I-84 + Meridian Road H-2021-0099 (2024-006166) ADA COUNTY RECORDER Trent Tripple 2024-006166
BOISE IDAHO Pgs=53 CHE FOWLER 02/07/2024 08:23 AM
CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO NO FEE
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
PARTIES:
1. City of Meridian
2. GRH Meridian I-84, LLC, Owner/Developer
THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this Agreement), is made and entered into this
6th day of February , 20 24 , by and between City of Meridian, a municipal
corporation of the State of Idaho, hereafter called CITY, whose address is 33 E. Broadway Avenue,
Meridian,Idaho 83642,and GRH Meridian 1-84,LLC,LLC,whose address is 855 W. Broad Street,
Boise, Idaho 83702, hereinafter called OWNER/DEVELOPER.
1. RECITALS:
1.1 WHEREAS, Owner is the sole owner, in law and/or equity, of certain tract of
land in the County of Ada, State of Idaho, described in Exhibit "A," which is
attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full,
herein after referred to as the Property; and
1.2 WHEREAS, Idaho Code § 67-6511A provides that cities may, by ordinance,
require or permit as a condition of zoning that the Owner and/or Developer
make a written commitment concerning the use or development of the subject
Property; and
1.3 WHEREAS, City has exercised its statutory authority by the enactment of
Section 11-5B-3 of the Unified Development Code("UDC"),which authorizes
development agreements upon the annexation and/or re-zoning of land; and
1.4 WHEREAS, Owner/Developer has submitted an application for an
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM) to
change the future land use designation on 70.4 acres of land from Mixed-Use
Community (MU-C) to Commercial (34.3 acres) and Medium High Density
Residential (MHDR) (approximately 36.1 acres); and annexation and zoning
of 18.30 acres of land with a request for the C-G (General Retail and Service
Commercial)zoning district on the property as shown in Exhibit"A"under the
Unified Development Code, which generally describes how the Property will
be developed and what improvements will be made; and
1.5 WHEREAS, Owner/Developer made representations at the public hearings
before Planning and Zoning Commission and the Meridian City Council as to
how the Property will be developed and what improvements will be made; and
1.6 WHEREAS, the record of the proceedings for requested rezoning held before
Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council includes responses of
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT—I-84+MERIDIAN ROAD(H-2021-0099) PAGE I OF 9
government subdivisions providing services within the City of Meridian
planning jurisdiction and includes further testimony and comment; and
1.7 WHEREAS, on the 5th day of December, 2023, the Meridian City Council
approved certain Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and
Order ("Findings"), which have been incorporated into this Agreement and
attached as Exhibit`B"; and
1.8 WHEREAS, the Findings require the Owner/Developer to enter into a
Development Agreement before the City Council takes final action on final
plat; and
1.9 WHEREAS, Owner/Developer deem it to be in its best interest to be able to
enter into this Agreement and acknowledges that this Agreement was entered
into voluntarily and at its urging and request; and
1.10 WHEREAS, City requires the Owner/Developer to enter into a development
agreement for the purpose of ensuring that the Property is developed and the
subsequent use of the Property is in accordance with the terms and conditions
of this Agreement,herein being established as a result of evidence received by
the City in the proceedings for zoning designation from government
subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction and from
affected property owners and to ensure zoning designation is in accordance
with the amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian on December
19, 2019, Resolution No. 19-2179, and the UDC, Title 11.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions set forth
herein, the parties agree as follows:
2. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS: That the above recitals are contractual and
binding and are incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
3. DEFINITIONS: For all purposes of this Agreement the following words, terms, and
phrases herein contained in this section shall be defined and interpreted as herein provided for,unless
the clear context of the presentation of the same requires otherwise:
3.1 CITY: means and refers to the City of Meridian, a party to this Agreement,
which is a municipal Corporation and government subdivision of the state of
Idaho, organized and existing by virtue of law of the State of Idaho, whose
address is 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642.
3.2 OWNER/DEVELOPER: means and refers to GRH Meridian I-84, LLC,
whose address is 855 W. Broad Street, Boise, Idaho 83702, hereinafter called
OWNER/DEVELOPER, the party that owns and is developing said Property
and shall include any subsequent owner(s)/developer(s) of the Property.
3.3 PROPERTY: means and refers to that certain parcel(s) of Property located
in the County of Ada, City of Meridian as in Exhibit "A" describing a parcel
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT-I-84+MERIDIAN ROAD(H-2021-0099) PAGE 2 OF 9
to bound by this Development Agreement and attached hereto and by this
reference incorporated herein as if set forth at length.
4. USES PERMITTED BY THIS AGREEMENT: This Agreement shall vest the right
to develop the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
4.1 The uses allowed pursuant to this Agreement are only those uses allowed under
the UDC.
4.2 No change in the uses specified in this Agreement shall be allowed without
modification of this Agreement.
5. CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY:
5.1. Owner/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following
special conditions:
a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual
development plan, renderings, pedestrian circulation plan and vehicular
connectivity plan included in Section VIII of the Staff Report attached to the
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law attached hereto as Exhibit `B" and the
provisions contained herein.Flexibility in the general configuration and size of the
building footprints and orientation, plaza areas, and parking on the site shall be
allowed with an allowance for up to 20% change in square footages of buildings.
b. As proposed by the Developer, a minimum of 10% of the total building square
footage for the site shall be reserved for non-retail commercial uses that may
include such uses as office, clean industry, entertainment,hospitality/hotel, fitness
and/or recreation, personal services, non-drive-through restaurants, health care,
daycare, finance and/or banking, and educational and/or training uses.
c. A vehicular cross-access/ingress-egress easement shall be provided to the
outparcel(Parcel#S 1213417320)at the northwest corner of the site and a recorded
copy of the easement submitted to the Planning Division with the first Certificate
of Zoning Compliance application for the site. The easement shall grant consent
to the owner/developer of the outparcel to construct the driveway on the subject
property at the time of development.
d. A detached 10-foot-wide multiuse pathway shall be provided within the street
buffer along Waltman Ln.; and a 10-foot-wide multiuse pathway shall be provided
east/west through the site in accord with the Pathways Master Plan with
connections to the pathways along Waltman Ln. and Meridian rd. and internal
pedestrian walkways. Coordinate the location of the pathway through the site with
the Parks Department. A 14-foot-wide public pedestrian easement shall be
required for the multiuse pathways if located outside the public right-of-way; a
recorded copy of such shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance
of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT-I-84+MERIDIAN ROAD(H-2021-0099) PAGE 3 OF 9
e. Internal pedestrian walkways shall be a minimum of 5 feet wide and shall be
distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers,
colored or scored concrete, or bricks, as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19.
f. A bus stop should be provided in the plaza area near Shop 1 or an alternate location
acceptable to Valley Regional Transit (VRT).
g. At no time shall construction traffic associated with the development of this site
be allowed to access this site using Ruddy Dr. through The Landing and Tanner
Creek subdivisions.
h. If the improvements to Waltman Ln. and Corporate Dr. aren't completed by the
developer of the project (Tanner Creek) to the west as planned, these
improvements shall be completed by this developer through a Cooperative
Development Agreement (CDA)with ACHD, as follows:
• Extend Corporate Dr. offsite from its current terminus north of Ten Mile
Creek to Waltman Ln. and construct a new bridge over the Ten Mile
Creek, within existing right-of-way as required by ACHD. These
improvements shall occur with the first phase of development and shall
be complete prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the
site.
• Construct Waltman Ln. as half of a 36-foot-wide street section with
curb, gutter, an 8-foot-wide planter strip/parkway and a 10-foot-wide
detached sidewalk within 29 feet of right-of-way from centerline with 7
feet of the sidewalk located outside of the dedicated right-of-way
abutting the site. All improvements shall be constructed south of the
existing edge of pavement for Waltman Ln., shifting the centerline 8 feet
south to the south. The north side of Waltman Ln. shall be constructed
with a minimum of 12 feet of pavement from centerline, a 3-foot-wide
gravel shoulder and a borrow ditch to accommodate the roadway storm
runoff. Center turn lanes shall be constructed on Waltman Ln. if
determined necessary by ACHD. The improvements to Waltman Ln.
shall include reconstruction of the existing bridge over the Ten Mile
Creek as a full 36-foot street section with curb and 5-foot-wide attached
concrete sidewalks. This will require a 54-foot-wide bridge with 2-foot
parapets. These improvements shall be completed as required by ACHD
and shall occur with the first phase of development and be complete
prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the site.
6. COMPLIANCE PERIOD This Agreement must be fully executed within six (6)
months after the date of the Findings for the annexation and zoning or it is null and void.
7. DEFAULT/CONSENT TO DE-ANNEXATION AND REVERSAL OF
ZONING DESIGNATION:
7.1 Acts of Default.In the event Owner/Developer,or Owner/Developer's heirs,successors,
assigns, or subsequent owners of the Property or any other person acquiring an
interest in the Property, fail to faithfully comply with all of the terms and conditions
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT-I-84+MERIDIAN ROAD(H-2021-0099) PAGE 4 OF 9
included in this Agreement in connection with the Property, this Agreement may be
terminated by the City upon compliance with the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance.
7.2 Notice and Cure Period. In the event of Owner/Developer's default of this
agreement, Owner/Developer shall have thirty (30) days from receipt of written
notice from City to initiate commencement of action to correct the breach and cure
the default,which action must be prosecuted with diligence and completed within one
hundred eighty (180) days; provided, however, that in the case of any such default
that cannot with diligence be cured within such one hundred eighty(180)day period,
then the time allowed to cure such failure may be extended for such period as may be
necessary to complete the curing of the same with diligence and continuity.
7.3 Remedies. In the event of default by Owner/Developer that is not cured after notice
from City as described in Section 7.2, City shall, upon satisfaction of the notice and
hearing procedures set forth in Idaho Code section 67-6511A, have the right, but not
a duty, to de-annex all or a portion of the Property, reverse the zoning designations
described herein, and terminate City services to the de-annexed Property, including
water service and/or sewer service. Further, City shall have the right to file an action
at law or in equity to enforce the provisions of this Agreement.Because the covenants,
agreements, conditions, and obligations contained herein are unique to the Property
and integral to City's decision to annex and/or re-zone the Property, City and
Owner/Developer stipulate that specific performance is an appropriate, but not
exclusive, remedy in the event of default. Owner/Developer reserves all rights to
contest whether a default has occurred.
7.4 Choice of Law and Venue. This Agreement and the rights of the parties hereto shall
be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho,
including all matters of construction, validity, performance, and enforcement. Any
action brought by any party hereto shall be brought within Ada County, Idaho.
7.5 Delay. In the event the performance of any covenant to be performed hereunder by
either Owner/Developer or City is delayed for causes that are beyond the reasonable
control of the party responsible for such performance, which shall include, without
limitation, acts of civil disobedience, strikes or similar causes, the time for such
performance shall be extended by the amount of time of such delay.
7.6 Waiver. A waiver by City of any default by Owner/Developer of any one or more of
the covenants or conditions hereof shall apply solely to the default and defaults
waived and shall neither bar any other rights or remedies of City nor apply to any
subsequent default of any such or other covenants and conditions.
8. INSPECTION: Owner/Developer shall, immediately upon completion of any portion
or the entirety of said development of the Property as required by this Agreement or by City ordinance
or policy, notify the City Engineer and request the City Engineer's inspections and written approval
of such completed improvements or portion thereof in accordance with the terms and conditions of
this Agreement and all other ordinances of the City that apply to said Property.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT-I-84+MERIDIAN ROAD(H-2021-0099) PAGE 5 OF 9
9. REQUIREMENT FOR RECORDATION: City shall record this Agreement,
including all of the Exhibits, and submit proof of such recording to Owner/Developer, prior to the
third reading of the Meridian Zoning Ordinance in connection with the rezoning of the Property by
the City Council. If for any reason after such recordation,the City Council fails to adopt the ordinance
in connection with the annexation and zoning of the Property contemplated hereby, the City shall
execute and record an appropriate instrument of release of this Agreement.
10. ZONING: City shall, following recordation of the duly approved Agreement, enact
a valid and binding ordinance zoning the Property as specified herein.
11. SURETY OF PERFORMANCE: The City may also require surety bonds,
irrevocable letters of credit, cash deposits, certified check or negotiable bonds, as allowed under the
UDC, to insure the installation of required improvements, which the Owner/Developer agree to
provide, if required by the City.
12. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: No Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued
in any phase in which the improvements have not been installed,completed,and accepted by the City,
or sufficient surety of performance is provided by Owner/Developer to the City in accordance with
Paragraph 11 above.
13. ABIDE BY ALL CITY ORDINANCES: That Owner/Developer agree to abide by
all ordinances of the City of Meridian unless otherwise provided by this Agreement.
14. NOTICES: Any notice desired by the parties and/or required by this Agreement shall
be deemed delivered if and when personally delivered or three (3) days after deposit in the United
States Mail, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed as
follows:
CITY: with copy to:
City Clerk City Attorney
City of Meridian City of Meridian
33 E. Broadway Ave. 33 E. Broadway Avenue
Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642
OWNER/DEVELOPER:
GRH Meridian I-84,LLC
855 W. Broad St.
Boise, ID 83702
14.1 A party shall have the right to change its address by delivering to the other
party a written notification thereof in accordance with the requirements of this section.
15. ATTORNEY FEES: Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto
concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief as
may be granted, to court costs and reasonable attorney's fees as determined by a Court of competent
jurisdiction. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall
survive any default, termination or forfeiture of this Agreement.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT-I-84+MERIDIAN ROAD(H-2021-0099) PAGE 6 OF 9
16. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE: The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that time
is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition and provision hereof, and that
the failure to timely perform any of the obligations hereunder shall constitute a breach of and a default
under this Agreement by the other party so failing to perform.
17. BINDING UPON SUCCESSORS: This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure
to the benefit of the parties' respective heirs, successors, assigns and personal representatives,
including City's corporate authorities and their successors in office. This Agreement shall be binding
on the Owner/Developer, each subsequent owner and any other person acquiring an interest in the
Property. Nothing herein shall in any way prevent sale or alienation of the Property, or portions
thereof, except that any sale or alienation shall be subject to the provisions hereof and any successor
owner or owners shall be both benefited and bound by the conditions and restrictions herein
expressed. City agrees,upon written request of Owner and/or Developer, to execute appropriate and
recordable evidence of termination of this Agreement if City, in its sole and reasonable discretion,
had determined that Owner and/or Developer have fully performed their obligations under this
Agreement.
18. INVALID PROVISION: If any provision of this Agreement is held not valid by a
court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed to be excised from this Agreement
and the invalidity thereof shall not affect any of the other provisions contained herein.
19. DUTY TO ACT REASONABLY: Unless otherwise expressly provided, each party
shall act reasonably in giving any consent, approval,or taking any other action under this Agreement.
20. REMOVED PROPERTY: The City is hereby authorized, in its sole discretion, to
remove a portion of the Property ("Removed Property") from this Agreement at any time, provided
that the City and the owner of the Removed Property concurrently enter into a modified development
agreement governing the development and use of the Removed Property. The remaining portion of
the Property,which has not been removed from this Agreement as described above, shall continue to
be bound by the terms of this Agreement.
21. COOPERATION OF THE PARTIES: In the event of any legal or equitable action
or other proceeding instituted by any third party (including a governmental entity or official)
challenging the validity of any provision in this Agreement, the parties agree to cooperate in
defending such action or proceeding.
22. FINAL AGREEMENT: This Agreement sets forth all promises, inducements,
agreements, condition and understandings between Owner/Developer and City relative to the subject
matter hereof, and there are no promises, agreements, conditions or understanding, either oral or
written, express or implied, between Owner/Developer and City, other than as are stated herein.
Except as herein otherwise provided,no subsequent alteration, amendment, change or addition to this
Agreement shall be binding upon the parties hereto unless reduced to writing and signed by them or
their successors in interest or their assigns, and pursuant, with respect to City, to a duly adopted
ordinance or resolution of City.
22.1 No condition governing the uses and/or conditions governing rezoning of the subject
Property herein provided for can be modified or amended without the approval of the
City Council after the City has conducted public hearing(s) in accordance with the
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT-I-84+MERIDIAN ROAD(H-2021-0099) PAGE 7 OF 9
notice provisions provided for a zoning designation and/or amendment in force at the
time of the proposed amendment.
23. EFFECTIVE DATE OF AGREEMENT: This Agreement shall be effective on the
date the Meridian City Council shall adopt the amendment to the Meridian Zoning Ordinance in
connection with the annexation and zoning of the Property and execution of the Mayor and City Clerk.
[end of text; acknowledgements, signatures and Exhibits A and B follow]
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT-I-84+MERIDIAN ROAD(H-2021-0099) PAGE 8 OF 9
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this agreement and made
it effective as hereinabove provided.
OWNER:
GRH Meridian I-84, LLC
BY: i2s,�ry
STATE OF IDAHO )
ss:
County of Ada )
On this 2 day of Wu , 20 2`t ,before me,the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said
State,personally appeared bran ff-y,,V-tK-t ,known or identified to me to be the bNl Y\ky
of GRH Meridian I-84,LLC and the person who signed above and acknowledged to me that they executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this
certificate first above written. oit$ III E I•,,••••
A
(SEAL) ri)) 1SOTAR y:;�N'� No ary Public
My Commission Expires: 01 1T-202(b
Z�pUB LlG b`O=
CITY OF MERIDIAN ••••., OF�,. ATTEST:
By:
Mayor Robert E. Simison 2-6-2024 Chris Johnson, City Clerk 2-6-2024
STATE OF IDAHO )
ss
County of Ada )
On this 6th day of February , 20 24 ,before me, a Notary Public,personally appeared Robert E.
Simison and Chris Johnson,known or identified to me to be the Mayor and Clerk,respectively,of the City of Meridian,
who executed the instrument or the person that executed the instrument of behalf of said City,and acknowledged to me
that such City executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this
certificate first above written.
i
(SEAL) Notary Public for Idaho
My Commission Expires: 3-28-2028
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT—I-84+MERIDIAN ROAD(H-2021-0099) PAGE 9 OF 9
EXHIBIT A
lam
E N G I N E E R I N G
December 8,2023
Project No.:20-176
1-84/Meridian Road
Development Agreement
Legal Description
Exhibit A
A parcel of land being a portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 13,Township 3
North, Range 1 West, B.M., City of Meridian,Ada County, Idaho being more particularly described as
follows:
Commencing at a brass cap marking the East 1/4 corner of said Section 13, which bears 589'26'10"E a
distance of 2,642.64 feet from a 5/8-inch rebar marking the Center 1/4 corner of said Section 13, thence
following the northerly line of said Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4, N89'26'10"W a distance of
1,196.68 feet;
Thence leaving said northerly line, S00°51'50"W a distance of 25.00 feet to a 5/8-inch rebar on the
southerly right-of-way of West Waltman Lane and being the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Thence following said southerly right-of-way the following five (5) courses:
1. S89°26'10"E a distance of 479.78 feet to a 5/8-inch rebar;
2. S00°51'50"W a distance of 20.00 feet;
3. S89°26'10"E a distance of 371.73 feet to a 5/8-inch rebar;
4. N82°46'30"E a distance of 147.54 feet to a 5/8-inch rebar;
5. S89°26'10"E a distance of 141.03 feet to the westerly right-of-way of South Meridian Road;
Thence leaving said southerly right-of-way and following said westerly right-of-way the following six (6)
courses:
1. S01°01'27"W a distance of 83.00 feet;
2. 179.68 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 1,245.92 feet, a
delta angle of 08'15'46", a chord bearing of 511'24'20"W and a chord distance of 179.52 feet to
a 5/8-inch rebar;
3. SO4°38'26"W a distance of 136.12 feet to a 5/8-inch rebar;
4. S89°08'08"E a distance of 17.92 feet;
5. S06°53'13"W a distance of 244.01 feet to a PK nail;
6. S08°26'58"W a distance of 374.88 feet to an aluminum cap on the northerly right-of-way of
Interstate 84;
Thence leaving said westerly right-of-way and following said northerly right-of-way the following six (6)
courses:
1. S70°43'09"W a distance of 34.02 feet;
2. S67°01'27"W a distance of 214.27 feet to an aluminum cap;
3. S79°29'13"W a distance of 465.73 feet to an aluminum cap;
4. S84°30'07"W a distance of 231.30 feet to an aluminum cap;
5. N00°25'56"E a distance of 184.21 feet;
6. N89°34'04"W a distance of 246.40 feet to an aluminum cap;
Thence leaving said northerly right-of-way, N00'43'22"E a distance of 396.63 feet to a 5/8-inch rebar;
Thence N00°47'14"E a distance of 270.15 feet;
Thence S89°26'10"E a distance of 124.11 feet;
Thence N00°51'50"E a distance of 369.65 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
5725 North Discovery Way • Boise, Idaho 83713 • 208.639.6939 • kmenglip.com
Said parcel contains a total of 29.89 acres, more or less, and is subject to all existing easements and/or
rights-of-way of record or implied.
Attached hereto is Exhibit B and by this reference is made a part hereof.
�NpL LAND
�ENSFOSG�G
0
662
s� �o
�9TF of �oP�
F� K E���`
PAGE 2
CENTER 1/4 CORNER SECTION 13 POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
FOUND 5/8-INCH REBAR EAST 1/4 CORNER SECTION 13
W. Waltman Ln. FOUND BRASS CAP 1
BASIS OF BEARING
---------------------S89'26'10"E 2642.64'--------------------------------
1445.96' A N89'26'10"W 1196.68' _
R/W /W — — — L 1
S00'51'50"W S89'26'10"E 479.78' LJ
25.00' (TIE) w J
(D POINT OF S89'26'10"E
LINE TABLE 2 0o in BEGINNING 371.73'
n r _
LINE BEARING DISTANCE Z) b c0 U
o � 1
Z Total Area: 29.89±AC.
L1 S00'51'50"W 20.00 51213417006, 51213417045, 51213417261 1
L2 N82'46'30"E 147.54 51213417281, 51213417300, 51213417310 J
51213417480, 51213417521, 51213417550
L3 S89'26'10"E 141.03 S89'26'10"E 51213417600, 51213417630, 51213417650
L4 S01'01'27"W 83.00 124.11' 51213417680, S1213417699 & S1213417707 L6
L5 SO4'38'2611W 136.12 N00'47'14"E
S06'53'13"W
L6 S89-08'08"E 17.92 270.15 244.01'
(011 I
K
CURVE TABLE a
LO 3
r CURVE RADIUS LENGTH DELTA CHORD BRG CHORD CI -
F'j00
00
Unplatted C1 1245.92' 179.68' 8'15'46" S11'24'20"W 179.52' N
o O CT) 0S
X ZCD
S70'43'09"W
u 34.02'
N 89'34'04"W
O
0 246.40' N00'25'56"E
3 184.21'
46573 S67'01'27"W
S79-29 13"`N 214.27'
nd Interstate g,4
S84'30'07"W W'80 PO Ramp)
ffi 231.30'
ID
0 250 S00 7S0
Plan Scale: 1" = 250'
z Nay LAND LEGEND
w �\CENSF�SG�` BRASS CAP
a o ® ALUMINUM CAP
w a.
6662 5/8-INCH REBAR
9 s� o CALCULATED POINT
OF \OP�� — BOUNDARY LINE
<< Y E R SECTION LINE
ENGINEERING R/W EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
m 5725 NORTH DISCOVERY WAY "
W BOISE,IDAHO 83713 Y '
PHONE(208)639-6939 I Exhibit B
kmengllp.com
Development Agreement
,D, DATE: December 2023
a PROECT: 20-176
SHEET: 1-84/ Meridian Road
0 1 OF 1 A P Qtion oft Ie K 1 ,4 o f I-e g 1/4 of act irn 13,T3 N R IN, B M Ada C cunty, Ida b
a ��
479.78
41.0.1
s89°26'10"e 1371.73 147.54�„� sA926'10„�
s89°26'10"e "ar
M o
M o
0
124.11 �
sH9"26'10"c
9
U
o 0
N O M ct
O o N
O
V)
d 3
N 41 00
M �O
00i o o l:
M O M
O
C
I
n89°34'04"w 1L
246.40 00�21
21�Z'I
N �
00 o
s79029'13w
O
C, 465.73
s84°30'0711W
231.30
Title: Development Agreement 20-176 Date: 12-08-2023
Scale: 1 inch= 220 feet I File: Deed Plotter.des
Tract 1: 29.893 Acres: 1302132 Sq Feet:Closure=n21.1627e 0.02 Feet: Precision=1/283686: Perimeter=4732 Feet
001=s89.2610e 479.78 009=s89':0808e 17.92 0 1 7=n89.3404w 246.40
002=s00.5150w 20.00 010=s06.5313w 244.01 018=n00.4322e 396.63
003=s89.2610e 371.73 011=s08.2658w 374.88 019=n00.4714e 270.15
004=n82.4630e 147.54 012=s70.4309w 34.02 020=s89.2610e 124.11
005=s89.2610e 141.03 013=s67.0127w 214.27 021=n00.5150e 369.65
006=s01.0127w 83.00 014=s79.2913w 465.73
007:Lt,R=1245.92,Delta=08.I546 015=s84.3007w 231.30
Bng=sl1.2420w,Chd=179.52
008=s04.3826w 136.12 016=n00.2556e 184.21
EXHIBIT B
CITY OF MERIDIAN
FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW (:�VE Nty
AND DECISION&ORDER
In the Matter of the Request for an Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map
(FLUM)to Change the Future Land Use Designation on 70.4 Acres of Land from Mixed Use—
Community(MU-C)to Commercial(34.3 Acres)and Medium High Density Residential(36.1+/-
Acres); and Annexation of 18.30-Acres of Land with a C-G(General Retail and Service
Commercial)Zoning District for I-84+Meridian Road,by Hawkins Companies.
Case No(s). H-2021-0099
For the City Council Hearing Date of. November 21,2023(Findings on December 5, 2023)
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of November 21, 2023, incorporated
by reference)
2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of November 21, 2023, incorporated
by reference)
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of November 21,
2023, incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code(see attached Staff Report for the hearing
date of November 21, 2023, incorporated by reference)
B. Conclusions of Law
1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use
Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code(I.C. §67-6503).
2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified as
Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has,by
ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian,
which was adopted December 17,2019, Resolution No. 19-2179 and Maps.
3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A.
4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction.
5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose
expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed.
6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be
signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the
Community Development Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party
requesting notice.
FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER
FOR I-84+MERIDIAN ROAD H-2021-0099 - 1-
7. That this approval is subject to the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the
hearing date of November 21,2023,incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to
be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the
application.
C. Decision and Order
Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-5A and based upon
the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted,it is hereby ordered that:
1. The applicant's request for an amendment to the Future Land Use Map in the Comprehensive
Plan and Annexation and Zoning is hereby approved with the requirement of a development
agreement per the provisions in the Staff Report for the hearing date of November 21,2023,
attached as Exhibit A.
D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits
Notice of Development Agreement Duration
The city and/or an applicant may request a development agreement or a modification to a
development agreement consistent with Idaho Code section 67-6511A. The development
agreement may be initiated by the city or applicant as part of a request for annexation and/or
rezone at any time prior to the adoption of findings for such request.
A development agreement may be modified by the city or an affected party of the development
agreement. Decision on the development agreement modification is made by the city council in
accord with this chapter. When approved, said development agreement shall be signed by the
property owner(s)and returned to the city within six(6)months of the city council granting the
modification.
A modification to the development agreement may be initiated prior to signature of the
agreement by all parties and/or may be requested to extend the time allowed for the agreement
to be signed and returned to the city if filed prior to the end of the six(6)month approval
period.
E. Judicial Review
Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521(1)(d),if this final decision concerns a matter enumerated in Idaho
Code § 67-652 1(1)(a),an affected person aggrieved by this final decision may,within twenty-eight
(28)days after all remedies have been exhausted,including requesting reconsideration of this final
decision as provided by Meridian City Code § 1-7-10, seek judicial review of this final decision as
provided by chapter 52,title 67,Idaho Code.This notice is provided as a courtesy; the City of
Meridian does not admit by this notice that this decision is subject to judicial review under LLUPA.
F. Notice of Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis
Pursuant to Idaho Code §§ 67-6521(1)(d)and 67-8003,an owner of private property that is the
subject of a final decision may submit a written request with the Meridian City Clerk for a regulatory
takings analysis.
FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER
FOR I-84+MERIDIAN ROAD H-2021-0099 -2-
G. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of November 21,2023
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 5th day of December
2023.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BRAD HOAGLUN VOTED AYE
COUNCIL VICE PRESIDENT JOE BORTON VOTED AYE
COUNCIL MEMBER JESSICA PERREAULT VOTED AYE
COUNCIL MEMBER LUKE CAVENER VOTED AYE
COUNCIL MEMBER TREG BERNT VOTED
COUNCIL MEMBER LIZ STRADER VOTED AYE
MAYOR ROBERT SIMISON VOTED
(TIE BREAKER)
Mayor Robert . Si son 12-5-2023
Attest:
a4—
Chris�2'�L
John46n 12- 3
City Clerk
Copy served upon Applicant, Community Development Department,Public Works Department and City
Attorney.
By: Cha&ycWM Dated: 12-5-2023
City Clerk's Office
FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER
FOR I-84+MERIDIAN ROAD H-2021-0099 -3-
STAFF REPORT Ell,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING DATE: November 21, 2023 legend 0
TO: Mayor&City CouncilEnt
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner
208-884-5533
SUBJECT: H-2021-0099
I-84+Meridian Road—CPAM,
AZ
LOCATION: Generally located at the northwest
corner of S. Meridian Rd. and I-84
on the south side of W. Waltman
Ln.,in the southeast %4 of Section
13, T.3N.,RAW.
f b
Note:Since this project was remanded back to the Commission, the Applicant has changed their CPAM request
from MU-R to Commercial and included the Tanner Creek project to the west in the amendment with a change
from MU-C to MHDR at the recommendation of Staff.An amended conceptual developmentplan and associated
exhibits have also been submitted. The staff report has been updated accordingly.
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map(FLUM)to change the future land use
designation on 33.1370.4-acres of land from Mixed Use—Community(MU-C)to Mixed Use Regional
/TR)Commercial(34.3-acres) and Medium High Density Residential(MHDR)Q6.1+/-acres); and
annexation of 18.30-acres of land with a C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial) zoning district.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details
Acreage 33.1370.4 acres(CPAM); 18.30 acres(AZ)
Future Land Use Designation MU-C(Mixed Use—Community)(existing);
(existing/proposed) Commercial(proposed on subject 34.3-acre property)&MHDR(Medium High
Density Residential)(proposed on adjacent 36.1-acre Tanner Creek property)
Existing Land Use Single-family residential and vacant/undeveloped land
Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial
Current Zoning R1 and RUT in Ada County; and C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial)
Proposed Zoning C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial)
Physical Features(waterways, The Ten Mile Creek runs along the west boundary of the site.
hazards,flood plain,hillside)
Neighborhood Meeting Date 12/9/2021
History(previous approvals) Annexation Ordinance#435 (High Country of Idaho)&02-987(Urban
Renewal MDC);H-2019-0101 (Resolution#19-2179)—Future Land Use Map
change
B. Project Maps
Note: The Future Land Use Map shown below includes the property subject to the CPAM request; the
other maps only depict the AZ property.
Future Land Use Map Aerial Map
Legend 0 Legend 0
Project Lacaton TOvtiSI Project'Lmato�
ff
f'r?
Tk ..?-
HCIV
ig
6W
iu Mir
id�r fia
-
�1L
Zoning Map Planned Development Map
Legend ,�a.. Legend
Project L•ac z:- Project Lcoutan
- -8 R-40
- R T -
�_ R.4 R I R1
SJ
I 1i!!1•T:
AIL
G-
JJ I
M4 ,L..
III. APPLICANT INFORMATION
A. Applicant:
Ethan Mansfield,Hawkins Companies—855 W. Broad Street,Boise,ID 83702
B. Owner:
Hawkins Companies 855 W. Broad Street, Boise,ID 83702
C. Representative:
Same as Applicant
IV. NOTICING
Planning&Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Newspaper notification
published in newspaper 4/5/2022; 10/17/23 5/29/2022; 11/5/2023
Radius notification mailed to
property owners within 300 feet 4/4/2022; 10/13/23 5/26/2022; 11/3/2023
Public hearing notice sign posted
on site 4/7/2022; 10/23/23 6/3/2022; 11/9/2023
Nextdoor posting 4/5/2022; 10/17/23 5/25/2022; 11/3/2023
V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS
EXISTING FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: This property and the adjacent property to the west totaling
70.4 acres of land is currently designated as Mixed Use—Community(MU-C) on the Future Land Use Map
(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan (see map in Section VIII.A). The purpose of this designation
is to allocate areas where community-serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban
fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses, including residential, and to avoid mainly single-use and
strip commercial type buildings.Non-residential buildings in these areas have a tendency to be larger than in
Mixed Use Neighborhood(MU-N) areas. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of the variety that
people will mainly travel by car to,but also walk or bike to(up to 3 or 4 miles). Employment opportunities
for those living in and around the neighborhood are encouraged. Developments are encouraged to be
designed according to the conceptual MU-C plan depicted in Figure 3C. (See pgs. 3-11 through 3-16 for
more information.)
PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: The proposed FLUM designation for this property is Mimed
Use Regional Commercial (34.3 acres)and Medium High Density Residential(MHDR) (36.1 acres)
the adjacent property to the west(see map in Section VIILA). The„ V„ese ef the AA r A designation ;y
pr-evide a nik of enTleyinent-, retaik, and-residential dwelhi*gs-an,419mblie uses near niajor arte
The Commercial designation will provide a full range of commercial uses to serve area residents and
visitors. Desired uses may include retail,restaurants,personal and professional services, and office uses,as
well as appropriate public and quasi-public uses. Multi-family residential may be allowed in some cases,but
should be careful to promote a high quality of life through thoughtful site design, connectivity, and
amenities. Sample zoning include: C-N, C-C, and C-G.
The MHDR designation allows for a mix of dwelling jtypes including townhouses, condominiums, and
apartments. Residential gross densities should range from eight to twelve dwelling units per acre. These
areas are relatively compact within the context of larger neighborhoods and are typically located around or
near mixed use commercial or employment areas to provide convenient access to services and jobs for
residents. Developments need to incorporate high quality architectural design and materials and thoughtful
site design to ensure quality of place and should also incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and area
pathways, attractive landscapin and nd a project identity.
The Applicant submitted a conceptual developmet plan for the area included in the FLUM amendment(see
Section VIII.D). The subject property,proposed to be designated Commercial, is proposed to develop with a
mix of regional commercial/retail and restaurant uses with some neighborhood serving uses. The adjacent
property to the west,proposed to be designated MHDR, is proposed to develop with a mix of residential
uses, including single-family,townhome and multi-family dwellingproposed uses are consistent with
the FLUM designations proposed for the subject property and the property to the west.
Note: The initial FL UM amendment request for this property was from MU-C to Mixed-Use Regional(MU-
R). The Commission recommended denial to City Council based on their belief the proposed use isn't
consistent with the general mixed-use development guidelines, the existing MU C or the proposed MU-R
guidelines: they also felt a Traffic Impact Study(TIS) was needed. Council heard the application and
remanded it back to the Commission in order to be reviewed concurrently with the Tanner Creek application
in an effort to determine consistency with the Comprehensive Plan for the overall property.
After review of these applications, it's Staffs opinion the proposed development plans for both projects are
lard ly inconsistent with the purpose statements and development guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan for
the general mixed use and specific land uses (i.e. MU-C and MU-R) for the following reasons: 1)functional
and physical integration of land uses is desired—these are two separate residential and commercial
developments with only a pedestrian pathway proposed for interconnectivity—no integration of uses is
proposed; 2) a mixed use project should include at least three (3) types of land uses—only two (2) are
proposed Li.e. residential and commercial(includes retail, restaurants, etc.17; 3) community serving
facilities such as hospitals, clinics, churches, schools,parks, daycares, civic buildings, or public safety
facilities are desired—none are proposed; 4)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—none are proposed; 5)mixed-use areas should be centered around spaces that are
well-designed and intg rrg ated public and quasi public centers of activity that are activated and incorporate
permanent design elements and amenities that foster a wide variety of interests ranging from leisure to play
—no such public/quasi public areas are proposed: 6) 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 alternate modes
of transportation—no such stops or lots are proposed; 7) community-serving uses and dwellings should be
seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric for an integration of a variety of uses to avoid mainly single-use
and strip commercial type buildin (MU-C —single-use developments are proposed that are not well-
integrated; 8 vertically integrated structures are encouraged—none are proposed(MU-C); 9) integration
of a variety of uses together, including residential as a supporting use, to avoid predominantly single use
developments such as a regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses (MU-R)—no
residential uses are included in the proposed MU-R designated area, which creates a single use development
with only commercial uses: and 10) retail commercial uses should comprise a maximum of 50%of the
development area (MU-R)—most if not all of the proposed MU-R designated area consists o�
commercial/retail uses, no residential, office, civic or other uses are proposed.
For this reason, Staff recommended the Applicant change their request for a map amendment from the MU-
R to the Commercial designation and include a map amendment on the adjacent property to the west
(Tanner Creek) from MU-C to MHDR, as agreed to by both Applicants. This change better aligns with the
proposed development plans for both properties and in Sta�f's opinion is more compatible with adjacent
existing and future residential development in the area and provides a good transition between these uses to
the proposed commercial uses and is more appropriate than the existing and previously proposed MU-R
designation.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES(https://www.meridiancity.orklcompplan):
Goals,Obiectives, &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):
• "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 be required to connect to City water and sewer systems.
• "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels
within the Ci, over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02)
The surrounding properties have all been annexed into the City; the property to the north is
developed, the property to the west is proposed to develop with residential uses (i.e. Tanner Creek
Development of this infill property will result in more efficient provision of public services.
• "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and ug tter,
sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G)
Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks is required to be provided with
development.
• "Require collectors consistent with the ACHD Master Street Map(MSM), generally at/near the mid-
mile location within the Area of City Impact."(6.01.03B)
The MSM depicts Waltman Ln. as a collector street where it abuts the site due to the increased traffic
anticipated with this development and the ad'a7 cent property to the west(Tanner Creek
• "Require pedestrian circulation plans to ensure safety and convenient access across large commercial
and mixed-use developments."(3.07.02A)
A pedestrian circulation plan was submitted for the site, included in Section VIII.F.
• "Improve and protect creeks and other natural waterways throughout commercial, industrial, and
residential areas."(4.05.01D)
The Ten Mile Creek along the site's west boundary should be protected during construction.
• "Support Valley Regional Transit's(VRT)efforts to construct multi-modal transit centers in areas of
high commercial activity and employment as well as areas with transit-supportive residential
densities."(6.01.01B)
A bus stop is proposed within this development, which will serve residents of the residential
development to the west and employees and customers of the proposed commercial development.
• "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
multimodal corridors."(3.07.02B)
Smaller-scale neighborhood commercial uses are proposed along with two Leger retail buildings.
A pedestrian pathway is proposed for access between the subject property and the adiacent proposed
residential property (Tanner Creek) to the west. For better connectivity, a more direct access, and to
reduce traffic on the collector street(Waltman Ln.), Staff recommends a vehicular driveway/bridge is
provided across the Ten Mile Creek between the two proiects for easy access from the residential
development in accord with UDC 11-3A-3A.2.
• "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)
The proposed vacant parcels are within the City limits and the lamer area is surrounded by
properties already annexed into the City. The development of this property will result in better
provision of City services.
The fel owing analysis is specific to the request for a Mixed Use Regional(MU R) designation, and not the
fRer-itS Of befief4tS Of Il f j I pr-opas d uses. Analysis for-either-eemplianee with the adopted f4we
!a-ad ese designation of MU C, or-another-one,may r-esult in very differ-epA_q4 I I . . . Perty designat
MU R ffffist eemply with both the general mixed used poliees and the MU R polieies below.
fi9i-a eembination ef eampatible land uses within a eles-e geogi-aphie area that allei�wfep eaqi4,aeees-sible
funetional andpkwieal integration ef land uses-, te et;eate and enhanee neighber-heed sense 6��ee, and to
allow.,.e.e..,t.e... ...greatep degree� ...e...b........,. _...e J.e.........y.
The proposed pr-ojeet is eofnpr-ised entifely of eemmer-eial uses,pf:imar-ily high tr-affie generating
•
two big box retail and junior anehor-retail spaees along with drive thfoul--r-estaufants), along with a single
gh
dediea4ed offiee site. Thef:e are fie residential E)r-publie uses proposed. The a!is fer-a
leea4ions far-day
ll
> flex spaee, > dentists,
. —uses. There is also no ifAegr-ated residential with or-eensider-ation for-the planned pr-ojeet to the west.
pFepepi�L, it has not yet been submitted as an tT4ated Tf:affie Impaet k S44:y is under review bYA GAP. A
the pre applieatien meetiffg, Stwff reeemmended te theApplieaw that thej,,wait and submit their applieation
Staff finds the ipAegr-ation of land uses in the proposed eaneept is not eensistent with many of the MU R an
minimal e&A haw been made to address mixed use r-equir-ements. The following items afe additional
Faents of the general mixed tise designation,the majority of w-hieh are not met with the proposed site
in r-e:v4ewing development
> ill >
per-the Comprehensive Plan (pg.3 13)! (S460 i4wk in italie-s)
..92s ant
cc
A mixed use pr-ojeet should ineltide 4 least thfee types of land uses. Exeeptions may be granted for-
smaller-sites on a ease by ease basis. This!and use is not in4eaded for-high density residential
development ."
This.is a 3344 tiere site with anky eammer-eial and effiee uses.jqtwpese6� This is.Hot a 4mall"site
• cc
Where appr-opr-ia4e,higher density and/or-ffmiti fafaily residential development is encour-aged fo
pr-ojeets with the potential to sen,e as employment destia4ion eenter-s and when the pf-ejeet is
adjacent to US 70/76 Cu cG Cu 16 or Cu 69 »
integration.
• cc
Mixed Use areas are t�Tieally developed tinder a master or eoneeptual plan; during an annexation or
rezone r-e"est, a development agf:eement will Pfpieally be r-eqttir-ed for-developments with a Mi*ed
Use designation,"
y to Me west�s met eons-ider-ed er integrated into the
• "In de"Iepmen4s where fneltiple ee er-cial and/or offiee buildings are proposed, the buildings
should be affanged to er-ea e some f6fm of eammon,usable afea, stieh as a plaza or-green spaee."
There is no shared 6yoaeeop odeg�aumnts, business gatherings, ep destination oriented retail(ereati
ar eammervial Igad sites to make Hs-e ef quiet and easi4,aeees-s-ible 6pen 6paee. Open&Pdee a
;,
• cc
The site plan should depiet a tr-ansitioaa4use and'of landseaped buffer-ing between Oommer-eia4 and
existing low or-meditnn density residential development."
fiami4,residential planned-tg the west, The s-4ejqkqn dges not integrate eMer eammunity,se * —
The site plan does net eenten*plate any eemmiumity se— designate s-paeefer them to eeeu
tteAture
to >plazas, > open spaee, > and sehools are expeeted;
• "Mixed use areas should be eenter-ed around spaees that are well designed publie and quasi public
amenities that foster-a wide variety of interests ranging ffOni leiSUFe to play. These afeas should be
• "All Mixed tise pr-ojeets shotild be dir-eetly aeeessible to neighbofhoods within the seetion by both
ve ieles and
pedestrians."
edestria nn ))
wouk4 be stibmittiHg plans that wei-e eoordinated in aeeoi-danee with Oty,poliey. They,have taYfed
64-11d etiVe .
• "Alleys and i:oadways should be used to tr-ansition f+ofn dissimilar-land"ises, and between Fesidential
densities and housing types."
The pFopE)sed site plan does inelude a df:iN,e aisle loeated behind the large retail anehor-,that in
eembination with a landseape buffer-pfevides "a"tr-ansition to fittwe residential to the west. This
however-is not the point of the mixed use transition standafds. As shown in the mixed use gefiefal and
mixed use fegional eompfehensive plan figures (3A and 3D,below), r-oads are generally use
tFansition with 4eating uses. These r-oads are intended to both integr-a4e and to tfansition, and not to
mixed
e d nt
ANdeairF
Tmmhuum I 4 I—
arfonrbs _ _ n
- 1 Spice
a F �
Twid
P
PAW. —r
:
luwrrhuuL+3
9•
4
kewerlfst * * � t
PIu��O�l$p�rr -� ArEriiall�,d
Fr��„rratuo��t4�redspace,G41}FaeaS�lntyk�tf.� I f — .
Figure 3A frorra City of Mendion famprehonslve Plan. Mote khe focus on 4dway frMtoge that
iraf sRior*and rrrt,,gfcpte.5 uses, Poo the aFen 5pa-Ew 4pmv Vvp;Wtr in#egrat4,v grid shored.
5�ngkl�mdX
srux
� � pr�adtwr+sl
am6t rmw
llea[�qwr4sn _
--
�� "grOd
1 * RUeAin
is trw
0 3 ii 44 4 tit 0 9
JAEeritlRtiad
Firaiurr area khorrdsparca,i:annrrtivity,ris.l �--4
Figure 3a from Gty of 44errdfun Campreherrsive?ion.Note the speeiof faeu;an uses widT
racgl4wdy{rpn�i�?rt,fhr Urumprd�f atrpf dfx*rt�rdrstr,Wn 7C.rttsF wrtNnv�tngwa',sirrJ}rrqurrar
parking afshN rhrappor'tunioes for a (narli t hr'gh viObilAy
lod:dlW and fire ihcrred Umar;ifYspbas and vperr sync¢fnt LWb the fbFOEr&rKhGe Qnd srrrblke
pad xf[Mf;Jmd "
in reviewing development >the following items w a 11 be considered in AIU R areas,
• Development should generally eomply with the general guidelines f6r-development in all Mixed Use
areas.. This.site and the ene te the west are net integ-rated s-inTly beeause an aeees-s l9eint i
qHalio,ochf-e. X9T-E.--Staff reeegnLoes-theqt the Ten Afile Greek separates.these Ave prejeets.
M-ewever-, both projeets are turning their baek to the Grvek and notigreposing to embraee it as an
amenity that ties theprejeet togeMei,. [Aik-it may be eestprehibitive to have sevem!er-ossin
and intent-, or-with the most of the speeoe standw�. Ae subjeet appheation requests AAK-ed-Use
of the development af:ea a4 gross densities
fanging fFem 6 to 4 0 tmits/aer-e. There is neither-a minimum nor- Yesed on non
ooffffnmialuses soeh as ffi ldtifyor- t4 .mot,o� oo nus them), and neither ef the l9r-oposedprejeet-s are integiwW into a eehesive design.
There is neither-a minifflUm nor-ma-x* A on non retail eon*ner-eial uses stieh as offiee—,
� o„ et 0
elean ..,1 str-y ..tt.,;,�.�e t uses.� � o ef
other
0� Of the dffek)-pfflefft area.
CoHneil that eammunio,Pffle s-eiq,iees.s-heHk4 oeeur en Waltman to the east; neither appl4eatien is
Aqiere the development proposes publie and quasi publie uses to st+ppoA the developmet#,the develope
may be eligible for-additional afea for-retail developmefA(beyond the allowed The proposed eoneept is ahigiost entirely retail with ne eMer eommunio,sen,ing uses.Atpi-evie
),based on the r-aties
> >
the developef is eligible for--a
2:1 bonus. That is to > if there is a one acre libfafy site planned and dedieated,
areas,be eligible far-two additional aer-es of retail development.
the developer-
>
> >
• Far-plazas that are in4egr-a4ed into a f:etail pr-ejeet,t4e developer-wetild be eligible for-a 6:1 20 additional aeres of retail
Sueh plazas should provide a fecal poiPA(sueh as a fountain,
> ,
and some wea4her-pr-oteetion. That wotild mean that by providing a half aer-e plaza,the developef
wetild be eligible for-thfee additional aer-es of retail developmefft.
This guideline is not applieable as no sueh publi8lqHasi publie uses are lgo;epe:g
Additional Analysisi
As outlined,the proposed pr-ejeet is a eammer-eial developmefft,not mi*ed Use. There are ne signifiea
later-nal Cir-eulation and Pedestrian Aeeess! Some effoft has been made to elevate the site plan to suppeft
pedestfian safety. iner-eased sidewalks dffoughetA the pafidag afeas have been provided,unlike eemmer-eial
strip malls a-ad power-eenter-s of deeades past. These improvements however-r-eally only suppoi4 and benefit,
users thm. o to the site via „4,..Y,ob to
leeations and uses for-residents to benefit. These eammunity sefviees afe intended and essential to fvdtfee
leea4 trips-.
Uses from the subjeet site require new residents to get into their ears forvii4ually all trips, and most o
would be ftinneled down Waltman and thfotigh an akea4-problematie and eongested ipAer-seetion. There are
> ,
these uses at an a&r-dable pr-iee-point giwn the seale, loe4ion, and inter-sta+e visibility. The smaller-Retail 2
-pad site (in the middie)may suppoi4 some multi tenant uses,but none of the listed&kamples are ttTieally
attraeted to these 4�Tes of loeation -i , eireulation,physieal building design, and general attorneys, or other eon+ffm+nity services. The 4 story class A offiee space,is not likely to support most of
Site Design; To be oonsidered a mixed use projeet, an entire site redesign is very likely required.No small
atimber-of ehanges will resolve the tinder-lying design issties. A large retail anehor-eottid easily be integr4eA
into a mixed use projeet,but for this site in this loeation, it would likely need to be loeated along th-e
inter-state or-Mer-idian Road. This is nofmal and typieal both for-sites sueh as this, and for-major-retailers, in
other-subufban afeas of the Cou*tfy. The loea4ion as designed prohibits any in4egr-a4ion with the adjaeent
uses to the west, and disallows the potential for-any lesser-eonmwnity servi -1 uses fr-o-m--
eee"��ng spaee along Waltman Lane. Waltman is the ideal In-tion fov- on- . ,uses that do
npod ;L P-m-n-A-taffor-d thevisibility of the inter-state and Mer-idian Read. The site needs to realize bette
elester-ing of non residential uses to fr-afne a-ad befiefit r-eloeated open spaee, c-md there needs to be
existing r-esid -n-ti al mle�-'s. Destination uses,beth'r-etail and eommunity sefviees for-leeal fesidefAs should be
e ffieient and safe.
The seeondafy mid box(larger-retail 2 along the ipAer-state)may be diffietilt to ifitegr-ate, and likely instead
needs the square footage rededieated for better-ifAiegr-a4ien ef een*nunity sey-ving uses. While office
also desir-ed,there is a eonsider-able amount of it being eonstfueted elsewhere in the eonffnuflity and �Ililfi
also be r-edediea4ed. The large Retail 1 anehor-eotild be easily provided with a eentr-al spine aeeess from
Wa4fnm if it was r-eloeated with the baek f4eing the inter-state. it would have gf:ea4er-visibilit-y,be no less
aeeessible, and allow fnueh bet4er-integfution for-a vai4ety of other-uses. The planned fesidentia4 to the wes
would also then not be liter-ally walled off by the tmattr-aetive side of a large big box, and eould make bet4er-
use of views aef:oss the Ten Mile efeek.None of the pad s4es on N4ef:idian Road need to be lost,thoug4
Open spaee provided in the subjeet layout is wasteful and wit-bout signifieant benefit to fu4ur-e,poten4i
users. Provision of A' - . "ot a eheekbox r-e"ir-emeat that ean be provided and just make a pfojec4
speeifie pokey. The spaee behind the loading doeks is unattfaetive and likely to be a nuisanee a-ad CPT-ED
issue. The area stfffounded by pafk4ag neaf offiee pads is a heat island,unsafe, and diffieult to aeeess,both
for-near-by employees and fof:fesidents. A4iile the eefAr-al open spaee eould serve as something of an otAdoof-
fnar-ket, it does not fneet the ifftent of the mixed use pfineiples and is poor4y loeated(see above).
Finally, and as pr-eviously stated,the site laeks ipAegr-ated desip feattwes for-users to leisufe and r-em
There afe fie elefneig4s of destin4ion fegional,no plaees designed for-business visits and ot4doof:meetings to
happen, or-foF users to visitof:s to simple 'stay' and ef�oy sen4ees with synergies. The site plan is standard
higl+w I . .1, designed to usher-in as many vehieles as possible, and then to get them oUt as Elffiekl!,4
TRANSPORTATION'
Access is proposed via three(3) driveways to/from Waltman Lane, a local street,at the project's north
boundary. ACHD's Master Street Map(MSM) designates Waltman Ln. abutting this site as a collector street.
Improvements are required to Waltman Ln., including reconstruction of the bridge over the Ten Mile Creek,
west of this site with the Tanner Creek project. Improvements to the section of Waltman that abuts this site
will be determined by ACHD with a future development application since this only an annexation request.
The extension of Corporate Drive to the northwest of this site, designated as a collector street on the MSM,
including construction of a bridge over the Ten Mile Creek from the north to Waltman Lane, is proposed to
be completed with the first phase of development of the Tanner Creek project prior to issuance of building
ep rmits.
If the Tanner Creek project doesn't go forward and complete the improvement to Waltman Ln. and
Corporate Dr. as planned, Staff recommends these improvements are completed by this developer
through a Cooperative Development Agreement(CDA)with ACHD, as follows:
• Extend Corporate Dr. off-site from its current terminus north of Ten Mile Creek to Waltman Ln. and
construct a new bridge over the Ten Mile Creek,within existing ROW. The roadway north of the
bridge should be constructed as a 40-foot wide commercial street section with vertical curb, gutter
and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk. The crossing of Ten Mile Creek will require a 58-foot wide
bridge with 2-foot Parapets. Staff recommends the roadway south of the bridge to Waltman
Lane is constructed as a complete street section with detached 10-foot wide multi-use pathways
along both sides of the street.These improvements should occur with the first phase of
development and should be complete prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the site..
• Construct Waltman Lane as 1/2 of a 36-foot wide street section with curb,_gutter, an 8-foot wide
planter strip/parkway and a 10-foot wide detached sidewalk within 29-feet of right-of-way(ROW)
from centerline with 7-feet of the sidewalk located outside of the dedicated ROW abutting the site.
All improvements are proposed to be constructed south of the existing edge of pavement for
Waltman Ln., shifting the centerline 8-feet south to the south. ACHD is requiringthe he Applicant to
construct the north side of Waltman with a minimum of 12-feet of pavement from centerline,a 3-
foot wide gravel shoulder and a borrow ditch to accommodate the roadway storm run-off. Center
turn lanes are required to be constructed on Waltman Ln. if determined necessary ACHD. The
improvements to Waltman Ln.will require reconstruction of the existing bridge over the Ten Mile
Creek as a fu1136-foot street section with curb and 5-foot wide attached concrete sidewalks. This
will require a 54-foot wide bridge with 2-foot parapets. These improvements should be completed as
required by ACHD and shall occur with the first phase of development and be complete prior to
issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the site.
The proposed commercial development is estimated to generate 10,891 vehicle trips per day(VTD) (950
vehicle trips per hour in the PM peak hour). Based on the findings of the Traffic Impact Study(TIS) for the
proposed project,which included the Tanner Creek project,the Meridian Rd./Waltman Ln. intersection
would exceed ACHD's Acceptable Level of Service thresholds. With previous development applications for
the Tanner Creek property,ACHD did not recommend any mitigation at the intersection due to right-of-way
(ROW)constraints,impacts to existing businesses, and substantial intersection redesign and construction,
making the recommended mitigation infeasible.
A letter prepared by Six Mile Engineering,dated 1/23/23, in response to comments and feedback during the
City Council hearing for this project,was submitted to ACHD proposing phased alternative improvements at
the Meridian Rd./Waltman Ln. intersection to address traffic impacts from these developments. A three-
phase concept designwas proposed in which the first two designs did not require any additional ROW
dedication and the final phase did. ACHD reviewed their proposal and does not recommend any
modifications to the intersection as under all concept designs,these modifications would negativelypact
existing operations of both the interchange and ramps.ACHD's concerns also extended to the impacts the
proposed modifications would have to the Central Dr. and Corporate Dr. intersections at Main St. and
Progress Ave. While the proposed improvements may benefit both of these proposed developments in the
short-term,they'll likely negatively iyely impact the already congested area roadways and intersections. These
improvements without significant widening increase corridor travel times and interchange queue lengths,
further compoundingexisting xisting congestion in this area.ACHD believes there are other alternatives that may be
considered such as converting Central Dr./Waltman Ln. and Corporate Dr.to a one-wa,} couplet,which is
anticipated to reduce both queue lengths and the impacts to the Meridian Rd. and the I-84 interchange system
(see ACHD's letter for more information).
The construction of the Linder Road overpass (3/4 mile to the west),scheduled in ACHD's IFYWP for
construction in 2026-2027,should greatly improve traffic conditions on Meridian Rd.by providing
another north/south connection over I-84. The Commission and City Council should consider if higher
levels of traffic and congestion in this area are acceptable when acting on this application.If not,
consideration should be given to the inclusion of a provision in the Development Agreement,which
limits development to the large retail(Retail 1) store at this time and delays the Retail 2 building and
Pads 3 and 4 until such time as the Linder Road overpass is completed or other area improvements
occur that allow for an acceptable level of service to be provided, as determined by ACHD.
TRANSPORTATION FOCUS—EXISTING TRANSPORTATION NETWORK CONCERNS
Staff and ACHD have concerns with the ability of the existing transportation network to support the
proposed development. T+shouldbe noteddia4 a A Traffic Impact Study(TIS)was not prepared Of submitted
for the subject project; a memo with additional information was also submitted. There are already signal
timing issues at the Waltman and Meridian intersection and this development will add to the wait times and
congestion.
• Northbound Left Turn from Meridian Road: There is inadequate storage for northbound left turns into
the project site, onto Waltman.A dual left-turn is likely needed in this location, even with community
uses occurring here,let alone regional serving uses. Further, a single left-turn lane requires longer green
light time to provide the needed access for major big box retailer,mid box, and several drive throughs,
ironically each rivaling the stacking capacity of this turn lane.
• Southbound Right Turn from Waltman Lane onto Meridian Road: There is inadequate suthbound right
turn lane capacity for all return trips originating from either the interstate or south side of the interstate.
While not a direct correlation to signal timing and capacity, each retail pad site can accommodate more
cars than this lane without blocking the proposed full turn access on Waltman,nearest to Meridian Road.
There are multiple proposed high traffic generating pad sites,never mind the large retail anchor and
variety of other pad sites.
traffic, local and regiona4, is focused onto Waltman. A robust loeal network should integrate with a planned
not4h south Corporate Drive extension and not require east west travel on Waltman exelusively. The east
West dr-iVe aiSle PFOPOSed With this-PFE)jeet, er-essing thr-etigh the middle of a planned pi4v4e nmki fam 1-
is not designed to safely aeeefumodate higher- veltifne thr-otigh tfaf4e. Ftti4her-, if t
eonneetion exists,the planned multi family pr-ojeet on the west should not have baek out par-king, shoi
greater-buffer-s from the roadway.
Speculative Entitlement; Staff believes that amending the Futtife Land Use Map as proposed, give
existing status of speealative development is unwise. It is not elear if one or-both of the prejeets tentatively
eompensate for their impacts. Prejeets for the entire adopted Mixed Use Conununity area need to have
eompleted traffie impaet studies,ha-ve been fully reviewed, and have eonsider-ed improvements that
adeqtta+ely address the aggr-eg4ed impaets of pr-qjeets for-the larger-afea. This is not possible when neithef
pr-ejeet has a solid and eehesive master-plan,when beth may still ehange dr-a-matieally, and when they ai:e
Valley,not just for-eppefttmit-y,btit also
OtheF T-FaHSP0Ftafi0H ConeeFHS! NE) fffff4age Feads afe pr-&vided to ifftegr-ate the par-eels in this area. ----
It is essential that analysis by both the Idaho Transportation Department and the Ada County Highway
District be fully and thoroughly reviewed, and that Commission and City Council be able to consider the full
array of both land use and transportation impacts before making a decision. ,
either-iteratively through subsequent requests by diff-eFent ffojeets,OF by multiple — . .
different stages of r- i I I ble haFM to the City's flagship and namesake
interehange and entr-yway into the City.There should be lingering o 1 questions,
nothing left to ehanee or-ehange iater-given the impoFtanee Of this aFea-.
Master Street Map (MSM):The MSM depicts W. Waltman Ln. and W. Corporate Dr.to the north,which
is planned to be extended across the Ten Mile Creek to Waltman, as commercial collector streets but does
not depict any collector streets across this property.
Note:ACHD has submitted comments based on their preliminary review of the TIS, which may be
considered with the future development application (see Section IX.I for more information).
VI. STAFF ANALYSIS
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT(CPAM)
Based on the analysis above in Section V, Staff finds the proposed development plan is generally
consistent with the requested FLUM designation of Commercial for this site and the requested
designation of MHDR for the adjacent property to the west(Tanner Creek) and is compatible with
adjacent existing and future land uses. Further,the proposed FLUM designations provide for a better
transition in uses from existing and future residential uses to the west and northwest and are compatible
with adjacent FLUM designations in this area.Note:If the proposed amendment to the FLUM is not
approved,Staff finds the proposed development is not consistent with the exisdnz MU-C FLUM
designation for the reasons noted above. See above analysis in Section V for more information.
B. ANNEXATION(AZ)
The Applicant proposes to annex 18.30-acres of land with a C-G(General Retail and Service
Commercial) zoning district consistent with the proposed FLUM amendment to MU Commercial. The
subject property is part of an enclave area surrounded by City annexed property. A legal description and
exhibit map for the annexation area is included in Section VIII.B.
The proposed G 9 zening distfiet is eensistent with both the @*istiag FLUM designation of MU G an
the pfopesed FL UM M designation of-N TT T D
A revised conceptual development plan was submitted as shown in Section VIII.0 that depicts how the
property proposed to be annexed,as well as the area currently zoned C-G, is planned to develop with
two (2)big box retail stores a-ad ajunief eher retail spaee [Retail 1 (130,000 150, 153,300 square
feet(s.f.)) &Retail 2(SB;AA0-80,500+/-s.f.),Re* Lot? `] o 4 pads,
ineluding 2 with drive ' , and a ^ stef,,80,000 e feet ffiee building 5 shoes. The area
shown on the concept plan on the bottom(south)portion of the development area(delineated by a red
line)is the portion of the site currently in Ada County proposed to be annexed;the area on the top
(north)portion of the development area is the portion of the site currently in the City. The portion of the
site currently in the City is entitled to develop subject to UDC Table 11-2B-2 Allowed Uses in the
Commercial Districts,regardless of whether or not the proposed annexation is approved, as there is not a
Development Agreement in effect for that property.
As proposed by the Developer in the updated application narrative, a minimum of 10% of the total
building square footage for the site will be reserved for non-retail commercial uses that may include such
uses as office, clean industry, entertainment,hospitality/hotel, fitness and/or recreation,personal
services,non drive-through restaurants,health care, daycare, finance and/or banking, and educational
and/or training uses.
The conceptual development plan depicts a future VRT bus stop at the northeast corner of the site along
Meridian Rd., an arterial street. For safety reasons and for better accessibility from the proposed
residential development to the west, Staff recommends it's relocated off the arterial street to the
plaza area at Shop 1 or another location acceptable to VRT.
A vehicular connection/stub is not depicted on the revised concept plan to the property to the west for
future extension across the Ten Mile creek and interconnectivity, onlya pedestrian pathway is proposed.
Staff recommends a driveway is provided(alongside the proposed pathway)in accord with UDC
11-3A-3A.2,which supports limiting access points to collector streets and requires a cross-
access/ingress-egress easement to be granted to adjoining properties where access to a local street
is not available,unless otherwise waived by City Council.The Applicant has submitted an emergency
access easement agreement with the property owner to the west for secondary emergency access to
Ruddy Dr. and Waltman Ln. At no time should construction traffic associated with the development of
this site be allowed to access this site using Ruddy Dr. through The Landing and Tanner Creek
Subdivisions.
A 10-foot wide pedestrian pathway exists along Meridian Rd. adjacent to the site. In accord with the
Pathways Master Plan,a detached 10-foot wide multi-use pathway should be provided within the
street buffer along Waltman Ln.; and a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway shall be provided
east/west through the site with connections to the pathways along Waltman Ln. and Meridian Rd.
and internal pedestrian walkways. The Applicant should coordinate the location of the pathway
through the site with the Park's Department.A 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement is
required for the multi-use pathways; a recorded copy of such should be submitted to the Planning
Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development.Internal
pedestrian walkways should be a minimum of 5-feet wide and should be distinguished from the
vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete,or bricks as set
forth in UDC 11-3A-19.
The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to
Idaho Code section 67-6511A. To ensure the site develops as proposed with this application,staff
recommends the provisions discussed above are included in a DA for the subject property. The
entire property depicted on the conceptual development plan in Section VIII.0 shall be governed
by the DA as agreed upon b t�pplicant.A legal description for the boundary of the property
subject to the DA is included in Section VIII.G. Future development of the property should be generally
consistent with the conceptual development plan in Section VIII.C. The Applicant requests flexibili , in
the ,general configuration and size of the building footprints and orientation,plaza areas and parking on
the site with an allowance for up to 20% change in square footages of buildings.
uses. The proposed eoneeptual development plan for the annexation area(and larger-area) only includes
�we (2) land use t"es eommer-eial retail a-ad offiee.Although residential land uses ar-elglanned-to
develop on the adj aeent pr-opeft-y to the west,the pr-opeAy is ettffently entitled to dewlop solely with
eonuner-cial uses;the previous residential development proposed for that property was As noted abeNle in Seetion N',mi*ed use designated a-Feas should inelude a4 least three(3)t"es of!and
Therefore,Tanner Creek). Reasons for denial ineltided Council's determination that the sole residential use of the
pr-opei4j,was fiet eoasisten�with the N4U G designa4ion beeattse a mi�E of uses wasn't proposed and thej
didn't want to btffden this property with providing only the non residential component of the mix of uses
desired for this area. Hence, Staffs reeommendation for this property and the adjaeet#property to the
west to eome in for-review eoneuffeady in order-to easur-e the over-all development is eonsisten with the
development guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan for-the mixed use designati
In aeeE)r-d with Staffs analysis above,the pfoposed development is Hot eensistent with the general
mixed use development guidelines,the existing MU C or-the pr-oposed MU R guidelines.
Stag is Hot in stippoA of the r-e"ested annexation with the eeneepttial developmen4 plan proposed"e to
its ineonsisteney with the Comprehensive Plan.
Stag r-eeowwaeads development applieations afe su-bmit4ed eoneuffeady for-these pr-opet4ies with a
master-plan for-the over-all area tha4 demofistfa4es eonsisteney with the guidelines in the Compr-ehensive
Plan for-mixed use developments and speeifleally the N4U G designation E)r-an altemate designation i
proposed. Altefaafively, if s4mitted separ-4ely,the developmeRt plan for-eaeh pr-epeft-y should
demonstrate eonsisteney with the Plan on its own mer-its. The TIS shotild also be ttpda4ed to take inte
eensider-ation the development impaets of both pr-oper-ties a-ad the neeessar-y road and inter-see
impr-Ewemen4s needed in this afea in oFder-for-the stfeet aetwoFk to funetion suffieiently with the
intensity f deve ,,,.meni r oa
VII. DECISION
A. Staff-
Staff recommends denial gpproval of the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map FLUM and
the proposed annexation per the updated analysis above in Sections V and VI and the Findings in Section
X. If City Council does not approve the requested amendment to the FLUM, Staff recommends denial of
the annexation request based on incompatibili , of the proposed development with the existing MU-C
FLUM designation.
tion.
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on April 28,2022. At the public
hearing,the Commission moved to recommend denial of the subject CPAM and AZ requests.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing_
a. In favor: Ethan Mansfield,Hawkins Companies;Matt Schultz,Representative for
Tanner Creek(to the west)
b. In opposition: Kelsi Lorcher,Joe Lorcher
C. Commenting: Clair Manning,Nona Haddock
d. Written testimony: None
e. Staff presenting_application: Sonya Allen
f. Other Staff commenting on application: Bill Parsons
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony
a. Public testimony in agreement with Staff s recommendation of denial due to not having
a Master Plan with the Tanner Creek development to the west;
b. Concern pertainingto o impacts on traffic in the area from the proposed development;
C. Testimony from the Tanner Creek developer's representative that they're in favor of the
proposed development and intend to re-submit a residential development plan for the
property to the west once ACHD has accepted their Traffic Impact Study(TIS�
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
a. Concern pertaining to the impact on traffic in this area if the proposed development plan
is approved;
b. Desire to have the TIS reviewed&accepted by ACHD for the overall development area
in order to know the impacts and transportation improvement requirements for the
development;
C. Consistency of the proposed development plan with the Comprehensive Plan.
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. None (Commission recommended denial based on their belief the requested use is not
consistent with the general mixed use development guidelines,the existing MU-C
guidelines or the proposed NU-R guidelines; also need a Traffic Impact Study.)
5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council:
a. None
C. The Meridian City Council heard these items on June 14,2022. At the public hearin .the Council
moved to remand the subject CPAM and AZ requests back to the Commission.
1. Summary of the City Council public hearing:
a. In favor: Ethan Mansfield,Hawkins Companies:Matt Schultz.Representative for the
Tanner Creek development to the west.
b. In opposition: Joe Lorcher,Kelsi Lorcher, Clair Manning; William Kissinger: Joey
Lorcher
C. Commenting: Mike Swenson:Kristy Inselman.ACHD
d. Written testimony: None
e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen
f. Other Staff commenting on application: None
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony:
a. Concern pertaining to traffic impact on the Meridian/Waltman intersection from the
proposed development;
b. Against the intensity of uses proposed with the MU-R FLUM designation and resulting
traffic in this area and at the Meridian/Waltman intersection-
C. Desire for a true mixed use project to be developed on this site as opposed to an entirely
commercial development.
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by City Council:
a. Preference for this property and the abutting property to the west to come in together or
concurrently with a master plan for the overall area that demonstrates consistency with
the existing or proposed FLUM designation:
b. Desire for the transportation issues to be addressed before a development plan is
approved:
C. Desire for changes to be made to the concept plan to be more consistent with the enteral
mixed use guidelines and specifically the requested MU-R designation.
4. City Council change(s)to Commission recommendation:
a. Council voted to remand this application back to the Commission for review of
anticipated changes to the concept plan to be more consistent with the general mixed
use guidelines and specifically the requested MU-R guidelines; and so that a master
plan can be reviewed for this property and the Tanner Creek property concurrently.
D. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on(continued from October 19,
2023)November 2,2023.At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval
of the subject CPAM and AZ requests.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing_
a. In favor: Ethan Mansfield,Hawkins Companies; Leah Kelsey, Six Mile Engineering
b. In opposition: Kelsi Lorcher,Joe Lorcher,Joey Lorcher
c. Commenting: Clair Manning
d. Written testimony: None
e. Staff presenting gpplication: Sonya Allen
f. Other Staff commenting on application: None
2. Key issue(s) public testimony
A. Against project due to the impact on traffic in this area from this development and the
extension of Ruddy Dr.
b. Concerned pertaining to the safety of area residents with the traffic that will be
generated from this development and the residential development to the west when
Ruddy is extended to Waltman Ln.
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
A. The Applicant's request to not be required to provide a vehicular connection to the west
across the Ten Mile Creek to the adjacent residential development.
b. The Applicant's request to not construct a driveway access to the out-parcel at the
northwest corner of this site at this time.
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. At Staff s request,modify DA provision#A.1(i)to require the extension of Corporate
Dr. to be constructed as required by ACHD.
b. The Commision is in support of Council ranting a waiver to UDC 11-3A-3,which
requires vehicular connectivity between the two projects via a cross-access easement,to
not require a connection(DA provision#IX.Alc .
c. Modify the requirement for a cross-access easement and driveway, t�provided to the
outparcel(Parcel#S 1213417320•)to only require an easement at this time. The
easement should grant consent to the owner/developer of the out-parcel to construct the
driveway on the subject property in the future at the time of development. (DA
provision#A.1 d).
5. Outstanding issue(s)for City Council:
a. None
E. The Meridian Citv Council heard these items on November 21,2023.At the public hearing.the
Council moved to approve the subject CPAM and AZ requests.
1. Summary of the City Council public hearing:
a. In favor: Ethan Mansfield Hawkins Companies Leah Kelsey, Six Mile Engineering
b. In opposition: Steve McCarthy; Clair Manning,Kelsey Lorcher: Kurt Lee;William
Kissinger:Ken Freeze
C. Commenting: Justin Lucas.ACHD
d. Written testimony: Ethan Mansfield.Hawkins Companies;23 letters of public testimony
(see public record)
e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen
£ Other Staff commenting on application: Joe Bongiorno,Fire Dept.; Shawn Harner,
Police Dept.
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony:
a. Concern pertaining to traffic impact from this development and no access to I-84 with
the Linder Road overpass:
b. Inconsistency of the proposed development plan with the vision of the Destination:
Downtown plan and Comprehensive Plan:
C. Concern pertaining to pedestrianibicycle safety with traffic comingthrough Ruddy Dr.
to Waltman Ln. and increased traffic at the Meridian/Waltman intersection:
d. Preference for a lower density development plan(i.e. single-family homes no
apartments, smaller offices, entertainment used:
e. Consider limiting density permanently or until there's a resolution in the future to the
traffic issues in this area.
f. Desire for the City to take a break on approving new projects to give existin approved
projects a chance to catch up and be built and see what the impacts are.
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by City Council:
a. Traffic level of service once Corporate Dr. is extended:
b. Questions pertaining to traffic solutions for this area posed to ACHD:
c. Concern pertaining to the proposed amendment to the FLUM:
4. City Council change(s)to Commission recommendation.
a. Council approved the Applicant's request for a waiver to UDC 11-3A-3 to not require a
vehicular connection and cross-access/ingress-egress easement to the residential
property(i.e. Tanner Creek)to the west(strike DA provision
VIIL EXHIBITS
A. Future Land Use Map—Adopted& Proposed Land Uses (Amended)
aof$= iaf}7j ,3
Adopted Land Uses
feet
Legend ■ �
Areo Gi CIly[Mead d do
21 d
i Irkm Land Um +•
LGw I�r75�tyr 12 �n1ip7 * �+I
MG Ok rn f R # fhGl ■a +
F-;h Oemlly RiWdentiui ■ k J
Commeldol
OWNS
induitrlal � � �
LL Cod Town I PF*posed Land Uses
-------------
MOM r
Mlx d+is dmr+�r��Y Fl�xl "rr // FF .1 / nr
Mined Use Regional r�I
Mixed use Non-ResideniO
�J W-ad u'.t-Imerchunptr
_ Lawner-cay Employmeni ■ ■ i r ■ ■ ■ . ■ . . . . Ir r■ w■ a W y
USAYN&Center : ;� r +'r
Dolly
71 IV
l I
MAxeid Emp:iymoni lip • r �; rl
MixeduseResidenllal ` { � F
N 4
® M11xeQ use Comrrbercipl � � r � +I
-+441
. R
ArAV
i
1 1
1
B. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit Map
km
E ryGth7EE RiJVG
February4,2C122
Project No.;20-176
I-W!Oeridian Road
Fxhlbit A
Legal Descriptlan for Annexati m and Reirone to C-G
A parcel of land being a po rtlon of the Northeast 114 of the Southeast 114 of Sect ion 19.Townshl p 3
North,Range 1 WEst,8_M.,Ada Caunty,Idaho beIMMOM partitularlydastrlbed as Follows=
Comvnerlcirr8 at a bra6s Cap marking the East 114 orner of said sac nn 13,which bears 589`25'10"E a
dis ice of 2.642,64 feet fro m a 5{9-inch re bar ma r�iTig the Center 1/4 Corner o f Sa Id-section 13,thence
foil owi rig the easterly I ine of the Southeast V4 of said Secti on 23r 501-41'431rW a distance of 420.62
feet to the POINT OF BEGIN NI MS.
T#enee-fDI low Ing said easterhE 1lner SC}1'01'43'W a distance-of 614.71 feet to the bound ary of the City of
Meridlan per ofelmance number 341,also known as South Gatr Annexatlon,dated May 7,1979;
1_ ThL�ncelea,rirtigsaldrasterlyIirre and fol lowing said bound arytfre fin How ingflveJ5�rour-Wv
IYU*58'17'W a distance of 96,.37 filet;
2- 577,°02'140W a distanre of 373-86 feet;
3. 574°40'17"W a distance of 471-15 feed;
4. 583°2N13"4V a distanre of 332.94 feet:
5. N89°34'12"bV a distance of 85.20 feet to the westerly Ii ne of said Northeast 114 of the Southeast
1/4;
Thence leaving saId boundary and fallowingsaId westerly line,W00°43'22"E a distance of664.99fe-et to
a 5/8-Inch rebar;
Tharice IeaviMg said westerly line.UV32'WE d dist3noe of 969.55 fees to a.5{8-inrh rebar;
Thence N01'41'36'eE a distance of 244,37 feet
Thence S89'08'013"E a dkstanoe of 349.99 feet to the KNIIT OF GECINNING.
Sa id pa r€el canta i ns a total of 18.304 acres,more Dr less.
Attached hereto Is EkhibK Sand by this reference Is made a part hereof,
p� LANp
E R S{O
o �
m a
1 66
Y K E'r1�``
4 �
5725 North DI5cowery Way-Bo-lse,Jsfaho 133713+ 20R.639,593B kmengllp.com
CENTER 1/4 CORNER POINT of COMMEKEMIENT
SEcnaN 1$ W Waltman Ln EAST 1l4 LOANER SECTION 13
f uNb 5 f a-INdi EFL+}2 SA56 Or [3EA.Rit+IG F4)-LEND 9R455 CAP
S8T25'70"E 26+4.2,64'
LI PEE TABLE
LINE 111ARIN5 ASTMCEA
ro
Li N6Er55'17W -96.37L2 571'tl2'14*W 373.a5 POINL 3 SE3'28'1�'W 332_d4
L'& N&W- 34'12-k 55.24 Unplatted
r�
Annexation Area;18.3QA±Ai` t►
Propose-d Zor�ing;C-13
L!n latt-ad m 5121341770?r S1213417690&S12134176H
r v`i
k o
"° �Ifr�rst V'
2onJng;RUT
K3 L 1
rrlrl
Lei
LA LEGEND
LEGEND
k EN 5 'y EN 5 COP
IS ALUMINUM W
W 5/a-114CH Raw
�9 ❑ $ CALCULATED P41NT
OF — — — ANPC(AnON & RUONE SOLJNDARY
—SECTION UNE
' Rlw Emmk6r. mnw--or-wAY L]H�
0 250 Soo 750
plan SCJ Ip:1'-xSQ'
E1461NI; E RI Nn
STr3 MATH ry5MiM Lo06-
BOESC.+]6LYQF31B y,
M7hC 13MI d794Pn }Exy.,Exhibit B
nx Llrylp--' ALF vexation and Rezone
Don -.L—.l.311a2
FA41ECr. MAN
SHEET; 1-84/Meridian Road
1 OF 1 NE1f4 SE1/4 Sec. 13,T3N, RIW, W Ada Counter, I-dah:D
C. Conceptual Development Plan(REVISED) &Renderings
I
I ..TI I_ _
R
aff
ET-
- _ » -
a�
I E � LJi
r sDEVELOPNIENT
I
l
- - lf lye ,- .
it'4a Aa
I -
6
Oil
D. Tanner Creek and I-84 &Meridian Road Conceptual Development Plan
EUPKEMMI,SMEC'-4 C'hNCF
1pr
p _ -�'t;' r=-�a • L���'F IIcy
y lei
FANNER CREEK & I-84MERIDIANDEVFLOPMENT
� SS
* PEE}�$TPoMCONr-CRA i -bvbMsmmDrAm"FU2ATYPE{
- ) :
Jiro
j,
B
� TANNER CREFJf PLAZA
UL
}
x
®.4 _-
E. Vehicular Connectivity
x + V
• CCUIHE{TfVrrY LEGEND
* ■.Pf■ VEHECLECOH!l=ETIL'R4
- �y • E -_
■
�w�w {c}L�L7R►7EE7EkERTEMEwSw
■ # WALTh%%N ViL 1 MEODL&N RS
{i. [H�ESL O4FDPrl55
fyi t■•iii Yif•fi■•�i•�i►i■i.I. - WAr{OfTTTi+
t� ■
Y. j * ''
_ aj7r
i'
■
■
a
•
•
v
F. Pedestrian Circulation Plan
1A N NLR EP:Lq y�mb.
_ m<_m_,
CTHEPS
W�.L
_*--. �
� . � % -- � Two - I . r . _. .
- it _. } ' ' ! ILZ
OL
A - �.a
............_,
.�' �. _
..........
i � §
_OL..
_._ ._ . j -
G. Legal Description&Exhibit Map for Property Subject to the Development Agreement—forthcoming, to
be included in Development Agreement
IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
The Plaflaing Divisiefl has fie eefiditions on this applieation because the reeommendation is for denial. ift
be eof4ifmed ' . Fit hearing in order-for-Stag to pr-epafe eonditions and Findings for-approval.
1. A Development Agreement(DA) shall be required as a provision of annexation of the subject
property. The DA shall be signed by the property owner(s)and returned to the City within six(6)
months of City Council approval of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision&Order
for the Annexation request. The new DA shall include the following=provisions:
a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development
plan,renderings,pedestrian circulation plan and vehicular connectivity plan, included in Section
VIII and the provisions contained herein. Flexibility in the general configuration and size of the
building footprints and orientation,plaza areas and parking on the site shall be allowed with an
allowance for up to 20%changein Square footages of buildings.
b. As proposed by the Developer, a minimum of 10%of the total building square footage for the
site shall be reserved for non-retail commercial uses that may include such uses as office,clean
industry, entertainment,hospitality/hotel, fitness and/or recreation,personal services,non drive-
through restaurants,health care, daycare, finance and/or banking, and educational and/or training
uses.
odesti-a .,thw ) of the site for-in+er-.eaaeetivit-,x ,,,.a with UPC 11 3 n 3 n 2 n!
Division with the first Get4ifieate of Zoning Complia-nee apoie4iaa fef the-4te,
d. A vehicular cross-access/ingress-egress easement shall be provided to the out-
parcel(Parcel#S 1213417320)at the northwest corner of the site and a recorded copy of the
easement submitted to the Planning Division with the first Certificate of Zoning Compliance
application for the site. The easement shall grant consent to the owner/developer of the out-
parcel to construct the driveway on the subject property at the time of development.
e. A detached 10-foot wide multi-use pathway shall be provided within the street buffer along
Waltman Ln.; and a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway shall be provided east/west through the site
in accord with the Pathways Master Plan with connections to the pathwa, sag Waltman Ln.
and Meridian Rd. and internal pedestrian walkways. Coordinate the location of the pathway
through the site with the Park's Department. A 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement shall be
required for the multi-use pathways if located outside the public right-of-way; a recorded copy
of such shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of
Occupancy for the development.
f. Internal pedestrian walkways shall be a minimum of 5-feet wide and shall be distinguished from
the vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks as
set forth in UDC 11-3A-19.
g_ A bus stop should be provided in the plaza area near Shop 1 or an alternate location acceptable
to Valley Regional Transit(VRT).
h. At no time shall construction traffic associated with the development of this site be allowed to
access this site using Ruddy Dr. through The Landing and Tanner Creek Subdivisions.
i. If the improvements to Waltman Ln. and Corporate Dr. aren't completed by the developer of the
project Tanner Creek)to the west as planned,these improvements shall be completed by this
developer through a Cooperative Development Agreement(CDA)with ACHD, as follows:
• Extend Corporate Dr. off-site from its current terminus north of Ten Mile Creek to Waltman
Ln. and construct a new bridge over the Ten Mile Creek,within existing ROWke
Mile C-eek will e a 58 feet wide b r-ike with 2 feet perii3cis. The ivcc va-y Svirtr-vf
as required by ACHD. These
improvements shall occur with the first phase of development and shall be complete prior to
issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the site.
• Construct Waltman Lane as '/2 of a 36-foot wide street section with curb, gutter, an 8-foot
wide planter strip/parkway and a 10-foot wide detached sidewalk within 29-feet of ri hg t-of-
wa(ROW) from centerline with 7-feet of the sidewalk located outside of the dedicated
ROW abutting the site. All improvements shall be constructed south of the existing edge of
pavement for Waltman Ln., shifting the centerline 8-feet south to the south. The north side
of Waltman shall be constructed with a minimum of 12-feet of pavement from centerline,a
3-foot wide gravel shoulder and a borrow ditch to accommodate the roadway storm run-off.
Center turn lanes shall be constructed on Waltman Ln. if determined necessary by ACHD.
The improvements to Waltman Ln. shall include reconstruction of the existing bridge over
the Ten Mile Creek as a full 36-foot street section with curb and 5-foot wide attached
concrete sidewalks. This will require a 54-foot wide bridge with 2-foot parapets. These
improvements shall be completed as required by ACHD and shall occur with the first phase
of development and be complete prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the
site.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
Site Specific Comments
1. No Public Works infrastructure was provided as part of this submittal, any changes must be
approved by Public Works.
2. Water main must connect to the existing main in Waltman Lane at two locations.
3. Provide a water main connection to the west.
4. Ensure no permanent structures are built within a utility easement including but not limited to tree,
shrubs,buildings, carports,trash enclosures,infiltration trenches, light poles, etc.).
5. Ensure no sewer services pass through infiltration trenches.
General Comments
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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. 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.
9. 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.
10. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of
street addressing to be in compliance with MCC.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of
the structures.
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that
may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
18. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office.
19. 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.
20. 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.
21. 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.
22. 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.
23. 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.meridiancioy.oMIpublic_works.aspx?id=272.
24. 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
hggs://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=257681&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City
D. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID)
https://weblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=258727&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU
E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT
https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=310268&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX
F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS)
https://weblink.meridiancioy.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=25861 7&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCioX
G. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD)
https://weblink.meridiancitE.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=257906&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
H. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
https://weblink.meridiancioy.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=259278&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City
I. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=267371&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCioX
https://weblink.meridiancioy.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=259453&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=309476&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiiy
X. FINDINGS
A. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment
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 amendment to the Comprehensive Plan,the
Council shall make the following findings:
1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the other elements of the Comprehensive Plan.
The City Council finds the proposed amendment from MU-C to Mr:K-edU Regional I r n
Commercial and MHDR and conceptual development plan is M-64 ��en�erall�consistent with the inten
the Comprehensive Plan in Mat k;qIw�mkLq##4, :9ingleuse
includingprovision of
a transition in uses and compatible uses, as noted in Section V.
2. The proposed amendment provides an improved guide to future growth and development of
the city.
The City Council finds that the proposal to change the FLUM designation from Mixed Use—
Community(MU-Q to Commercial and MHDR deer�provides an
improved guide to future growth and development of the City as the proposed development plan sees
is consistent with the
proposed development plan and existing and future uses in the area, as discussed in Section V
above.
3. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the Goals,Objectives and Policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
The City Council finds that the proposed amendment is 1*64 consistent with the Goals, Objectives,
and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan for the proposed 44W B Commercial and MHDR
designations as noted above in Section V.
4. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified Development Code.
The City Council finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified Development
Code.
5. The amendment will be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses.
The City Council finds the proposed amendment and conceptual development plan will H-64 be
compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses fer the r-ease as noted in Section V
above.
6. The proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities.
The City Council finds that the proposed amendment and development will likely burden
transportation capabilities in this portion of the city even witheut slant improvements to
Waltman,and the extension of Corporate, . Sewer and water
services are available to be extended to this site.
7. The proposed map amendment(as applicable)provides a logical juxtaposition of uses that
allows sufficient area to mitigate any anticipated impact associated with the development of
the area.
The City Council finds the proposed map amendment provides a logical juxtaposition of uses hu-t
deesn't meet many ef the mixed use gHidehnaq for de+vlepmen as discussed in Section V above;
there should be sufficient area to mitigate any development impacts to adjacent properties.
8. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City of Meridian.
For the reasons stated in Section V and the subject findings above, the City Council finds that the
proposed amendment is Bret in the best interest of the City.
B. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E)
Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full
investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation
and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
The City Council finds the proposed map amendment to the C-G zoning district and plan to develop
&&k+ commercial retail and effiee neighborhood serving uses on the property per the proposed
conceptual development plan does. no demonstrates consistency with the ,..,n..u,.' niked H6e OF the
Commercial FLUM as noted above in Section V. (See section V above
for more information.)
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
The City Council finds the proposed map amendment to C-G and conceptual development plan
generally complies with the purpose statement of the C-G district in that it will provide for the retail
and service needs of the community.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health,safety, and
welfare;
The City Council finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health,
safety and welfare as the proposed commercial uses should be conducted entirely within a structure.
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 City Council finds City services are available to be provided to this development. No residential
development is proposed; therefore, enrollment at area schools shouldn't be affected.
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
The City Council finds the proposed annexation with the conceptual development plan proposed is
neF in the best interest of the City per the analysis in Sections V and VI above.