PZ - Staff Report Updated 4-29-20191
Charlene Way
From:Bill Parsons
Sent:Monday, April 29, 2019 7:01 AM
To:Bill Nary; Ted Baird; Laren Bailey (laren@congergroup.com); Chris Johnson; Charlene
Way; Andrea Pogue; Jim Conger
Subject:Updated Staff Report R-15 Dimensional Standards UDC Text Amendment for 05/02/19
P/Z MTG
Attachments:R-15 Dimensional Standards Text Amendment.pdf
Attached is the updated staff report for the proposed R-15 Dimensional Standards UDC Text Amendment H-2018-0035.
This item is scheduled to be on the Commission agenda on May 2, 2019. The public hearing will be held at City Hall, 33 E.
Broadway Avenue, beginning at 6:00 pm. Please call or e-mail with any questions.
Jim or Laren - Please submit any written response you may have to the staff report to the City Clerk’s office
(cityclerk@meridiancity.org ) and me as soon as possible.
Bill Parsons, AICP | Planning Supervisor
City of Meridian | Community Development Dept.
33 E. Broadway Ave., Ste. 102, Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: 208-884-5533 | Fax: 208-489-0571
Built for Business, Designed for Living
All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law,
in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law.
Page 1
STAFF REPORT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: May, 2, 2019; continued from November
15, 2018
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM: Bill Parsons, Planning Supervisor
208-884-5533
SUBJECT: H-2018-0059
Residential District Naming Convention
and R-15 Dimensional Standards Text
Amendment
PROPERTY LOCATION:
City wide
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
NOTE: This project was continued so the applicant’s request could be reviewed by members of
the UDC Focus Group. Staff distributed these changes along with one’s the City is processing
with the subsequent City initiated UDC text amendment application. Staff hasn’t receive any
feedback on the proposed changes to the R-15 zoning district from the UDC Focus Group
participants.
During the November 15, 2018 Commission hearing, the Commission did acknowledge the
applicant’s request to withdraw the Residential Naming Convention portion of the text
amendment. Staff has updated to the staff report in a strike-through and underline format for
the Commission’s consideration on the R-15 dimensional standards only.
Request for a text amendment to change the naming convention of the Residential Districts of R-2, R-
4, R-8, R-15 and R-40 to R-A, R-B, R-C, R-D and R-E, modify other related sections in Chapters 1-3
of the Unified Development Code (UDC) to coincide with the proposed naming convention AND
modify the dimensional standards of the R-15 district for the purpose of specifying certain setbacks
along private streets, common driveways, interior side yards and the perimeter of a development with
private streets.
II. APPLICANT INFORMATION
A. Applicant/Representative: DevCo Development LLC [Phone: (208) 336-5355]
III. NOTICING
A. Newspaper notification published on: April 19, 2019
B. PSA distributed: April 16, 2019
Page 2
C. Next door posting: April 16, 2019
IV. STAFF ANALYSIS
The applicant requests approval to modify the several sections of the UDC as follows:
1. Proposing to change the map symbol of the R-2, R-4, R-8, R-15 and R-40 zones to R-A, R-B, R-C,
R-D, and R-E zones. Because the request impacts other sections of the UDC, additional modifications
are necessary to coincide with the proposed change.
2. Modify the dimensional standards of the R-15 zone (proposed as R-D with the first request) for the
purpose of specifying certain setbacks along private streets, common driveways, interior side yards
and the perimeter of a development with private streets.
The first modification is being requested because the applicant contends the current numerical notation
confuses the public which believe it still correlates the number to a maximum density of a particular
residential zone. A previous UDC text amendment, approved by City Council, removed the maximum
density requirements from Chapter 2 of the UDC. The purpose of the residential districts is to provide a
range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The residential districts
are distinguished by the dimensional standards of the corresponding zone and the housing types that can
be accommodated. The Comprehensive Plan is the guiding document that specifies the density
requirements for a property.
For the last several years, City staff has contemplated renaming the residential map symbol to be more
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan FLUM designations. Staff was hoping to have this discussion
with the UDC Focus group for additional input and guidance but the applicant didn’t want to wait on the
City timeframes for implementing the change.
Staff is not supportive of the requested changes to the naming of the districts as proposed by the
applicant. Staff is of the opinion that the residential district should be retitled to align more closely
with the nomenclature of the zoning district and the Comprehensive Plan as follows:
Low density residential - R-LD
Medium low density residential - R-MLD
Medium density residential - R-MD
Medium high density residential - R-MHD
High density residential - R-HD
This naming convention would also be more consistent with the other zoning designations in the
UDC; for example Light Industrial District (I-L). If the request is approved, the County Assessor
office would be responsible for changing the zoning symbol for over 39,000 parcels that are
currently zoned R-2 through R-40 districts. The City has not contacted any of the affected property
owners to inform them of the potential for the name change. Further, the City has embarked on the
Comprehensive Plan update which complicates the timing for the requested change. Typically, code
updates should occur after the adoption of a new Comprehensive Plan to ensure alignment between
the two (2) documents. Commission should determine if it is the best interest of the City to modify
the residential district symbols before the adoption of the new Plan and soliciting further input
from Meridian residents.
The second request is to add or change the setbacks of the R-15 zone when a property takes access from a
private street or common driveway. The applicant believes the changes are necessary to allow for
increased flexibility in the housing types to meet market demand. The City has approved several
developments for the applicant (East Ridge Estates and Movado Village) in which there have been issues
with the complying with the current setbacks of the R-15 setbacks, specifically the 12-foot rear yard. With
Page 3
these development approvals, a central common open space and clubhouse are to serve as the primary
open space and amenities for these communities.
In order to provide some livability to the home on lots were no rear yards may exist, the applicant is
proposing that the home provide a minimum of a 120 square foot patio as part of the requested
modifications. To support the requested dimensional changes, the applicant has provided exhibits.
Staff supports some of the dimensional standard changes that the applicant is proposing, except for
the proposal for the 1.5’ setback for the structure from the common driveway. Staff believes the
applicant should apply a consistent setback of 3’ to allow for adequate separation of the structure
and the common driveway. Additionally, the applicant is proposing zero setbacks but doesn’t
indicate whether a zero lot line means an attached structure. Historically, when zero lot lines are
depicted on a plat, staff has required the applicant to construct attached homes. Therefore, staff
recommends that a footnote be added to the UDC table requiring attached homes to be constructed
when a zero lot line is depicted.
Further, staff has concerns with how drainage will function on these lots. Currently, the City
doesn’t have an adequate grading and drainage ordinance and there has been an increase in the
number of citizen complaints on these issues.
NOTE: If the proposed setbacks are approved, this will take additional staff time to review plans
for conformance of these setbacks with the proposed standards. The applicant was given the option
of proceeding forward through the PUD process to request the desired setbacks without amending
the dimensional standards of the UDC.
Per the Comprehensive Plan, City staff is responsible for ensuring diverse housing in the community and
keeping the UDC current with local trends. Below are a few policies that support the applicant’s request.
Amend the Unified Development Code and Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to ensure
a wide variety of housing types can be developed and properly zoned and land is available
(3.07.01A)
Keep current the Unified Development Code and Future Land Use Map to implement the
provisions of this plan (7.01.01A)
In general, staff is supportive of the overall proposed changes. In the Exhibit Section below, Staff
has inserted the applicant’s requested modifications and associated support documents. Because
staff is recommending modifications to the applicant’s request, staff has provided a strike-through
and underline version of staff’s recommended changes and included additional changes that were
inadvertently missed with the applicant’s request.
Written Testimony: As of the print date of the staff report, the City has received multiple responses from
the public not supporting the proposed changes. Please refer to the public record for the specific
comments on the subject application.
V. DECISION
Staff recommends approval of the proposed text amendment to the UDC based on the analysis
provided in Section IV, modifications in Section VI and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
listed in Section VII.
Page 4
VI. EXHIBITS
A. Applicant’s Proposed UDC Text Amendment Changes
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
B. Staff’s Recommended UDC Text Changes
11-1A-1 Definition of Terms
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: For the purposes of this title, the term residential district shall include the
Low-Density Residential District (R-ALD)(R-2), Medium Low-Density Residential District(R-BMLD)
(R-4), Medium-Density Residential District (R-CMD) (R-8), Medium High-Density Residential
District(R-DMHD) (R-15), High-Density Residential District(R-EHD) (R-40), and Traditional
Neighborhood Residential District (TN-R).
11-2-1: ZONING DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED:
For the purpose of this title, the incorporated territory of the city of Meridian, Idaho, is divided into the
following districts:
Districts Map Symbol
Residential
Low-density residential district R-2 R-ALD
Medium low-density residential district R-4 R-BMLD
Medium-density residential district R-8 R-CMD
Medium high-density residential district R-15 R-DMHD
High-density residential district R-40 R-EHD
Commercial
Neighborhood business district C-N
Community business district C-C
General retail and service commercial district C-G
Limited office district L-O
Mixed employment M-E
High density employment H-E
Industrial
Light industrial district I-L
Heavy industrial district I-H
Traditional neighborhood
Old Town O-T
Traditional neighborhood center TN-C
Traditional neighborhood residential TN-R
TABLE 11-2A-2
ALLOWED USES IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
Use R-ALD
R-2
R-BMLD
R-4
R-CMD
R-8
R-DMHD
R-15
R-EHD
R-40
Arts, entertainment or recreation facility, outdoors1 - - C C C
Page 8
Cemetery1 - C C C C
Church or place of religious worship1 - - C C C
Civic, social or fraternal organizations1 - - C C C
Daycare center1 - C C P P
Daycare, family1 - A A A C
Daycare, group1 - - C P P
Direct sales3 A A A A A
Dwelling, secondary1 A A A A A
Dwelling, single-family attached - C P P P
Dwelling, single-family detached P P P P A/C
Dwelling, townhouse - C P P C
Dwelling, two-family duplex - C P P C
Education institution, private1 - C C C C
Education institution, public1 - C C P/C P/C
Home, manufactured or mobile subdivision - - C C C
Home occupation, accessory use1 A A A A A
Laundromat1 - - - A A/C
Manufactured home park - - - C -
Multi-family development1,2 - - - C C
Nursing or residential care facility1 - - C C C
Parking facility - - - - C
Parks, public and private P P P P P
Personal service - - - - A
Professional service - - - - A
Public, infrastructure C C C C C
Public or quasi-public use1 - - C C C
Public utility, minor P P P P P
Recreational vehicle park - - - - C
Restaurant - - - - A
Page 9
Storage facility, outside1 A A A A A
Storage facility, self-service1 A A A A A
Vertically integrated residential project1 - - - C C
Wireless communication facility1 P/C P/C P/C P/C P/C
Wireless communication facility, amateur radio antenna1 A/C A/C A/C A/C A/C
Notes:
1. Indicates uses that are subject to specific use standards in accord with chapter 4 of this title.
2. Multi-family dwellings may be allowed in the R-BMLD R-4 and R-CMD R-8 Land Use Districts when included
in a planned unit development (PUD).
3. Subject to the home occupation, accessory use standards set forth in section 11-4-3-21 of this title
11-2A-3F
F. Living Space: Excluding the garage, all detached residential dwelling units in the R-2LD and R-4MLD
districts shall meet minimum living space size requirements in accord with sections 11-2A-4 and 11-2A-5
of this article.
11-2A-4: LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (R-2LD):
Dimensional standards for development in the R-2LD residential district shall be as follows:
TABLE 11-2A-4
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE R-2LD DISTRICT
R-2LD Standard Requirement
Minimum property size/dwelling unit (in square feet) 12,000
Minimum street frontage (in feet) 80
Rear setback (in feet) 15
Interior side setback (in feet) 7.5/story
Street setback1 (in feet):
Local 20
Collector 25
Street landscape buffer2 (in feet):
Collector 20
Arterial 25
Page 10
Entryway corridor 35
Interstate 50
Maximum building height (in feet) 35
Minimum living area (in square feet) 1,500
Minimum ground floor area for multi-story units (in square feet) 800
11-2A-5: MEDIUM LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (R-4MLD):
Dimensional standards for development in the R-4MLD residential district shall be as follows:
TABLE 11-2A-5
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE R-4MLD DISTRICT
R-4MLD Standard Requirement
Minimum property size/dwelling unit (in square feet) 8,000
Minimum street frontage (in feet) 60
Rear setback (in feet) 15
Interior side setback (in feet) 5
Street setback1 to front loaded garage (in feet):
Local 20
Collector 25
Street setback1 to living area and/or side loaded garage (in feet):
Local 15
Collector 25
Street landscape buffer2 (in feet):
Page 11
Collector 20
Arterial 25
Entryway corridor 35
Interstate 50
Maximum building height (in feet) 35
Minimum living area (in square feet):
Detached 1,400
Attached 800
Minimum ground floor area for multi-story units (in square feet) 800
11-2A-6: MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (R-8MD):
Dimensional standards for development in the R-8MD residential district shall be as follows:
TABLE 11-2A-6
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE R-8MD DISTRICT
R-8MD Standard Requirement
Minimum property size/dwelling unit (in square feet) 4,000
Minimum street frontage (in feet): 40
With alley loaded garage, side entry garage, or private mew lots 32
Street setback1 to garage (in feet):
Local 20
Collector 25
Page 12
Alley 5
Street setback1 to living area (in feet):
Local 10
Collector 25
Alley 5
Interior side setback (in feet) 5
Rear setback (in feet) 12
Street landscape buffer2 (in feet):
Collector 20
Arterial 25
Entryway corridor 35
Interstate 50
Maximum building height (in feet) 35
11-2A-7: MEDIUM HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (R-15MHD):
Dimensional standards for development in the R-15MHD residential district shall be as follows:
TABLE 11-2A-7
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE R- R-15MHD DISTRICT
R-15MHD Standard Requirement
Minimum property size/dwelling unit (in square feet) 2,000
Minimum street frontage (in feet) 0
Street setback1 to garage (in feet):
Local 20
Page 13
Collector 25
Alley 5
Private Street 20
Common Driveway1 20
Street setback1 to living area (in feet):
Local 10
Collector 20
Alley 5
Private Street 10
Common Driveway1,5 1.5’- 3’
Interior side setback (in feet)3,4,5 0 or 3’
Public Street Rear setback (in feet) 12
Private Street Setback (in feet):
Rear setback3,4,5 0 or 3’
Exterior boundary of entire development 12’
Street landscape buffer2 (in feet):
Collector 20
Arterial 25
Entryway corridor 35
Interstate 50
Maximum building height (in feet) 40
Notes:
1. Measured from back of sidewalk, back of common driveway or property line where there is no adjacent sidewalk.
2. A reduction to the width of the buffer may be requested as set forth in subsection 11-3B-7C1c of this title.
3. A public utility, irrigation and drainage easement shall be 3’ wide adjacent to interior lot lines except where
occupied by an attached zero lot line structure.
4. A minimum of one hundred and twenty (120) square feet of private, usable open space shall be provided for each
unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches, patios, decks, and/or enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway
and other accessways shall not count toward this requirement. In circumstances where strict adherence to such
standard would create inconsistency with the purpose state ments of this section, the Director may consider an
alternative design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions as set forth in section 11 -5B-5 of this title.
5. Up to 50% of the building face adjacent to a common driveway may be 1.5’from the edge of pavement.
5. Any property line with a zero lot line depicted shall attach the units.
11-2A-8: HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (R-40HD):
Page 14
Dimensional standards for development in the R-40HD residential district shall be as follows:
TABLE 11-2A-8
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE R-40HD DISTRICT
R-40HD Standard Requirement
Minimum property size/dwelling unit (in square feet) 1,000
Minimum street frontage (in feet) 0
Rear setback (in feet) 12
Interior side setback (in feet) 3
Street setback to garage (in feet):
Local 20
Collector 25
Alley 5
Street setback1 to living area (in feet):
Local 10
Collector 20
Alley 5
Street landscape buffer2 (in feet):
Collector 20
Arterial 25
Entryway corridor 35
Page 15
Interstate 50
Maximum building height (in feet) 60
11-3A-7: FENCES:
C. Additional standards in the R-ALDR-2, R-BMLDR-4, R-CMDR-8, R-DMHDR-15, R-EHDR-40, L-O,
O-T, TN-C, and TN-R districts:
11-3D-5: SUBDIVISION IDENTIFICATION SIGNS
B. Signs In Residential Districts: In addition to the general standards for subdivision identification signs
set forth in this section, the following standards shall apply to subdivision identification signs in
residential districts (R-ALDR-2, R-BMLDR-4, R-CMDR-8, R-DMHDR-15, R-EHDR-40, and TN-R):
11-3D-6: MARKETING SIGNS:
B. Signs In Residential Districts For Three Or Less Dwelling Units: In addition to the general standards
for marketing signs set forth in this section, the following standards shall apply to marketing signs for
three (3) or less dwelling units per property in residential districts (R-ALDR-2, R-BMLDR-4, R-CMDR-
8, R-DMHDR-15, R-EHDR-40, and TN-R):
C. Signs In Residential Districts For Multi-Family Developments: In addition to the general standards for
marketing signs set forth in this section, the following standards shall apply to marketing signs for multi-
family developments and allowed nonresidential uses in residential districts (R-ALDR-2, R-BMLDR-4,
R-CMDR-8, R-DMHDR-15, R-EHDR-40, and TN-R):
11-3D-7: CONSTRUCTION SIGNS:
B. Construction Signs In Residential Districts: In addition to the general standards for construction signs
set forth in this section, the following standards shall apply to construction signs in residential districts
(R-ALDR-2, R-BMLDR-4, R-CMDR-8, R-DMHDR-15, R-EHDR-40, and TN-R):
11-3D-8B and 11-3D-8C
B. Business Signs In Residential Districts: In addition to the general standards for business identification
signs set forth in this section, the following standards shall apply to business identification signs for
residential districts (R-2LD, R-4MLD, R-8MD, R-15MHD, R-40HD, and TN-R):
1. In addition to the general standards for business identification signs set forth in this section, the
following standards shall apply to business identification signs for residential districts for dwelling and
accessory uses (R-2LD, R-4MLD, R-8MD, R-15MHD, R-40HD, and TN-R):
C. Business Signs For Multi-Family Developments And Allowed Nonresidential Uses: In addition to the
general standards for business identification signs set forth in this section, the following standards shall
apply to business identification signs for multi-family developments and allowed nonresidential uses (R-
2LD, R-4MLD, R-8MD, R-15MHD, R-40HD, and TN-R), excluding accessory uses:
Page 16
VII. FINDINGS
1. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS: (UDC 11-5B-3E)
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 a text amendment
to the Unified Development Code, the Council shall make the following findings:
A. The text amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
Staff finds that the proposed UDC text amendment complies with the applicable provisions of
the Comprehensive Plan if the changes to the text of the UDC are approved with staff’s
recommendations in Section VI above. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals,
Section IV, of the Staff Report for more information.
B. The text amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare; and
Staff finds that the proposed zoning ordinance amendment will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety or welfare if the changes to the text of the UDC are approved with staff’s
recommendations in Section VI above. It is the intent of the text amendments to further the
health, safety and welfare of the public.
C. The text 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.
Staff finds that the proposed zoning ordinance amendment does not propose any
significant changes to how public utilities and services are provided to
developments. All City departments, public agencies and service providers that
currently review applications will continue to do so. Please refer to any written or
oral testimony provided by any public service provider(s) when making this finding.