Planning and Zoning - Regular Meeting

We're waiting for one commissioner. So, if you don't mind, we're just going to give her a couple more minutes. We do have quorum without her, but um since it's not overly stacked tonight, we have got a little bit of time. So, if you can just bear with us, we'll give her till about 5 after. If she's not here, we'll go ahead and start. Okay.

agenda which are to include um to approve the minutes of the planning and zoning meeting from March 5th. Could I get a motion to accept the consent agenda as presented? Sec. So moved, seconded. It's been moved and second to uh to accept the consent agenda. All those in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? Motion carries. At this time, I would briefly like to explain the public hearing process. We will open each item individually and begin with the staff report. Staff will report their findings on how the item adheres to our comprehensive plan and our unified development code. After staff has made their presentation, the applicant will come forward and present their case and respond to staff's comments. They will have 15 minutes to do so. After the applicant has finished, we will open the floor to public testimony. Each person will be called only once during public testimony. The clerk will call the names individually of those who have signed up on our website in advance. You may come to the microphones and chambers or you'll be unmuted on Zoom. Please state your name and address for the record and you will have three minutes to address the commission. If you've previously sent pictures or presentation for the meeting, it will be displayed on the screen and our clerk will help you run your presentation. If you've established that you are speaking on behalf of a larger group like an HOA where others from that group will allow you to speak on their behalf, you will have up to 10 minutes. After all those who have signed up in advance have spoken, we will invite any others that may wish to testify. If you wish to speak on a topic, you may come forward in chambers or if on Zoom, press the raise hand button in the Zoom app or if you're listening on a telephone, please press star 9 and wait for your name to be called. If you're listening on multiple devices such a com as a computer and a phone, please be sure to mute those extra devices so we don't experience feedback and we can hear you clearly. When you are finished, if the commission does not have questions for you, you will return to your seat in chamber or be muted on Zoom and no longer have the ability to speak. Please remember, we will not call on you a second time. After all testimony has been heard, the applicant will be given another 10 minutes to come back and respond. When the applicant has finished responding to questions and concerns, we will close the public hearing and commissioners

will have the opportunity to discuss and hopefully make final decisions or recommendations to city council as needed. So with that in mind, let's open item number two H2025-00007. Siring and crossing mixed use development has requested a continuence. Madame clerk, do we have a date in mind for their continuence? Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, we have April 2nd. Can I get a motion to accept the continuence for Sering Crossing? So moved. Second. It's been moved and second to continue Seringa Crossing mixeduse development to April 2nd. All those in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? Motion carries. The next item on the agenda is H206-00003 for North Meridian Fields at the southwest corner of Highway 16 and Chinden for annexation. And we will begin with the staff report.

Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the commission. Next item on the agenda is the annexation for the North Meridian Fields. Uh the applicant requests annexation of 71.4 acres of land with the R8 and CN zoning districts. The RA zoning district would consist of 47.8 acres and the CN zoning district would consist of 23.6 acres. The site is generally located at the southwest corner of State Highway 16 and Chinden Boulevard. And as shown on the screen, the existing zoning is RU and Ada County and the Flume designation is mixeduse interchange and medium density residential. So, the community development d and public works directors made a determination for the subject development allowing for the annexation to move forward without sewer services being readily available. Uh, currently the city is installing a sewer trunk line in McMillan Road that will ultimately serve this property once it's brought up Star Road and then to the east. Um, so the applicant has sub or the subject property falls within the field sub area plan um at the northwest corner of the city's area of impact boundary. In accord with the field sub area plan, the general design identity of this area shall have a cohesive theme that is mo a modern rural which applies to housing, amenities, streetscape, open space and commercial developments. A high quality design is expected in this area. Uh so the applicant has submitted a conceptual plan uh proposing single family detached residents on the southern twothirds of the site and a commercial development on the north the northern third. Uh at this time detailed development plans have not been provided. However, the applicant did provide a road layout and open space layout for the larger uh residential portion of the development. Uh this provides some highle information into the integration of the residential and commercial uses as well as Cole Valley Christian School which will be directly to the south which is already annexed into the city um but is awaiting to develop. Uh in the applicant's narrative, they

propose to exclude the following uses including fuel fuel sales facilities, convenience stores, storage facilities, and vehicle washing facilities. As the mixeduse interchange is intended for low traffic generating uses, staff recommends further restricting uh the permitted uses by prohibiting drive-through establishments, vertically integrated residential uses, and retail stores exceeding 10,000 square ft. Now, the primary reason behind this is to not allow big big box re retailers and drive-throughs as they will generate significantly more traffic than the mixeduse interchange designation is intended for. Uh the applicant has depicted the primary access points for the development coming off the future extension of North Ator Storm Avenue, a collector roadway which is currently almost stubbed to this property line. There is a little bit of a road trust that was put up to get it fully to the property line, but it will be extended in the future and will connect to the south. And this extension will lead to a a future signalization with at Chinden Boulevard. U in addition, the applicant is proposing to construct two east west collectors that would connect North Ursat Road uh or North Ursat Place with a Heistorm Avenue in the future. And that would be collector one and collector two would be down here. Um, so many of the details that typically be required with an annexation have not been provided, which is why staff is requiring a development agreement modification prior to any future applications or development being submitted. The future DA mod would be required to provide details from the field sub area plan, comprehensive plan and udc as well as updating the overall concept plan so we can see how the mixeduse area really integrates with one another with the residential and the future commercial. So staff has had conversations with the applicant about this and they will be proposing some changes to the development agreement provisions for you guys tonight with their presentation. Um there's a few things that they're not in

agreement with staff on. Um, so we'll discuss that after their presentation. So staff is recommending approval with a development agreement and we have not received any written testimony at this time and I'll stand for any questions. And I did want to say their building elevations um for you guys to look at. It's um more of conceptual at this point than provide super in-depth um information, but that would be something that we would hope to get with future development agreement modification as well. And here are the DA provisions that are in the staff report. And now I'll stand for questions. Madam Chair, Commissioner Perau.

Um, since this will be a DA mod, it typically doesn't come before planning and zoning. It'll go straight to council or Madam Chair, Commissioneration. Yeah, Commissioner Pro. Yes, the future development agreement modification would go straight to city council. Um, so it wouldn't be Right now they're just requesting annexation, so they're getting their DA. Um, but in the in the DA that we created, it does require them to come back with a DA mod, which would only be required to go in front of city council. However, they are going to have to plat the property as well, and the prelim preliminary plat will be seen by commission as well. So, those could be potentially done concurrently. Um, and that would be, I think, the preference from staff. Correct. Would

the applicant like to come forward?

Would the applicant like to come forward? Thank you. All right. Good evening, Madame Chair and commissioners. My name is Emily Mueller, 839 South Bridgeway Place in Eagle. I represent the applicant team, 5B Holdings, um who is the owner of the property and Idaho Holdings, um with um who submitted the application. Um, we want to first thank staff um for their review of this, working with us. Um, as Nick alluded, we have been in conversations and will continue to be in conversations up until the city council hearing um to discuss some of the finer points of those staff conditions that I'll address. Um, but do want to thank them for um their discussion with us and continued discussion. Um so as um staff said um this property is 70 acres southwest of the future highway 16 intersection with Chinden 2026. Um it is north of the Cole Valley future school site. We have been in discussions with them about their timing. Um and like them um we will be dependent on a new sewer line that is being constructed. Um the sewer lift station is further west um on McMillan and Canada and the city's project is bringing the sewer the for uh mainline and the force line to Star Road. And then at that point sewer will really be available for a developer to come and get it. Um there's a couple different ways this property could sewer. One is to go up through Star Road and over I think that's in the city's master plan. Um or we could work with the school um to to sewer that way as

well. So um water is um available to the east. So um as as sewer isn't available at the current moment, we would wait to develop until um I believe that sewer should be in Star and McMillan. Um I think it's scheduled for the end of 2026. So they are working fast and um we've been keeping track of of that construction update. Um the city of Star is to the north of this project. Um the city of Star also has um de uh designated their property to the north of this for uh largely commercial use um and then some higher density residential up here. So um that it's consistent with you know STAR's boundaries to the north. Um and then the only other development pertinent development in the area um is this I believe it's about 10 acres is a storage facility that was developed in the county. Um and so that is in the county and when that developed they constructed their portion of the Aahi Storm Boulevard which will um per name go down towards Aahi High School and will border this site to the west. So, as part of staff's conditions, um we would build our share of that collector road plus 12 to make it a functional um street streetway. Um and to that point with traffic, um we would be submitting a traffic impact study once we come forward with with future applications. So, the applications tonight are just for annexation and zoning, an initial zoning with a development agreement. and future applications would be for a preliminary plat any cups that we think are appropriate um a development agreement modification to the extent that it's required. This property is included in the city of Meridian field specific area plan that

was adopted I believe in 2021. So the city did recently look at this um this four square miles of really kind of this last area of Meridian. um that sewer lift station is going to bring this online. Um and this is just really a great area of Meridian that we're excited to be a part of. That specific area plan and the future land use map designate this for mixeduse interchange and medium density residential. The annexation is appropriate here because um all owners have consented to the annexation. Um the property is contiguous to city limits within the city area of impact and services will be provided um in uh a reasonable amount of time as staff presented. Um the zoning that we are requesting is a commercial zoning along Chinden 23 acres of neighborhood business um commercial use and then 47 acres of medium density residential. Both of those are consistent with the comprehensive plan and the future land use map uh field specific area plan. The commercial is approximately situated near um you know off of Highway 2026 near Highway 16 and the future collector roadway. There will be a plan for a stoplight at Oahhei Storm Boulevard and Chinden. Um and so again in in conjunction with STAR's development to the north which is commercial um fits well within it. We're not in a vacuum here. So um and then the residential is also an appropriate zone um and helps meet some of the comprehensive plan guides of developing uh housing near schools um near commercial use and yeah providing some of those housing needs. As staff said, we have provided some design guidelines that we believe meet

the fieldspecific area plan to provide somewhat of a rural architectural theme. um more modern farmhouse styles with um yeah those clean architectural lines um shed roofs, gable roofs um and the materials that we feel are consistent with that um design architectural standard. Additionally, we have provided um the pathways that that match the comprehensive plan and the field specific area plan for connectivity amongst the commercial residential uses and then down to the school. Um in the staff report, staff also noted that yeah, there needs to be um with future preliminary plats connectivity and emphasis on those pedestrian pathways, which we 100% agree with. As staff noted, um we are in agreement with the majority of their conditions of approval, but would ask to um change three of them. Um the first is to AC. As staff noted, we looked at the um Institute of Traffic Engineers, the IT traffic manual, and looked at what are those most intensive traffic uses that staff and the comprehensive plan want to avoid in this area. And those that we saw were gas stations, uh, convenience stores, and car washes, and some of those other traffic generating uses. Um, drive-thru establishments are a conditional use. So, if we ever wanted to propose a drive-thru, we would need to come with a conditional use permit and meet the standards of a conditional use permit application. Um Mark Bottles um and myself agree that drive not all drive-through uses are the same. Um there are some drive-through uses that

are traditionally very high traffic. Um and then there are some that are not. Um and postcoid the market has really demanded that of even non-traditionally thought of drive-through uses. So you know your Chipotle or your Costa Vita um things like of that nature. So, we want to um we we request that drive-thru establishments not be categorically excluded at this time and would appreciate the opportunity to in the future if we feel there is a use um in a specific user and concept plan that match that could bring that forward with a conditional use permit in the future. Um similar reasoning also applies to this second change that we're requesting um which is to strike the requirement that retail commercial uses be restricted to building sizes of 10,000 square feet. there is a broad array of um retail uses, a broad array of traffic generation. Um and so and and really looking at the traffic generation model, smaller footprints, smaller buildings, smaller retail uses actually generate more uh traffic in the aggregate than a single um a single larger establishment. So again, we just disagree, I guess, with the analysis that this is categorically going to bring more traffic. Um really any kind of strip retail or smaller retail here uh per the traffic manual generates almost twice the traffic per square foot as a larger commercial development. So in that regard, we um we hear the staff, we've read, you know, the comp plan and and we just disagree with the ultimate analysis um with that. And then finally, um, and this is a point that we've talked with staff, um, at length about is we would recommend and and we would like to say that we don't need a development agreement modification. Um moving forward we have provided

conceptual building renderings uh materials and um on top of that staff has also provided additional details about what needs to be incorporated into future preliminary plots um pathway considerations those sorts of things that we would like that to just be given the direction to us now whatever we've proposed that doesn't match what they're looking for. um development agreement modifications are um not entitled rights. Um and so we don't want to be in a situation that we don't have direction at the point of annexation. Um so we would prefer to have that direction now. Um and and accordingly we would like to come back with preliminary plat um with any direction that staff has at this point um but not be required to go through a more subjective um development agreement modification process um that that yeah would be more subjective in the future. So we believe that what we've submitted um complies with the comprehensive plan um and would just ask staff for more direction um rather than waiting for that direction down the road. Um so with that I will stand for any questions and we appreciate yeah your time.

Um I have a question for staff. Bill, we had talked about um identifying drive-throughs in um small, medium, and large for a simplistic way of putting it. Where are we in that process? Madam Chair, members of the commission, those rules are in effect now. So, we do have our tier one, tier 2, tier three drive-throughs. And then on Tuesday night, the ordinance was approved to establish the new process, which requires tier 2 to come to you and tier three to go to city council or to

they go to you as a recommending body, but then they go on to city council for approval. So, and then again, tier one would only require a conditional use permit if it was next to a residential use. So, it could be a permitted use in in a CN zone, right? if it and again those were banks, pharmacies, kind of those low generating traffic uses that Emily was speaking to and where she said she they agreed that not all drive views are the same and we thought the same thing and that's why we changed our code. So Emily, you're aware of those changes. Correct. Uh Madame Chair, no, I'm not. I'm sorry that was adopted on

it's been in discussion for a while but you're saying city council actually uh in adopted it just this past Tuesday. Madam chair maybe some clarification. So the tier one tier three tier 2 tier three changes were approved in October. Okay. Just aren't currently reflected in the code. And then uh the process changes the the the process that was chosen to how they would be heard whether they were administrative or conditional use by P&Z or council that was approved on Tuesday night. So basically yes the new the the new definitions for drive-throughs the new processes for drive-throughs have been adopted and in are in effect.

Okay. So this project dry cleaners and banks are considered tier one. Um a coffee shop

uh and small smaller brand drive-throughs would be tier two and then like your In-N-Outs and raising canes would be like tier three. And what that means for you is that if you have a client who wants those things, um it used to all come through planning and zoning and tier one gets director approval. Tier two and tier three come through planning and zoning, but the ultimate decision for like the big drive-throughs, the really high-end brands, um a high volume brands would just go to council, right? So, um I guess the reason I'm I'm saying that is that for the drive-thru establishments um for your condition of approval for um C. We would I um we would just have to kind of see what they are. Um, we'll see what the the um commissioners say about that. But um before we go into public testimony, does anybody have any questions for the applicant at this time?

Madam Chair, Commissioner Smith, I I have kind of a follow- on question of that for for staff specifically regarding, you know, the the tier that is most concerned, Rick, because on one hand, obviously, I don't think it would make sense to have it in now here. Um, and so I'm thinking would it make sense to restrict to a certain level, but would you be concerned with, for example, a tier one not having C like commission level C approval and only going to director absence some sort of requirement for a DA mod? Madam Chair, uh, Commissioner Smith, it's a good question. No, and uh, because this is pretty fresh. If I would to go back and write it, I'd probably allow for tier ones. Okay.

Um, because I can read it to you. uh drive-thru. So tier one would be a drive-through associated with a financial institution, automated teller machine, so an ATM, pharmacy, laundry, dry cleaning, restaurants limited to online or mobile ordering only. So like a pickup window that's online ordering or other comparable uses as determined by the director. Typically, those would be a lot lower traffic generating um than tier two or tier three, which would be pretty much any restaurant that actually has an ordering and a pickup window. Uh, so I think that that would be something staff would be comfortable with would be allowing for tier ones but limiting tier twos and tier threes.

And just to follow up again, Nick, so mixed use interchange because of Highway 16's impact at that at at really at the junction of where your property stands. Is tier 2 even allowed in a mixeduse interchange? Madame Chair, so Misuse Interchange is a is a flume, so future land use map designation, but it's not a zoning. So the zoning is what would be tied to what allows drive-thru establishments. Um, so no, I mean, in talking with the team and in my analysis, you know, mixeduse interchange is meant for really low traffic generating uses, really not even retail uses. It's more for um employment where you actually have trip capture where people you know go stay for the day and then they'll leave and then the really the intent behind that is to limit state highway 16 and Chinden as you we all know once it actually is in operation that's going to be a very busy interchange and intersection um and trying to push those the traffic away from those areas with more of the regional retail users which we do have plans for in the field district um is really the intent behind that so we don't get big regional raw commercial users that's going to generate, you know, thousands of trips a day. Um, like some big boxes do. So, that's really the intent in the mixeduse interchange is to find uses that our neighborhood serving because it does allow for some low, you know, some low density residential or medium to low density residential, but finding the balance between what kind of trip generation with what we have right now. And I don't and I know the I've talked with the applicant. They don't necessarily have an exact plan for the commercial at this time. And that's why they don't have, you know, buildings shown or drive aisles. So without having that information, it's really hard for me to say, yeah, this looks like I it would be something that would be acceptable. Um because I have I don't have any square footages or types of uses to gauge a, you know, traffic generation off of. I can't have that conversation with ACG because they don't

even know what the uses are going to be and how what the square footages are. So that's kind of the the difficulty or the challenge with this. Gotcha. Madam Chair, um Commissioner Stall first, please. So Nick, um following up on your point that you don't have the information, is that why you're requiring a development agreement modification that you you need additional information?

Madam Chair, Commissioner Stole, that is correct. That's really one of the primary drivers is you know especially in I would say with the commission and with council um they def more details upfront is definitely preferred so we can and from staff's perspective as well so then we can ensure something is consistent with what was seen so we can ensure that the concept plan and what is actually being built is the same or generally or substantially consistent as determined by the director. Um, so you know, obviously sometimes square footages will change. You know, you'll go up 2,000 or go down 2,000 ft on a commercial building that we would consider that substantially consistent. Um, we'd look at the larger area and find that. But that's correct. You're spot on. Getting that information is why we want the development agreement modification. Um, as well as seeing the integration with the residential uses um to the south because with Cole Valley Christian School to the south um, you know, it's K through 12. If I'm not mistaken, you know, there's going to be high school age students that are going to want to go on their lunches or after school go maybe get something to drink, something to eat, and it's pretty common. We see that in the city throughout. So, seeing how that integration and all that works is primary driver behind that development agreement modification. That's correct. Thank you,

Commissioner Perau. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, good evening. Um, so can you share with us what the purpose would be to annex now but not have a details in uh in your concept plan and obviously you'll start paying city taxes and whatnot but but you're quite a ways out from actually having a full plan developed.

Madam Chair, um, Commissioner Pearl. Yes. Um, we really this is an approp this is an appropriate time to annex. Um there are the city services will be there soon. The school is you know going to get going and um we you know at this time we think that I guess what I how I would answer that is we agree with the comprehensive plan. We're not asking for a comprehensive plan map amendment and um we agree with you know all the guidelines pretty much that they're giving in terms of integration in terms of how it it fronts that um but the uses yeah we we don't have an exact user yet. Um, but I think that we really can, you know, once rooftops get there, I think we need to see rooftops and see plans come in place until those commercial users, um, even office development, um, all of those kinds of things will come in. So, I think really from a developer's perspective, um, having a plan in place really is a catalyst then to get those users in. um and and and which is why we will agree to different design guidelines and those sorts of things right now.

Madam Chair, Commissioner Pearl, um so I remember when the Fields area plan was being developed and put together and um the intention of it was for it to look different than other parts of Meridian, have a different feel, um a little bit more of a neighborhood feel rather than a kind of a bigger commercial feel. and um also to have a a real variety of housing types and um and just having the R8 I don't I don't think that really meets sort of the intention. So I'm curious if the developer has considered or looked at options of giving more variety of housing.

Madam Chair, um Commissioner, thank you. The R8 does allow for obviously a range of single family product types. So, um I believe the single family lot minimum is 40 ft of street frontage. And the developers, the different um so we won't develop it ourselves. We work with a number of different um local and national home builders really a wide range. Um and it it really becomes market driven in terms of what um product type they want to develop. you know, not a lot of home builders are wanting to do um town homes right now because really the the cost to build town homes is really the same as a single family home, but the value in a single family home um detached is there much longer um and is much greater for those homeowners. Um and you know sometimes um you might think that more single family developers want to do um just you know would do the minimum would do 40 ft but a lot of developers right now are wanting to do at least 60 feet wide lots um that that's really what this market is and and so it just gives some flexibility. I think there is flexibility within the R8 zone um while also staying within the comprehensive plan. Um and yeah we you know it's a big it's a big area. There's it's four square miles. Um there's a lot of other areas designated for medium high density, designated for apartments all throughout it. So, this really is that single family. Um and the R8 zone is kind of the perfect zone to allow for that flexibility in this specific type of product, which would be a detached single family house.

Madam Chair, Commissioner Smith.

Um yeah, I'd appreciate some some clarity. I think you said something earlier specifically looking at like uh looking at uh AF kind of this last uh section um that is kind of in tension with kind of the conversation that I think we're having which is on one hand you're asking kind of for some more guidance from staff and and more direction um rather than waiting until down the line. On the other hand, it seems like that staff's kind of trying to give you that by saying, "Hey, here are some areas that we would restrict. You know, we would want to see restricted. Here are some areas that we think don't make sense here. Here's some guidance of, you know, as you're looking for different customers." Help help me understand. Help me square that circle. Like on one hand, you're kind of asking for some more guidance. is yeah I guess I'm just I'm I'm struggling to understand what about the the guidance itself is is it that it's too restrictive is it that it's maybe not the guidance you're open for if you could help me.

Uh thank you Madame Chair um and Commissioner Smith. Yes. So with regard to those uses, like the actual uses, um that is guidance from staff that we expressly disagree with. Um those two uses and and the the cup with the drive-thru like so that's a use, right? And um so for example, we yeah, we think that there should be some drive-thru uses allowed here. So to that extent, we we disagree with that guidance. Um the staff report um I think with regard to the design standards um and I'm sorry the staff report this doesn't have pages on it but it's C design standard analysis um CA um I think and it and that's in bold um to my understanding and and staff can I don't want to speak for them but in some of our conversations this is some of the um design guidelines um like when you know staff said, "Hey, well with um your commercial, we don't have your layout, so we don't know if you're going to include a plaza area between the commercial and the residential." So that's the first bullet point. Um so we need a DA mod so that we can make sure you include a plaza area. My suggestion is how about we put that in the development agreement now that says in your commercial you will include a plaza area between the commercial and residential. That's an example. Yes.

Any other questions for the applicant before we take public testimony? Okay, I think we're good. Thank you. Madam clerk, do we have anybody in advance to sign up to testify? Thank you, Madam Chair. I have Darcy Hart.

Hi. If you can state your name and address for the record, that'd be great. Sure can. Good evening. For the record, Darcy Hart, uh, PO Box 1304, Eagle. My partners and I own the parcel to the north at 7015 Chendant, where the storage facility. Oh, okay. Yeah. Um, we were so excited to see this meeting invitation for the neighborhood meeting. Uhhuh.

Um, however, it was a little underwhelming to say the least. Um the one-page letter contained no project description or site plan. Uh we also noted that there was no preliminary plat or landscaping, nothing to describe the project itself. And we now understand why that is. Um there has been no traffic impact study, no actual preliminary plat submitted, um nothing substantial for review. Um, we also noted that 48 acres with an R8 zoning allows for 384 single family residences. Now, that's not much of a small ask in my opinion. Without a traffic impact study, how can they ask for modifications to any conditions? While my team and I are very excited to see the growth in the area, we benefit from it as well. Two things can be true at the same time. Reszone and annexation should be the result of a materially complete heard and approved application by all agencies involved. If the applicant disagrees with the analysis, they need to provide their own for review. This evening, the applicant is requesting your approval for the maximum allowable residential density while giving nothing of substance for any of you to review. They seek the valuation of an R8 reszone on this parcel with the possibility of nearly 400 single family homes with no preliminary plat. I must point out also the applicant is listed as a stakeholder for the remedian field sub area plan and sat in years ago to assist and give input while this area was designed. I think we could do better. While there is a determination by the

Meridian Public Works the parcel can be annexed today, the trunkline sewer connection is roughly a year or more away. This gives the applicant plenty of time to prepare a preliminary plat a landscaping plan and conduct a traffic impact study for review. Further, when you look at the exhibit in the packet, exhibit D, showing the concept plan, it depicts a proposed road design, an amenity, and a park. But without a preliminary plat for ACD to review, it's a guess at its very best. My partners and I are humbly requesting the application be held pending the completion of the required items as they are attempting to forego them tonight. Once those requirements are met, this application can be heard as process dictates. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Madam Clerk. We have anybody else to testify? Madam Chair, no one else has signed up and nobody is in attendance online.

Is there anybody else in chambers that'd like to speak? You guys good? Would the applicant like to come forward and address Miss Hart's concerns? Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, commissioners. Um, I understand I just wanted to address the density. I'm not exactly sure where um, Miss Hart is getting 400 units. Maybe she's concern maybe she's confusing R8 with saying that that allows eight dwelling units to the acre. That's not how the city of Meridian code works. Um, it's not like R8 means eight dwelling units to the acre. um it's a dimensional standard. So I I can um just say that to the extent that that's I don't know if she did a site layout to see with all the dimensional standards how that would work, but um that would be eight dwelling units to the acre, which I don't know how you would make that work with single family homes. Um so that was really um the only thing. Um again um we will do a traffic impact study um and that will be part of a preliminary plat application and any commercial uses. So um definitely uh we'll be doing that and we'll be abiding by any kind of ACHD or ITD requirements at the time.

Thank you. Thanks. May I get a motion to close the public hearing? So moved. Second. It's been moved and second to close the public hearing for North Midian Fields. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed?

Motion carries. Um I think with the we're all getting used to the tier one, tier two, and tier three of the drive-through uses. um because it's kind of new language for us to completely eliminate drive-through establishments on uh number 4 A and C. I agree with the applicant on that, but maybe it would be allow drive-thru establishments tier one and staff had indicated that that might um be allowable for mixeduse interchanges. Um, and considering I I live in one as well for Highway 16, um, to be able to have a 10,000 square foot store in a possible very congested area, I think, will be challenging. And that's why the DA modification for at least the commercial part of it along with your preliminary plat to me would be essential. um you want clarification, but the city needs transparency. And so by providing the DA modification, then there's no surprises. And because not only do you disagree, but we also have challenges not only with this commission, but with city council when it comes to intended uses for any zone or use on the flume like mixed use interchanges. It can be interpreted in other ways. It may be your interpretation that well we're following the rules but the reason why we um manage each application individually is because the corner of Franklin and Blackhat is a lot different than the corner of Chanden and McDermott. Even though they may be zoned the same way, but their intended uses

are going to be different. And the fact that your application right now is just two colors and very very vague um leads me hesitant to approve these conditions of approval because of yours because I think there needs to be more information especially going to council and um I think annexing you into the city is the right choice. If this is the right time, even though that substation's not available, that's your choice, that's fine. But um through the DA modification and the preliminary plat and any other conditional use permits that we might need for the commercial part of it and including the R8, I think needs to be better defined and you can do that during that permitting process. So because we have a usual and customary way of of managing um how those next steps go, I don't think those should be foregone here. So to summarize my thoughts, yes, you should be annexed. No, I don't think um your conditions of approval, your crossouts should be included at this time.

Chair, Commissioner Perau,

thank you. Um, I agree with you on the conditions of approval, although I feel like that conversation's even preliminary. I I just didn't hear from the applicant a really compelling reason to annex this right now. It's just going to sit and there's not really anything that could be done until we have the details that will be needed for the DA modification. Um, I imagine there's some financial planning maybe on their part that or perhaps they feel it's necessary to be annexed to uh to have discussions with end users and that's okay. But this obligates the city to provide services to this area and um obligates our taxpayers and I just don't I just not understanding why the need would be necessary now. Um I'd rather wait and see. I mean annexation that annexation is the the first the very first um kind of latitude that we have to to see some um you know more clarity more information on on what the applicant intends and so I'm always hesitant to sort of give up that ability uh as a decision maker um until we have more information.

Okay. Thank you Madam Chair.

Commissioner Smith. Um I generally agree kind of with uh your position. Um I I think I'm okay with annexing at the time uh given some of the kind of I think uh u direction and feedback planning staff has gotten at a director level. Um, from what I understand, um, yeah, I think there's there's a disconnect here though regarding these conditions and regarding the planning. Um, give me grace when I say this cuz I don't want to I'm not trying to cast any aspersions or or or any implications, but it feels like there's almost a desire for planning for city staff to act in a project development and project planning capacity. uh like for the individual site and and their job is to review from the perspective of the city, not to dictate, you know, from whole cloth where everything should go on on the map. And so discussing kind of plazas, for example, um staff can't tell where a plaza should probably go until they see where the rest of the um the plan what the rest of the plan looks like. they can't dictate how, you know, traffic uh impact should be uh incorporated into the plan until they have something to, you know, uh look at regarding a traffic impact study or things like that. So, I think from from the city perspective, it seems like services are already kind of being extended this direction. And I don't feel like there's an obligation that the city is um an additional obligation that will be placed on the city beyond what is already kind of in the intention for for the near future from what I understand. I really do think though that absent some sort of development agreement requirement or future DA mod requirement that there's just not enough developed here to you to sink your teeth into. Um I agree. I think that especially given that staff is okay with it allowing tier one uh

would make sense. Honestly, if this were more developed, I might even be personally okay with a tier 2 um allowance, but we don't again we don't have that that level. Um I could see a tier 2 kind of amount of volume here potentially for for some smaller kind of restaurant drive-thru things like that. Um but again without more clarity and without more transparency into the actual plans I know the I know the applicant is not the developer themselves or the the intended you know um builder of of you know doing the the actual build out of of this application. So they don't have all that visibility you know locked in place. Um but yeah I think because of those reasons we need to kind of limit that to you know absent some sort of DA mod or some some sort of uh future application. So, um I I'm okay with the annexation. Um I think all staff's uh you know, staff's recommendations make sense absent, you know, we can allow a tier one.

Madam Chair, I'm I'm in agreement with your positions. Um I'm particularly in agreement because the directors have uh said that it's okay um to do the annexation at this point in time even though the sewer facilities are not present. I would okay I would not be supportive of the um annexation without the de development agreement modification um given the lack of detail that we currently have. Um I wouldn't recommend moving forward. Yeah.

Okay. So now we'll try it. All right. You're good. Um, so if we and I am in agreement with having the tier one um drive-throughs on there. So, right, Commissioner Joelino, you have any comments? Madam Chair, I'll echo my fellow commissioners. Okay. Thank you. Anybody want to take a try to stab it at a motion? Madam Chair, Commissioner Smith,

after considering all staff applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the city council of file number H--2026-00003 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 19th with a modification to allow for tier 1 uh drive-throughs. Seconded. It's been moved and second to approve North Meridian Fields. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. I will take uh one more motion. Madam chair. Seconded. It's been moved and second to adjurnn. All those in favor say I. I. I.

Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much everyone. My thing's been walk. Madam Chair, did you motion to adjurnn? I did.