HomeMy WebLinkAboutBanff Subdivision CUP
--,--,-""\'-'-'-, -;I-'\~:I ';".-~--- ,--,..-:
, '"
",,-, -",,--"-- .."" '-' ,,--" "-'",,,
----'~"
CITY OF MERIDIAN
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF
LA WAND
--------~-~---------,-J)ECISION & ORDER
--~~~~- -
L~." I'~? ){:,~;,
~lf¡,~' '\:!;:~5;,~'~~:
~g ¿"lilY,..' ~*:¡ (ê'T!:,.'j,,-,-,-,.-=
\..../YltJrldián" '~; '. .~~
~-
1.
//
-"..,/
U.\.IIU
\~~,
""-9,:~.>!,".,!",,:X""_"'}_:~' y,:,-}j,~,-""
- ,,-
In the Matter of Banff Subdivision;-arequest for Annexation and Zoning of 3.02 acres with
an R-8 zoning; Appeal of a Planning Commission denial for Preliminary Plat of Sixteen
Single Family Residential Lots and Seven Other Lots; and Conditional Use Permit request
(Qx.--A-Pláñ.ned Development for reduced lot sizes, setbacks, reduced building square footage
~::-ãnd lot frontage requirements, by Conger Management Group, Landworks LLc.
-~
Case No(s). CUP-05-032, AZ-02-033, AP-05-003
For the City Council Hearing Date of: November 22, 2005
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report)
2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report)
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report)
4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (see attached Staff Report)
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 City of Meridian 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. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction.
4. That the City has granted an order of denial in accordance with this Decision, which
shall be signed by the Chainnan of the Planning Commission 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.
5. That this denial is subject to the Preliminary Plat dated September 16,2005 in the
attached Staff Report.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S), CUP-O5-032, AZ-O2-033, AP-O5-003- PAGE 1 of2
C. Decision and Order
Pursuant to the Planning Commission authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 12-3-3
and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is
hereby ordered that:
1. The applicant's appeal of the Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the
Preliminary Plat dated September 15, 2005 is hereby denied.
D.
Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis
1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may
request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed
with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision
concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the
time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed.
2. 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.
Exhibit A:
Staff Report
By action ofthe City of Meridian Council at its regular meeting held on the
,2005.
day of
Attest:
William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk
Copy served upon Applicant, The Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department
and City Attorney.
By:
City Clerk's Office
Dated:
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDfNGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S), CUP-O5-032, AZ-O2-033, AP-O5-003- PAGE 2 of 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
STAFF REPORT
P & Z Commission Hearing Dates:
August 4, 2005
Continued to August 18, 2005
--- - Continued to October 6, 2005
--~~- City Council Hearing Date:
November 22, 2005
------------------- -
Meridian Cìty'Ç..Q~cil
Joe Guenther, Ass'OOiak..Ç~ty Planner
Banff Subdivision -"----"-
-'~\~"
,,~~"" .., II<
elf/;; d /;;, ~
"
...
1:).\1'1(\ Ii
;., ¡/
v (, ,.""",1/
'. ""'~'~~!_"-'!'" J'",->:c""". ,~.."~!:~',,,-
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
. AP ~05-003
~ ~~ .~ Appeal of File #PP-OS-Q32 for 21 Single fanrily residential!ots and 7
- ~ common lots on 2.91 acres
"-~-<::_----------~---~-'-~-õ_- *Amended to 18 Single family residential lots and 7 other lots August 4, 2005
~.:...---~ *Amended to 16 Single Family residential lots and 5 other lots Sept 16, 2005
----:::------::~,,--
. AZ-05-"ü3T
Annexation of 3.02 acres with proposed R-8 zoning
. CUP-05-032
A Planned Development for reduced lot sizes, setbacks, reduced building
square footage and lot frontage requirements in an R-8 zone
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, Landworks, LLC, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) and Preliminary Plat (PP)
approval of 21 building lots and 7 common/otherlots on 2.91 acres, *Amended to 16 Single family
residential lots and 5 common lots, dated September 16, 2005. The site is located on the west side of
Linder Road approximately one-half of a mile south of Franklin Road. This site is cuITently residential
with two outbuildings and one single family residential building. The site has not been previously
platted.
On August 4, 2005 the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on the
matter of Banff Subdivision and tabled the time until August 18,2005 at the applicant's request.
On August 18, 2005 the Planning Commission held the public hearing. Several concerns were
addressed and the applicant requested continuance to redraw the site in an attempt to appease the
Commission's concerns. On September 18, 2005, the Planning Department received a revised
Preliminary Plat dated September 16, 2005. This staff report is based on the revised plat
submitted by the applicant for the continued hearing of October 6, 2005.
2. SUMMARY RECOMl\1ENDATION
The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area. Staff has provided a detailed
analysis of the subject applications (AZ CUP, and PP) that were submitted concuITently to the
Planning Department for review. Staff and the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission have
recommended denial for the requested annexation/zoning and conditional use applications below.
On October 6. 2005 the Meridian Plarulin£ and Zonin£ Commission denied the plat for file #PP~
05-032 for 16 sin!!le-familv residential lots and 5 other lots. On October 26. 2005 the applicant
BANFF SUBDIVISION
CUP-05-032/ AP-O5-003/AZ-O5-033
PAGE 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
appealed the decision of the Meridian PlanninQ: and ZoninQ: Commission to the Meridian Citv
Council for reconsideration of the preliminary plat dated September 16. 2005. The subject
application is reviewed in this document and staff has recommended denial of the applicants
request for reconsideration consistent with the Meridian Planning Commission's actions.
Staff and the Meridian Planning Commission are recommending denial of the proposals dated September
16, 2005 for Banff Subdivision submitted as AZ-05-033, CUP-05-032, and staff has recommended
upholding the Planning Commission's Denial of the plat with the appeal file AP-05,,003 as outlined in
this report.
a. Summary of Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Dave McKinnon, Scott Beecham -Conger Management
ii. In opposition: JelT)' Hiatt, 755 South Linder
iii. Commenting: None
iv. Staff presenting application: Joe Guenther, Associate Planner
v. Other staff commenting on application: Bill Nary, City Attorney; Ted Baird,
Assistant City Attorney, Mike Cole, Development Services
b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission:
i. High density of the site in relation to surTOunding properties;
ii. Size of the lots in relation to surrounding properties;
iii. Linder Road access and future development along Linder Road prior to the
overpass being constructed;
iv. Lack of Fire protection south ofthe Ten-Mile Creek;
v. The fact that the project is not an infill development;
vi. The submission of a planned development for a very small site;
vii. Future problems for annexation and development of adjacent properties;
viii. Lack of public road access to the parcel north of the site.
c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation:
i. The Commission added to Staff recommendation the fmding that the project is
premature for development in the general vicinity, until such a time as the Linder
Road overpass is operational and the nearby undersized parcels have a
development plan.
d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council:
i. None.
3. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
a. Site Address/Location:
675 South Linder
NE ~ ofSE 'l:í 3NIWl4
b. Owner:
Mel Lacy
675 South Linder
Meridian, Idaho 83642
c. Applicant:
Conger Management Group
Landworks, LLC
405 S. 8th Street STE 290
Boise, Idaho, 83642
d. Representative:
e. Present Zoning:
Dave McKinnon, Conger Management Group
COUNTY R-I
BANFF SUBDIVISION
CUP-05-032/ AP-05-003/ AZ~O5-033
PAGE 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation:
Medium Density Residential
g. Description of Applicant's Request:
1. Date of preliminary plat (attached as Exhibit AI): August 4, 2005
Date of REVISED preliminary Plat (Attached as exhibit A1.1): September 16,2005
2. Date of CUP site plan (attached as Exhibit A2): June 14, 2005
3. Date oflandscape plan (attached as Exhibit A3): June 14,2005
h. Applicant's Statement/Justification:
Dave McKinnon, Conger Management Group has submitted a statement of purpose with the
application, dated June 13,2005. The applicant has made amendments to the site plan due to
Meridian City Staff concerns and has addressed the north/south stub street, lot sizes, and
shared accesses in response to City of Meridian staff, ACHD staff, and neighbors concerns
with the submittals dated August 4,2005.
From the applicants request for continuance: The amended site drawing includes another
design for the north/south stub street, the lot sizes have increased to a minimum of 4,053
square feet, reduced the common lot/amenity lot square footage and the original home site but
added one more open space lot at the western end of Block 2.
4. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application will in fact constitute an annexation as determined by City Ordinance.
By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 16, a public hearing is
required before the City Council on this matter.
b. The subject application will in fact constitute a preliminary plat as determined by City
Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 12 Chapter 3, a public
hearing is required before the City Council on this matter.
c. The subject application will in fact constitute a planned development as detennined by City
Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 12 Chapter 6, a public
hearing is required before the City Council on this matter.
d. Newspaper notifications published on:
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Published July 18. 2005, August 1, 2005
City Council Meeting Published on October 10, 2005 and October 24, 2005
e. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on:
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Published on July 8, 2005
City Council Meeting Published on October 7, 2005
f. Applicant posted notice on site by:
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Posted July 26, 2005
City Council Meeting Posted by October 24, 2005
5. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use(s):
R-l Ada County - Residential
b. Description of Character of SuITounding Area: Single Family Residential Subdivisions with
BANFF SUBDIVISION
CUP-05-032/ AP-05-003/AZ-O5-033
PAGE 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNiNG DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11122/05
,,-~~--
an R-4 designation in the City of Meridian. There is a school site immediately west of the site.
Large lot single family residential lots South and West of the site off of Waltman Court are
within Ada County.
c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning
1. North: Unplatted Ada County R-l, Unplatted Meridian City R-4
--" 2. East: The Landing Subdivision, Meridian City R-4
3. South: - "Unplatted Ada County R-l
4. West: Whitestone Estates Subdivision, Meridian City R-4, School Site
d. History of Previous Actions: N/A
e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities
1. Public Works
Location of sewer: From Linder Road right-of-way
Location of water: From Linder Road right-of-way
Issues or concerns: The sewer in Linder Road gravity flows to a private lift
station in the Landing Subdivision. The applicant shall have to install any
upgrades to the lift station that are required to meet the capacity of the extra
sewage being generated by this development.
2. Vegetation: Applicant shall contact City Arborist for tree mitigation.
3. Flood plain: NA
4. CanalslDitches Irrigation: Tiling and relocation of existing agricultural irrigation
ditches will need coordination with Settlers Irrigation District.
5. Hazards: None Identified
6. Proposed Zoning: R-8 - with Planned Development
7. Size of Property: 2.91 acres
8. Description of Use:
f. Subdivision Plat Infonnation
Single family residential
1. Residential Lots: 16
2. Non.residential Lots: 0
3. Total Building Lots: 16
4. Common Lots:
5
5. Other Lots:
one of the common lots is for future development to the north
6. Total Lots: 21
7. Open Lots: N/A
8. Residential Area:
9. Gross Density:
g. Landscaping
1.30 acres new residential/AI existing
5.50 units per acre
BANFF SUBDIVISION
CUP-05-032/ AP.05-003/ AZ-05-033
PAGE 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF IU22/05
1, Width of street buffer(s): 20' on Linder Road Lot 1 Block 1. Lot 10 Block 2
2. Width ofbuffer(s) between land uses: 0' with 6' solidfencing
3. Percentage of site as open space (PP and PD applications):
8.6%: 10,696 square feet
4. Other landscaping standards:
h. Conditional Use Infonnation
1. Non-residential square footage: 979 square feet
2. Proposed building height: Less than 35 '
3. Percentage of site devoted to buildable lots: 1.7 acres
4. Percentage of site devoted to landscaping: .21 acres
5. Number of Residential units: 16
i. Plarmed Development - Lots 2-6,8,9, 11, 12 Block 1, and Lots 2-7 Block 2 of Banff
Subdivision dated September 16, 2005
j. Amenities - Lot 2 Block 1 will have additional landscaping with a picnic shelter area.
Lot 10 Block 1 Pathway cormection to school site.
1. Proposed and Required Residential Standards
Plarmed Development standards apply to all lots of Banff Subdivision as shown below:
Setbacks Proposed Required
Front Living Area of 15 15
Front Accessed Garage 20 20
Side 3 5
Rear 10 15
Frontage 45.3ft 65ft
Lot Size 4,053 6,500
k. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.):
All roadways have been designed according to ACHD standards and will be public streets,
the Meridian Fire Department has deemed Banff Street to be a minimum width of 29-feet
back of curb to back of curb to allow on-street parking on one side ofthe street.
For a detailed report on the public streets and access points to public streets, the staff report
from the Ada County Highway District has been included with the packet of infonnation.
6. AGENCY COMMENTS MEETING
On July 15, 2005 staff held an agency comments meeting. Further meetings were held with the Meridian
Fire Department on July 27,2005 to address the redesign of the Preliminary Plat dated August 4,2005.
Staff did not present the amended design at an agency meeting but was infonned by Meridian Fire ofthe
parking status of Banff Street.
7. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
BANFF SUBDIVISION
CUP-05-032/ AP-05-003/ AZ-05-033
PAGE 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
In Chapter VII ofthe Comprehensive Plan, 'medium density' is defined as areas including single-
family homes at densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. Staff finds that the requested
zoning designation, R-8, is in accordance with the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land
Use Map, which designates the land to be "Medium Density Residential". However, the 6.19
dwelling units per acre proposed with the preliminary plat are not consistent with previous
Commission and Council actions and generally do not confonn to the goals, objectives, and
action items contained in the Comprehensive Plan for the immediate vicinity.
,.~----- '
-,...-----,.- --
Staff finds the following 2002 Comprehensive Plan text policies to be applicable to this
application (staff analysis is in italics below policy):
---"'-"----""-"~-'-
Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services (Chapter
VII, Goal III, Obj ective A, Action 1)
When the City established its Area of City Impact, it planned to provide City services to the
subject properties. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands
proposed to be annexed in the following manner:
. Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the
developer's expense.
The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire
District. Once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian
City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the
Meridian Rural Fire Department. Fire and Emergency Medical Services will be
provided by Meridian City Fire
The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriff's
Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police
Department (MPD).
The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained
by the Ada County Highway District (ACHD). This service will not change.
The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This
service will not change.
The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This
service will not change and the Meridian Library District should suffer no
revenue loss as a result of the subject annexation.
.
.
.
.
.
Municipal, fee-supported, services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department,
the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian
Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning and Zoning Department, Meridian Utility
Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company.
.
Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent
parcels (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1)
All of the properties adjacent to the subject site are designated for medium or low density
residential uses on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The applicant has
proposed single family residential products for the site. However, the immediate neighbors
are in an Ada County Residential-One (R-l) zone that requires a minimum of a one acre lot
size. Staff has spoken with the applicant as to a proposed redevelopment plan for the one-
acre site north of the proposal which is anticipated to become an enclave parcel with little or
BANFF SUBDIVISION
CUP-05-032/ AP-05-003/ AZ-05-033
PAGE 6
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
no redevelopment potential. Stafffeels it is not in the best interest of the City qfMeridian to
limit the redevelopment opportunities on this property,
Subdivisions in the immediate vicinity are in the 10,000 squarefoot rangefor building lots in
accordance with the R-4 standards,
The proposed 4,053 square-foot lot range is 62% of the required 6.500 square1oot minimum
for the R-8 development. Staff feels that there is not enough transition for the immediate
vicinity.
.
Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, and high-density single family,
multi-family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of
providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities (Chapter VII, Goal IV,
Objective C, Action 10).
The subject property is designated Medium-Density Residential on the Future Land Use Map
which identifies this area as an appropriate area for medium-density residential
development, This proposal meets the Comprehensive Plan definition qf medium"density,
with a gross density of 5.5 dwelling units per acre. Staffïs not supportive of the design as the
minimum standard for single Jàmily attached housing is a 4,000 square feet for lots which
share a common drive.
.
Although the revised site layout improves the redevelopment potential of the property north of
the site, staff is still concerned about the design qf the subdivision. Staff feels the proposed
design does not provide a transition from very low density to medium high density. The lot
sizes less than 4,000 square feet more closely resemble an R-15 development (minimum 2,400
square1oot lot) which does not fit into the medium low density neighborhood.
Develop policies and incentives to encourage infill and contiguous development. (Chapter V
Goal I Objective A Action 8)
The subject property has a unique design due to limited property width at the connection to
Linder Road and is surrounded by existing large lot developments. This proposal would be
the first development with urban densities in this area and it does not meet the standards to
be classified as infill development. Staff has encouraged the applicant to work with adjacent
property owners for developing an overall site plan Jor how the immediate vicinity will
develop and show the transitionfrom one property to another, The site does not classifY for
i'!fill development as it is surrounded on two sides by undeveloped properties.
Apply design and performance standards to infilling development in order to reduce adverse
impacts upon existing adjacent development. (Chapter VII Goal V Objective A Action 11)
.
Staffforesees negative impacts on surrounding development due to the width of the street
section, lack of parking for the size of lots, further reductions of lot sizes in order to
accommodate parking, the lack of a redevelopment plan for the properties to the north and
south, and the amount of reduction of lot size from the R-8 bulk standards as listed in MCC
11-9-1. The site has an existing residence which is proposed to be retained as a residence,
the brick and historicfaçade would be considered an accent to the site,
Staff finds that the proposal is not harmonious with the surrounding areas and does not meet the
goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
8. ZONING ORDINANCE
BANFF SUBDIVISION
CUP-05-032/ AP-05-003/AZ-05-033
PAGE 7
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: Meridian City Code 11-2-1 lists Planned Development
modifications as conditional use in the R-8 zoning district. Single Family Residential uses
are pennitted in the R-8 zoning district
b, Purpose Statement of Zone: R-8 Medium Density Residential District: The purpose of the R-
8 district is to pennit the establishment of single. and two-family dwellings at a density not
exceeding eight (8) dwelling units per acre. This district delineates those areas where such
development has or is likely to occur in accord with the comprehensive plan of the city and is
also designed to pennit the conversion of large homes into two-family dwellings in well-
established neighborhoods of comparable land use. Connection to the municipal water and
sewer systems is required.
c. General Standards: According to MCC 11,,17-1, the City should impose any condition(s)
deemed necessary to insure compatibility of the development (CUP) with other uses in the
vicinity and such additional safeguards as are necessary to uphold the intent of the
ordinance.
9. ANALYSIS
a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation
As noted above, the applicant is proposing to subdivide the subject site into 16 single
family residential lots. Each of the 15 new building lots contains a minimum 4,053 square
feet. The proposed new building lots range in size from 4,053 square feet up to 5,484
square feet. These lot sizes meet the minimum standards of an R-15 development which
is not compatible with the surroWlding neighborhood.
The proposed development will constrain redevelopment of the surrounding properties.
Staff has concerns about developing any of these properties individually without a
conceptual development plan for the area.
The applicant has more closely taken staff advice on design of the roadway system to
facilitate connection to the parcel north of the site. The design presented on September
16,2005 still is not allowed under the Meridian City Code for allowance of a site strip
with an easement and Lot 7 of Block 1 would need to be amended again.
The applicant has requested reduced frontages and reduced lot sizes which would require
more on-street parking. All housing types are proposed as single family residential and
the applicant has submitted several elevations of the proposed units.
The applicant has requested all ofthe property be zoned R-8 (Medium Density
Residential). The applicant has indicated a gross density of the proposed subdivision at
5.5 gross dwelling units per acre. lfthe area of the largest lot (17,745 square feet) is
removed from the calculations the gross density rises to 6.0 dwelling units to the acre.
Higher density projects using the planned development standards are required to
incorporate larger transitional lots with a mix of products to buffer the neighboring
properties. The site is not large enough to accommodate a wide range of lot sizes. Staff
feels that there is no transition from high density to the very low density lots required to
buffer the neighboring properties from anticipated problems.
Due to the number of planned development requests for exceptions to the dimensional
standards, lack of transitional lot sizes, the medium-low density character of the
BANFF SUBDIVISION
CUP-05-032/ AP-05-003/ AZ-05-033
PAGE 8
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
neighborhood, the lack of on street parking, and the possibility of impeding future
developments, staff is recommending denial of Banff Subdivision.
--"-"'"
ANNEXATION & ZONING ANALYSIS: The site is a substandard Ada County property with
no public services. The site is sun-ounded by undeveloped properties and cooperation and
integration of other parcels is in the best interest of the City of Meridian at this time. There are
several immediate issues for public services, mainly emergency services on Linder Road which
-,. "-~-"---....._-- will be remedied in the near future when Linder Road is improved and the Black Cat Sewer trunk
---rs-broJ!ght through along the Kennedy Lateral. Currently Linder Road provides the oruy
arterial/colleGtor çonnection for over 700 homes south of Franklin Road. Either the Linder Road
overpass or the extension of West Waltman Street would solve this problem and staff anticipates
the road improvements to eventually happen although no timeline has been set but significant
work to resolve the issue has begun and an agreement is pending.
--
---'
Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the outstanding issues
of the proposed development with the Zoning Ordinance, staff believes the applicant's proposal is
premature at this time. Staff feels that this design more closely resembles an R-15 development
which could be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan designation of medium density
residential. Please see Exhibit C for detailed analysis of facts and findings.
PRELIMINARY PLAT ANALYSIS: Preliminary Plat Application (PP-05-032):
Plat: The preliminary plat provides one section of residential products with a narrow range of
small lots with approximately 4,500 square-foot lot sizes. These lots would all require
modification to the bulk standards of the zoning ordinance as listed in MCC 11-9-1.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:
Stub Streets: The applicant is proposing one Y2 stub street with a future connection to the
north and one stub street to the south. If approved, the stub street to the north will need to be
amended to provide full easement access to the property to the north. A full conceptual
layout of the vicinity would show the full interconnectivity of the future road system as
defined at the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings.
Existinl! Residences/Buildinl!s: The site contains an existing home and two outbuildings
used for residential storage. The home is historic in nature and will be retained on a larger
sized lot to be incorporated into the neighborhood. If approved, this home will need to be
connected to City of Meridian services.
Arterial Street Buffer: MCC 12-13-10-4 requires a 25-foot wide street buffer along classified
arterial roadways. On the submitted landscape plan, the applicant is proposing to construct a
25-foot wide street buffer along Linder Road, to be maintained by the Home Owner's
Association.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ANALYSIS: CUP Application (CUP-05~032):
Reduced Standards: As stated earlier, the applicant is requesting modifications from standard
ordinance requirements for street frontage, lot size, setbacks and minimum building square
footages.
BANFF SUBDIVISION
CUP-05-032/ AP-05-003/ AZ-05-033
PAGE 9
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
Lot Size: The applicant has requested reduced lot sizes; the submitted preliminary plat has
lots that (with the exception of the existing home lot) are all below the 6,500 square-foot
minimum size. The proposed lot sizes range from 4,053 square-feet up to 5,484 square-feet.
Lot Fronta!!e: The minimum requested street frontage is 45.5 feet. There are 11 lots at
approximately 52 feet of frontage and 4-lots with approximately 46 feet of frontage (65-feet
is the minimum for the R-8 zone).
Setbacks: The applicant's submittal dated September 16, 2005 requests that this development
have a front setback of 20 feet. The standard front setback is 15 feet to living space only and
a minimum front setback of 20 feet to a garage entry way. Interior side setbacks are
requested with respect to the design of the homes at 3 feet non-living space to non-living
space, creating a 6 foot separation between garages and 7 feet between living space, creating
a 14 foot separation between homes. All other setbacks (rear and front) shall be the required
setbacks for an R-8 district as listed in MCC 11-9-1.
Amenities: MCC 12-6-2.A.3 requires two or more amenities to be provided as part of each
planned development or as appropriate to the size and uses of the proposed development. The
proposed open space is 8% of the site - 5% minimum is required and 10% is required to be
considered an amenity. The applicant has included additional road buffers in this calculation
and has not reduced the open space figures by the proposed future driveway easement on Lot
2 Block 1. Landscaped open space means land exclusive of streets, street buffers, required
buffers, and driveway cuts. No drainage lots, required street buffers, or canal buffers have
been included in this calculation. The applicant is counting the additional lot to connect to
the school as an open space lots, a pathway connection into the school site is proposed but the
school has not commented on interconnectivity (a chain link fence culTently exists with no
gates.) Lot 2, Block 1 shows a seating area with a picnic structure as the main amenity,
Elevations: The applicant has submitted six front elevation drawings for the proposed
dwelling units included with the PD. Staff believes that the dwelling units will be too
compact to be compatible with the adjoining uses, if the buildings are constructed as shown
on the submitted elevations they will encompass the entire building envelope and available
yards will be significantly reduced in a neighborhood with 10,000 sq/ft to 2-acre sites.
b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Denial ofCUP-05-03/ PP-05-032/AZ-O5-033 for
Banff Subdivision as presented in the staff report dated September 27,2005 based on the
Findings of Fact as listed in Exllibit C as attached to this report. Staff has prepared findings
consistent with this recommendation.
10. PROPOSED MOTIONS
Approval
I move to continue File Numbers CUP-O5-032/ AP-05-003/ AZ~05-033 for Banff Subdivision
until date set (enter date of Planning and Zoning Commission hearing-MCC 11-1-I1.B) and direct staff to
prepare findings and conditions for approval as defined in the public hearing of November 22, 2005.
Denial
I move to deny File Numbers CUP-05-032/ AP-05-003/ AZ-05~033 for Banff Subdivision as
presented in the staff report dated November 22,2005 with the Site Plan dated June 14,2005 and
Preliminary Plat dated September 16, 2005.
BANFF SUBDIVISION
CUP-05-032/ AP-05-003/ AZ-05-033
PAGE 10
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF ] 1/22/05
11. EXHmITS
'---
A. Drawings
1. Preliminary Plat - Dated August 4, 2005 prepared by W &H Pacific
Preliminary Plat - Dated September 16, 2005 prepared by W&H Pacific
2. CUP Site Plan- Dated June 14,2005 prepared by W&H Pacific
3. Landscape Plan- Dated June 14, 2005 prepared by W&H Pacific
B. Legal Description
C. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
---_/
~-
BANFF SUBDIVISION
CUP-05-032/ AP-05-003/AZ-05-033
P AGE II
A. Drawings
1. Preliminary Plat (dated: August 4,2005)
,f
---"-------""""..,..,.."....",,,--__,~,Jk
"",,"""',"","""
-IC":;'",,-'-' ,-' "",
: 1~.;Ll': :L: "
:i;::~E:,,~'
~ ¡ ~t¡:~1j
------'I
¡¡'¡,'ili'I" ,;- ¡~'!I"¡I.. ¡H¡¡¡II ,j
',I . "'I ¡ "¡' 1'11/" \,' f>
d I,"!I !"; q, ! ~il'l¡ I II ¡II':;:
"'I 'II ¡""','" 'i ¡' '"
.11- ,¡'I "!"i'!'!¡ h'i,. f:~
,-"I ""t ,",-- 11'11 ", j,> III,
I' Ii \.~, I lì' \. ' 'I,:>; I ~;" ¡
11 . ~\~I ~"l;! II U q ,,!'
I'! 1¡"Ji ! ",1 il'!!!! ! ",I I
¡! ; i/¡ ¡ ¡ ¡II~ .,iF. I P
" ! ,, ~ " \ . \ , \
""""""",
'I .' ;
I !
~ 1,
¡i! I
I:
, r.
;i§ ---,.. ":'
1[
h
¡'
" ',,----;""
:~ 11
. 1" ,,-------.--J-;
Ji I"
'\,
'"
",
~
0
~
~
<>
i
IJ:I
..:>~
~~~ ~~
Ja~~
~;~~ ~~
¡~~ ~~
c~O'"
Z
¡' , " : , ~. 'I' I .. 'J....!", ,"
, :,' I" +,' "~
¡ ,", ..;:, I
,.\ .:8 (jz- ¡¡H;HPi!¡;HIWW
, ¡¡;:InH¡;q¡:::n~;ì
¡,Ii,,'," jl;i l;",
;,i ¡ ¡ '. "
:"~¡----""~=.... .'¡~r,"'c-~-::B:/'~~" """"'."-""""~~:":"._" ---
" PRELIMINARY PLAT .. .... "-~-, "",,- "c~-;.", I 'Vii ' ~-""..""....~
-1""","""""""",."",""""""""""",,,--, ----",...." """,--:"-~~~,;:"":""",,"i--r',~~,,, I"", :;:;:::'.., """""""""
"0'" """""-------,-¡c;..,....,""",,.., ,----,-",,-- ",,-----,-JI""-' ,-""-,"".~-_..,_...~.,.,-,,
'-, -~_1"_'-,!,!,- ",',...,._--__.lL1'--"", "!,,:,,,,'<~".i'" '-..r~::::,_:,,-,. ~~~,::'::"',==..o:J=i...,¿."",-,.., ...---'
.," i" '" ~ ; ¡ i' '; :1'
I ' ~,,~ ¡ ,ii'" i;
I,' ,,!I~.~\, :d!<"
!,..I'\ iI'! { "'I ~.. ,..,~
;¡ ' ' ¡',~, c.'... ' ¡"
I! ' ' .k ~ 'i;~"I~ ,,"
I'" ' '1 ~' ,\, ~ '~
~ : ".. >":~
"'""'" , , ',""."""
Banff Subdivision
Drawings
EXHIBIT A
j' ,
I '
: !
iii, ¡' ¡¡!li'~
! ! " d"
¡J":!"
, , ! Š
: : ,~
, ,'-- '"" I
¡ ò' ..
~ \ !
"""""',n '""'",,...'
""-,.-----",.
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
1.1 Preliminary Plat (Dated: September 16, 2005)
._',,--,--,--,-_.._.
~ii
~Ií
;ijR~U<i~iïi;Îf
fi ¡: ti I! I :
i!ij!'E Illi, ~~
iii I~~' I~
~. ,. 'I~ II"
,,; II I ~I .
_....L]-
~,. \
J ¡I",
J i'
II
¡ ~'l,
I
, ~ '¡"III,
I!!. 151 !!iI Iii '~f
I~ I~ I~ ~llll
[]
0"""
Banff Subdivision
Drawings
EXHIBIT A
~s, llC
BANFF SUSDMSIOIII
PRELIMINARY PLA T
I
-~
---, "-,,.-
u
~
c;c
~>
¡FZ
~¡j¡~""
:;:~ 'ii .." r
I~~ (I)~
~~~ C""
!~~61:C~
~~O-'"
!~!< ::~
~~¡ ::::n
~/~(f)
~~Õ
Z
¡ . 'III!
; li'¡'I""".'ler
I;I:I:;;I~I::IIIIIIIII
II II! : III III iI ¡ II PI ! "
\111;/'111\\1111'
\I \ t I
~-"-~"""""---~I
-~.. --- ~"----"'---- _._L
~"..' --". ",~. --.... - ---
,---- II -
,:: .,.. ::,_:~~~--'4:,:: ø .-==----"'=-
IUII lI,
hi ml
rill' ; il
' III
\ l \ ~.. I
I) I
I
k!!+-
.~
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
2. CUP Site Plan (dated: June 14,2005)
_...,- ---I-~-'__,--......
I;
II
~I
I
"""-.., ,.,.."'---.,,---, ,",-_..""
--r----"-----'----
I
I
I
I ,---
I
I
0 "oJ]
- .. I
tt'
~>
I ¡¡¡~Z~1
I ~ i§ tf "Tj ¿j
~~'iJ '"T'j¡;¡
I~~ 3::
ðClh.
~' ~I::C~
i-~ t:Og
.. 0<"
~~¡¡¡-¡;;
~;.~<;
t'~I-£
~- C/) ~
: -g
'!iiO""
Z
.
I. [!J~I: )
-l~~ 1I1 . i
-~. -:~ - , ~-
,\ I r------r-"-i
J I I ¡ I .
~-~~ ¡ I
----J I ¡ I :1
"----,--, "--., "-'/-/~Iíl'
\/---
i/J;"I
'II ¡It,
I
I
I
I
/
//
~""------""--
,-,-_...,._--_...."._---_._-~~,--J-
--I-
I ¡
II
I
L__n-
/
/
II~ ¡III I
r ¡1Ii!ri'~'o'~r
111111,11111111111111
,11111 HiII,Iì'¡m',I.11
IIII! II I "!
.. I I
=-~~~~J~I.~ -I
!J!.~
, ~:
.
B! . ~~~MwP
~ --~-
..
C,'-, ...,' "" ,,',
"~-"'-~"'~~,--'~"'- ',..',
Banff Subdivision
Drawings
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
3. Landscape: Plan (dated June 14, 2005)
f~
-~ ~= -llfi ~!- ':; ,,~¡~~~::::;:::::=-,= ==
::":' ~ ~ Ji/i. i ~~,~ !~,;I' , I!~ ,I § i------ --~';\,'~","t,---, -I I'
I (Ø~ I ~I' , :11 Ii 2"\ - "-, ~jr, 11:!ð\ ~, I
~ Ii:! : : '" " '.' ,:;' dtðJ--------~ I 1
rl ,r,:II' I ;"'t-~; ,¡'-~i~ ; I' ;
i ì, , I ' I: I I . "\' , '1 ,." ".,. - , I
~ G ¡ I ì " : ¡ I. ê '. , , ~, ,
p:",,-¡ J. j fi I. - _i .-: -C) ----, ,J ,
. 'I'.' 1 '~I' .)1 I
11' I ¡~ j ¡ I ; i ~~-- ---:, '
.' 'i:I~I.~"tl'~ =il I I
'I' r I :; ._+--_._-';¡ I 1
,I! ~ I ~I:'~.I~~;-:~f~ ~ I I-'-"-~".-,--I
IP I I , I. Jj] I I
, l -, I
I
I
I
, ,1
F--'-~;-- 1'1 In_--
'ô> ..,--,.- ~ .. - - - ~~:-,. - - ;:;::~-------'
u~- II!iliji'il!,!iU1
; /!~ 5iliiii¡I!1iJ,ii¡III'i!l:
'frio lt1Ih.lll ill,¡i'I:l
Ii irj'/m I¡'11t I!
t ~ 'dpm= 1IIIIt!!': II ~ìifH!i¡J II!lI!i r
~!,è I~~~ ,,;1: ¡ . ,III ¡ I!I'¡" , ! ¡ !ii.i! Þ II II i J "',: I
:iI!~ :.~~ Ii:! ~ . ;, ¡ J ! ' ql! 11 i d II ~. ~ .<'*>-
l~~._"~¡¡'¡'-;; ____nl~! _~L_~ -
'I IE Ii' ~=£: ---I~~~r (~1)-jIIL~:,~~"~'X~~,:,-l'
'- .J~~" "J=~~-W~~::=;"" - "'7~?~~::'".:'~G;+;=-=~~_:-'---_z:~~.;c":"~'-~~~~=--"""_...-:;;;_7~- -'co
I -
~ \
~ I ¡,
1 I'
~ IHII l! lilÌ
1'jI IliI
III II
'Ii I'
11,',1 'ild I~!I
il IIÜ ./1
---1' èJ
,
Banff Subdivision
Drawings
EXHIBIT A
t::d
~>-n
~.ii1~Z~
;:¡¡;~'Tj,",1
'<;.;-" 'Tj ¡;;J I
",0 \:" "7'
1;(" ~ U) -:; ,
, ~~¡:;cz'
I ~"'~ :»
, §:\;;"" ~ t::dQ .
. '~::~!-\f2
<J ,.. e, '---' I'J
"',"0 -i
~;,,~~...,
~:;¿¡ -§ó
B~~(f)O
",..-C
. :i 0-0
Z
--------.--
tTjl:¡j
XI>'
::r::::>
,.....::tJ
1::0 U1
-¡:
-10-
1:¡j9-.
-<
00'
Õ"
::>
. ~~~}.~J~C
{20B} 342-IItOO
'~-'-"-"'-"",""",""",",
,k¡
~ -
"I- "I-
~ 01
h "
a (])
0 -
z
EXHIBIT FOR
PURCHASE LEGAL DESCRIPTION
675 S. UNDER ROAD
LOTS 15. 16, AND 17 OF THE VAN HEES SUBDIVISION.
LOCATED IN THE SE 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4
OF SECTION 14, T :3 N, R 1 W, B.M" ADA COUNTY. IDAHO
2005
W. FRANKliN RD.
NE COR, SEe. 14
COR REG. # 98117244
J 1/4" BRASS CAP
589"2'35"[
639.82'
.!-'J.
. I"'-
ro ..,.
a .
~ I"'-
r<1 -
. r<1
0 N
0
Z
LOT 15
~
q,-
.o'bi
ri"
,(])
0-
0
V"¡
LOT 16
LOT 17
N89"2'3~"W
639.85' !
paiN T OF
.t.J .
BEGINNING à;¡ i",
.0 'I öi
.., .
~ ~
8 ..,
:;::
WALTMAN ST.
N8912'31"W
25.00'
E 1/4 COR. SEe. 14
COR. REC. # 103143079
5/8" REBAR/CAP PLS 4431
f/)
~
Z
Ioo
~ .
'< ~
tI:1
It¡ ~
~CI
~
004
tti
~
CI}
~
!I;I:
I .
.~
~ to
;tr=
. ~
-
~
to
'"
n
""I
..'
"0
Q'.
Q
==
i
-8-
!
.. NTS ..
"\
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARiNG DATE OF 11/22/05
I.'AUC":L DESCRIPTION
June 14,2005
Project:
Project No:
675 S, Linder Purchase Legal Description
JZ707
A parcel orland being lots 15, 16, and 17 orthe Van Hees Subdivision recorded June 10, 1948, Ada
County Recorder records, located in the SE 1/4 of the NE Yo of Section 14, Township 3 North, Range I
West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the E 1/4 comer of said Seçtion 14, said comer being marked by a found 5/8"
rcbar/cap P,L.S" 4431, çorncr record #103143079;
Thence North 00"33 '08" East (record: North 00"06' West), coincident with the east line of said Section
14, a distance 0[339.92 (record: 340,OO) feet to a point, said point being South 00"33 '08" West, 2317.47
leet (record: South 00"06' East, 2318-00 feet) from the NE comer of said Section 14, said NE comer being
marked by a 3 114" brass cap, comer record #98117244;
Thence North 89"12'31" West (record: North 89"49' West), 25,00 feet to the westerly right-or-way llie of
S. Linder Road and the southeasterly wrner of said lot] 7, said comer being marked by II set 5/8" rebar/cap
P.L.8. 8726, and said comer being the POINT OF BEGINNING;
Thence continuing North 89"12'31" West, 639.85 feet (record: North 89°49' West, 640.50 fed) to the
southwesterly comer of said lot 17, said comer being marked by a set. 5/8" rebar/cap P,LS. 8726;
Thence North 00"33'44" East, 197,94 feet (record: North 00"04' West, 198.00 feet) to the northwesterly
comer of said lot 15;
Thence South 89" 12'35" East, passing through a found 1/2" rebar/no cap at 0.16 feet, a total distance of
639,,82 teet (record: South 89"49' Enst, 640.40 feet), to the westerly right-of-way line of S. Linder Road
¡md the northeasterly comer of said lot 15, said comer being marked by a found 112" rcbar/cap P.A.T-
4347;
Thence South 00"33'08" West (record: South 00°06' But), parallel to, and offset 25.00 feet from the cast
line of said Section 14, coincident with the westerly right-of"way line of S. Linder Road, a distançe of
197,95 (record: 19B.OO) feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
The above described parcel contains 2,9075 acres, more or less.
Together with and subject to covenants, easements and restrictions ofrecord,
Banff Subdivision
EXHIBIT B
C. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
1. ANNEXATION FINDINGS:
According to Ordinance 11-15-11, 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 terms 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 11-15-11 and analysis by staff:
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;
See Comprehensive Plans and Policies as listed in the Banff Subdivision staff report item #7
above. Council does not support the zoning and finds the proposal in conflict with the
Comprehensive Plan.
B.
Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the future;
Council does not anticipate that the applicant intends to rezone the subj ect property in the future.
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;
Council finds that single-family residential uses are allowed within the requested zoning district
ofR-8. Medium Density Residential permits the establishment of residential uses and is designed
to protect the integrity of residential development by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible
nonresidential uses. The accompanying plat demonstrates the land is proposed to be developed
with lot sizes, housing types and other dimensional requirements that conform to a higher density
residential district. The proposed zoning designation is not consistent with the existing residential
neighborhood.
D.
Bas 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;
Council finds that residential developments to the north and east have been developed with much
larger single family residential lots than the proposed subdivision proposaL Development in the
area is limited by available services and is dominated by large lot residential subdivisions,
Based on the ACHD Long Range 2030 proposal, Linder Road is anticipated to eventually be a
three lane roadway abutting this site. However, Linder Road between Franklin Road and 1-84 is
not currently included within ACHD's Five Year Work Program or in the currently adopted 20-
year Capital Improvements Plan for roadway improvements.
Banff Subdivision
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
Banff Street is designed to provide stub connection to the property south of the site and for
driveway accesses from the north. Council supports the revisions to the road layout to more
adequately provide public street connection to the properties to the north.
E.
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;
Council finds that the requested zoning and proposed density is more dense than the anticipated
range for a medium density urban project in this vicinity. Based on the Comprehensive Plan,
Council believes that the existing parcels in the area (south and north and east) have already
developed with much lower densities. Allowances for alternate products and designs are
encouraged, and Council believes this could become a quality product in a high-density
neighborhood or along a neighborhood center as a transitional product. Council also finds that the
proposed zoning/uses can be designed and constructed in a manner that will be hannonious with,
and appropriate in appearance with, the existing and intended character of the surrounding area
with an alternate R-8 proposal without amending as many bulk standards as requested.
The existing character of the area will change as this is the first parcel the vicinity of the school
site under proposal to develop. Council finds that the proposed zoning and higher density uses
will adversely change the essential character of area. The Commission and Council rely on staffs
analysis, public testimony received and any comments submitted from any other agencies or
departments regarding whether this property should be annexed as proposed.
F.
Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring
uses;
Council anticipates that the proposed residential uses will create issues of concern as outlined in
this report. The number and size of homes on this small of a property would require a larger road
section in order to have enough parking to satisfy the neighborhood. Single-sided street parking
at this location is not encouraged. Also anticipated is the creation of a higher density enclave in a
predominantly very low density region of the City of Meridian.
The Commission and Council rely on any public testimony (oral and written) when detennining
whether or not the proposed zoning and subsequent uses will be disturbing or hazardous to 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 fire 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;
On July 15, 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 from agencies/departments, council finds that the public services listed above
can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. The Commission and Council
reference any written and/or verbal testimony submitted by any public service provider, regarding
their ability to adequately service this project.
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;
Banff Subdivision
EXHIBIT C
H.
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNiNG DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
If approved, the developer will be financing the extension of sewer, water, local street
infrastructure, utilities and irrigation services to serve the project. The primary public costs to
serve the future residents will be fire, police and school facilities and services. 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.
~---
Io----,.--Will the proposed uses not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and
conditioI!s of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general
welfare byfeaso-n--of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors;
Council finds that the proposed annexation and the development of single-family homes on this
site may create nuisances that, because of the vast differences in lot sizes, may be detrimental to
the general welfare of the sulTounding area.
Council recognizes the fact that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of this
subdivision; however, Council does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to
the general welfare of the public. Council does not anticipate the proposed annexation and
subsequent uses will create excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors.
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;
The applicant is proposing to construct one public street stub to the south of the property and a
half street connection to the north on Banff Street. The street section was amended to be a 29'
roadway section back of curb to back of curb. The Meridian Fire Department has required
similar designs to provide a 29' road section back of curb to back of curb and restricts these roads
to one side of street parking. The designed proposal has a sufficient number of homes that
council anticipates the need for on street parking which could create impedance for emergency
services and interfere with interconnected traffic.
K.
Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major
importance; and
There are some mature trees on this property. Any existing trees larger than 4" caliper that are
removed should be mitigated for, per the Landscape Ordinance. Council has not seen the
mitigation plan and is not fully confident that if required to mitigate the size and location of the
proposed landscape lots would allow for full mitigation of lost trees. Council fmds that the
proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural feature(s)
of maj or importance if developed under these conditions.
The Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to detennine
whether or not the proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of
major importance of which Council is unaware.
L.
Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of Meridian. (Ord. 592,
11-17-1992)?
The R-8 zoning amendment would provide lots that are similar in nature to existing subdivisions
in the very general vicinity. Council finds that all essential services are available or will be
provided by the developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure
Banff Subdivision
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
of public funds through a standard R-8 design. Council feels that the design with the proposed
elevations more closely resembles a standard R-15 development and does not fit the character of
the neighborhood. Council does not recommend lot sizes that would be invasive to the properties
to the north and east of the subject property but the lot sizes should be transitional in nature and
allow additional residential densities and product opportunities for the general vicinity. There are
several parcels in the near vicinity which are yet to be developed. Council would anticipate a
concept plan to be developed for this area in its entirety. The conceptual plan would address the
concerns of the overall lot size, interconnectivity, and transitions of the projects with relation to
final build out of these parcels. Subdivisions of medium-low density have already been built to
the north, south and east and this is a logical expansion of the City limits for a similar design. In
accordance with the findings listed above, Council finds that annexation and zoning of this
property would not be in the best interest of the City.
2.
APPEAL FINDINGS (PRELIMINARY PLAT)
The appeal file is subject to the followim! code MCC 11-1-11.B ~
After receipt of an appeal of an action of the commission, the council shall hold a hearing to reach a
decision to uphold or overrule the action of the commission. By majority vote, the council may uphold or
overrule the action of the commission. If the action of the commission is overruled, the council shall send
the matter back to the commission for action consistent with the council decision. (Ord. 03-1030, 7-15-
2003, eff. 7M15-2003)
The Preliminary Plat findings are defined in MCC and found by the Meridian Planning and Zoning
Commission are Sections 12-3-3 J.2 and 12-3-5 D which read as follows: "In detennining the acceptance
of a proposed subdivision, the Commission and Council shall consider the objectives of this title and at
least the following:
A.
The conformance of the subdivision with the Comprehensive Development Plan;
Council finds that the proposed application is not in substantial compliance with the adopted
Comprehensive Plan. Council does not support the proposed layout as a practical solution in the
south Linder Road area which has been dictated by previous developments as medium low
density development. Please see Annexation and Zoning Analysis.
B.
The availability of public services to accommodate the proposed development;
Council finds that public services are available to accommodate the proposed development. (See
fmding "G" under Annexation and Zoning Analysis for more detai1.)
C.
The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement program;
Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost,
Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds.
D.
The public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development;
The Commission and Council rely upon comments from the public service providers (i.e.- police,
fire, ACHD, etc.) to detennine this finding. (See finding "G" under Annexation and Zoning
Analysis above for more detai1.)
Banff Subdivision
EXHlBIT C
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
E.
The other health, safety or environmental problems that may be brought to the
Commission's attention.
The proposed design creates a unique situation for properties to the north and south. A
subdivision design for this area would incorporate these properties into an overall developed
concept for this area. However the proposed design will force constraints on the existing lots for
future development. Banff Street does not extend services to the south and only serves traffic
concerns.
Council is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the
development of this subdivision that should be brought to the Councilor Commission's attention.
ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. The Commission and Council reference any
public testimony that may be presented to detennine whether or not the proposed subdivision may
cause health, safety or environmental problems of which Council is unaware.
3. CONDITIONAL USE FINDINGS
The Commission and Council review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed
conditional use in tenus of the following and may approve a conditional use pennit if they shall
find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11-17-3):
A.
That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces,
parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance;
As part of the Planned Development (PD) the applicant is requesting relief from the standard
street frontage requirement, lot size requirement, standard setbacks and minimum required first
floor square footage, as required by Meridian City Code. See Conditional Use Special
Consideration #1 above for detailed analysis.
Council frods that the subject property is not large enough to accommodate the requested use and
all other required features. Although the site is large enough to accommodate all of the features
required by ordinance, the applicant has asked, through the Planned Development, to modify
numerous specific development standards for 15 ofthe 16 single family residential lots. The
nan-ow nature of the north connection of the property creates a unique situation which could be
addressed through nonnal R-8 standards with fewer lots and incorporation of other contiguous
properties.
B.
That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian
Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance;
Council finds that the proposed single-family residential subdivision, with a gross density of 5.5
dwelling units per acre, is in accordance with the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use
Map, which designates the site to be "Medium Density Residential". However, the lot sizes in
the general vicinity are at a much lower density and are severely constrained as to future
development due to the concerns presented in this report. This proposal may not be harmonious
and appropriate at this time. Please see Annexation & Zoning Analysis "A" above.
C.
That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with other
uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general
Banff Subdivision
EXHIBIT C
H.
I.
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING DATE OF 11/22/05
vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area;
Please see Annexation & Zoning Analysis "E" above.
D.
That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not
adversely affect other property in the vicinity;
The Commission and Council rely upon public testimony, staffs analysis, and other agency
comments when determining if the proposed uses will adversely affect other properties in the
vicinity.
E.
That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services
such as highways, street, police, and fire protectiou, drainage structures, refuse disposal,
water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional
use shall be able to provide adequately any such services;
Please see Annexation & Zoning Analysis "G" and "H" above and any comments that may be
submitted to the City Clerk regarding this proj ect.
F.
That the proposed use 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;
Please see Annexation & Zoning Analysis "H" above.
G.
That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare
by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors;
Please see Annexation and Zoning Analysis "1" above.
That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so
designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets;
Please see Annexation & Zoning Analysis "J" above. The Commission and Council should
review any comments received from the ACHD provide for this project when determining this
finding.
That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic
or historic feature considered to be of major importance.
Please see Annexation & Zoning Analysis "K" above.
Banff Subdivision
EXHIBIT C