifckl
lw � �
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
STAFF REPORT
E IDIAN --
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1,H p
HEARING December 13,2022 Legend
DATE: 0
Project Luca tor.
TO: Mayor&City Council
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner
208-884-5533
SUBJECT: Turin Plaza—RZ, SHP
H-2022-0063; SHP-2022-0013
LOCATION: 3169 W. Belltower Dr., in the NW 1/4 of
Section 35,TAN.,R.1W. (Parcel
#R1079860290)
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Rezone of 1.80 acres of land from the R-4(Medium Low-Density Residential)to the L-O(Limited Office)
zoning district; and Short Plat consisting of four(4)building lots on 1.62 acres of land in the proposed L-O
zoning district for Turin Plaza Subdivision.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details
Acreage 1.62 acres(Short Plat)& 1.80 acres(Rezone)
Future Land Use Designation Office
Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped
Proposed Land Use(s) Office
Current Zoning R-4(Medium Low-Density Residential)
Proposed Zoning L-O(Limited Office)
Lots(#and type;bldg/common) 4 building lots PM
Phasing plan(#of phases) NA(not proposed to be phased)
Number of Residential Units(type 0
of units)
Density(gross&net) NA
Open Space(acres,total[%]/ NA
buffer/qualified)
Amenities NA
Physical Features(waterways, NA
hazards,flood plain,hillside)
Page 1
Neighborhood meeting 7/11/22
date
History(previous Lot 2,Block 6,Bridgetower Crossing Sub.2;AZ-01-003 (Ord.#01-930),DA Inst.
approvals) #101117652.
B. Community Metric
Description Details
Ada County
Highway District
• Staff report Yes
(yes/no)
• Requires No
ACHD
Commission
Action
es/no
• Existing N. Ten Mile Rd.,an arterial street runs along the street buffer on the west side of this property.
Conditions
• CIP/IFYWP
Access(Arterial/Collectors/State A backage road exists along the east boundary of the site for access via W.
Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Belltower Dr., a residential collector street.
Proposed Road Improvements None proposed,none required.
Fire Service No comments received.
Police Service - No comments received.
West Ada School District No comments received.
Distance(elem,ms,hs)
Capacity of Schools
#of Students Enrolled
Wastewater
• Distance to Sewer Services Sewer is available to the east.
• Sewer Shed
• Estimated Project Sewer
ERU's
• WRRF Declining Balance
• Project Consistent with WW Ycs
Master Plan/Facility Plan
• Impacts/Concems
Water
• Distance to Services Water is stubbed to the site.
• Pressure Zone
• Estimated Project Water
ERU's
• Water Quality Concerns
• Project Consistent with
Water Master Plan
• Impacts/Concerns
Page 2
1 1 1
F _
` M CM ILLA+ '` 1.4 Cm IiL'
41
rail
RZ
■ mill
_ in mill
11
11■� •11 1111 I 11■
f.. W
IF
,ik-
loom
MI
LILn-x IIIIIIILr Z 11 r F`- I
}} LW 11 IIIIIIII F
+=� LLLL
I NI NOloll
■III ■■■N■■u :0 .. r
= i■III
2zz •• IIIr
NII
IN uw - ' 11 =+• II 111 II == L��II 111
�11111111 =��-I� ulrrll I�I ulrru p' III
1 uul -2 1111 Ir III 11 •LImill
�1111111 -- 111■11 ■LL 111 �LL 1111
mw
Olin all all
mono
1 u 11 mill :I ■ —.I
II 111
IGI�1l1 1 �i1 11 Igs�l Ilxl 111
_IIIrII_r IIIN L Irlrll_�IIINr1+IL
- LILN-2 111111 rI 11 IIIN-2 IIIIIIIII 11
11 uuul � �I�1 11 uuw �
11 1111111 I 11 1111111
mill Ill
MEN IN I
mill . IMI- ■
_■1 1 wu 1
rI IIIIIImoms ■III IIIIIIIIIN
i■III son no :■I i■IIL on "No■� ;;■I
i
IV. NOTICING
Planning&Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Newspaper notification
published in newspaper 10/19/2022 11/27/2022
Radius notification mailed to
property owners within 300 feet 10/13/2022 11/13/2022
Public hearing notice sign posted
on site 10/20/2022 11/28/2022
Nextdoor posting 10/13/2022 11/28/2022
V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS
LAND USE: This property is designated as Office on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM) contained in the
Comprehensive Plan. This designation will provide opportunities for low-impact business areas. These uses
would include professional offices,technology and resource centers; ancillary commercial uses may be
considered(particularly within research and development centers or technological parks). Sample zoning
include L-O.
The subject property is an enclave in the City surrounded by office and residentially developed properties.
The Applicant proposes to rezone the subject property from the R-4(Medium Low-Density Residential)to
the L-O(Limited Office)zoning district and re-subdivide the property into four(4)building lots for the
development of four(4) 3,550 to 3,600 square foot office buildings, consistent with the Office FLUM
designation for this property.
TRANSPORTATION: The Master Street Map(MSM)does not depict any collector streets across this
property. A collector street,W. Belltower Dr., exists to the north for access via N. Ten Mile Rd.; a backage
road from Belltower provides access to the subject property.
Goals,Objectives,&Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable
to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics):
• "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and
urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for
public facilities and services."(3.03.03F)
City water and sewer service has been stubbed to this lot and is available to be extended by the
developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21.
• "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land."
(3.07.00)
The site design for the proposed development should be compatible with the adjacent office uses to
the north and the senior living center to the south.A backage road exists along the east boundary of
the site and a 50 foot wide landscape buffer exists on the east side of the backage road with sight-
obscuring fencing which provides screening for adjacent single-family residential uses to the east,
which should reduce conflicts.
• "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 should be consistent with existing adjacent uses and shouldn't
Page 4
negatively impact adjacent properties.
• "Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote
neighborhood connectivity."(2.02.01D)
With lot development, a pedestrian connection should be provided from the sidewalk along N. Ten
Mile Rd. to the main building entrances in accord with UDC 11-3A-19B.4.
• "Locate smaller-scale,neighborhood-serving commercial and office use clusters so they complement
and provide convenient access from nearby residential areas, limiting access to arterial roadways and
multi-modal corridors."(3.07.02B)
The proposed office uses are smaller-scale and will have convenient access from nearby residential
areas. No access is proposed or approved to N. Ten Mile Rd., an arterial street.
• "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. REZONE(RZ)
The Applicant proposes to rezone 1.80 acres of land from the R-4(Medium Low-Density Residential)to
the L-O(Limited Office)zoning district. A legal description and exhibit map for the rezone area is
included in Section VIII.A. This property is within the City's Area of City Impact boundary.
There is an existing Development Agreement(DA) for Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision recorded in
2001 as Instrument No. 1011]7652,that governs future development of this property. It requires the
subject property to be rezoned to L-O prior to issuance of any building permits.
The Applicant proposes to develop the property with four(4) 3,550 to 3,600 square foot office buildings,
consistent with the Office FLUM designation for this property.
Professional services,which include,but are not limited to, architects,landscape architects and other
design services; graphic designers, consultants,lawyers,media advisors,photography studios, and
general offices, are listed as a principal permitted use in the L-O zoning district per UDC Table 11-2B-2.
Future development is subject to the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table I1-2B-3 for the L-O
zoning district.
This property is an undeveloped enclave that was previously annexed into the City surrounded by
developed properties. As noted above in Section V,the proposed development and use of the property
should be compatible with the scale and use of adjacent properties.
The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with a rezone pursuant to
Idaho Code section 67-6511A.Because there is already an existing DA in effect for this property
and the proposed development is in compliance with the DA, Staff does not recommend a new DA
or changes to the DA with this application.If the Commission and/or City Council would like to tie
future development to the conceptual development plan submitted with this application included
in Section VIII.B below,an amendment to the DA should be required to do so.
B. SHORT PLAT(SHP):
The proposed short plat is a re-subdivision of Lot 2,Block 6,Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision No. 2,
consisting of four(4)building lots on 1.62 acres of land in the proposed L-O zoning district. Each of the
four(4)lots are 17,686 square feet in area.
Page 5
The existing plat for Bridgetower Crossing No. 2 depicts the following easements applicable to this
property: a 35-foot wide landscape easement along N. Ten Mile Rd. with a note prohibiting vehicle
access across the easement; a 33-foot wide Idaho Power easement also Long N. Ten Mile Rd.; and a 25-
foot wide cross-access and City of Meridian sewer easement along the east boundary of the site where
the backage road is located. These easement have been carried over to the proposed plat.
Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are no existing structures on this site. There is an
existing landscaped street buffer with a detached sidewalk along N. Ten Mile Rd.that was constructed
with the subdivision improvements for Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision No. 2.A backage road exists
along the east boundary of this site and adjacent lots to the north and south for access via W. Belltower
Dr., a collector street to the north.
Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to
comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the L-O zoning district,which
require a minimum 10-foot interior side setback—the front and rear setbacks are zero (0). Buildings may
not encroach within the street buffer along Ten Mile Rd. Changes may be needed to the building
placement shown on the conceptual development plan to comply with the side setback standard or
lot lines may need to be adjusted accordingly.
Access: Access is proposed via an existing backage road along the east boundary of the site from W.
Belltower Dr., a collector street to the north, from N. Ten Mile Rd.,an arterial street along the west
boundary of the site. Direct access via Ten Mile Rd. is prohibited. A cross-access/cross-parking
easement should be granted between all of the proposed lots for internal access from the backage
road and because some of the parking for each building appears to be located on adjacent lots; this
may be done via a note on the plat.
Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 35-foot wide street buffer exists along N. Ten Mile Rd., an arterial
street,in accord with UDC Table 11-2B-3, as depicted on the plat.No landscaping is proposed with this
application. With future development of each lot,parking lot landscaping will be required in accord with
the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C.
Sidewalks(11-3A-17): A 5-foot wide detached sidewalk exists within the street buffer along N. Ten
Mile Rd.,an arterial street.
Waterways:No waterways cross this site.
Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is required in accord with UDC
11-3A-21.
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 Storm
Drainage Master was submitted with this subdivision.
Certificate of Zoning Compliance&Design Review: No conceptual building elevations were
submitted with this application. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is
required to be approved for each of the structures and associated site improvements prior to submittal of
building permit applications.All structures shall comply with the design standards in the Architectural
Standards Manual.Note: One CZC/DR application could be submitted for the entire development.
Page 6
VII. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed rezone and short plat with the provisions in Section IX in
accord with the Findings in Section X.
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on November 3, 2022. At the
public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject RZ request.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing_
a. In favor: Jessica Petty and David Moorhouse
b. In opposition:None
C. Commenting. None
d. Written testimony: Jessica Petty, 1215 Design(Applicant's Representative
agreement with staff report
e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons
f. Other Staff commenting on application:None
2. Key issue(s) testimony
a. None
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
a. None^
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. None
5. Outstandin issue(s)ssue(s) for City Council:
a. None
Page 7
VIII. EXHIBITS
A. Rezone Legal Description and Exhibit Map
Professional Engineers,Land Surveyors and Planners
Masc>n 924 3-St.So. Nampa, ID 83551
AS,5�Cla AC,5 lr;c Ph (20t1)454-W56 Fax(208)467-4130
o-mail:dhoWicrftcaa2onan4Lg 4
FOR: McCarter-Moorhousc
JOB NO.:MR0622
DATE: August 23,2021
REZONE DESCRIPTION
A parcel of land being all of Lot 2,Block 6,Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision No.2 in
the Ada County Recorder's Office in Book86 at Pages 9641-9643 situated in the SW114
NW 114 of Section 35,Township 4 North,Range 1 West,Boise Meridian, Meridian,Ada
County Idaho,more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the northwest corner of Section 35;
Thence S 00'52' 50"W.,2630.% feet along the west boundary of the NW114 to the
southwest corner of the NW1l4;
'thence N 00*52'50"E_,218.84 fcct along the west boundary of the NWI14 the POINT
OF BEGINNING;
Thence N 00'52' 50"E., 197.62 feet along the west boundary of the NW IA;
7-hence S 89°07' 10"E.,40.00 feet of Lot 2 to the northwest comer of Lot 2;
Thence 5 89°07' 10"E_,358.00 feet along the north boundary of Lot 2 to the northeast
comer of Lot 2;
Thence S Ot)°52'50"W., 197.62 feet along the east boundary of Lot 2 to the southeast
corner of Lot 2;
Thence N 89'07' IV'W.,358.00 feet ab[rng the south boundary of Lot 2 to the southwest
comer of Lot 2;
Thence N 890 07' 10"W.,40.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGIN KING.
This rezone description contains 1.80 acres more or less.
a 42
Page i-of i
Page 8
LOT2 BLOCK 6 OFBRIDGETOVVFR CROSSING Su9DIVISIONNO.2
IN THE SW114 N'W114 OF SECTION 35 TOVVNSHIP 4 IVORTH
COMER RANGE 7 NEST CE THE SUSE MERUAN ADA COUNTYIDAHO
SEC.35 2022
I
d :I,
C3
m
50'07 WE
358.00
J
rr
z
REZONE
' f.80AC-p-
mw or row —
ao.Wmoo — — —
wily
SEC.m
LQT 2 BLOCK
8MCCEFOWER ORDSBING sLWDIWWON NO s
LEGEND ,gym, rNRM22
F e a r Mason�, — ''a',�. � f•�sa g �
oFr ay,ro�rz
Page 9
B. Conceptual Development Plan
Tr
----------
-'ffi
U
__III 11T I
71
M t I
------------------- -------------------- --------------------4- --�----7-- ----
K MM
O
III I I E
Ad Of
IIIII HIT', --IE 0
III III III
ii- "a LLI I
O
o
O
1 002
Page 10
C. Short Plat(dated: 8/11/22)
TURIM PLAZA u^I.IBDIVISIOIV
- m-a LOT 2.BLOCK 6,BRIDOETONER CROSSING SUBDIVISION NO.2,
A PART OF THE sW 114 NW'A sECTION 35, L 4 N.,R. T W.,B-M-.
MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO
2022
�a
i
ws
_ ssenrior ,mar
f I Q m.e aaal. 1
ii ° Ts 3o an
f ��T
f lid~ M I].ead 1�8 i I LMEND
�.F.
8 sa Fr. i cALcuurEL Pair
FO / /LUMIMUL CAP YONUYENT
FCUNLUND A BRA55 CAP NQVUMFNT
RnTT W 5 rRCM
� 8"MON PIN
oils $ii I� W/PLASRL LAP PLS 9%fi
amhp'P C FOUND 0/v-PMI
'� IxM semlet m wa aerl SET 1/2-X 24-OW PIN
N,ppp W/PLASNL LAP PLS 936fi
R'.Opf NUMBER
BPINCART LINE
i
for[EASBUE LaYE
II 'i IJ,696 i� 1NE
s4.Fr. 17 BBB s AC.GL£NT LUT 1 NF
BE LIME/l.EABER
j ii i 1
II ii I� ' NO?E9
1 N£
TIIIE nAAF o�9� > - =rs Trxs r CC�u-l.r vM niE Aw1wv9L IEACAIwrS M
� i Q i iFiFCT A lIF AL-4JANNYm[
i II�ifG ' IxAY ' i 1
._�.__ __�__�_ IxN IMP tltVM1 � 2 NnRc°MmWSF A^P110VEO BY TM flIY CI�YeRY1'AX All BLWLYNL SIBAq'S SHALL
PONTR00' ____ x µx[AuwwC+Is uT axe rwWlc ptnYlAN4£M FFFCCT M1r wE IMF ff ftwA'MC PWMI/PONT OF 38BDTIB'E
. i BETA a°i,,awf s rAr xuw.amn ''ry1 �
m A4 n,F MI dHOIS A°�A'o s �1�mr£m AS¢mmlrs Fla[Y.tiln£AS YtRXalnv w91NICT m
i' eApE Ta THE w�lc IAEAlIIr BE WPIALL®YVNS!ME WA2T SYSRiI
NARRATfME RLCORD oaTA uwmNn a Tr¢srnrARr xswcrtal PnFAg
iP yky n a:.IA2Laa4flVC 9.adlmM An 4
� i KSM+�'°lKFE°N. rA1HN AS SiA]XN NIO i�J
Mason ,
i 93$B ssociates m�QB�»,.°�'
,��rry/�� seeaA� I�.MIn
!Igry, w7auzzaoz m/n/zazz
SHEET i of 3
Page 11
IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
1. The short plat shall include the following revisions:
a. Note#4: "Lots shall not be reduced in size without prior approval from the health authority and
the City of Meridian."
b. Include a note stating all lots within the proposed subdivision are subject to a cross-access/cross-
parking easement.
c. Include a note prohibiting access via N. Ten Mile Road.
2. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be approved for
each of the structures and associated site improvements prior to submittal of building permit
applications. All structures shall comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards
Manual.Note: One CZC/DR application may be submitted for the entire development if desired.
3. Approval of the short plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to obtain the City
Engineer's signature on the final plat within two(2)years of the approval of the short plat, as set
forth in UDC 11-6B-7A.Upon written request prior to the expiration of the final plat,the Applicant
may request an extension of time to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the final plat as set forth
in UDC 11-6B-7C.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.1 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.
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
Page 12
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.
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
Page 13
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. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD)
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=278191&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiiy
D. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID)
https://weblink.meridiancity.oEgj ebLink/DocView.aspx?id=278762&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiiy
E. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=275948&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX
X. FINDINGS
A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-5B-3E)
Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full
investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation
and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
The Commission finds the Applicant's request to rezone the subject property from the R-4 to the L-O
zoning district and develop the site with office uses is consistent with the Office FLUM designation
for this property.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the
purpose statement;
Page 14
The Commission finds the proposed map amendment to L-O and development generally complies
with the purpose statement of the commercial districts in that it will provide for the service needs of
the community in accord 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 office uses should be compatible with adjacent office, residential
care facility and 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 this property and will be provided with
development.
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
This finding not applicable as the request is for a rezone, not annexation. The Commission finds the
proposed rezone is in the best interest of the city.
B. Short Plat(UDC 11-6B-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)
Stafffinds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC and the Comprehensive
Plan.
2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the
proposed development;
Stafffinds public services are 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;
Stafffinds 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;
Stafffinds there is public financial capability ofsupporting services for the proposed development.
5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and
Stafffinds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general
welfare.
6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005,
eff. 9-15-2005)
Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be preserved
with this development.
Page 15
w IDIAN�
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for West Valley Emergency Center (H-2022-0065) by Fulmer
Lucas Engineering, LLC., located at Southwest corner of N. Levi Ln. and N. Rustic Way
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0065
A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to the existing development agreement for
Prescott Ridge (Hospital Portion) (Inst.#2021-132724) to update the phasing plan and modify the
provision requiring noise abatement to be provided along W. Chinden Blvd./State Highway 20-26
to allow for alternative compliance.B. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a hospital in the C-G
zoning district.
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET
DATE : December 139 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 6
PROJECT NAME : West Valley Emergency Center ( H - 20 M065 )
Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify
( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes )
If yes, please
provide HOA name
2
3
4
5
' 6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
STAFF REPORT C�I
w IDIAN --
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O
HEARING December 13,2022 Legend
DATE:
Project Location
TO: Mayor&City Council
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner
208-884-5533
i® f
SUBJECT: H-2022-0065—West Valley Emergency
Center—MDA, CUP,ALT ' o
LOCATION: Southwest corner of N. Levi Ln./N. _
Rustic Oak Way, in the NW 1/4 of Section -
28,Township 4N.,Range 1 W. (Parcel --
#R6991222250) �®�•'
Fin
® �T
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Modification to the existing Development Agreement for Prescott Ridge(Hospital Portion) (Inst. #2021-
132724)to update the phasing plan and modify the provision requiring noise abatement to be provided along
W. Chinden Blvd./State Highway 20-26 to allow for alternative compliance; and conditional use permit for a
hospital(i.e. emergency center)in the C-G zoning district.
Alternative compliance is requested to UDC 11-3H-4D,which requires noise abatement to be provided for
residential and other noise sensitive uses, including hospitals, adjoining state highways.
Alternative compliance is also requested to UDC 11-3B-7C,which requires trees to be planted within the
required 35-foot wide street buffer along W. Chinden Blvd., an entryway corridor.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details
Acreage 16.46
Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R)&Medium Density Residential(MDR)
Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped land
Proposed Land Use(s) Hospital with an emergency center
Current Zoning General Retail&Service Commercial(C-G)
Physical Features(waterways, None
hazards,flood plain,hillside)
Neighborhood meeting date;#of 7/11/2022
attendees:
Pagel
History(previous approvals) H-2020-0047(DA Inst.#2021-132724);PBA-2022-0024
B. Community Metrics
Description Details
Ada County Highway
District
• Staff report(yes/no) Yes
• Requires ACHD No
Commission Action
(yes/no)
Traffic Impact Study No
es/no
Access Access is proposed from Rustic Oak Way via W. Chinden Blvd. at the east boundary of
(Arterial/Collectors/State the site.An emergency access is proposed from N. Serenity Ln.via W. Chinden Blvd.at
Hwy/Local)(Existing the northwest corner of the site.
and Proposed)
Trip Generation 279 additional vehicle trips per day& 17 additional vehicle trips per hour in the PM peak
hour(estimate)
Wastewater
• Distance to Sewer Sewer will come from the Prescott Ridge Development to the South.
Services
• Sewer Shed
• Estimated Project See Application
Sewer ERU's
• WRRF Declining
Balance
• Project Consistent Yes
with WW Master
Plan/Facility Plan
• Impacts/Concerns
Water
• Distance to Water
Services
• Pressure Zone
• Estimated Project See application
Water ERU's
• Water Quality
Page 2
1 1 1 1
1 1
;e
■
r�r
,�l R is
Ira
�:{uU#Illlllllb��rw •�
- • - CHI�Nh� �� rurrd
n ,
- -:u1. rlmr „I• .�Rting
Q-n �� mmnnl ari'
a m
^ "�^ ymnu,un ,iiiiiii li Ir+ r l GMiI -e nla .
*•iunn'a. _un IInu1�=II II 'g' 9'.lu s�,� ' , , d � r-
�aI1111111M� •1■=11,1111111 : ,n i1rSY1P1Y ,f a �d IIIII lye.
I,n,ll11R�I,111 Illlnl 111111,11 in 1 1�d.I la�.I.1.•,llldll( Nnn -
41llllllllll,VIIIIIII IIIIIIIOI IIIIIIIIIIIII
--iIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIe 5 I11111111111= - - - = II flGllllll=�. ti�,'T - -
1
• • - • • • 1 • - • • • . •1•
" � - Yid '.-. -�_ /Ld• •NI
_ • era...�iil �/_• � ��r��Itin
f I�IL �_ Inn TIIIIIII � - 21� I
"All mill I � -lI7uui�q—qy -rip rq,
mm Innll�_ 1 n m
• �� I�I�IIIIIIIIIIIIII�,
CHll
l� D
............
.� = ■
WA
9ON, r
�� . ,I-III-i 1•La�.., Iq =➢I �Q:II f� Y p-
W •�1.,-,•ul1 _ u -u c`I-75�p uri; � =uuoi
�' _ r - I '==_"' el iii■iiiii=9e nuun►V-1'�-
unl `�- IIIIq" i•nr•
�•-ilnrnnunl, - -�" nw l....11m•nw mum=per •_�„►.�;��„ul�n�
IU .'.n. I In, I I':I'.IIIIIII Illlfni MlII11,f1.���1a !-_
..,� •�.pl►5_IIII�' — ���I°Iilllun Illlilllll,'� ,,riu1a-=-��.:Jlu.
+,c ' +pri,H." pnr. ♦ '.� �"'.1.D�pri f,11G'."T"a,::" _ �J
�l�: -� {,. i •!u111iU'.,7.��`����: a ♦ - �a�•aNa�Sri �Nyun'.'.:::.:•.:m p:�in..
♦ irµtd ♦,ry\.'i'iii�'...•• ► I . ♦.Iy�:�,♦a ♦ Y♦•/uun 7_- �rmn
ImN rI�+ ♦ ♦ ^ I` �iii"i r1 +V � ♦ �-1-1 /Iun,u
,uu,t�I a♦ � l►�Huw=_'- p �I�IIni1 �1'�1 n..r'. .♦ yifl,nnn.::::::����:A3? Zy�::n n
.�J�1•�,11111•:rr�:`• II1I1111n:.pp n,iri�__: .. ip Lnn,If r.�:_ 9„nlf■IIIOIIIIIuu �•�:
�I•In 11{r.,a•r -- U—...._�_IIIIIM� I llmlu`. II n
�IIIII,lfnnll�ll�.��..� �Illllln nn
�numl ull►_ unnl '-WE-II--rr
mlll nw l_
:illllln,.� ' ��nnl = -- - 3 ♦,ulnlp+Il,m un11!Ilnnm=;����,II.I"-= =1�-.._...
IIIIIIIUy •1■�11,1 1111111 - �"_ , , In,I III
nmu��Ilrw uum uuum- - -Ia.uunlin Inmm�nwuui�=-~ I
uiu Ilu��ln 1.11 III _ - _
, I-
III. APPLICANT INFORMATION
A. Applicant:
Hugh Lucas,Fulmer Lucas Engineering,LLC—2002 Richard Jones Rd., Ste. B200,Nashville, TN
37215
B. Owner:
West Valley Medical Center, Inc. —c/o HCA Healthcare, Inc. One Park Plaza,Nashville,TN 37203
C. Agent/Representative:
Same as Applicant
IV. NOTICING
Planning&Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Newspaper Notification 11/16/2022 11/27/2022
Radius notification mailed to
properties within 300 feet 11/10/2022 11/28/2022
Public hearing notice sign posted
11/18/2022 12/2/2022
on site
Nextdoor posting 11/10/2022 12/2/2022
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 Appliant proposes to develop a hospital with an emergency room and medical offices on this site.
This use was conceptually approved with the annexation for Prescott Ridge subdivision. This site is
located near a major arterial intersection,W. Chinden Blvd. and N. McDermott Rd. and the future SH-
16/Chinden Blvd. interchange.
Transportation:
ACHD's Master Street Map(MSM) depicts a residential collector street along the eastern boundary of
this.A collector street(Rustic Oak Way) is planned with development along the east boundary
consistent with the MSM.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES(https:llwww.meridiancity.or /�compplan):
Goals,Objectives, &Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be
applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics):
• "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and
urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for
public facilities and services."(3.03.03F)
Page 4
City water and sewer services are available and can be extended by the developer with development
in accord with UDC 11-3A-21.
• "Ensure that quality fire protection,rescue and emergency medical services are provided within
Meridian."(4.11.03)
The proposed hospital with an emergency room and medical offices will provide much needed
medical services in north Meridian.
• "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 an 8-foot tall solid CMU wall and a 30 foot wide densely
landscaped buffer along the west property boundary adjacent to existing residential uses to assist in
screening and buffering the proposed use.
• "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land."
(3.07.00)
The proposed emergency room associated with the hospital is located approximately 460 feet away
from the residential neighborhood to the west, which should minimize conflicts between land uses.
• "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.
• "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 as proposed.
• "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)(Prescott Ridge—Hospital Portion H—
2022-0047,Inst. #2021-132724))is proposed to to update the phasing plan and modify the provision
requiring noise abatement to be provided along W. Chinden Blvd./State Highway 20-26 to allow for
alternative compliance.
The existing phasing plan is for the overall Prescott Ridge development,which is being developed
separately from the proposed development.A phasing plan for the subject property is proposed to
replace the existing plan. The emergency room and perimeter buffers along the north,west and south
boundaries of the site are proposed to develop with the first phase;the medical office building with retail
and restaurant uses is proposed to develop with the second phase; and the hospital is proposed to develop
with the third and final phase of development. The collector street(Rustic Oak Way) and associated
street buffer will be constructed by the developer of Prescott Ridge Subdivision with their first phase of
development. See phasing plans in Sections V111.A &B. Staff is supportive of the proposed change to the
Page 5
phasing plan that includes more detailed phasing for the subject property and separation from the
residential portion of the development under separate development.
DA provision#5.1.3 states, "Noise abatement shall be provided in the form of a berm or a berm and wall
combination parallel to W. Chinden Blvd./SH 2O-26 constructed in accord with the standards listed in
UDC 11-3H-4D."The Applicant proposes a modification to the provision as follows, "Noise abatement
shall be provided in the form of a berm or a berm and wall combination parallel to W. Chinden Blvd./SH
20-26 constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D or by an alternative compliance
proposal as defined in UDC 11-31-14D.4."Staff is amenable to the proposed change as UDC 11-3H-
4D.4 states, "The Director may approve alternative compliance as set forth in Chapter 5,
"Administration", of this title where the Applicant has a substitute noise abatement proposal in accord
with ITD standards and prepared by a qualified sound engineer."
B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT(CUP)
A CUP is proposed for an 11,241 square foot emergency medical facility on 2.4-acres of land,ultimately
planned to be part of a hospital campus, on a total of 16.46-acres of land in the C-G zoning district as
required by UDC Table 11-2B-2. The emergency facility is proposed in Phase 1 and the hospital is
proposed in Phase 3,per the phasing plan in Section VIII.B. An application for a modification to the
CUP will be required to be submitted for approval of the hospital.
Dimensional standards: Compliance with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 is
required.
Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3):
The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-22,as follows: Staff's
comments in italics.
A. If the hospital provides emergency care,the location shall have direct access on an arterial street.
The City Council previously deemed the access for the emergency room via Rustic Oak, a
collector street, meets the intent of this standard as noted in the DA (provision#5.1.10).
B. Accessory retail uses including,but not limited to,retail shops, food or beverage service, and
personal service shops,may be allowed if designed to serve patrons of the hospital and their
visitors only.
C. No hospital shall be located within one thousand(1,000)feet of the following uses: Explosive
manufacturing or storage, flammable substance storage, foundry, freight and truck terminal,
manufacture or processing of hazardous chemicals,power plant, food product storage and
processing plant.
Access: Access is proposed from two (2)access driveways via Rustic Oak Way, a future collector street
along the east boundary of the site; an emergency only access driveway is proposed from the west via
Serenity Ln., a private street. Direct access via Chinden Blvd./SH 2O-26 is prohibited.
An access easement is needed for the proposed emergency access via Serenity Ln.If an easement
isn't attainable, a minimum 20-foot wide emergency access driveway constructed to Fire Dept.
standards shall be provided to the south to N.Backcountry Pl.between Lots 5 and 7,Block 12 in
Prescott Ridge Subdivision No.3; and a barrier prohibiting access shall be erected at the west end
of the frontage road.The frontage road may be extended in the future if/when the property to the west
redevelops. Emergency access is not required with the emergency center;however, it will be required
with the hospital if the overall area of the building exceeds 124,000 square feet or 3+stories in height. If
an easement is obtained prior to submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance for the
emergency center, a copy of the recorded easement should be submitted to the Planning Division;
otherwise,access should be depicted on the site plan from the south with the expansion of the
Page 6
hospital.Note: The Peregrine Heights subdivision plat note#6 states all lots except Lots 18 and 19 have
an interest in Lot 10, the private street lot for Serenity Ln.; note#7 states direct access to W. Chinden
Blvd. is limited to Lots 18 and 19—therefore, the subject property has no interest or right to access
Serenity Ln. unless an access easement is obtained.
Sidewalks: A detached sidewalk is required along W. Chinden Blvd.per UDC 11-3A-17. Because the
Pathways Master Plan depicts a 10-foot wide pathway along Chinden, Staff recommends a 10-foot wide
detached pathway is provided within the street buffer in lieu of a sidewalk.
Pathways: Ten-foot(10')wide pathways are proposed within the street buffer along Chinden and within
the land use buffers to residential uses along the west and south boundaries of the site in accord with the
Pathways Master Plan. These pathways are required to be placed in a 14-foot wide public
pedestrian easement.An easement for such should be submitted to the Planning Division for
Council approval and recordation prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed
use.
Landscaping: A 35-foot wide street buffer is required to be provided on this site along W. Chinden
Blvd./SH 2O-26, an entryway corridor, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. The street
buffer is measured from the back of curb;where the transportation authority is anticipating future
widening of the street,the width of the buffer is measured from the ultimate curb location. There is a
large expanse of land within the right-of-way along Chinden that can be counted toward the street buffer
requirement if landscaped per the standards in UDC 11-3B-7C.3; landscaping may be allowed through a
license agreement with ITD. Because this is an entryway corridor, enhanced landscaping should be
installed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.3.A revised landscape plan should be
submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application that reflects compliance with
standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C,including enhanced landscaping along the entryway corridor
(i.e.Chinden Blvd).
Alternative Compliance is requested to the landscape standards in UDC 11-3B-7C.3,which require a
minimum density of one(1)tree per 35 linear feet along with shrubs, lawn or other vegetative
groundcover,to be installed within the street buffer along W. Chinden Blvd. On the western portion of
the site,the buffer area is constrained where the emergency access road is proposed to the north of
Peregrine Heights Subdivision. In this area,the trees are proposed on the south side of the driveway.
Because driveways are an allowed impervious surface in street buffers and the required number of trees
are proposed on the south side of the driveway, Staff sees no purpose for the request as the proposed
landscaping appears to meet UDC standards;thus, Staff recommends denial of the request.
A 25-foot wide buffer is required to adjacent residential uses to the west and south, landscaped per the
standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C as proposed. A 30-foot wide buffer is proposed with an 8-foot tall
wall,landscaped with a mix of evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs and lawn,which should result in a
barrier that allows trees to touch at the time of maturity.
Irrigation: All landscape areas shall be served with an automatic underground irrigation system that
complies with the performance specifications listed in UDC 11-3B-6B(this includes the native dryland
seeded areas within the right-of-way along Chinden Blvd.).
Noise Abatement: Because a noise sensitive use(i.e. a hospital) is proposed adjacent to W. Chinden
Blvd./State Highway(SH)20-26,noise abatement in the form of a berm or a berm and wall combination
is required to be provided within the street buffer along the state highway in accord with the standards
listed in UDC 11-3H-4D. The top of the berm or berm/wall is required to be a minimum of 10-feet
higher than the elevation at the centerline of the highway. The Applicant requests alternative compliance
to this standard to not provide noise abatment along the entire frontage of the site adjacent to the state
highway.Per UDC 11-3H-4D.4, the Director may approve alternative compliance as setforth in UDC
Page 7
11-5 where the Applicant has a substitute noise abatement proposal in accord with ITD standards and
prepared by a qualified sound engineer.
The Applicant states that strict conformance to these standards is not possible due to physical constraints
present on the property. The emergency vehicle access from Serenity Lane via W. Chinden Blvd./SH 20-
26 from the west is required to be a minimum of 20-feet wide—at its narrowest point it's only 20.9-feet
wide,which is not sufficient to accommodate construction of the emergency access and a berm or
berm/wall combination,as required. There is room for landscaping within ITD's right-of-way(ROW)
along Chinden Blvd./SH 2O-26 with a license agreement;however,ITD does not allow walls within their
ROW. Additionally,the first 20-feet of the property south of the northern property boundary is
encumbered with a 20-foot wide ITD easement(Inst. #2015-010191)which further constrains the
property. The Applicant states this is an irrigation easement for a waste ditch that served this site;
if no longer needed,the Applicant should pursue abandonment of this easement. To mitigate the
noise impacts to the building/use,the structure is proposed to be set back over 400-feet south of the
northern right-of-way line along the state highway. The Applicant states this setback provides significant
reduction in noise levels(even when accounting for future traffic growth)and brings the noise levels to
within national hospital design standards which require no noise abatement and meets the UDC
requirements' intended purpose.
A Site Noise Study and Barrier Wall Evaluation was performed by a licensed acoustical engineer and
submitted with this application. Their findings state that the current and predicted future noise levels at
the site meet the 2018 FGI Minimal category at both the proposed hospital fagade and outdoor use area.
The Minimal category indicates that mitigation is not needed at outdoor patient seating areas and that the
fagade could be constructed using typical means and materials with mechanical ventilation.
Staff is amenable to the Applicant's proposal to located the building 400+feet to the south of the state
highway to lessen the noise impacts as proposed;however,Staff recommends a minimum 3-foot tall
berm with no less than 4:1 slope is provided within the street buffer for aesthetic reasons(i.e. to
screen the parking area) since the site is located along an entryway corridor into the City, consistent
with UDC 11-3B-7C.3f.
Parking: Off-street vehicle parking is required per the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6B.1. Based on
the 11,241 square foot facility, a minimum of 22 parking spaces are required.A total of 47 spaces are
poposed, in excess of UDC standards.
Bicycle parking is required per the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6G. Based on 47 vehicle parking
spaces, a minimum of two(2)bicycle spaces are required.A total of three(3) spaces are proposed,in
excess of UDC standards. Bicycle parking facilities should comply with the location and design
standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C.
Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations
were submitted for the proposed structure as shown in Section VIII.E. Building materials consist of
EIFS,thin stone veneer and corrugated roof screen wall panels. Final design is required to comply with
the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual.
VII. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed modification to the existing Development Agreement and
Conditional Use Permit per the provisions included in Section IX in accord with the Findings in Section
X. The Director has conditionally approved the request for Alternative Compliance to the noise
abatement standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D; and denied the request for Alternative Compliance to the
landscape standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C for the reasons noted above in Section VI,per the Findings
in Section X.
Page 8
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on December 1, 2022. At the
public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject CUP request.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing_
a. In favor: Nancy Hunseeker
b. In opposition:None
c. Commenting: Cory Coltrin
d. Written testimony: Val Stack&Paul How
e. Staff presenting gpplication: Bill Parsons
f. Other Staff commenting on application: None
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony
a. An access easement hasn't been granted via Serenity Ln., a private street, for the
proposed emergency access at the northwest corner of the site; therefore, emergency
access should be provided from the south from the cul-de-sac in Prescott Ridge
Subdivision.
b. If a frontage road isn't provided to Serenity Ln.,there would be adequate room to
construct a sound attenuation berm and wall and the Applicant could comply with UDC
standards for noise abatement for the hospital.
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
a. None
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. None
5. Outstandin issue(s) for City Council:
a. Condition#8 in Section IX.A incorrectly states a 4-foot tall berm is required. It should
be a 3-foot tall berm consistent with condition#3b—Staff requests Council make this
correction.
Page 9
VIII. EXHIBITS
A. Existing Phasing Plan for Overall Development(Prescott Ridge)
PHASE BUILDABLE
�f—G. Cv p E' LOTS
�r 95
2 44
T 3 41
y 4 43
5 41
6 37
PHASE 1 7 39
8 46
S 14 O a Z
f TA
BUIABLE 370
LOTS a
f
I
R• p$ $p�� $$p$p.L
h7nPyaSF R � _
m�``: r e EN OI IV E El INO
•� Viyn
PHASE 3 1 OF 1!
I
f HASE 1
o sm ••�
Pi
Page 10
B. Proposed Phasing Plan for Hospital Medical Center Site
W.CWNUEN BLVD.
................ ..................................................................
I —n.............!,........... .._.c._:=1.2sk":.°Cti.. —— -
b-u„ }ITIIIIiIIIJ1111fPllll -Milli.Will. G
"a Y� �a " � PHASE2MOBMETAl11
� n" n.c ra[ss � _ -_(^`� �I � RES7Rl1RAN7 -• cre aursrrr.rm a
Q$'Z W,
2 m
w
p
eLI11WlU��JJ1L1711L......�11I.L"J1LUf. IIIIIIIIIf;lUALUl1L..0
_ a
.(G............. —H gi MRANb iwr WRI 00 ¢
11 `„/ P£RiMETER SUFFERS _�
9G� �PHA$E3HdSPIrnPLs�In-�• _ i y�
� NG
mrc % r�o = yE LL�i10'r[�YFM
E
a05 mmywAv nNE-ATS.IACENT
iAND MING TO BE CON3TRUCTEOEY
F oTRRRR es PARTEP
IIIIII-'IlILLI llilllll fflllll��llflllllll �—
N�„��'cennllr,�� 1 1 1LLl:JJ1L1
e�aN M o Ex.2 n
o�
■ o Aso 30Q aso
[��yJ PIan—:1'=15[Y
Page 11
C. Site Plan(dated: 9/29/2022)
------ ------------------------------- - ---------- -------------------------- ------
I LaRo
VVEST VA LLEY ER MER DIANEa
HCA-W�—DVIA—V AN
—5—T—NDEM—D
4 f MERIDIAN 11-0114f 6
nI
------------- ----------- ----------
------------- ------
----------
-------------------
II
:-- -- ------------------
,7 i ---------V------------------------------------
------ ------------------- --------RAvlxcieeex uxowAn
I.SITE
LAYOUT PLAN
C-1.00
Page 12
D. Landscape Plan(dated: 7/22/2022)—full plan set
r ——`WEST CHINDEN BLVD.--t- 4
f
6 — :
771.
l�le
1 1 1 VICINITY MAP ;
HEFT L1.1 i 1 w DEVELOPMENT FEATURES mmm
I'
1 SHEET L1.2 1 SHEET L1.3 Iw a
d..
Dj
za 1 1 & LANDSCAPING INFORMATION
LL,i ® 1 1 ' 41
I 1 1 7
w 1. J ' m
= I 1 1 1 = 1 e ® Z
— ' ----------- '
C]�
SHEET L1.4 4 ' +----SHEET L1.5---' SHEET L1.6- --
''"!SHEET L1.7 i ', SHEET L1.8 i SHEET 1-1.9 1 z "r
' [
--------------------------------------
w
77
--oa(D •
--- -----------A-------------------'------------------ • 0
OVERALL LANDSCAPE PLAN
DISCLAIMER: 0
LANDSCAPE SET SHEET INDEX
SHEETS L1-7-Ll 9 DETAILED LANDSCAPE PLANS- R
SHEETL2.ULANDSCAPE NOTES AND DETAILS. w «a ., µ.. .o.. L1.D
A B C E F G H J K L M N 0 P
Page 13
E. Elevations(date: 4/27/2022)
--� -� - _ ------- — 0 ms
e�
`1
EAST ELIVATION
_ _ (y�
- 1=_ _ -_-'—a 1= PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
., ra
eL e f
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WESTVALLEYER-
��....®..�...�w.,a,e��,.,a.
n SOUTH ELEVATION
eg r i
/3 W EST ELEVATION
_ 33 .. . i _ �: - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
4� �3 �ry i❑i I mil 3
I
4 NORTH ELEVATION ' A201
Page 14
IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
Development Agreement Modification:
1. The phasing plan included in Section VIII.B shall replace the original phasing plan in the existing
Development Agreement(DA)(Inst. #2021-132724.).
2. Provision#5.1.3 in the existing agreement shall be modified as follows, "Noise abatement shall be
provided in the form of a berm or a berm and wall combination parallel to W. Chinden Blvd./SH 20-
26 constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D or by an alternative compliance
proposal as defined in UDC 11-3114D.4."
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:
3. The site and/or landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance shall be revised
as follows:
a. Depict the location and a detail of the bicycle rack that complies with the location and design
standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C.
b. Depict a minimum 35-foot wide street buffer along W. Chinden Blvd. with landscaping in
accord with the updated standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.3. Enhanced landscape design
features shall be provided within the street buffer along Chinden Blvd., an entryway corridor, in
accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.3f, including a minimum 3-foot tall berm with no less than 4:1 slope
to screen the parking area. Include calculations that demonstrate compliance with the standards.
Landscaping may be allowed within the right-of-way along Chinden Blvd. with a license
agreement with ITD.
c. If an easement for emergency access via Serenity Lane is not attainable prior to submittal of the
Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the proposed emergency center, a barrier
prohibiting access shall be erected at the west end of the frontage road. If an access easement is
obtained, submit a copy of the recorded easement to the Planning Division.Emergency access is
not required with the emergency center; however, it will be required with the hospital expansion
if the overall area of the building exceeds 124,000 square feet or 3+ stories in height.
4. A 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division for the
proposed multi-use pathways within the site along the north,west and south property boundaries,
prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed use.
5. The Applicant should pursue abandonment of the 20-foot wide ITD easement(Inst. #2015-010191)
that runs along the northern boundary of this site and constrains the property if the easement is no
longer needed.
6. All landscape areas shall be served with an automatic underground irrigation system that complies
with the performance specifications listed in UDC 11-3B-6B(this includes the native dryland seeded
areas within the right-of-way along Chinden Blvd.).
7. Comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-22 for hospitals.
8. The Applicant's request for Alternative Compliance to the noise abatement standards listed in UDC
11-3H-4D was approved by the Director with the condition a minimum 4-foot tall berm is installed
within the street buffer along W. Chinden Blvd.
Page 15
9. An application for a modification to the Conditional Use Permit shall be submitted for approval of
the hospital prior to the third phase of development.
10. Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Administrative Design Review applications shall be submitted
and approved for the proposed use prior to submittal of a building permit application.
11. The conditional use permit is valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise
approved by the City. During this time,the Applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord
with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval,and
acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the
ground as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6.A time extension may be requested as set forth in UDC 11-5B-
6F.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.1 Extend 8" water main to area of hydrant and then install the 6" lateral and hydrant. See mark up
on sheet C-3.0. This would also allot the fire line and water meter runs to be shorter.
1.2 Both the fire hydrant lateral and the Fire line are called out as "Fire Lines". Call them out
differently as the fire hydrant lateral is public and requires an easement where the fire line is
private and does not require an easement.
1.3 The fire hydrant lateral has a tee.No other item can connect to an 6" fire hydrant lateral except a
single hydrant. So tee would not be allowed.
1.4 Provide a 20'easement for the water line, fire hydrant lateral, and service up to the meter.
Extend easement 10'beyond the hydrant and water meter.
1.5 Subject to the Oaks Lift Station and Pressure Sewer reimbursement agreement.
1.6 Sewer will come from the Prescott Ridge Development to the South.
1.7 Ensure no sewer services cross infiltration trenches.
1.8 To and through must be brought to parcels SO428120750, SO428120715, and S0428120651.
1.9 Any unused stubs must be abandoned per City requirements.
1.10 A future install agreement for Chinden Blvd will be required for the development of this
property in the amount of$140,000.00.
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.
Page 16
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 I"map with bearings and distances(marked EXHIBIT B)for
review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO
NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be
submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval.
2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface
or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point
connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,
the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to
prior to receiving development plan approval.
2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat
by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation
and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC.
2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals,or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting,
crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per
UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207
and any other applicable law or regulation.
2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service
per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering
Department at(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used
for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of
Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at(208)334-2190.
2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City
Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures
and inspections(208)375-5211.
2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,
road base approved by the Ada County Highway District 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.
Page 17
2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting
that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office.
2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC I I-12-3H.
2.17 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.
2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a
minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure
that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above.
2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or
drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district
or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed
in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a
certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project.
2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per
the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and
approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the
project.
2.21 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.
2.22 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.
2.23 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. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID)
https://weblink.m eridia n c i ty.org/WeUink/Doc View.aspx?id=2 78 5 3 9&db id=0&rep o=Meridia n City
Page 18
F. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=276952&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
X. FINDINGS
A. Conditional Use Permit(UDC 11-513-6E)
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 is large enough to accommodate the proposed use
and dimensional and development regulations of the C-G district(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 consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is
allowed as a conditional use per UDC Table 11-2B-2 in the C-G zoning district.
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 proposed design of the development, construction, operation and
maintenance should be compatible with the mix of other uses planned for and existing in this area
and with the intended character of the area and that such uses will not adversely change the
character of the area.
4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely
affect other property in the vicinity.
The Commission finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the
proposed use should not adversely affect other property in the area.
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 essential public services are available to this property and that the use will
be adequately served by these facilities.
B. Alternative Compliance(UDC 11-511-5):
In order to grant approval of an alternative compliance application,the Director shall determine the
following:
In regard to the request for alternative compliance to the standards listed in UDC 11-311-41):
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 not feasible for the
western portion of the site where site constraints exist north of Peregrine Heights Subdivision,-
Page 19
however; the Director finds it would be feasible on the eastern portion of the site outside of the ITD
easement area.
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 a building setback of
over 400 feet from the state highway provides an equal means for meeting the requirement.
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.
In regard to the request for alternative compliance to the standards listed in UDC 11-313-7C:
1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements is not feasible; OR
The Director finds strict adherence to the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C is feasible.
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 trees on the south side
of the emergency access driveway does not conflict with the required landscape standards;
therefore, alterative compliance is not needed.
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 complies with UDC standards as-is—
alternative compliance is not needed.
Page 20
W IDIAN�
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Sessions Parkway (H-2022-0046) by KM Engineering, LLP.
located at 2700 N. Eagle Rd.
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0046Sessions
A. Request: Development Agreement Modification on the existing Development Agreement
(Inst.#104129529) to remove the subject property from the agreement in order to enter into a
new Development Agreement for the proposed project.B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of
5 building lots on 5.32 acres of land in the C-G zoning district with a request for City Council
approval of an access via N. Eagle Rd./SH-55.
STAFF REPORT C�I
w IDIAN --
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O
HEARING December 13,2022 Legend
DATE:
leiPFnjet Lorca i�or
TO: Mayor&City Council i INI
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner _ -
208-884-5533 - -'
SUBJECT: H-2022-0046
Sessions Parkway—MDA,PP
---- E
LOCATION: 2700 N. Eagle Rd.,in the NW 1/4 of EB [
Section 4,T.3N.,R.IE. --
Parcel#S1104233650 ±.
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Modification to the existing Development Agreement(DA) (Inst. #2017-0121321,re-recorded as
Inst. #2022-065403)to remove the commercial portion of the property from the agreement and enter
into a new DA for the proposed project with an updated conceptual development plan; and
Preliminary Plat consisting of five(5)building lots on 5.32 acres of land in the C-G zoning district
with a request for City Council approval of a right-in/right-out driveway access via N. Eagle Rd./SH-
55.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details Page
Acreage 5.32
Existing/Proposed Zoning C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial)
Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R)
Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/undeveloped land
Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial pads with a fuel sales facility
Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 5 building/0 common
Phasing Plan(#of phases) None(to be constructed in one phase)
Number of Residential Units(type 0
of units)
Physical Features(waterways, The Finch Lateral runs along the southern boundary of the
hazards,flood plain,hillside) site within an 80'wide easement(40' from centerline each
side)as depicted on the plat.
Neighborhood meeting date: 3/23/22
Pagel
Description Details Page
History(previous approvals) AZ-03-021;AZ-15-012;MDA-15-011;DA Inst.#2022-
065403;A-2020-0115 (PBA ROS#12423)
B. Community Metrics
Description Details Page
Ada County Highway
District
• Staff report(yes/no) Yes
• Requires ACHD No
Commission Action
es/no
West Ada School District No comment have been received.
Police Department No comment have been received.
Fire Department No comments have been received.
C. Project Area Maps
Future Land Use Map Aerial Map
� F
Legend 7lq 0 Legend
13.=ro.e
11+kliaCtT9-. ff ' -
_ Co ial ,
NuGffi�e Hal
ILULLU
{
lu
Page 2
Zoning Map Planned Development Map
Legend '1 R-3 0
Legend _--
Project Luca?--- + Prcjent Luca-ror
WL
C-1 City Limit
— P1onnL-d ParoeB 11
17 R. =R- 6—R _ -
R-: R1 C-G R-8 R1 ¢ _
R'1-�15
RUTR , R% _
RUT
R1 R, 9.. Rl R � I
R1 R-4 i-O R-44 EB
RUT _
RU7
C- 01
A. Applicant:
Stephanie Hopkins,KM Engineering, LLP—5725 N. Discovery Way, Boise, ID 83713
B. Owners:
Meridian Investments, LLC—74 E 500 S, Ste. 200,Bountiful,UT 84010-0000
C. Representative:
Same as Applicant
III. NOTICING
Planning&Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Notification published in
9/21/2022 11/27/2022
newspaper
Notification mailed to property
owners within 300 feet 9/15/2022 11/13/2022
Applicant posted public hearing
9/21/2022 12/2/2022
notice on site
Nextdoor posting 9/15/2022 11/28/2022
IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS(Comprehensive Plan)
Land Use: The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates this
property, and many of the surrounding properties in this vicinity along the Eagle Road corridor, as
Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R). The purpose of this 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.For example, an employment center should have supporting retail uses; a retail center should
Page 3
have supporting residential uses as well as supportive neighborhood and community services. The
standards for the MU-R designation provide an incentive for larger public and quasi-public uses
where they provide a meaningful and appropriate mix to the development. The developments are
encouraged to be designed consistent with the conceptual MU-R plan depicted in Figure 3D of the
Comprehensive Plan as shown below.
FIGURE 3D= 11 TXED UrsE REGI{ANAL C[IIVC"EPT DimmR.l►m
5�gk fantNy
fdPsldlnti�l
OftiW r I I � �� ! r•� ! 1 � I 1 � � i
H04my \ Rptall or
12 LOGId lu Ini m
� , � k�'ssldtntlal
orMce
DMIMJ LW_ � - ;
Head Mrs _ }}. 6 O a, # 9
J� , . .p ° _ 1n[egrate�l
v y } J PwraArfa
�� �r � � � � 11 - � �. .a- �• �le[ail
Arlerlal f'"d
The applicant has submitted two (2)conceptual development plans. The first proposed conceptual
development plan depicts five(5)commercial building pads, including one for a fuel sales facility
and one for a drive-through establishment,totaling 32,625 square feet(s.f)of building area. The
second conceptual plan also depicts the fuel sales facility and drive-through, eliminates the three
commercial pad sites in favor of a 51,670,4-story hotel. The applicant desires to have two concept
plans attached to the new development agreement to allow for greater flexibility. Additional uses may
develop on the site as allowed by UDC Table 11-2B-2 in the C-G district.Multi-family residential
uses(i.e. Village Apartments A-2021-0231)by the same developer have been approved and are in the
development process on the parcel directly to the east.
Vehicle interconnectivity is proposed between the commercial and residential uses to the east at the
north and south boundaries of the site. Safe pedestrian access should also be provided between the
commercial uses within the site and to the future residential uses.
The proposed development should provide a variety of commercial and retail uses in close proximity
to residential uses. Kleiner City Park exists within a 1/4 mile of this site to the southeast,which is
considered a Civic use. The site is located along N. Eagle Rd./SH-55 within 1/4 of a mile of a major
arterial intersection at E.Fairview Ave. and N. Eagle Rd.Although not anchored by uses that have a
regional draw,the existing and proposed uses contribute to the variety of uses within this overall MU-
R designated area as desired and should provide services to nearby residents.
Originally, staff raised concerns that the proposed commercial development was not integrated
with the future residential development to the east,nor was there a common usable gathering
Page 4
area with a plaza or green space as desired in mixed use designated areas.Further,the rear of
the fuel facility/convenience store faces the backage road and the rear of Buildings C,D and E
face the residential development which creates a wall effect. This concern is less relevant with
the second concept plan because the building placement is farther from the shared property
line.Both plans have been updated to include some form of open space as desired by the Plan
and the applicant has provided pedestrian circulation plans to demonstrate pedestrian
movements between the commercial and future multi-family development to the east,which
more closely aligns with the development guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan for Mixed Use
and MU-R designated areas as noted below.However,with concept plan 1,labeled as EX1.0,
some or all of the buildings along the eastern boundary should be rotated and/or relocated and
a shared plaza area/green space added to a more central location within the development for
better integration,including a central pathway connection to the open space and front pad sites.
If the site develops consistent with concept plan 2,staff recommends that the applicant
construct a 5-foot sidewalk on the east boundary and provide a decorative crosswalk across the
drive aisle of the multi-family portion of the development to enhance pedestrian connectivity.
In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in all Mixed-Use
areas: (Staff's comments in italics)
• A mixed-use project should include at least three types of land uses. Exceptions may be
granted for smaller sites on a case-by-case basis. This land use is not intended for high
density residential development alone.
The larger overall mixed-use designated area includes a mix of residential, commercial,
office and civic uses. This project may only include commercial(i.e. retail, restaurant, etc)
and residential uses (Village Apartments) as proposed, which may be adequate because it's a
smaller site.
• Where appropriate,higher density and/or multifamily residential development is encouraged
for projects with the potential to serve as employment destination centers and when the
project is adjacent to US 20/26, SH-55, SH-16 or SH-69.
Multi family residential uses (i.e. Village Apartments) were approved on the parcel directly
to the east, which provide housing options for the commercial and employment uses along the
Eagle Road/SH-55 corridor.
• Mixed Use areas are typically developed under a master or conceptual plan; during an
annexation or rezone request, a development agreement will typically be required for
developments with a Mixed-Use designation.
A new conceptual development plan is proposed to replace the existing plan in the
development agreement approved with the annexation.
• In developments where multiple commercial and/or office buildings are proposed,the
buildings should be arranged to create some form of common,usable area, such as a plaza or
green space.
The proposed conceptual development plan does include common usable area but it is not
central to the development and is located along the southern drive aisle.
• The site plan should depict a transitional use and/or landscaped buffering between
commercial and existing low-or medium-density residential development.
No low-or medium-density residential uses abut this site; however, a minimum 25 foot wide
buffer, landscaped per the standards in UDC 11-3B-9C, is required along the eastern
boundary of the site in the C-G district adjacent to future residential uses.
Page 5
• Community-serving facilities such as hospitals, clinics,churches, schools,parks, daycares,
civic buildings, or public safety facilities are expected in larger mixed-use developments.
No community-servingfacilities are proposed with this development; however, these uses do
exist within a fairly close proximity to the site and this is a smaller development.
• Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places including but not
limited to parks,plazas, outdoor gathering areas,open space, libraries, and schools are
expected; outdoor seating areas at restaurants do not count.
Open space and plaza areas have been added to both concept plans.
• Mixed use areas should be centered around spaces that are well-designed public and
quasi-public centers of activity.Spaces should be activated and incorporate permanent
design elements and amenities that foster a wide variety of interests ranging from
leisure to play.These areas should be thoughtfully integrated into the development and
further placemaking opportunities considered.
Specific details for the integrated plaza areas have not been provided The applicant should
provide an exhibit that demonstrates compliance with this goal.
• All mixed-use projects should be accessible to adjacent neighborhoods by both vehicles and
pedestrians. Pedestrian circulation should be convenient and interconnect different land use
types. Vehicle connectivity should not rely on arterial streets for neighborhood access.
The proposed development is accessible to the adjacent future residential development to the
east(i.e. Village Apartments) by vehicle via two (2)driveways, one at north end and one at
the south end of the site. Separate pedestrian walkways should also be provided for
pedestrian safety that provides a connection to the multi-use pathway along Eagle Rd. and
between buildings within the commercial development. The applicant has provided an
exhibit that demonstrates how pedestrian movements are achieved through the
development. Staff recommends additional pedestrian connections as noted above.
• A mixed-use project should serve as a public transit location for future park-and-ride lots,bus
stops, shuttle bus stops and/or other innovative or alternative modes of transportation.
Public transit isn't available in this vicinity.
• Alleys and roadways should be used to transition from dissimilar land uses, and between
residential densities and housing types.
The three (3) eastern building pads back up to a drive aisle with a row of parking on either
side associated with the multi family development.
• Because of the parcel configuration within Old Town, development is not subject to the
Mixed-Use standards listed herein.
This guideline is not applicable as the property is not in Old Town.
In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in MU-R areas:
• Development should generally comply with the general guidelines for development in all
Mixed-Use areas.
See analysis above.
• Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 10%of the development area at gross
densities ranging from 6 to 40 units/acre.
Page 6
Between this site and the adjacent site to the east being developed by the same developer,
residential uses exceed 10%of the development area at a gross overall density of 20.12
units/acre.
• There is neither a minimum nor maximum imposed on non-retail commercial uses such as
office, clean industry, or entertainment uses.
The Applicant is unsure at this point what commercial uses will develop on this site other
than a fuel sales facility and convenience store and a drive-through establishment.
• Retail commercial uses should comprise a maximum of 50%of the development area.
To ensure retail commercial uses don't exceed 50% of the development area and for a
transition in uses,Staff recommends the concept plan is revised to depict non-retail
commercial, office and/or civic uses for a minimum of 50% of the development area
between the residential and retail commercial uses. The plans have not been updated to
reflect this request however, the second concept plan does depict a hotel site which could
limit the amount of retail that could develop on the site. The new DA should restrict the
amount of retail on this site unless Commission and Council find this development
shouldn't be further restricted because this property is part of a larger MU-R designated
area.
Where the development proposes public and quasi-public uses to support the development,the
developer may be eligible for additional area for retail development(beyond the allowed 50%),
based on the ratios below:
• For land that is designated for a public use, such as a library or school,the developer is
eligible for a 2:1 bonus. That is to say, if there is a one-acre library site planned and
dedicated,the project would be eligible for two additional acres of retail development.
• For active open space or passive recreation areas, such as a park,tot-lot, or playfield,the
developer is eligible for a 2:1 bonus. That is to say, if the park is 10 acres in area,the site
would be eligible for 20 additional acres of retail development.
• For plazas that are integrated into a retail project,the developer would be eligible for a
6:1 bonus. Such plazas should provide a focal point(such as a fountain, statue, and water
feature), seating areas, and some weather protection. That would mean that by providing
a half-acre plaza,the developer would be eligible for three additional acres of retail
development.
No public or quasi public uses are proposed with this development. If the concept plan is
revised to include such uses, the developer may be eligible for additional area for retail
development(beyond the allowed 50016).
Sample uses,appropriate in MU-R areas,include: All MU-N and MU-C categories,
entertainment uses,major employment centers, clean industry, and other appropriate
regional-serving most uses. Sample zoning include: R-15,R-40,TN-C, C-G, and M-E. The
proposed commercial/retail/restaurant and fuel sales facility uses are allowed uses in the
existing C-G zone, although they are not "regional serving"uses.
Page 7
The following Comprehensive Plan Policies are also applicable to this development: (Staffs
analysis in italics)
• "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities
and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of
service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F)
City water and sewer service is available and can be extended by the developer with
development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Urban services are available to be provided
upon development.
• "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land."
(3.07.00)
The proposed commercial uses should be compatible with adjacent commercial uses to the
north and south; and with the future multi family residential uses to the east if non-retail,
office and/or civic uses are provided as a buffer and transition in uses as recommended.
• "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 commercial uses and fuel sales facility should provide nearby services and
employment options to the residents of the adjacent multi family developments, reducing
vehicle trips on area roadways.
V. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS UD
A. Development Agreement Modification(MDA):
The Applicant proposes a modification to the existing Development Agreement(DA) for Village
Apartments(AZ-I5-012;MDA-I S-011—DA Inst. #2022-065403)to remove the commercial
portion of the property, consisting of 5.32 acres of land, from the agreement and enter into a new
DA for the proposed project with two(2)updated conceptual development plans.
The existing conceptual development plan depicts three(3)retail/commercial building pads along
the frontage of N. Eagle Road,two(2)of which are drive-through establishments,and one(1)
larger retail building east of the building pads fronting on Eagle Rd. totaling 28,500 square feet
(s.f.). A driveway is depicted at the northeast corner of the site for vehicular connectivity with the
residential development to the east.A driveway is not depicted to the property to the south (fka
Great Wall)because when that property developed, access was not required to be provided to this
property because of the Finch Lateral, a large irrigation facility that separates the two properties.
The properties to the south of the Finch Lateral were to have a backage road along their east
boundaries for access via E. River Valley St.
Since that time,this developer and the property owner to the south have been working together to
construct a backage road between the two properties along Eagle Rd. and the Finch Lateral has
been piped. A new access via Eagle Rd./SH-55 is proposed with this application,which will
replace the existing temporary access on the Great Wall/Copper Canary property,if approved by
the City and ITD. The temporary access was allowed to remain until such time as access became
available from the south via E. River Valley St. If non-residential uses develop on the property to
the south of the Copper Canary(fka Great Wall)property at 3280 E. River Valley St. as currently
entitled,the backage road will extend to E. River Valley St.; however,if residential uses develop
on that property, only an emergency access will be provided from the north to that property per
the development agreement(Copper Canary Inst. #2022-048293).
Page 8
As noted above,the applicant has submitted two (2)conceptual development plans. The first
proposed plan depicts five(5)building pads totaling 32,625 s.f. A fuel sales facility with a
convenience store is proposed on the northwest pad,a drive-through is proposed on the pad
directly to the south, and three(3)other pads are proposed along the east boundary of the site
adjacent to the future multi-family residential development to the east. The second plan still
depicts the fuel sales facility with convenience store and drive-through but in lieu of the three
other pads, a hotel is proposed. As noted above in Section IV, Staff recommends changes to
both concept plans for better integration between uses in accord with the mixed use and
MU-R guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan.
One driveway access is proposed at the north boundary which will serve as a backage road along
Eagle Rd. and will connect to the property to the south. Two(2) driveways to the east are
proposed for interconnectivity with the future residential development. Typically, Staff would
prefer the alignment of the backage road to be more linear and direct but the access points to the
north and south are not in alignment. The"jog"in the roadway will result in traffic calming and
reduced speeds,which is desired, especially if the access via Eagle Rd. is approved which will
intersect the backage road.
A cross-access easement(Inst. #2016-003980)exists with the property to the north for access via
Eagle Road for this property. A reciprocal cross-access easement should also be recorded
granting cross-access between the subject property and the abutting property to the south
(Parcel#51104233802); and the abutting property to the east(Parcel#51104233730).
Copies of the recorded agreements should be submitted to the Planning Division prior to
signature on the final plat by the City Engineer.
Staff has reviewed the provisions of the existing DA and finds provisions#5.If,which requires a
buffer to residential uses;#5.1g,which requires pedestrian connections to be provided between
the residential portion of the site and future commercial development; and#5.1h,which requires
traffic calming to be provided between the residential and commercial development, still apply to
development of the subject property. Therefore, Staff recommends these provisions are carried
over to the new DA along with new provisions as noted herein and in Section VIII.A.
B. Preliminary Plat(PP):
A Preliminary Plat is proposed consisting of five(5)building lots on 5.32 acres of land in the C-
G zoning district.As part of the plat,the Applicant requests City Council approval of an access
via N. Eagle Rd./SH-55, located on the abutting property to the south(Parcel#51104233802).
Consent has been granted from the abutting property owner for this request as part of this
application.
Existing Structures/Site Improvements:
There are no existing structures on this site; the previous structures have been removed.
Dimensional Standards:
Development of the proposed lots is required to comply with the dimensional standards of the C-
G zoning district in UDC Table 11-2B-3.
Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards(UDC 11-6C-3):
Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design and
improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3.
Access(UDC 11-3A-3)
There are two(2)existing accesses on this site associated with the previous residential use(s) and
one(1)temporary access on the abutting property to the south via N. Eagle Rd./SH-55 that are
Page 9
proposed to be removed and replaced with one(1)new right-in/right-out driveway access on the
abutting property to the south as depicted on the plans and as shown below.
Per UDC 11-3H-4,the use of existing approaches via the state highway are not allowed to
continue if the intensity of the use increases. With the change in use to commercial,the intensity
of the use will increase;therefore,the existing approaches are not allowed to remain and must be
abandoned and removed as proposed.New approaches directly accessing a state highway are only
allowed at the section line road and the half mile mark between section line roads,which does not
apply in this case. City Council may consider and approve modifications to the standards in
UDC 11-311-4 upon specific recommendation of the Idaho Transportation Department
(ITD) or if strict adherence is not feasible, as determined by City Council.
ITD issued a letter of acceptance of the revised traffic striping conceptual drawings, dated
November 13,2019, for SH-55/Eagle Rd. from River Valley St. to approximately 1,500 feet
north for the proposed right-in/right-out access via Eagle Rd. The letter states the drawings
address all of ITD's safety concerns but only acknowledges the acceptance of the conceptual plan
—final approval of the proposed access and associated improvements is determined once all
documentation has been provided and the permit is signed. Final approval of the access has not
yet been granted been ITD.
A Traffic Impact StudX(TIS)was submitted for the Village Apartments and Sessions Parkway
developments,prepared by Kittelson&Associates in 2021. The study finds a northbound right-
turn lane on Eagle Road into the site as proposed is warranted and should be constructed as
proposed.
A curb cut exists at the northern boundary of the site for access via Eagle Rd./SH-55 through an
existing vehicular&pedestrian cross-access easement(Inst. #2016-003980). A cross-
access/ingress-egress easement should be provided to the properties to the south and east
for interconnectivity and access.A recorded copy of said agreements should be submitted
prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer.
Page 10
PROPOSED
VEHICLE ACCESS
TO COMMERCIAL
QRNE AISLE
PRIVA I_L?RIVL
I
I �
ExISnNc I '
APPROACHES n
TD 9E
ABANDONED —' 4
� > 4
ii
I
CD I
PROPOSED ' 1 6LOCN 1
CONSOL10AFE0 I+
ACCESS r
POINT TO I
EAGLE ROAD
PRIVA7_4c_ Vf
BACKAGE
ROAD TO
5DllT . •
a
FORMER
Exl5nm GREAT WALL
VEHICLE RESTAURANT
ACCESS TO �' I
EAGLE ROAD
BE CLOSED AL it
Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8):
A multi-use pathway is depicted on the Pathways Master Plan and required by UDC 11-3H-4C 3
along N. Eagle Rd./SH-55. The pathway should be detached from the curb and constructed per
the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8. If the pathway is located outside of the right-of-way,a
14-foot wide public pedestrian easement should be submitted to the Planning Division and
recorded prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer.Pedestrian lighting and
landscaping shall be installed along the pathway consistent with the Eagle Road Corridor
Study and comply with the specifications listed in UDC 11-3H-4C.3.
Two pedestrian plans have been submitted that depicts pedestrian walkways between the
building pads in the proposed commercial development and the future residential
development to the east,and to the commercial properties to the north and south,for safe
pedestrian access and interconnectivity. Connectivity is also be provided to the multi-use
pathway along Eagle Rd.Pedestrian walkways should be distinguished from the vehicular
driving surfaces through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete,or bricks in accord
with UDC 11-3A-19B.4.As noted above in section IV,staff recommends additional pathway
connections to enhance connectivity within the proposed development.
Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-1 :
In lieu of a detached sidewalk, a detached multi-use pathway is required to be constructed along
N. Eagle Rd./SH-55 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8 and the Pathways Master
Plan.
Page 11
Landscaping(UDC 11-3B1:
A minimum 35-foot wide street buffer is required along N. Eagle Rd./SH-55, an entryway
corridor, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. The final plat should depict the
buffer in a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer easement,maintained by the
property owner,or business owner's association per UDC 11-3B-7C.2a.
A minimum 25-foot wide buffer is required by UDC Table I1-2B-3 in the C-G district along the
eastern boundary of the site adjacent to future residential uses, landscaped per the standards in
UDC 11-3B-9C. This buffer may be installed at the time of lot development. Landscape buffers
are required to facilitate safe pedestrian access between residential and commercial
development as set forth in UDC 11-3B-9C.3; the plan should be revised accordingly.
Storm Drainage:
An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's
adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction is required to follow
Best Management Practices as adopted by the City. The Applicant submitted a Geotechnical
En ing eering,Evaluation for the proposed subdivision that was prepared in 2015 with the Village
Apartments application. Stormwater integration is required in accord with the standards listed in
UDC 11-3B-11 C.
Pressure Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-1�:
Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided for each and every lot in the
subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-15.
Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21):
Utilities are required to be provided to the subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-21.
Waterways(UDC 11-3A- :
The Finch Lateral runs along the project's south boundary and has been piped in accord with
UDC 11-3A-6B. The lateral lies within an 80-foot wide easement—40' from centerline on each
side—structures should not encroach within this easement and trees should be placed outside of
the easement. This project is not within the flood plain.
Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7)•
All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7.
Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual):
Conceptual building elevations were not submitted for the proposed commercial development.
All structures should comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards
Manual.
VI. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed preliminary plat with the conditions noted in Section
VIII,per the Findings in Section IX; and approval of the development agreement modification
contingent upon revisions to the concept plan as discussed above and noted in Section VIII.
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard the PP on October 6 and November 17,
2022.At the public hearing on November 17,2022,the Commission moved to recommend
approval of the subject PP request.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing_
a. In favor: Stephanie Hopkins,KM Engineering
b. In opposition:None
C. Commenting. None
Page 12
d. Written testimony: Givens Pursley,Applicant's Representative
L. Staff presenting gpplication: Sonya Allen
f. Other Staff commenting on application: None
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony
a. The Applicant requests removal of all four changes to the concept plan recommended by
staff in Section 8 of the Staff Report,A.1 a.
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
a. None^
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. None
5. Outstandin issue(s)ssue(s) for City Council:
a. Request for City Council approval of a right-in/right-out access via N. Eagle Rd./SH-55.
Page 13
VII. EXHIBITS
A. Existing Development Agreement Provisions and Conceptual Development Plan
5. CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY:
5.1 Owrrer/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following
special conditions:
a. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be
removed irorn their domestic service prior to development.
b. Development of this site shall be generally consistent with the overall site
plan,landscape plan and buildingelevations included in Exhibit A of the
Staff Report attached to the Findings of Fact attached hereto as Hxhibit
"C" and the conditions of approval included in Exhibit B of the Staff
Report attached to the Findings of Fact attached hereto as Exhibit"C"
c. The Milk Lateral which cusses the noiKlxmq corner of this site shall be
piped in accord with TJDC 11-3A-6A.
d. A 35-foot wide street buffer, is required to he constructed along N. Eagle
Road,an entryway corridor,with the second phase(commercial portion)of
development; and a 20-foot wide street buffer is.equired to be constructed
along N. Records Avenue,a collector street,with the firsf phase(residential
portion) of development and prior to issuance of the fi"l Certificate of
Occupancy for each phase.Landscaping is required to be installed within the
buffer in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.
e, A 10-foot wide multiuse pathway is required to he constructed within the
street buffer along N. Eagle Road within a public use easement; pedestrian
lighting and landscaping is alsorequired to be installed as set forthinUDC 1I-
3hI-4C. These improvements are required to be constructed with the second
phase(commercial portion)of development and prior to issuance of the fir v
Certificate of Occupancy for that portion of the site.
f. Upon development of the retaillcornmercial portion of the property, a 25-foot
wide h►ffer is mouimd to he installed adiacent to the residential uses in
accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C,unless otherwise modified
by City Council.
g. Pedestrian connections am required to be provided between the residential
portion of the site and die future commercial. development on the western
portion of this site and the residential developments to the north and south.
h. Traffic calming shall be provided within the site between the
residential and couvnercial development and in N. Records Avenue (as
allowed by ACI-1D).
Page 14
TA 0---
1HEu�ce�cisa��
MIS. 4rY� •�rl� r���~
Pad 1�-- -�----------� ,,.�rml I I I I I I I I I ...,,� °��e� ,: `•'-;.�._$��q ����_'.. -_
3500 sF n r Lri i__---_-�
--- VILLAGE
P's _;___�� APARTMENTS
-
�� r
L- _p
Pad 2 (1
y, 7000 sF -FFFAT ❑ I�-�,�T Yl i1 �`�'1 � 'g nm �I+i Y
R s = 14,000sf
—
Retail j [ -- W.•r: ���
-
a - _
---- -------= coy
5 84.2 5-3 ,3 '� i -'�`\ -�'� L � .7' -y��r ,n u•L ?� :- or--. : j �a�
6 •yps�_� \ e4� -�r�h.-� �I�ra .;�.G�Ip%�r-� �����`•r?�-'9�t- i � rb.mn
:.\' ... si —�•aus,:: x:.,, aw wsr.as
1 BYERALL SITE PLAN EXHIBIT
�A1.0
O4EHALL WrE EMOr
Page 15
B. Proposed Conceptual Development Plans(EX1.0 and EX2.0) AND Ped Access Plans (EX1.1 and
EX2.1)
e I - -
R R �
I
km
1 ae W.
i •': m'?dcm ..:$Ye
� wed p O
J
GG N30
5E59�(1 PAXK9Y 111"111N-CONCEYRIAE SIZE PIAN{EXHIBIT LO}
i_��r
CG
I I I-I uI II
I
x HE.r-
i 9i i' a.....
q�g
LE
_--_=-----
Enhanced
'! crosswalk
f�}SE PA 2j HKWA CO 50111MIIO"- IICIMAE 1.1.{EXHIBIr2-O —
1_��T
Page 16
~. — ——— —
{
r I � .I.I_•; Y4
r �
{ � rraEnwuNuw .,•.••
i
C-G rsfl
SE OMK PARKWAY SUBDIVISION-PEDESTRIAN ACCESS(EXHIBIT 1.1
IX11Y
�' ... ..� ..�... .............
I II I
UJA
HiM
is
km
i
■ ¢
� r y � I jK mxwaywuw � �
m SESSIONS PARK WAY SU BDMSION-PEOESTRLAN ACCESS(E%HI BIT 21I
Page 17
C. Proposed Preliminary Plat(date: June 2022)
PRELIMINARY PLAT SHOWING PNEOMIMART UTQETA
SESSIONS PARKWAY SUBDIVISION i
SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST114 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SEMON 4,TOWNSH I P 3
NORTH,RANGE 1 EAST,R.M.,CITY OF MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO.
2022
J I — LINA BIA5910__—__--_ �•c•y ��:�w x e..e.e.•.a:...�
LG31 eLacx 1 +�1eE.anc 1 eoort IG3 PAGE IlBl1l®E
SOIfR1fAT 81ARRfTP1ACE 8416. I SWilEAST AIAREEIPIACE SOB.
BGGE 101 PAG f 13353-13255 800E IOl PACE 13353L'255 �__
--
I �� EESEHG
L I tl�v1
H$°
•� o.�,r =� 6EI-EAEA�NN IN4ETAIElRS LLC � � � �� i— � �
RSP:51106133]1E
' o,m
w E �i� I I Et✓S1 RR['L9PQ5 AVE I ��
f�
>xw �fx t AIIII I L
Y A
LOT L66L0[✓K 69 i�u ���',
LOOHBA FALLS B418.HO.12 I — � `
900N 42 PAGE 1W58-103G0 � qg ��
1 SESSIONS AW 1116
M MERAN,,IDAH0
� LLtt 2&38LOOf1 � � R191PRYAYPNTLV�ER
LOTI6LO[L 1 BACH SOB.
B0.CH5418. BOON 1]3 PGGf IfifiO&]fiE1l
800E 113 PAGE 16508-IE6f1
PP]A
Page 18
D. Landscape Plan(date: June 2022)
I T I I T T
J: 0 "T E� n r I T nI IT
M.
n.
(XI
T T.
T"IjI,TE I
MET :0 w
.T-
T I
T-
CD T
r
M—REQUIR—E—
SMIOMS PARK
REQU—/P—DED
WAYSUB
MEE CIAN,I DMO
LANDSCAPE PLAN
PPLLG
Page 19
E. Access Exhibit
PROPOSED
VEHICLE ACCESS
TO COWERCIAL
pRNE AISLE
—}� PRIVATE URNE
r7 i—
� m
D z
Z }w{
EXISTING —
APPROACHES — Q
TQ BE 2
AFANDONED 12 w V
— w
N 7
PROPOSED ! I BLOCK1
CONSOLIDATED r
ACCESS _
ROUT TO r
EAGLE ROAD
PRfVA Q
OR1Vf _
� km
SO
Eu.CHAGE
ROADTO y�
S011hi
� is mel�vs xv
FORMER ✓
EAISTING GREAT WALL
VEHICLE AESTAIIRAUT L I
ACCESS TO 1
EAGLE ROAD
BE CLOSED
VEHICLE ACCESS EXHIBIT
so ISO 270
PN n Scale_T'=so'
Page 20
F. Legal Description&Exhibit Map for Property Subject to New Development Agreement
ENUh3"
IKE EIRINQ
h+kdy 14,2Q20
Project No-17-16&
Legat oestrlptlan
Parcel f3
A parcel of land situated in the southwest 1/4 of the N43rthwa�t 114 of Sittuorr 4,T4wrrshlp�Nbrlh.
Range 1 East,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County,Idaho,and being mare particularly
described j�s bllows:
Commeneing at a found brass tap marking the Northwest corner of said Section 4,whicb bears
N0O"36'W E a d ista nce of�,611.31}feet tram a found b rats ea p ma rking the Vilest 1/4 co rner of sald
Section 4;
Thence following the westerly Ilne ofsald Northwest 1f4,SOO'36'00'W a distance of 13-95.13 feet
Thence leaving said wostedy line,W'51'36"E a distance of 74-41 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar
marking the southwest corner of Southeast Corner Marketplace subdivi5iprl No. 1 and beinv khe POINT
OF BEGINNING.
Thence fallowing the southerly boundary line of said Southeast Corner Marlketplace 5ubdiwi5;ian rtv-T,
S89°51'35"E a distance of 4n.48 feet to a set 518•inch rebar,
Thence leaving said southerly subdivision boundary Ilne,5W-17'57'w a d1stence of 565.51)feet to a set
518-inch rebar on the northerly subdivision boundary fine of Bach 5ubdivi5i4n;
Thence following the northerly subdivislon boundary line the following two(21 caur5es;
1. NEr IV,91"w a distance of 151-�7 Feet to a fou nd aluminum cap;
2, 584•26'08"w a diStainre of 17-1a feet t4 8 found 5 f 8-inch mbar marking the northwest corner of
said Bach Subdivision;
Thence leaving saW portherFy subdivi5ian�qun4ary liter 5$4°26'0VVw a distance of 114-61 feet to a
found 5/9-inch rebar;
Thgrlre N53'04'0TW a distanee of 144-05 feet to a found 5/8 0 rehar on the easterly right-of-way
line of N.Eagle Road;
Thence foAowing said easterly right-of-way ling,Nr}{Y'36fJ0"'E a distance of 391.77 feet to the POIt47 OF
DEUINN IR145-
Said parcel contains 231,902 Sq.Ft.15.324 acres},more or less,and is subjiectto all existing easements
and{vr right5-af-way of record-
All subdivisions,deedsr record of surveysr and other instruments of record referenced herein are
recorded documents of the[burrty in which these described lands are situated in.
f 1, LA
# A
a 62 M
4233 West State Streal OWse,Ida 4 * 108,5n,6939 • kmeedllp-cam
Page 21
RECORD OF SURVEY
PROPERTY BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT FOR ROS No.
G -Meridian Investments, C.
A PARCEL OF LAND 9l3uATE01N il* 7TI 3WWf5T 114 pF'fHE NpRTH'NESEST 1/d OF 5ECHON4,
TDWN5HIP 3NORTH.RANGES FAST.E.".MY OF MERIDIAN,ADA LiII CY.IpAHp•
�oDo
o Faa 3P6 3m
PT»+r aF Ftrr
M[n7de:F'•141'
Pn�ueRulsP qP�AECmII r
32 33 IxsT.ra Itrnre[o
If6EH0
F6.w rLylY6.M cw.as HUM
5 A � caw Pxw�cw,wH xoTm
I I [1N >b HIY!fqR 1 I O F0.M SAY R®Yi A5 neh➢
I I I &otl41 I I o Faxa Vx-razln.rs Holm
RC6n I1661x �'� I I $ c�ucTnena raxr
I� t SRu1Mxt Conmr . .L mor,:att eouxnar yxP
�' ,� 566rS4'S8"E Sf14 T' _ � -_ ewwE Lm uxE
ALVR OyF/�B•¢GnxC PaAC£i B .-3
�p°�T� i y 4� - FnwAwewnw m„aue
k aln,cm urm c..wvlxR
r mEA T AL 1PF6r 5119.5I'36'E 479 4Z O.47' '•�•-"•'�^^IAN{EHr PRLFA,RY uYc
[ia per.Z= wun nP:RK}_µ I f -----------F DT UNE 69 WU
I"'—lir�i�n��h]�n Rnr aF eEcrnHu ntRcn r M woo.�„ea
u u1FrbL[F3A'.W NE 5]'
I ! I PrFERERCE5
� a+.ism r.wa swam'uxe li'.oa Prorr�F-rr.r usoluF I R1 �49PP SF R.PtEf No PRN.PEWF.4G ff rAi Ate'.IRY/d
PER E9F.Xa'IIQ20L61'mm�
Ir....15'Rnv un[umorr RL PaT OF B1CN SUA]IF13r11 BRox I,a a PWS lI PtlCi
R II Fm xPr.tlx.ctltiwc I I leeoe-,ee,q RE[OPa3 d,�n.murTr,lore
MNFIIL RIL'A 60HHYRI u E
��A A � II-=-_--� Ps'rtl e � 113T�ffinM I � „i�Y R' o,o�Purs tiT r+toci,i�°�,i a rEeaan'�die'ff eu',cwmw6i`
C3 S.S2c.c IM.—qF[7 h A 6ww.
au.PL�SgFy RA PLU OF Bo06 IW CF Pu94 AT PA4C
� uRfi3NE9,ltF.ERiF61ni bw-t]3ob,RE60X9 a 3W�Ilr,iUUFR
x�9;1 X I KJd6 Let.rn AnxxeS n I R> weaawrc cusp nerv,�xr xd m,e-0mma leaonvs v xr
x � I ;y ue*A11PYI I 3 onnrtr.avrp
d i V LSP[P Y� l>F
'PER nsT.w. `"E 'E'A1° gR1"s kd
�0' .9. 9eoaKee L.�'.� r7asx I,aoe'4[CFrWF6S ]Y rIRE§.Mm N6 � Lt iiPat'mt Ina[ I I CER'TIFIUTr 9F ppVIlTT REgpRCER
1 d7\��~ --. xr1TE.[SPSn 1 SATE OP�Ulif]
I �rtTT ra*,nx,wwerlP n uo•xmz aa.2r I ��
,�Z� ee.cc r[Kn u tl3a•tesrr az.FR I ,a,ao-,elr .]�.[ �E
I �4 ti����� IAIFRLL dSFFEHF 1 I Ixataw,r x[ReeR�ib� '-�"1
-PEA MIST.rb.NP], N HIR16'�6'M R.cr
sk LS i,143PIPP'6' ,32m I '3MuF P.sr Z pLSA' ��tr
I -���i"� [a wa*a.m•r ,.wu I ..a.n xr LFtE wn r our o
����L 4 ftiy_��� Li YYIY4[4 lLAP I _
Tail
RriGtr
I d35d4nr ur F �~� � ��ti x�tnaa I I
! 2!84FP FATIe Rd. QR � IQ
+�'} \eed�4thdHYlm `
I �l tl�[ `���• 'fir I IERTRICFTE IIF SR1fNEYOR
L r 10Wt W HERFHr 4SIRFf ix.E N!.REgPTERpp
PRCiC=90HLL lML SAMYS+.lIC£H-iD Fr THE iTxTE pF pµp.!M
TntT T,e4 lYP N6 fEp Pptppm FNH N aiC1LUL 9.ellE/MILE W
4 mo�xe uuW Ffl 1rPE1NWOx.rnx llwi iM FVP P AH M111A1E
53ob'Lft R[TnCmR.TIa,o vo'lAniY.
KSr 5¢nox. •13C fh9 TPIY
Fou.o� a arr c-x 1l1P—HM cPllsta y
pw u�.na tINATaRP Sg
�2
SLIPYEI RAIIFATIYE
HTMiER.49 1nTd Mi: a M 1H -Fosv+y+F+s air rs 4. xF E H C I H E E itI N C
uFd[TrC ummorrtr PF IYOnIP CF 911M1EY Mo PAN N4,F4 PVRS 1 6C WrrtY SArF STF4F,
ex[M amRlw,LauRf�fl llf%M MNRTF4ACE•!.[afATEgIa AW fE Oral dA[R
4x'urE i>J��•iau wm risen
IWIWEA„+W Hp4[9+n"M gFPNFa[R. Inulr]m e[H
9.�TINRt WHraFM41.'E NFx WE REL17,P�
we.ne.3,1-�-�-3-0-HabO n]nM. 1npA PReiO1
Page 22
VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
1. The subject property shall no longer be subject to the terms of the Development Agreement
(DA) (Inst. #2022-065403,MDA-15-012)for Village Apartments and shall instead be subject
to a new agreement. The new DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the
Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting approval of the
amendment. The specific provisions for the new DA are as follows:
a. Development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development
plans approved by City Council and the conditions of approval included in Section
VIII.A and include the following:
➢ Depict non-retail commercial, office or civic uses for a minimum of 50%of the
development area on Exhibit EX1.0,unless Commission or Council find this isn't
applicable because this property is part of a larger MU-R designated area. This
doesn't apply if the property develops with the hotel as proposed in exhibit EX2.0.
➢ Specific details for the integrated plaza/open areas shall be provided with the
first certificate of zoning compliance.The applicant can relocate open
space/plaza areas depicted on the plan with director approval once specific
tenants are known.
➢ On concept plan 1,labeled as EX1.0,some or all of the buildings along the
eastern boundary should be rotated and/or relocated and a shared plaza
area/green space added to a more central location within the development for
better integration,including a central pathway connection to the open space and
front pad sites.
➢ If the site develops consistent with concept plan 2,labeled as EX2.0,the
applicant shall construct a 5-foot sidewalk on the east boundary and provide a
decorative crosswalk across the drive aisle of the multi-family portion of the
development(SWC of the Village Apartments)to enhance pedestrian
connectivity.
b. The subject property shall be subdivided prior to submittal of the first Certificate of
Zoning Compliance application for the site.
c. A 25-foot wide buffer shall be installed along the eastern boundary of the site adjacent to
the future residential uses, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C,unless
otherwise modified by City Council. Construction of the buffer may take place with lot
development.
d. Pedestrian connections shall be provided between the subject property and the future
residential development to the east,the commercial properties to the north and south and
to the multi-use pathway along N. Eagle Rd./SH-55 in accord with the approved
pedestrian plans.Pedestrian walkways should be distinguished from the vehicular driving
surfaces through the use ofpavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks in accord with
UDC 11-3A-19B.4.
e. Traffic calming shall be provided within the site between the subject property and the
residential development to the east.
f. Provide trash enclosures within the development capable of housing containers for both
solid waste and recyclable materials in accord with MCC 4-1-4.
Page 23
2. The final plat shall include the following:
a. Include the recorded instrument of the existing 30-foot wide City of Meridian sewer and
water main easement graphically depicted on the plat.
b. Depict the street buffer along N. Eagle Rd./SH-55 in a common lot or on a permanent
dedicated buffer easement,maintained by the property owner, or business owner's
association per UDC 11-3B-7C.2a.
c. Include a note stating direct lot access via N. Eagle Rd./SH-55 is prohibited except for
the access approved with the plat.Note: The proposed access via Eagle Rd. is required to
be approved by City Council and ITD.
d. Include a note stating all lots in the subdivision are subject to a cross-access/ingress-
egress easement as graphically depicted on the plat.
e. Depict a 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement for the multi-use pathway along N.
Eagle Rd./SH-55 if the pathway is located outside of the right-of-way; include the
recorded instrument number of the easement.
3. The landscape plan depicted in Section VII.D shall be revised with submittal of the final plat,
as follows:
a. Depict landscaping within the 25-foot wide buffer along the eastern boundary of the site
adjacent to residential uses in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C.1; and
safe pedestrian connections between commercial and residential uses as set forth in UDC
11-3B-9C.3. Construction of the buffer may take place with lot development.
b. Depict landscaping within the 35-foot wide street buffer along N. Eagle Rd./SH-55 in
accord with the updated standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.3; and pedestrian lighting and
landscaping consistent with the Eagle Road Corridor study per UDC 11-3H-4C.3.
4. A reciprocal cross-access/ingress-egress easement shall be recorded between the subject
property and the abutting property to the south(Parcel# 51104233802) in accord with UDC
11-3A-3A.2. A recorded copy of the agreement shall be submitted to the Planning Division
prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer.
5. A reciprocal cross-access/ingress-egress easement shall be recorded between the subject
property and the abutting property to the east(Parcel#S 1104233730)in accord with UDC
11-3A-3A.2. A recorded copy of the agreement shall be submitted to the Planning Division
prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer.
6. Submit details for the pedestrian lighting required along the multi-use pathway adjacent to N.
Eagle Rd./SH-55 that demonstrate compliance with the specifications set forth in UDC II-
3H-4C.3.
7. If the multi-use pathway along N. Eagle Rd./SH-55 is located outside of the right-of-way,
submit a 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement to the Planning Division for City Council
approval and recordation prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat.
8. Future development shall be consistent with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table
11-2B-3 for the C-G zoning district.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1. Terminate water main with hydrant
Page 24
2. Provide easement from end of water main to north property line for potential future
connection.
3. Additional 271 gpd flow committed to model. WRRF declining balance is 14.35 MGD.
4. Max Slope of 8" line is 8%.
5. Adjust manhole#1 so it is not located in the curb/gutter.
6. Ensure that the existing manhole is not located in a curb/gutter.
7. For sewer and water in parallel,if sewer depth is greater than 15 feet, locate the water main 5
feet from the edge of easement and center the sewer main between the water main and other
edge of easement.
8. Pedestrian decorative lighting will be required for sidewalk frontage along Eagle Road.
General Conditions of Approval
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public
right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet
wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via
the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard
forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit
an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works), a legal description
prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of
the easement(marked EXHIBIT A)and an 81/2"x 11"map with bearings and distances
(marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a
Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this
document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development
plan approval.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. 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
Page 25
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.
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. 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.
18. 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.
19. 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.
20. 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.
21. 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.
22. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404
Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
23. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office.
24. 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.
25. 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.
26. 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.
27. 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.
28. 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
Page 26
copy of the standards can be found at
http://www.meridiancioy.oMIpublic works.aspx?id=272.
29. 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.
30. 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. PARK'S DEPARTMENT
https://weblink.meridiancioy.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=272579&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
i &cr=1
D. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID)
https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=273745&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
hty
E. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=272564&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
hty
IX. FINDINGS
A. Preliminary Plat:
In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat,or short plat,the
decision-making body shall make the following findings:
1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan;
The Commission finds that the proposed plat and subsequent development will be in substantial
compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use and transportation if
the Applicant complies with the provisions in the staff report. (Please see Comprehensive Plan
Policies in, Section IV of this report for more information)
2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the
proposed development;
The Commission finds that public services will be provided to the subject property with
development. (See Exhibit B of the StaffReport for more details from public service providers)
3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's
capital improvement program;
Page 27 —
Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at
their own cost, the Commission finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of
capital improvement funds.
4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development;
The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the
proposed development based upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., Police,
Fire, ACHD, ITD, etc). (See Section VIII for more information)
5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and,
The Commission is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with
the platting of this property. ACHD and ITD considers road safety issues in their analysis.
6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features.
The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on
this site that require preserving.
Page 28
W IDIAN�
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for McDermott Village (H-2022-0056) by Boise Hunter Homes,
located at 3235 N. McDermott Rd., at the northwest corner of W. Ustick Rd. and N. McDermott
Rd.
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0056
A. Request: Annexation of 40.05 acres of land with R-15, R-40 and C-G zoning districts.B.
Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 85 building lots (81 townhome, 1 multi-family, 3
commercial lots) and 8 common lots on 40.05 acres of land in the R-15, R-40 and C-G zoning
districts.C. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family residential development consisting
of 250 dwelling units on 12.19 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district.
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET
DATE : December 13 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 8 & 9
PROJECT NAME : McDermott Village ( W2022 - 0056 ) & Variance ( VAR= 2022 - 0004 )
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 �> S� b
2 fy\e� VCLo4n 1Le
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 December 13,2022 Legend
DATE:
lei Piajeat Lava Liar
TO: Mayor&City Council
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner -- ------
208-884-5533 `
SUBJECT: H-2022-0056; VAR-2022-0004
McDermott Village—AZ, CUP,PP,
VAR - --
�J i
LOCATION: 3235 N. McDermott Rd. at the northwest
corner of W. Ustick Rd. &N.
McDermott Rd., in the SE 1/4 of Section
32,TAN.,R.1 W. (Parcel#SO432429360
&#SO432429355)
f
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Annexation of 40.05 acres of land with R-15 (17.12 acres),R-40(15.85 acres) and C-G zoning(7.08
acres); Preliminary plat consisting of 85 building lots(81 townhome, 1 multi-family and 3
commercial)& 8 common lots on 40.05 acres of land in the R-15,R-40&C-G zoning districts; and
Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family residential development consisting of 250 dwelling units
on 12.19 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district.
A Variance is also requested to UDC Table 11-2A-7 to allow 44 of the 81 townhome lots on the
eastern portion of the development to be reduced from 2,000 to 1,694 square feet.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details
Acreage 40.05-acres(AZ);40.05-acres(PP); 12.19-acres(CUP)
Existing/Proposed Zoning RUT in Ada County(existing);R-15,R-40&C-G(proposed)
Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R)
Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/undeveloped land used for agricultural purposes
Proposed Land Use(s) Mix of commercial(fuel sales facility&convenience store and flex
commercial/office); and residential(i.e.multi-family apartments and
townhomes)
Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 85 buildable lots(81 townhome lots, 1 multi-family lot&3 commercial
lots)and 8 common lots
Phasing Plan(#of phases) 3 phases
Number of Residential Units(type 250 multi-family apartment units&81 townhome units
of units)
Page 1
Description Details
Physical Features(waterways, The Eight Mile Lateral runs across the northeast corner of this site and the
hazards,flood plain,hillside) Sky Pilot Drain runs across the southern portion of the site.
Neighborhood meeting date 5/25/22
History(previous approvals) None
B. Community Metrics
Description Details
Ada County Highway
District
• Staff report(yes/no) Yes
• Requires ACHD No
Commission Action A Traffic Impact Study(TIS)was prepared by Kittleson&Associates,Inc.
es/no
Access One access is proposed via S.Rolling Hill Dr.from E.Overland Rd.to the south;
(Arterial/Collectors/State and two driveways will provide access from the commercial development to the
Hwy/Local)(Existing and west via S. Silverstone Way from E.Overland Rd.(a signalized intersection
Proposed) exists at Silverstone/Overland)
Traffic Level Of Service Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Roadway Frontage Classification Traffic Count Level of
Service
Ustick Road 1,304-feet Principal Arterial 321 Better than"E"
McDermott Road 1,304-feet Collector* 100 Better than"D"
Stub A public stub street is planned to the north boundary of this property with the
Street/Interconnectivity/Gros Aviator Springs development(H-2021-0065).W.Endeavor St.to the west is
s Access planned to stub/connect to the west boundary of this property when the abutting
Flower property(#SO432438850)re-develops.
Existing Road Network N.McDermott Rd.,a residential collector street&entryway corridor;and W.
Ustick Rd.,a residential arterial street&entryway corridor,abut this site along
the south and east property boundaries.
Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ None
Buffers
Proposed Road Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)/Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP):
Improvements • The intersection of Ustick Road and McDermott Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to be
1� widened and reconstructed with design in 2026 and construction in the future.
• Ustick Road is listed in the IFYWP and GIP to be widened to 5-lanes from Star Road to
McDermott Road with design in 2026 and construction in the future.
• Star Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 54anes from Ustick Road to McMillan Road
between 2031 and 2035.
• The intersection of Ustick Road and Star Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 4-lanes
on the north leg, 4-lanes on the south, 5-lanes east, and 5-lanes on the west leg, and
signalized between 2031 and 2035.
SH-16 is planned to extend north/south through this property and an interchange
is proposed at Ustick Rd.
Approved units rotes e
West Ada School District
Approved lots per per attendance Students from
Enrollment Capacity attendance area area Approved Dev.
Pleasant View Elementary 614 650 3322 100 970
Star Middle School 893 1000 9667 321 880
Owyhee High School 1785 1800 6229 137 829
School of Choice Options
Chief Joseph Elementary—Arts 524 700 N/A N/A
Barbara Morgan STEM Academy 421 500 N/A N/A
• Distance(elem,ms,Its)
Page 2
Description Details
• Capacity of Schools
• #of Students Enrolled
• Predicted#of students 73+/-
generated from
proposed development
Police Service
• Distance to Police 7.5 miles
Station
• Police Response Time 6:59 minutes-doesn't currently meet response time goal of 3-5 minutes;
however,response times will drastically decline when the MPD precinct opens in
the Fall.
• Calls for Service 313 within a mile of the site between 6/l/20 and 5/31/22
• Accessibility PD requests police access into each building's entry point using a multi-
technology keypad
• Specialty/resource needs None—MPD can service this development&already serves this area.
• Crimes 54 within a mile of the site between 6/1/20 and 5/31/22
• Crashes 8 within a mile of the site between 6/l/20 and 5/31/22
• Other For more info, see Section VIILD
Wastewater
• Distance to Sewer
Services
• Sewer Shed
• Estimated Project Sewer
ERU's
• WRRF Declining 14.42 MGD
Balance
• Project Consistent with Yes
WW Master
Plan/Facility Plan
• Impacts/concerns Additional 11,691 gpd committed to model.
Water
• Distance to Water
Services
• Pressure Zone
• Estimated Project Water
ERU's
• Water Quality Concerns
• Project Consistent with Yes
Water Master Plan
• Impacts/Concerns
Page 3
i u ri�w
r
IIN�
11 R III R
UN
IIN� IIN� _
A HI■ IS
••• •- � • ' : • • •
••
III. NOTICING
Planning&Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Notification published in
10/19/2022 11/27/2022
newspaper
Notification mailed to property
owners within 300 feet 10/13/2022 11/22/2022
Applicant posted public hearing
notice on site 10/24/2022 12/2/2022
Nextdoor posting 10/13/2022 11/28/2022
IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS(Comprehensive Plan)
Land Use: The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates this
property as Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R). Note: The Applicant requested this designation as part
of the update to the Comprehensive Plan in 2019.
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). Sample uses, appropriate in MU-R areas would include: All MU-N and MU-C categories,
entertainment uses,major employment centers, clean industry, and other appropriate regional-serving
most uses. Sample zoning include: R-15,R-40, TN-C, C-G, and M-E
Transportation: State Highway(SH) 16 is planned to extend through this site and an interchange is
planned at Ustick Rd.
ACHD's Master Street Map doesn't depict any collector streets planned across this site. The segment
of Ustick Rd.that this site fronts on is designated on the MSM as a residential arterial with 5-lanes
and on-street bike lanes within 100-feet of right-of-way. The segment of McDermott Rd.that the
townhome portion of the development fronts on is designated on the MSM as a residential collector
with 3-lane roadway, a 46-foot street section within 74-feet of ROW. Due to the extension of SH-16,
sidewalk is required on only the east side of the roadway.
Transit services are not available to this site.
Proposed Development: The Applicant proposes to develop the site with two(2)land use types—
commercial(includes retail,restaurants, etc.) and residential(i.e. multi-family and townhome).No
employment or public uses are proposed and it's unlikely any of the proposed uses will have a
regional draw. The site is designed with the commercial uses along Ustick Rd., an arterial street,with
an integrated plaza area between the two northern buildings and multi-family development to the
north along future SH-16. Townhomes are proposed on the east side of future SH-16 along N.
McDermott Rd., a collector street. The proposed development is generally consistent with the
conceptual MU-R plan in the Comprehensive Plan.
This is the only property in this area with a MU-R designation;that along with the property being
bisected by SH-16 in the future,which reduces the size of the property from 40 acres to 26.5 acres,
makes it difficult to develop the property entirely consistent with the MU-R designation.
Additionally,because an interchange is planned in this area and access is limited,the Comprehensive
Page 5
Plan states retail and auto-generated services should be minimized and transition rapidly from the
interchange to residential uses near the County line,which the plan proposes. For these reasons, Staff
is amenable to only two(2)land uses and the lower intensity of uses(i.e.primarily residential)
proposed rather than more intense commercial uses as is typically desired in the MU-R designation.
Additionally,because of the bifurcation of this property with the SH-16 extension, interconnectivity
and a full integration of uses within the overall site is not possible as typically desired in mixed use
designated areas.
In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in all Mixed-Use
areas,per the Comprehensive Plan(pg.3-13): (Staff's analysis in italics)
• "A mixed-use project should include at least three types of land uses. Exceptions may be
granted for smaller sites on a case-by-case basis. This land use is not intended for high
density residential development alone."
The proposed 26.5-acre development(after right-of-way is taken out for SH-16) includes two
types of land uses—commercial and residential. Because this is the only MU-R designated
property in this area and the site is not very large and will be divided by a state highway,
Staff is of the opinion the proposed number of land use types is sufficient.
• "Where appropriate,higher density and/or multi-family residential development is encouraged
for projects with the potential to serve as employment destination centers and when the project
is adjacent to US 20/26, SH-55, SH-16 or SH-69."
The proposed development includes 250 multi family units at a gross density of 20.5 units per
acre. The multi family portion of the project is located along the west side of future SH-16 and
at the northwest corner of the future interchange at Ustick Rd. An employment destination
center is not proposed but Owyhee High School exists directly to the west. High-density
development is desired near schools so that students can walk to school, reducing bussing
needs and traffic in the area.
• "Mixed Use areas are typically developed under a master or conceptual plan; during an
annexation or rezone request, a development agreement will typically be required for
developments with a Mixed-Use designation."
A conceptual development plan was submitted with the annexation request, included in Section
VII.B.A Development Agreement that ties future development to this plan and the general
guidelines for mixed use developments and specifically the MU-R designation is recommended
as a provision of annexation.
• "In developments where multiple commercial and/or office buildings are proposed,the
buildings should be arranged to create some form of common,usable area, such as a plaza or
green space."
The conceptual development plan depicts a common plaza area between the northern two
commercial buildings with a pedestrian walkway to the area from the southern lot(fuel
facility/convenience store).
• "The site plan should depict a transitional use and/or landscaped buffering between
commercial and existing low-or medium-density residential development."
There is an existing low-density residential property along the west boundary of the site south
of the Sky Pilot Drain adjacent to the proposed commercial uses.A public street(N. Glassford
Ave) is proposed between the commercial buildings and the residential property but a buffer
is not proposed to the residential property.A landscaped street buffer is proposed on the east
side of the street. Per UDC Table 11-2B-3, a minimum 25 foot wide landscaped buffer is
Page 6
required on C-G zoned properties to residential uses, unless such width is otherwise
modified by City Council at a public hearing with notice to surrounding property owners.
• "Community-serving facilities such as hospitals,clinics, churches, schools,parks, daycares,
civic buildings, or public safety facilities are expected in larger mixed-use developments."
No such uses are specifically proposed in this development—the tenants of the commercial
buildings are unknown at this time. Owyhee High School is located directly to the northwest of
this site and an LDS seminary and Boys & Girls Club has been conceptually approved to
develop on the adjacent property to the north next to the school in close proximity to this site.
Although these uses are not within the MU-R designation, they are still provided nearby.
• "Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places including but not
limited to parks,plazas, outdoor gathering areas, open space, libraries,and schools are
expected; outdoor seating areas at restaurants do not count."
A plaza/gathering area is depicted on the conceptual development plan between the two
northern commercial buildings; there are no other public and/or quasi public spaces or
places proposed. As noted above, a high school exists to the northwest and an LDS seminary
and a Boys & Girls Club are planned to develop in the Aviator Springs development directly
to the north.
• "Mixed use areas should be centered around spaces that are well-designed public and quasi-
public centers of activity. Spaces should be activated and incorporate permanent design
elements and amenities that foster a wide variety of interests ranging from leisure to play.
These areas should be thoughtfully integrated into the development and further placemaking
opportunities considered."
No such spaces are proposed on the conceptual development plan. Although a "mix"of uses
(i.e. commercial&residential) are proposed, Staff wouldn't consider this a true mixed-use
development due to the lack of integration and connectivity within the overall site, which isn't
possible due to the extension of SH-16 through the property. A plaza/common open space
area is depicted between the two (2) northern commercial buildings, which Staff feels is
appropriate given the development limitations for this site.
• "All mixed-use projects should be directly accessible to neighborhoods within the section by
both vehicles and pedestrians."
The proposed commercial portion of the development is directly accessible to the multi-
family residential portion of the development to the north and the single-family development
further to the north (Aviator Springs) by both vehicles and pedestrians.
Future SH-16 will separate the commercial and multi family development from the townhome
development making it impossible for these uses to be directly accessible. Pedestrian
pathways are proposed throughout the commercial and multi family development and a 10-
foot wide pathway is proposed to the single-family development to the north for connectivity.
• "Alleys and roadways should be used to transition from dissimilar land uses, and between
residential densities and housing types."
A roadway,parking area and landscape buffer is proposed between the commercial and multi-
family development(150'between structures); and a 2-way drive aisle with parking on either
side and a landscape buffer is proposed between the proposed multi family and future single-
family development to the north (115'between uses) as a transition and buffer between uses.
Page 7
• "Because of the parcel configuration within Old Town,development is not subject to the
Mixed-Use standards listed herein."
The subject property is not located in Old Town; therefore, this item is not applicable.
In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in MU-R
areas,per the Comprehensive Plan(pgs.3-16 thru 3-17):
• Development should generally comply with the general guidelines for development in all
Mixed-Use areas.
Staffs analysis on the proposed project's compliance with these guidelines is included above.
• Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 10%of the development area at gross
densities ranging from 6 to 40 units/acre. There is neither a minimum nor maximum imposed
on non-retail commercial uses such as office, clean industry, or entertainment uses.
Residential uses are proposed over 86%of the development area at an overall gross density
of 14.58 units/acre, consistent with the density desired in MU-R designated areas. The gross
density of the multi family portion is 20.5 units/acre and the townhome portion is 7.71
units/acre.
• Retail commercial uses should comprise a maximum of 50% of the development area.
Retail/commercial uses are only proposed to comprise of 14%of the development area in
accord with this guideline.
Where the development proposes public and quasi-public uses to support the development,the
developer may be eligible for additional area for retail development(beyond the allowed 50%),
based on the ratios below:
• For land that is designated for a public use, such as a library or school,the developer is
eligible for a 2:1 bonus. That is to say, if there is a one-acre library site planned and
dedicated,the project would be eligible for two additional acres of retail development.
• For active open space or passive recreation areas, such as a park,tot-lot, or playfield,the
developer is eligible for a 2:1 bonus. That is to say, if the park is 10 acres in area,the site
would be eligible for 20 additional acres of retail development.
• For plazas that are integrated into a retail project,the developer would be eligible for a 6:1
bonus. Such plazas should provide a focal point(such as a fountain, statue, and water
feature), seating areas, and some weather protection. That would mean that by providing a
• half-acre plaza,the developer would be eligible for three additional acres of retail
development.
This guideline is not applicable as no public/quasi-public uses are proposed on this site and
the retail development area is below the allowed 50%.
Comprehensive Plan Policies: The following Comprehensive Plan Policies are applicable to this
development:
• "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities
and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of
service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F)
Page 8
City water and sewer service is available and can be extended by the developer with
development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Urban services are available to be provided
upon development.
• "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land."
(3.07.00)
The proposed retail/commercial uses should be compatible with the existing low-density
residential use to the west if a 25 foot wide buffer is provided with dense landscaping as
required by UDC Table 11-2B-3 and 11-3B-9C1 to minimize conflicts between land uses.
The proposed multi family development should be compatible with future single-family
residential uses to the north in Aviator Springs subdivision with the proposed separation in
uses by drive aisles,parking and a densely landscaped buffer to minimize conflicts between
higher and lower density residential uses; and to the high school to the west. The proposed
townhomes should be compatible with existing low-density residential properties across
McDermott Rd. to the east and any future redevelopment of that area with MU-I(Mixed Use
—Interchange) uses; and also, the future research and development use to the north, which is
proposed to be separated by a 75 foot wide densely landscaped buffer.
• "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 apartments and townhomes will provide housing in close proximity to Owyhee
High School which will reduce bussing and vehicle trips in the area. The proposed
retail/commercial uses should provide benefits to future residents of being able to live, shop
and possibly work nearby enhancing overall livability and sustainability.
• "Require pedestrian circulation plans to ensure safety and convenient access across large
commercial and mixed-use developments."(3.07.02A)
The conceptual development plan depicts pedestrian pathways throughout the commercial
and multi family residential developments and to the adjacent single-family residential
development to the north (Aviator Springs)for interconnectivity.
• "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.
• "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 to this site and can be extended by the developer
with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. The emergency response times for Police
and Fire Dept. currently fall outside of response time goals; however, when the new MPD
precinct opens in Fall of 2023 and Fire Station#8 is constructed and staffed in late summer
of 2023, response time goals will be met.
Page 9
• "With new subdivision plats,require the design and construction of pathway connections,
easy pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, safe routes to schools, and the incorporation of
usable open space with quality amenities."(2.02.01A)
Safe pathway connections should be provided from the proposed multi family development
to the abutting high school to the west. Usable open space and quality amenities are
proposed with the multi family development that exceed UDC standards.
• "Require appropriate landscaping,buffers, and noise mitigation with new development along
transportation corridors(setback,vegetation,low walls,berms, etc.)."(3.07.01 C)
A minimum 35 foot wide landscaped street buffer is required to be provided along future SH-
16 and N. McDermott Rd., both designated entryway corridors. Noise mitigation is required
within the buffer along future SH-16 per the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D for
residential uses adjoining a state highway.
• "Evaluate the feasibility of annexing existing county enclaves and discourage the creation of
additional enclaves."(3.03.03I)
This property abuts City annexed land to the north and west; a large enclave area of County
land exists to the east. This area is largely sprawl with a lot ofproperties still in Ada County
to the east and southeast. The land directly to the south is within Canyon County's Area of
City Impact boundary. Annexation of this property will not create additional enclaves and
will actually decrease the existing enclave area.
• "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and
gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G)
Urban infrastructure as noted is required to be provided with development in accord with
UDC standards.
In summary, Staff believes the proposed development plan is generally consistent with the vision
of the Comprehensive Plan for this area per the analysis above.
V. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS UD
A. Annexation:
The proposed annexation is for 40.05 acres of land with R-15 (17.12 acres),R-40 (15.85 acres)
and C-G zoning(7.08 acres). The proposed use of the property will include a mix of commercial
uses,including a fuel sales facility&convenience store and flex commercial/office(tenants have
not been identified at this time) on 3.8 acres in the C-G district,multi-family residential
apartments on 12.19 acres in the R-40 district, and townhomes on 10.51 acres of land in the R-15
district. The right-of-way proposed to be dedicated for the future extension of SH-16 consists of
13.55 acres of land.
A conceptual development plan was submitted, included in Section VII.B below that shows how
the overall property is planned to develop. Based on the analysis above in Section IV, Staff is of
the opinion the proposed annexation, zoning and development plan is generally consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan with the provisions noted in Section VIII as discussed herein.
A multi-family development requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit(CUP)in the R-40
zoning district, subject to the specific use standards for such listed in UDC 11-4-3-27, and
townhouse dwellings are listed as a principal permitted use in the R-15 zoning district per UDC
Table 11-2A-2. Commercial/retail and fuel sales facility uses are listed as a principal permitted
use in the C-G zoning district per UDC Table 11-2B-2,fuel sales facilities are subject to the
Page 10
specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-20. Other uses may be allowed as noted in the
Allowed Uses in the Commercial Districts Table 11-2B-2.
The proposed uses and zoning districts are listed as appropriate uses and zoning in the
Comprehensive Plan for the MU-R designated area.
The property is contiguous to City annexed land and is within the City's Area of City Impact
boundary. A legal description and exhibit map of the overall annexation area is included in
Section VII.A.
The City may require a development agreement(DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant
to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. To ensure future development is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and with the development plan proposed with this application, Staff
recommends a DA is required with this application,containing the provisions noted in
Section VIII.A, as discussed herein.
B. Preliminary Plat:
The proposed preliminary plat consists of 85 building lots(81 townhome, 1 multi-family and 3
commercial)& 8 common lots on 40.05 acres of land in the R-15,R-40&C-G zoning districts.
The Applicant anticipates the development will be constructed in three(3)phases with the multi-
family development first,the townhomes second and the commercial last unless they get a
demand for the commercial,then it might be second.
Existing Structures/Site Improvements:
There are no existing structures or improvements on this site.
Dimensional Standards:
Development of the proposed lots is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in
UDC Tables 11-2A-7 for the R-15 district and 11-2A-8 for the R-40 district; and UDC Table H-
2B-3 for the C-G zoning district. Some of the R-15 zoned lots do not comply with the
minimum lot size of 2,000 square feet per dwelling units; revisions are necessary to comply.
Zero (0)lot lines should be graphically depicted on the plat on the internal lot lines where
the townhomes are proposed(i.e.where structures are proposed to span across lot lines).
Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards(UDC 11-6C-3):
Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design and
improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3.
Road Improvements [Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)/Integrated Five Year Work Plan
(IFYWP)]: The intersection of Ustick Road and McDermott Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to
be widened and reconstructed with design in 2026 and construction in the future. Ustick Road is
listed in the IFYWP and CIP to be widened to 5-lanes from Star Road to McDermott Road with
design in 2026 and construction in the future. Star Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 5-
lanes from Ustick Road to McMillan Road between 2031 and 2035. The intersection of Ustick
Road and Star Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 4-lanes on the north leg,4-lanes on the
south, 5-lanes east, and 5-lanes on the west leg, and signalized between 2031 and 2035. See
ACHD's staff report in Section V111.1 for more information.
Access(UDC 11-3A-3)
A public street access is proposed via W.Ustick Rd., an arterial street, to the portion of the site
west of future SH-16.A stub street is proposed to the property to the north(Aviator Springs)to
connect to a planned stub street to this property.Another stub street(W. Endeavor St.)is
proposed to the school property to the west for future extension and connection to N. Owyhee
Storm Ave., a collector street. Alleys/private streets are depicted on the plat in the proposed
Page 11
multi-family development. Private streets should be provided for addressing purposes. A private
street application should be submitted prior to or concurrent with the final plat application.
Two(2)accesses are proposed via N. McDermott Rd.,a collector street,to the portion of the site
east of future SH-16. McDermott Rd. is planned to dead-end in a cul-de-sac just north of Ustick
Rd. and not connect to Ustick when the interchange is constructed. An emergency only access is
proposed out to W. Ustick Rd. that has been approved by the Fire Dept.; ITD has verified that this
access does not touch or abut the State Highway system. The bollards should be located
completely outside of the right-of-way.ITD's roadway plans for the existing Ustick/McDermott
Rd. intersection are included in Section VIII.I. Alleys are proposed for access to the townhome
units located north of W. Aspenstone St. and south of Beechstone St. All alleys must comply with
the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5. The proposed alleys appear to comply with these
standards.
Cross-access/ingress-egress easements should be provided between all C-G zoned
commercial lots in the subdivision via a note on the final plat or a separate recorded
easement.
Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8):
The Pathways Master Plan depicts a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway along W. Ustick Rd. on this
site; a 10-foot wide pathway is depicted on the landscape plan as required.
A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway is proposed within the street buffer along the west side of
N. Glassford Ave.,consistent with the developments to the north,which crosses to the east
at the north boundary of the site within the buffer along SH-16 which will connect to the
pathway planned to the north in Aviator Springs.A 14-foot wide public use easement is
required for the pathway; the easement should be submitted to the Planning division prior
to submittal for City Engineer signature on the final plat.
Internal pedestrian pathways are proposed throughout the central common open space area and to
the commercial development to the south.
Safe pathway connections should be provided from the proposed multi-family development
to the abutting high school to the west.
Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17):
Detached sidewalks are required along all collector and arterial streets; attached sidewalks may
be provided along local streets. Sidewalks are not required along 1-84;however, a pathway is
proposed within the buffer.ACHD is requiring a sidewalk to be constructed off-site along one
side of S.Rolling Hill Dr.with development of this site.
Landscaping(UDC 11-3B):
Street buffers are required to be provided as follows: A minimum 35-foot wide buffer is required
along future SH-16 and the interchange and along N.McDermott Rd., entryway corridors; a
minimum 25-foot wide buffer is required along the western portion of W.Ustick Rd., an arterial
street; and a minimum 10-foot wide buffer is required along local streets in the C-G zoning
district,measured per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.1 M. Landscaping is required within
the street buffer as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C(see updated standards). Street buffers are
required to be maintained by the property owner or business owners' association and
should be depicted on the plat in a common lot or permanent dedicated buffer per UDC 11-
3B-7C.2b.
Landscaping is required adjacent to all pathways in accord with the standards listed in
UDC 11-3B-12C.
Depict landscaping within common open space areas as set forth in UDC 11-3G-5B.3.
Page 12
The City Arborist requests a change in tree selection of the Fraxinus Pennsylvanica
"Marshall's Seedless" Green Ash is changed to another variety due to a future threat of
Emerald Ash Borer.
There are no existing trees on the site to be removed or that require mitigation.
Common Open Space(UDC 11-3G-3B): A minimum of 15%qualified open space is required to
be provided within the townhome portion of the development that meets the quality standards
listed in UDC 11-3G-3A.2. Based on 10.51 acres, a minimum of 1.58 acres of qualified open
space is required. A total of 3.33 acres of qualified open space is proposed on the open space
exhibit included in Section VII.F in excess of UDC standards (i.e red hatched areas). Open space
areas consist of open grassy areas of at least 5,000 square feet and linear open space.
Site Amenities(UDC 11-3G-4): A minimum of 2 points of site amenities are required based on
10.51 acres of development area from the Site Amenities and Point Value Table 11-3G-4. 14's net
ele r to Staff what is Two 2)pickleball courts at 4 points each are proposed for site amenities in
the townhome portion of the development,which exceeds UDC standards.
Noise Abatement: Noise abatement is required for residential uses along state highways per the
standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D.A 10-foot solid screen wall is proposed. Noise abatement
should be provided within the street buffers along SH-16 that are adjacent to residential
uses per the standards listed in UDC 11-311-41)for residential uses adjoining a state
highway.A berm or a berm and wall combination that's a minimum of 10-feet higher than
the elevation at the centerline of the state highway is required. Include a cross-section of the
berm or berm/wall that complies with this standard with the final plat application(s).
Storm Drainage(UDC 11-3A-1 :
An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's
adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction is required to follow
Best Management Practices as adopted by the City. The Applicant submitted a Geotechnical
Engineering Report for the subdivision. Stormwater integration is required in accord with the
standards listed in UDC 11-3B-IIC.
Pressure Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-IS):
Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided for each and every lot in the
subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-15. This property lies within the Nampa-Meridian
Irrigation District boundary.
Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21):
Utilities are required to be provided to the subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-21.. Street
lights shall be installed in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and
ordinances/
Waterways(UDC 11-3A-6):
The Sky Pilot Drain crosses the southern portion of this site within a 100-foot wide easement;the
Eight Mile Lateral crosses the northeast corner of the site within a 50-foot wide easement; and the
Noble Lateral runs along the east boundary of the site within a 40-foot wide easement(20-feet
from centerline each side). The easements for all of these waterways shall be depicted on the
final plat; structures shall not encroach within these easements.All waterways on this site
shall be piped as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B.3,unless otherwise waived by City Council. This
project is not within the flood plain.
The developer has requested ITD relocate the Eight Mile Lateral to accommodate the proposed
development plan. Because the plans have already been designed and environmental approvals
Page 13
obtained to pipe it in its current location,a change this late in the process may not be approved. If
the location of the lateral changes,it should be depicted on the plans submitted with the
final plat application.
Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7)•
All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. A 6-foot tall solid
screen fence is proposed along the northern&western boundaries of the multi-family
development.
C. Conditional Use Permit(CUP):
A Conditional Use Permit is requested for a multi-family residential development consisting of
250 dwelling units on 12.19 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district in accord with UDC Table
11-2B-2. The proposed development will have(12) 3-story multi-family structures and a 9,055
square foot amenity building centrally located within the complex. Six(6)different floor plans
are proposed with a mix of units consisting of 1-(97),2-(114)and 3-(39)bedroom units ranging
from 712 to 1,278 square feet in size.
Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3-27):
The proposed use is subject to the following standards: (Staff's analysis/comments in italic text)
11-4-3-27: MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT:
Site Design:
I. 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 site plan included in Section VII.D depicts buildings at a minimum
setback of 10 feet; no greater setback is required.
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 plans submitted with the
Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should demonstrate compliance with this
standard.
3. A minimum of eighty(80)square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for
each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks, and/or
enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other 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 11-513-5 of this title. The Applicant's narrative states each dwelling unit is
provided with a minimum 80 square foot attached patio or deck, which meets 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 should comply with this requirement.
Page 14
6. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to
All Districts", of this title.A minimum of 477 off-street parking spaces are required for
the multi family development with 250 of those being in a covered carport or garage; a
minimum of 19 bicycle parking spaces are required. A minimum of 18 spaces are
required for the amenity building with a minimum of one (1) bicycle parking space. The
minimum number of spaces required overall is 495 with a minimum of 20 bicycle spaces.
A total of 482+/-parking spaces are proposed overall, with 250 of those being covered,
and 20 bicycle spaces, which does not meet the minimum standard.A revised parking
plan that meets the minimum standards should be submitted prior to the Commission
hearing.Bike racks should be provided in central locations for each multi family
building and the amenity building.
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 site amenity plan included in Section VII.G depicts a leasing area (property
management office), a maintenance storage area and mailbox location (including
provisions for parcel mail), in accord with this standard. The location of the directory
and map of the development should be depicted on the site plan submitted with the
Certificate of Zoning Compliance application.
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 10%
of the gross land area for multi-family developments of 5 acres of more.A minimum of 1.22
acres of common open is required to meet this standard.
Common open space areas are also required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-
4-3-27C.2,which state that open space areas must be integrated into the development as a
priority and not for the use of land after all other elements of the development have been
designed. These areas should have direct pedestrian access,be highly visible, comply with
CPTED standards and support a range of leisure and play activities and uses—irregular
shaped, disconnected or isolated open spaces do not meet the standard. Open space areas
should be accessible and well connected throughout the development(i.e. centrally located,
accessible by pathway and visually accessible along collector streets or as a terminal view
from a street). Open space areas should promote the health and well-being of its residents
and support active and passive uses for recreation, social gathering and relaxation to serve
the development. The proposed common open space meets these standards.
All multi-family projects over 20 units are required to provide at least one (1)common
grassy area of at least 5,000 s.f. in area that's integrated into the site design allowing for
general activities by all ages,which may be included in the minimum required open space.
The area shall increase proportionately as the number of units increase and shall be
commensurate to the size of the development as determined by the decision-making body.
The Applicant proposes two (2) central common open space areas of 67,632 and 29,360 sf
that meets this requirement.
Page 15
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.All units contain more than 500 square feet(sf.) of
living area.
b. Two hundred fifty(250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred
(500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living
area.A total of 211 units contain between 500 and 1,200 sf. of living area; therefore,
a minimum of 52,750 sf. (or 1.21 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.A total of 39 units contain
more than 1,200 sf.; therefore, a minimum of 13,650 sf. (or 0.31 acre) of common
open space is required.
At a minimum, a total of 66,400 sf. (or 1.52 acres) of qualified outdoor common open
space is required to be provided per this standard. In order to meet the baseline
requirement noted above and this standard, a total of 119,500 sf. (or 2.74 acres) of
common open space is required. A total of 146,094 sf. (or 3.35 acres) of qualified open
space is proposed in excess of the minimum standards as shown in Section VII.F(red
hatch areas). Qualified areas consist of central common/amenity areas and a pedestrian
corridor where a multi-use pathway is planned.
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').All of the red hatched
areas depicted on the open space exhibit in Section VII.G meet this requirement.
In phased developments,common open space shall be provided in each phase of the
development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units.
The Applicant anticipates the multi family development will be constructed in one phase. If
not, compliance with this standard is required.
Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process,common open space areas
shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets unless separated from the street by a
berm or constructed barrier at least four feet(4)in height,with breaks in the berm or
barrier to allow for pedestrian access. (Ord. 09-1394, 3-3-2009, eff. retroactive to 2-4-2009)
None of the common open space areas are located adjacent to a collector or arterial street.
Site Development Amenities:
1. All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space and recreation
amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows:
a. Quality of life:
(1) Clubhouse.
(2) Fitness facilities.
(3) Enclosed bike storage.
(4) Public art such as a statue.
(5) Dog park with waste station.
(6) Commercial outdoor kitchen.
Page 16
(7) Fitness course.
(8) Enclosed storage.
b. Open space:
(1) Community garden.
(2) Ponds or water features.
(3) Plaza.
(4) Picnic area including tables,benches,landscaping and a structure for shade.
c. Recreation:
(1) Pool.
(2) Walking trails.
(3) Children's play structures.
(4) Sports courts.
d. Multi-modal amenity standards:
(1) Bicycle repair station.
(2) Park and ride lot.
(3) Sheltered transit stop
(4) Charging stations for electric vehicles
2. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of multi-family development as
follows:
a. For multi-family developments with less than twenty(20)units,two(2)amenities
shall be provided from two(2)separate categories.
b. For multi-family development between twenty(20) and seventy-five(75)units,three
(3)amenities shall be provided,with one from each category.
c. For multi-family development with seventy-five(75)units or more, four(4)
amenities shall be provided,with at least one from each category.
d. For multi-family developments with more than one hundred(100)units,the decision-
making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the
proposed development.
3. The decision-making body shall be authorized to consider other improvements in
addition to those provided under this subsection D,provided that these improvements
provide a similar level of amenity. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005)
Proposed amenities include a clubhouse with a fitness facility, a swimming pool and spa
with cabanas and an outdoor lounge area, 10 foot wide multi-use pathways and internal
walking trails, a plaza, a pickleball sports court, and a bike repair station. A BBQ area
is depicted on the site plan;Staff recommends this area is constructed as a commercial
outdoor kitchen.An outdoor seating area is also depicted on the site plan;Staff
recommends this area is constructed as a picnic area with tables, benches, landscaping
and a shade structure. Staff also recommends a children's play structure is provided.
Staff is of the opinion these upgrades and addition of an amenity is commensurate with
the number of units proposed.
Page 17
E. Landscaping Requirements:
1. Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3,
"Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title.
2. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The foundation
landscaping shall meet the following minimum standards:
a. The landscaped area shall be at least three feet(Y)wide.
b. For every three(3)linear feet of foundation,an evergreen shrub having a minimum
mature height of twenty-four inches(24") shall be planted.
c. Ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area.
The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application
should depict landscaping in accord with these standards.
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.
Landscaping(UDC 11-3B):
Street buffer landscaping, including noise abatement along future SH-16, is required to be
provided with the subdivision improvements as noted above in Section V.B.
Landscaping is required to be provided along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-
12C.A mix of trees,shrubs,lawn and/or other vegetative ground cover with a minimum of
one(1)tree per 100 linear feet of pathway.
Fencing: All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. A 6-foot
tall solid screen fence is proposed along the northern&western boundaries of the multi-family
development.
Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual):
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed structures, included in Section
VII.H. The townhomes are proposed to be 2-or 3-stories in height,the multi-family structures are
proposed to be 3-stories in height, and the clubhouse if proposed to be a single-story in height;
building materials consist of a mix of vertical board&batten fiber cement siding and horizontal
lap siding with brick veneer siding and wood ridge beam accents,metal awnings and asphalt
shingle roofing.
A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be
submitted for approval of the multi-family and commercial development to ensure
compliance with UDC standards and development provisions associated with this
application.A Design Review application is required to be submitted for approval of the
townhomes.Final design of all structures must comply with the design standards in the
Architectural Standards Manual.
D. Variance(VAR):
A Variance is requested to UDC Table 11-2A-7 to allow 44 of the 81 townhome lots on the
eastern portion of the development to be reduced from 2,000 to 1,694 square feet.UDC 11-5B-4
allows requests to vary from the requirements with respect to lot size.
Page 18
In order to grant a variance,City Council must make the findings for such,which state the
variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; and the variance shall
not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare per UDC 11-5B-4E.
The Applicant's narrative states there are several characteristics of the site that create an undue
hardship, as follows:
• The angle of the SH-16 right-of-way determined by ITD creates a remnant parcel that is an
unusual shape for development and restricts how the property can be developed.
• The Sky Pilot drain traverses through the middle of the property within a 100-foot wide
easement where no structures may be located,which reduces the amount of developable space
on the property.
• Ustick Road where it abuts the property will be widened to accommodate the SH-16
interchange,which reduces the amount of developable space for the property.
• McDermott Rd.will be terminated with a cul-de-sac, eliminating access from Ustick Rd.
which reduces the viable uses for the property.
• McDermott Rd. is in a fixed location and must be widened to meet ACHD standards,which
further reduces the amount of developable area.
• A landscape buffer is required to be provided along the northern property boundary adjacent to
the light industrial use proposed on the abutting property,which also reduces the developable
space for the property.
Although these characteristics do exist, Staff finds they do not prevent the Applicant from
reducing the number of lots within the development in order to comply with the minimum lot size
standard of 2,000 square feet. If a variance is approved, alternative compliance will also be
necessary to reduce the street buffer along McDermott Road, an entryway corridor, in order to
accommodate the proposed layout. Reducing the number of building lots will allow compliance
with the minimum lot size standards as well as street buffers. Therefore, Staff is not supportive of
the proposed variance request.
VI. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation with the requirement of a development
agreement,preliminary plat and conditional use permit and denial of the requested variance with
the provisions noted in Section VIII,per the Findings in Section IX.
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on November 3,2022. At the
public hearin.9,the Commission voted to recommend approval of the subject AZ, CUP and PP
requests.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing_
a. In favor: Travis Hunter,Josh Evarts, and Todd Tucker
b. In opposition: None
C. Commenting: Ron Hopper,Rod Green,and Paul Elam
d. Written testimony: Todd Tucker,Boise Hunter Homes
e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons
f. Other Staff commenting on application: Kurt Starman
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony
Page 19
a. Additional traffic on Ustick and McDermott Roads.
b. Transition of the McDermott Village development to the rural residential in the area.
c. Amount of development occurring in the area.
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
a. Timing for the construction of SH 16 and the commencement/completion of phase 1
construction.
b. Impacts of increased traffic on Ustick Road.
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. At Staff s recommendation, Commission modified DA provision#A.1 f to read, "A 10-
foot wide multi-use pathway shall be provided within the street buffers along N.
Glassford Ave. adjacent to SH-16 within a 14-foot wide public use easement.
b. Commission modified condition of approval#10k. to replace commercial outdoor
kitchen with outdoor BBQ.
5. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council:
a. Applicant requests Council waive condition#Al.c in Section VIII that requires a 25-foot
landscape buffer adjacent to the Flowers property along the west bounda rya of the
proposed development. This request was supported by the Commission. The
requirement does not apply because right-of-way will separate the subject property from
the residential property.
Page 20
VII. EXHIBITS
A. Annexation Legal Descriptions&Exhibit Maps
a IDAHO 9955 W Emerald St
SURVEY Boise, ID 83704
GROUP Phone: (208)846-8570
Fax: (208)884-5399
McDermott Village Subdivision
Annexation
Boundary Description
Project Number 21-575 June 15,2022
The southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 32,Township 4 North, Range 1
(Nest, Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho,and being more particularly described as
follows:
BEGINNING at the southeast corner of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of
Section 32,Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian:
Thence N89'17'49"W, 1325.58 feet along the south line of the southeast quarter
of the southeast quarter to the east sixteenth-section corner;
Thence N00°33'07"E,1316.23 feet along the west line of the southeast quarter of
the southeast quarter to the southeast sixteenth-section corner;
Thence S89"19'58"E,1324.63 feet along the north line of the southeast quarter of
the southeast quarter to the south sixteenth-section corner;
Thence S00"30'38"W, 1317.06 feet along the east line of the southeast quarter of
the southeast quarter to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
The above-described parcel contains 40.05 acres,more or less.
AL
s�
Page 1 of 1 �r� �£OF I
S.
Page 21
Scale: 1"=400'
0 100 200 400 800
Lagerid 5.32 5.33
E1/4
Property Corner
Property Boundary Line
— - - --— Parcel Line
1
--- Section Line co
N
!2
I 2i;
Ix
ICr)
b
Ql
[V
Q
C]
I
I I
I
h�
SE1/16 S89.1 9'58"E 1324,63' S1/16
O r4
a}
w ±40.05 Acres m o
a rai o `v
r] O vJ O
Q
En
5.32 E1/16 5.32 5.33
S.5 N89'17'49"W 1325.58' S.5 S.4
W. Ustick Rd. Point of
Beginning
P:\M75 N IA[0e It Rd Snd•y 21-578`d"\21-579 M....limA,, &/15�2M 717:22 Pu
Jah Ho.
IDAHO Exhibit Drawing for 2t-5�s
SURVEY OGE.1EOADUaST Shaft Na.
6U)04&8 daalr6l Annexation
(aoel aar-ssro
GROUP, LLC Situated In the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 32, Qwp. Oate
Township 4 North, Range 1 West, B.M., Ada County, Idaho. �f15�2422
Page 22
IDAHQ "�!$W E!rWIld$A
SUILVEY FA*@. la 8�704
GROUP Phomr,12im)&%-B'M
Fam- 4208�AB4-53#9
McDeermLnt 1411rsae Guhdivi�iw
Ftaadna Gfa
8oundaryF E*scriptirvl
f� =t rji.orber22-:578 Ailpit 3 7r 2022
14 µreel of daiid bitudLtd irl Lhe sDutlheaa quani,er i1 the!�oulheaxt gwdreer A 5et1imorr 33
TpwrL$hlp 4 Nonh,Range] "st,Bars■rt andrr,n•Ada Goun4y..i zh%and ho'rng room
pmthculerly dcxrihe+d as Togs:
BfiGlNNiNG et the ensf mteenth•sertiori darner o4 Section 32,Tcrwrwshr 4 Now*, Range
I West Bolie McAdlarl,wench beads NW717'49'W,1325 53 Teer fivm she jouKhea5t
corner of Sectlm 32:
TkerKs NarB•07't.44&2,D"Ah}ng the west lire of the soLOmt quarter of
the tauthva%t g4W"r,
tKanc2 fAr't?'3rE,7209 feet to tha cenlarlinrr of the dutiure Hlghrway id;
1 berwe M'4SVO`W,A53.71 Feet abrig the cvttwhn a 434 th4i f+utLpm HgKway 16
w the 5auTh lirke al tilt souch-em iju-:mer 4+f RPLe s*Ammi guarcen
The&ce+449'17' W,i551•Zra fees altpng the s*utfr fine flT Me s*UiNaA gwWr cl
th■svuthbast qumler to thr+MmT OF hMm miNci.
1 he abovr•described parcel contains 7.09 arm more or kess-
�3
. t
`• r
1
P!tgc l uf l _
Page 23
3 733 150 65€
C) IMR+wom RAM
two wwww •kh4
P%rsw L4rr
' Wqr Lan*
rvl.
' rrf
I
� I
I
1 I ¢
L I I !
Uhl VIYE 14 3
7.08 ALroi }r I
oink 49pt �� �•�
Beginning
LN
N0917'49'w 1325.5W
1M Udl:m 11 Rd.
IDAHO fxhi3ii Drcmir+g for
SURVEY G—G Rezone Mmi W-C,
GRCUr LLC 9iroa+d Y Wm amti•a quwbw*r 1hm ma.MmmW g.wI r PI JiKIWa M. Dro CMIr
1pm&v+ I IftL 8A. Ad Dan ISF Nan qfl ar70P3
Page 24
IiDAHO IR955 w Em-eram 5t
SURVEY Hoist, 4a 037414
G ROUP phrane: {208F 015.8570
fax: l Na I:B[,,51,99
l�Id�ermalR S�GMb�e 3+uEdn�l��an
larirdry bcwriptlm
Xxvjt l Numbar 22-5 78 A.aQ4sd J 7 2W2
A parcel DF lanrr srtuwLed in t7he smwthaest qumler aFt'he 3auebeasl oµrarler of Section 33~
TOWP,Shlp4 Ni)rTh, HaAge ] West.FWe MRrldLw,AdDQijnp,I0aho,qM bemE Mwe
Ipamr Artrtrr desxnhed as W62ws:
HF61MNPNG all the mauthesrst corner od S"Icin M,Ynwmhlp 4 NDrtir, Range 7 we rt,
Dribe flflerld"fl.
Fheno rQW IT4^U,612A�fawL a&vq rho smth Irrrt of ihd sraumumst ipartor
aFthe-.mrthw esl quar+'ter to•kh-e centerline of the Fribure Highwa-X 16;
Thentt 1C4rA5'DC`L 13.3335Ilem "vM emit i mt bf LN fdtute Hiaiwr a;6
1a khw flOM line of the w it w 5t-quarter of IN MWMOML g4Qrt9r,
fhonm 5BF"mrse"t,4%9.23 Fpft plang tht nartfi lime of than mumari%l grrsrtpr mi
the Mrth"st quark-to tare!muth sikkrenth-secth3D mmerr,
Thenfr`5CU'3(Y3W"W,M7.06 feet Soft A&"A Ilm rttf rho Scia0 ahL grxirher of
lht ADwroepSt 4War%r to lb@ FQIr4T I)F MQIMNI H0
Thf ;,Mvp-rid�srrotia J parf.#1�arrFsn4]7 1#srnil-;,rrw"rsr Ipr&
;—
_ r_
y
5
Page Iof1 -6
Page 25
j M IM 300 6m
Lend
Di-md 1 PGink
2orm 9ourmsmy Lkr■
Nr{O Lon*
SdLlw LM*
1 a4" Line
TIM
0 fp
02
:2 �s
# E
rf 17.12 „
Afrm �: ■r
m
cL-
1 4
i
l '� I pain I of
Begin ning
W. LlitlGk Rd
�E7c%
IDAHO ENwihiL Gran •1.3 rarSURVE1 R-1 Fk$zorre p
CROUP, LLB ��.� �-� ��,..�, �a,���,.��..�����s■■ia, ,� ,.� n,�.
To■Pilp#+1� Morm1 Lot 1:1-Y..Atb dmrri:L Idr#a x.l a12M
Page 26
IOAHQ 9925 W E1r MOLd St
Su KVF r Sorim,16 S370 4
GROU R IPh I )W 070
156 Flex; g2mp OM-5399
Mrr O matt%MUEr`3ut3MVIrJ ri,
Re2une R-41)
Dwn1M DfluIptIum
A pwce4 of land sltrmt+ed In tfic sDkAheast quarter of the sautheart quarter of Setiian 22.
Town&hip A harth4 RwV 1 Wait,Boite Wr idian,OAm{dunrg,Idaho, amd being more
WcuLwN dowrihi d w Fr.Iltrrv#:
Dmmergkig m tiro ioutheast cufn r of 34mlon 32.T000milip q 1I14, Rarge l Ott
Boise Muidiark;
TMwe KBT17'4VW, 1325.59 fleet along the iouRh line of the saui hmi quarter of She
p¢ulhRast quarter W 1hq put slKW nth-wr#Ipn 14;
Theme MCKY R07"E, "S.W Feet bluna the gust line dF the seuthe-mt quarter or,.he
sarrhaaat qu artgr tip-qhq P{]INT QF BEGINNIOAl :
Thgntrr cp,ntirrulrrg WG3"a3M7"P,SU.M NM;Jong ih4 wgFt Ilnq of thq$rthamt
quarter QF 1he wwheast quarter tip the smurtfremt jkLeenth-sedrion :Dr mrr
TMmce 5.M'15'5W'F,B55.29 feel j%mM the monk line 0 the saRnheast iWane+of
thQ so-uthQag quwlq,r 1q thip wintpHinp of 1hp hu14mp Hlg"gy 14;
Thencr '4SW"W,B?9.€$fmt along the centerkne oaf tive Future Highway 36;
Thence NN'17'i M,724j69 fret is the POINT OF GEMNIMING
The abase-derrulhe:d parcel contains 15.35 acres,n-pare-or less.
I4
�.
Pne 1 C'f 3 jr
Page 27
DIX
� �LYNn�a Phs�r1
emm dQk-owy L.Irrp
— So-rLbn LLno
I
91 WM'E
Elva r
E
4 I
a
�1 I I
C3t5.85 Ares
r- 4Z
LL
m o
Rein# of
i ■i u
rloTil�l�w S m
WI I
a
�I� I
I
I
r
-•W 1��N- F� �'1 l i i�J t
I DAHO r i�ibii arovAnq Pof �°=5m
SURVEY �;,4�' R-40 Rem"
1F�r�W i lar-, i I lz QLL Pilo F.5fnp b4m& Af%:V�m
Page 28
B. Conceptual Development Plan, Overall Development Plan in the Vicinity&Concept Data
� 10�0. --ft.
CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Page 29
s
r
a r. + t■
■
(TI
ik
.4 .
■
k r■64
yy �,
Ip
Ire ILL,
at 40
' 1 t -• # a
--
F
Page 30
Usd'ckf McDermott Residential PNot North Arch It c
Meridian.ID 05/25/2022
2nning Sumrmry� Unll summary
$ite Area: I NSF' 06« Nm*deck NSF SUBi0iAL %
"I
Iyl JTHl 10.4 A )99
Site 2:IRetail/Cstprel 13.B9 AC High.,(N.AP.): 13.9 AC 1B l0 835 50 915
Subtotal I-bed 97 731 70,903 38.Y%
prnpnsed-
[urrenfIDning: RUT Rura 1,Urban Trami9oaal Proposed 2oning(mr):R-W (—a l 11
58 11
009 11,089
]g 1,217 BO 1,197
MaB.Density: 43.56du/AC I1,000sf)dpl Proposed Density: 20.5 du/AC 2C 3S l,Ob1 w l,[g4
Subtotal 2-bed 114 L024 216.780 45.6%
sethackz Regwree: -¢mocks pmpnsed.
Rear. 12' Pear 20'min. 3A 99 1,289 EO 1,365
tilde In[: 3' slde Ind: 1U mip.
Street S,,ted to Garage Required: Street Settark to Garage P.limtd: Subtotal3 ,d 39 1,285 Kit s 15.6%
Local: 20' L-1, 20'min
strret smbad:to Li—Required: -tined sethackm Uem,,prnp¢a¢d: 25p "1 are. 79a 5F
local: 10' Lacab 2tlmin. nova ode u,a".onw.naaaemrl mnmr,pa"n..a:
5veer landscape n,M,Required; 5—Landscape Duffer Proposed:
local: .1. L.A 20 min
Ma,neighs w Proposed Belch L H41'-9"
6...pmi Parking wmmary',
MYkil-1, Flr.-t," Mg. Bldg. .0, EH. pUnit Parking Required: Fading hopmed:
Height: GSF.deck GSF Net sF R per floor b 111 tolal total
MSel l: - 1-d amge: 1.
lerel2: 10'-2" 116,)50 ]08,)50 99,IR1 A9% 100 1-bed He 25 221 Ca.port: R]
lespl3: ll'-2" 113,636 106,63a 93,16E 9q% 10p 3-bed 39 Z 1H Garport. 3Y
Roof: in'-, Guest 250 0.1 25 standard: fit
Tp I; 41'-9" 346,801 326.801 237.793 73% 250 NnMM Pad: 112
Amenity: 9,000 1/500 19 AmenM' 18
ardllll 5lr!!o 25
Bubt9tal Mukftnnkl: 4Tl AahenmlMulHFamily: 4n
Covered: I 250 Covered 250
CommercialOma: p oral
-sore. C-stYY¢: 5,549 ]:5006f t12
Retail l: 3,40i Retail 1: 3',m —a of 7 Retail: Bl
Retail 2: 6.117 Relail 2: 6,117 15009 13 HC. 3
lercl l: Srbblal[,d. suhmral[md�
n Open 5pace5ummary. Bike Parking—Ary:
Co....Open Spew Rinl.u.d: Common Open Space Propmed: Bike Parking Required: Bike parking mpm,d:
B—Ime 1mtlo total total
)D%Wu3e_ m% 3 d Ground levek
30,710
MUSllamlly, m110 mil 17,32d A ra0e mdl oral
Unea<SOOsf: 0 I50 - 13,629 Wiffnend, 41 1:25 rM Coreredf5ecured: d20
Unit-500"'00 d: 211 250 52,"1 Total Required: 20 30vl Proposed: 20
D0 s1
Subtotal Required: 260 66,400 d
eYblaal Nf i"W'ed: 111,613 d SYmedal MF Provider 14q,730 sP
THK,tgre'. Asf ratio total total
round Level:
s%of sire 169,448 5% 8,473 Plaza: 15.—
5uhzrnalRequlred: aA7a p S.—Il Pmvl— )A
CONCEPT DATA Nog:Dalai-acbamahca.d Bpb,e 1q Ypdate as morn info matbnia known
05 25 2022
McDermott Multifamily PNaJ B#21-nott.,Mendianla pivotOM' north
aR[Hlreeruse
Page 31
C. Preliminary Plat(date: 10/25/2021)&Conceptual Phasing Plan
MCDERMOTT VILLAGE o 0
PRELIMINARY PLAT s
A PORTION OF THE SE J OF SECTION 32, @ `s
TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH,RANGE 1 WEST 0�
ADA COUNTY,IDAHO
OWNEWDEVELOPER GNILENGINEER LAND SURVEYOR
III H
PRELIMINARY PLAT DATA --^*^rT^•mrunao.,ec
LEGEND
zaE �r-i s`�is] oeimr
p
IIIi
mr
PRELIMINARY PLAT NOTES
E
E - SHEET INDEX
Le
.E
r. o m- r e R _
.u TxL1 -
_. T 11 1LIT
-^1Ym' n E. e n ene.c room Dge
num.
W
w. i,E xn
WT 1.1 e. u T.r. ,u.. cow..r - - O
ggo
a
> a
� J
W
C
IL
01 17
Page 32
M BLOCK
-
II . I
L
MATCHLINE-SEE SHEET LEFT i
SLOG(
§w
r 3igme
x
BLOCK L� •o���eJ`I=,o ae a ya •e h
3
sad e » FMAM^e nsl O
4
Z
o a
°'wi.ai�
19 is t J 3
BLOCKS Lu
L���Ep+
4 BLOGc
tz
Nm+ fi F F F Ik
MATCHLINE°-°SEE SHEET RIGHT oft
02 r 17
Page 33
- - —
1 '1,
c
m =
� BLOCK
E'k R
MATLHLNE-SEE SHLET LEFT -
f
M o a a
e BLOCK
r
�� BLOCK 5 IL
oza
� IY
A MAHEH NE-SEE
i SHEET Ric*r
Page 34
rt
V
�E
a
4
I
I
J
a
J —.
-WEO F
C
. z
Lli
Page 35
D. CUP Site Plan for Multi-Family Development(dated: 6/30/2022)
f -*-fir i
r ,►aim n' 1
Ld
f4i
— -z
p`s
a
-OzEd
- v -
-OA,
iW Jfl
wn,wuxE-sFE 9iEEl t3
a
,2 a 17
Page 36
E. Landscape Plan—PP&CUP (date: 6/30/2022)
tilt
ig
LC
qmm%m,W
PIN
Ch
Pill
jp,.IL
0
77
Page 37
r
��: �_ � � 1111111111 1111111111��� � ,►!�
HININWRINNIN
f� .g
:ash !3fy, ..♦\\\ems \♦.♦♦♦♦♦.♦\ °"• � t
QQ
WEE
' � .mom V� .\�`\.\�: ♦; 7 '>� �'���\ 1 M � �4 [` r`'`
NZ
IMP
Me
ss \\\\\\\\\\\\\ Ab, �` r
VANS
.�• �a� 4'.I � •��\:,, ��' �� w� �6r it
sw
Mlwm
i!i Fiiii� rusFri n �: ril nrpsrs iryrs r-f i#} ;; ,t+
�_�tk��.ke #d •ikll• ...•Fh1�kAAi�a1•A�i�� �.,' -
�i�!i� �i�i�l�i�ii��s�!�i�;
111111111111�. � 111111111111;,,,,,"• ,° h,,,
a�>a+<:xx xx atx��.-��` �.e.� �r�:a a•�e:3.s i
lug 151; 171;
IA V 1
X
W M, . C. p IV '
15 il
it
R
up
0 ui
MM R
ju Rig ..,I
Q Lu I!;I I
Wn �; 2 s- 3 P j
Lu
Mgg 4!
.ale l p-
H i, I — Hs i dig
Ma Fie
T 6
pe
LU
FIRM
ry
AV3GN]
CI
uj
z. co
I?
0
7e
mmish hK
Page 39
LLP a: x
. ii
k,
CL
1 1.1 N
LLP
LL
ml
x
Up
IM i1h
i
m Rb
-4.
3,.
iqLLP
LLP
Ch
HIR
i
X
Ng i!
0
Lu
6
)ousn
....... ....
Page 40
• E- E. . E. -E . 1 1
All 11111 IN
46
mod•' ?gg 2ji :\`e' •� —'
fir•. „"_ � i+�.��.\. •.� �.e ��ti � ,•'
am
ME
s
a
! IIIil ! I ,. Uif3gllll �llEy
,,��"
13.` A yy ]ti h 1 Al •g.4v�111A� _ E
Mil
104 i R
U M, ! i
�2 17;; R I
sp
P i
LLP 2
H 2 ill 11 IR I
L
tg O L..
MIN RI
u IcaHIP i's
M
S LU 2
Fz
H� M
cg VV
as lit
d
1 1 R1. F H HE i sm a A o.
U
zd
�Lq— Mo
.. .........
.1cA A ON3 I
t v
21
0
..............
AOLLsn&7
Page 42
M.�
Ldi
52
7777
CL
flar
uj N
EL
3;
H
Au
cc
J
4D
LLP
ui dc E
C3
His
C3
..........
IS
61
ks
7-7
It
20
ie
ze I
U)
10'IF
dm
7�
. ...........
Or
;W;i 41 B
i
MI
Oil
(D
uitl
f. dm
nr
f. aa
Ca
mnisn
nMu
Page 43
G. Site Amenity Plans for Multi-Family&Townhome Developments—CUP(dated: 6/29/22)
0
N
N
ca ` u
` V
Q
® � N�
AWNINGA80VE
a • • s
ab
n Qo �
m ql
P,
!
! 'r
V�
1 - -�
l�
H O
z r
W
� � L
4
o �
4 o a Q
k iI L1J
N Z V
N w
N
� � U
Page 44
7
r � J
! < <
w
LU
LU
_ w
v
< _
UZ N
<
UJcy _
= 0 0 A
W
CL 3 x
+-m
LU
A .1
Page 45
H. Conceptual Building Elevations&Perspectives for Residential(dated: 6/30/22)
Townhomes:
0 wig
•��{ °i7y1 "r
M ;
y t�
it
Multi-Family Development—Apartment&Amenity Buildings:
COW—NA—
McDermott Mixed-Use rN oaazius9ex nEaiowx,io pivotww
Page 46
Il
r '
WEW5.VEWTOYESIOETITRUIMIK LOOKING NORTHWEST YEW E.YEWTO RESMENT 6U€LD€NG,LOOKING SOUTH EAST
4
1
.-.
WEWT.YEW TO RESEENT C -IIIUNITY FROM FU WHIGHWAY VEW 1.AEPIALVEW TO AMENRY 8Df NG
GONCEPTIMAGERY 6N3�.2@2
McDermott Mixed-Use pIDJ0 2ll1.11ERIDIAN,ID pivotf"w
59
n�
1.STREET(NORTH)ELEVATION
enczrxauuxEirv�siorvwwr�Fzc��� �I �I
Pu si ix ucvic
wuv mewl r�evcxu.w�
1 '7
2.STREET(WEST)ELEVATION J.HWY16(EAST)ELEVATION
4.INTERIOR DRIVE(NORTH)ELEVATION
Df
CONCEPT ELEVATION VIEWS SGALEVIC=1 6'-0@24u 0102D22
McDermott Mixed-Use PNa,OB#21-0590ck,MERIDIAN,ID pivot nortW
Page 47
N II
1.OPEN SPACE ISOUTH)ELEVAnON
2.(WEST)ELEVATION 3-{EAST)ELEVATION
4.INTERIOR DRIVE(NORTH)ELEVATION
02
CONCEPT ELEVATION VIEWS 06.30.2022
MuD noff and
McDermott Mixed-Use PNa`JOB#21-059UsUck,MERIDIAN,ID pivotnoftW
777
I.CLUBHOUSE ENTRY(SOUTH)ELEVATION
_41
2.(WEST)ELEVATION 3.(EAST)ELEVATION
00 M
vxmrxwocomxxwwxc
4.CLUBHOUSE POOL DECK(NORTH)ELEVATION
03
CONCEPT ELEVATION VIEWS 06 3G 2022
McDenoft and Us
McDermott Mixed-Use PNS JOB#21-059tick,MERIDIAN,ID pivotnoftW
Page 48
^ OF LJJ
� I I
MI BY BWR BY CERED
7"j4
1�
9.PAINim METAL LOUVERS ORNm I 12.VERDCMD GRPIX 1].W000RIME SEAM SETPIL +d.GAOLE BORMERVENi Ri ts-PaIIRm CARACE ODGR
14C 1. E 1. 0 5 20 4 1C 12 11 0 1A 2C 9C ]C 6C ]C
J - _— ., '•ice,
SHERWINW]LNAMSSW7R5 SHERWIN WILLAMSM50
ro"r
EPCCESSINLE BEIGE
SHERWIN WILLIAMS SWG6G5 SNERLNNWILLWMSSW1036
NUMBERS OEHOIE MAIERWL3 FLLMPIEFtlPL3 P3 NOlEN ORONIIER
- _ � -- f LERERS OENOIE COLORS ARnRovEOEWu
XX
CONCEPT DETIMU MATERIAL BOARD 06 N.
McDermott Mixed-Use P Da .ttB it2BdIJ'hck,MERIDIAN,ID pivotnoftw
Page 49
L Emergency Access Exhibit Approved by Fire Department �g
`+J
r Btu �
? „ a XAPpyNC-EEE SIEE[I LETT
rw
A eE.00K `c ti� Lul.fazl:.�. 19
�. ins°`
a`.- T' W
T
XAiLIXWE-4f 9EfE PITNi
MtTCIELIN[-SE 9�EfT W
Ilk
WHY
-
i �
a
1
i
P
Page 50
J. ITD's Plan for the Ustick Rd./SH-16 Interchange
401.42,
�MAT�y IINE z43D+44.ea�— MATCH UNE to T4N, R1W, B.M. lo-osee CErr w(rST
SrAOiD
�43 D'1'SQ 614-0256LT � ��"z43G{.7p seal-0T[ SE45E45EC.32 WOODSID EAVENDE 966 FT 91A ROR7K4,q&R]R.96'RT TO
614-0256 028#061]. 59FT BTAR030 ,16,31'0.1
�� z 2 —2029 ,120.41 LTTD
2026+85,64, 100,10'LT INVESTORS LLC sTA x9xw4O,w,s6aTLT
I
20lot 62-IT74.58�0 R-20,00' 3$' +41,41. 610-03-6 610.100A GATETMI
101,fi2'IT R +64,37,
R=IO.00;'-• C 30019'LT r10D,]D'LT I ,EA[al sTA29 �09 R1
I 0.=20 00' �J I EA[al 8TA 202e+4e ,
20233.21"D, 2430+60.]0, '.�I + .............................. �F � fi1L415A 910EWLLN
I 83.21'LT 35.50'RT 1... g clAzozs OO.T4
0.-10.00' 1+OIEA -12023+e5 Ra•111.]'
C 610-SODA 6 1 �LTTD
x9xsxm,00,]4,00•ERTV
243D+00.31,I•. �+ ......614.O15A o 0.-2b�D�Q SIDEWALK 8FA 20z0.4�7,00.1�.RT
- SIDEWALK 5,50'LT srA2E.+1.q0's4 1.i q•1r
202+70,7fi, R-10,00' ..—...—.—.— .—.—' —.—.—.—.-.--••�•� 5961' SFA xO00+W,O0,66,00'R7TO
' 2026+84,36, ry ]00.1V LT - elemfiq cuRe RA
615426 2027+75,04 EGlN TAP 2.xR ORFRPENOICURAl0
63.50'LT
26+44,93, 9 86'LT I 615i92A +9631,
I- 74,00'9T 0.-5�09' _ RC 24293.92.71 1T410'9T,44. RET ROTECT la 14SY SFA x02]+4R03,9/A9'LT
202b.00' . 89,50'LT 224V 8TA202T•5gT4 T3M'LT
+ 64.00'FT vn W WAT LP 8223 I C] I� allnzozl•94,p.EO,e9•RT
M W IW q�iW W iW W iW IW�W d ,
„I ¢SH•16 i CP R224 292T ]s LT I ' z Az92q+�3,M/1r
b/W / q/W—@9.90'LT N6-x6EA OVRg TYPE'
rvY LLL usTTcK ROAD IAxiv o —2017 1.t11, ry McT 91A,azT.62,B&12$RT TO
LT _ T 59,]_05E w n -i v— i'x -I w _m STA u2q+1D,1z.'-TA4•"T
2026+3609, ---- --- 5950'ir _ _ _
n __ 36 FT STA—+]6,88.3I,15 RT TO
aI zozs°0°' zon zdze zoze usrlcK RD zoso � � a STA,426+92,eT.p47'RT
r se9°Se'o7^E I-
N �� 91A 16tB.9�499.�9,9 TO
vciZM
2650. 8 I W 56 FT 3FAR9Ri+95,B5.2T97'RT TO
__________ _ _____ _____ ,R ____ ___ a Z9B'RT15LS1A �4 CONDVIIS �' r ----- 2WT+55,06,2T[XI'RTTO
8 . 00.11 RT IX1NlINUEDONNEDFT6HMP AB STA. BEGIN TAPER F IE>=F]
MP BC STA.ZTICN RO STA.2026+840R46'RTR.178.50' 1202R+47.R=1.00' 1 65.03'RT 54.34'RT
b-SIDEWALK 2026+53,54, - b+,P� q SIDEWALK
i
I 63.50'RT h R-63.50- J NOTEs
a
^ 5991-06X .............................. n5 FOR sTOR•...••.... .••...• 1, ER TO DRAINAGE Pu
I ............................. ry 1428+6],]9. I ................ .•...•...... — � ORAIN0.GE FACIDiIES, N
2026+47.06, 102,5V RT "'f' 2029+0051, 614015A
74,00'RT 1 2028+47,41, 11,56'RT RFEER TO tRRICAnUx Purvs FRR
2026154,54, 'E ` I T5-03'x_� „�,�-..�.,.t—..—ti--� PpprosED OFF E,.uNP15.ANO
L 64,50'RT d 2023+53.35��, I OTHER taatcnnon FACRITIES•
I 614-o25b RF 64.34'RT I 3, REFER TO VTIIIN PWNS FO0.EXISTING
1 14217.59'L1+11 T +9 / 610-SODA AND PROFOSEO U-MES.
1 r 10 RT 2026+15.00,
1426+56.29, j 74,82'RT
BEGIN 17,50'LT r! I 4 CVR610R EDGESOFRPAYEMENT VNlE55
Q 'CONSTRUCTION T� I y I I narE°°rHLRwISE
I RAMP AB
STA 5.0 . Ofi9
s REFER
�ivaxAO OETAt15 FO0.
N 717743.3 . 610-036 NE0IA AO
E 243288.229 ! 4D 13.70, GRIFFIN.]AMES F I KEY MAP
` v 82,64'RT
GOVi'LOT 1,SECS 5
I I 14 7+3';iT I 1 ; 1427+ T3N, R1W, B.M. I �"
67,92 CL
f I 1 6
II t` PI=Y2432.76.14
1 ' •.\.� 83,92' f 11 6 22R33433a•RT
I II r L -566.76'
E[ . I O/i4��G5N5AI20 0 20 R=2200.78I® ----- 1427+305 ME C398T9 I
Sc0e, 1 =4W TE R�FA,
/
115�32'RT 4 P .
S[ REVISIONS I DE— g,STMK ILI5"OM" IDAHO PROJECT NOS ROADWAY PLAN SHEET FNGL I SN rJ
NO OATS E MA.1RTNNI ME FOR I]'X n^ SH-16,USTICK RD TO US20R6
E DESIGN CNECNOED _M °NLT TRANSPORTATION' CO�TM a1ska ,p
I DETMLE. wV6 V FILENAME DEPARTMENT A023(408) ADA AND CANYON COUNTY -ADAA6ER °sq N' y
1,GRAVE s 4 N,6 m-���EI-�I=o,w - USTICK ROAD 9lj �GF� @J
DRAWING CH oKEPO� [NN MG�Mo i �rIIAQSOCIATC��k. STA,2025+60 TO STA,2030+40 5NEEF 191 OF l62 Z•wti
Page 51
VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
1. A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property.
Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance,a DA shall be entered into between the City of
Meridian,the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption,and the
developer.
Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to
commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the
Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA
shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions:
a. Development of the subject property shall be generally consistent with the conceptual
development plan, site plan,preliminary plat, conceptual phasing plan, landscape plan,
open space and site amenity exhibits, and conceptual building elevations submitted with
the application contained herein.
b. The two(2)commercial buildings proposed on the northern portion of the site shall be
arranged to create some form of common,usable gathering area, such as a plaza or green
space as depicted on the conceptual development plan in accord with the mixed-use
guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan (see pg. 3-13).
c. A minimum 25-foot wide buffer shall be provided on the C-G zoned property to the
adjacent residential use to the west(Flower#SO432438850)and to the future multi-
family residential uses in this development as set forth in UDC Table 11-2B-3,unless
such width is otherwise modified by City Council at a public hearing with notice to
surrounding property owners as set forth in UDC 11-3B-9C.2. The buffer shall be
landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C.Note:If the land use on
the Flower property changes to non-residential prior to development of the subject
property, a buffer to residential uses is not required.
d. Noise mitigation shall be provided within the buffers along future SH-16 in accord with
the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D for residential uses adjoining a state highway.
e. Private streets shall be required within the multi-family development for addressing
purposes and shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. The private street
application shall be submitted prior to or concurrently with the final plat application.
f. A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway shall be provided within the street buffers along N.
Glassford Ave. adjacent to SH-16 within a 14-foot wide public use easement.
g. The final plat shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits for any structures
within this development.
h. All future structures constructed on this site shall comply with the applicable design
standards contained in the Architectural Standards Manual.
Preliminary Plat:
2. The final plat shall include the following revisions:
a. Include a note granting cross-access/ingress-egress easements between all commercial
lots in the subdivision via a note on the final plat or a separate recorded easement.
b. Depict all street landscape buffers in a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer
easement,maintained by the property owner,homeowner's association or business
Page 52
owners' association as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C.2a.A minimum 35 foot wide buffer is
required along future SH-16 and the interchange and along N. McDermott Rd., entryway
corridors; a minimum 25 foot wide buffer is required along the western portion of W.
Ustick Rd., an arterial street; and a minimum 10 foot wide buffer is required along local
streets in the C-G zoning district, measured per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.1.
c. Depict the easements for all waterways (i.e. the Sky Pilot Drain,the Eight Mile Lateral
and the Noble Lateral) on the site; structures shall not encroach within these easements.A
License Agreement is required with NMID for any encroachments within the easements.
If the location of the Eight Mile lateral changes, the new location shall be depicted on the
plat.
d. All R-15 zoned lots shall be a minimum of 2,000 square feet as set forth in UDC Table
11-2A-7.
e. Graphically depict zero(0) lot lines on the internal lot lines where the townhomes are
proposed(i.e.where structures will span across lot lines).
3. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall be revised as follows:
a. Depict the bollards proposed to restrict access to the emergency access driveway off W.
Ustick Rd. completely outside of the right-of-way.
b. Depict a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway within the street buffers along SH-16 within a
14-foot wide public use easement;the easement shall be submitted to the Planning
division prior to submittal of the final plat for City Engineer signature.
c. Depict landscaping along all pathways as set forth in UDC 11-3B-12C.
d. Landscaping is required within the street buffer as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C. (See
updated standards.)
e. Depict landscaping within common open space areas as set forth in UDC 11-3G-5B.3.
f. Change the Fraxinus Pennsylvanica"Marshall's Seedless"Green Ash tree to another
variety per the City Arborists' comments.
g. Depict a minimum of two(2)points of site amenities for the townhome portion of the
development from the Site Amenities and Point Value Table 11-3G-4. The Apphea
should elar-ify prior-to or-at the Commission hearing what amenities are proposed.
4. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in
UDC Tables 11-2A-7 for the R-15 district and 11-2A-8 for the R-40 district; and UDC Table
11-2B-3 for the C-G zoning district.
5. All waterways on this site shall be piped as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B,unless otherwise
waived by City Council.
6. Cross-access/ingress-egress easements shall be provided between all commercial C-G zoned
lots in the subdivision via a note on the final plat or a separate recorded easement.
7. The emergency access driveway required and approved by the Fire Dept. off W. Ustick Rd.
east of future SH-16 shall be approved by ITD as it's located within the influence area of
their intersection project.
8. All alleys shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5.
Page 53
Conditional Use Permit:
9. Compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27: Multi-Family
Development and the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-8 is required.
10. The site/landscape plans included in Section VII shall be revised as follows:
a. 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 in accord with UDC 11-4-3-
27B.2.
b. Depict the location of the property management office;maintenance storage area; central
mailbox location,including provisions for parcel mail,that provide safe pedestrian and/or
vehicular access; and a directory and map of the development at an entrance or
convenient location for those entering the development in accord with UDC 11-4-3-
27B.7.
c. Depict safe pathway connections from the proposed multi-family development to the
abutting high school to the west.
£ Depict landscaping along all the foundation of all street facing elevations in accord with
the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27E.
g. Depict landscaping along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C.A mix
of trees, shrubs, lawn and/or other vegetative ground cover with a minimum of one (1)
tree per 100 linear feet of pathway.
i. Depict a minimum of 20 bicycle parking spaces per the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-
6G;bicycle parking facilities shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C.
Bike racks should be provided in central locations for each multi-family building and the
amenity building.
j. Depict a minimum of 495 off-street parking spaces for the development in accord with
the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 and 11-3C-6B.1 per the analysis in Section
VI.
k. At a minimum, depict site amenities consisting of the following: a clubhouse with a
fitness facility, a swimming pool and spa with cabanas and an outdoor lounge area; 10-
foot wide multi-use pathways and internal walking trails; a plaza; a pickleball sports
court; a bike repair station; a eemmer-eial outdoor kite hen with a BBQ; a picnic area with
tables,benches,landscaping and a shade structure; and a children's play structure.
k. Minimum 7-foot wide sidewalks shall be provided where parking abuts sidewalks if
wheel stops aren't proposed to prevent vehicle overhang in accord with UDC 11-3C-5B4;
if 7-foot sidewalks are proposed,the length of the stall may be reduced to 17 feet.
11. 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 as set forth
in UDC 11-4-3-27B.5.
12. 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 as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27F. A recorded copy of the document shall be
submitted prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development.
Page 54
13. 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 in
accord with UDC 11-4-3-27C.6.
14. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be
submitted for approval of the multi-family and commercial development to ensure
compliance with UDC standards and development provisions associated with this application.
A Design Review application is required to be submitted for approval of the townhomes.
Final design of all structures must comply with the design standards in the Architectural
Standards Manual.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.1 There is a sewer loop on the northern section. Sewer connects to McDermont in Block 1 and
the existing SSMH-06. Reconfigure the design so this is removed.
1.2 Manhole SSMH-11 and SSMH-12 has angles of pipe in/out of manhole at less then 90
degrees. Adjust these manholes so min angle of pipe through manhole is 90 degrees.
1.3 Provide Steel Casing for all locations where sewer crosses future Hwy 16 per City's casing
requirements.
1.4 All manholes require 14ft graveled/paved access path.
1.5 End of the line requires minimum 0.6% slope.
1.6 Ensure manholes are not located in curb/gutter.
1.7 Sewer/water easement varies depending on sewer depth. Sewer 0-20 ft deep require a 30 ft
easement,20-25 ft a 40 ft easement, and 25-30 ft a 45 ft easement. Adjust easements
accordingly.
1.8 Area is subject to the Oaks Lift Station and Pressure Sewer Reimbursement agreement.
1.9 No permanent structures (trash receptacle walls,trees,bushes,buildings, carports, fences,
infiltration trenches, light poles,etc.) are to be built within the utility easement.
1.10 Sewer must be built 1Oft from edge of easement.
1.11 Ensure no sewer services pass through infiltration trenches.
1.12 12-inch water main must be built to and through the development on McDermott Road. On
west side of future SH-16,water must connect to north.
1.13 A streetlight plan will be required for the development of this property.
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.
Page 55
2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public
right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet
wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via
the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard
forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit
an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works), a legal description
prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of
the easement(marked EXHIBIT A)and an 81/2"x 11"map with bearings and distances
(marked EXHIBIT B)for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a
Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this
document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development
plan approval.
2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing
surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a
single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point
connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for
the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval.
2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final
plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to
evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC.
2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals,or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting,
crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed
per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-
1207 and any other applicable law or regulation.
2.7 Any wells that will not continue to be used must be properly abandoned according to Idaho
Well Construction Standards Rules administered by the Idaho Department of Water
Resources. The Developer's Engineer shall provide a statement addressing whether there are
any existing wells in the development, and if so,how they will continue to be used, or
provide record of their abandonment.
2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City
Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment
procedures and inspections(208)375-5211.
2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and
activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this
subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits.
2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted
fencing,landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat.
2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to
occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a
performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the
final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B.
2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction
inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan
approval letter.
Page 56
2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply
with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act.
2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404
Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office.
2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H.
2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all
building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material.
2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a
minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to
ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above.
2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or
drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation
district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been
installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required
before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project.
2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings
per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and
approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the
project.
2.21 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.
2.22 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.
2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount
of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure
for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by
the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit,
cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the
Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service
for more information at 887-2211.
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT
https:llweblink.meridianciV.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=272855&dbid=O&repo=MeridianC
Lty
Page 57
D. POLICE DEPARTMENT
https://weblink.meridianciV.org/WeUink/DocView.aspx?id=279522&dbid=0&repo=Meridian C
Lty
E. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID)
hggs://weblink.m eridia n c i ty.org/WeUink/DocView.aspx?id=273744&dbid=0&rep o=Me ridia n C
hty
F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS)
https://weblink.meridiancioy.or zlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=276592&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
X
G. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD)
https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=279662&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
v&cr=1
H. PARK'S DEPARTMENT
City Arborist:
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=2 72 795&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
X
I. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCHOOL IMPACT
https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=275929&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
X
J. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
by s://weblink.meridiancioy.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=273537&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
&y cr--I
K. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD)
https://weblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=278192&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
Y
L. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https://weblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=275528&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
Y
IX. FINDINGS
A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-5B-3E)
Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full
investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an
annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
Page 58
The Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment to R-1 S, R-40 and C-G and
subsequent development is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the MU-R
FL UM designation.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
The Commission finds the proposed map amendment will allow for the development of
commercial uses which will assist in providing for the service needs of area residents; and
residential uses which will contribute to the range of housing opportunities in the City
consistent with the purpose statement of the commercial and residential districts in accord
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 zoning map amendment should not be detrimental to the
public health, safety and welfare.
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 the proposed zoning map amendment will not result in an adverse
impact on the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services
within the City.
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
The Commission finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City.
B. Preliminary Plat:
In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the
decision-making body shall make the following findings:
I. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan;
The Commission finds that the proposed plat is in substantial compliance with the adopted
Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use and transportation. (Please see Comprehensive
Plan Policies in, Section IV of this report for more information)
2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the
proposed development;
The Commission finds that public services will be provided to the subject property with
development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers)
3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's
capital improvement program;
Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at
their own cost, the Commission finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of
capital improvement funds.
4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development;
Page 59
The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the
proposed development based upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., Police,
Fire, ACHD, etc.). (See Section VIII for more information)
5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and,
The Commission is not aware of any health,safety, or environmental problems associated with
the platting of this property. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis.
6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features.
The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on
this site that require preserving.
C. 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 is large enough to accommodate the
proposed use and dimensional and development regulations of the R-40 zoning district(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 consistent with the future land use map
designation ofMU-R and is allowed as a conditional use in UDC Table I1-2B-2 in the R-40
zoning district.
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 proposed design of the development, construction, operation and
maintenance should be compatible with the mix of other uses planned for this area and with
the intended character of the area and that such uses will not adversely change the character
of the area.
4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not
adversely affect other property in the vicinity.
The Commission finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report,
the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission and
Council should weigh any public testimony provided to determine if the development will
adversely affect other properties in the vicinity.
5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such
as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse
disposal,water, and sewer.
The Commission finds that essential public services are available to this property and that the
use will be adequately served by these facilities.
Page 60
D.Variance(UDC 11-5B-4):
1. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site;
Stafffinds although there are characteristics that hinder development of this site, the Applicant
could easily comply with the 2,000 square foot minimum lot size standard in UDC Table 11-
2A-7 if the number of lots were reduced.
2. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare.
Staff finds granting the variance should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and
welfare.
Page 61
Item 22
E IDIAN;---
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: PRESENTATIONS
Ll
THE TEAM Team•Welcome•
THE ORDER OF EVENTS Staff Comments•Project Elevations•Our Approach/Solution•The Challenge•Preliminary Plat/CUP•Rezoning•Annexation•The Ask•The Development Justification•The Property•
•MCDERMOTT RDUSTICK RD THE PROPERTY included this site5 miles of HWY 16 that 2017 ITD Redefined the final •growthStrategic corner in the path of •family housing developmentby with a
goal of a single40 acres was acquired in 2006 •Property Background
•THE DEVELOPMENT JUSTIFICATION the adjacent land usesprovides a nice transition to Owyhee High School and aligns with the proximity to Our proposed development •Use MapMeridian City
Future Land RG on the identified as MUThe land is already
•THE ASK: ANNEXATION REQUEST units per acreOur proposed density is 12.49 •per acre40 dwelling units -between 6residential dwellings in a range employment, retail and RG anticipates a
mix of -MU•property linesnorthern and western to City Limits along the Area of Impact and adjacent Property is in the Meridian
•THE ASK: REZONING REQUEST G (Commercial)and CFamily) 15 (SingleMF), R40 (Residential specified R(RUT) in Ada County to the from Rural Urban Transition of the parcel, transitioning We
are asking for a rezoning
•THE ASK: PRELIMARY PLAT REQUEST Employment Density)Offices (Increased •(Aligned with Regional Draw)Flex Commercial/Retail •Store/Fuel (Interchange)•G (Commercial)•81 Townhomes•15 (Single
Family)•250 Dwellings•40 (Residential MF)
•THE ASK: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) REQUEST development.submitted with this Conditional Use Permit was Code. An application for the the Unified Development Conditional Use Permit
per the development requires a family portion of The multi
THE CHALLENGE MCDERMOTT RDUSTICK RD Phase 2 (20/22 to 84) funded 2021•Phase 2 design finished in 2020•finished in 2014 Phase 1 S.H. 44 to U.S. 20/22 •Effort initiated in 2006•HWY 16
ITD/ACHD IMPROVEMENTS USTICK RD All Work Completed by 2024•locationConstruct McDermott Rd. in new •Rd.)Ustick(north & south of Rd. Sac existing McDermott -De-Cul•Rd.UstickWiden •Rd.)Ustickramps
at (on and off 16 –Construct Highway •
OUR APPROACH MCDERMOTT RDUSTICK RD Water Line Easement•S. Sewer Main•N. Sewer Main•Be a Great Partner•Common GoalBuild the Best Team with a •ComprehensivelyApproach the Site ••
SOLUTION:Meridian Housing NeedsCOMMON GOAL: Meeting •plazasIntegrated green space and •RegionRetail and Office amenities for •Family Townhomes-Single•CommunityFamily Lifestyle -Multi•of
Owyhee High SchoolLeveraging the Regional draw •programming•R Development-MU McDermott Village
MERIDIAN COMP PLAN Integrated Plaza•Office/Hospitality•Retail/Office•ResidentialSingle Family •MIXED USE REGIONAL SAMPLE–
Map with actual data overlayed:DATA OVERLAY Indoor Kitchen, Outdoor BBQ, Pool 9k sqft Clubhouse–Site Amenities Owyhee High Schoolconnecting MF & Commercial to Plazas, Pickle Ball Courts,
Walking Paths Open Space 32%15,000–Sqft Retail/Office 250-# Apartments 81-# Townhomes
7 FAMILY AND COMMERICIAL-LOOKING NORTH AT MULTI
LOOKING WEST AT MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL-
COMMERCIAL PUBLIC PLAZA
TOWNHOME ELEVATIONS
STAFF COMMENTS referenced on the map.for both sides of this project as We have maximized strategically 16-Hwywide buffer along -foot-Requiring a 35
STAFF COMMENTS highwaybuffer on the West side of the supported with our current 33’ which can be reductionCode allows for a 10% 16.-along Hwywide buffer -foot-Requiring a 35
STAFF COMMENTS 76’ Buffer Total lose the Western lot in the project, so we do not alternative compliancehighway. We are asking for an 26’ buffer on the East side of the with our current
is not sufficient which Code allows for a 10% reduction option 16.-wide buffer along Hwy-foot-Requiring a 35
STAFF COMMENTS lots)sqftare 1700 yellow(highlighted in sqftunder 2,000 Only 44/81 lots are of the development. negating a portion of the affordable spirit of the units for Meridian residents,
and results is a 10% increase in the costs units (project size decreases by 9 units) eliminates roughly 10% of the available If the 2,000sqft compliance is required, it safety and welfare
for this variance. There is NO impact to the public health, Easement. Sky Pilot Drainwide -foot-100hardships presented by HWY 16 and the this project due to the two undue for the townhome
portion of variancea The McDermott Village project is seeking health, safety, and welfare.detrimental to the public the site and must not be because of characteristics of relieve an
undue hardship Per code: The variance must a minimum of 2,000 square feet.Requiring all townhome lots to be
QUESTIONS?
WEST ADA CONSIDERATION campus.Valley Christian Primary/Secondary Charter School and the new Cole including the existing Gem Prep rivate school's capacity and pcharter does not account
for the this project, with no concerns. This West Ada School District provided
TOWNHOME OPEN SPACE
COMMERCIAL GOALS Day Care•Dentist•Optometrist•Sports Therapy•slice, Ice Cream)-by-Grab and Go Food (Subway, Pizza•Convenience Store (Frontage w/ primary traffic burden)-Fuel •
v IDIAN�
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for McDermott Village Variance (VAR-2022-0004) by Boise
Hunter Homes, located at 3235 N. McDermott Rd., at the northwest corner of W. Ustick Rd. and
N. McDermott Rd.
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/VAR-2022-0004
A. Request: Variance to reduce the minimum lot size in the R-15 zoning district from 2,000
square feet to 1,694 square feet.
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET
DATE : December 13 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 8 & 9
PROJECT NAME : McDermott Village ( W2022 - 0056 ) & Variance ( VAR= 2022 - 0004 )
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 �> S� b
2 fy\e� VCLo4n 1Le
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 December 13,2022 Legend
DATE:
lei Piajeat Lava Liar
TO: Mayor&City Council
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner -- ------
208-884-5533 `
SUBJECT: H-2022-0056; VAR-2022-0004
McDermott Village—AZ, CUP,PP,
VAR - --
�J i
LOCATION: 3235 N. McDermott Rd. at the northwest
corner of W. Ustick Rd. &N.
McDermott Rd., in the SE 1/4 of Section
32,TAN.,R.1 W. (Parcel#SO432429360
&#SO432429355)
f
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Annexation of 40.05 acres of land with R-15 (17.12 acres),R-40(15.85 acres) and C-G zoning(7.08
acres); Preliminary plat consisting of 85 building lots(81 townhome, 1 multi-family and 3
commercial)& 8 common lots on 40.05 acres of land in the R-15,R-40&C-G zoning districts; and
Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family residential development consisting of 250 dwelling units
on 12.19 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district.
A Variance is also requested to UDC Table 11-2A-7 to allow 44 of the 81 townhome lots on the
eastern portion of the development to be reduced from 2,000 to 1,694 square feet.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details
Acreage 40.05-acres(AZ);40.05-acres(PP); 12.19-acres(CUP)
Existing/Proposed Zoning RUT in Ada County(existing);R-15,R-40&C-G(proposed)
Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R)
Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/undeveloped land used for agricultural purposes
Proposed Land Use(s) Mix of commercial(fuel sales facility&convenience store and flex
commercial/office); and residential(i.e.multi-family apartments and
townhomes)
Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 85 buildable lots(81 townhome lots, 1 multi-family lot&3 commercial
lots)and 8 common lots
Phasing Plan(#of phases) 3 phases
Number of Residential Units(type 250 multi-family apartment units&81 townhome units
of units)
Page 1
Description Details
Physical Features(waterways, The Eight Mile Lateral runs across the northeast corner of this site and the
hazards,flood plain,hillside) Sky Pilot Drain runs across the southern portion of the site.
Neighborhood meeting date 5/25/22
History(previous approvals) None
B. Community Metrics
Description Details
Ada County Highway
District
• Staff report(yes/no) Yes
• Requires ACHD No
Commission Action A Traffic Impact Study(TIS)was prepared by Kittleson&Associates,Inc.
es/no
Access One access is proposed via S.Rolling Hill Dr.from E.Overland Rd.to the south;
(Arterial/Collectors/State and two driveways will provide access from the commercial development to the
Hwy/Local)(Existing and west via S. Silverstone Way from E.Overland Rd.(a signalized intersection
Proposed) exists at Silverstone/Overland)
Traffic Level Of Service Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Roadway Frontage Classification Traffic Count Level of
Service
Ustick Road 1,304-feet Principal Arterial 321 Better than"E"
McDermott Road 1,304-feet Collector* 100 Better than"D"
Stub A public stub street is planned to the north boundary of this property with the
Street/Interconnectivity/Gros Aviator Springs development(H-2021-0065).W.Endeavor St.to the west is
s Access planned to stub/connect to the west boundary of this property when the abutting
Flower property(#SO432438850)re-develops.
Existing Road Network N.McDermott Rd.,a residential collector street&entryway corridor;and W.
Ustick Rd.,a residential arterial street&entryway corridor,abut this site along
the south and east property boundaries.
Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ None
Buffers
Proposed Road Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)/Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP):
Improvements • The intersection of Ustick Road and McDermott Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to be
1� widened and reconstructed with design in 2026 and construction in the future.
• Ustick Road is listed in the IFYWP and GIP to be widened to 5-lanes from Star Road to
McDermott Road with design in 2026 and construction in the future.
• Star Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 54anes from Ustick Road to McMillan Road
between 2031 and 2035.
• The intersection of Ustick Road and Star Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 4-lanes
on the north leg, 4-lanes on the south, 5-lanes east, and 5-lanes on the west leg, and
signalized between 2031 and 2035.
SH-16 is planned to extend north/south through this property and an interchange
is proposed at Ustick Rd.
Approved units rotes e
West Ada School District
Approved lots per per attendance Students from
Enrollment Capacity attendance area area Approved Dev.
Pleasant View Elementary 614 650 3322 100 970
Star Middle School 893 1000 9667 321 880
Owyhee High School 1785 1800 6229 137 829
School of Choice Options
Chief Joseph Elementary—Arts 524 700 N/A N/A
Barbara Morgan STEM Academy 421 500 N/A N/A
• Distance(elem,ms,Its)
Page 2
Description Details
• Capacity of Schools
• #of Students Enrolled
• Predicted#of students 73+/-
generated from
proposed development
Police Service
• Distance to Police 7.5 miles
Station
• Police Response Time 6:59 minutes-doesn't currently meet response time goal of 3-5 minutes;
however,response times will drastically decline when the MPD precinct opens in
the Fall.
• Calls for Service 313 within a mile of the site between 6/l/20 and 5/31/22
• Accessibility PD requests police access into each building's entry point using a multi-
technology keypad
• Specialty/resource needs None—MPD can service this development&already serves this area.
• Crimes 54 within a mile of the site between 6/1/20 and 5/31/22
• Crashes 8 within a mile of the site between 6/l/20 and 5/31/22
• Other For more info, see Section VIILD
Wastewater
• Distance to Sewer
Services
• Sewer Shed
• Estimated Project Sewer
ERU's
• WRRF Declining 14.42 MGD
Balance
• Project Consistent with Yes
WW Master
Plan/Facility Plan
• Impacts/concerns Additional 11,691 gpd committed to model.
Water
• Distance to Water
Services
• Pressure Zone
• Estimated Project Water
ERU's
• Water Quality Concerns
• Project Consistent with Yes
Water Master Plan
• Impacts/Concerns
Page 3
i u ri�w
r
IIN�
11 R III R
UN
IIN� IIN� _
A HI■ IS
••• •- � • ' : • • •
••
III. NOTICING
Planning&Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Notification published in
10/19/2022 11/27/2022
newspaper
Notification mailed to property
owners within 300 feet 10/13/2022 11/22/2022
Applicant posted public hearing
notice on site 10/24/2022 12/2/2022
Nextdoor posting 10/13/2022 11/28/2022
IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS(Comprehensive Plan)
Land Use: The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates this
property as Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R). Note: The Applicant requested this designation as part
of the update to the Comprehensive Plan in 2019.
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). Sample uses, appropriate in MU-R areas would include: All MU-N and MU-C categories,
entertainment uses,major employment centers, clean industry, and other appropriate regional-serving
most uses. Sample zoning include: R-15,R-40, TN-C, C-G, and M-E
Transportation: State Highway(SH) 16 is planned to extend through this site and an interchange is
planned at Ustick Rd.
ACHD's Master Street Map doesn't depict any collector streets planned across this site. The segment
of Ustick Rd.that this site fronts on is designated on the MSM as a residential arterial with 5-lanes
and on-street bike lanes within 100-feet of right-of-way. The segment of McDermott Rd.that the
townhome portion of the development fronts on is designated on the MSM as a residential collector
with 3-lane roadway, a 46-foot street section within 74-feet of ROW. Due to the extension of SH-16,
sidewalk is required on only the east side of the roadway.
Transit services are not available to this site.
Proposed Development: The Applicant proposes to develop the site with two(2)land use types—
commercial(includes retail,restaurants, etc.) and residential(i.e. multi-family and townhome).No
employment or public uses are proposed and it's unlikely any of the proposed uses will have a
regional draw. The site is designed with the commercial uses along Ustick Rd., an arterial street,with
an integrated plaza area between the two northern buildings and multi-family development to the
north along future SH-16. Townhomes are proposed on the east side of future SH-16 along N.
McDermott Rd., a collector street. The proposed development is generally consistent with the
conceptual MU-R plan in the Comprehensive Plan.
This is the only property in this area with a MU-R designation;that along with the property being
bisected by SH-16 in the future,which reduces the size of the property from 40 acres to 26.5 acres,
makes it difficult to develop the property entirely consistent with the MU-R designation.
Additionally,because an interchange is planned in this area and access is limited,the Comprehensive
Page 5
Plan states retail and auto-generated services should be minimized and transition rapidly from the
interchange to residential uses near the County line,which the plan proposes. For these reasons, Staff
is amenable to only two(2)land uses and the lower intensity of uses(i.e.primarily residential)
proposed rather than more intense commercial uses as is typically desired in the MU-R designation.
Additionally,because of the bifurcation of this property with the SH-16 extension, interconnectivity
and a full integration of uses within the overall site is not possible as typically desired in mixed use
designated areas.
In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in all Mixed-Use
areas,per the Comprehensive Plan(pg.3-13): (Staff's analysis in italics)
• "A mixed-use project should include at least three types of land uses. Exceptions may be
granted for smaller sites on a case-by-case basis. This land use is not intended for high
density residential development alone."
The proposed 26.5-acre development(after right-of-way is taken out for SH-16) includes two
types of land uses—commercial and residential. Because this is the only MU-R designated
property in this area and the site is not very large and will be divided by a state highway,
Staff is of the opinion the proposed number of land use types is sufficient.
• "Where appropriate,higher density and/or multi-family residential development is encouraged
for projects with the potential to serve as employment destination centers and when the project
is adjacent to US 20/26, SH-55, SH-16 or SH-69."
The proposed development includes 250 multi family units at a gross density of 20.5 units per
acre. The multi family portion of the project is located along the west side of future SH-16 and
at the northwest corner of the future interchange at Ustick Rd. An employment destination
center is not proposed but Owyhee High School exists directly to the west. High-density
development is desired near schools so that students can walk to school, reducing bussing
needs and traffic in the area.
• "Mixed Use areas are typically developed under a master or conceptual plan; during an
annexation or rezone request, a development agreement will typically be required for
developments with a Mixed-Use designation."
A conceptual development plan was submitted with the annexation request, included in Section
VII.B.A Development Agreement that ties future development to this plan and the general
guidelines for mixed use developments and specifically the MU-R designation is recommended
as a provision of annexation.
• "In developments where multiple commercial and/or office buildings are proposed,the
buildings should be arranged to create some form of common,usable area, such as a plaza or
green space."
The conceptual development plan depicts a common plaza area between the northern two
commercial buildings with a pedestrian walkway to the area from the southern lot(fuel
facility/convenience store).
• "The site plan should depict a transitional use and/or landscaped buffering between
commercial and existing low-or medium-density residential development."
There is an existing low-density residential property along the west boundary of the site south
of the Sky Pilot Drain adjacent to the proposed commercial uses.A public street(N. Glassford
Ave) is proposed between the commercial buildings and the residential property but a buffer
is not proposed to the residential property.A landscaped street buffer is proposed on the east
side of the street. Per UDC Table 11-2B-3, a minimum 25 foot wide landscaped buffer is
Page 6
required on C-G zoned properties to residential uses, unless such width is otherwise
modified by City Council at a public hearing with notice to surrounding property owners.
• "Community-serving facilities such as hospitals,clinics, churches, schools,parks, daycares,
civic buildings, or public safety facilities are expected in larger mixed-use developments."
No such uses are specifically proposed in this development—the tenants of the commercial
buildings are unknown at this time. Owyhee High School is located directly to the northwest of
this site and an LDS seminary and Boys & Girls Club has been conceptually approved to
develop on the adjacent property to the north next to the school in close proximity to this site.
Although these uses are not within the MU-R designation, they are still provided nearby.
• "Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places including but not
limited to parks,plazas, outdoor gathering areas, open space, libraries,and schools are
expected; outdoor seating areas at restaurants do not count."
A plaza/gathering area is depicted on the conceptual development plan between the two
northern commercial buildings; there are no other public and/or quasi public spaces or
places proposed. As noted above, a high school exists to the northwest and an LDS seminary
and a Boys & Girls Club are planned to develop in the Aviator Springs development directly
to the north.
• "Mixed use areas should be centered around spaces that are well-designed public and quasi-
public centers of activity. Spaces should be activated and incorporate permanent design
elements and amenities that foster a wide variety of interests ranging from leisure to play.
These areas should be thoughtfully integrated into the development and further placemaking
opportunities considered."
No such spaces are proposed on the conceptual development plan. Although a "mix"of uses
(i.e. commercial&residential) are proposed, Staff wouldn't consider this a true mixed-use
development due to the lack of integration and connectivity within the overall site, which isn't
possible due to the extension of SH-16 through the property. A plaza/common open space
area is depicted between the two (2) northern commercial buildings, which Staff feels is
appropriate given the development limitations for this site.
• "All mixed-use projects should be directly accessible to neighborhoods within the section by
both vehicles and pedestrians."
The proposed commercial portion of the development is directly accessible to the multi-
family residential portion of the development to the north and the single-family development
further to the north (Aviator Springs) by both vehicles and pedestrians.
Future SH-16 will separate the commercial and multi family development from the townhome
development making it impossible for these uses to be directly accessible. Pedestrian
pathways are proposed throughout the commercial and multi family development and a 10-
foot wide pathway is proposed to the single-family development to the north for connectivity.
• "Alleys and roadways should be used to transition from dissimilar land uses, and between
residential densities and housing types."
A roadway,parking area and landscape buffer is proposed between the commercial and multi-
family development(150'between structures); and a 2-way drive aisle with parking on either
side and a landscape buffer is proposed between the proposed multi family and future single-
family development to the north (115'between uses) as a transition and buffer between uses.
Page 7
• "Because of the parcel configuration within Old Town,development is not subject to the
Mixed-Use standards listed herein."
The subject property is not located in Old Town; therefore, this item is not applicable.
In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in MU-R
areas,per the Comprehensive Plan(pgs.3-16 thru 3-17):
• Development should generally comply with the general guidelines for development in all
Mixed-Use areas.
Staffs analysis on the proposed project's compliance with these guidelines is included above.
• Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 10%of the development area at gross
densities ranging from 6 to 40 units/acre. There is neither a minimum nor maximum imposed
on non-retail commercial uses such as office, clean industry, or entertainment uses.
Residential uses are proposed over 86%of the development area at an overall gross density
of 14.58 units/acre, consistent with the density desired in MU-R designated areas. The gross
density of the multi family portion is 20.5 units/acre and the townhome portion is 7.71
units/acre.
• Retail commercial uses should comprise a maximum of 50% of the development area.
Retail/commercial uses are only proposed to comprise of 14%of the development area in
accord with this guideline.
Where the development proposes public and quasi-public uses to support the development,the
developer may be eligible for additional area for retail development(beyond the allowed 50%),
based on the ratios below:
• For land that is designated for a public use, such as a library or school,the developer is
eligible for a 2:1 bonus. That is to say, if there is a one-acre library site planned and
dedicated,the project would be eligible for two additional acres of retail development.
• For active open space or passive recreation areas, such as a park,tot-lot, or playfield,the
developer is eligible for a 2:1 bonus. That is to say, if the park is 10 acres in area,the site
would be eligible for 20 additional acres of retail development.
• For plazas that are integrated into a retail project,the developer would be eligible for a 6:1
bonus. Such plazas should provide a focal point(such as a fountain, statue, and water
feature), seating areas, and some weather protection. That would mean that by providing a
• half-acre plaza,the developer would be eligible for three additional acres of retail
development.
This guideline is not applicable as no public/quasi-public uses are proposed on this site and
the retail development area is below the allowed 50%.
Comprehensive Plan Policies: The following Comprehensive Plan Policies are applicable to this
development:
• "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities
and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of
service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F)
Page 8
City water and sewer service is available and can be extended by the developer with
development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Urban services are available to be provided
upon development.
• "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land."
(3.07.00)
The proposed retail/commercial uses should be compatible with the existing low-density
residential use to the west if a 25 foot wide buffer is provided with dense landscaping as
required by UDC Table 11-2B-3 and 11-3B-9C1 to minimize conflicts between land uses.
The proposed multi family development should be compatible with future single-family
residential uses to the north in Aviator Springs subdivision with the proposed separation in
uses by drive aisles,parking and a densely landscaped buffer to minimize conflicts between
higher and lower density residential uses; and to the high school to the west. The proposed
townhomes should be compatible with existing low-density residential properties across
McDermott Rd. to the east and any future redevelopment of that area with MU-I(Mixed Use
—Interchange) uses; and also, the future research and development use to the north, which is
proposed to be separated by a 75 foot wide densely landscaped buffer.
• "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 apartments and townhomes will provide housing in close proximity to Owyhee
High School which will reduce bussing and vehicle trips in the area. The proposed
retail/commercial uses should provide benefits to future residents of being able to live, shop
and possibly work nearby enhancing overall livability and sustainability.
• "Require pedestrian circulation plans to ensure safety and convenient access across large
commercial and mixed-use developments."(3.07.02A)
The conceptual development plan depicts pedestrian pathways throughout the commercial
and multi family residential developments and to the adjacent single-family residential
development to the north (Aviator Springs)for interconnectivity.
• "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.
• "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 to this site and can be extended by the developer
with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. The emergency response times for Police
and Fire Dept. currently fall outside of response time goals; however, when the new MPD
precinct opens in Fall of 2023 and Fire Station#8 is constructed and staffed in late summer
of 2023, response time goals will be met.
Page 9
• "With new subdivision plats,require the design and construction of pathway connections,
easy pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, safe routes to schools, and the incorporation of
usable open space with quality amenities."(2.02.01A)
Safe pathway connections should be provided from the proposed multi family development
to the abutting high school to the west. Usable open space and quality amenities are
proposed with the multi family development that exceed UDC standards.
• "Require appropriate landscaping,buffers, and noise mitigation with new development along
transportation corridors(setback,vegetation,low walls,berms, etc.)."(3.07.01 C)
A minimum 35 foot wide landscaped street buffer is required to be provided along future SH-
16 and N. McDermott Rd., both designated entryway corridors. Noise mitigation is required
within the buffer along future SH-16 per the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D for
residential uses adjoining a state highway.
• "Evaluate the feasibility of annexing existing county enclaves and discourage the creation of
additional enclaves."(3.03.03I)
This property abuts City annexed land to the north and west; a large enclave area of County
land exists to the east. This area is largely sprawl with a lot ofproperties still in Ada County
to the east and southeast. The land directly to the south is within Canyon County's Area of
City Impact boundary. Annexation of this property will not create additional enclaves and
will actually decrease the existing enclave area.
• "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and
gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G)
Urban infrastructure as noted is required to be provided with development in accord with
UDC standards.
In summary, Staff believes the proposed development plan is generally consistent with the vision
of the Comprehensive Plan for this area per the analysis above.
V. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS UD
A. Annexation:
The proposed annexation is for 40.05 acres of land with R-15 (17.12 acres),R-40 (15.85 acres)
and C-G zoning(7.08 acres). The proposed use of the property will include a mix of commercial
uses,including a fuel sales facility&convenience store and flex commercial/office(tenants have
not been identified at this time) on 3.8 acres in the C-G district,multi-family residential
apartments on 12.19 acres in the R-40 district, and townhomes on 10.51 acres of land in the R-15
district. The right-of-way proposed to be dedicated for the future extension of SH-16 consists of
13.55 acres of land.
A conceptual development plan was submitted, included in Section VII.B below that shows how
the overall property is planned to develop. Based on the analysis above in Section IV, Staff is of
the opinion the proposed annexation, zoning and development plan is generally consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan with the provisions noted in Section VIII as discussed herein.
A multi-family development requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit(CUP)in the R-40
zoning district, subject to the specific use standards for such listed in UDC 11-4-3-27, and
townhouse dwellings are listed as a principal permitted use in the R-15 zoning district per UDC
Table 11-2A-2. Commercial/retail and fuel sales facility uses are listed as a principal permitted
use in the C-G zoning district per UDC Table 11-2B-2,fuel sales facilities are subject to the
Page 10
specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-20. Other uses may be allowed as noted in the
Allowed Uses in the Commercial Districts Table 11-2B-2.
The proposed uses and zoning districts are listed as appropriate uses and zoning in the
Comprehensive Plan for the MU-R designated area.
The property is contiguous to City annexed land and is within the City's Area of City Impact
boundary. A legal description and exhibit map of the overall annexation area is included in
Section VII.A.
The City may require a development agreement(DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant
to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. To ensure future development is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and with the development plan proposed with this application, Staff
recommends a DA is required with this application,containing the provisions noted in
Section VIII.A, as discussed herein.
B. Preliminary Plat:
The proposed preliminary plat consists of 85 building lots(81 townhome, 1 multi-family and 3
commercial)& 8 common lots on 40.05 acres of land in the R-15,R-40&C-G zoning districts.
The Applicant anticipates the development will be constructed in three(3)phases with the multi-
family development first,the townhomes second and the commercial last unless they get a
demand for the commercial,then it might be second.
Existing Structures/Site Improvements:
There are no existing structures or improvements on this site.
Dimensional Standards:
Development of the proposed lots is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in
UDC Tables 11-2A-7 for the R-15 district and 11-2A-8 for the R-40 district; and UDC Table H-
2B-3 for the C-G zoning district. Some of the R-15 zoned lots do not comply with the
minimum lot size of 2,000 square feet per dwelling units; revisions are necessary to comply.
Zero (0)lot lines should be graphically depicted on the plat on the internal lot lines where
the townhomes are proposed(i.e.where structures are proposed to span across lot lines).
Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards(UDC 11-6C-3):
Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design and
improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3.
Road Improvements [Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)/Integrated Five Year Work Plan
(IFYWP)]: The intersection of Ustick Road and McDermott Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to
be widened and reconstructed with design in 2026 and construction in the future. Ustick Road is
listed in the IFYWP and CIP to be widened to 5-lanes from Star Road to McDermott Road with
design in 2026 and construction in the future. Star Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 5-
lanes from Ustick Road to McMillan Road between 2031 and 2035. The intersection of Ustick
Road and Star Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 4-lanes on the north leg,4-lanes on the
south, 5-lanes east, and 5-lanes on the west leg, and signalized between 2031 and 2035. See
ACHD's staff report in Section V111.1 for more information.
Access(UDC 11-3A-3)
A public street access is proposed via W.Ustick Rd., an arterial street, to the portion of the site
west of future SH-16.A stub street is proposed to the property to the north(Aviator Springs)to
connect to a planned stub street to this property.Another stub street(W. Endeavor St.)is
proposed to the school property to the west for future extension and connection to N. Owyhee
Storm Ave., a collector street. Alleys/private streets are depicted on the plat in the proposed
Page 11
multi-family development. Private streets should be provided for addressing purposes. A private
street application should be submitted prior to or concurrent with the final plat application.
Two(2)accesses are proposed via N. McDermott Rd.,a collector street,to the portion of the site
east of future SH-16. McDermott Rd. is planned to dead-end in a cul-de-sac just north of Ustick
Rd. and not connect to Ustick when the interchange is constructed. An emergency only access is
proposed out to W. Ustick Rd. that has been approved by the Fire Dept.; ITD has verified that this
access does not touch or abut the State Highway system. The bollards should be located
completely outside of the right-of-way.ITD's roadway plans for the existing Ustick/McDermott
Rd. intersection are included in Section VIII.I. Alleys are proposed for access to the townhome
units located north of W. Aspenstone St. and south of Beechstone St. All alleys must comply with
the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5. The proposed alleys appear to comply with these
standards.
Cross-access/ingress-egress easements should be provided between all C-G zoned
commercial lots in the subdivision via a note on the final plat or a separate recorded
easement.
Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8):
The Pathways Master Plan depicts a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway along W. Ustick Rd. on this
site; a 10-foot wide pathway is depicted on the landscape plan as required.
A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway is proposed within the street buffer along the west side of
N. Glassford Ave.,consistent with the developments to the north,which crosses to the east
at the north boundary of the site within the buffer along SH-16 which will connect to the
pathway planned to the north in Aviator Springs.A 14-foot wide public use easement is
required for the pathway; the easement should be submitted to the Planning division prior
to submittal for City Engineer signature on the final plat.
Internal pedestrian pathways are proposed throughout the central common open space area and to
the commercial development to the south.
Safe pathway connections should be provided from the proposed multi-family development
to the abutting high school to the west.
Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17):
Detached sidewalks are required along all collector and arterial streets; attached sidewalks may
be provided along local streets. Sidewalks are not required along 1-84;however, a pathway is
proposed within the buffer.ACHD is requiring a sidewalk to be constructed off-site along one
side of S.Rolling Hill Dr.with development of this site.
Landscaping(UDC 11-3B):
Street buffers are required to be provided as follows: A minimum 35-foot wide buffer is required
along future SH-16 and the interchange and along N.McDermott Rd., entryway corridors; a
minimum 25-foot wide buffer is required along the western portion of W.Ustick Rd., an arterial
street; and a minimum 10-foot wide buffer is required along local streets in the C-G zoning
district,measured per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.1 M. Landscaping is required within
the street buffer as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C(see updated standards). Street buffers are
required to be maintained by the property owner or business owners' association and
should be depicted on the plat in a common lot or permanent dedicated buffer per UDC 11-
3B-7C.2b.
Landscaping is required adjacent to all pathways in accord with the standards listed in
UDC 11-3B-12C.
Depict landscaping within common open space areas as set forth in UDC 11-3G-5B.3.
Page 12
The City Arborist requests a change in tree selection of the Fraxinus Pennsylvanica
"Marshall's Seedless" Green Ash is changed to another variety due to a future threat of
Emerald Ash Borer.
There are no existing trees on the site to be removed or that require mitigation.
Common Open Space(UDC 11-3G-3B): A minimum of 15%qualified open space is required to
be provided within the townhome portion of the development that meets the quality standards
listed in UDC 11-3G-3A.2. Based on 10.51 acres, a minimum of 1.58 acres of qualified open
space is required. A total of 3.33 acres of qualified open space is proposed on the open space
exhibit included in Section VII.F in excess of UDC standards (i.e red hatched areas). Open space
areas consist of open grassy areas of at least 5,000 square feet and linear open space.
Site Amenities(UDC 11-3G-4): A minimum of 2 points of site amenities are required based on
10.51 acres of development area from the Site Amenities and Point Value Table 11-3G-4. 14's net
ele r to Staff what is Two 2)pickleball courts at 4 points each are proposed for site amenities in
the townhome portion of the development,which exceeds UDC standards.
Noise Abatement: Noise abatement is required for residential uses along state highways per the
standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D.A 10-foot solid screen wall is proposed. Noise abatement
should be provided within the street buffers along SH-16 that are adjacent to residential
uses per the standards listed in UDC 11-311-41)for residential uses adjoining a state
highway.A berm or a berm and wall combination that's a minimum of 10-feet higher than
the elevation at the centerline of the state highway is required. Include a cross-section of the
berm or berm/wall that complies with this standard with the final plat application(s).
Storm Drainage(UDC 11-3A-1 :
An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's
adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction is required to follow
Best Management Practices as adopted by the City. The Applicant submitted a Geotechnical
Engineering Report for the subdivision. Stormwater integration is required in accord with the
standards listed in UDC 11-3B-IIC.
Pressure Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-IS):
Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided for each and every lot in the
subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-15. This property lies within the Nampa-Meridian
Irrigation District boundary.
Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21):
Utilities are required to be provided to the subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-21.. Street
lights shall be installed in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and
ordinances/
Waterways(UDC 11-3A-6):
The Sky Pilot Drain crosses the southern portion of this site within a 100-foot wide easement;the
Eight Mile Lateral crosses the northeast corner of the site within a 50-foot wide easement; and the
Noble Lateral runs along the east boundary of the site within a 40-foot wide easement(20-feet
from centerline each side). The easements for all of these waterways shall be depicted on the
final plat; structures shall not encroach within these easements.All waterways on this site
shall be piped as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B.3,unless otherwise waived by City Council. This
project is not within the flood plain.
The developer has requested ITD relocate the Eight Mile Lateral to accommodate the proposed
development plan. Because the plans have already been designed and environmental approvals
Page 13
obtained to pipe it in its current location,a change this late in the process may not be approved. If
the location of the lateral changes,it should be depicted on the plans submitted with the
final plat application.
Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7)•
All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. A 6-foot tall solid
screen fence is proposed along the northern&western boundaries of the multi-family
development.
C. Conditional Use Permit(CUP):
A Conditional Use Permit is requested for a multi-family residential development consisting of
250 dwelling units on 12.19 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district in accord with UDC Table
11-2B-2. The proposed development will have(12) 3-story multi-family structures and a 9,055
square foot amenity building centrally located within the complex. Six(6)different floor plans
are proposed with a mix of units consisting of 1-(97),2-(114)and 3-(39)bedroom units ranging
from 712 to 1,278 square feet in size.
Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3-27):
The proposed use is subject to the following standards: (Staff's analysis/comments in italic text)
11-4-3-27: MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT:
Site Design:
I. 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 site plan included in Section VII.D depicts buildings at a minimum
setback of 10 feet; no greater setback is required.
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 plans submitted with the
Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should demonstrate compliance with this
standard.
3. A minimum of eighty(80)square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for
each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks, and/or
enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other 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 11-513-5 of this title. The Applicant's narrative states each dwelling unit is
provided with a minimum 80 square foot attached patio or deck, which meets 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 should comply with this requirement.
Page 14
6. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to
All Districts", of this title.A minimum of 477 off-street parking spaces are required for
the multi family development with 250 of those being in a covered carport or garage; a
minimum of 19 bicycle parking spaces are required. A minimum of 18 spaces are
required for the amenity building with a minimum of one (1) bicycle parking space. The
minimum number of spaces required overall is 495 with a minimum of 20 bicycle spaces.
A total of 482+/-parking spaces are proposed overall, with 250 of those being covered,
and 20 bicycle spaces, which does not meet the minimum standard.A revised parking
plan that meets the minimum standards should be submitted prior to the Commission
hearing.Bike racks should be provided in central locations for each multi family
building and the amenity building.
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 site amenity plan included in Section VII.G depicts a leasing area (property
management office), a maintenance storage area and mailbox location (including
provisions for parcel mail), in accord with this standard. The location of the directory
and map of the development should be depicted on the site plan submitted with the
Certificate of Zoning Compliance application.
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 10%
of the gross land area for multi-family developments of 5 acres of more.A minimum of 1.22
acres of common open is required to meet this standard.
Common open space areas are also required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-
4-3-27C.2,which state that open space areas must be integrated into the development as a
priority and not for the use of land after all other elements of the development have been
designed. These areas should have direct pedestrian access,be highly visible, comply with
CPTED standards and support a range of leisure and play activities and uses—irregular
shaped, disconnected or isolated open spaces do not meet the standard. Open space areas
should be accessible and well connected throughout the development(i.e. centrally located,
accessible by pathway and visually accessible along collector streets or as a terminal view
from a street). Open space areas should promote the health and well-being of its residents
and support active and passive uses for recreation, social gathering and relaxation to serve
the development. The proposed common open space meets these standards.
All multi-family projects over 20 units are required to provide at least one (1)common
grassy area of at least 5,000 s.f. in area that's integrated into the site design allowing for
general activities by all ages,which may be included in the minimum required open space.
The area shall increase proportionately as the number of units increase and shall be
commensurate to the size of the development as determined by the decision-making body.
The Applicant proposes two (2) central common open space areas of 67,632 and 29,360 sf
that meets this requirement.
Page 15
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.All units contain more than 500 square feet(sf.) of
living area.
b. Two hundred fifty(250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred
(500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living
area.A total of 211 units contain between 500 and 1,200 sf. of living area; therefore,
a minimum of 52,750 sf. (or 1.21 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.A total of 39 units contain
more than 1,200 sf.; therefore, a minimum of 13,650 sf. (or 0.31 acre) of common
open space is required.
At a minimum, a total of 66,400 sf. (or 1.52 acres) of qualified outdoor common open
space is required to be provided per this standard. In order to meet the baseline
requirement noted above and this standard, a total of 119,500 sf. (or 2.74 acres) of
common open space is required. A total of 146,094 sf. (or 3.35 acres) of qualified open
space is proposed in excess of the minimum standards as shown in Section VII.F(red
hatch areas). Qualified areas consist of central common/amenity areas and a pedestrian
corridor where a multi-use pathway is planned.
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').All of the red hatched
areas depicted on the open space exhibit in Section VII.G meet this requirement.
In phased developments,common open space shall be provided in each phase of the
development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units.
The Applicant anticipates the multi family development will be constructed in one phase. If
not, compliance with this standard is required.
Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process,common open space areas
shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets unless separated from the street by a
berm or constructed barrier at least four feet(4)in height,with breaks in the berm or
barrier to allow for pedestrian access. (Ord. 09-1394, 3-3-2009, eff. retroactive to 2-4-2009)
None of the common open space areas are located adjacent to a collector or arterial street.
Site Development Amenities:
1. All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space and recreation
amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows:
a. Quality of life:
(1) Clubhouse.
(2) Fitness facilities.
(3) Enclosed bike storage.
(4) Public art such as a statue.
(5) Dog park with waste station.
(6) Commercial outdoor kitchen.
Page 16
(7) Fitness course.
(8) Enclosed storage.
b. Open space:
(1) Community garden.
(2) Ponds or water features.
(3) Plaza.
(4) Picnic area including tables,benches,landscaping and a structure for shade.
c. Recreation:
(1) Pool.
(2) Walking trails.
(3) Children's play structures.
(4) Sports courts.
d. Multi-modal amenity standards:
(1) Bicycle repair station.
(2) Park and ride lot.
(3) Sheltered transit stop
(4) Charging stations for electric vehicles
2. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of multi-family development as
follows:
a. For multi-family developments with less than twenty(20)units,two(2)amenities
shall be provided from two(2)separate categories.
b. For multi-family development between twenty(20) and seventy-five(75)units,three
(3)amenities shall be provided,with one from each category.
c. For multi-family development with seventy-five(75)units or more, four(4)
amenities shall be provided,with at least one from each category.
d. For multi-family developments with more than one hundred(100)units,the decision-
making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the
proposed development.
3. The decision-making body shall be authorized to consider other improvements in
addition to those provided under this subsection D,provided that these improvements
provide a similar level of amenity. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005)
Proposed amenities include a clubhouse with a fitness facility, a swimming pool and spa
with cabanas and an outdoor lounge area, 10 foot wide multi-use pathways and internal
walking trails, a plaza, a pickleball sports court, and a bike repair station. A BBQ area
is depicted on the site plan;Staff recommends this area is constructed as a commercial
outdoor kitchen.An outdoor seating area is also depicted on the site plan;Staff
recommends this area is constructed as a picnic area with tables, benches, landscaping
and a shade structure. Staff also recommends a children's play structure is provided.
Staff is of the opinion these upgrades and addition of an amenity is commensurate with
the number of units proposed.
Page 17
E. Landscaping Requirements:
1. Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3,
"Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title.
2. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The foundation
landscaping shall meet the following minimum standards:
a. The landscaped area shall be at least three feet(Y)wide.
b. For every three(3)linear feet of foundation,an evergreen shrub having a minimum
mature height of twenty-four inches(24") shall be planted.
c. Ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area.
The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application
should depict landscaping in accord with these standards.
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.
Landscaping(UDC 11-3B):
Street buffer landscaping, including noise abatement along future SH-16, is required to be
provided with the subdivision improvements as noted above in Section V.B.
Landscaping is required to be provided along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-
12C.A mix of trees,shrubs,lawn and/or other vegetative ground cover with a minimum of
one(1)tree per 100 linear feet of pathway.
Fencing: All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. A 6-foot
tall solid screen fence is proposed along the northern&western boundaries of the multi-family
development.
Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual):
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed structures, included in Section
VII.H. The townhomes are proposed to be 2-or 3-stories in height,the multi-family structures are
proposed to be 3-stories in height, and the clubhouse if proposed to be a single-story in height;
building materials consist of a mix of vertical board&batten fiber cement siding and horizontal
lap siding with brick veneer siding and wood ridge beam accents,metal awnings and asphalt
shingle roofing.
A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be
submitted for approval of the multi-family and commercial development to ensure
compliance with UDC standards and development provisions associated with this
application.A Design Review application is required to be submitted for approval of the
townhomes.Final design of all structures must comply with the design standards in the
Architectural Standards Manual.
D. Variance(VAR):
A Variance is requested to UDC Table 11-2A-7 to allow 44 of the 81 townhome lots on the
eastern portion of the development to be reduced from 2,000 to 1,694 square feet.UDC 11-5B-4
allows requests to vary from the requirements with respect to lot size.
Page 18
In order to grant a variance,City Council must make the findings for such,which state the
variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; and the variance shall
not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare per UDC 11-5B-4E.
The Applicant's narrative states there are several characteristics of the site that create an undue
hardship, as follows:
• The angle of the SH-16 right-of-way determined by ITD creates a remnant parcel that is an
unusual shape for development and restricts how the property can be developed.
• The Sky Pilot drain traverses through the middle of the property within a 100-foot wide
easement where no structures may be located,which reduces the amount of developable space
on the property.
• Ustick Road where it abuts the property will be widened to accommodate the SH-16
interchange,which reduces the amount of developable space for the property.
• McDermott Rd.will be terminated with a cul-de-sac, eliminating access from Ustick Rd.
which reduces the viable uses for the property.
• McDermott Rd. is in a fixed location and must be widened to meet ACHD standards,which
further reduces the amount of developable area.
• A landscape buffer is required to be provided along the northern property boundary adjacent to
the light industrial use proposed on the abutting property,which also reduces the developable
space for the property.
Although these characteristics do exist, Staff finds they do not prevent the Applicant from
reducing the number of lots within the development in order to comply with the minimum lot size
standard of 2,000 square feet. If a variance is approved, alternative compliance will also be
necessary to reduce the street buffer along McDermott Road, an entryway corridor, in order to
accommodate the proposed layout. Reducing the number of building lots will allow compliance
with the minimum lot size standards as well as street buffers. Therefore, Staff is not supportive of
the proposed variance request.
VI. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation with the requirement of a development
agreement,preliminary plat and conditional use permit and denial of the requested variance with
the provisions noted in Section VIII,per the Findings in Section IX.
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on November 3,2022. At the
public hearin.9,the Commission voted to recommend approval of the subject AZ, CUP and PP
requests.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing_
a. In favor: Travis Hunter,Josh Evarts, and Todd Tucker
b. In opposition: None
C. Commenting: Ron Hopper,Rod Green,and Paul Elam
d. Written testimony: Todd Tucker,Boise Hunter Homes
e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons
f. Other Staff commenting on application: Kurt Starman
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony
Page 19
a. Additional traffic on Ustick and McDermott Roads.
b. Transition of the McDermott Village development to the rural residential in the area.
c. Amount of development occurring in the area.
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
a. Timing for the construction of SH 16 and the commencement/completion of phase 1
construction.
b. Impacts of increased traffic on Ustick Road.
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. At Staff s recommendation, Commission modified DA provision#A.1 f to read, "A 10-
foot wide multi-use pathway shall be provided within the street buffers along N.
Glassford Ave. adjacent to SH-16 within a 14-foot wide public use easement.
b. Commission modified condition of approval#10k. to replace commercial outdoor
kitchen with outdoor BBQ.
5. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council:
a. Applicant requests Council waive condition#Al.c in Section VIII that requires a 25-foot
landscape buffer adjacent to the Flowers property along the west bounda rya of the
proposed development. This request was supported by the Commission. The
requirement does not apply because right-of-way will separate the subject property from
the residential property.
Page 20
VII. EXHIBITS
A. Annexation Legal Descriptions&Exhibit Maps
a IDAHO 9955 W Emerald St
SURVEY Boise, ID 83704
GROUP Phone: (208)846-8570
Fax: (208)884-5399
McDermott Village Subdivision
Annexation
Boundary Description
Project Number 21-575 June 15,2022
The southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 32,Township 4 North, Range 1
(Nest, Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho,and being more particularly described as
follows:
BEGINNING at the southeast corner of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of
Section 32,Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian:
Thence N89'17'49"W, 1325.58 feet along the south line of the southeast quarter
of the southeast quarter to the east sixteenth-section corner;
Thence N00°33'07"E,1316.23 feet along the west line of the southeast quarter of
the southeast quarter to the southeast sixteenth-section corner;
Thence S89"19'58"E,1324.63 feet along the north line of the southeast quarter of
the southeast quarter to the south sixteenth-section corner;
Thence S00"30'38"W, 1317.06 feet along the east line of the southeast quarter of
the southeast quarter to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
The above-described parcel contains 40.05 acres,more or less.
AL
s�
Page 1 of 1 �r� �£OF I
S.
Page 21
Scale: 1"=400'
0 100 200 400 800
Lagerid 5.32 5.33
E1/4
Property Corner
Property Boundary Line
— - - --— Parcel Line
1
--- Section Line co
N
!2
I 2i;
Ix
ICr)
b
Ql
[V
Q
C]
I
I I
I
h�
SE1/16 S89.1 9'58"E 1324,63' S1/16
O r4
a}
w ±40.05 Acres m o
a rai o `v
r] O vJ O
Q
En
5.32 E1/16 5.32 5.33
S.5 N89'17'49"W 1325.58' S.5 S.4
W. Ustick Rd. Point of
Beginning
P:\M75 N IA[0e It Rd Snd•y 21-578`d"\21-579 M....limA,, &/15�2M 717:22 Pu
Jah Ho.
IDAHO Exhibit Drawing for 2t-5�s
SURVEY OGE.1EOADUaST Shaft Na.
6U)04&8 daalr6l Annexation
(aoel aar-ssro
GROUP, LLC Situated In the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 32, Qwp. Oate
Township 4 North, Range 1 West, B.M., Ada County, Idaho. �f15�2422
Page 22
IDAHQ "�!$W E!rWIld$A
SUILVEY FA*@. la 8�704
GROUP Phomr,12im)&%-B'M
Fam- 4208�AB4-53#9
McDeermLnt 1411rsae Guhdivi�iw
Ftaadna Gfa
8oundaryF E*scriptirvl
f� =t rji.orber22-:578 Ailpit 3 7r 2022
14 µreel of daiid bitudLtd irl Lhe sDutlheaa quani,er i1 the!�oulheaxt gwdreer A 5et1imorr 33
TpwrL$hlp 4 Nonh,Range] "st,Bars■rt andrr,n•Ada Goun4y..i zh%and ho'rng room
pmthculerly dcxrihe+d as Togs:
BfiGlNNiNG et the ensf mteenth•sertiori darner o4 Section 32,Tcrwrwshr 4 Now*, Range
I West Bolie McAdlarl,wench beads NW717'49'W,1325 53 Teer fivm she jouKhea5t
corner of Sectlm 32:
TkerKs NarB•07't.44&2,D"Ah}ng the west lire of the soLOmt quarter of
the tauthva%t g4W"r,
tKanc2 fAr't?'3rE,7209 feet to tha cenlarlinrr of the dutiure Hlghrway id;
1 berwe M'4SVO`W,A53.71 Feet abrig the cvttwhn a 434 th4i f+utLpm HgKway 16
w the 5auTh lirke al tilt souch-em iju-:mer 4+f RPLe s*Ammi guarcen
The&ce+449'17' W,i551•Zra fees altpng the s*utfr fine flT Me s*UiNaA gwWr cl
th■svuthbast qumler to thr+MmT OF hMm miNci.
1 he abovr•described parcel contains 7.09 arm more or kess-
�3
. t
`• r
1
P!tgc l uf l _
Page 23
3 733 150 65€
C) IMR+wom RAM
two wwww •kh4
P%rsw L4rr
' Wqr Lan*
rvl.
' rrf
I
� I
I
1 I ¢
L I I !
Uhl VIYE 14 3
7.08 ALroi }r I
oink 49pt �� �•�
Beginning
LN
N0917'49'w 1325.5W
1M Udl:m 11 Rd.
IDAHO fxhi3ii Drcmir+g for
SURVEY G—G Rezone Mmi W-C,
GRCUr LLC 9iroa+d Y Wm amti•a quwbw*r 1hm ma.MmmW g.wI r PI JiKIWa M. Dro CMIr
1pm&v+ I IftL 8A. Ad Dan ISF Nan qfl ar70P3
Page 24
IiDAHO IR955 w Em-eram 5t
SURVEY Hoist, 4a 037414
G ROUP phrane: {208F 015.8570
fax: l Na I:B[,,51,99
l�Id�ermalR S�GMb�e 3+uEdn�l��an
larirdry bcwriptlm
Xxvjt l Numbar 22-5 78 A.aQ4sd J 7 2W2
A parcel DF lanrr srtuwLed in t7he smwthaest qumler aFt'he 3auebeasl oµrarler of Section 33~
TOWP,Shlp4 Ni)rTh, HaAge ] West.FWe MRrldLw,AdDQijnp,I0aho,qM bemE Mwe
Ipamr Artrtrr desxnhed as W62ws:
HF61MNPNG all the mauthesrst corner od S"Icin M,Ynwmhlp 4 NDrtir, Range 7 we rt,
Dribe flflerld"fl.
Fheno rQW IT4^U,612A�fawL a&vq rho smth Irrrt of ihd sraumumst ipartor
aFthe-.mrthw esl quar+'ter to•kh-e centerline of the Fribure Highwa-X 16;
Thentt 1C4rA5'DC`L 13.3335Ilem "vM emit i mt bf LN fdtute Hiaiwr a;6
1a khw flOM line of the w it w 5t-quarter of IN MWMOML g4Qrt9r,
fhonm 5BF"mrse"t,4%9.23 Fpft plang tht nartfi lime of than mumari%l grrsrtpr mi
the Mrth"st quark-to tare!muth sikkrenth-secth3D mmerr,
Thenfr`5CU'3(Y3W"W,M7.06 feet Soft A&"A Ilm rttf rho Scia0 ahL grxirher of
lht ADwroepSt 4War%r to lb@ FQIr4T I)F MQIMNI H0
Thf ;,Mvp-rid�srrotia J parf.#1�arrFsn4]7 1#srnil-;,rrw"rsr Ipr&
;—
_ r_
y
5
Page Iof1 -6
Page 25
j M IM 300 6m
Lend
Di-md 1 PGink
2orm 9ourmsmy Lkr■
Nr{O Lon*
SdLlw LM*
1 a4" Line
TIM
0 fp
02
:2 �s
# E
rf 17.12 „
Afrm �: ■r
m
cL-
1 4
i
l '� I pain I of
Begin ning
W. LlitlGk Rd
�E7c%
IDAHO ENwihiL Gran •1.3 rarSURVE1 R-1 Fk$zorre p
CROUP, LLB ��.� �-� ��,..�, �a,���,.��..�����s■■ia, ,� ,.� n,�.
To■Pilp#+1� Morm1 Lot 1:1-Y..Atb dmrri:L Idr#a x.l a12M
Page 26
IOAHQ 9925 W E1r MOLd St
Su KVF r Sorim,16 S370 4
GROU R IPh I )W 070
156 Flex; g2mp OM-5399
Mrr O matt%MUEr`3ut3MVIrJ ri,
Re2une R-41)
Dwn1M DfluIptIum
A pwce4 of land sltrmt+ed In tfic sDkAheast quarter of the sautheart quarter of Setiian 22.
Town&hip A harth4 RwV 1 Wait,Boite Wr idian,OAm{dunrg,Idaho, amd being more
WcuLwN dowrihi d w Fr.Iltrrv#:
Dmmergkig m tiro ioutheast cufn r of 34mlon 32.T000milip q 1I14, Rarge l Ott
Boise Muidiark;
TMwe KBT17'4VW, 1325.59 fleet along the iouRh line of the saui hmi quarter of She
p¢ulhRast quarter W 1hq put slKW nth-wr#Ipn 14;
Theme MCKY R07"E, "S.W Feet bluna the gust line dF the seuthe-mt quarter or,.he
sarrhaaat qu artgr tip-qhq P{]INT QF BEGINNIOAl :
Thgntrr cp,ntirrulrrg WG3"a3M7"P,SU.M NM;Jong ih4 wgFt Ilnq of thq$rthamt
quarter QF 1he wwheast quarter tip the smurtfremt jkLeenth-sedrion :Dr mrr
TMmce 5.M'15'5W'F,B55.29 feel j%mM the monk line 0 the saRnheast iWane+of
thQ so-uthQag quwlq,r 1q thip wintpHinp of 1hp hu14mp Hlg"gy 14;
Thencr '4SW"W,B?9.€$fmt along the centerkne oaf tive Future Highway 36;
Thence NN'17'i M,724j69 fret is the POINT OF GEMNIMING
The abase-derrulhe:d parcel contains 15.35 acres,n-pare-or less.
I4
�.
Pne 1 C'f 3 jr
Page 27
DIX
� �LYNn�a Phs�r1
emm dQk-owy L.Irrp
— So-rLbn LLno
I
91 WM'E
Elva r
E
4 I
a
�1 I I
C3t5.85 Ares
r- 4Z
LL
m o
Rein# of
i ■i u
rloTil�l�w S m
WI I
a
�I� I
I
I
r
-•W 1��N- F� �'1 l i i�J t
I DAHO r i�ibii arovAnq Pof �°=5m
SURVEY �;,4�' R-40 Rem"
1F�r�W i lar-, i I lz QLL Pilo F.5fnp b4m& Af%:V�m
Page 28
B. Conceptual Development Plan, Overall Development Plan in the Vicinity&Concept Data
� 10�0. --ft.
CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Page 29
s
r
a r. + t■
■
(TI
ik
.4 .
■
k r■64
yy �,
Ip
Ire ILL,
at 40
' 1 t -• # a
--
F
Page 30
Usd'ckf McDermott Residential PNot North Arch It c
Meridian.ID 05/25/2022
2nning Sumrmry� Unll summary
$ite Area: I NSF' 06« Nm*deck NSF SUBi0iAL %
"I
Iyl JTHl 10.4 A )99
Site 2:IRetail/Cstprel 13.B9 AC High.,(N.AP.): 13.9 AC 1B l0 835 50 915
Subtotal I-bed 97 731 70,903 38.Y%
prnpnsed-
[urrenfIDning: RUT Rura 1,Urban Trami9oaal Proposed 2oning(mr):R-W (—a l 11
58 11
009 11,089
]g 1,217 BO 1,197
MaB.Density: 43.56du/AC I1,000sf)dpl Proposed Density: 20.5 du/AC 2C 3S l,Ob1 w l,[g4
Subtotal 2-bed 114 L024 216.780 45.6%
sethackz Regwree: -¢mocks pmpnsed.
Rear. 12' Pear 20'min. 3A 99 1,289 EO 1,365
tilde In[: 3' slde Ind: 1U mip.
Street S,,ted to Garage Required: Street Settark to Garage P.limtd: Subtotal3 ,d 39 1,285 Kit s 15.6%
Local: 20' L-1, 20'min
strret smbad:to Li—Required: -tined sethackm Uem,,prnp¢a¢d: 25p "1 are. 79a 5F
local: 10' Lacab 2tlmin. nova ode u,a".onw.naaaemrl mnmr,pa"n..a:
5veer landscape n,M,Required; 5—Landscape Duffer Proposed:
local: .1. L.A 20 min
Ma,neighs w Proposed Belch L H41'-9"
6...pmi Parking wmmary',
MYkil-1, Flr.-t," Mg. Bldg. .0, EH. pUnit Parking Required: Fading hopmed:
Height: GSF.deck GSF Net sF R per floor b 111 tolal total
MSel l: - 1-d amge: 1.
lerel2: 10'-2" 116,)50 ]08,)50 99,IR1 A9% 100 1-bed He 25 221 Ca.port: R]
lespl3: ll'-2" 113,636 106,63a 93,16E 9q% 10p 3-bed 39 Z 1H Garport. 3Y
Roof: in'-, Guest 250 0.1 25 standard: fit
Tp I; 41'-9" 346,801 326.801 237.793 73% 250 NnMM Pad: 112
Amenity: 9,000 1/500 19 AmenM' 18
ardllll 5lr!!o 25
Bubt9tal Mukftnnkl: 4Tl AahenmlMulHFamily: 4n
Covered: I 250 Covered 250
CommercialOma: p oral
-sore. C-stYY¢: 5,549 ]:5006f t12
Retail l: 3,40i Retail 1: 3',m —a of 7 Retail: Bl
Retail 2: 6.117 Relail 2: 6,117 15009 13 HC. 3
lercl l: Srbblal[,d. suhmral[md�
n Open 5pace5ummary. Bike Parking—Ary:
Co....Open Spew Rinl.u.d: Common Open Space Propmed: Bike Parking Required: Bike parking mpm,d:
B—Ime 1mtlo total total
)D%Wu3e_ m% 3 d Ground levek
30,710
MUSllamlly, m110 mil 17,32d A ra0e mdl oral
Unea<SOOsf: 0 I50 - 13,629 Wiffnend, 41 1:25 rM Coreredf5ecured: d20
Unit-500"'00 d: 211 250 52,"1 Total Required: 20 30vl Proposed: 20
D0 s1
Subtotal Required: 260 66,400 d
eYblaal Nf i"W'ed: 111,613 d SYmedal MF Provider 14q,730 sP
THK,tgre'. Asf ratio total total
round Level:
s%of sire 169,448 5% 8,473 Plaza: 15.—
5uhzrnalRequlred: aA7a p S.—Il Pmvl— )A
CONCEPT DATA Nog:Dalai-acbamahca.d Bpb,e 1q Ypdate as morn info matbnia known
05 25 2022
McDermott Multifamily PNaJ B#21-nott.,Mendianla pivotOM' north
aR[Hlreeruse
Page 31
C. Preliminary Plat(date: 10/25/2021)&Conceptual Phasing Plan
MCDERMOTT VILLAGE o 0
PRELIMINARY PLAT s
A PORTION OF THE SE J OF SECTION 32, @ `s
TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH,RANGE 1 WEST 0�
ADA COUNTY,IDAHO
OWNEWDEVELOPER GNILENGINEER LAND SURVEYOR
III H
PRELIMINARY PLAT DATA --^*^rT^•mrunao.,ec
LEGEND
zaE �r-i s`�is] oeimr
p
IIIi
mr
PRELIMINARY PLAT NOTES
E
E - SHEET INDEX
Le
.E
r. o m- r e R _
.u TxL1 -
_. T 11 1LIT
-^1Ym' n E. e n ene.c room Dge
num.
W
w. i,E xn
WT 1.1 e. u T.r. ,u.. cow..r - - O
ggo
a
> a
� J
W
C
IL
01 17
Page 32
M BLOCK
-
II . I
L
MATCHLINE-SEE SHEET LEFT i
SLOG(
§w
r 3igme
x
BLOCK L� •o���eJ`I=,o ae a ya •e h
3
sad e » FMAM^e nsl O
4
Z
o a
°'wi.ai�
19 is t J 3
BLOCKS Lu
L���Ep+
4 BLOGc
tz
Nm+ fi F F F Ik
MATCHLINE°-°SEE SHEET RIGHT oft
02 r 17
Page 33
- - —
1 '1,
c
m =
� BLOCK
E'k R
MATLHLNE-SEE SHLET LEFT -
f
M o a a
e BLOCK
r
�� BLOCK 5 IL
oza
� IY
A MAHEH NE-SEE
i SHEET Ric*r
Page 34
rt
V
�E
a
4
I
I
J
a
J —.
-WEO F
C
. z
Lli
Page 35
D. CUP Site Plan for Multi-Family Development(dated: 6/30/2022)
f -*-fir i
r ,►aim n' 1
Ld
f4i
— -z
p`s
a
-OzEd
- v -
-OA,
iW Jfl
wn,wuxE-sFE 9iEEl t3
a
,2 a 17
Page 36
E. Landscape Plan—PP&CUP (date: 6/30/2022)
tilt
ig
LC
qmm%m,W
PIN
Ch
Pill
jp,.IL
0
77
Page 37
r
��: �_ � � 1111111111 1111111111��� � ,►!�
HININWRINNIN
f� .g
:ash !3fy, ..♦\\\ems \♦.♦♦♦♦♦.♦\ °"• � t
QQ
WEE
' � .mom V� .\�`\.\�: ♦; 7 '>� �'���\ 1 M � �4 [` r`'`
NZ
IMP
Me
ss \\\\\\\\\\\\\ Ab, �` r
VANS
.�• �a� 4'.I � •��\:,, ��' �� w� �6r it
sw
Mlwm
i!i Fiiii� rusFri n �: ril nrpsrs iryrs r-f i#} ;; ,t+
�_�tk��.ke #d •ikll• ...•Fh1�kAAi�a1•A�i�� �.,' -
�i�!i� �i�i�l�i�ii��s�!�i�;
111111111111�. � 111111111111;,,,,,"• ,° h,,,
a�>a+<:xx xx atx��.-��` �.e.� �r�:a a•�e:3.s i
lug 151; 171;
IA V 1
X
W M, . C. p IV '
15 il
it
R
up
0 ui
MM R
ju Rig ..,I
Q Lu I!;I I
Wn �; 2 s- 3 P j
Lu
Mgg 4!
.ale l p-
H i, I — Hs i dig
Ma Fie
T 6
pe
LU
FIRM
ry
AV3GN]
CI
uj
z. co
I?
0
7e
mmish hK
Page 39
LLP a: x
. ii
k,
CL
1 1.1 N
LLP
LL
ml
x
Up
IM i1h
i
m Rb
-4.
3,.
iqLLP
LLP
Ch
HIR
i
X
Ng i!
0
Lu
6
)ousn
....... ....
Page 40
• E- E. . E. -E . 1 1
All 11111 IN
46
mod•' ?gg 2ji :\`e' •� —'
fir•. „"_ � i+�.��.\. •.� �.e ��ti � ,•'
am
ME
s
a
! IIIil ! I ,. Uif3gllll �llEy
,,��"
13.` A yy ]ti h 1 Al •g.4v�111A� _ E
Mil
104 i R
U M, ! i
�2 17;; R I
sp
P i
LLP 2
H 2 ill 11 IR I
L
tg O L..
MIN RI
u IcaHIP i's
M
S LU 2
Fz
H� M
cg VV
as lit
d
1 1 R1. F H HE i sm a A o.
U
zd
�Lq— Mo
.. .........
.1cA A ON3 I
t v
21
0
..............
AOLLsn&7
Page 42
M.�
Ldi
52
7777
CL
flar
uj N
EL
3;
H
Au
cc
J
4D
LLP
ui dc E
C3
His
C3
..........
IS
61
ks
7-7
It
20
ie
ze I
U)
10'IF
dm
7�
. ...........
Or
;W;i 41 B
i
MI
Oil
(D
uitl
f. dm
nr
f. aa
Ca
mnisn
nMu
Page 43
G. Site Amenity Plans for Multi-Family&Townhome Developments—CUP(dated: 6/29/22)
0
N
N
ca ` u
` V
Q
® � N�
AWNINGA80VE
a • • s
ab
n Qo �
m ql
P,
!
! 'r
V�
1 - -�
l�
H O
z r
W
� � L
4
o �
4 o a Q
k iI L1J
N Z V
N w
N
� � U
Page 44
7
r � J
! < <
w
LU
LU
_ w
v
< _
UZ N
<
UJcy _
= 0 0 A
W
CL 3 x
+-m
LU
A .1
Page 45
H. Conceptual Building Elevations&Perspectives for Residential(dated: 6/30/22)
Townhomes:
0 wig
•��{ °i7y1 "r
M ;
y t�
it
Multi-Family Development—Apartment&Amenity Buildings:
COW—NA—
McDermott Mixed-Use rN oaazius9ex nEaiowx,io pivotww
Page 46
Il
r '
WEW5.VEWTOYESIOETITRUIMIK LOOKING NORTHWEST YEW E.YEWTO RESMENT 6U€LD€NG,LOOKING SOUTH EAST
4
1
.-.
WEWT.YEW TO RESEENT C -IIIUNITY FROM FU WHIGHWAY VEW 1.AEPIALVEW TO AMENRY 8Df NG
GONCEPTIMAGERY 6N3�.2@2
McDermott Mixed-Use pIDJ0 2ll1.11ERIDIAN,ID pivotf"w
59
n�
1.STREET(NORTH)ELEVATION
enczrxauuxEirv�siorvwwr�Fzc��� �I �I
Pu si ix ucvic
wuv mewl r�evcxu.w�
1 '7
2.STREET(WEST)ELEVATION J.HWY16(EAST)ELEVATION
4.INTERIOR DRIVE(NORTH)ELEVATION
Df
CONCEPT ELEVATION VIEWS SGALEVIC=1 6'-0@24u 0102D22
McDermott Mixed-Use PNa,OB#21-0590ck,MERIDIAN,ID pivot nortW
Page 47
N II
1.OPEN SPACE ISOUTH)ELEVAnON
2.(WEST)ELEVATION 3-{EAST)ELEVATION
4.INTERIOR DRIVE(NORTH)ELEVATION
02
CONCEPT ELEVATION VIEWS 06.30.2022
MuD noff and
McDermott Mixed-Use PNa`JOB#21-059UsUck,MERIDIAN,ID pivotnoftW
777
I.CLUBHOUSE ENTRY(SOUTH)ELEVATION
_41
2.(WEST)ELEVATION 3.(EAST)ELEVATION
00 M
vxmrxwocomxxwwxc
4.CLUBHOUSE POOL DECK(NORTH)ELEVATION
03
CONCEPT ELEVATION VIEWS 06 3G 2022
McDenoft and Us
McDermott Mixed-Use PNS JOB#21-059tick,MERIDIAN,ID pivotnoftW
Page 48
^ OF LJJ
� I I
MI BY BWR BY CERED
7"j4
1�
9.PAINim METAL LOUVERS ORNm I 12.VERDCMD GRPIX 1].W000RIME SEAM SETPIL +d.GAOLE BORMERVENi Ri ts-PaIIRm CARACE ODGR
14C 1. E 1. 0 5 20 4 1C 12 11 0 1A 2C 9C ]C 6C ]C
J - _— ., '•ice,
SHERWINW]LNAMSSW7R5 SHERWIN WILLAMSM50
ro"r
EPCCESSINLE BEIGE
SHERWIN WILLIAMS SWG6G5 SNERLNNWILLWMSSW1036
NUMBERS OEHOIE MAIERWL3 FLLMPIEFtlPL3 P3 NOlEN ORONIIER
- _ � -- f LERERS OENOIE COLORS ARnRovEOEWu
XX
CONCEPT DETIMU MATERIAL BOARD 06 N.
McDermott Mixed-Use P Da .ttB it2BdIJ'hck,MERIDIAN,ID pivotnoftw
Page 49
L Emergency Access Exhibit Approved by Fire Department �g
`+J
r Btu �
? „ a XAPpyNC-EEE SIEE[I LETT
rw
A eE.00K `c ti� Lul.fazl:.�. 19
�. ins°`
a`.- T' W
T
XAiLIXWE-4f 9EfE PITNi
MtTCIELIN[-SE 9�EfT W
Ilk
WHY
-
i �
a
1
i
P
Page 50
J. ITD's Plan for the Ustick Rd./SH-16 Interchange
401.42,
�MAT�y IINE z43D+44.ea�— MATCH UNE to T4N, R1W, B.M. lo-osee CErr w(rST
SrAOiD
�43 D'1'SQ 614-0256LT � ��"z43G{.7p seal-0T[ SE45E45EC.32 WOODSID EAVENDE 966 FT 91A ROR7K4,q&R]R.96'RT TO
614-0256 028#061]. 59FT BTAR030 ,16,31'0.1
�� z 2 —2029 ,120.41 LTTD
2026+85,64, 100,10'LT INVESTORS LLC sTA x9xw4O,w,s6aTLT
I
20lot 62-IT74.58�0 R-20,00' 3$' +41,41. 610-03-6 610.100A GATETMI
101,fi2'IT R +64,37,
R=IO.00;'-• C 30019'LT r10D,]D'LT I ,EA[al sTA29 �09 R1
I 0.=20 00' �J I EA[al 8TA 202e+4e ,
20233.21"D, 2430+60.]0, '.�I + .............................. �F � fi1L415A 910EWLLN
I 83.21'LT 35.50'RT 1... g clAzozs OO.T4
0.-10.00' 1+OIEA -12023+e5 Ra•111.]'
C 610-SODA 6 1 �LTTD
x9xsxm,00,]4,00•ERTV
243D+00.31,I•. �+ ......614.O15A o 0.-2b�D�Q SIDEWALK 8FA 20z0.4�7,00.1�.RT
- SIDEWALK 5,50'LT srA2E.+1.q0's4 1.i q•1r
202+70,7fi, R-10,00' ..—...—.—.— .—.—' —.—.—.—.-.--••�•� 5961' SFA xO00+W,O0,66,00'R7TO
' 2026+84,36, ry ]00.1V LT - elemfiq cuRe RA
615426 2027+75,04 EGlN TAP 2.xR ORFRPENOICURAl0
63.50'LT
26+44,93, 9 86'LT I 615i92A +9631,
I- 74,00'9T 0.-5�09' _ RC 24293.92.71 1T410'9T,44. RET ROTECT la 14SY SFA x02]+4R03,9/A9'LT
202b.00' . 89,50'LT 224V 8TA202T•5gT4 T3M'LT
+ 64.00'FT vn W WAT LP 8223 I C] I� allnzozl•94,p.EO,e9•RT
M W IW q�iW W iW W iW IW�W d ,
„I ¢SH•16 i CP R224 292T ]s LT I ' z Az92q+�3,M/1r
b/W / q/W—@9.90'LT N6-x6EA OVRg TYPE'
rvY LLL usTTcK ROAD IAxiv o —2017 1.t11, ry McT 91A,azT.62,B&12$RT TO
LT _ T 59,]_05E w n -i v— i'x -I w _m STA u2q+1D,1z.'-TA4•"T
2026+3609, ---- --- 5950'ir _ _ _
n __ 36 FT STA—+]6,88.3I,15 RT TO
aI zozs°0°' zon zdze zoze usrlcK RD zoso � � a STA,426+92,eT.p47'RT
r se9°Se'o7^E I-
N �� 91A 16tB.9�499.�9,9 TO
vciZM
2650. 8 I W 56 FT 3FAR9Ri+95,B5.2T97'RT TO
__________ _ _____ _____ ,R ____ ___ a Z9B'RT15LS1A �4 CONDVIIS �' r ----- 2WT+55,06,2T[XI'RTTO
8 . 00.11 RT IX1NlINUEDONNEDFT6HMP AB STA. BEGIN TAPER F IE>=F]
MP BC STA.ZTICN RO STA.2026+840R46'RTR.178.50' 1202R+47.R=1.00' 1 65.03'RT 54.34'RT
b-SIDEWALK 2026+53,54, - b+,P� q SIDEWALK
i
I 63.50'RT h R-63.50- J NOTEs
a
^ 5991-06X .............................. n5 FOR sTOR•...••.... .••...• 1, ER TO DRAINAGE Pu
I ............................. ry 1428+6],]9. I ................ .•...•...... — � ORAIN0.GE FACIDiIES, N
2026+47.06, 102,5V RT "'f' 2029+0051, 614015A
74,00'RT 1 2028+47,41, 11,56'RT RFEER TO tRRICAnUx Purvs FRR
2026154,54, 'E ` I T5-03'x_� „�,�-..�.,.t—..—ti--� PpprosED OFF E,.uNP15.ANO
L 64,50'RT d 2023+53.35��, I OTHER taatcnnon FACRITIES•
I 614-o25b RF 64.34'RT I 3, REFER TO VTIIIN PWNS FO0.EXISTING
1 14217.59'L1+11 T +9 / 610-SODA AND PROFOSEO U-MES.
1 r 10 RT 2026+15.00,
1426+56.29, j 74,82'RT
BEGIN 17,50'LT r! I 4 CVR610R EDGESOFRPAYEMENT VNlE55
Q 'CONSTRUCTION T� I y I I narE°°rHLRwISE
I RAMP AB
STA 5.0 . Ofi9
s REFER
�ivaxAO OETAt15 FO0.
N 717743.3 . 610-036 NE0IA AO
E 243288.229 ! 4D 13.70, GRIFFIN.]AMES F I KEY MAP
` v 82,64'RT
GOVi'LOT 1,SECS 5
I I 14 7+3';iT I 1 ; 1427+ T3N, R1W, B.M. I �"
67,92 CL
f I 1 6
II t` PI=Y2432.76.14
1 ' •.\.� 83,92' f 11 6 22R33433a•RT
I II r L -566.76'
E[ . I O/i4��G5N5AI20 0 20 R=2200.78I® ----- 1427+305 ME C398T9 I
Sc0e, 1 =4W TE R�FA,
/
115�32'RT 4 P .
S[ REVISIONS I DE— g,STMK ILI5"OM" IDAHO PROJECT NOS ROADWAY PLAN SHEET FNGL I SN rJ
NO OATS E MA.1RTNNI ME FOR I]'X n^ SH-16,USTICK RD TO US20R6
E DESIGN CNECNOED _M °NLT TRANSPORTATION' CO�TM a1ska ,p
I DETMLE. wV6 V FILENAME DEPARTMENT A023(408) ADA AND CANYON COUNTY -ADAA6ER °sq N' y
1,GRAVE s 4 N,6 m-���EI-�I=o,w - USTICK ROAD 9lj �GF� @J
DRAWING CH oKEPO� [NN MG�Mo i �rIIAQSOCIATC��k. STA,2025+60 TO STA,2030+40 5NEEF 191 OF l62 Z•wti
Page 51
VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
1. A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property.
Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance,a DA shall be entered into between the City of
Meridian,the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption,and the
developer.
Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to
commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the
Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA
shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions:
a. Development of the subject property shall be generally consistent with the conceptual
development plan, site plan,preliminary plat, conceptual phasing plan, landscape plan,
open space and site amenity exhibits, and conceptual building elevations submitted with
the application contained herein.
b. The two(2)commercial buildings proposed on the northern portion of the site shall be
arranged to create some form of common,usable gathering area, such as a plaza or green
space as depicted on the conceptual development plan in accord with the mixed-use
guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan (see pg. 3-13).
c. A minimum 25-foot wide buffer shall be provided on the C-G zoned property to the
adjacent residential use to the west(Flower#SO432438850)and to the future multi-
family residential uses in this development as set forth in UDC Table 11-2B-3,unless
such width is otherwise modified by City Council at a public hearing with notice to
surrounding property owners as set forth in UDC 11-3B-9C.2. The buffer shall be
landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C.Note:If the land use on
the Flower property changes to non-residential prior to development of the subject
property, a buffer to residential uses is not required.
d. Noise mitigation shall be provided within the buffers along future SH-16 in accord with
the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D for residential uses adjoining a state highway.
e. Private streets shall be required within the multi-family development for addressing
purposes and shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. The private street
application shall be submitted prior to or concurrently with the final plat application.
f. A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway shall be provided within the street buffers along N.
Glassford Ave. adjacent to SH-16 within a 14-foot wide public use easement.
g. The final plat shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits for any structures
within this development.
h. All future structures constructed on this site shall comply with the applicable design
standards contained in the Architectural Standards Manual.
Preliminary Plat:
2. The final plat shall include the following revisions:
a. Include a note granting cross-access/ingress-egress easements between all commercial
lots in the subdivision via a note on the final plat or a separate recorded easement.
b. Depict all street landscape buffers in a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer
easement,maintained by the property owner,homeowner's association or business
Page 52
owners' association as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C.2a.A minimum 35 foot wide buffer is
required along future SH-16 and the interchange and along N. McDermott Rd., entryway
corridors; a minimum 25 foot wide buffer is required along the western portion of W.
Ustick Rd., an arterial street; and a minimum 10 foot wide buffer is required along local
streets in the C-G zoning district, measured per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.1.
c. Depict the easements for all waterways (i.e. the Sky Pilot Drain,the Eight Mile Lateral
and the Noble Lateral) on the site; structures shall not encroach within these easements.A
License Agreement is required with NMID for any encroachments within the easements.
If the location of the Eight Mile lateral changes, the new location shall be depicted on the
plat.
d. All R-15 zoned lots shall be a minimum of 2,000 square feet as set forth in UDC Table
11-2A-7.
e. Graphically depict zero(0) lot lines on the internal lot lines where the townhomes are
proposed(i.e.where structures will span across lot lines).
3. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall be revised as follows:
a. Depict the bollards proposed to restrict access to the emergency access driveway off W.
Ustick Rd. completely outside of the right-of-way.
b. Depict a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway within the street buffers along SH-16 within a
14-foot wide public use easement;the easement shall be submitted to the Planning
division prior to submittal of the final plat for City Engineer signature.
c. Depict landscaping along all pathways as set forth in UDC 11-3B-12C.
d. Landscaping is required within the street buffer as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C. (See
updated standards.)
e. Depict landscaping within common open space areas as set forth in UDC 11-3G-5B.3.
f. Change the Fraxinus Pennsylvanica"Marshall's Seedless"Green Ash tree to another
variety per the City Arborists' comments.
g. Depict a minimum of two(2)points of site amenities for the townhome portion of the
development from the Site Amenities and Point Value Table 11-3G-4. The Apphea
should elar-ify prior-to or-at the Commission hearing what amenities are proposed.
4. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in
UDC Tables 11-2A-7 for the R-15 district and 11-2A-8 for the R-40 district; and UDC Table
11-2B-3 for the C-G zoning district.
5. All waterways on this site shall be piped as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B,unless otherwise
waived by City Council.
6. Cross-access/ingress-egress easements shall be provided between all commercial C-G zoned
lots in the subdivision via a note on the final plat or a separate recorded easement.
7. The emergency access driveway required and approved by the Fire Dept. off W. Ustick Rd.
east of future SH-16 shall be approved by ITD as it's located within the influence area of
their intersection project.
8. All alleys shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5.
Page 53
Conditional Use Permit:
9. Compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27: Multi-Family
Development and the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-8 is required.
10. The site/landscape plans included in Section VII shall be revised as follows:
a. 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 in accord with UDC 11-4-3-
27B.2.
b. Depict the location of the property management office;maintenance storage area; central
mailbox location,including provisions for parcel mail,that provide safe pedestrian and/or
vehicular access; and a directory and map of the development at an entrance or
convenient location for those entering the development in accord with UDC 11-4-3-
27B.7.
c. Depict safe pathway connections from the proposed multi-family development to the
abutting high school to the west.
£ Depict landscaping along all the foundation of all street facing elevations in accord with
the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27E.
g. Depict landscaping along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C.A mix
of trees, shrubs, lawn and/or other vegetative ground cover with a minimum of one (1)
tree per 100 linear feet of pathway.
i. Depict a minimum of 20 bicycle parking spaces per the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-
6G;bicycle parking facilities shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C.
Bike racks should be provided in central locations for each multi-family building and the
amenity building.
j. Depict a minimum of 495 off-street parking spaces for the development in accord with
the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 and 11-3C-6B.1 per the analysis in Section
VI.
k. At a minimum, depict site amenities consisting of the following: a clubhouse with a
fitness facility, a swimming pool and spa with cabanas and an outdoor lounge area; 10-
foot wide multi-use pathways and internal walking trails; a plaza; a pickleball sports
court; a bike repair station; a eemmer-eial outdoor kite hen with a BBQ; a picnic area with
tables,benches,landscaping and a shade structure; and a children's play structure.
k. Minimum 7-foot wide sidewalks shall be provided where parking abuts sidewalks if
wheel stops aren't proposed to prevent vehicle overhang in accord with UDC 11-3C-5B4;
if 7-foot sidewalks are proposed,the length of the stall may be reduced to 17 feet.
11. 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 as set forth
in UDC 11-4-3-27B.5.
12. 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 as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27F. A recorded copy of the document shall be
submitted prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development.
Page 54
13. 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 in
accord with UDC 11-4-3-27C.6.
14. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be
submitted for approval of the multi-family and commercial development to ensure
compliance with UDC standards and development provisions associated with this application.
A Design Review application is required to be submitted for approval of the townhomes.
Final design of all structures must comply with the design standards in the Architectural
Standards Manual.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.1 There is a sewer loop on the northern section. Sewer connects to McDermont in Block 1 and
the existing SSMH-06. Reconfigure the design so this is removed.
1.2 Manhole SSMH-11 and SSMH-12 has angles of pipe in/out of manhole at less then 90
degrees. Adjust these manholes so min angle of pipe through manhole is 90 degrees.
1.3 Provide Steel Casing for all locations where sewer crosses future Hwy 16 per City's casing
requirements.
1.4 All manholes require 14ft graveled/paved access path.
1.5 End of the line requires minimum 0.6% slope.
1.6 Ensure manholes are not located in curb/gutter.
1.7 Sewer/water easement varies depending on sewer depth. Sewer 0-20 ft deep require a 30 ft
easement,20-25 ft a 40 ft easement, and 25-30 ft a 45 ft easement. Adjust easements
accordingly.
1.8 Area is subject to the Oaks Lift Station and Pressure Sewer Reimbursement agreement.
1.9 No permanent structures (trash receptacle walls,trees,bushes,buildings, carports, fences,
infiltration trenches, light poles,etc.) are to be built within the utility easement.
1.10 Sewer must be built 1Oft from edge of easement.
1.11 Ensure no sewer services pass through infiltration trenches.
1.12 12-inch water main must be built to and through the development on McDermott Road. On
west side of future SH-16,water must connect to north.
1.13 A streetlight plan will be required for the development of this property.
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.
Page 55
2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public
right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet
wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via
the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard
forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit
an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works), a legal description
prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of
the easement(marked EXHIBIT A)and an 81/2"x 11"map with bearings and distances
(marked EXHIBIT B)for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a
Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this
document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development
plan approval.
2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing
surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a
single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point
connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for
the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval.
2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final
plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to
evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC.
2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals,or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting,
crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed
per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-
1207 and any other applicable law or regulation.
2.7 Any wells that will not continue to be used must be properly abandoned according to Idaho
Well Construction Standards Rules administered by the Idaho Department of Water
Resources. The Developer's Engineer shall provide a statement addressing whether there are
any existing wells in the development, and if so,how they will continue to be used, or
provide record of their abandonment.
2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City
Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment
procedures and inspections(208)375-5211.
2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and
activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this
subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits.
2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted
fencing,landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat.
2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to
occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a
performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the
final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B.
2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction
inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan
approval letter.
Page 56
2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply
with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act.
2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404
Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office.
2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H.
2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all
building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material.
2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a
minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to
ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above.
2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or
drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation
district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been
installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required
before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project.
2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings
per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and
approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the
project.
2.21 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.
2.22 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.
2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount
of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure
for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by
the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit,
cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the
Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service
for more information at 887-2211.
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT
https:llweblink.meridianciV.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=272855&dbid=O&repo=MeridianC
Lty
Page 57
D. POLICE DEPARTMENT
https://weblink.meridianciV.org/WeUink/DocView.aspx?id=279522&dbid=0&repo=Meridian C
Lty
E. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID)
hggs://weblink.m eridia n c i ty.org/WeUink/DocView.aspx?id=273744&dbid=0&rep o=Me ridia n C
hty
F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS)
https://weblink.meridiancioy.or zlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=276592&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
X
G. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD)
https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=279662&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
v&cr=1
H. PARK'S DEPARTMENT
City Arborist:
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=2 72 795&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
X
I. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCHOOL IMPACT
https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=275929&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
X
J. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
by s://weblink.meridiancioy.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=273537&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
&y cr--I
K. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD)
https://weblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=278192&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
Y
L. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https://weblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=275528&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
Y
IX. FINDINGS
A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-5B-3E)
Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full
investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an
annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
Page 58
The Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment to R-1 S, R-40 and C-G and
subsequent development is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the MU-R
FL UM designation.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
The Commission finds the proposed map amendment will allow for the development of
commercial uses which will assist in providing for the service needs of area residents; and
residential uses which will contribute to the range of housing opportunities in the City
consistent with the purpose statement of the commercial and residential districts in accord
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 zoning map amendment should not be detrimental to the
public health, safety and welfare.
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 the proposed zoning map amendment will not result in an adverse
impact on the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services
within the City.
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
The Commission finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City.
B. Preliminary Plat:
In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the
decision-making body shall make the following findings:
I. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan;
The Commission finds that the proposed plat is in substantial compliance with the adopted
Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use and transportation. (Please see Comprehensive
Plan Policies in, Section IV of this report for more information)
2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the
proposed development;
The Commission finds that public services will be provided to the subject property with
development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers)
3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's
capital improvement program;
Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at
their own cost, the Commission finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of
capital improvement funds.
4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development;
Page 59
The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the
proposed development based upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., Police,
Fire, ACHD, etc.). (See Section VIII for more information)
5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and,
The Commission is not aware of any health,safety, or environmental problems associated with
the platting of this property. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis.
6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features.
The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on
this site that require preserving.
C. 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 is large enough to accommodate the
proposed use and dimensional and development regulations of the R-40 zoning district(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 consistent with the future land use map
designation ofMU-R and is allowed as a conditional use in UDC Table I1-2B-2 in the R-40
zoning district.
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 proposed design of the development, construction, operation and
maintenance should be compatible with the mix of other uses planned for this area and with
the intended character of the area and that such uses will not adversely change the character
of the area.
4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not
adversely affect other property in the vicinity.
The Commission finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report,
the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission and
Council should weigh any public testimony provided to determine if the development will
adversely affect other properties in the vicinity.
5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such
as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse
disposal,water, and sewer.
The Commission finds that essential public services are available to this property and that the
use will be adequately served by these facilities.
Page 60
D.Variance(UDC 11-5B-4):
1. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site;
Stafffinds although there are characteristics that hinder development of this site, the Applicant
could easily comply with the 2,000 square foot minimum lot size standard in UDC Table 11-
2A-7 if the number of lots were reduced.
2. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare.
Staff finds granting the variance should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and
welfare.
Page 61
Item 22
E IDIAN;---
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: PRESENTATIONS
Ll
THE TEAM Team•Welcome•
THE ORDER OF EVENTS Staff Comments•Project Elevations•Our Approach/Solution•The Challenge•Preliminary Plat/CUP•Rezoning•Annexation•The Ask•The Development Justification•The Property•
•MCDERMOTT RDUSTICK RD THE PROPERTY included this site5 miles of HWY 16 that 2017 ITD Redefined the final •growthStrategic corner in the path of •family housing developmentby with a
goal of a single40 acres was acquired in 2006 •Property Background
•THE DEVELOPMENT JUSTIFICATION the adjacent land usesprovides a nice transition to Owyhee High School and aligns with the proximity to Our proposed development •Use MapMeridian City
Future Land RG on the identified as MUThe land is already
•THE ASK: ANNEXATION REQUEST units per acreOur proposed density is 12.49 •per acre40 dwelling units -between 6residential dwellings in a range employment, retail and RG anticipates a
mix of -MU•property linesnorthern and western to City Limits along the Area of Impact and adjacent Property is in the Meridian
•THE ASK: REZONING REQUEST G (Commercial)and CFamily) 15 (SingleMF), R40 (Residential specified R(RUT) in Ada County to the from Rural Urban Transition of the parcel, transitioning We
are asking for a rezoning
•THE ASK: PRELIMARY PLAT REQUEST Employment Density)Offices (Increased •(Aligned with Regional Draw)Flex Commercial/Retail •Store/Fuel (Interchange)•G (Commercial)•81 Townhomes•15 (Single
Family)•250 Dwellings•40 (Residential MF)
•THE ASK: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) REQUEST development.submitted with this Conditional Use Permit was Code. An application for the the Unified Development Conditional Use Permit
per the development requires a family portion of The multi
THE CHALLENGE MCDERMOTT RDUSTICK RD Phase 2 (20/22 to 84) funded 2021•Phase 2 design finished in 2020•finished in 2014 Phase 1 S.H. 44 to U.S. 20/22 •Effort initiated in 2006•HWY 16
ITD/ACHD IMPROVEMENTS USTICK RD All Work Completed by 2024•locationConstruct McDermott Rd. in new •Rd.)Ustick(north & south of Rd. Sac existing McDermott -De-Cul•Rd.UstickWiden •Rd.)Ustickramps
at (on and off 16 –Construct Highway •
OUR APPROACH MCDERMOTT RDUSTICK RD Water Line Easement•S. Sewer Main•N. Sewer Main•Be a Great Partner•Common GoalBuild the Best Team with a •ComprehensivelyApproach the Site ••
SOLUTION:Meridian Housing NeedsCOMMON GOAL: Meeting •plazasIntegrated green space and •RegionRetail and Office amenities for •Family Townhomes-Single•CommunityFamily Lifestyle -Multi•of
Owyhee High SchoolLeveraging the Regional draw •programming•R Development-MU McDermott Village
MERIDIAN COMP PLAN Integrated Plaza•Office/Hospitality•Retail/Office•ResidentialSingle Family •MIXED USE REGIONAL SAMPLE–
Map with actual data overlayed:DATA OVERLAY Indoor Kitchen, Outdoor BBQ, Pool 9k sqft Clubhouse–Site Amenities Owyhee High Schoolconnecting MF & Commercial to Plazas, Pickle Ball Courts,
Walking Paths Open Space 32%15,000–Sqft Retail/Office 250-# Apartments 81-# Townhomes
7 FAMILY AND COMMERICIAL-LOOKING NORTH AT MULTI
LOOKING WEST AT MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL-
COMMERCIAL PUBLIC PLAZA
TOWNHOME ELEVATIONS
STAFF COMMENTS referenced on the map.for both sides of this project as We have maximized strategically 16-Hwywide buffer along -foot-Requiring a 35
STAFF COMMENTS highwaybuffer on the West side of the supported with our current 33’ which can be reductionCode allows for a 10% 16.-along Hwywide buffer -foot-Requiring a 35
STAFF COMMENTS 76’ Buffer Total lose the Western lot in the project, so we do not alternative compliancehighway. We are asking for an 26’ buffer on the East side of the with our current
is not sufficient which Code allows for a 10% reduction option 16.-wide buffer along Hwy-foot-Requiring a 35
STAFF COMMENTS lots)sqftare 1700 yellow(highlighted in sqftunder 2,000 Only 44/81 lots are of the development. negating a portion of the affordable spirit of the units for Meridian residents,
and results is a 10% increase in the costs units (project size decreases by 9 units) eliminates roughly 10% of the available If the 2,000sqft compliance is required, it safety and welfare
for this variance. There is NO impact to the public health, Easement. Sky Pilot Drainwide -foot-100hardships presented by HWY 16 and the this project due to the two undue for the townhome
portion of variancea The McDermott Village project is seeking health, safety, and welfare.detrimental to the public the site and must not be because of characteristics of relieve an
undue hardship Per code: The variance must a minimum of 2,000 square feet.Requiring all townhome lots to be
QUESTIONS?
WEST ADA CONSIDERATION campus.Valley Christian Primary/Secondary Charter School and the new Cole including the existing Gem Prep rivate school's capacity and pcharter does not account
for the this project, with no concerns. This West Ada School District provided
TOWNHOME OPEN SPACE
COMMERCIAL GOALS Day Care•Dentist•Optometrist•Sports Therapy•slice, Ice Cream)-by-Grab and Go Food (Subway, Pizza•Convenience Store (Frontage w/ primary traffic burden)-Fuel •