Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAshtyn Park AZ ¡ of/e;¡ di~ \ ¡U,IHO STAFF SUMMARY OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL Transmittal Date: June 14, 2005 Project Name: Ashtyn Park Annexation I<.E C~ E~ IV"E 11 -'UN 1 4 2005 Case No(s): AZ-05-020 Applicant: David Price Cit;y Of Meridiall City Clerk Office P&Z Commission Hearing Date(s): June 2, 2005 Recommendation: Approve with conditions A. Summary of Public Hearing: 1. In favor: David Price (Applicant), Greg Thueson 2. In opposition: None 3. Commenting: None 4. Staff presenting application: Craig Hood 5. Other staff commenting on application: Bruce Freckleton, Mike Cole, Ted Baird B. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: 1. Vehicular access and cross access to west and south. 2. Future uses. 3. Hours of operation. 4. Existing 8" sewer line service that bisects the property. C. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: 1. The Commission recommended allowing the applicant to apply for a child care facility on this site in the future (4th bullet in Comment #3). This is the only non-office/clinic use that may be applied for on this property. 2. The recommended hours of operation were changed from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. to 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. (5th bullet in Comment #3). D. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: None. E. Conceptual Site Plan 1. Date of Conceptual Site Plans (2): March 29,2005 F. Recommended Conditions of Approval (by Commission, if applicable) See attached Exhibit "c" "-,--. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER -,. Iift-heJ\!atter of a Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.9 Acres from R4 (Ada County) to L-O (Limitect9f!ice.District), by David Price Case No(s): AZ-05-020 For the City Council Hearing Date of: June 28, 2005 A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts a. A notice of a public hearing was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the City Council public hearing, the first publication appearing and written notice mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred feet (300') of the external boundaries of the property. The notice of public hearing before the City Council was posted upon the property under consideration more than one week before said hearing. All other noticing was done consistent with Idaho Code §67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the June 28, 2005, public hearing(s). The applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian were given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. b. Written and oral testimony was received on this matter, as reflected in the records ofthe City Clerk (for written testimony) and in the official meeting minutes (for oral testimony). The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and issued a written recommendation on the subject matter to the City Council. c. d. The City Council heard and took oral and written testimony and duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code §67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code §§ 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof of Posting filed with the staff report. 3. Application and Property Facts a. In addition to the application and property facts noted in the staff report and the Planning & Zoning Recommendation for the subject application(s), it is hereby CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-O5-020- PAGE 1 of 4 verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings is the Presbytery of Boise. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibit D for the findings required for this application. B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67- 6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and Development Ordinances codified at Titles 11 and 12, Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-17-9. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public ifthe attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Conceptual Site Plans dated March 29,2005 as shown in Exhibit B, and the Annexation and Zoning Comments as shown in Exhibit C. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 12-3-5 and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Conceptual Site Plans as evidenced by having submitted the Conceptual Site Plans dated March 29,2005 are hereby conditionally approved; and, 2. The Annexation and Zoning Comments are as shown in Exhibit C. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-O5-020- PAGE 2 of 4 D. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use pennit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. E. Exhibits Exhibit A: Exhibit B: Legal Description Approved Conceptual Site Plan (2) Exhibit C: Annexation and Zoning Comments Exhibit D: Zoning Amendment Findings By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ,2005. day of COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTINE DONNELL VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED Mayor Tammy de Weerd Attest: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). AZ-O5-020- PAGE 3 of4 Copy served upon Applicant, The Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. By: City Clerk's Office Dated: CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-O5-020- PAGE 4 of 4 EXHIBIT A Ashtyn Park Annexation AZ-OS-O20 Legal Description f?lJ.&..r4. rEÞ~U>Æa6;. ,(1M; 5505 W. Franklin AOQd. Boilill, Idaho 83705"1055, Maverick Country Stores land Description for Annexation to the City of Meridian 10 November 2004 A portion of lots 3 and 4 of Block 1 of Strasser Farms Subdivision No.2, as shown on the official plat thereof on file in the office of Ule Ada County, Idaho, Recorder, and adjoining public right-oF-way, being situated in U.S" Lot 1 of Section 1, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridìan, Ada County, Idaho, and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the northeast COmer of said Section 1, which is the Real Point of Beginning: Thence SOO"17'24"W, 426.49 feet. along the easterly boundary of said Section 1 to the southerly boundary extended of said Lot 3; Thence N89"19'19"W, 45.00 Feet along the southerly boundary extended of said Lot 3 to the southeast COrner of said Lot 3; Thence continuing N89"19'19'W, 255.84 feet along the southerly boundary of said lot 3 to the extension of the westerly boundary of said Lot 4; Thence NOO"17'24"E, 200.21 feet along the extension of the westerly boundary of said Lot 4 to the southwest comer of saId Lot 4; Thence continuing NOO"17'24"E, 193.24 feet along the westerly boundary of said lot 4 to the northwest comer of saId Lot 4; Thence continuing NOO"1T24"E, 33_00 feet along the extensìon of the westerly boundary of said Lot 4 to the northerly boundary of said Section 1; Thence S89"19'43"E, 300.84 feet along the northerly boundary of said Section 1 to the Real Point of Beginning. .,J\ ,~ ,,), Comprising 2,945 acres, more or less. e~~~)r1-- ' "'eRIOWI PUBLIC WORKS DEPt :- :;:: ""'~ ;: . ::~ .. . 3C: .00-1'1' ;:!-I-i:.i/.()(} N --z ~- :: ;: 0- u- ...~ ~.. ..- ~-~ .... ~: P UÞIJ (-- ;". <:.-' <>g. """"'" ~;" .'" .",;;>-- "> <> '" .... '" ~I>,">"'~~;;~ ",~' .- I '" ~..., :~...~ " Qo.~""'~'" ... ~" U'::'g~:-t.2" ;.,. ;"8 ~"" ~ u :or ~ Š.. ~... a- åo '" .. . .. .. .., ,,;.. . .. .. ...~;; .. ;¡; :: .. ':.."... :t .. ,. ... ",::.. . ... .. ~ : '; ... "10"':;- .. ~ -.. .. "'" .. ." Q --~. ... "I: .. .."- .. .. "- :: .. 011: .. .. .. .. <It: . '9"/5;! II" ~i:"LI:õõ""}, . . 0 ""- ... .. .. , - -' .....,. .. -"-' ." ',-- '..' I;\. '" :- ~ ~ : ... - Q- -::,0:. ......:"'.;- ..::......- .. . ... I:; Q .... ...:. ,.".-",,- Q . q ~ bQE; ;,- ~..:;=..;. ... Q Q - Q .. 011:: - 'It ... ..'" Co .- .... ... Ie - . ~: 'It It! r¡'~ON !" "'.. -a ;"" -..;. ¡"... .. "" - EXHIBIT B Ashtyn Park Annexation AZ-O5-020 Conceptual Site Plan (2) 1 """".,,~-----~---- - - - - ICII.OI. ......... ..,...... -- ,.- .., ..".. ...... -... .".. ... -"","- - - """"'----""..- .,N "" .",._,,- --- _::-e::- 1--= 1_- "",,--- -- . .-..".. .-.- .,oa .. - - C ~~EME lrYl" S (l:-eÞeJ;: ç -¡,fe, :r IÚf PJ-~ " "..' r ~ ~-;- -I I Îilirlr / I i,!ihf I dlln! I ii~¡!!'1 I IflHf, fd:'dl I U£l'!¡¡ I I mn!n . .",-_. --- ---- I- E --I I 5 I I ~ I ':::1 . I ~ I I" j ~ 91 > « " I i ~ ~ I ~ W :J L.~-~"..~_""I 1----1 I ~ f6 :,; I :t: ~~l ~ .ai~f1~ I I Eii If I "---.""",._.--.1 IP7i>\YI ~~il .~ .11 L__.".._- ..-.J I r~~"~... J ~;'N"..""" . t-~:.~:j r ... .." - - - - -- - -- JJ-[J _D[ . - ~- -" "n ""-" ~ ,.U.., - == ~~,' IlJ [OJ,- "". -- -.-. LJ- ... - - - - ec~SMS " ," , , ¡ ",.' .' II, .' I-¡¡Im! ¡ I if!,lIit I I ~!I!if! Iru"í I I" "F":, hIli! ¡ L_}ii!~li~" ~I '- ;;- ---I u I ~ I ,g I I ~ I' I ~ ~ "j II ~ ~,' i~_~ ~ ,,-~,-J '=I, ;--1 I ~ ~~m .'1 I.c:i'~ !~I ~-- ,.-..",,] i~ lâo,. ..~--, I A1.l I '--",,--_..,,----1 11 C- ."""~_..l [" "'HI'."'! r=..~"~--j EXHIBIT C Ashtyn Park Annexation AZ-05-020 Annexation and Zoning Comments ANEXATION & ZONING FACTS AND COMMENTS 1. The subject property is within the Urban Services Planning Area. The legal description submitted with the application (dated ll-10-04, stamped by Joseph D. Canning) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. The Public Works Department has confinned that the submitted legal description meets the requirements of the City of Meridian and the Idaho State Tax Commission. 2. Any future subdivision and/or development of this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time. 3. Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, property owner (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 888-4433 to initiate this process. The DA shall incorporate the following: . That no alterations, expansions, reconstructions or other enlargements to the existing single-family structures will be pennitted except through a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) and except where 1) the use of the structure changes to a use consistent with this Development Agreement and 2) the structure meets all applicable development standards such as setbacks, frontage, height, etc. . That no building or other structure shall be erected, moved, added to or structurally altered, nor shall any building, structure or land be established or changed in use without a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC). . That all future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. . That the following shall be the only allowed uses on this property: professional and sales offices, personal or professional services, clinics (medical, dental and optical), and health care or social services. As the only exception to the uses specifically allowed by Resolution 04-454, the applicant may apply for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a child care facility on this property in the future. . That the hours of operation shall be limited to :¡.. 6 a.m. to ::¡. 10 p.m., unless otherwise modified through a Conditional Use Permit. . That any new structure(s) shall be generally compatible in appearance and bulk with the surrounding residential properties, as determined by the Planning Director or otherwise approved through a Conditional Use Permit. . That the applicant agrees to provide cross-access to the church parcel to the west, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) pennit for any future use. . That vehicular access to this site shall be restricted to those approved by ACHD and the City. Further restrictions may be placed on access in the future by ACHD. EXHIBIT D Ashtyn Park Annexation AZ-O5-020 Zoning Amendment Findings ANNEXATION & ZONING ANALYSIS According to Ordinance ll-l5-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, both the P &Z Commission and Council are required "to review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed zoning amendment in tenus of the following standards and shall find adequate evidence answering the following questions about the proposed zoning amendment." The following is the list of standards found in l1-l5-l1 and analysis: A. Will the new zoning be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and, if not, has there been an application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment; As noted in the summary above, the 2002 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the subject property as "Medium Density Residential" for the northern half, and "Public/Quasi-Public" for the southern half. The purpose of a medium density residential designation is to allow smaller lots for residential purposes within city limits. Uses may include single-family homes at densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre (Page 95, 2002 Comprehensive Plan). Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan defines Public, Quasi-Public and Open Space as areas designated to preserve and protect existing private, municipal, state, and federal land for area residents and visitors. Theses areas include neighborhood, community, and urban parks. Government facilities, public and private schools, health care facilities, churches, utilities, park and recreational areas, and cemeteries are also considered public/quasi-public type uses. The City recently approved Resolution No. 04-454, which amended Chapter VII, Section 1, of the Comprehensive Plan to include the following language: "At the discretion of City Council, areas with a Residential Comprehensive Plan designation may request office uses if the property has frontage on an arterial street or a section line road and is 3 acres in size or less in size. In this instance, no ancillary commercial uses shall be pennitted." City Council finds that the subject property has frontage on two arterial streets (Meridian Road and Ustick Road) and is less than 3 acres in size (2.9 acres total). Because a majority of the property is designated for residential use, but the property is only 3 -acres in size and is located on an arterial/arterial intersection, City Council believes that a residential use of the property may not be the best use of the land. City Council believes that an office zone/use on the subject property is appropriate as the request is consistent with the intent of Resolution No. 04-454. Please see the following facts and circumstances and the Special Considerations below for further analysis of the proposed zoning designation and anticipated office uses. City Council finds the following Goals, Objectives, and Action items contained in the 2002 Comprehensive Plan to be applicable to this application (Analysis is in italics below policy): . "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 2) On the submitted conceptual plans, the applicant is proposing a single access to Meridian Road, approximately 150-feet south of Us tick Road. ACHD has approved one access to the site as proposed. See Finding "J" and Special Consideration #1 for further analysis. . "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridors (setback, vegetation, low walls, benDs, etc.)." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 4) Meridian Road and Ustick Road are designated arterial streets. By City Ordinance, a 25-foot wide landscape buffer is required adjacent to Meridian Road and UstickRoad (MCC 12-13-10-4). Landscape buffers along Meridian Road and Ustick Road will be required by the City with CZC/Subdivision approval. . "Require all commercial businesses to install and maintain landscaping." (Chapter V, Goal III, Objective D, Action item 5) The applicant is not specifically proposing to install any landscaping with the subject annexation application. In order to construct buildings on this site the applicant will be required to construct internal and perimeter landscaping. . "Pennit new. . . commercial development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City." (Chapter IV, Goal I, Obj. A, #6) This parcel is contiguous to the city via Settlers Park to the north. Sanitary sewer and water are available to this parcel. . "Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area." (Chapter VII, Goal 1, Objective B) City Council believes that the proposed zone, which allows office uses, does contribute to the variety of uses in this area. E. City Council finds that the new zoning to L-O should be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended by Resolution No. 04-454. B. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the future; Concurrent with the annexation and zoning application, the applicant has submitted two conceptual site plans. These site plans depict six office buildings on this property. City Council does not anticipate that the applicant plans to rezone the subject property in the future if the subject annexation/zoning is approved, as the anticipated office/clinic uses may be allowed in the requested L- 0 zone. Please see Finding "C". c. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be developed in the fashion that would be allowed under the new zoning -for example, a residential area turning into a commercial area by means of conditional use permits; City Council finds that professional offices, laboratories, libraries and medical clinics would be pennitted uses within the requested L-O zone. As mentioned above, however, there is no detailed development plan proposed at this time. There are several uses in the requested L-O zone that can occur with conditional use permit approval. City Council is concerned that this area may turn into a commercial retail site, and is limiting the uses that can operate on the site. D. Has there been a change in the area or adjacent areas which may dictate that the area should be rezoned. For example, have the streets been widened, new railroad access been developed or planned or adjacent area being developed in a fashion similar to the proposed rezone area; City Council finds that the recent annexation and zoning of Sundance Subdivision, Cedar Springs Subdivision, Salisbury Subdivision, and the recent construction of Settlers Park directly north of this site, dictates that the subject property be similarly zoned and developed. The streets adjacent to this site have not been widened recently, and neither Ustick Road nor Meridian Road roadway improvements abutting this site are in the current ACHD Five-Year Work Program. Will the proposed uses be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area; The applicant will be required to construct, operate and maintain the future buildings in accordance with City Code. Although this area was intended for residential and public/quasi-public uses when the 2002 Comprehensive Plan was adopted, City Council finds that an office zone also complies with what is intended for this intersection, as Resolution No. 04-454 allows the City Council to consider office uses in this location. City Council finds that the design of the submitted conceptual layouts for office buildings could be hannonious with the adjacent properties if cross-access is provided to the parcel to the west (church). City Council further finds that the proposed office zone/use will change the existing character of the area, but that the proposed zone and future use(s) should be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the character of the overall area. City Council finds that any future uses, if designed, constructed and operated in accordance with adopted city ordinances, should be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the intended character ofthe vicinity. F. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; Commercial (office) vehicular access to this site could cause a potential disturbancelhazard to existing and/or future uses. The 2002 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the properties to the north and west as public/quasi-public, and to the south and east as medium density uses. The Commission and Council should rely on public testimony to detennine whether the proposed L-O zoning will be disturbing or hazardous to the neighboring uses. City Council finds that the use of this site for professional office/clinic type uses should not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses if the applicant enters into a development agreement with the City and all development and landscaping ordinances are exercised. The Commission and Council should rely on public testimony to detennine whether or not the potential disturbance of allowing a commercial access int%ut ofthis site will substantially affect the existing or future neighboring uses. G. Will the area be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and tIre protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed zoning amendment shall be able to provide adequately any of such services; Sanitary sewer is available in Meridian road, and water is available in Meridian Road and Ustick Road. The eight inch line through this property is a private service and is not eligible for additional hookups at this time. Any other agreement for its use is subject to Public Works Department approval. The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay any applicable park and highway impact fees as well as construct on-site stonn water drainage facilities. On May 13, 2005, a joint agency/department comments meeting was held with representatives of key service providers to this property. Based on the joint agency/department meeting and other comments received fÌom agencies/departments, City Council finds that the public services listed above can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. The Commission and Council should reference any written and/or verbal testimony submitted by any public service provider, regarding their ability to adequately service this proj ect. H. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; If approved, the developer will be financing the extension of sewer, water, local street (driveway) infrastructure, utilities and irrigation services to serve the project. Other required site improvements will be funded and constructed by the developer through the CZC/Subdivision approval process. The primary public costs to serve the future uses will be fire and police facilities and services. City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed zoning and subsequent development will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. I. Will the proposed uses not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; If the subject annexation and zoning application is approved, the applicant intends to construct six office buildings on this site. City Council finds that any future uses on this site will generate additional traffic on adjacent roadways above and beyond the existing residences. The level of impact will depend upon the type of future use(s) and the square footage ofthe buildings. City Council recognizes that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of this development; however, do to the smaller size of the site City Council does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. The purpose ofthe L-O zone is to "pennit the establishment of groupings of professional, research, executive, administrative, accounting, clerical, stenographic, public service and similar uses.. . shall not involve heavy testing operations of any kind or product manufacturing of such a nature to create noise, vibration or emissions of a nature offensive to the overall purpose of this District." (MCC 11- 7-2.G) As such, City Council does not anticipate future uses will create smoke, fumes, glare, or odors that will be detrimental to the general welfare of persons or property in the area. City Council does not anticipate the proposed annexation and subsequent use( s) will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. City Council finds that the proposed office zoning/use should not be detrimental to people, property or the general welfare of the area. MCC ll-16-4 provides the P&Z Commission and City Council the authority to require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Meridian that may require some written commitment for all future uses to more fully comply with this finding. Due to the close proximity of existing and future residential uses, City Council believes that a Development Agreement is necessary to ensure that the purpose of the L-O zone is maintained. J. Will the area have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; This parcel has a limited amount of frontage on both Meridian Road and U stick Road. Therefore, any driveway to the site is going to be close to the intersection. The applicant is conceptually proposing a driveway approach to Meridian Road that aligns with Eastbrook Court to the east. ACHD consider access points in their analysis of development applications and has approved this vehicular approach. City Council believes that this is the best location for an access, but it may be restricted to right-inlright-out movements in the future if safety does become an issue. To help future traffic flows in this area, City Council believes that cross access between the subject property and the church property to the west should be provided. If cross access is provided then patrons of the church can access Meridian Road without going through the UstickiMeridian intersection and the proposed office development can access Ustick Road. City Council believes that the proposed uses (and access) should not be hazardous to neighboring uses or traffic flows. Further, City Council finds that the least amount of interference to traffic on the surrounding public streets will occur if cross access between the subject property and the property to the west (church) is provided. The Commission and Council should rely on public testimony, ACHD staff, and City staffs analysis when detennining whether or not a vehicular approach to Meridian Road, will create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance; and City Council is unaware of any natural of scenic features of major importance on this site and finds that no natural or scenic features of major importance will be lost or damaged by approving the annexation and zoning application. Any existing trees identified by the City Arborist as being required for mitigation that are removed shall be mitigated for, per the Landscape Ordinance. L. Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of Meridian. (Ord. 592,11-17-1992)" The legal description submitted with the application, prepared by B & A Engineers, Inc., shows that the property is contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. The land directly north, and northeast of the subject property have previously been annexed into the City and this is a logical expansion of the City boundary. The applicant is proposing to develop the land in substantial compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. In accordance with the findings listed above, City Council finds that the annexation/zoning of this property would be in the best interest of the City. NOTE: City Council has included Development Agreement stipulations for annexation and zoning ofthis property.