Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ - Staff Report 12-3 Page 1 HEARING DATE: 12/3/2020 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Joe Dodson, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2020-0100 Compass Pointe Subdivision LOCATION: The site is located at 3247 S. Locust Grove Road, in the NE ¼ of the NE ¼ of Section 30, Township 3N., Range 1E. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Annexation and zoning of 7.69 acres of land with a request for the R-15 zoning district; • Preliminary Plat consisting of 48 residential building lots and 9 common lots on approximately 4.69 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district; • Alternative Compliance to connect a private street directly to an arterial street; • Planned Unit Development to reduce the rear setback of the R-15 zoning district for a portion of the development due to site constraints, by A-Team Land Consultants. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 7.69 acres Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residential Existing Land Use(s) County Residential Proposed Land Use(s) Attached single-family and townhomes Lots (# and type; bldg./common) 57 total lots – 48 single-family residential; and 9 common lots. Phasing Plan (# of phases) Proposed as one (1) phase. Number of Residential Units (type of units) 48 total units - 48 single-family attached and townhome units. Density (gross & net) Gross – 6.24 du/ac.; Net – 13.4 du/ac. Open Space (acres, total [%]/buffer/qualified) 3.28 acres total – 2.84 acres of qualifying open space (or approx. 35.68% qualified) much of the qualified open space is the creek and landscape buffers STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Page 2 Description Details Page Amenities 3 amenities – Climbing rocks for children, walking loop, and shaded picnic area. Physical Features (waterways, hazards, flood plain, hillside) Tenmile Creek runs along the western property boundary with most of its easement on this property. Portion of the property within the easement shows area of flood hazard. Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: September 8, 2020; 1 attendee. History (previous approvals) N/A B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report (yes/no) Yes Section VIII.H • Requires ACHD Commission Action (yes/no) No Access (Arterial/Collectors/State Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Proposed access is from S. Locust Grove, an arterial. The proposed access is via a new private street and all internal roadways are proposed as private streets. Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Access No stub streets are proposed due to site constraints. Existing Road Network E. Victory Road and S. Locust Grove Road, arterial streets, are existing with 2 travel lanes. Existing Arterial Sidewalks / Buffers No Proposed Road Improvements No road improvements are proposed by the Applicant due to all abutting right-of-way to the subject site being scheduled for widening by ACHD. The intersection of Locust Grove and Victory is to be a roundabout in 2022-23 with Locust Grove Rd. being widened to 5 lanes north of the intersection and Victory Road being widened to 3 lanes on either side of the intersection by 2025. Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 1.5 miles from Fire Station #4 • Fire Response Time Proposed development falls within the 5 minute response time goal. • Resource Reliability 77% (below the target rating of 80%) • Risk Identification Risk Factor 2 – Residential with hazards; current resources would not be adequate to supply service to this project due to nearby waterway if a water emergency were to occur. • Accessibility Proposed project meets all required access, road widths, and turnarounds. The project will be limited to 30 homes until the entire emergency access to Victory Road is constructed. Police Service • Distance to Police Station 2 miles • Response Time Estimated response time of 4.5 minutes (Goal of 3-5 minutes) • Accessibility MPD has no concerns with access into this development; the MPD can service this development if approved. Page 3 Description Details Page • Additional Comments Between 8/1/2019 and 7/31/2020, MPD responded to 636 calls for service within one mile of this proposed development. The crime count on those calls was 79. Between 8/1/2019 and 7/31/2020, MPD responded to 30 crashes within 1 miles of this proposed development. West Ada School District • Distance (elem, ms, hs) No comments submitted. • Capacity of Schools • # of Students Enrolled Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services N/A • Sewer Shed South Black Cat Trunk Shed • Estimated Project Sewer ERU’s See application • WRRF Declining Balance 13.98 • Project Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan YES • Additional Comments N/A Water • Distance to Water Services 0’ • Pressure Zone 4 • Estimated Project Water ERU’s See application • Water Quality Concerns None • Project Consistent with Water Master Plan YES • Impacts/Concerns • See the attached water markup for more details; • Connect water main north to Victory Road; • At the end of Navigation Road provide a meter pit for a 1” service and a 4” sleeve to the northeast at the proposed edge of the future roundabout. This will be used for a future water service to the roundabout used by Parks for landscaping. Page 4 C. Project Area Maps III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Steve Arnold, A-Team Land Consultants – 1785 Whisper Cove Avenue, Boise, ID 83709 B. Owner: Butler Realty LLC – 204 Franklin Street, Redwood City, CA 94063 C. Representative: Same as Applicant 0BFuture Land Use Map 1BAerial Map 2BZoning Map 3BPlanned Development Map Page 5 IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date City Council Posting Date Newspaper Notification 11/13/2020 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 11/10/2020 Site Posting 11/6/2020 Nextdoor posting 11/10/2020 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan) Medium Density Residential – This designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as a park, school, or land dedicated for public services. The proposed annexation area is an undeveloped corner of land with existing medium density development to its west and east across Locust Grove. Specifically, this parcel of land is at the southwest corner of Victory Road and Locust Grove Road. There is existing City of Meridian zoning to the west, east, and northeast located at the northeast corner of the same intersection. All existing development most adjacent to the subject site is zoned R-8. There is a large county zoned parcel directly to the north of this site that has not yet received development approval but its future land use designation is Low Density Residential (LDR) dictating that it will likely have less density than this site. The proposed land use of attached single-family residential, and townhomes would be a new type of dwelling in this immediate area and is therefore consistent with policies noted in the Comprehensive Plan for all residential future land use designations, including Medium Density Residential (MDR), to contain different types of dwellings. MDR, as noted above, also allows gross densities of 3-8 units per acre; the Applicant has proposed this project with a gross density of 6.24 du/ac. Staff finds that the proposed project meets the density requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. The City may require a development agreement (DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. In order to ensure the site develops as proposed with this application, Staff recommends a DA as a provision of annexation with the provisions included in Section IX.A1. The DA is required to be signed by the property owner(s)/developer and returned to the City within 6 months of the Council granting the annexation for approval by City Council and subsequent recordation. A final plat will not be accepted until the DA is executed and the AZ ordinance is approved by City Council. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): The applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are cited below with Staff analysis in italics. “Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area; provide for diverse housing types throughout the City” (2.01.01G). The proposed R-15 zoning and proposed land use of single-family attached and townhomes would be a new dwelling type in the immediate area surrounding this development. R-8 zoning abuts the subject site to the south and west and across Locust Grove to the east. This policy, and the comprehensive plan, calls for a variety of housing types in any one geographical area. So, adding 48 units of a different product type to the area shows congruency with this comprehensive plan policy. Page 6 “With new subdivision plats, require the design and construction of pathways connections, easy pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, safe routes to schools, and the incorporation of usable open space with quality amenities” (2.02.01A). The Tenmile Creek runs adjacent to this property on its western boundary and the entirety of its 100’ easement is located on the subject site. Because of this, the Applicant has proposed to utilize this area as a natural open space and place a 5-foot wide path adjacent to the easement. In addition, the Applicant is proposing sidewalks adjacent to the internal private streets with connections to the path along the creek and out to Locust Grove and Victory Roads. These connections create a continuous walking path through the development creating easy pedestrian and bicycle access within and out of the proposed development. Despite the Tenmile Creek qualifying as open space per the UDC, it is the majority of the proposed open space and is not an active open space area. The Applicant has not been able to enter into a license agreement with the irrigation district to beautify the creek but code does allow for this waterway to be left natural. There are other small pockets of open space within this development that can accommodate active use and the Applicant has chosen to place them throughout the project to encourage use by all future residents; only one of these areas is large enough to be qualified open space. Despite the inclusion of a large area of qualified open space in terms of percentage of the site, Staff finds the proposed project lacking in usable open space. “Reduce the number of existing access points onto arterial streets by using methods such as cross- access agreements, access management, and frontage/backage roads, and promoting local and collector street connectivity” (6.01.02B). Due to the triangle shape of this parcel and its location being constrained directly by the Tenmile Creek and two arterial streets, strict compliance with this policy is not feasible. There are no streets stubbed to this property and this parcel also cannot stub to any other parcel due to these constraints. The Applicant is only proposing one access for the development and is locating it as far away from the intersection as physically possible. Despite not being able to comply with this policy, Staff appreciates that only one access to an arterial is proposed. The access to Victory Rd. is for emergency access only. “Require all new residential neighborhoods to provide complete streets, consistent with the Transportation and Land Use Integration Plan.” (2.02.01C). The Applicant is not proposing to construct complete streets with this development and therefore does not comply with this policy. Instead, the Applicant is proposing to construct private streets at their minimum standard width of 24 feet with 5-foot attached sidewalk on one side. Both ACHD and the Applicant believe private streets are the preferred street type in this development because there is no opportunity for road connectivity to adjacent parcels due to the site constraints outlined above. The Applicant is not required to construct private streets and public streets would be accepted by the highway district if proposed as compliant with their standards. However, public streets require more right-of-way than private streets and if this were to be constructed with public roads instead, a redesign of the project would be required and would likely result in a large reduction in building lots. “Annex lands into the corporate boundaries of the City only when the annexation proposal conforms to the City's vision and the necessary extension of public services and infrastructure is provided.” (3.03.03). The proposed development and use adhere to the vision established by the underlying future land use designation in that it should offer an additional housing option for the immediate area. Attached single-family and townhomes are permitted uses in the R-15 zoning district. In addition, all infrastructure extensions will be paid for by the Applicant and not the taxpayers. “Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land.” (3.07.00). The proposed development is not like any of the detached single-family homes adjacent Page 7 to the subject site and this distinction is encouraged in the comprehensive plan in order to offer different housing options at different price points and to different types of home buyers. The open space within the development may leave something to be desired but the development has buffers on all three sides of the development to minimize any conflict that may arise from having an attached product in an area dominated by detached single-family homes. In addition, the Applicant is proposing only one access to the development which should help minimize traffic impact on adjacent streets, especially once the arterial network surrounding this development is widened and improved in the coming years. Staff finds this development to be generally consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies and objectives. VI. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW A. Planned Unit Development: The Applicant is requesting to construct this subdivision as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) in line with UDC standards and findings (UDC 11-7). PUD’s have specific purpose statements, standards, and findings that the Applicant should meet in order to garner an approval. The proposed project meets the applicability requirements and the following purpose statements should also be complied with; Staff analysis is in italics: A. The purpose of the planned unit development (PUD) requirements is to provide an opportunity for exemplary site development that meets the following objectives: 1. Preserves natural, scenic and historic features of major importance; The entire western property boundary of the subject site is made up of the Tenmile Creek and its easement. The Applicant is choosing to leave this waterway in its natural state to preserve its natural beauty and meet city code requirements to protect the creek. 2. Allows for innovative design that creates visually pleasing and cohesive patterns of development (including, but not limited to, residential development at densities greater than 8 units per acre where design guidelines are in place for development and where garage doors are generally not fronting the street); The proposed development will have a net density greater than 8 units per acre (approximately 13 du/ac) after area is removed from the calculation due to the constraints surrounding this site (i.e. the creek easement, arterial street buffers, and additional right-of-way dedication). Minimally, Staff finds the creek easement to be non-buildable and should be removed from the density calculation in general. Once this area is removed, the density is 8.6 units per acre, helping to meet this design requirement. The net density is higher than that of the immediately surrounding neighborhoods because of this but the site will be buffered on all three sides from adjacent subdivisions precisely because of the site constraints which should help mitigate any nuisances presented by the higher density. As presented, the overall site design is lacking in innovation, in Staff’s opinion. All of the units are garage dominate which does not meet the PUD standards. However, Staff has recommendations to assist the Applicant in meeting these requirements. First, thru the PUD process, the Applicant should amend the application and include a request to eliminate the parking pad requirement for the 12 internal units (Lots 1-14, Block 2) that are part of the Applicant’s existing request for a setback relief. This would make the setback request only applicable to five (5) units instead of 17 and allow these units to be pushed back towards the street with a rear setback of no less than 5 feet, as allowed in the R-15 zoning district for alley-loaded units. Secondly, once these units become alley- loaded, they should front on the internal micro-path that is already proposed between Page 8 these lots—this area should then be platted in its own common lot and function as a mew following these changes. If the Applicant adheres to these recommendations, the mew could be 30 feet wide and be a great vista and pathway connection through the center of the development offering more than adequate pedestrian access to the arterial sidewalk network that will be in place following the construction of the roundabout. With an additional housing type in the development, the Applicant meets this objective by being innovative in the PUD request and overall design. In essence, the proposed development would be its own style of development showcasing that attached and townhome products can look and feel modern while maintaining a small community feel and offer adequate open space. Note: Staff has other specific recommendations related to these changes in other sections of the report below regarding open space, fencing, and sidewalks. 3. Creates functionally integrated development that allows for a more efficient and cost effective provision of public services. The Applicant is required to construct all public infrastructure required for this project and tie into the existing network. This includes the requirement to offer adequate vehicular access to the site. As noted, the site constraints severely limit the point of access for this development to the one location proposed by the Applicant. Locust Grove is a very busy corridor due to the minimal improvements currently existing at the intersection of Locust Grove and Victory abutting the site. However, this intersection should be constructed and improved with a multi-lane roundabout in 2021-23, likely prior to and during construction of this development. Once these improvements are complete, this development should be functionally integrated into the road and pedestrian network with a more efficient traffic pattern and adequate road capacity on both abutting arterial streets. B. It is not the intent that the PUD process be used solely for the purposes of deviation from the dimensional standards in the district. Prior to incorporating the recommended additional changes as discussed above, the one specific request made by the Applicant through the PUD process is to reduce the rear setback of the centermost lots of the R-15 zoning district (Lots 2-14 Block 2 and Lots 2-6, Block 3). However, it is not the Applicant’s intent or function to do this only to have a larger home on the proposed lots. Because the site is constrained and private streets are recommended by ACHD, the Applicant states that this setback relief is needed to provide the innovative product type, pedestrian circulation, and street layout while maintaining compliance with the R-15 dimensional standards along the perimeter of the site. With the changes recommended by Staff above, this request is further diminished because it would only apply to Lots 2-6, Block 3. The standards prescribed within the PUD code are as follows; Staff analysis is in italics: A. General Use Standards: 1. Deviations From Underlying District Requirements: Deviations from the development standards and/or area requirements of the district in accord with chapter 2, "District Regulations", of this title may be approved. The exception is that along the periphery of the planned development, the applicable setbacks as established by the district shall not be reduced. Depending on the frame reference, a majority of the site can be considered to contain periphery lots due to the odd triangle shape of the subject site. The Applicant is currently requesting to deviate from the rear setback standard of the R-15 zoning district for 17 of the 48 proposed units that Staff considers to be the centermost lots in the subdivision (Lots 2-14 Block 2 and Lots 2-6, Block 3). Again, once Staff’s Page 9 recommended changes are included, this request will be reduced to 5 lots that are central to the development. 2. Allowed Uses: Applicant may request that specific conditional or accessory use(s) allowed in the district be allowed as principal permitted use(s). The Applicant is not making a request in line with this standard so Staff finds it not applicable in this case. 3. Interconnected Uses: The uses within the planned unit development are interconnected through a system of roadways and/or pathways as appropriate. Private streets and service drives may be permitted, if designed and constructed to the transportation authority standards and in accord with chapter 3, article F, "Private Street Requirements", of this title. The subject site is proposed to be constructed with private streets that appear to meet UDC standards. In addition, the Applicant is proposing good interconnectivity of open spaces to all residential units in the subdivision through sidewalks and micro- paths. However, the amount of usable open space and housing types within the subdivision can be increased if the central units front on the micro-path as recommended by Staff above. This micro-path would then be part of a mew and offer more usable open space, an additional housing type in the form of alley-loaded homes, and more clear pedestrian connection to Locust Grove. Staff finds this project to be compliant with this standard if Staff’s recommendations are adhered to. 4. Building Clusters: Buildings shall be clustered to preserve scenic or environmentally sensitive areas in the natural state, or to consolidate small open spaces into larger, more usable areas for common use and enjoyment. Buildings within the development are proposed as attached single-family and townhomes. These structures are therefore inherently clustered in small blocks. In addition, the Applicant is preserving the Tenmile Creek as a scenic area and is remaining out of its easement completely by clustering the entire development more to the east and north. If the central units (Lots 2-14, Block 2) become alley-loaded and front on a mew as recommended by Staff, usable open space within the development can be consolidated without sacrificing the density of the project. B. Private Open Space: In addition to the common open space and site amenity requirements as set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying To All Districts", of this title, a minimum of eighty (80) square feet of private, usable open space shall be provided for each residential unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches, patios, decks, and enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other accessways do not count toward this requirement. Per the submitted, PUD Map (Section VIII.E) and conceptual elevations (Section VIII.F), private open space is shown for each unit in the form of first and second story porches. The specific sizes of the proposed porches is unclear but they appear to be greater than the required minimum 80 square feet. The Applicant should show compliance with this standard by graphically depicting the dimensions of the proposed porches with the required Design Review submittal for attached units. C. Residential Use Standards: 1. Multi-Family: Notwithstanding the provisions of chapter 2, "District Regulations", of this title, multi-family dwellings may be an allowed use when approved through a planned unit development. Not applicable for this development. 2. Housing Types: A variety of housing types shall be included within a single planned development, including attached units (townhouses, duplexes), detached units (patio homes), single- family and multi-family units, regardless of the district classification of the site, provided that the overall density limit of the district is maintained. As noted Page 10 above, 45 of the 48 units are proposed as townhomes. The remaining three units are made up of one single-family attached and one detached single-family home. Staff finds the Applicant needs to include an additional housing type that is more dominant than the few remnant unit types noted. As discussed above, Staff recommends the central units be designed to front on the internal mew and become alley-loaded. This would add 12 units of different type than the garage dominated townhomes currently proposed. However, if Commission and/or Council determine otherwise, Staff recommends additional conditions be included that increase or decrease one or more other housing types in this development. 3. Density Formula: Residential density in a planned development shall be calculated by multiplying the net residential area (gross acreage less the area of nonresidential uses) by the maximum number of dwelling units per acre allowed for the district in which the site is located. There are no non-residential uses proposed with this development but Staff believes the creek easement should be removed from the density calculation as this area will be non-buildable in perpetuity. Once this area is removed, the density of the project becomes 8.6 du/ac. This is above the allowed gross density of the underlying future land use designation but Staff is only using this calculation to show compliance with the PUD standards where the overall gross density calculation is still accurate by definition. 4. Density Bonus: A residential density bonus may be given for dedications of land for public use such as school, park, fire station or recreational facility provided to the public entity by donation or at a cost less than, or equal to, the applicant's predevelopment cost for that land. The bonus shall be proportional to the amount of land being dedicated. For example, if ten percent (10%) of the total property is being dedicated, the density bonus shall be ten percent (10%). However, in no case shall the bonus exceed twenty five percent (25%) of the units permitted by the district. The Applicant is not requesting a density bonus; Staff finds this standard not applicable in this case. Staff finds the proposed development to be generally consistent with the PUD purpose statements and standards applicable for this project if the Applicant makes the revisions recommended by Staff. B. Private Streets/Access: Access for this development is proposed via a private street connection to S. Locust Grove in the southeast corner of the site aligning with E. Coastline St. on the east side of Locust Grove (the access into Tradewinds Subdivision). All private streets appear to meet UDC dimensional standards for width, number of units, and turnarounds. Because the site is a triangle shape, bordered on two sides by arterial streets and on one side by the Ten Mile Creek, there is no opportunity for connectivity to any adjacent site and so ACHD prefers private streets within the development. Consequently, because private streets take less right-of-way than public streets and because of the constraints just noted, the Applicant agrees with this assessment and has proposed private streets throughout the development. City code requires that private streets are to be used in either a mew or gated development and this Applicant has proposed neither. Within the PUD analysis above, Staff has recommended that Lots 2-14, Block 2 become alley-loaded garages off of the private street by requesting to eliminate the required parking pad through the PUD request. Once the Applicant does this, the units can be pushed towards the streets and the micro-path already proposed between these units can be placed in a common lot and become a mew. Thus, the development would include a mew and meet the Private Street standards. Page 11 The access point into the development does not meet ACHD district policy but they are modifying their policy to accommodate access into the development because this is the best place for an access to a residential development. This is largely because of the site constraints already outlined above. The Applicant is proposing to construct private streets that are 24’ wide with 5’ attached sidewalk on one side of the streets throughout the project. Staff supports the inclusion of the sidewalk on one side to ensure adequate pedestrian access in the development. At the north end of the main street within the development (labeled as Compass Lane on the landscape plans) the Applicant is proposing an emergency only access to Victory Road. This access is required if more than 30 homes are to be constructed. Staff is not aware of the kind of emergency access proposed but Meridian Fire prefers bollard type accesses for added efficiency in emergency situations; Meridian Fire has approved the requested preliminary plat for fire access, turnarounds, and road widths. Near the center of the development the Applicant is showing a hammerhead type turnaround because that dead-end street is longer than 150’ and therefore is required to have a turnaround for emergency vehicles. Since the hammerhead does not take up the full length of a buildable lot, the Applicant is proposing the rest of that lot to be a small area of open space. With Staff’s recommendations discussed in the PUD analysis, this currently small open space area would become part of the larger common open space mew lot. Further analysis is below in the open space section. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There appears to be an existing home on the property and this building will be demolished at the time of development. There are no other site improvements known at this time. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed use is attached single-family and townhomes whichare listed as principally permitted uses in the R-15 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. There is one detached unit proposed closest to the entrance of the development. As discussed in the comprehensive plan section above, the proposed use of attached single-family homes would be a new type of residential use within almost a square mile in every direction of this development. So long as the Applicant complies with the recommended conditions of approval, including those regarding adding an alley-loaded product type, Staff finds that the proposed use will be a welcomed addition to the City of Meridian and add more housing options in this area of the City. E. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): The proposed lots and the private streets appear to meet all UDC dimensional standards per the submitted preliminary plat. This includes property sizes, required street frontages, and road widths for the requested R-15 zoning district. As noted above, the Applicant is requesting to reduce the rear setback on a section of the proposed lots within the subdivision. This is the only request the Applicant is making that would adjust the required dimensional standards. If the PUD request is approved, then all lots will be in compliance with the dimensional standards of the R-15 zoning district and the PUD request. In addition, all subdivision developments are also required to comply with Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards (UDC 11-6C-3). Staff finds the proposed project meets these standards. Page 12 F. Parking (UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11- 3C-6 for single-family detached and attached dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. Future development should comply with these standards. No parking plan was submitted with the application. The proposed street sections (29 feet wide) of the private streets within the development, shown on the submitted preliminary plat, CANNOT accommodate parking on either side of the street. The entirety of the private streets will be required to be labeled as “No Parking,” per the Meridian Fire recommendations. Each unit will be required to meet the off-street parking standards and Staff encourages the developer of this site to include provisions within their HOA bylaws that prohibit garages being used as storage. This would help alleviate some of the parking issues seen throughout the City and especially in areas where no on-street parking is allowed. The PUD Site Map submitted by the applicant appears to show compliance with the parking standards with a two-car garage for each unit and a parking pad. However, if Council and the Applicant agree with Staff’s recommendations, the 12 internal units would lose their parking pad through a PUD request to eliminate that requirement as allowed through the PUD process. This would eliminate some parking in the subdivision but the Applicant is also proposing to construct guest parking off the main private street in three areas of the development to total 12 additional spaces. Staff is amenable to using some of the other small open space pockets for additional guest parking or losing a lot to accommodate additional guest parking. For example, Lot 1, Block 2 and losing the unit on Lot 14, Block 2. Staff is only making a specific recommendation to add off-street parking on Lot 1, Block 2. G. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): No multi-use pathways are proposed or required with this development because the required multi-use pathway is already constructed on the west side of the Tenmile Creek on an adjacent parcel. This Applicant is proposing a 5-foot wide pathway on this side of the creek and behind the proposed homes. This pathway connects to the private streets at the southern end of the project and thru the common open space lot located midblock on the west side of the site. This pathway also continues north and connects to the required sidewalk along Victory Road. In addition, the Applicant is proposing a micro-path between the center-most lots that connects to the required sidewalk along Locust Grove. This path should be kept and included within the recommended mew to serve as the sole pedestrian connection to Locust Grove. Therefore, the additional pathway connections shown to Locust grove are not needed and should be removed. H. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): Five -foot attached sidewalks are proposed along one side of all internal local streets. Sidewalks are not required when constructing Private Streets. There is no existing sidewalk along Victory Road or Locust Grove; both arterial streets are scheduled to be widened as part of the roundabout project at this intersection in 2021-22, according to ACHD, as stated above. Detached sidewalks are required along arterial roadways per UDC 11-3A-17. The Applicant has already agreed to dedicate additional right of way to ACHD for the roundabout and future widening of Victory and Locust Grove. ACHD is requiring the Applicant to road trust for the sidewalk improvements as the roundabout and associated improvements will likely be constructed prior to construction of this site. In addition, this will ensure any improvements made by the Applicant will not have to be removed to make the planned roundabout improvements. Therefore, Page 13 Staff is recommending that the Applicant comply with the ACHD conditions of approval for the arterial sidewalks. As discussed, the Applicant is proposing 5-foot attached sidewalks on one side of the internal private streets to accommodate better pedestrian access through the development. Staff recommends that these sidewalks and every expected pedestrian crossing be constructed with pavers, stamped concrete, or similar to clearly delineate the sidewalks from the driving surface and to subsequently help with pedestrian safety. I. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): A 25-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to E. Victory and S. Locust Grove because they are arterial streets. This buffer should be landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C and placed into a common lot that is at least 25-feet wide. In most cases this common lot should also contain the detached sidewalk required along all arterial roadways but in this case the sidewalk abutting this site will be built with the ACHD roundabout project. The submitted landscape plan and preliminary plat depict a 25-foot wide landscape buffer; the correct number of trees appear to be shown on the submitted landscape plans (see Section VIII.C). However, there is no landscape calculations table as required by code. The Applicant shall be required to submit revised plans that include a calculation table depicting the linear footage of the landscape buffers, the required number of trees, their common name and their scientific name, the class of tree, and the dimensions of the tree canopy at maturity; each type of shrub proposed to be used should also be included in the calculations table. The Applicant shows beautiful landscaping throughout the site but Staff has concerns on whether the trees shown abutting the internal private streets will be able to be placed there. This concern stems from the Applicant proposing the water and sewer mains nearly 20 feet apart within the right-of-way dictating that the overall easement width will encroach into the front yards of the homes. These utility easements cannot contain any vegetation more than grass per Public Works standards. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Applicant graphically depict the vegetation on the submitted landscape plans can be constructed in the locations shown OR revise the proposed water and sewer main locations to alleviate this issue by reducing the overall width of the easement. Common open space is required to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3G-3E. The total square footage of common open space is not included because there is no Landscape Calculations table on the submitted landscape plans demonstrating compliance with UDC standards. However, Staff can graphically see that the open space lots are vegetated according to UDC standards. Still, the Applicant will be required to add a calculations table with the recommendation noted above and revise the landscape plan to show the addition of the mew between Lots 2-14, Block 2 as recommended by Staff. The proposed pathway located behind the homes and adjacent to the Tenmile Creek is also required to be landscaped with a tree every 100 feet per UDC 11-3B-12. However, the Applicant did not include a 5-foot wide landscape bed on either side meant for the required trees. The Applicant will need work with the irrigation district to obtain a license agreement to include at least 5 feet of landscaping on one side of this pathway. Otherwise, the Applicant will need to apply for Alternative Compliance with the Final Plat submittal so show an equal or better means of compliance with this requirement. J. Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3G): A minimum of 10% qualified open space meeting the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B is required. According to the property size of 7.69 acres, the Applicant should supply at least 0.77 Page 14 acres of qualified open space, or approximately 33,500 square feet. The applicant is proposing 3.28 acres of open space, of which 2.84 acres is shown as qualifying open space on the submitted open space exhibit (see Section VIII.D). Some of the area listed as qualifying open space by the Applicant does not meet UDC standards due to their size not being at least 5,000 square feet. Once this area is removed, the qualified open space proposed is 2.68 acres, down from 2.84; the Applicant should revise the open space exhibit to correctly label the qualified open space. More importantly, the open space for this development is vastly made up of the Tenmile Creek easement (2.12 acres) and the arterial street buffers (19,281 square feet of qualifying area). All of this area is qualifying but the Tenmile Creek will be left natural (no improvements) and will be a buffer and more of a visual amenity than usable open space for the development. Abutting the creek and generally mid-block, the Applicant is proposing an open space lot that is approximately 5,150 square feet. This open space lot contains one set of the amenities and a micro-path that connects the private street to the pathway along the creek. This open space lot and micro-path offers a clear connection to one of the other micro-paths in the development that runs between the homes in the center of the development and the attached sidewalks throughout the development. This micro-path should become part of the mew recommended by Staff and increase the usable open space provided by this development. Prior to the City Council hearing, the Applicant should revise the open space calculations to show this additional common open space lot containing the mew between Lots 2-14, Block 2. K. Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G): Based on the area of the proposed plat, 7.69 acres, a minimum of one (1) qualified site amenity is required to be provided per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C. The applicant has proposed four (4) qualifying amenities in multiple locations: gazebos, seating around small plazas, climbing rocks, and walking paths. The proposed amenities exceed the minimum UDC requirements and Staff finds them to be applicable for a community of this kind due to the variety of activity levels they can accommodate. L. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. Fencing is shown on the landscape plan along the subdivision boundary and around the central open space lot but no other fencing is shown. Fencing shown next to any open space shall be open-vision or semi- private fencing per UDC requirements. According to the Applicant, the exclusion of fencing between homes is purposeful despite the homes being a for sale product. The Applicant intends for the open areas between homes to be a more shared space than what is normal in a subdivision. Staff’s recommendations to include a mew for some of the units lends itself to this design as the units would front on the mew and fencing is not always included in these instances. Fencing is not required in these areas so Staff has no conditions regarding this. However, there should be open-vision fencing along the western edge of the pathway adjacent to the Tenmile Creek to ensure the safety of pedestrians, especially children. Staff is recommending a condition of approval to show this additional fencing. M. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): The Applicant has submitted sample elevations of the attached, triplex, single-family homes for this project (see Section VIII.F). Page 15 The submitted elevations show all two-story attached structures with two-car garages and identical finishing materials of wood and stone. In addition, the elevations show modern architecture designs with shed roofs, second story patios with glass railings, and stone accents that go the full height of the proposed homes. Staff has also not received elevations for the one detached home nor the one duplex unit. However, attached single-family homes require design review approval prior to building permit submittal and at that point, Staff will ensure compliance with the Architectural Standards Manual. The submitted elevations for the townhomes units appear to meet the architectural standards but with the design review application for the site, the Applicant will be required show additional styles and colors for these units. In addition, Staff recommends the Applicant provide a different design for the units fronting on the recommended mew. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation and zoning with the requirement of a Development Agreement, the preliminary plat, and planned unit development with the conditions noted in Section VIII.A per the findings in Section IX of this staff report. The Director has approved the private street and alternative compliance applications. B. Commission: Summary following Commission meeting. C. City Council: To be heard at future date. Page 16 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit Map Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 B. Preliminary Plat (dated: 11/2/2020) Page 20 C. Landscape Plan (dated: 11/2/2020) Page 21 D. Open Space Exhibit (dated: 11/02/2020) Page 22 E. Site Plan – “PUD Map” (dated: 11/02/2020) Page 23 F. Conceptual Building Elevations Page 24 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. Currently, a fee of $303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six (6) months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the approved Preliminary Plat, PUD Map, Landscape Plan, and conceptual building elevations for the development, especially the attached single-family dwellings, included in Section VIII and the provisions contained herein. b. The Applicant shall comply with the ordinances in effect at the time of application submittal. c. Direct lot access to E. Victory Road and S. Locust Grove Road shall be prohibited. Page 25 d. The entire frontage improvements along E. Victory Road and S. Locust Grove Road shall be completed with the first phase of development. e. All sidewalks and pedestrian crossings within the subdivision shall be constructed with pavers, stamped concrete, or similar to clearly delineate the pedestrian pathways throughout the development and to add to the character of the private development. f. Lots 2-14, Block 2 shall have reduced parking standards to include only the required two (2) garage spaces per the Planned Unit Development request. 2. The Applicant shall revise their Planned Unit Development request to: 1) reduce the lots being asked for a rear-yard setback relief; 2) request an elimination of the parking pad requirement of the off-street parking standards (UDC 11-3C-6) for Lots 2-14, Block 2; and 3) include a mew at least 20-feet wide between these lots to meet the PUD and Private Street standards. 3. At least ten (10) days prior to the City Council hearing, the preliminary plat included in Section VIII.B, dated 11/02/2020, shall be revised as follows: a. Revise note #4 to list the building lots that have a reduced rear-yard setback per the PUD request (Lots 2-6, Block 3) b. Revise the plat to show Lot 71, Block 2 as Lot 8, Block 2 to correct a labeling mistake. c. Revise the plat to show Lots 2-14 as alley-loaded homes that front on the central mew between them commensurate with the revised PUD request. d. Revise the plat to show Lot 5, Block 2 as at least a 20-foot wide common lot creating a mew and containing the proposed micro-path. e. Revise the plat to show the removal of the two additional pathway connections to Locust Grove that are north and south of the micro-path located in the mew between Lots 2-14, Block 2. f. Revise the plat to show all sidewalks and expected pedestrian crossings to be constructed with pavers, stamped concrete, or similar to clearly delineate the pedestrian pathways throughout the development and to add to the character of the private development. g. Show additional guest parking on Lot 1, Block 2. 4. At least ten (10) days prior to the City Council hearing, the landscape plan included in Section VIII.C, dated 11/02/2020 shall be revised as follows: a. Include a landscape calculations table that includes the following information at a minimum: the linear footage of the landscape buffers, the required number of trees, their common name and their scientific name, the class of tree, and the dimensions of the tree canopy at maturity; each type of shrub proposed to be used should also be included in the calculations table with the same accessory information as is required for the proposed trees. b. Show open vision fencing on the west side of the pathway abutting the Tenmile Creek; all fencing shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. c. Revise the landscape plan to show the recommended layout changes; any changes in landscape calculations shall also be reflected in the calculations table. Page 26 d. The Applicant shall graphically depict the vegetation on the submitted landscape plans can be constructed in the locations shown OR revise the proposed water and sewer main locations to alleviate this issue by reducing the overall width of the utility easement. e. Show the required landscaping on the western side of the pathway abutting the Tenmile Creek per UDC 11-3B-12. 5. At least ten (10) days prior to the City Council hearing, the open space exhibit included in Section VIII.D shall be revised to accurately depict and label the qualified and non-qualified open space per the standards in UDC 11-3G-3 and per the revisions recommended by Staff. 6. Future development shall be consistent with the R-15 dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7 for all buildable lots except for those lots given a reduced rear setback with the PUD request. 7. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit except for Lots 2-14, Block 2, per the PUD request. 8. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval as noted in Section IX.H. 9. The Applicant shall work with the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District to obtain a license agreement to include a 5-foot wide landscape strip and the required landscaping (including trees) per UDC 11-3B-12 prior to applying for the Final Plat application; IF the Applicant can prove this agreement could not be reached, the Applicant shall apply for Alternative Compliance at the time of Final Plat application submittal for the required landscaping. 10. Administrative Design Review application is required to be submitted and approved prior to submittal of any building permit applications for single-family attached dwellings as applicable. 11. A minimum of 80 square feet of private, usable open space shall be provided for each dwelling unit; this requirement can be satisfied through porches, patios, decks and enclosed yards as set forth in UDC 11-7-4B. 12. The Ten Mile Creek that resides along the western boundary of the subject site shall be protected during construction. 13. The Applicant shall comply with and maintain all applicable standards for the proposed Private Streets as outlined in UDC 11-3F. 14. “No Parking” signs shall be erected on both sides of the private streets throughout the development; coordinate with Joe Bongiorno of the Fire Department if you have any questions regarding this condition. 15. The proposed development shall have a reduced rear-yard setback of no less than ten (10) feet for Lots 1-6, Block 3 per the Planned Unit Development request. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 Connect the Compass Lane water main north to the water main in Victory Road. 1.2 At the end of Navigation Road, provide a meter pit for a 1” service and a 4” sleeve to the northeast at the proposed edge of the future roundabout. This will be used for a future water service to the roundabout for landscaping. Page 27 1.3 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. A streetlight future installation agreement will be required for the streetlights on Locust Grove and Victory. Locust Grove and Victory are scheduled to be improved by ACHD and streetlights will be installed during the improvements. Contact the Transportation and Utility Coordinator for additional information. 1.4 The geotechnical investigative report prepared by SITE Consulting, LLC dated April 6, 2020, indicates some specific construction considerations and recommendations. The applicant shall be responsible for the strict adherence of these considerations and recommendations to help ensure that homes are constructed upon suitable bearing soils, and that groundwater does not become a problem with home construction. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code (MCC), the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian’s standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2” x 11” map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year- round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. Page 28 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3 -feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. Page 29 2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT (MFD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=216616&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ity D. POLICE DEPARTMENT (MPD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=216663&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ity E. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCHOOL IMPACT TABLE https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=216459&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ity F. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (DEQ) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=216673&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ity G. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT (CDH) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=216532&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ity H. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT (ACHD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=217090&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ity X. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone (UDC 11-5B-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission, the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Page 30 Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment to R-15 and proposed residential uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, if all provisions of the Development Agreement and conditions of approval are complied with. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed districts, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment will allow for the development of single- family attached homes which will contribute to the range of housing opportunities available within the City and especially in the area immediate to this site, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and the purpose statement of the residential districts. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including, but not limited to, school districts; and Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment will not result in an adverse impact on the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City. 5. The annexation (as applicable) is in the best interest of city. Staff finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City per the Analysis in Section VI. B. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Staff finds that the proposed plat, with Staff’s recommendations, is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density, transportation, and pedestrian connectivity. (Please see Comprehensive Plan analysis and other analysis in Section V and Section VI of this report for more information.) 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds that public services will be provided to the subject property with development. (See Section IX of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City’s capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at their own cost, Staff finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Page 31 Staff finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development based upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., Police, Fire, ACHD, etc.). (See Section VII for more information.) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and, Staff is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the platting of this property. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis and approves of the project with specific conditions of approval relating to the scheduled road improvements adjacent to the subject site. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The Applicant is preserving the Tenmile Creek that resides on the subject property; therefore, Staff finds the Applicant meets this finding. C. Private Street Findings: In order to approve the application, the Director shall find the following: 1. The design of the private street meets the requirements of this Article; The design of the proposed private streets complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F- 4. See analysis in Section VI for more information. 2. Granting approval of the private street would not cause damage hazard, or nuisance, or other detriment to persons, property, or uses in the vicinity; and Staff does not anticipate the proposed private streets would cause any hazard, nuisance or other detriment to persons, property or uses in the vicinity if they are designed as proposed and constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4B. 3. The use and location of the private street shall not conflict with the comprehensive plan and/or the regional transportation plan. The location of the private streets does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and/or the regional transportation plan despite needing Alternative Compliance for its connection directly to an arterial street. With the constraints detailed and analyzed for this development, Staff finds that local street access has been provided via a private street. 4. The proposed residential development (if applicable) is a mew or gated development. The proposed residential development does not include a mew or gates. The Applicant shall be required to include a mew between the central lots of the development to meet this finding. If the conditions of approval are adhered to, Staff finds this development in compliance with this finding. D. Alternative Compliance: In order to grant approval for alternative compliance to allow Private Streets directly off an arterial, the director shall determine the following findings: 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements is not feasible; OR Access to this development is provided by a private street and the UDC restricts access to both Victory Road and Locust Grove Road, arterial streets. There are no available local street connections to the subject property due to it being a triangle shape bordered on two sides by arterial streets and the other by the Tenmile Creek. Because the property is not Page 32 served by public local street streets and any public street would not be able to be extended to any adjacent property, the Director finds strict adherence to the UDC is not feasible and approves the request for the private streets to directly connect to S. Locust Grove Road, an arterial street. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and The Director finds the development proposed by the applicant as a whole provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements in that it contributes to the unique character of the area and provides diversity in housing types available within the City. 3. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of the surrounding properties. The Director finds that the proposed alternative means will not be detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended use/character of the surrounding properties and will contribute to the character and variety of housing types in this area of the City. E. Planned Unit Development: 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 planned development request, the council shall make the following findings: 1. The planned unit development demonstrates exceptional high quality in site design through the provision of cohesive, continuous, visually related and functionally linked patterns of development, street and pathway layout, and building design; Staff finds the planned unit development demonstrates high quality design in the ways listed above and analyzed in Section VI of the staff report with Staff’s recommendations. 2. The planned unit development preserves the significant natural, scenic and/or historic features; Because the Applicant is proposing to preserve the Tenmile Creek, Staff finds the significant natural features of the site are being preserved. 3. The arrangement of uses and/or structures in the development does not cause damage, hazard, or nuisance to persons or property in the vicinity; Staff finds no proof that the proposed uses or structures will cause damage, hazard, or nuisance to persons or property in the vicinity, especially after the adjacent road improvements are complete. 4. The internal street, bike and pedestrian circulation system is designed for the efficient and safe flow of vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians without having a disruptive influence upon the activities and functions contained within the development, nor place an undue burden upon existing transportation and other public services in the surrounding area; If all conditions of approval and recommended revisions are approved and adhered to, Staff finds the internal street, bike, and pedestrian circulation system is designed for the efficient and safe flow of vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians without disrupting the activities and functions within the development or surround area. Page 33 5. Community facilities, such as a park, recreational, and dedicated open space areas are functionally related and accessible to all dwelling units via pedestrian and/or bicycle pathways; Staff finds the proposed sidewalk and pathway connections within the development provide adequate and efficient access to any nearby parks and dedicated open space for all dwelling units within the subdivision. 6. The proposal complies with the density and use standards requirements in accord with chapter 2, "District Regulations", of this title; Staff finds the proposed development complies with the density and use standards of the requested R-15 zoning district and the future land use designation of Medium Density Residential. 7. The amenities provided are appropriate in number and scale to the proposed development; and Staff finds the proposed amenities are appropriate in number and scale for the proposed development because the proposed amenities are less common within the city and the overall area of development (approximately 3 acres) is relatively small in size. 8. The planned unit development is in conformance with the comprehensive plan. As noted in Section V of this staff report, Staff finds the development to be in conformance with the comprehensive plan.