PZ - Staff Report
Page 1
HEARING
DATE:
February 21, 2019
Continued from: 1/17/2019
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner
208-884-5533
Bruce Freckleton, Development
Services Manager
208-887-2211
SUBJECT: H-2018-0129
Stapleton Subdivision
LOCATION: 4435 S. Meridian Road
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Annexation and zoning of 38.15 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district; Preliminary plat
consisting of (212) single-family residential building lots, (1) multi-family building lot and (22)
common lots on 35.67 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district; and Variance to UDC 11-3H-4B for
access to State Highway 69/S. Meridian Rd.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
STAFF REPORT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Description Details Page
Acreage 35.67
Future Land Use Designation MU-R (Mixed Use – Regional)
Existing Land Use Existing home & accessory structures (vacant)
Proposed Land Use(s) Residential (SFR & MFR)
Current Zoning RUT in Ada County
Proposed Zoning R-15
Lots (# and type; bldg/common) 213 building/22 common
Phasing plan (# of phases) Yes; 5 phases
Number of Residential Units (type
of units)
240 units total (96 attached/116 detached SFR, 28 MFR)
Density (gross & net) 6.73 gross
Open Space (acres, total [%] /
buffer / qualified)
5.43 acres (15.2%)
Amenities Basketball court, dog park for small dogs, 24’ x 36’ children’s
play structure, swings, rock climbing boulders and a climbing
Page 2
dome structure, big wheel track, benches, pedestrian
pathways, segment of multi-use pathway system.
Physical Features (waterways,
hazards, flood plain, hillside)
An irrigation ditch runs along the northeast corner of the site,
the Carlson Lateral runs along the west boundary of the site,
and the Northwest gas pipeline runs along the southwest
corner of the site. The topography of this site slopes
considerably down on the northeast portion of the site.
Neighborhood meeting date; # of
attendees:
July 18, 2018; 6 attendees
January 16, 2019; 3 attendees
History (previous approvals) CPA-08-001 (amendment to the Comprehensive Plan
FLUM to change the land use designation from MDR to
MU-R - approved);
AZ-08-005 (a Development Agreement was required as a
provision of annexation – the DA was never signed,
therefore the annexation approval is null and void);
VAR-08-008 (approved 3 access points to SH 69/S.
Meridian Rd. – this approval has since expired because
the property was never annexed);
MDA-11-010 (modification to the DA to extend the time
period allow for the agreement to be signed – the DA was
never signed and expired)
Page 3
B. Community Metrics
Page 4
Description Details Pa
ge
Ada County
Highway District
Staff report
(yes/no)
Yes (draft) – see Section VII.
Requires
ACHD
Commission
Action
(yes/no)
Yes, for modification to Master Street Map for collector street
Fire Service
Distance to
Fire Station
2.9 miles from Fire Station #1
Fire
Response
Time
5 minutes under ideal conditions
Resource
Reliability
63% from Fire Station #1 – does not meet the target goal of 85% or greater
Risk
Identificatio
n
1 (residential)
Accessibility signage for addressing needs to be provided for homes accessed by the common
driveways on Lots 10 & 61, Block 1; Lots 23 & 29, Block 2; and Lot 28, Block 3
Special/reso
urce needs
None
Water
Supply
Requires 1,000 gallons per minute for 2 hours
Other
Resources
NA
Police Service
Distance to
Police
Station
3.5 miles
Police
Response
Time
3-4 minutes
Calls for
Service
104 within a mile of the site between 1/1/18-12/31/18
Accessibility Harris St. and SH-69; future stub to south
Specialty/res
ource needs
No additional staffing, equipment needs or other resources needed to serve this
development
Crimes
Crashes 12 crashes within a mile of the site – 66% injury related between 1/1/18 and 12/31/18
West Ada School
District
Distance
(elem, ms,
hs)
Mary McPherson Elementary – 1 mile; Victory Middle School – 1.6 miles; Meridian
High School – 4.4 miles
Capacity of
Schools
Mary McPherson Elementary 650; Victory Middle School 1,000; Meridian High
School 2,400
# of Students
Enrolled
Mary McPherson Elementary 525; Victory Middle School 928; Meridian High
School 1,913
Page 5
C. Project Area Maps
Anticipated
school aged
children
generated by
this
development
178
Wastewater
Distance to
Sewer
Services
200-feet, Bore under Meridian Road
Sewer Shed NA
Estimated
Project
Sewer
ERU’s
See application information
WRRF
Declining
Balance
13.57 MGD
Project
Consistent
with WW
Master
Plan/Facility
Plan
Yes
Water
Distance to
Water
Services
0-feet
Pressure
Zone
5
Estimated
Project
Water
ERU’s
See application information
Water
Quality
None
Project
Consistent
with Water
Master Plan
Yes
Impacts/Con
cerns
Each phase must be modeled as developed to ensure adequate fire flow. If a
transportation/pathway connection is built to the west (proposed Graycliff
Apartments), a water main connection shall be required under said connection.
Future Land Use Map Aerial Map
Page 6
III. APPLICANT INFORMATION
A. Applicant:
Stapleton, LLC – 4824 W. Fairview Ave., Boise, ID 83706
B. Owner:
GRHH Amity, LLC – 855 Broad St., Ste. 300, Boise, ID 83702
C. Representative:
Laren Bailey, Stapleton, LLC – 4824 W. Fairview Ave., Boise, ID 83706
Zoning Map
Planned Development Map
Page 7
IV. NOTICING
Planning & Zoning
Posting Date
City Council
Posting Date
Newspaper Notification 12/28/2018
Radius notification mailed to
properties within 300 feet 12/26/2018
Public hearing notice sign posted
on site 1/4/2019
Nextdoor posting 12/26/2018
V. STAFF ANALYSIS
A. ANNEXATION & ZONING
Comprehensive Plan (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan):
The Future Land Use Designation (FLUM) for this site is Mixed Use – Regional (MU-R) – The
purpose of this designation is to provide a mix of employment, retail, and residential dwellings
and public uses near major arterial intersections. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses
together, including residential, and to avoid predominantly single-use developments such as a
regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses. Developments should be
anchored by uses that have a regional draw with the appropriate supporting uses. MU-R
developments are encouraged to be designed according the MU-R plan depicted in Figure 3-5
below:
Transportation:
The Master Street Map (MSM) depicts a planned north/south collector street through and along
the west boundary of the site from W. Harris St. to W. Amity Rd. (see blue and orange dashed
line on map below).
Page 8
The collector street designation was placed on this property because of the Comprehensive Plan
amendment to the FLUM approved in 2008 which changed the land use designation on this
property and the property to the south to MU-R. Because of the intensity of uses (i.e. commercial,
office and multi-family residential – see concept plan below) planned with the associated
development, there was a need to disperse traffic to the signals at Amity Rd. and Meridian
Rd./SH-69 and the future signal at Harris St. and Meridian Rd./SH-69. This street was intended to
serve as a backage road for the commercial development along SH-69. However, the property
was never annexed and the property was not developed as intended.
Page 9
The proposed plat depicts a short segment (400’+/-) of the collector street (N. Lone Pine Way)
from W. Harris St. to the intersection of W. Radiant Edge Dr.; and W. Lyra St. from SH-69 and
S. Solaris Ave. to the south; a continuous collector street is not proposed through the site
therefore, the proposed street network is not consistent with the MSM. However, ACHD is of the
opinion the proposal to construct two discontinuous collector streets meets the intent of the MSM
and doesn’t preclude the construction of the southern segment in the future.
The Applicant is requesting a modification to the MSM to eliminate the continuous collector
street through this site to better reflect the proposed land uses. With development applications to
the west of this site, a north/south collector street from Harris to Amity is required to be
constructed at the half mile in accord with the MSM.
Land Use:
The proposed land use for this site is a mix of single-family residential attached and detached
units (212 units) with a small portion of multi-family 4-plex units (28 units) at an overall gross
density of 6.73 units per acre. This land is part of a larger Mixed Use designated area in this
vicinity. The MU-R designation stretches along the frontage of SH-69 from W. Harris St. to W.
Amity Rd. with MU-C (Mixed Use – Community) to the south across Amity; MU-NR (Mixed
Use – Non-Residential) designated land exists to the east across SH-69 and south of Amity (see
FLUM below).
The Applicant submitted a bubble plan included in Section VII.G that demonstrates how the
property owner to the south of this site anticipates that property developing with a mix of uses
consisting of office/multi-family residential as a buffer and transition to the single-family
residential planned on this site with commercial, office and retail uses further to the south.
Page 10
Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan):
Goals, Objectives, & Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be
applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property (staff analysis in
italics):
“Provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes and
multi-family arrangements) and choices between ownership and rental dwelling units for all
income groups in a variety of locations suitable for residential development.” (3.07.03B)
A mix of single-family attached and detached homes and multi-family apartment units are
proposed within this development which will provided ownership and rental options for
various income groups in this area.
“Provide housing options close to employment and shopping centers.” (3.07.02D)
The proposed development will provide housing options in close proximity to future office
and commercial uses planned to develop on the adjacent property to the south.
“Locate high-density development, where possible, near open space corridors or other
permanent major open space and park facilities, Old Town, and near major access
thoroughfares.” (3.07.02L)
The proposed development falls within the medium-density category. The site is located in
close proximity to a future City park to the west and an existing City Park (Bear Creek) to the
north and a segment of the City’s multi-use pathway system to the west and along SH-69, a
major access thoroughfare. For this reason, Staff is of the opinion a higher density would be
more appropriate in this area; however, the proposed density is higher than the adjacent
residential developments to the north and west and although at the low end, it falls within the
desired density range of 6 to 40 units per acre in mixed use designated areas.
“Consider ACHD’s Master Street Map (MSM) in all land use decisions.” (3.03.04K)
The MSM depicts a north/south collector roadway across this site providing access between
W. Harris St. and W. Amity Rd. and to the future signal at Harris St./SH-69 and the existing
signal at Amity/SH-69. The proposed plan depicts a 400+/- foot long segment of a collector
street (N. Lone Pine Way) at the entry of the development from Harris St. and a 225+/- foot
long segment of a collector street (S. Solaris Ave.) at the south boundary with local streets in
between that do not provide a direct connection between Harris and Amity which is not
consistent with the MSM. However, because the development plan for this site and the
property to the south has changed from that previously proposed which warranted the
provision of a collector street in this area and because ACHD has approved the proposed
street layout/designations, Staff is amenable to the proposed design without the provision of a
full collector street.
“Require open space areas within all development.” (6.01.01A)
An open space exhibit is included in Section VII.D that appears to comply with the minimum
UDC standards although some of the areas (as noted) do not count toward qualified open
space per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3.
“Permit new development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time
of final approval and development is contiguous to the City.” (3.01.01F)
The proposed development is contiguous to the City and urban services can be provided to
this development.
“Restrict private curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets.” (3.06.02D)
One (1) access is proposed via W. Harris St., a collector street; and one (1) access is
proposed via SH-69, a state highway. Access via SH-69 is prohibited per UDC 11-3H-4B; a
Page 11
variance is requested for Council approval of the proposed access. Note: Without access
via SH-69, a secondary emergency access is required that meets Fire Department
requirements (IFC Section D104.3).
“Work with ACHD, COMPASS, and VRT on bringing public transportation to and through
Meridian.” (3.03.04H)
The Applicant contacted VRT to see if a bus stop is needed on this site; VRT stated their long-
term plan (ValleyConnect 2.0) does not include any service along S. Meridian Rd./SH-69.
“Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to
promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system.” (3.03.03B)
A segment of the City’s multi-use pathway system is proposed at the southwest corner of the
site which will assist in providing connectivity with adjacent developments and the future City
Park to the west. Pedestrian access connectors are provided internally to the sidewalks along
Harris St. and the multi-use pathway along SH-69. One other pedestrian connection is
proposed to the west on Lot 26, Block 3 which also serves as the access driveway to a new
pressure irrigation pump station and an existing irrigation diversion structure.
“Work with transportation agencies and private property owners to preserve transportation
corridors, future transit routes and infrastructure, road and highway extensions, and to
facilitate access management planning.” (3.01.01J)
The Applicant has been working with ITD on the proposed access via SH-69 and with ACHD
on the proposed access via W. Harris St. and internal roadways. The UDC (11-3H-4)
prohibits new approaches to state highways; a Variance is requested for the proposed
access. Staff finds approving the access via SH-69 does not preserve the transportation
corridor.
“Develop alternative modes of transportation through pedestrian improvements, bicycle
lanes, off-street pathways, and transit-oriented development as appropriate.” (3.03.03D)
VRT (ValleyConnect 2.0) does not have any bus service along S. Meridian Rd./SH-69. A 10-
foot wide multi-use pathway is required as proposed along SH-69 and across the southwest
corner of this site within the Northwest Pipeline easement for pedestrian/bicycle use.
In reviewing development applications, the following items will be considered in all Mixed
Use areas, per the Comprehensive Plan (pgs. 23-24): (Staff’s analysis in italics)
• “Residential densities should be a minimum of six dwellings/acre.”
The gross density of the proposed development is 6.73 units per acre which falls at the low
end of the 6 to 40 unit per acre range desired in MU-R designated areas but is within the
desired range. Higher residential densities are anticipated on the R-40 zoned property to the
west.
• “Where feasible, higher density and/or multi-family residential development will be
encouraged, especially for projects with the potential to serve as employment destination
centers and when the project is adjacent to US 20/26, SH-55, SH-16 or SH-69.”
Although the proposed development does include a multi-family component and meets the
minimum density desired in mixed use areas, because this site is adjacent to a major
transportation corridor (SH-69) and within a mile and a half of a mobility corridor (Lake
Hazel Rd.), AND is designated on the FLUM as MU-R in which large employment and retail
uses with a regional draw are anticipated, Staff is of the opinion a higher density and/or
more multi-family units would be appropriate in this area to support the future
commercial/office/employment uses desired in this area.
• “A conceptual site plan for the entire mixed-use area should be included in the application.”
Page 12
A bubble plan was submitted for the overall MU-R area (see Section VII.G); however, only
the northern 36+/- acre portion of that area is included in this application, the remaining
30+/- acres is not a part of this application and therefore future development cannot be held
to the plan. Without both properties developing together, staff believes that the projects may
not be as well-intregrated as desired by the Comprehensive Plan.
• “In developments where multiple commercial and/or office buildings are proposed (not
residential), the buildings should be arranged to create some form of common, usable area,
such as a plaza or green space.”
This development does not contain commercial/office buildings.
• “The site plan should depict a transitional use and/or landscaped buffering between
commercial and existing low- or medium-density residential development.”
The proposed plan depicts multi-family 4-plex residential uses as a transitional use between
the planned multi-family apartments to the west and the proposed single-family residential
units in this development. Common area with landscaping and a multi-use pathway is
proposed along the southern boundary providing a transition to planned office/multi-family
uses on the adjacent property to the south.
• “A mixed-use project should include at least three types of land uses [i.e. commercial
(includes retail, restaurants, etc.), office, residential, civic (includes public open space, parks,
entertainment venues, etc.), and industrial]. Exceptions may be granted for smaller sites on a
case-by-case basis.”
The proposed development plan only includes one land use type (i.e. residential); however,
three different types of residential units are proposed (i.e. single-family detached/attached
and multi-family 4-plex units). The concept plan submitted for the off-site MU-R designated
area to the south depicts a mix of land use types as desired (i.e. office, multi-family,
commercial, retail). Because the adjacent mixed use designated area to the east does not
allow new residential uses, Staff is of the opinion all residential uses on this site is
appropriate in order to serve the future commercial/office/employment uses.
• “Community-serving facilities such as hospitals, churches, schools, parks, daycares, civic
buildings, or public safety facilities are expected in larger mixed-use developments.”
This is a relatively small portion of the overall mixed use designated area; none of these
types of uses are proposed on this site. However, they may be in the future on the adjacent
larger portions of the mixed use area.
• “Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places including but not
limited to parks, plazas, outdoor gathering areas, open space, libraries, and schools are
expected; outdoor seating areas at restaurants do not count.”
The proposed plan does not incorporate public and/or quasi-public spaces and places; the
common area proposed in the residential development is owned by the Homeowner’s
Association and does not satisfy this requirement. These types of public spaces should be
included in the adjacent mixed use designated area when it develops.
• “All mixed-use projects should be directly accessible to neighborhoods within the section by
both vehicles and pedestrians.”
The only neighborhood that would be directly accessible to the proposed development is the
future multi-family development to the west. A couple of pedestrian connections are proposed
but no vehicular connections are proposed. In order to comply with this guideline, a
vehicular connection should be provided.
• “Street sections consistent with the Ada County Highway District Master Street Map are
required within the Unified Development Code.”
Page 13
The Master Street Map depicts a north/south collector street through and along the west
boundary of this site providing access to W. Harris St. and W. Amity Rd. and the traffic
signals (planned and existing) at the SH-69 intersections of those streets. The proposed
plan does not depict a continuous collector street as planned and therefore is not in
compliance with the MSM and UDC 11-6C-3B.1, which requires arterial and collector
streets as shown on the Comprehensive Plan to be dedicated to the public in all cases.
However, because the development plan has changed for this area, the collector street may
not be needed.
• “Because of the existing small lots within Old Town, development is not subject to the
Mixed-Use standards listed herein.”
The proposed development is not within Old Town; therefore, this provision is not applicable.
In reviewing development applications, the following items will be considered in MU-R
areas, per the Comprehensive Plan (pg. 30):
• “Development should comply with the general guidelines for development in all Mixed-Use
areas.”
See analysis above.
• “Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 10% of the development area at densities
ranging from 6 to 40 units/acre.”
The proposed residential uses on this site comprise approximately 55% of the overall MU-R
area at a density of 6.73 units per acre in accord with this guideline.
• “Retail commercial uses should comprise a maximum of 50% of the development area.”
No retail commercial uses are proposed with this development; however, the remainder of
the area to the south consists of approximately 45% of the overall MU-R area and is planned
to develop with a mix of commercial, retail, and office uses in accord with this standard.
• “There is neither a minimum nor a maximum imposed on non-retail commercial uses such as
office, clean industry, or entertainment uses.”
No commercial uses are proposed with this development.
Zoning:
Based on the analysis above, Staff is of the opinion the requested annexation with the R-15
zoning district and proposed development is generally consistent with the MU-R FLUM
designation for this site and is appropriate for this site.
The proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property to the north and west and is
within the Area of City Impact Boundary. A legal description for the annexation area is included
in Section VII.A.
The City may require a development agreement (DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant
to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. In order to ensure the site develops as proposed with this
application, staff recommends a DA as a provision of annexation with the provisions
included in Section VIII.
B. PRELIMINARY PLAT
Boundary of the Plat:
The proposed boundary of the plat is not consistent with the existing boundary of the site.
The Applicant intends to apply for a property boundary adjustment in the County prior to
annexation ordinance approval by City Council if the subject application is approved. Final
Page 14
approval of the property boundary adjustment will need to be obtained prior to annexation
ordinance approval.
Existing Structures/Site Improvements:
There is an existing home and accessory structures on this site that is unoccupied. These
structures are required to be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City
Engineer.
Proposed Use Analysis:
The proposed single-family dwellings (attached & detached) are listed as a principal permitted
use; and the multi-family development is listed as a conditional use in the R-15 zoning district per
UDC Table 11-2A-2. Multi-family developments are subject to the specific use standards listed in
UDC 11-4-3-27; compliance with these standards will be evaluated in the future through the
conditional use permit process.
Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2):
The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to comply with the minimum
dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 district (see below). The front
lot dimension is missing on lots in Block 1 and should be included on a revised plat.
Page 15
Phasing Plan:
The subdivision is proposed to develop in 5 phases. The 1st phase is dependent upon a Variance
being approved by Council for access via SH-69, the second phase will have access via W. Harris
St. followed by the 3rd phase at the corner of Harris/SH-69, and 4th phase directly west of phase 1;
the 5th phase will be the multi-family development. Because the UDC prohibits access via SH-69,
Staff recommends the phasing plan is revised to reflect the first phase of development adjacent to
Harris St. for access purposes; if Council approves the requested Variance, the phasing plan does
not need to be revised.
Per the Applicant’s narrative, the following improvements are proposed with each phase:
Phase 1: The SH-69/S. Meridian Rd. roadway improvements, 10-foot wide multi-use
pathway and street buffer landscaping along the full length of the project boundary along SH-
69/S. Meridian Rd.
Phase 2: The W. Harris St. roadway improvements including curb, gutter and detached
sidewalk and street buffer landscaping along the full length of the project boundary along W.
Harris St.; and installation of the traffic signal at the W. Harris St./SH-69 intersection.
Prior to issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy in each of these phases the associated
improvements as proposed by the Appliant should be complete. If Council doesn’t approve
the variance for access via SH-69, the Harris St. improvements, including the traffic signal
at Harris/SH-69, should be completed with the first phase of development.
Access (UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4)/Streets:
One full access is proposed via W. Harris St., a collector street; one full access is proposed via
SH-69, a state highway (although ITD has only tentatively approved a right-in/right-out/left-in
access); and a stub street is proposed to the south for future extension. The access via SH-69 is
prohibited per UDC 11-3H-4B; a variance is requested for this access (if the access isn’t
approved, it should be removed from the plat and a secondary emergency access provided in
accord with IFC requirements).
Improvements are required to Harris St. per the ACHD report; and SH-69 per ITD’s letter to the
City (see Section VIII).
ACHD is requiring bulb-outs to be constructed to reduce traffic speed and enhance pedestrian
safety at crossings where internal pathways intersect the street on Radiant Ridge Dr., W. Hydman
St. and at the intersection of Springfield Ave. and Broyhill St.
Common Driveways (UDC 11-6C-3)
All common driveways are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D.
Several common driveways are proposed that comply with UDC standards. Common driveways
should be a maximum of 150’ in length or less, unless otherwise approved by the Fire Dept.
An exhibit is required to be submitted with the final plat application that depicts the
setbacks, fencing, building envelope and orientation of the lots and structures. Driveways
for abutting properties that aren’t taking access from the common driveway(s) should be
depicted on the opposite side of the shared property line away from the common driveway.
Solid fencing adjacent to common driveways is prohibited unless separated by a minimum
5-foot wide landscaped buffer.
A perpetual ingress/egress easement for the common driveway(s) is required to be filed with
the Ada County Recorder, which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved
surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. A copy of the easement should
be submitted to the Planning Division prior to signature on the final plat.
Page 16
Parking (UDC 11-3C):
Parking for single-family detached/attached and multi-family dwellings is required based on the
number of bedrooms per unit. For 2-, 3- or 4-bedroom single-family units, a minimum of 4 spaces
are required per unit with at least 2 of those in an enclosed garage, the other spaces may be
enclosed or a minimum 10’ x 20’ parking pad.
Because of the narrow lots (i.e. 32’+) for detached homes and associated driveways, there is not
adequate room for on-street parking in front of those lots for guest parking and in some areas
parking is quite a ways away. Where attached homes are proposed, there is room for
approximately one space per every 2 lots for on-street parking. On-street parking is also available
adjacent to common lots. The Applicant has submitted an exhibit included in Section VII.E that
demonstrates available on-street parking for the development which amounts to 109+/- spaces
available for guest parking (note: parking on the 27’ wide street section adjacent to Lot 12, Block
2 can only be accommodated on one side per Fire Department standards).
For a 1-bedroom multi-family unit, a minimum of 1.5 spaces per unit with an least 1 space in a
covered carport or garage; for 2- or 3-bedroom multi-family units, a minimum of 2 spaces per
unit are required with at least 1 in a covered carport or garage. For greater number of bedrooms,
see UDC Table 11-3C-6 for more information.
Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8):
Pathways (micro-pathways and multi-use pathways) are required to be constructed in accord with
the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8 with landscaping on either side of the pathway(s) in accord
with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C.
Several micro-pathways are proposed for pedestrian circulation within the development. A
segment of the City’s multi-use pathway is proposed within the Northwest Pipeline corridor
across the southwest corner of the site in accord with the Pathways Master Plan; and within the
street buffer along SH-69 in accord with UDC 11-3H-4C.3. Landscaping is required to be
installed along these pathways as set forth in UDC 11-3B-12C. A public use easement is
required for the multi-use pathways; coordinate the details of the easement with Kim
Warren, Park’s Department (208-888-3579).
Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17):
Sidewalks are required to be constructed adjacent to public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17.
Minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalks are required along all collector and arterial streets; and
minimum 5-foot wide attached (or detached) sidewalks are required along local streets as
proposed.
Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17):
Parkways are required to be constructed and landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11 -3A-
17E. Eight-foot wide parkways are proposed along collector streets and along certain local street
sections within the development in accord with UDC standards.
Landscaping (UDC 11-3B):
Street buffer landscaping is required to be provided within common lots in accord with the
standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. Per UDC Table 11-2A-7, a 20-foot wide buffer is required
adjacent to collector streets; a 35-foot wide buffer is required adjacent to SH-69, an entryway
corridor; and no buffer is required along local streets. The landscape plan depicts the gravel
symbol within the street buffer along SH-69 and Harris St. where vegetative groundcover is
required; the symbol should be changed to grass.
Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3G):
A minimum of 10% (3.57 acres) qualified open space is required to be provided within the
development per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B. A qualified open space exhibit was
Page 17
submitted as shown in Section VII.D that depicts 5.43 acres (or 15.2%) of open space; however,
there are several areas counted that Staff finds do not meet the requirements for qualified open
space and other space that is marginal (i.e. the landscaped area on Lot 30, Block 4 that is below
the dimensions of 50’ x 100’; and the area at the northeast corner of the site where the topography
of the land slopes significantly down from the building lots toward the SH-69/Harris intersection
and although is accessible by all residents, will not likely provide much of a benefit to
homeowners. Staff requests a revised exhibit is submitted excluding certain non-qualified
areas as detailed in Section VII.D prior to the Commission hearing to determine accurate
qualified open space calculations.
Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G):
A minimum of (2) qualified site amenities are required to be provided for this development based
on the size of the development (i.e. 35.67 acres). The Applicant proposes a segment of the City’s
multi-use pathway system within the Northwest Pipeline corridor at the southwest corner of the
site; a multi-use pathway within the street buffer along SH-69; a centrally located half-acre park
with children’s play structures consisting of a 24’ x 36’ play structure, swings, climbing dome,
rock climbing boulders, basketball court, big wheel track, and seating area with 4’ tall wrought
iron fencing with a gated entry surrounding the park for children’s safety; and a dog park for
small dogs with seating areas. The proposed amenities comply with and exceed the minimum
standards. In order for the dog park to count as a “qualified” site amenity, it needs to
comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C.1h which require a dog washing station
with drain to sanitary sewer system and trash receptacles and bags for dog waste disposal.
Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6):
The Carlson Lateral runs along the western boundary of this site and has been piped. An
irrigation ditch crosses the northeast corner of this site and if open, should be piped in
accord with UDC standards.
Northwest Gas Pipeline:
The Northwest gas pipeline runs across the southwest corner of this site witin a 75-foot wide
easement contained in Lot 15, Block 3. All development within this easement should comply
with the Williams Pipeline Developer’s Handbook.
Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7):
All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-
7. A mix of 6-foot tall solid vinyl privacy fencing and 4-foot tall black iron fence is proposed.
The developer is required to construct fencing abutting pathways and common open space
lots to distinguish common from private areas. Fences abutting all pathways and common
open space lots not entirely visible from a public street are required to be an open vision or
semi-private fence up to 6’ in height; or 4’ in height if closed vision fencing is used (an
additional 2’ of open vision fencing may be provided at the top section of the fence). In
accord with these standards, fencing adjacent to Lot 15, Block 3 should be revised; fencing
should be added on Lot 23, Block 1 and at the rear of building lots adjacent to Lot 1, Block
1 on lots adjacent to Solaris Ave. and Lyra St. and Harris St.; and the beginning and end
points of the 6’ concrete fence should be clearly delineated.
Because this site is adjacent to SH-69, the UDC requires noise abatement to be provided for
residential uses in the form of a berm or berm and wall combination a minimum of 10 feet higher
than the elevation at the centerline of the state highway parallel to the state highway per the
standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D. A 6-foot tall concrete fence on top of a 4-foot tall berm is
proposed; a detail of the berm and wall combination should be submitted with the first
phase final plat application that depicts the centerline of SH-69.
Page 18
Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21):
Connection to City water and sewer services is proposed. Street lighting is required to be installed
in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances.
See Section VIII-B below for Public Works comments/conditions.
Pressurized Irrigation System (UDC 11-3A-15):
An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided for each lot within the
development.
Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18):
An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City’s
adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best
management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18.
Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual):
Conceptual building elevations and photos were submitted for the proposed single-family
attached and detached units and the multi-family structures as shown in Section VII.F. Building
materials for the single-family homes consist of a mix of siding (horizontal and vertical lap siding
and board & batten) with stone veneer accents. Building materials for the multi-family structures
consist of horizontal and vertical siding with board and batten accents (see Exhibit F in Section
VII.)
The single-family attached and multi-family structures are required to comply with the design
standards in the Architectural Standards Manual; single-family detached structures are exempt
from this requirement.
Structures adjacent to W. Harris St. and SH-69 are proposed to all be a single-story in height
except for those on Lots 60 and 62, Block 1 which will be 2-stories in height. To avoid
monotonous wall planes, the rear of structures visible from Harris St. and SH-69 should have
varied setbacks.
C. VARIANCE
The applicant requests a Variance to UDC 11-3H-4B for access via SH-69 at the ¼ mile between
Harris St. and Amity Rd.
UDC 11-3H-4B.2 prohibits new approaches directly accessing a state highway (i.e. SH-69).
Public street connections to the state highway are only allowed at the section line road and at the
half mile mark between section line roads. However, requests for variances can be made to City
Council for the placement and/or number of access points to state highways as set forth in UDC
11-5B-4B.
The purpose of limiting access to state highways are to maintain traffic flow and provide better
circulation and safety within the community and for the traveling public; to preserve right -of-way
for future highway expansions; and to mitigate noise impacts associated with such roadways for
new residential development along state highways. The decision making body may consider and
apply modifications to these standards upon specific recommendation of the Idaho Transportation
Department, in which case a Variance is not required. If Council/Legal finds ITD has provided
such recommendation, the Variance application could be withdrawn by the Applicant and the
access request considered by Council without a Variance.
The Applicant’s request is for a full access via the state highway; however, ITD has responded
that they would only support a right-in/right-out/left-in until such time as a center median is
constructed at which time the access would be restricted to right-in/right-out only.
Page 19
In order to grant a Variance, Council must make the findings listed below; Staff is unable to make
these findings in order to recommend approval of the request (see analysis in Section IX.C).
1. The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the
district;
2. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; and
3. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare.
If Council denies the proposed Variance, the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) will need to be updated
to reflect the new trip distribution and volumes; the preliminary plat would need to be revised and
reconfigured to remove the access; and a new phasing plan would need to be submitted as the
current plan depicts the first phase with access via SH-69. Additionally, Staff recommends the
traffic signal at Harris St./SH-69 is installed with the first phase of development to protect public
safety if the access via SH-69 isn’t approved.
VI. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Annexation & Zoning and Preliminary Plat
as it complies with the mininimum UDC standards with the conditions included in
Section VIII.A per the Findings in Section IX; and denial of the proposed Variance
request per the Findings in Section IX.
Page 20
VII. EXHIBITS
A. Annexation & Zoning Legal Description and Exhibit Map
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
B. Preliminary Plat (date: 1/29/2019) & Phasing Plan
Page 24
Page 25
C. Landscape Plan (date: 1/29/2019)
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
D. Qualified Open Space Exhibit & Site Amenities NOT APPROVED
The following exhibit includes area that does not count toward “qualified” open space per the
standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3 as interpreted by Staff. Staff recommends this exhibit is
revised prior to the Commission hearing per the redlined version of the plan below (red areas
should be removed).
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
E. On-Street Parking Exhibit
Page 33
F. Conceptual Building Elevations (Single-Family Attached/Detached and Multi-Family)
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
G. Conceptual Development Plan for Off-Site Portion of MU-R Designated Area
Page 37
VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
Prior to annexation ordinance approval, the Applicant shall obtain final approval of a
property boundary adjustment in Ada County and submit a copy of the associated
recorded Record of Survey that coincides with the boundary of the preliminary plat.
Staff recommends the qualified open space exhibit in Section VII.G is revised prior to
the Commission hearing as recommended by Staff to only include areas that “qualify”
per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3 as interpreted by Staff to ensure accurate
calcuations.
1. A Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property.
Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of
Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the
developer.
Currently, a fee of $303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division
prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner
and returned to the Planning Division within six (6) months of the City Council
granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following
provisions:
a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat,
phasing plan, landscape plan and building elevations included in Section VII and the
provisions contained herein.
b. The building lots along the perimeter of the development that are adjacent to W. Harris
St. and SH-69/S. Meridian Rd., except for Lots 60 and 62, Block 1, shall be restricted to a
single-story in height as proposed by the Developer.
c. Prior to issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy within the first phase of development,
the SH-69/S. Meridian Rd. roadway improvements, 10-foot wide multi-use pathway and
street buffer landscaping shall be constructed along the full length of the project
boundary along SH-69/S. Meridian Rd.
d. Prior to issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy within the second phase of
development, the W. Harris St. roadway improvements including curb, gutter and
detached sidewalk and street buffer landscaping along the full length of the project
boundary along W. Harris St. shall be constructed; and the traffic signal at W. Harris
St./SH-69 shall be installed.
e. All single-family attached and multi-family structures shall comply with the design
standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. An application for Design Review
shall be submitted and approved for all attached dwellings prior to submittal of building
permit applications. An application for Design Review and Certificate of Zoning
Compliance shall be submitted and approved for all multi-family structures prior to
submittal of building permit applications. To avoid monotonous wall planes, the rear of
structures visible from Harris St. and SH-69 should have varied setbacks.
f. Prove a vehicular connection between this site and the planned multi-family development
to the west for interconnectivity.
g. Site amenities shall be provided within the development per those described in Section
VII.D; comparable amenities as determined by Staff may be considered as substitutions.
Page 38
h. All development within the Northwest gas pipeline easement shall comply with the
Williams Gas Pipeline Developer’s Handbook.
i. A Conditional Use Permit is required to be submitted and approved for the multi-family
development prior to application for Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design
Review.
2. The preliminary plat included in Section VII.B, shall be revised as follows:
a. Include the front lot dimension on lots in Block 1 that is missing.
b. Revise the phasing plan so that the first phase of development is adjacent to Harris
St. for access purposes because access via SH-69 is prohibited per UDC 11-3H-4B.2.
If Council approves a Varaince which would allow the access, the phasing plan does
not need to be revised.
c. Remove the access via SH-69 as access is prohibited per UDC 11-3H-4B.2, unless
otherwise approved by City Council.
d. Provide a secondary emergency access that meets Fire Department requirements (IFC
Section D104.3) and remove the access via SH-69 unless Council approves a
Variance for a public street access via SH-69.
e. Depict a vehicular connection between this site and the planned multi-family
development to the west.
3. The landscape plan included in Section VII.C shall be revised as follows:
a. Include a symbol for the 6’ concrete fence in the legend and the beginning and end
points of the fence along SH-69.
b. Include a detail of the 6-foot tall concrete fence on top of a 4-foot tall berm as
proposed along SH-69 that depicts the centerline of SH-69 that demonstrates
compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D with the first phase final plat
application.
c. Depict fencing adjacent to Lot 15, Block 3 in accord with the standards listed in UDC
11-3A-7A.7b.
d. Depict fencing on Lot 23, Block 1 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-
7A.7.
e. Depict fencing at the rear of building lots adjacent to Lot 1, Block 1 on lots adjacent
to Solaris Ave., Lyra St. and Harris St.
f. Depict landscaping along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C.
g. Depict a vehicular connection between this site and the planned multi-family
development to the west.
h. Depict landscaping along the pathway on Lot 26, Block 3 in accord with the
standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C if this lot is counted toward the qualified open
space as currently shown on the open space exhibit in Section VII.D.
i. Replace the gravel symbol and replace it with the lawn symbol within the street
buffer along SH-69 in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.3a.
Page 39
4. A 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement is required to be submitted to the Planning
Division for the multi-use pathway within the street buffer along SH-69 and within the
Northwest Pipeline corridor prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat for the phase in
which it is located; coordinate the details of the easement with Kim Warren, Park’s
Department.
5. For lots accessed by common driveways, an exhibit is required to be submitted with the final
plat application that depicts the setbacks, fencing, building envelope and orientation of the
lots and structures. Driveways for abutting properties that aren’t taking access from the
common driveway(s) should be depicted on the opposite side of the shared property line
away from the common driveway. Solid fencing adjacent to common driveways is prohibited
unless separated by a minimum 5-foot wide landscaped buffer.
6. Signage for addressing needs to be provided for homes accessed by the common driveways
on Lots 10 & 61, Block 1; Lots 23 & 29, Block 2; and Lot 28, Block 3 for emergency
wayfinding purposes.
7. A perpetual ingress/egress easement is required to be filed with the Ada County Recorder for
all common driveways, which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface
capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. A copy of the recorded easement should
be submitted to the Planning Division prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer.
8. All existing structures on the site shall be removed prior to City Engineer signature on the
final plat in which they are located.
9. Parking is restricted to only one side of the 27-foot wide street section for W. Broyhill St.; the
curb shall be painted red and signage shall be installed prohibiting parking on one side of the
street to ensure emergency access can be provided.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.1 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan
requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. A copy of the
standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272
1.2 Each phase must be modeled as developed to ensure adequate fire flow.
1.3 A water main connection to the west (proposed Graycliff Apartments) is needed, and can
be co-located within a common driveway/pathway. Coordinate design location with the
Meridian Development Analyst during construction plan review.
2 General Conditions of Approval
2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works
Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to
provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is
three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate
materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments
Standard Specifications.
2.2 Per Meridian City Code (MCC), the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and
water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a
reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5.
Page 40
2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of
public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall
be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be
dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of
Meridian’s standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for
reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public
Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,
which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2” x 11”
map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be
sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a
note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted, reviewed,
and approved prior to development plan approval.
2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-
round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any
existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not
available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a
single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of
assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval.
2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the
final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject
to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with
MCC.
2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,
intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall
be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply
with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation.
2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic
service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian
Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services.
Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by
Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190.
2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City
Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment
procedures and inspections (208)375-5211.
2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and
activated, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for
this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits.
2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all
uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc., prior to signature on the final plat.
2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to
occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a
performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on
the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B.
2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and
construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the
issuance of a plan approval letter.
Page 41
2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features
comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act.
2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404
Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office.
2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H.
2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all
building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material.
2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set
a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is
to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above.
2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or
drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation
district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have
been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be
required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project.
2.20 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record
drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be
received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any
structures within the project.
2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light
plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street
Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at
http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272.
2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the
amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water and reuse
infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost
estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an
irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for
surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please
contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211.
2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the
amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, water and reuse
infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost
estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an
irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for
surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please
contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211.
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT
http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/160245/Page1.aspx
D. POLICE DEPARTMENT
http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/160225/Page1.aspx
Page 42
E. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO (COMPASS)
http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/160222/Page1.aspx
F. BOISE PROJECT BOARD OF CONTROL
http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=160052&dbid=0
G. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT
http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=159845&dbid=0
H. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (DEQ)
http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/159880/Page1.aspx
I. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT (WASD)
http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/160498/Page1.aspx
J. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT (ACHD)
http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=161671&dbid=0
K. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT (ITD)
http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/browse.aspx?dbid=0
L. VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT (VRT)
http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/160309/Page1.aspx
IX. FINDINGS
A. Annexation and/or Rezone (UDC 11-5B-3E)
Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission, the council shall make a full
investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an
annexation and/or rezone, the council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
The Applicant is proposing to annex and develop the subject 35.67 acre property with R-15
zoning consistent with the MU-R designation. (See section V above for more information.)
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
Staff finds the proposed map amendment and development complies with the purpose
statement of the residential districts in that it will provide for a range of housing
opportunities consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare;
Staff finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety
and welfare as the proposed residential use should be compatible with adjacent existing and
future residential uses in the area.
Page 43
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
City services are available to be provided to this development. The School District has
submitted comments, included in Section VIII.I, that currently show student enrollment is
below capacity; however, the proposed development may cause area schools to be over
capacity depending on the age of school children enrolled.
5. The annexation (as applicable) is in the best interest of city.
Staff finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City.
B. Preliminary Plat (UDC 11-6B-6)
In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the
decision making body shall make the following findings: (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-
2005)
1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified
development code; (Ord. 08-1372, 7-8-2008, eff. 7-8-2008)
Staff finds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC if the Applicant
complies with the conditions of approval in Section VIII.
2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the
proposed development;
Staff finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate
to accomoate the proposed development.
3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's
capital improvement program;
Staff finds the proposed plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord
with the City’s CIP.
4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development;
Staff finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed
development.
5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and
Staff finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
general welfare.
6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-
30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005)
Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be
preserved with this development.
C. Variance (UDC 11-5B-4E)
Required Findings: In order to grant a variance, the council shall make the following findings:
Page 44
1. The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the
district;
Staff finds that granting a Variance for access via SH-69 would grant a right or special privilege
that is not otherwise allowed as the UDC (11-3H-4B) prohibits new approaches directly
accessing a state highway.
2. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; and
Staff finds there are no characteristics of the site that create a hardship for development that
granting the variance would relieve. The Applicant could construct a backage road adjacent
to SH-69 but prefers the access via SH-69.
3. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. (Ord. 05-1170,
8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005)
Staff finds that granting a Variance for access via SH-69 would likely be detrimental to the safety
and welfare of the public, especially a left-in access which would encourage traffic movements
across 2 lanes of high speed traffic and vehicles slowing down to turn left and sitting in the center
lane waiting to turn left.