HomeMy WebLinkAboutCedarcreek Subdivision PP
PP 06-007
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING
June 1,2006
APPLICANT Centennial Development, LLC ITEM NO. 11
REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from May 18, 2006: Preliminary Plat approval of
85 single family residential building lots and 12 common lots for Cedarcreek Subdivision -
470 West McMillan Road
AGENCY
COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
See Previous Item Packet / Minutes in Al Packet
See Staff Report In AZ Packet
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
\(g..C.CX{\~ ~ () c
~~#
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER: ~
Contacted: ~~~ Date: q.3:>/~
Emailed:5~<€./t:1.cId~AS..(klh Ais-. ;H..tStaff Initials:
Phone: ?~-3<i'~
I.$!-
Materials presented at public meeUngs shall become property of the City of Meridian.
MeliLli<l11 Planning & Zoning Commission
May 18, 2006
Page 7 of 47
Brown: Any other questions?
Rohm: Thank you very much.
Brown: Thank you.
Item 5:
. Continued Public Hearing from April 20, 2006: AZ 06-009 Request for
Annexation and Zoning of 19.57 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for
Cedarcreek Subdivision by Centennial Development, LLC - 470 West
McMillan Road:
Item 6:
Continued Public Hearing from April 20, 2006: PP 06-007 Request for
a Preliminary Plat with 85 single-family residential lots and 12 common
lots for Cedarcreek Subdivision by Centennial Development, LLC - 470
West McMillan Road:
Rohm: At this time I'd like to open the continued Public Hearing from April 20th, 2006,
for AZ 06-009 and PP 06-007, for the sole purpose of continuing these two items to the
regularly scheduled meeting of June 1 st, 2006.
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move that at the request of the applicant we re-continue AZ 06-009 and PP
06-007, to our regularly scheduled meeting of June 1st, 2006.
Moe: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we continue AZ 06-009 and PP 06-007. All
those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Rohm: Okay.
Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? Just real quick. What do we have in the que for June?
Do we -- is it --
Rohm: I believe that we are going to have the third meeting and it will be the fifth
Thursday of June. Is that what your question was?
Newton-Huckabay: I was just -- I guess that would be the essence of it, yeah.
Rohm: At this point in time I believe there has been an agenda created for that fifth
Thursday and I couldn't tell you what has been placed on it, but I believe that they are --
the planning staff has intended to add that to our regular schedule.
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04120/06
STAFF REPORT
Hearing Date: April 20, 2006
Continued from March 16, 2006
Planning Commission
'. ,0;~, . J~~i
II 1- .~ ".j .' 'IIj
...". e. .}i-:r ~
"';'~"4~'~'
~'I'-<l" ;'H..1.\'
erididn~~'~
SUBJECT
Joe Guenther, Associate City Planner
Meridian Planning Department
Cedarcreek Subdivision
\_0 l:'......l-V.,
,~.j). .
~:!~~ T \1.'1' ~.I.-~.
~-=-,~~~.-~ ;;,'<
"
t'
.",~t//
TO
FROM:
AZ-06-009
~~...~_..,! ~ ";,.,
Annexation of 19.57 acres from RUT to R-8
PP-06-007
85 Sing1e-tamily residential lots and 12 other lots
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The request is for annexation and zoning of 19.57 acres of land that is currently zoned RUT in Ada
County. The applicant is seeking an R-8 zone (Medium Density Residential District) for the el1tin~ parcel.
The applicant has :submitted a preliminary plat for the subject property for 85 single-family lots all with
detached products, and 12 common/other lots on 19.57 acres. Amenities for the development include an
open space lot with a tot lot and parkway planters adjuining the streets.
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recorrunending approval of the subject annexation and
zoning (AZ-06-009-Revised), preliminary plat (PP-06-007-Revised) for the reasons listed herein and
subject to the conditions of approval listed. The applicant proposes to sewer this development via
extensions of mains in Paramount Subdivision and water mains in McMillan Road.
/, "
'n.' '
~:. 1 '
;i:
I ~..~ ". .-
.... .~-", I . .
PROPOSED MOTIONS (to be considered after the public hearing)
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the
City Council of File Number(s) AZ-06w009/PP-06-007 as presented in the staff report fotthe
hearing date of April 20, 2006, and the preliminaty plat labeled C-l, dated December 21,2005
with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed modifications).
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the
City Council of File Number(s) AZ-06-009/PP~06-007 as presented in the staff report for the
hearing date of April 20, 2006, for the following reasons: (you should state specific reasons for
denial of the annexation or plat and you must state specific rcasou(s) for denial of the conditional
use pennit.)
Continuance
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Number(s)
AZ-06-009IPP-06-007 to the hearing da;te of (insert continued hearing date here) for the
following reason(s): (you should state specific reason(s) for continuance.)
3. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
a. Site AddresslLocation:
N central location off of McMillan Road and ~ mile west of Meridian Road
81/2 of the SWl/4 of the SW 'l4 of4NlW25
b. Owner
Cedar-creek Subdivision
~-06-009!PP-06~07
PAGE 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
Dalice Chester
470 W. McMillanRd
Meridian, Idaho 83642
c. Applicant:
Centennial Development, LLC
36 E. Pine Street
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Agent: Shawn Nickel
Land Consultants Inc.
52 N. 2nd street
Eagle, Idaho, 83616
d. Representative: Shawn Nickel, Land Consultants, Inc
e. Present Zoning: COUNTY-RUT
f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation:
Medium Density Residential- North Meridian Comprehensive Plan Amendment
g- Description of Applicant's Request:
1. Date of preliminary plat (attached as Exhibit AI): December 21, 2005.
2. Date oflandscape plan (attached as Exhibit A2): January 13, 2006
h. Applicant's Statement/Justification: The proposed overall density (4.34 dwellings per acre) of
the project complies with the City's designation of Medium Density Residential, which
allows for residential densities which allows 3 to 8 dwellings per acre. We believe the use
of the proj ect will provide a development which will complement the surrounding land
uses and will be a compatible continuation of the Paramount project north and east of the
site.
4. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application will in fact constitute an annexation and/or rezone as determined
by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11
Chapter 5, a public hearing is required hefore the City Council on this matter.
b. The subject application will in fact constitute a preliminary plat as determined by City
Ordinance. By reason ofthe provisionR ofthe Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 6, a
public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter.
c. Newspaper notifications published on: March 13,2006 and February 27,2006
d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: February 22,2006
e. Applicant posted notice un site by: February 27, 2006
5. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use(s): Agricultural
b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area:
c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning
1. North: Paramount Subdivision, R-8
AgriculturallUrbanizing
2. East: Paramount Subdivision, R-40
Cedan;:reek Subdivision
AZ-06 -009/PP-06-007 PAGE 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
3. South: Cedar Springs Subdivision #4 and #5- R-8 and L-O
4. West: Agricultural Ada County RUT
d. History of Previous Actions: N/A
e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities
1. Public Works
Location of sewer: This property is planned to sewer to future mains extended
from the Paramount Subdivision to the north.
Location of water: There is currently water main in W. McMillian Road, and
future cormections from planned mains in Paramount.
Issues or concerns: This development is not sewerable until Paramount brings
sewer mains down to this development.
2. Vegetation: Agricultural/Irrigated
3. Flood plain: NA
4. CanalsIDitches Irrigation: Lemp Canal Local Lateral
5. Hazards: None Identified
6. Proposed Zoning: R-8
7. Size of Property: 19.57 acres
8. Description of Use: 85 single family residential lots
f. Subdivision Plat Information
1. Residential Lots: 85
2. Non-residential Lots: 4- Future ROW lots
3. Common Lots: 8
4. Total Lots: 97
5. Gross Density: 4.34 units per acre
g. Landscaping
1. Width of street buffer(s): 30 feet (25 required) on McMillan Road.
2. Width ofbuffer(s) between land uses: none required (all residential)
3. Perct:ntage of site as useable open space:
The applicant has defined 1.12 acres or 5.7% open space, Lot 18 Block 6, Lot 14
DIock 2, and parkways (See section 5-h for additional analysis)
4. Other landscaping standards:
The landscape architect shall certify that one tree per 8,000 square teet of lawn
has been provided on the landscape plan.
Lot 9, Block I shown as a non-buildable parcel to be retained by the developer
this lot shall be landscaped with lawn or other vegetative undercover until such time as
the parcel may be incorporated into a larger opt:n space lot or platted as a buildable lot.
The existing canal on Lot 9 Block 1 shall be tiled as per UDC ll-3A-6.
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP -06 -007
PAGE 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAt' l' REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
h. Required Open Space:
The applicant is required to provide a minimum of five percent qualified open space. UDC
ll-3G-3 A and B. The applicant is showing:
Public Open Space Area:
Lot 8 Block 3 as 36,786 sqlft:
Collector Buffers:
Lot 14 Block 2 - 2,700 sq/ft
Lot 18 Block 6 - 2,550 sq/ft:
Park.-way planters along streets -1.14 acres or 49,658 sq/ft total. Minus 26'x 8' x 69 '=
14,352 sq/ft for 35,306 qualified sq/ft: for the parkways on single~family detached, street
loaded products.
The total open space qualified is 77,342 sq/ft for 9.0% qualified open space_
1. Amenities:
The applicant is required to provide one qualified amenity for single family residential
subdivisions that are under 20 acres in area.
The applicant is showing qualified site amenities as follows:
11-3G-3C-l Quality of Life Atm:nities - None
11-3G-3C-2 - Recreation Amenities ~ children's play structures
11-3G-3C-3 - Pedestrian Amenities - None
Amenities shall be generally located in centrally accessible locations and all common areas
shall be maintained by the Cedarcreek Homeowners Association. The applicant is proposing
the tot lot as the required amenity.
1. Proposed and Required Residential Standards
R-8 (Standards)
Setbacks (*all streets local) Proposed
** measured from back of sidewalk
Street setback to Living Area **
Sidc Accessed Garage** 15
Front Accessed Garage** 20
Side 4
Rear 12
Street frontage -
With garagc facing street 50
With alley loaded 40
Lot Size -SF detached
With garage facing street 5,000
Alley Loaded 4,680
Cedarcreek Subdivision
A 7.-06-009/PP .06-007
15
Required
15
15
20
4
12
5U
40
5,000
4,000
PAGE 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
Maximum Building Height 35 35
1. Proposed and Required Non-Residential
Non-residential lots are to be used for amenities and open space. Except the lots
proposed to be retained by the developer which shall comply with the required
improvements listed in this report. Lots to be retained by the developer for future right of
way acquisition shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval.
m. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.):
Direct lut access to McMillan is to be prohibited, including Lot 9 Block 1. Access to
Paramount subdivision is as proposed with connections at Seel Way, Silverspruce and
Street E. A stub street with full services shall be provided to the property excluded at the
south west listed as Reitennan property and shown as Ramsbrook Street.
For a det;:tiled report on the public streets and al,;l,;ess points to public streets, please the
attached staff report from the Ada County Highway District (Exhibit C).
6. AGENCY COMMENTS MEETING On February 24,2006 staff held an agency comments
meeting, all agencies attending provided comments as attached in Exhibit B.
Staff has included all comments and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the
attached Exhibit B.
7. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICmS AND GOALS
The subject site is designated 'Medium Density Residential' on the North Meridian
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The Council approved the North Meridian
Comprehensive Plan Amendment on March 7, 2006. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan,
medium density is defmed as areas including single-family homes at densities of three to eight
dwelling units per acre. Staff fInds that the proposed density of (4.34 d.u.lacre) for the subject
application conforms with the North Meridian Comprehensive purpose and intent. In the
applicant's submittal letter, dated January 13, 2006 several Comprehensive Plan policies axe
listed (please see applicant's letter).
Staff also fmds 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 thc provision of all public services
(Chapter VII, Goal ill, Objective A, Action 1)
When tht: City established its Area of City Impact, it plarmed to provide City services to the
subject properties. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands
proposed to be armexed in the following manner:
· Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the
developer's expense.
· lhe 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.
· The subject lands current(v lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sherijf's
Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police
Department (MPD).
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/I'r-06-007
PAGE 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04120/06
. The western roadway adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and
maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACHD). This service will not
change.
. The northern roadway adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and
maintained by the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). 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 Meridiun 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.
. "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal
IV, Objective D, Action item 2)
Staff finds that McMillan Road will serve as the main access pointfor all the pruperties in
this subdivision as well as a connection into the future collector roadfor Paramount
Subdivision to the East of the site.
The applicant is requesting to retain Lot 1, Block 6, Lot 9 Block 5,and Lot 11 Block 1 of the
design dated December 21, 2005. This lot .I:hould be noted on the plat thut it is for future
right of way reservation for when ACHD roadway improvements occur. The width of right of
way reservations shall be as setforth by ACHD
. "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridors (setback,
vegetation, low walls, berms, etc)." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 4)
As depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. the applicant is proposing to
construct a 30-foot wide landscape buffer along McMillan Road. Staff is supportive of these
widths, as long as the entire buffer lies outside the ultimate right-ai-way. S
See Site Specific Conditions in the Preliminary Plat section below in Exhibit C.
. "Cunsider "Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recommended Approach"
from the National Center for Bicycling and walking in all land use decisions." (Chapter VI,
Goalll, Objective A, #3)
This publication encourages jurisdictions to establish bikeway and walkway facilities in new
construction and reconstruction projects, in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient.
The sidewalk connections shown on the landscape plan are disconnected by the out parcel
along McMillan Road. Staff has asked the applicant to work with the owners of the out
parcel to facilitate a sidewalk connection through this site as it lies very near a future school
site. This would be consistent with other out parcel developments in the near vicinity
(Solitude Subdivision and Amber Creek Subdivision)
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP -06-007
PAGE 6
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
. Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent
parcels (Chapter VIT, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1)
All of the properties acijacent to the subject site are designated for medium density residential
or neighborhood center uses on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map.
. Support a variety of residential categorit:s (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 Vll, Goal IV,
Objective C, Action 10)
The subject property i:i designated Medium Density Residential on the North Meridian Future
Land Use Map which identifies this area as an appropriate area for medium density
residential development. This proposal meets the Comprehensive Plan definition of medium
density, with a gross density of 4.34 dwelling units per acre. Staff has reviewed Cedarcreek
Subdivision under the Medium Density Residential North Meridian Future Land Use Map
designatiun and finds the application consistent with the comprehensive designation.
Staff finds that the proposed zoninz and subsequent uses (single-familv homes) will be
harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan.
8. ZONING ORDINANCE
a. Alluwed Uses in the Residential Districts: UDC Table 11-2A-2lists single-family residential
development uses as pennitted uses in the R-8 zoning district.
b. Purpose Statement of Zone:
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (R.8) The purpose of the residential districts is
to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
COlll1ection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential
districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre
and corre>:ponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. Residential
land uses are also allowed within the O-T, TN-C, and TN-R districts as set forth in Chapter 3
Article D.
c.11-3G.1:
Conunon Open Space and Amenity Requirements
The regulations of this Article are intended to provide for common open space and site amenities
in residential districts that improve the livability of residential neighborhoods, buffer the street
edge, and protect natural amenities.
9. ANALYSIS
9a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation
1. ANNEXATION & ZONING ANALYSIS: Based on the policies and goals contained in the
Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Zoning
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-OG-007
PAGE 7
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
Ordinance, staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed Single Family Residential
products. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analYRis offacts and findings.
1.1 The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on Jllnuary 11,
2006 by Clinton Hansen, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate
boundary of the City of Meridian.
1.2 Any future subdivision, uses and construction on this property shall comply with the City
of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time.
1.3 That the applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water
service extension. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will
have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when
services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for nun-domestic
purposes such as landscape irrigation.
1.4 That all fulure development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance
with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. All future uses shall not
involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditiuns of operation that will
be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive
production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
1.5 UDC 11-5B-3D2 provides the P&Z Commission and City Council the authority to require
a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Meridian that may
require some written commitment for all future uses. Due to the homogenous nature of only
residential uses, the submission of a development proposal (PP-06-007), and the compliance
with Meridian City Unified Development Code, staff believes that a Development Allfeement
is not necessary to ensure that this property is developed in a fashion that is consistent with the
comprehensive ~lan designation and does not negatively impact nearby properties. lfthe
Commission or Council feels a development agreement is necessary staff recommends a clear
outline of the commitments ofthc developer being required.
2. PRELIMINARY PLAT SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
2.1 Public Streets and Access:
(CoIUlectivity Paramount Subdivisions)
The stub street from Paramount Subdivision shall connect from N. Seel Way and again from
Street E. The subdivision is constrained by previous development in the areas east and north
of the site and is bound by ACHD policies of inter connectivity. No direct access is allowed
to McMillan Road is approved outside ofthe point of connection permitted by ACHD.
(CoIUlectivity Out Parcel)
A new stub street has been propost:d to the Reiterman property in the southwest comer of the
site. This stub street shall have future public service connections from Ramsbrook Street.
Alley -
A new alley is proposed on Lot 9 Block 4. The UDC does not allow alleys to be placed on a
lot and this lot should be dedicated to ACHD as it will not meet the standards for a private
street as required by UDC 11- 3F.
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 8
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
2.2. Landscaping: Staff is generally supportive of the landscaping design with the following
considerations:
The 30 feet of right-of-way landscaping on McMillan Road shall be maintained by the Home
Owners Associatiun.
A sidewalk connection along McMillan Road shall cunnect to the right of way for the future
Paramount collector road.
If Lot 14 Block 2 and Lot 18 Block 6 are not vacated then they shall be landscaped as
perimeter buffers with open vision fencing to the east.
The landscape plan shall show trees in the parkways compliant with ODe ll-3B-7
Prior to [mal plat the applicant shall submit a landscape plan depicting the required changes
to the landscape plan as detailed by this report.
2.3 Tree Mitigation: Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be
replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent numbt:r of caliper inches of trees
that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees
for those trees that are removed. The applicant should coordinate a tree protection/mitigation
plan with Elroy Huff at the Meridian Parks Department.
2.4. Ditches. Laterals. and Canals: All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of
natural wateIWays, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being
subdivided shall be tiled. Settlers Irrigation District has a local lateral from the Lemp Canal
on this site and has commented on the proposal as showing compliance with the required
improvements.
2.5 Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be
supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to utilize 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 dcvelopel- will be responsible for the payment of assessments
for the common areas prior to signature on the fInal plat by the City Engineer. An
underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the
approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3B-6. See Site Exhibit B below.
2.6. Fencing: The applicant is proposing 1u construct a minimum of a six foot tall solid fence
around the perimeter of the site with four-foot solid fencing along common areas. A detailed
fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the fmal plat. Additional standards fur
fencing and details of fencing material shall be submitted at the time of the fInal plat. If
permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be
installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fences should taper
down to 3 feet maximum within 20 feet of all right-of-way. All fencing should be installed in
accordance with City Code in effect at the time the pencit is issued. The applicant shall
comply with all fencing standards as listed in UDC 11-3A-7.
2.7 Unimproved Right-or-Wav: Meridian City Code requires a 10-foot wide gravel shoulder
abutting right-of-way where the unimproved portion of the right-of-way is greater than 13
feet (measured from the edge of pavement to the edge of sidewalk Ol' property line), and road
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 9
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
widening is not in the ACHD Five Year Work Program. The remainder of the unimproved
right-of-way should be landscaped with lawn or other vt:getative groundcover. McMillan
Road is shown as 37' from edge of pavement to the required landscape buffer. The applicant
shall construct a 10' gravel shoulder with the remaining portion of the future right-of-way
lots being landscaped with lawn or other vegetative groundcover.
2.8 Amenities: UDC 11-3G-3 is the qualiLied site amenity requirement. Amenities are to be
provided as part of each plat based on number of acres per site. The proposed amenities for
the subject development include: a tot lot. The proposed open space is shown to make up
9.0% of the site; if an additional 1 % open space is provided the applicant may is count open
space as a quality of life amenity.
2.ga Common Open Space:
The applicant is required to provide a minimum of five percent qualified open space. UDC
11-3G-3 A and B.
The applicant is showing:
Public Open Space Area:
Lot 8 Block 3 as 36,786 sq/ft
Collector Buffers:
Lut 14 Block 2 - 2,700 sq/ft
Lot 18 Block 6 -2,550 sq/ft
Parkway streets -1.14 acres or 49,658 sq/ft total. Minus 26'x 8' x 69 = 14,352 sq/ft for
35,306 qualified sq/ft for the parkways on single-family detached, street loaded products.
The total open space qualified is 77,342 sq/ft for 9.0% qualified open space.
2.9b Qualified Site Amenities:
Quality of Life Amenity: None Provirled
Recreation Amenities: Tot Lot
Pedestrian or bicycle circulation system amenities: None Provided.
2.10 Suecial Considerations:
Lot 14 Block 2 and Lot 18 Block 6 are proposing to place the required perimeter fencing at
the rear lot lines of lots in Blocks 2 and 6 along the eastern property boundary. The
proposed Paramount Subdivision is showing a 20' landscape strip along a future
commercial/multifamily access street whieh has yet to be developed. The 10' ingress/egress
easement is not anticipated to continue when the existing residences are removt:d. The
easement will also not be allowed to take access to McMillan Road in the future and should
be landscaped as per UDC 11 ~3F.
Perimeter Sidewalk: In 2007, a middle school (Heritage Middle School) is planned to open
on the northeast comer of Meridian Road and McMillan Road. At past meetings, the City
Council and the public have expressed concerns over the lack of sidewalks adjacent to arterial
streets and how difficult it is for children to walklbike to nearby schools. In light of these
conccms, staff recommends that the applicant be required to contact the owner of the out
parcel to discuss the construction a 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along their frontage of
McMillan Road, prior to issuance of building permits in the fIrst phase of the development as
Cedarcreek Subdivision
lLl-06-009fPP-06-007
PAGE 10
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20106
similarly agreed upon in Ambercreek and Solitude Subdivisions. If the applicant offers to
construct an off site improvement then the commissionlcouncil should rey'uire a development
agreement for Cedarcreek subdivision with the same provisions as listed in Ambercreek
Subdivision.
11. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings
1. Preliminary Plat (dated: December 21, 2005)
2. Landscape Plan (dated: January 13, 2006)
B. Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
2. Public Works Department
3. Fire Department
4. Police Department
5. Parks Department
6. Sanitary Service Company
7. Ada County Highway District
8. Settlers Irrigation District
C. Legal Description
D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 11
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
A. Drawings
1. Preliminary Plat (dated: December 21,2005)
.. . t'm."
('f -:~ ;
g!,)''::;,
i(~: 'I' ,
r:
, ,
)~.: ) :-
',,",,0 ""1- "
;:.,-,:~, ::. ~
l':'T ., .,... " ,
;~~ il '.'1'
~~i'-II !.: I;
~', "j"
'I I' !~ II
t r!!
I:J-JI'I'
if i :~J
~ II l Ii
!i ~ --, i1
ii' I "11'/1111
il W"i':f':;i,,"~'
l'[ ".-, "I'
;'! 'III; . 'I
~~jjl!qqp:
l ., "'. I II
i i ~ I ~ ~ ,. -
rii;~'!~~ i';,~;J~~:lii;'; t i~
" H.l] 1:~!~i&~1J.:~>i]:i
i; ;~-I~i~~f'i(,:I;,/~~~i~
· j!'~hfi l'~.~",hi~;n'
;~ ~!Jm &~li~?):~irj
, I ,_0, " ," r (,1 '
WIlli i JI:llli
1';1~~ g .. '") l~. . ,
:d l!Ji~ Unf'~ n
Cedarcreek Subdivision
Exhibit A Page 1
.f ~ ~
t'l!:':
~>~
'';'>If
,! '~I:
\~~ '
,',
-";~:I
!l
:t
ill
:"~:;I,I', -,', ':
10 rufj; i Iif'JI -,
.g 1;/1 I" H.,
I> IJJ, , I ' '11 ! ," (' I --~---=rr-j
~;~I!II '! 1, I" ; .., i' _ . :--11 'f
~!-:~ l i! I!I.~., ~Ci -.,-....=" I r,
M'{ij;' II, ,I j~i~,__, ,.., "~' '0' ~ . ,I '.
;:I~;'U&;~ --~- __, ='
~,I~[~:;ll #J: j!H,eiH~Hi[lHfW1J1J!ii J'I'i~i::~jM ;!iH! '):.I:I;;:f!:tjlH~ ~I_ _, ~~, Ll
-I '<:ii ; 11 i -~ ')-'1" -/'1,,-' '.' n, ... , ' t
5'/' " i~ "~ '-l~~ 1;,';:;' '; !Ji;~ ~r J' 8 '4 ( 'H (' ,-"__' 'f1=t- ';_ :.,~!.~!
z:~:~IJ It _, _~"
L);~L_ ~_ I.' _.'~
~ ,~~.,"':~. ""'2'";'"
'j"'
-"
~}
tl
$'~ .
>.. ii'f'F.\:
1/'\ 'f! i
i !i.=I~ gll i',
j ,- .--.~, I ! :
il ~ :~ f- --i4j'f r!
'" [" -, '
'll'l! II': f~r 1,1
I"! i/l-':tJj ,I
j
~ ~~~
Hit
~ !,:
~ ~~
s ~
,
~
'I
/
~1,J
, iii
~~! 1\,
//
)
/1
,.. I
/,.l
I
I
Ii: ,/
'\ /
fl "
.< .
__' I'
"'!':'.:i"I:.~., ::
"';P'AW~.'" ~'. ~~l<",. or...,
'!i~~ ,
...~ ~= j
h..h.. '
If!f!
~;]
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20106
2. Landscape Plan (dated: January 13, 2006)
11'=rl~~i~'T=T~n,t::~!Fo-r, .
[~.M ~. f~ -" ( """ .; ...-~::, ~ I ~ i I ! L I ~
; t~m!~itm t!~ ; I' 1 ' j ;ChTI-T't ,J f' -.-----~." ~ 's' ';;/ / _ I '
If,dl!; ) 'j !,. - "'ir "" ""-,,,,~-"".' '.., /
I ,~IJ }i~ 1:' '.ili, ~f~~' . '" ,---- ~...~ -: fj' "::'1 l;>-- >,;~/ _ r:
1',lf P:l" I I ti., I c !'S "-.. -'_._n~,~_ t ( . 1 .;; ,
-~ ~ ~ ! I ' . , j -~f - ' I , I I, r ,z, ,
' : f !i - ~~; I . l 'i'.4'-'" ..:' j i ! i ~'\ '-, '/(' ~ _ ~_"' _ J
I - t ';I. il.ifJt-4'!1. _ ~ ~l'~-.t.""=t...I'~/':-;"- i\.. ~: :
.. !'i ~"I'i 'r "''?Ir::--r=~l".--'r --:-"- /-:- '1-"~r1 I <~)' I,
I ; '? II , ' .' , i '::! I I Ii I -" '-', I , i 11'"--- - --1
I' ' ..I ,Ii ;' . --:: ~~ I,' ,'I 1.1 I f (-" I ~', I;, r ~,II 1 'g/' : i~
I' I., " , ' , . \:;.; '""'." I '~) I -, I ' f---"---1 'I.
'"f,/' ~' "t --, I j "~, --"" --'-r- '-'-----..,' I 10"::' A',
j 'I. I' ~ ~ / ~ -. ~ I"~ _.~- _.:.....I - -- ~- r- --- -~- ~,~ 'f1 "'~I - - ~- f /'
1 ',,!h, ~:' ';:-~n ':j' - /~~~~:":""-';=:~5;~:~__".\ II @ -;~" 11 ;"
"'j' '!'.;;',", i; -,I II ~."., II 'I~ " 1"
'J 1 II - ",: r, ' ','I j II "(' u, , , i I -'--'--;---'/
:il!i1ijll' ...',~ :: , .':11 ;11 ~r (~~~ - - '~~lfi )-;: II :; i ~-i!
I '. 1t!: . - ,; : I~') i I _ "/, ".-- '"""-;:- _ I ~ "-;--;. ~ \
' : If,1,",' ":'c --T~\ I I 'c~ ~'_" I ____' __:':lj :ll@!! 3! d ,
I ' :~;;II'I "II, , _,_3,' -', i " _ ; i ( " ~~, . ~ !~~ ----;--"--/'!~ I
I .; '",~';II,I1,~,~.::..,1 ;<~':,"-,- "'1" ~II' @'I~_ '/ ) /:
{'~~~"".'I~' ',1 .~~,-,;.---- n.: ~ -...~~.,-':.:!..:' ....,-_~.... '. (1,,1<\1 ~ ~> :~, _,
"'''''''''I'.p.~,F " ~- NIJT" 'I, "."'",, ,",:, " '"," ",j , \i~l I'" "I t I
' I,,' " Bl(W~ " ,> ,': :'::"":',",: '_"'_", ;'" , .",':' ~",
\11'~1 i ,'j<;! t:Y':'r<" I <,) .; " @; I ~l\ ! !i !
',,' !f~1 '",' .'" {:-l] 'I ,""'"' ~:'II,"~"' I -. u.-_--'",(: " ~"
I "IJ'.fr ,';-.r-""-~~j ~I /,'-':.:',,(:\~,:: (:;, j/(: ("): t~:i";
r': ;~\ il:" ,r, I." ", "-'iT (0, i ,! t," .~~ "<:2J}I~,:,,'"_=~_) I I, ,"e':_~..p'J ":
. ," "~i ,I. ':4 ' , '."'-~,' .,,",..- '"'''''"''"",-.." ,,,..' '", ",C'?t"~" , ,,' _"" 'fC
I 'i:,} Pili I'? ;:-I;;~ I;.' ,-"-_..;-- ,--~!"-.:-,,_.~,,,.._, r- ~~~~~='~._ri("-
18:JN!'/ 'l":~ ~c~, tf~'ll...n; -~_TI. ~;~,')~11,lr:I[(: ~Ii 'II
"I 'U', I ~ '> ~ ~ ',:: '. 2~ ,'" ,.' I ;"< (:: 'I'''' ~",,~-,:,,~ "i
^,;I t-l.. ' . ~'-""~---" '11~1 t--: ._/ I- :"--;:""-"""'- ", j , "'" I' '"
I ~ ': .Jj 'Ii I' "~< "" " \;.,/ ;.~, I' (0:' " ,l ,. ': I~)l ,I ; ( (::1 ~ ! ::1 ,'~
' ~" .,' ,I,. ". '\."':; , -, i ',I "--" '-".. I'" ""-:" ""' I 11""'--" ,.' Ii "0 '
I :'" , \1.1" 1 " " , ..-,--",./ I, (;)"; \';~!I : (~)' _" 1,'~;; I
~~ ~ ---.,.-~~......-..L..!.. \.: i ro" .':.. ~,. I -. ,': .!.. - .~.), (<It.) :~.. f t, ~..~
qil :-0'1111. '," ". Co,. ' ",~.",- 'I"; '" ----, '''-"''.-.~ " '''-, '1 "c I
I ~5 . f;~ I:, -~""~ .' .' \.;:;.!; . . ',,: I;;" ," i .:'_"'~ ,'j ',:: ,
,~I~I~i~ I' II ~. >1, ,Ct.:", _! ,.5' ,,,I ,<I.... .j i~' 1" .' " ';; r:)', I '+ I \:"), l' l ",", ~j I
lil]r~"1 'I'~ 1.1:~1/ . " "'-' .2.....2::J."""'''['' t'<'~--:L__l r---"--:L_",,:-,J j t~.'""--'--""l~ ,-'''.'C,'':
rEi~:llilll ii' 11.}1~1 f ..'. :',~: r'i.{tf~\:~,:"'~hf,~ ~;*l~-:' ,~t" u "i I' r"-TJ~ II'r+reO~""" \+. :;: ,/ i
1:1:lli; i it i II. ~i! i1 ',*~$'t/'.tl~ "-~~;-=7...j i i 1\-:-: 1 ',il
::~i.I~I!r,.:h:-.~r"ll: j: 'I i ,",~ Jt ."~ '~4i'r "', "~;"'+~L'""-r'-'.:;~~.',-:<~~t:",.;..~'~_"" ','" ""~' ,'. / "t';~
: ,,::";;i ~ 'l i ',' '. , r '"
'"{:ifl>'''' .. '"(
""<:, 'Iii 'jl'" I" " ..
~~;'~l~ . ;:ht~tJ. .~~~,;LL~!~~l~,~t.;_~~~L:3 .~~?
Cedarcreek Subdivision
Exhibit A Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
B. Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
1.1 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELTMINARY PLAT
1.1.1 The preliminary plat labeled as C-I prepared by Bailey Engineering, dated December 21,2005, is
approved, with the required amendments and llunditions listed herein. All comments/conditions
of the accompanying Annexation/Zoning (AZ-06-009-Revised) shall also be considered
conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-06-007-Revised).
1.1.2 The applicant shall construct a 30-foot landscape buffer along McMillan Road, the sidewalks
within these buffers shall be placed as to line up with existing buffers in m:ighboring
subdivisions.
1.1.3 The Plat shall be revised lo show Lot 9 Block 4 as a public alley.
1.1.4 That the applicant shall certify that Lots 7, 8 and 12 of Block 1 have the required 30 feet of
frontage as required by UDC 11-2A.
1.1.5 The applicant shall comply with the requirements of no direct lot access for any lots adjacent to
McMillan Road as required by ACHD.
1.1.6 That portion of the detached sidewalk which lies outside of the right-of-way shall be contained in
an easement which dedicates pedestrian cross-access and is in favor of the Ada County Highway
District, and said easement shall bc depicted all lhe fmal plat or an instrument m.unber referenced
in a plat note.
1.1.7 A landscape plan shall be submitted prior to fmal plat showing the landscaping in relation to the
changes required by this report. The landscape plan shall be modified to reflect the conditions
contained in this report and the revised preliminary plat and shall be submitted with the fmal plat
application.
1.1.8 A detailed fencing plan in accordance to UDC 11-3A-7 shall be submitted with the fmal plat.
1.1.9 The submitted landscape plan prepared by Bailey Engineering, dated January 13, 2006 is not
approved. The following should be included in a revised landscape plan:
· Lot 1 Block 6, Lot 9 Block 5 and Lot 11 Block 1 shown as future rights of way on shall be
landscaped with lawn or other vegetative undercover until such time as ACHD has acquired
the property for future roadway improvements.
· The applicant shall show a sidewalk in Lot 11 Block 1.
· The applicant shall provide perimeter landscaping in Lot 14 Block 2 and Lot 18 Block 6. If
the ingress/egress easement is to be used to buffer the future collector roadway in Paramount
Subdivision
· All parkway landscaping shall be consistent with UDe 11.3B.7
· Where the Bisby/Harrell Laterals are to be covered, all vegetation shall be installed as
required by the DOC 11.3B. Ifthe Settlers Irrigation District restricts the type and quantity
Exhibit B Page 1
CITY OF MEKWIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
of vegetation, the landscape buffers shall be increased as to accommodate the plan as
approved or the applicant may apply for alternative compliance.
· The applicant shall certify that one tree per 8,000 square feet oflawn has been provided.
· All parkway trees shall be Class II trees.
· A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or
qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and SUblllittt:u prior to City Council
signature of the Final Plat. All standards of installation shall apply as listed in UDC 11- 3B-
14.
Other than the changes listed above, the approved landscape plan is not to be altered without prior
written approval of the Planning Department.
1.1.1 0 A 11 road drainage shall be contained on site .Lntht: drainage swales/areas as depicted.
1.1.11 Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Cedarcreek Subdivision
Homeowners' Association.
1.1.12 Other than the public street access approved by ACHD, direct lot access to McMillan Road is
prohibited. A note shall be placed on the fInal plat restricting access to McMillan Road.
1.1.13 Construct all alleys to comply with ACHD's requirements for public alleys. All alleys shall
contain at least 20 feet of pavement within a 24-foot right-of-way, as proposed, and include 28-
foot inside and 48-foot outside turn radii where the alleys intersect the public streets.
1.1.14 The planter strip between the curb and the near edge of the sidewalk along all the internal streets
with four-foot wide detached sidewalks shall be a minimum of eight-ft:d wide and include Class
II trees.
1.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT
1.2.1 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision
pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17.
1.2.2 All areas approved as upen space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All
stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subject to UDC 11-
3A-18 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other nun-vegetated
surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as permitted under UDC 11-3B.
Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed
such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as
proposed by staff. If the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved
open space and still meet the Rtandards of UDC 11-3A-18, then the applicant shall relocate the
facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of
the developer to comply with ACHD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at
the time of final construction.
1.2.3 The applicant shall submit a detailed fencing plan with the final plat application for the
subdi vision. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain
debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fencing
should be installed in accordance with City Code.
Exhibit B Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
1.2.4 Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing
additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inuhes of trees that were removed.
Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to
be mitigated.
1.2.5 All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or
lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled pcr UDC 11-3A-6,
unless otherwise approved by Settlers Irrigation District. Plans will need to be approved by the
appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written
approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association
approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer
prior to final plat signature.
1.2.6 Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation/plat does
not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance.
1.2.7 Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions Het forth in UDC 11-6B.
2. Public Works Department
2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension of mains planned in
Paramount Subdivision. The mains will be extended on the developer's time1inc and the City of
Mt:ridian does not guarantee sewer service in the timelines outlined in the UDC.
2.2 The applicant shall install mains to and through this proposed development; applicant shall
coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms
of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. 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.
2.3 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in W. McMillian Road and
future mains in Paramount Subdivision to the north. The applicant shall be responsible to install
water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public
Warks, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide
servlCe.
2.4 The applicant has not indicated who will own and operate the pressure irrigation system in this
proposed development. If it is to be maintained as a private system, plans and specifications will
be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the construction plan review. A "draft
copy" of the operations and maintenance manual will be required prior to pIau approval with the
"final draft" being required prior to final plat signature on the last phase ofthis project.
If it is to be owned and maintained by an Irrigation District then evidence of a Hl,;ense agreement
shall be submitted prior to scheduling of a pre-construction meeting.
2.5 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water (ODe 11-3A-6). 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
signature on the [mal plat by the City Engineer.
2.6 If there is going to be a pressurized irrigation pump station of this property it must be located in a
common lot, and cannot encroach into any required landscape buff!;:rs.
Exhibit D Page 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
2.7 Prior to signature on the final plat vacate the ingress/egress easement shown on the preliminary
plat.
2.8 All existing structures shall be removed prior to signature on the [mal plat by the City Engineer.
2.9 Meridian Public Works :specifications do not allow any large landscaping within a five foot radius
of water meters. The applicant shall make the necessary adjustments to achieve this separation
requirement and comply with alllaridscape requirements.
2.10 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from
domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8 . Wells may be used for non-
domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
2.11 The applicant has not indicated how the stoml drainage from the proposed private alley will be
disposed. A drainage plan designed by a State ofIdaho licensed architect or engineer is required
and shall be submitted to the City Engineer COrd. 557, 10-1-91) for all improved surfaces. Stonn
water treatment and disposal shall be designed in accordance with Department of Environmental
Quality 1997 publication Catalog of Stann Water Best Management Practices for Idaho Cities
Imd Counties and City of Mcridial1 stanuards and policies. Off-site disposal into surface water is
prohibited unless the jurisdiction which has authority over the receiving stream provides written
authorization prior to development plan approval_ The applicant is responsible for filing all
necessary applications with the Idaho Department of Water Resources regarding Shallow
Injection Wells.
2.12 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed,
drainage lots constructed, 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.
2.13 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted
fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to
signature on the final plat.
2.14 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths,
pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining
certificates of occupancy.
2.15 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction
inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat
per Resolution 02-374.
2.16 It shall be the responsibility ofthe applicant to ensure that all development features comply with
the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act.
2.17 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that
may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency.
2.18 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Sectiun 404 Pennitting
that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
2.19 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office.
2.20 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building
pads receiving engineered backfiU, where footing would sit atop flil material.
2.21 The 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. TIns is tu ensure that the bottom
elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least I-foot above.
Exhibit B Page 4
CJTY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20106
2.22 One hundred watt, high~pressure sodium streetlights shall be required at locations designated by
the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical
locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are
detennined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light
contractor shall obtain design and pennit from the Public Works Department prior to
commencing installations.
3. Fire Department
3.1 Acceptance ofthe water supply for fIre protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water
quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing.
3.2 One and two family dwellings will require a [lTe-flow of 1 ,000 gallons per minute available for duration
of2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500 feet apart.
International Fire Code Appendix C.
3.3 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department.
a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 W' outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle.
b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it.
c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec.
d. Locations with [ue hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the
hydrant location.
e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits.
f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'.
g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade.
h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5.
3.4 Entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius.
3.5 All common driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and
shall have a clear driving surface which is 20' wide.
3.6 Provide a 20-foot wide Fire Lane for all internal roadways all roadways shall be marked III
accordance with Appendix D Section D103.6 Signs. Lot 9 Block 4.
3.7 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather
surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site.
3.8 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one and two story construction.
3.9 The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall
have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29'
street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side.
These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension.
3.10 The proposed 85.lot subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total
estimated population of 247 residents at build out.
3.11 All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as
measured around the perimeter of the building.
Exhibit B Page 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
3.12 Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the
jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant 011 a fire apparatus access road, as measured
by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains
shall be provided where required by the code official. For huildings equipped throughout with an
approwd automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the
distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183).
For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m).
For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in
accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m).
4. Police Department
4.1 Any interior fencing shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if
solid fencing is used.
4.2 Lots 9+10 of Block 1 create residences that will be isolated from their surrounding neighbors.
Such areas have an increased crime potential. Prior to the next public hearing, the applicant shall
work with the Police Chief and/or Planning Staff to revise the plat/site plan such that the
houses/dwelling units in the general area are oriented toward one another and encourage
interaction between more neighbors. The plat/site plan shall be revised in accord with those
discussions.
4.3 The propoSt;d development and/or plat do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the
public areas. Prior to the next public hearing, the applicant shall meet with the Police Chief and/or
Planning Staff to discuRs features that increase visibility, including but not limited to: doors and
windows that look out on the public areas, front porches, and adequate nighttime lighting. The
site plan and/or landscaping plan shall be revised in accord with those discussions.
5. Parks Department
5.1 Standard for Mitigation of trees: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape
Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-1O) will be followed.
5.2 Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in
the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-10) will be followed.
6. Sanitary Service Company
6.1 sse will not provide trash pick~up services utilizing the common driveway. The developer shall
install a concrete pad at the end of the common drive no more than five (5) feet behind the
sidewalk. The pad shall be of sufficient area to accommodate the receptacles of the residences
that take access from the conun.on driveway.
6.2 Please contact Bill Gregory at sse (888-3999) for detailed review of your proposal and submit
stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application.
7. Ada County Highway District
Site Specific Conditions of Approval
7.1 The applicant shall do .one ofthe following:
Exhibit B Page 6
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DtPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
a. Dedicate a total of 3S-feet of right-of-way along McMillan Road, and construct a minimum 5-
foot wide concrete sidewalk along McMillan Road, located a minimum of 38-feet from centerline
within an easement.
b. Dedicate a total of 45-ft:et of right-of-way from the centerline of McMillan Road abutting the
parcel by means of a warranty deed and locate the sidewalk a minimum of 38-feet from centerline
within the right-of-way. -
Note: Any right-of-way dedicated with this application along McMillan Road will be purehast:d
by the Dhtrict with Corridor Preservation funds.
7.2 Construct the internal streets as 34 -foot street sections (with local fire department approval) with
curb, gutter, 4-foot detached concrete sidewalks, and 8-foot planter strips, as proposed.
7.3 Provide sufficient pavement width on the site entrance roadway intersection (N. Summit Way,
intersecting McMillan Road) to accommodate simultaneous left and right turn movements. This
may require 24-feet of pavement on the west side of the island to allow for two exit lanes. The
design and construction of the island should be coordinated with the ACHD Traffic Department
and Development Review.
7.4 Provide 21-foot street sections on each side of the proposed center island. Any proposed
landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by tbis plat shall be owned
and maintained by a homeowners association. Notes of this are required on the final plat. The
design should be reviewed and approved by ACHD's Development staff.
7.5 Construct stub streets to the surrounding properties as identified below. Install a sign at the
terminus of each roadway stating, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE."
. Stub street to the west, Ramsbrook Street, lOl;ated 405-feet west ofN. Summit Way
(measured centerline to property line). This stub street will provide access to the adjacent
parcel.
. Stub street to the east, Street E, located 145-feet east ofN. Newsham Way (measured
centerline to property line). This stub street should align as an entrance to the Paramount
Subdivision.
. The stub to the north, N. Seel Way, is proposed to be located 13S-feet north ofW.
Archerfield Street (measured centerline to property line). This stub stre;:et should align as
an entrance to the Paramount Subdivision.
7.6 Construct one roadway, N. SwlUIlit Avenue, to intersect McMillan Road approximately 725-feet
west of the east property line in alignment with the existing street to the south, as proposed.
7.7 Submit a Road Trust deposit to the District for $1,000 for sidewalk abutting McMillan Road
along the 50-foot strip at the west property line
7.8 Other than the access specifically approved with this application, direct lot access is prohibited to
McMillan Road and shall be noted on the fInal plat.
7.9 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval.
Standard Conditions of Approval
Exhibit B Page 7
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04120/06
7.10 Any existing inigation facilities shall be relocated outside ofthc right-of-way.
7.11 Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACHD roadway or
right-uf~way.
7.12 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be
borne by the developer.
7.13 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the
construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file
number) for details.
7.14 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy.
7.15 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing
by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for
details.
7.16 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy
Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all
applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the
State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans.
7.17 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit
(or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes.
7.18 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable
requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy.
7.19 Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accOl-dauce
with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance.
7.20 It is the responsibility of the applicant tu verifY all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The
applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The
applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days
prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact AClID Traffic
Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during
any phase of construction.
7.21 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing
and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authurized
representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to
obtain written confrrmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District.
7.22 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this
application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or
other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest
advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subj ect property unless
a waiver/variance uf said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect
at the time the change in use is sought.
Exhibit B Page 8
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20106
8. Settlers' Irrigation District
8.1 All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to
function. The facilities involved are Bisby Lateral (20' easement), Harrell Lateral #12 (20'
easement). Contact SID for additional requirements.
8.2 A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals.
8.3 A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any SID facilities, or
within its easements.
8.4 Any Change to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, water delivery, tiling, and
landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District's Board of Directors.
8.5 All storm drainage must be retained on-site.
8.6 The development must supply pressure irrigation access to all lots within the above-mentioned
subdivision from the current delivery point. Ifthe developer wishes to have SID own, operate,
and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement must be in place prior to the pre-
construction meeting.
Exhibit B Page 9
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
Exhibit C. Legal Description
legal Description
Cedarcreek Subdivision - Annexation
RUT to R8 Zoned
A parcel located in the S V2 of the SW V4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 25, Township 4 North,
Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. more particularly described as
follows;
BEGINNING at a brass cap monument marking the southwest corner of said S V2 of the
SW 1f.t of the SE '4 (1;4 corner), from which 5/8 inch diameter iron pin marking the
southeast corner of said S Vz of the SW 1/4 of the SE V4 bears S 89<54'20" E a distance
of 1340.90 feet;
Thence N 0"'05'40" E along the westerly boundary of said S V2 of the SW % of the SE ~~
a distance of 660.04 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin marking the northwest corner of
said S V:t of the SW V4 of the SE '/.t;
Thence S 89 "54'17" E along the northerly boundary of said S 1h of the SW Y4 of the SE
1f4 a distance of 1339.99 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin marking the northeast
corner of said S Y2 of the SW % of the SE '14;
Thence S 0"00'55" W along the easterly boundary of said S % of the SW 'Ai of the SE 1;4
a distance of 660.02 feet to the southeast corner of said S \12 of the SW % of the SE l,4;
Thence N 89OS4'20" W along the southerly boundary of said S V2 of the SW l,4 of the SE
14 a distance of 1340.90 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Excepting therefrom the following described parcel;
Commencing at a brass cap monument marking the southwest corner of
said S V2 of the SW % of the SE 1f.l (1J.l corner), from which 5/8 inch
diameter iron pin marking the southeast corner of said S 1/2 of the SW 114 of
the SE '/4 bears S 89"'54'20" E a distance of 1340.90 feet;
Thence S 89 "54'20" E along the southerly boundary of said S \12 of the SW
\/4 of the SE 114 a distance of 50.20 feet to a point;
Thence leaving said southerly boundary N 0"05'40" E a distance of 30.00
feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin and the POINT OF BEGINNING;
Thence continuing N 0"05'40" E a distance of 290AO feet to a 5/8 inch
diameter iron pin;
Thence S 89"54'20" E a distance of 150.00 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron
pin;
-"..,
UindSolutjons
L. _ dO. i l!iQ' _;~('l(lf"t"~'" Jlml !.,,~~~Jlll~(i;
Cerjar Cfe.gk Sub.:h\.'j;;~:WJr
Job No. 04"43
Exhibit C Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
Thence S 0"05'40" W a distance of 290.40 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron
pin;
Thence N 89"54'20" W along a line 30.00 feet north of and parallel to the
southerly boundary of said S '/2 of the SW V4 of the SE 'A a distanceo!
150.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
This parcel contains 19,31 acres and is subject to any easements existing or in use.
Clinton W. Hansen, PLS
Land Soluliom;, PC
January 11, 2006
PRO'lj.\1.
REIII)M AP/", "
B't,.L::-~~'
, -II'
Nlel'\.\fJ\~~s~ Po~gl, "
WO'f\" .
. )
UlJ1dSoJutiorlS
L. j"""~lP'oI.rj<'''')''''''<:'>''''''''~~
(:.:'j".J J\"~.'I':' 't;'" !~IJI;-Jl;.l' 'I r::; i I:'r.
.Joh Nn 04-4-.3
Exhibit C Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04120106
~
~~
;~ H ~1j "ti ~~, Mil g~' ~/ --- Mm~:r
.,. .,. ;:.~ :~~:. i~ f. """'''.c
H ~i ~i: ,. ,J tl~ It ~ - ~a----r.
ifi '1. ~" :! ~:i .s' 'l. t...~ ~,~
.., ,. .' ". .~~ .. I 'll .'1 o,~
;~, U if ~j ::!l p~ . Ji -J~
~~?~ ~~ ill~'I" .~; ~~_""
ii g~ I~ U H lj I' r -""""".c
H ~~ 1~ 1~ ~F fi I
~ :.~ J. f~ ~~~ gl I
i iJ Ii ~~ di J' I I
f H Ii iUiHi ! '
.J:~ ~~ j; ~. if 'i r:"
" 'ii i~ n J! ! r
~ !~ ,~~ IJ f ;i' I I
~ ~ ~'! i~ ~: ~ ~I~ ..~i
i ~ la ~~ ~~ i ~1...~I!
~ ~ · q ';: , i.ii~("
~i , J ' n ~~ Fl ~I'I' "
-'t ,5 ~ # !~ ~, ~~ ~ !
il ,; ~ ~ ~$ ~,l'~ i
-,",f~~~"J,i "
~~ ~ ; t. 1~ 1; ~'i ~ 1
l~ ~ :, ~ i~ _~ 'j~ . .
i. ~ . 3 1 I , ~ ..
U 1 ; ill H'li 'I' I
;~ ~ . ~ · - ~'i , ~ I
~~ d ~i i Hu I I'
"., " . s ~ ;. .' /
~t ~ ~, ~ i'~ I
~; I j ~ 1 ~ I,I,! I
h . j ~ Gi ;:: ~ .. , r
i' · ~ " . ~ ~ .
,'J~~J~n
,.! , J ~ , ; ~~ :,;,
;1;1 .J.... -;: n," F' .
rl ,~;: H ~~:~.~.., .
,. ~ "1 "<" ..q ~.. ,.
~ '.. i)
O'! i;! ;f:li 11 "I;
! J ~i
IF':
Ii
'I I II
I. 1
j'j I r:t-
I I I =~I~
11 Q;;:: <:
I Q2~ ~
J I ~;;:lx ~
/: 1m""", -I
:;;0""' r
m~ ~ I 1 ~ ~m~
I': I"~ ~ ~ uu
~:;J :t m"
o ' I I O~:;:;;\J
~ 'I I I C'i, ~
;l~ II I I"Q ~
~~~t__ Jl,:. ,,-I,
.~ F= ~ . ~r-v <,
IftMriD . ~ ~ i:.
~ ij.
10 0: ~
~ le
j~" -- ~ ----A_~
""',> ~ -,. - --="'.~. ". _-RO<. V.'/"'f..'J;, v -1
~ i d
J'
-.'............_~~~~~...........-------........,
r.- t'
! ;' ~'"'~fl:l~-
i.\; . 1bg~H J ~ .
, ~::, ~ aUUn ~r;1 f I" I
~ ""\ \ ~~~~'5:,! ! '
. "''''~J :i "l~, 01 il I
m~ ~ ~) I~~~~ ~fl~Uil~ I
:!" ~ ~~, I:,:.:: .~}i ~i n~ Q .
'j ""-' " . '"'''''''' '" .il.... ..,.., ~ I
~-'JJI,'~ "'i"ll!o -':':'.J'('j~~';.i.:2::1: ..<!:=t-,: L
"'''' " , .. '..0>, _, '_'. g
) i q, ' I mm Q .
a \.. j' !~im
~::' , 'im
~ ~ ~ ;.. .Ii i "r;
Exhibit C Page 3
~............~.
>:
;!i'"
o:!!
~~
O-v
~~
i.'l
ft~ i~J" ~J~
gl~ .~ I'l ~
jS .~ ~ 5~'
~~ " S ,::>
,-~ J'" fi
.:::;s; r, ~..
8~ I g ~~
, ;l! ~;
~~ I ~ i~
,'i ,~;
I ! 'j
H . }-
ig
n
o
;.,
o
o
."
'"
C
""
<:
m
-<
Z
o
I
-1 I ' I I
; ii, ; " ~ . "jl (:
~ ~ ."~!b fQ
11 ti~! :~-
; I
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
EXHIBIT D:
Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
Annexation Findings: UDC 11-SB-3E
Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and
shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or
rezone, the Council shall make the following fmdings:
A. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
The applicant is proposing to zone the subject property to R-8 Medium Density Residential District.
Staff fmds that the proposed zoning map amendment complks with the applicable provisions of the
comprehensive plan. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, 'medium density' is defined as
areas including single-family homes at densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre; 'low
density' consist of single-family homes at densities of three dwelling units or less per acre. Staff
[mds that the requested residential zoning designation, R-8, is harmonious with and in accordance
with the 2005 North Meridian Comprehensive Plan amendment and Future Land Use Map, which
designates the SW corner of the SW comer S25 4N I W at McMillan and Meridian Roads to be
medium density residential. The density proposed with the preliminary plat is consistent with
previous Commission and Council actions and generally conforms to the goals, objectives, and
action items contained in the Comprehensive Plan for these low density areas with a requeRt for a
'step up' in density-
Staff finds that the proposed zoning is in general conformance with the comprehensive plan (please
see Section 8 of the Staff Report for detailed analysis of specific comprehensive plan action items
that apply to this development).
B. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
Concurrent with the annexation and zoning application, the applicant has submitted a preliminary
plat that proposes single-family detached residential products on the subject site (PP-06-007- dated
December 21,2005). Staff does not anticipate that the applicant plans to rezone the subject property
in the future if the accompanying PP application is approved. Staff [mds that the single-family
homes would be allowed (pennitted) within the requested R-8 district. The entire site is being
proposed as residential and upon build-out staff would not anticipate changes of usage for this site.
C. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare;
The applicant has not submitted elevations for the proposed units which are anticipated to be
designed and constructed to meet similar architecture to the single family detached residences of
the near vicinity. Staff believes that the design of these single family attached dwelling units will be
compatible with the adjoining UStlS and transitional in nature to anticipated lower density uses north
of the site in the Paramount development and the adjacent subdivisions also in the medium density
comprehensive designations. Stafffmds that the proposed dcvelopmtmt will change the existing
character ofthe area, which is still largely rural. However, the proposed development is generally
harmonious with the intended character envisioned by the Comprehensive PlaR Staff does not find
that the proposed zoning/UStlS will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
Further, staff does not anticipate that the proposed uses will be hazardous as long as the applicant
complies with the conditions contained in Exhibit B and all City Code provisions. Staff
recommends that the Conunission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that may be
provided when determining this rmding.
Exhibit D Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
D. 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,
There have been no recent street improvements in the area. The abutting roadway McMillan Road
is not in ACHD's Five Year Work Program or CIP (20-year plan) for road widening. The subject
property is generally surrounded by roral residential acreages. Staff does not [md that there has
been a change in the area that dictates that this property should be rezoned. Staff recommends that
the Commission and Council rely on staff s analysis, public testimony received and any comments
submitted from any other agencies or departments regarding whether this property should be
annexed.
Other urban services, such as water, are near to this site and the applicant should be able to extend
such services to the site. Staff fmds that the subject site is proposed for development in a fashion
similar to other properties in the area.
The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay park and highway impact fee~_
ACHD has submitted a staff report with site specific and standard conditions as attached in Exhibit
B7.
On February 24, 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, staff finds that except for sanitary sewer, the public
services listed above can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. The
Commission and Council should reference any written and/or verbal testimuny submitted by any
public service provider, regarding their ability to adequately service this project.
Staff does not find that there has been a change in the area that dictates that this property should be
rezoned. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on staff s analysis, public
testimony received and any comments submitted from any other agencies or departments regarding
whether this property should be annexed. Staff fmds that the proposed zoning amendment will not
result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing
services to this site.
E. The annexation is in tbe best ofinterest ofthe City (ODe 1l-SB-3.E).
Due to the residential nature ufthe general vicinity. the proiect's conformance to the Unified
Development Code. and the applicant's agreement to abide by the conditions of approval contained
in this staff report. staff [mds that the annexation and zoning of this pruperty to R -8 would be in the
best interest of the City.
2. Preliminary Plat Findings:
In detennining the acceptance of a proposed subdivision, the Commission shall consider the
objectives of this Title and at least the following:
A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan;
Please see Armexation Findings Item A above.
B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate accommodate the
proposed development;
Please see Annexation Findings Items C and D above
Exhibit D Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord
the City's capital improvement program;
Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, the
subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds.
D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development;
Please see Exhibit B for comments and conditions from other agencies and departments.
E. The development will not be detrimental to the public heath, safety or general welfare; and
Staff is not aware of any health, safety or general welfare 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. ~taff recommends that the Commission and
Cuuncil reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the
proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which staff is
unaware.
F. The development preserves si2nificant natural, scenic or historic features.
Staff is not aware of any natural, scenic or historic features which require preservation.
The applicant will be required to improve all waterways on this site.
Exhibit D Page 3
CiTY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
Exhibit E Page 1
Sharon Smith
Page 1 of 1
1?$Lto(Vl.~
J-hvu 6~&
From:
C. Caleb Hood
~5-/g-CJ(P
Sent: Thursday, May 18. 2006 4:09 PM
To: Tara Green; Sharon Smith; Machelle Hill; Will Berg; Bill Nary
Cc: Shawn Nickel
Subject: FW: Cedarcreek
Importance: High
F or tonight's hearing.
C. Caleb Hood
Current Planning Manager
Meridian Planning Department
208.884.5533
208,888,6854 (fax)
From: Shawn Nickel [mailto:shawn@landconsultants.net]
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 3:23 PM
To: Barbara Shiffer
Cc: C. Caleb Hood
Subject: Cedarcreek
Dear Caleb. As representative for Cedarcreek Subdivision, please accept this request to postpone tonight's public
hearing. We thought that we had everything worked out with the neighbors regarding the land on the west end of
the property, According to my developer, another issue regarding a neighboring development has arisen. This just
came up, and we are not comfortable moving forward until we get this new issue resolved. Please table us for two
weeks. We will be getting with the neighbors again to try and get this worked out prior to the next meeting. I will
update you with our progress. Thanks,
8I-IA "'N h NICI(]j";L
SLN PLANNING. INC.
t-mH Eo 'VINDING CRE]~l{ DR. S'l~E 201
Ii;AGLE, ID 8:3GIG
PH. 208-9:38-8812
I:LJ\L\IL. SI-IA WN@LANDCONs:ur/l'ANTS.J~{E'J'
5/18/2006
May 15, 2006
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING
PP 06-007
May 18, 2006
APPLICANT Centennial Development, LLC ITEM NO. 6
REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from April 20, 2006: Preliminary Plat approval of
85 single family residential building lots and 12 common lots for Cedarcreek Subdivision -
470 West McMillan Road
AGENCY
COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
See Previous Item Packet / Minutes in Al Packet
COrmhLA-e P/H -to b-I-D0
DZ-- D/17 LJ--O
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
Date:
Phone:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meeUngs shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
April 20, 2006
Page 3 of 88
well, why do you put so many items on the agenda and the answer is there is so many
projects going, if we were to not expand the agenda, it would just make the next
meeting's agenda that much longer. We are going to go to additional Planning and
Zoning meetings whenever we can have a fifth Thursday, as along as the balance of the
Commission agrees to it. But tonight we have 24 items on the agenda and depending
upon how each hearing goes, we mayor may not get through that agenda. The way I
will notify you is at 9:00 o'clock or at the end of the hearing that concludes at or about
9:00 o'clock, we'll be able to tell how far along within the agenda we are and at that time
I will let you know if we are going to be able to hear the entire agenda and, if not, we will
cut those -- we will make notice and say Items 19, 20 through 24 will have to be
continued to a following hearing. But last week -- last meeting we were here until 3:00
o'clock and we probably won't do that again. So, with that being said -- oh, one other
little note that I wanted to pass on. Any presenter, if they have a CD that they would like
to bring forward to the staff for help in their presentation, it's best for them if they have it
now, just so that they can work it in and make sure that it's ready to go at such time that
your particular hearing comes forward. Okay. All right. With that being said, I think that
I will talk a little bit about how this procedure works. Each hearing is opened and we
ask that the staff make their presentation first. The staff presents the project as it
relates to Comprehensive Plan and ordinance. Their position is ostensibly neutral and
they just speak to it from an ordinance and Comprehensive Plan prospective. The
second -- and, then, we will ask staff any questions. But, then, the presentation of the
applicant is basically their opportunity to sell the project. Once that portion of the
hearing is over, then, that's when each of you have an opportunity to speak to the
project and if, in fact, there is a property owner or a president of a homeowners
assuciation that is speaking for a larger group, we will give that individual ten minutes.
Otherwise, we'd like you to hold your comments to about three minutes and at that time
conclude and we will move onto the next person that wants to speak.
Item 4:
Continued Public Hearing from March 16, 2006: AZ 06-009 Request
for Annexation and Zoning of 19.57 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for
Cedarcreek Subdivision by Centennial Development, LLC - 470 West
McMillan Road:
Item 5:
Continued Public Hearing from March 16, 2006: PP 06-007 Request
for a Preliminary Plat with 85 single-family residential lots and 12 common
lots for Cedarcreek Subdivision by Centennial Development, LLC - 470
West McMillan Road:
Rohm: So, with that being said, I'd like to open the continued Public Hearing for March
16th, 2006, for AZ 06-009 and PP 06-007, both related to Cedarcreek Subdivision and
begin with the staff report.
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, we are--
Meridian Planning & Zoning
April 20, 2006
Page 4 of 88
Rohm: Oh, there you go. And that's one of the two that will be continued and at this
time I'd entertain a motion to continue these two items to the regularly scheduled
meeting of May 18th.
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I move that we continue AZ 06-009 and PP 06-007, both
relating to Cedarcreek Subdivision to our regularly scheduled meeting of May 18th,
2006.
Moe: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we continue AZ 06-009 and PP 06-007 to
the regularly scheduled meeting of May 18th, 2006. All those in favor say aye.
Opposed same sign? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 6:
Item 7:
Item 8:
Continued Public Hearing from March 16, 2006: AZ 06-013 Request
for Annexation and Zoning of 21.77 acres from RUT to R-15 zone for
Canterbury Commons Subdivision by America West Homes, LLC -
south side of Pine Avenue and east of Ten Mile Road:
Continued Public Hearing from March 16, 2006: PP 06-011 Request
for Preliminary Plat approval of 122 residential lots (50 4-plex lots and 72
townhouse lots) and 10 common lots on 21.77 acres in a proposed R-15
zone for Canterbury Commons Subdivision by America West Homes,
LLC - south side of Pine Avenue and east of Ten Mile Road:
Continued Public Hearing from March 16,2006: CUP 06-006 Request
for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a multi-family development
consisting of 200 multi-family dwelling units (4-plexes) on 50 lots and 72
townhouse dwelling units on 21.77 acres in a proposed R-15 zone for
Canterbury Commons Subdivision by America West Homes, LLC -
south side of Pine Avenue and east of Ten Mile Road:
Rohm: Okay. At this time I'd like to open the pUblic hearings on continued AZ 06-013
related to Canterbury Commons Subdivision and PP 06-011 and CUP 06-006, all
related to Canterbury Commons Subdivision and begin with the staff report.
Canning: Chairman Rohm, Members of the Commission, this is, as you said, the
Canterbury Commons project. It's located on Pine east of Ten Mile, as shown on your
vicinity map there. The project includes several applications. There is annexation and
zoning, preliminary plat, Conditional Use Permit, and a private street application and it
also includes a variance application and, as you know, you won't be acting on that
variance tonight, but we will give you an idea of what that is as we go along. To give
you a little highlight of the development -- just a second. The site plan doesn't read very
well, so I will just explain what's going on. There is a number of four-plex units that front
CITY OF MERIDIAN
PUBLIC HEARING
SIGN-UP SHEET
May 18, 2006
ITEM #
5,6
DATE
PROJECT NUMBER
AZ 06-009 & PP 06-007
PROJECT NAME
Cedarcreek Subdivision
NAME (PLEASE PRINT)
FOR AGAINST NEUTRAL
RE. r' E'~"'t -I"l"::~'"l -t- - ') page 1 ot 1
'-.J "L ".tJ ,_,
APFt 1 ~:i 20m3
Tara Green
CiLY Of Melidian
City Clerk OfficE
From: Joe Guenther
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 2:03 PM
To: Will Berg; Anna Canning; C. Caleb Hood; Jessica Johnson; Sharon Smith; Machelle Hill; Tara
Green
Cc: shawn@landconsultants.net
Subject: FW:
Clerks - please accept Shawns request for Continuance until the May 4, 2006 hearing. If the agenda for May 4
is full then it may get scheduled for May 18.
Thanks
JG
From: Shawn Nickel [mailto:shawn@landconsultants.net]
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 1:32 PM
To: Joe Guenther
Cc: 'Kevin Amar'; shannon@lndpro.comi 'David Bailey'i 'Vickie WOOds'
Subject:
Joe, please accept this request to defer Cedar Creek Subdivision, scheduled for P&Z on Thursday night. We are
continuing to work with the property owners ofthe out parcel to the southwest, but have not resolved the issues.
Please schedule us on the next available hearing date. Thank you and call if you have any questions.
SHAWN L. NICKEL
SLN PLANNING. INC.
839 E. WINDING CREEK DR. STE 201
EAGLE. ID 83616
PH. 208-938~3812
EMAIL.SHAWN@LA~CONSULTANTS.NET
p+ L Mt~"
L\-1.0-0LD
\tfm \}- -4.+S
4/19/2006
\3 ~t :u
\! _ .r~_,
<<
MAR 1 0 2006
_~{j:'i (~; ,"'2,.: ---, -.
~&~'7~'2)~
1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651 "4395
FAX # 208-463-0092
7 March 2006
phones: ArFln Code 208
OFFICE: Nampo 466-7861
SHOP: Nampo 466-0663
Will Berg, City Clerk
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho
Meridian,ID 83642
RE: AZ 06-009, PP 06-007/Cedarcreek Subdivision
Dear Will:
Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District has no comment on the above referenced application for
Annexation and Zoning and Preliminary Plat for proposed Cedarcreek Subdivision as it is outside
of our district.
ALL WORK WITHIN NAMP A & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT FACILITIES
MUST BE COMPLETED BY MARCH 15, 2006.
Sincerely,
~.Gff!.J~
-gill H!tfs~n
Asst. Water Superintendent
Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District
BH/dbg
c:
File - Office/Shop
APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES
RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000
BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS. 40,000
CITY OF MERIDIAN
PUBLIC HEARING
SIGN-UP SHEET
April 20, 2006
ITEM #
4,5
DATE
PROJECT NUMBER
AZ 06-009, PP 06-007
PROJECT NAME
Cedarcreek Subdivision
NAME (PLEASE PRINT)
FOR AGAINST NEUTRAL
:'/1
cM;;'ndi~n
;
r,
~ -"', TRANSMITTALS TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON
, } DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
:I-
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by
the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission please submit your
comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall
~~
RECEIVED
FEB 2 1 2006
CITY HALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433
crTI' CLERK - FAX 888-1218 FINANCE & UTILITY BILLING - FAX 887-4813 MAYOR'S UH'ICE - FA(M1j1@f Meridi8.11
Printed on recycled paper City Clerk Office
IDAHO
MAYOR
Tammy de Weerd
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Keith Bird
Joseph W. Borton
Charles M. Rountree
Shaun Wardle
CITY DEPARTMENTS
City Attorney/HR
703 Main Street
898-5506 (City Attorney)
898-5503 (HR)
Fax 884-8723
Fire
540 E. Franklin Road
888-1231/ fax 8950390
Parks & Recreation
11 W, Bowpr Street
888-3579 / fax 898-5501
Planning
660 E. Water tower Lane
Suite 202
884-5533 / fax 888-6844
Police
1401 E. Watertower Lane
888-6678/ fax 846-7366
Public Works
660 E. Watertower Lane
Suite 200
898-5500/ fax 895-9551
- Building
660 E. Watertower Lane
Suite 150
887-2211 / fax 887-1297
Wastf'wMer
3401 N. Ten Mile Road
888-2191/ fax 884-0744
- Water
2235 N.W. 8th Street
888-5242 / fax 884-1159
Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk, by: March 9, 2006
Transmittal Date: February 22,2006 File No.: AZ. 06-009, PP 06-007
Hearing Date: March 16, 2006
Request: Annexation and Zoning of 19.57 acres from Ada County RUT to R-8
Medium~Density residential and a Preliminary Plat with 85 single-family
residential lots and 12 common J other lots for proposed Cedarcreek
Subdivision
By: Centennial, llC
Location of Property 0
McMillan Road
David Zaremb~ FES 2 3 2006 Meridian School District (No FP)
=DaVid Moe ('V!~ ,OJ? ]}lR.RlhLA ~f\l1eridian Post Office(FPIPPonly)
Wendy NewtMi'..~ ~da County Highway District
= Michael Rohm (NoFP) R D.kP~da County Development Services
Keith Borup (No FP) Central District Health
_ Tammy de Weerd, Mayor == Nampa Meridian Irrig. District
Charlie Rountree, CIC Settlers Irrig. District
Christine Donnell, C/C -Idaho Power CO. (FP,PP,CUp)
Keith Bird, CIG Qwest (FPIPP only)
Shaun Wardle, C/G Intermountain Gas (FPIPP only)
_ V)later Department Bureau of Reclamation (FPIPP only)
~ewer Department Idaho Transportation Dept. (No FP)
- Sanitary Services(NovAR, VAC, FP) - Ada County Ass. Land Records
= Building Department I Rich Greene - Meridian Development Corp.
Fire Department Historical Preservation Comm.
Police Department
City Attorney
City Engineer
_ City Planner
_ Parks Department
Your Concise Remarks:
CITY OF MERIDIAN
PUBLIC HEARING
SIGN-UP SHEET
DATE
March 16,2006
ITEM #
14 & 15
PROJECT NUMBER
AZ 06..009 and PP 06..007
PROJECT NAME
Cedarcreek Subdivision
NAME (PLEASE PRINT) FOR AGAINST NEUTRAL
C 1i)2., L J2.12: /TJ(J2 l'\~ A \ '>(
60)j~1 ~ '1-- (, I J 12- )2..,Y\AJ~ .'j...
pc,-"y Z~---- ~ )<
:5h;vJt--i jJ!clt/( X
CITY OF MERIDIAN
PUBLIC HEARING
SIGN..UP SHEET
DATE
June 1, 2006
ITEM #
10, 11
PROJECT NUMBER
AZ 06-009, PP 06-007
PROJECT NAME
Cedarcreek Subdivision
NAME (PLEASE PRINT)
17- l- (2
FOR AGAINST NEUTRAL
^
Nie Ic-e (
City Clm Office
PP 06-007
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING
April 20, 2006
APPLICANT Centennial Development, LLC ITEM NO. 5
REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from March 16, 2006: Preliminary Plot approval of
85 single family residential building lots and 12 common lots for Cedarcreek Subdivision -
470 West McMillon Road
AGENCY
COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
See Previous Item Packet / Minutes in Al Packet
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
See Revised Staff Report in Al Packet
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
.$Y $'O'\J
'><' ~ ~,
if' ~ C?
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CFNTRAI DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
~rJ }J~(kv
Date: t{,;'1 ~ (0 It-
Staff Initials:
Phone: q;-J /.'")$ I 1- q j'I../'-.-
Contacted:
Emailed:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
STAFF REPORT
Hearing Date: April 20, 2006
Continued from March 16, 2006
Planning Commission
1.~"
, "'.i.
, t L ~..
~'r...' ~ ~', It
cUe;;di;~;(~
~;,.
.,.-'~
"'~)';Sc~~:--.(
L.l.\t'lU
','
"
Ii
j/
/.
TO
SUBJECT.
Joe Guenther, Associate City Planner
Meridian Planning Department
Cedarcreek Subdivision
FROM:
AZ-06-009
Annexation of 19.57 acres from RUT to R-8
PP-06-007
85 Single-family residential lots and 12 other lots
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The request is for annexation and zoning of 19.57 acres ofland that is currently zoned RUT in Ada
County. The applicant is seeking an R-8 zone (Medium Density Residential District) for the entire parceL
The applicant has submitted a preliminary plat for the subject property for 85 single-family lots all with
detached products, and 12 common/other lots on 19.57 acres. Amenities for the development include an
open space lot with a tot lot and parkway planters adjoining the streets.
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending approval of the suhject annexation and
zoning (AZ-06-009-Revised), preliminary plat (PP-06-007-Revised) for the reasons listed herein and
subj ect to the conditions of approval listed. The applicant proposes to sewer this development via
extensions of mains in Paramount Subdivisiun and water mains in McMillan Road.
J ; I~~" ~~r Jr:~.,.:
~. ~,.' n.
_l.~' ;:.:
~-- !-..:
'1 :',
I ..- '_nO
"."" r-"
PROPOSED MOTIONS (to be considered after the public hearing)
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the
City Council of File Number(s) AZ-06-009/PP-06-007 as presented in the staff report for the
hearing date of April 20, 2006, and the preliminary plat labeled C-l, dated December 21, 2005
with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed modifications).
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and puhlic testimony, I move to recommend denial to the
City Council of File Number(s) AZ~06-009/Pp.06-007 as presented in the staff report for the
hearing date of April 20, 2006, for the following reasons: (you should state specific reasons for
denial o[the annexation or plat and you must state specific reason(s) for denial of the conditional
use permit.)
Continuance
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Number(s)
AZ.06-009/PP-06-007 to the hearing d'!te of (insert continued hearing date here) for the
following reason(s): (you should state specific reason(s) for continuance.)
3. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
a. Site Address/Location:
N centralloeation off of McMillan Road and ~ milt: west of Meridian Road
51/2 ofthe SWl/4 of the SW ~ of4NIW25
b. Owner
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
Dalice Chester
470 W. McMillan Rd
Meridian, Idaho 83642
c. Applicant:
Centennial Development, LLC
36 E. Pine Street
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Agent: Shawn Nickel
Land Consultants Inc.
52 N. 2nd street
Eagle, Idahu, 83616
d. Representative: Shawn Nickel, Land Consultants, IDC
e. Present Zoning: COUNTY - RUT
f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation:
Medium Density Residential- North Meridian Comprehensive Plan Amendment
g. Description of Applicant's Request:
1. Date of preliminary plat (attached as Exhibit AI):
2. Date oflandscape plan (attached as Exhibit A2):
December 21, 2005.
January 13, 2006
h. Applicant's Statement/Justification: The proposed overall density (4.34 dwellings per acre) of
the project complies with the City's designation of Medium Density Residential, which
allows for residential densities which allows 3 to 8 dwellings per acre. We believe the use
of the project will provide a development which will complement the surrounding land
uses and will be a compatible continuation of the Paramount project north and east of the
site.
4. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application will in fact constitute an armexation and/or rezone as determined
by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11
Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter.
b. The subject application will in fact constitute a preliminary plat as detennined by City
Ordinance. By reason of the provisions uf the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 6, a
public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter.
c. Newspaper notifications published on: March 13, 2006 and Februaty 27,2006
d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: February 22, 2006
e. Applicant posted notice on site by: February 27,2006
5. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use(s): Agricultural
b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area:
c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning
1. North: Paramount Subdivision, R.8
2. East: Paramount Subdivision, R-40
AgriculturallUrbanizing
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009IPP-06-UU7 PAGE 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20106
3. South:
4. West:
Cedar Springs Subdivision #4 and #5- R-8 and L-O
Agricultural Ada County RUT
d. History of Previous Actions: N/A
e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities
1. Public Works
Location of sewer: This property is planned to sewer to future mains extended
from the Paramount Subdivision to the north.
Location of water: There is currently water main in W. McMillian Road, and
future connections from planIled mains in Paramount.
Issues or concerns: This development is not sewerable until Paramount brings
sewer mains down tu this development.
2. Vegetation: Agricultural/Irrigated
3. Flood plain: NA
4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: Lemp Canal Local Lateral
5. Hazards: None Identified
6. Proposed Zoning; R-8
7. Size of Property: 19.57 acres
8. Description of Use: 85 single family residential lots
f. Subdivision Plat Information
1. Residential Lots: 85
2. Non-residential Luts: 4- Future ROW lots
3. Common Lots: 8
4. Total Lots: 97
5. Gross Density; 4.34 units per acre
g. Landscaping
1. Width of street buffer(s); 30 feet (25 required) on McMillan Road.
2. Width ofbuffer(s) between land uses: none required (all residential)
3. Percentage of site as useable open space:
The applicant has defined 1.12 acres or 5.7% open space, Lot 18 Block 6, Lot 14
Block 2, and parkways (See section 5-h for additional analysis)
4. Other landscaping standards:
The landscape architect shall certify that one tree per 8,000 square feet of lawn
has been provided on the landscape plan.
Lot 9, Block 1 shown as a non-buildable parcel to be retained by the developer
this lot shall be landscaped with lawn or other vegetative undercover until such time as
the parcel may be incorporated into a larger open space lot or platted as a buildable lot.
The existing canal on Lot 9 Block 1 shall be tiled as per UDC 11-3A-6.
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP -06-007
PAGE 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
h. Required Open Space:
The applicant is required to provide a minimum of five percent qualified open space. ODC
ll-3G-3 A and B. The applicant is showing:
Public Open Space Area:
Lot 8 Block 3 as 36,786 sq/ft
Collector Buffers:
Lot 14 Block 2 - 2,700 sq/ft
Lot 18 Block 6 - 2,550 sq/ft
Parkway planters along streets -1.14 acres or 49,658 sq/ft total. Minus 26'x 8' x 69 =
14,352 sq/ft for 35,306 qualified sq/ft for the parkways on single-family detached, street
loaded products.
The total open space qualified is 77,342 sq/ft for 9.0% qualified open space.
1. Amenities:
The applicant is required to provide one qualified amenity for single family residential
subdivisions that are under 20 acreFl in area_
The applicant is showing qualified site amenities as follows:
11-3G-3C-1 - Quality of Life Amenities - None
11- 3Gw3C-2 - Recreation Amenities - children's play structures
11-3G-3C-3 - Pedestrian Amenities - None
Amenities shall be generally located in centrally accessible locations and all common areas
shall be maintained by the Cedarcreek Homeowners Association. The applicant is proposing
the tot lot as the required amenity.
1. Proposed and Required Residential Standards
R-8 (Standards)
Setbacks (*all streets local) Proposed Required
** measured from back of sidewalk
Street setback to Living Area ** 15 15
Side Accessed Garage** 15 15
Front Accessed Garage** 20 20
Side 4 4
Rear 12 12
Street frontage -
With garage tacing street 50 50
With alley loaded 40 40
Lot Size -SF detached
With garage facing street 5,000 5,000
Alley Loaded 4,680 4,000
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04120106
Maximum Building Height
35
35
1. Proposed and Required Non-Residential
Non-residential lots are to be used for amenities and open space. Except the lots
proposed to be retained by the developer which shall comply with the required
improvements listed in this report. Lots to be retained by the developer for future right of
way acquisition shall comply with all ACIID condit.ions of approval.
ill. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.):
Direct lot access to McMillan is to be prohibited, including Lot 9 Block 1. Access to
Paramount subdivision is as proposed with connections at Seel Way, Silverspruce and
Street E. A stub street with full service:s :shall be provided to the property excluded at the
south west listed as Reiterman property and shown as Ramsbrook Street.
Por a detailed report all the public :streets and access points to public streets, please the
attached staff report from the Ada County Highway District (Exhibit C).
6. AGENCY COMMENTS MEETING On February 24,2006 staff held an agency comments
meeting, all agencies attending provided comments as attached in Exhibit B.
Staff ha:s induded all corrunents and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the
attached Exhibit B.
7. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
The subject site is designated 'Medium Density Residential' on the North Meridian
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map_ The Council approved the North Meridian
Comprehensive Plan Amendment on March 7, 2006. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan,
medium density is defined as areas including single-family homes at densities ofthree to eight
dwelling Wlits per acre. Staff finds that the proposed density of (4.34 d.u.lacre) for the subject
application conforms with the North Meridian Comprehensive purpose and intent. In the
applicant'!': submittal letter, dated January 13, 2006 several Comprehensive Plan policies are
listed (please see applicant's letter).
::ItatT also 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 ill, Objective A, Action 1)
When the City established its Area of City hopact, 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.
· 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).
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
· The western roadway adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and
maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACHD). This service will not
change.
· The northern roadway adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and
maintained by the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). 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.
· "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal
N, Objective D, Action item 2)
Staff finds that McMillan Road will serve as the main access point for all the properties in
this subdivision as well as a connection into the future collector roadfor Paramount
Subdivision to the East of the site.
The applicant is requesting to retain Lot 1, Block 6, Lot 9 Block 5, and Lot 11 Block 1 of the
design dated December 21,2005. This lot should be noted on the plat that it isfnr future
right of way reservation for when A CHD roadway improvements occur. The width of right of
way reservations shall be as setforth by ACHD
· "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridors (setback,
vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.)." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 4)
As depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, the applicant is proposing to
construct a 30-foot wide landscape buffer along McMillan Road. Staff is supportive of these
widths, as long as the entire buffer lies outside the ultimate right-of-way. S
See Site Specific Conditions in the Preliminary Plat section below in Exhibit C.
. "Consider "Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recommended Approach"
from the National Center for Bicycling and walking in all land use decisions." (Chapter VI,
Goal II, Objective A, #3)
This publication encoura!{esjurisdictions to establish bikeway and walkwayfacilities in new
construction and reconstruction projects, in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient.
The sidewalk connections shown on the landscape plan are disconnected by the out parcel
alung Mc:Millan Ruad. Staff has asked the applic:unt tu wurk with the owners of the out
parcel to facilitate a sidewalk connection through this site as it lies very near a future school
site. This would be consistent with other out parcel developments in the near vicinity
(Solitude Subdivision and Amber Creek Subdivision)
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP -06-007
PAGE 6
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04120/06
· Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent
parcels (Chapter VII, Goal N, Objective C, Actiun 1)
All of the properties adjacent to the subject site are designatedfor medium density residential
or neighborhood center uses on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map.
· 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 North Meridian Future
Land Use Map which identifies this area as an appropriate area for medium density
residential development. This proposal meets the Comprehensive Plun definition of medium
density, with a gross density of 4.34 dwelling units per acre. Staff has reviewed Cedarcreek
Subdivision under the Medium Density Residential North Meridian Future Land Use Map
designation andfinds the application consistent with the comprehensive designation.
Staff finds that the prouosed zoninJ! and subseuuent uses (sinJ!le-familv homes) will be
harmonious with and in accordance with the Comvrehensive Plan.
8. ZONING ORDINANCE
a. Allowed Uses in the Residential Districts: UDC Table 11-2A-2Iists single-family residential
development uses as permitted uses in the R-8 zoning district.
b. Purpose Statement of Zone:
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (R-8) The purpose of the residential districts is
to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
Connection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential
districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre
and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. Residential
land uses are also allowed within the O-T, TN-C, and TN-R districts as set forth in Chapter 3
Article D.
c.1l-3G-l:
Common Open Space and Amenity Requirements
The regulations of this Article are intended to provide for common open space and site amenities
in residential districts that improve the livability of residential neighborhoods, buffer the street
edge, and protect natural amenities.
9. ANALYSIS
9a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation
1. ANNEXATION & ZONING ANALYSIS: Based on the policies and goals contained in the
Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Zoning
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 7
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04120/06
Ordinance, staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed Single Family Residential
products. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings.
1.1 The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on January 11,
2006 by Clinton Hansen, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate
boundary of the City of Meridian.
1.2 Any future subdivision, uses and construction on this property shall comply with the City
of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time.
1.3 That the applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water
service extension. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will
have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7.517, when
services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be uscd for non-dOlnestic
purposes such as landscape irrigation.
1.4 That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance
with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. All future uses shall not
involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of uperation that will
be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive
production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
1.5 UDC 11-5B-3D2 provides the P&Z Commission and City Council the authority to require
a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Meridian that may
require some written commitment for all future uses. Due to the homogenous nature of only
residential uses. the submission of a development proposal (PP-06-007). and the compliance
with Meridian City Unified Development Code. staff believes that a Development Agreement
is not necessary to ensure that this property is developed in a fashion that is consistent with the
comprehensive plan designation and does not negativelv impact nearby prooerties. Ifthe
Commission or Council feels a development agreement is necessary staff recommends a clear
outline ofthe commitments of the developer being required.
2. PRELIMINARY PLAT SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
2.1 Public Streets and Access:
(Connectivity Paramount Subdivisions)
The stub street from Paramount Subdivision shall connect from N. Seel Way and again from
Street E. The subdivision is constrained by previous development in the areas east and north
ofthe site and is bound by ACHD policies of interconnectivity. No direct access is allowed
to McMillan Road is approved outside ofthe point of connection pennitted by ACHD.
(Connectivitv Out Parcel)
A new stub street has been proposed to the Reiterman property in the southwest comer of the
site. This stub street shall have future public service connections from Ramsbrook Street.
Alley.
A new alley is proposed on Lot 9 Block 4. The UDC does not allow alleys to be placed on a
lot and this lot should be dedicated to ACHD as it will not meet the standards for a private
street as required by UDC 11-3F.
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 8
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
2.2. Landscapine: Staff is generally supportive of the landscaping design with the following
considerations:
The 30 feet of right-of-way landscaping on McMillan Road shall be maintained by the Home
Owners Association.
A sidcwalk connection along McMillan Road shall connect to the right of way for the future
Paramount collector road.
If Lot 14 Block 2 and Lot 18 Block 6 are not vacated then they shall be landscaped as
perimeter buffers with open vision fencing to the east.
The landscape plan shall show trees in the parkways compliant with UDC 11- 3B-7
Prior to final plat the applicant shall submit a landscape plan depicting the required changes
to the landscape plan as detailed by this report.
2.3 Tree Mitieation: Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be
replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of l:aliper inches of trees
that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees
for those trees that are removed. The applicant should coordinate a tree protection/mitigation
plan with Elroy Huff at the Meridian Parks Department.
2.4. Ditches. Laterals. and Canals: All irrigation dill,;hes, laterals or canals, exclusive of
natural watetways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being
subdivided shall be tiled. Settlers Irrigation District has a local lateral from the Lemp Canal
on this site and has commented on the proposal as showing compliance with the required
improvements.
2.5 Pressure Irrieation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be
supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to utilize 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 signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An
underground. pressurized irrigation system should be installed to alllandseape areas per the
approved specifications and in accordance with UDC ll-3B-6. See Site Exhibit B below.
2.6. Fencing: The applicant is proposing to construct a minimum of a six foot tall solid fence
around the perimeter of the site with four-foot solid fencing along common areas. A detailed
fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the fmal plat. Additional standards for
fencing and details of fencing material shall be submitted at the time of the final plat. If
permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be
installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fences should taper
down to 3 feet maximum within 20 feet of all right-of-way. All fencing should be installed in
accordance with City Code in effect at the time the permit is issued. The applicant shall
comply with all fencing standards as listed in UDC 11-3A-7.
2.7 Unimproved Rieht-of-Wav: Meridian City Code requires a 10-foot wide gravel shoulder
abutting right-of-way where the unimproved portion of the right-of-way is greater than 13
feet (measured from the edge of pavcmcnt to the edge of sidewalk or property line), and road
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP.06-007
PAGE 9
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
widening is not in the ACHD Five Year Work Program. The remainder of the unimproved
right-of-way should be landscaped with lawn or other vegetative groundeover. McMillan
Road is shown as 37' from edge of pavement to the required landscape buffer. The applicant
shall construct a 10' gravel shoulder with the remaining portion of the future right-of-way
lots being landscaped with lawn or other vegetative groundcover.
2.8 Amenities: UDC ll-3G-3 is thc qualified site amenity ttlquirement. Amenities are to be
provided as part of each plat based on number of acres per site. The proposed amenities for
the subject development include: a tot lot. The proposed open space is shown to make up
9.0% of the site; if an additional 1 % open space is provided the applicant may is count open
space as a quality of life amenity.
2.9a Common aDen SDace:
The applicant is required to provide a minimum of five percent qualified open space. UDC
11-3G-3 A and B.
The applicant is showing:
Public Open Space Area:
Lot 8 Block 3 as 36,786 sq/ft
Collector Buffers:
Lot 14 Block 2 - 2,700 sq/ft
Lot 18 Block 6 - 2,550 sqlft
Parkway streets -1.14 acres or 49,658 sqlft total. Minus 26'x 8' x 69 = 14,352 sq/ft for
35,306 qualified sq/ft for the parkways on single-family detached, street loaded products.
The total open space qualified is 77,342 sq/ft for 9.0% qualified open space.
2.9b Qualified Site Amenities:
Quality of Life Amenity: None Provided
Recreation Amenities: Tot Lot
Pedestrian or bicycle circulation system amenities: None Provided.
2.10 SDecial Considerations:
Lot 14 Block 2 and Lot 18 Block 6 are proposing to place the required perimeter fencing at
the rear lot lines of lots in Blocks 2 and 6 along the eastern property boundary. The
proposed Paramount Subdivision i:s :shuwing a 20' landscape strip along a future
commercial/multifamily access street which has yet to be developed. The 10' ingress/egress
easement is not anticipated to continue when the existing residences are removed. The
easement will also not be allowed to take access to McMillan Road in the future and should
be landscaped as per UDC ll-3F.
Perimeter Sidewalk: In 2007, a middle school (Heritage Middle School) is planned to open
on the northeast comer of Meridian Road and McMillan Road. At past meetings, the City
Council and the public have expressed concerns over the lack of sidewalks adjacent to arterial
streets and how difficult it is for children to walk!bike to nearby schools. In light of these
concerns, staff recommends that the applicant be required to contact the owner of the out
parcel to discuss the construction a 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along their frontage of
McMillan Road, prior to issuance of building permits in the first phase ofthc development as
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 10
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04120/06
similarly agreed upon in Ambercreek and Solitude Subdivisions. If the applicant offers to
construct an off site improvement then thc comm.ission/council should require a development
agreement for Cedarcreek subdivision with the same provisions as listed in Ambercreek
Subdivision.
11. EXHIBITS
k Drawings
1. Preliminary Plat (dated: December 21, 2005)
2. Landscape Plan (dated; January 13,2006)
B. Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
2. Public Works Department
3. Fire Department
4. Police Department
5. Parks Department
6. Sanitary Service Company
7. Ada County Highway District
8. Settlers Irrigation District
C. Legal Description
D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 11
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
A. Drawings
1. Preliminary Plat (dated: December 21,2005)
-'I ,-:
ig I]-~- :1';T~rt .j " .
"Oill.==! !; . Coli ~!f, ':~
1~'rqi~l.ili!il" O(
Cl'n! II'! illl"~,' '__,
~.-:i I,:' , 1 " , ~~:
~!~Ii~ ,'I' .': ;!!! ___,.~:___
~,~,:b/ ~1 ,m'" ~.".'" "'; ,: ,,' 0
I':i~'lf. ! rtIHj;!!'I!~11!i'j; :
~~I;I;;~, ;>
,~ ,H~ ~ '
.1", ... ""'..__ . .~"__",,.~._..
(___J--i: ;:"
I:H l~, i
i!, ",.l--..-: I:
,,:: 'I " '
,~ ;::
!" '..
lJ;) -'
,,'il ~'i
. :~?,:{ . :::~ :: . ~
)"'~" ,.,. , .,
',:;. i' l' -I'
4~~ tl I': I,
yl< -, I '
f';~ I L'I'
i I'. "'I'
j, ll, ,
j--
I!ft,~ ~~_" -r 1
~ I,: (",
J: ~ --c '.1
'I '----" ',,;
: 'ill.11 'I II
r h .. : " i i,,~,
1 ': Ii I: ','!
i' j! II ~! I ~ j ! ~ j:! ! Ii'
'Ui!H" li~fi."m
, ; \' -";'~;
~ 1 t ~
i"!:'""I,}V~j'O' a II ~.".
foq!"n;fl~
-'1' ,dll 'ii
J.~ ' II. ,,\
~ }" ~ t l
, !
11lii'!:~~f;~W~WJ'~~ :.1~
:~ kg \ !lq~~.;:.S'Y;!
'1 ;~;j':~:<;'~!I'~~~H
:~ ;LJlljl~;~8~h~iik
:" "1,1" '~~l";",,..~l. >
" ".,,:11 r~" !"-""~,,. "
'.~ .i! :J~l.., '}'.; ,~_' ~J~f~ .f
i i ::j~ ~i H :!; ~ i
.~ " ;.~~. t :I! ~; a(. J '~
1 G lH~ ; : ~:' .~>: t ~
" , "1";''' ", ,j, j !
~ ' t,",~ fir f~ , ,
! i 'IiI! iiI/Ill :
Cedarcreek Subdivision
Exhibit A Page 1
i~~
",
.' ~ ..
fi~
,: ~",1:=:-~ ".
~ j i ",
'j" m
;:.~
i~
~ ~~
,
,
;,'f-rl: !
i i ,,41 TI;,t I,
! illt ; : '
, E i,3I'Jr! i!
81:; Ill"~ I 'I
i~~ ,i' :r]i'i ~ I
! - 'I~' ~' :
'Iill, il~ ~il !
f..!'] :,l'''11
I '''''',
tfl, O'O', - t:_,
J
,/ f
/
in /
/
..
.., '-.
'n_"".." , '~W,"---
I ", l'j
..........o:L'I'".lI. ._ I ".'l _._
""Jlfj - A___
;i~ 'II
~~,.. L~
~"<.',.I:~I .:
:I~P~l.t'.Ii,"" ~,;",.~,"'~.t".
:-.,:.... ,-~, ",:"
,
.~
~. ----:'ilJ- .
~";. ~-. 1 I I
,,[ L
-- --~
p . - '0 -I ",- % .r ']1
.I~l;iil,:" :!; ,. -"c;,i 1 1/" 1<1 " _ I;
',!Ji': ~ ,1/':"': dlllO -j I" ' i
I1Il:,!i:j , ,'I . I, ,,-. ,-- t
iiilI H IJ ';. ~ j' " ii-" . '--"l;'\l=f".'O'_.'-;'
I ", I-~J~. ~ i O'. ';-
,,' L__ __ '__ . :~:O"
~t,_ i
~~ .~:2E
~; .?; e !
h~[g::s .
[t~~::-r: z :
'IiI: .
\'
~
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
2. Landscape Plan (dated: January 13, 2006)
I t:~ --'.r'tttf ~~~~l~~t-::?;'~'-:~~';;~~(-:-~~~-~~-~-'l?'~'''' :_~~fr-:--'--r:~" _ _.c- ~'
[~.,,} I, 'I' 1ff+(. ~~BJ:)d.j~" " I ' I I " '
115"0<' iI,. '.. I . "{1.,'~r . I - -~, 'j If,-, t__ I -, I
t~~J~;lf{Ji I;' :~ ' r' I" j ;'i~ _ ~, J ;?.---, --~ :~~ 'E) j ,~) / _, / /,: I
-'I'" i~ .' , -, '-- I;'... ',' J<--'" _/ (-;;,) _'
:1f'S I"i ~Ii' . ,-.! - +'1' 0 -::, (""V--' "" ,:,' ;
'i ., l I~' ,.............. ...",,~ ,,- ,- y./ \ ~ I
j~. ! 0 'Ijl I" I I, ~H ' ~ --.- ~---, ( \[" ",' I
i' 1 '-I i r' 'L..1 I -n .'/ i-I I 12,1 .
, . t Ik ~ ~~ \ I 1
.\ . l'l~llt' , - ~';:Q;-- J",.", : I - , ,I . ---.--- -.
2 ~ i ~ 1If. ~ _ . j -,* 4_ ---l ..... ~, j
," n ~';, I I, '_ /'r:."'.r 'n'-~r'. --Y~r ---=-" I-~--' ~_.-'~' I 'if)' I '1
I . ,.1/1 . : '::, J I I! I'" I I'll ----., -j ,
~I ~I 11 . ." . --1 - ':: j ) I I. I" I" i )1 ":;. . I
,:1 I,ll . ~ I i (~, I (~" I -;" P J j -" , i:
~'I. :~i I it -, ~- ~~~~ I J' - ___L__ .-- _L,-_: ..1~__ '~~ -") ;
;::) ! Il,l ,-':~ i II ;-- -i,~;Zn: :1 ,! I'L@-o-rj
,', ", I \,\ \ . -=-- -.--" -< I ; [ ,@' (fij!": . , C:) 11 I (tli . \! '
1\' dl l' 0', 0j II '~I r'. - -1-1 ~: .'; '\ -------~ ,t:... -~ )
1{,;"li 'J : -'~ --I' I~ ~[~) ~. '" I . I~:IIII @i)
II 11'1 - " : (D ) I I ~ " -- j '-:-- -~. I' I I ~-::. --;-..~--: \
II ' ,', -"-.. ~ (dJ' ".) ("', --' 1 I'
I ;~ j J-" ,.~)! ~~- ___, -... _~~--' 1: "~!, ~~j I.
, 1{~lil r,yW-_:f (j (,oJ" a,' i ~t;r)l '(- '?~' --,-- 'I i,
I I ot.;"', I 1,"', ,.;. _RYj ~'" I " ~]; I ~) ~;. : \
n.. -, , ! "'1:..~ _~~~~~..., _J ~~~, '.10 r
_tL..:.iWI!!!.1ir,r,' I ,-~/ l.N~,l.a..'r'I: I" ,l-._,r--:- _ I !: -----:--~ II
~ ~-\ ' J ---w>>- 11 r .. ~'~:-;~., - ~~ I . (~; I ,,~} -. i l:l "'"l
f,;!~., 1" 'Ej"~ ,,',' -. '-'. 1-" /1 d
---- - ---"'-- ~~ i < ',- '--, .' ,jl '~" -. I ___ --=---d" ,,, ~~
~ ~ I l' 1 I. I'll I ;.t: ~
/'l'il; ," ,"/ " i ,; (:~ I I :;j.:" I ~'. 'I j I ,- __' II '~>- ---'I': II ~ ~!
· il I f - . ",' -. I k " I,) 151)' "'I'
,\\ If' r L-r .' -: (~ ! < '. . ;~~J)l"_,__- - .,:.-- ,l -~=- ..~--F " ~
Ir l~w\ . \.;;J j ('~II " (~), II ~) =- - I [ -~f
I ;~; ~<]tt\....J r .~ "I~:' - ~--I "I ~- ~~\ . .---. }":il --.. (.';'1" II'~-'-- - -1 ~I,' ~~ I
~~ . I;' : (;, . -.- ,':. -- -. . .J,.. 'I ,;:), 'I -'c I
I .' '1 t ' ~ (:;,; I --, . T I 't r--~ --j ," --.,
I J, nlll"" -~' ,~~I I, ,--- -- '""-t'I;----::o-:':~~~,~"f j'-i +~i"Z1 ';-r-"~1:j1" ,
1~,~'~lfl1WI'~li'~{1 :,,(OJL'''-'.''rf:1 H0)~ -....i r--' ~',___:~){i I~'III~' ,';'7-'I,j :~I
~';I~';I'IIII~ ',~' :, -::' , J~'_iii l !' (~\ ,-' ~ (-\, ";11 (,~; ~_j: I' _)11
1,1" { ,~, I ~ ... j ---;P.--- ,,--1--~ ' --- _ I I , ' _.
1'..lJZOIII ~ '~"'>.;;oo14~, ~'I'. I r~".\.' I
-I~I~:!; II" ft' I '.( 'l:d..,;"XJl ,f:.-f [' " . _'n "-".",' 'III ~_J,,___ _.j,J "1 'i
1~,)J'i 111/1111 :'I:! j '.Ie .J~"' -,~'f /. -.' '., "~-- - ~-- ,.-r~~:<-'-" -~- -! / ': ~ 1,:',. ,- r I' ~~ '
),~:,,~jr~- J,'" cl ~ ,,!-_c i'.--~;' -~ P..",:"~. . ,.
j;~,I!!~ ! I:f,~lg~, .. ....". 'Li'l ~;."." '0'\; .}m
J~11;':II~ "{;:;~\l~~I~~~"""l' !~ ""it'j'! <t;;' :;.f~.r-:I' . "I." :\..1"
'--rll-1 g Ii ,.t -.' .. ,,---....,. ,-...... ."".',,"'--_L....1 ,......-. . t "-"--- j 1 "..-....,!..
l).~.',i-.'.' fli r . !,-::-~ ',;:.~::.,,;:..:...,~_.::.::..._:.:.:-,- ",.. :.~...:...;;;.'!,.._".."'.; "":"""":i:.I.:!;"r '. ,", ,'I->...~-;::~_~.~~;"""'
Cedarcreek Subdivision
Exhibit A Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
B. Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
1.1 SITE SPECIFIC R EQUlREMENTS-PRELIlVIINAR Y PLAT
1.1.1 The preliminary plat labeled as C-l prepared by Bailey Engineering, dated December 21, 2005, is
approved, with the required amendments and conditions listed herein. All comments/conditions
of the accompanying Annexation/Zoning (AZ-06M009-Revised) shall also be considered
conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-06-007-Revised).
1.1.2 The applicant shall construct a 30-foot landscape buffer along McMillan Road, the sidewalks
within these buffers shall he placed as to line up with existing buffers in neighboring
subdivisions.
1.1.3 The Plat shall be revised to show Lot 9 Block 4 as a public alley.
1.1 A That the applicant shall certify that Lots 7, 8 and 12 of Block 1 have the required 30 feet of
frontage as required by UDC IIM2A.
1.1.5 The applicant shall comply with the requirements of no direct lot access for any lots adjacent to
McMillan Road as required by ACHD.
1.1.6 That portion of the detached sidewalk which lies outside of the right-of-way shall be contained in
an easement which dedicates pedestrian cross-access and is in favor of the Ada County Highway
District, and said casement shall be depicted on the fInal plat or an instrument number referenced
in a plat note.
1.1.7 A landscape plan shall be submitted prior to ftnal plat showing the landscaping in relation to the
changes required by this report. The landscape plan shall be modified to reflect the conditions
contained in this report and the revised preliminary plat and shall be submitted with the final plat
application.
1.1.8 A detailed fencing plan in accordance to UDC 11-3AM 7 shall be submitted with the [mal plat.
1.1.9 The submitted landscape plan prepared by Bailey Engineering, dated January 13, 2006 is not
approved. The following should be included in a revised landscape plan:
. Lot 1 Block 6, Lot 9 Rlock 5 and Lot 11 Block 1 shown as future rights of way on shall be
landscaped with lawn or other vegetative undercover until such time as ACHD has acquired
the property for future roadway improvements.
. The applicant shall show a sidewalk in Lot 11 Block 1.
. The applicant shall provide perimeter landscaping in Lot 14 Block 2 and Lot 18 Block 6. If
the ingress/egress easement is to be used to buffer the future collector roadway in Paramount
Subdivision
. All parkway landscaping shall bl;: consistent with UDe 11-3B~ 7
. Where the Bisby/Harrell Laterals are to be covered, all vegetation shall be installed as
required by the UDC 11 M3B. If the Settlers Irrigation District restricts the type and quantity
Exhibit B Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04120106
of vegetation, the landscape buffers shall be increased as to accommodate the plan as
approved or the applicant may apply for alternative complialll..:e.
. The applicant shall certify that one tree per 8,000 square feet oflawn has been provided.
· All parkway trees shall be Class II trees.
· A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or
qualified nurseryman Te~ponsible for the landscape plan and submitted Plior to Cily Council
signature of the Final Plat. All standards of installation shall apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-
14.
Other than the changes listed above, the approved landscape plan is not to be altered without prior
written approval of the Planning Department.
1.1.10 All road drainage shall be contained on site in the drainage swales/areas as depicted.
1.1.11 Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Cedarcreek Subdivision
Homeowners' Association.
1.1.12 Other than the public street access approved by ACHD, direct lot access to McMillan Road is
prohibited. A note shall be placed all the [mal plat restricting access to McMillan Road.
1.1.13 Construct all alleys to comply with ACHD's requirements for public alleys. All alleys shall
contain at least 20 feet of pavement within a 24-foot right-of-way, as proposed, and include 28-
foot inside and 48-foot outside turn radii where the alleys intersect the public streets.
1.1.14 The planter strip between the curb and the near edge of the sidewalk along all the internal streets
with four-foot wide detached sidewalks shall be a minimum of eight-feet wide an.d includt: Class
II trees.
1.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT
1.2.1 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision
pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17.
1.2.2 All areas approvt:d as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All
stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subj ect to UDC 11-
3A-18 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other non-vegetated
surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as pennitted under UDC 11-3B.
Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed
such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as
proposed by staff. If the stonnwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved
open space and still meet the standards of UDC 11-3A-18, then the applicant shall relocate the
facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of
the developer to comply with ACHD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at
the time of final construction.
1.2.3 The applicant shall submit a detailed fencing plan with the final plat application for the
subdivision. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain
debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fencing
should be installed in accordance with City Code.
Exhibit B Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
1.2.4 Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing
additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed.
Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to
be mitigated.
1.2.5 All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or
lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per UDC 11-3A-6,
unless otherwise approved by Settlers Irrigation District. Plans will need to be approved by the
appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written
approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association
approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer
prior to final plat signature.
1.2.6 Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation/plat does
not relieve the applicant of responsihility for compliance.
1.2.7 Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC II-oR.
2. Public Works Department
2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension of mains planned in
Paramount Subdivision. The mains will be extended on the developer's timeline and the City of
Meridian does not guarantee sewer service in the timelines outlined in the UDC.
2.2 The applicant shall install mains to and through this proposed development; applicant shall
coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms
of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum cover over sewer
mains is three feet, if cover from top ufpipe 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.
2.3 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in W. McMillian Road and
future mains in Paramount Subdivision to the north. The applicant shall be responsible to install
water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public
Works, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide
servlCe.
2.4 The applicant has not indicated who will own and operate the pressure irrigation system in this
proposed development. If it is to be maintained as a private system, plans and specifications will
be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the construction plan review. A "draft
copy" of the operations and maintenance manual will be required prior to plan approval with the
"final draft" being required prior to final plat signature on the last phase of this project.
If it is to be owned and maintained by an Irrigation District then evidence of a license agrccment
shall be submitted prior to scheduling of a pre-construction meeting.
2.5 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water (UDC 11-3A-6). 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
connectioll tu the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point cOlUlection is utilized,
the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to
signature on the final plat hy the City Engineer.
2.6 If there is going to be a pressurized irrigation pump station of this property it must be located in a
common lot, and cannot encroach into any required landscape buffers.
Exhibit B Page 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
2.7 Prior to signature on the fInal plat vacate the ingress/egress easement shown on the preliminary
plat.
2.8 All existing structures shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer.
2.9 Meridian Public Works specifications do not allow any large landscaping within a fIve foot radius
of water meters. The applicant shall make the necessary adjustments to achieve this separation
requirement and comply with all landscape requirements.
2.10 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from
domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9A-8. Wells may be used for non-
domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
2.11 The applicant has not indicated how tht: sturm drainage from the proposed private alley will be
disposed. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required
and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all improved surfaces. Storm
water treatment and disposal shall be designed in accordance with Department of Environmental
Quality 1997 publication Catalog of Storm Water Best Management Practices for Idaho Cities
and Counties amI City of Meridian standards and policies. Off-site disposal into surface water is
prohibited unless the jurisdiction which has authority over the receiving stream provides written
authorization prior to development phm approval. The applicant is responsible for filing all
necessary applications with the Idaho Department of Water Resources regarding Shallow
Injection Wells.
2.12 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed,
drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final
Plat for tbis subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits.
2.13 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted
fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to
signature on the [mal plat.
2.14 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths,
pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining
certificates of occupancy.
2.15 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction
inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the fInal plat
per Resolution 02-374.
2.16 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.
2.17 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Pennitting that
may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency.
2.18 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting
that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
2.19 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office.
2.20 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.
2.21 The 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. TIus is to t:Ilsure that the bottom
elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least I-foot above.
Exhibit B Page 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
2.22 One hundred watt, high~pressure sodium streetlights shall be required at locations designated by
the Public Works Department. A 11 streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expenst:. Typical
locations are at street intersections and/or fIre hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are
detenmned after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light
contractor shall obtain design and pennit from the Public Works Department prior to
commencing installations.
3. Fire Department
3.1 Acceptance of the water supply for fIre protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water
quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing.
3.2 One and two family dwellings will require a frre-flow of 1 ,000 gallons per minute available for duration
of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500 feet apart.
futemational Fire Code Appendix C.
3.3 Final Approval ofthe fIre hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department.
a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 W' outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle.
b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it.
c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec.
d. Locatiom; with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the
hydrant location.
e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits.
f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'.
g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above fInish grade.
h, Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFe Section 509.5.
3.4 Entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of28' inside and 48' outside radius.
3.5 All common driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and
shall have a clear driving surface which is 20' wide.
3.6 Provide a 20-foot wide Fire Lane for all internal roadways all roadways shall be markt:u ill
accordance with Appendix D Section D103.6 Signs. Lot 9 Block 4.
3.7 Operational rrre hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather
surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site.
3.8 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one and two story construction.
3.9 The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall
have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29'
street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side.
These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension.
3.10 The proposed 85-lot subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total
estimated population of247 residents at build out.
3.11 All portions of the buildings located on this proj ect must be within 150' of a paved surface as
measured around the perimeter of the building.
Exhibit B Page 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
3.12 Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the
jurisdiction is more than 400 fcct (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured
by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains
shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an
approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the
distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183).
For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m).
For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in
accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m).
4. Police Department
4.1 Any interior fencing shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if
so lid fencing is used.
4.2 Lots 9+1 0 of Block 1 create residences that will be isolated from their surrounding neighbors.
Such areas have an increased crime potential. Prior to the ncxt public hearing, the applicant shall
work with the Police Chief and/or Planning Staff to revise the platJsite plan such that the
houses/dwelling units in the general area are oriented toward one another and encourage
interaction between more neighbors. The platJsite plan shall be revised in accord with those
discussions.
4.3 The proposed development and/or plat do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the
public areas. Prior to the next public hearing, the applicant shall meet with the Police Chief and/or
Planning Staff to discuss features that increase visibility, including but not limited to: doors and
windows that look out on the public areas, front porches, and adequate nighttime lighting. The
site plan and/or landscaping plan shall be revised in accord with those discussions.
5. Parks Department
5.1 Standard for Mitigation of trees: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape
Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-1O) will be followed.
5.2 Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in
the City ofMcridian Landscape Ol-dinance (UDC 11-3B-10) will be followed.
6. Sanitary Service Company
6.1 SSC will not provide trash pick-up serviceiS utilizing the common driveway. The developer shall
install a concrete pad at the end of the common drive no more than five (5) feet behind the
sidewalk. The pad shall be of sufficient area to accommodate the receptacles of the residences
that take access from the common driveway.
6.2 Please contact Bill Gregory at sse (888-3999) for detailed review of your proposal and suhmit
stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application.
7. Ada County Highway District
Site Specific Conditions of Approval
7.1 The applicant shall do one of the following:
Exhibit B Page 6
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
a. Dedicate a total of 35-feet of right-of-way along McMillan Road, and construct a minimum 5-
foot wide concrete sidewalk along McMillan Road, located a minimum of 38-feet from centerline
within an easement.
b. Dedicate a total of 45-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of McMillan Road abutting the
parcel by means of a warranty deed and locate the sidewalk a minimum of 38-feet from centerline
within the right-of~way.
Note: Any right-of~way dedicated with this application along McMillan Road will be pmdmsed
by the District with Corridor Preservation funds.
7.2 ConstlUl:llhe internal streets as 34 -foot street sections (with local fire department approval) with
curb, gutter, 4-foot detached concrete sidewalks, and 8~foot planter strips, as proposed.
7.3 Provide sufficient pavement width on the site entrance roadway intersection (N. Summit Way,
intersecting McMillan Road) to accommodate simultaneous left and right twn movements. This
may require 24~feet of pavement on the west side ofthe island to allow for two exit lanes. The
design and construction of the island should be coordinated with the ACHD Traffic Department
and Development Review.
7.4 Provide 21-foot street sections on each side of the proposed center island. Any proposed
landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat shall be owned
and maintained by a homeowners association. Notes of this are required on the final plat. The
design should be reviewed and approved by ACHD's Development staff
7.5 Construct stub streets to the surrounding properties as identified below. Install a sign at the
terminus of each roadway stating, "THIS ROAD WilL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE."
. Stub street to tht: west, Ramsbrook Street, located 405-feet west ofN. Swnmit Way
(measured centerline to property line). This stub street will provide access to the adjacent
parcel.
· Stub street to the east, Street E, located 145-feet east ofN. Newsham Way (measured
centerline to property line). This stub street should align as an entrance to the Paramount
Subdivision.
· The stub to the north, N. See! Way, is proposed to be located 135-feet north ofW.
Archerfield Street (measured centerline to property line). This stub street should align as
an entrance to the Paramount Subdivision.
7.6 Construct one roadway, N. Summit Avenue, to intersect McMillan Road approximately 725-feet
west of the east property line in aligmnent with the existing street to the south, as proposed.
7.7 Submit a Road Trust deposit to the District for $1,000 for sidewalk abutting McMillan Road
along the 50-foot strip at the west property line
7.8 Other than the access specifically approved with this application, direct lot access is prohibited to
McMillan Road and shall bc noted on the final pIal.
7.9 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval.
Standard Conditions of Approval
Exhibit B Page 7
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
7.10 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right~of-way.
7.11 Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACHD roadway or
right-of-way.
7.12 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be
borne by the developer.
7.13 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the
construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file
number) for details.
7.14 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy.
7.15 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing
by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for
details.
7.16 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy
Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all
applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the
State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans.
7.17 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building pennit
(or other required permits), which incorporates any required de::;ign changes.
7.18 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable
requirements ofthe Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy.
7.19 Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance
with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance.
7.20 It is the responsibility of the applil.;ant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The
applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The
applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (I-ROO-342.1585) at least two full business days
prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of.way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic
Operations 387.6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during
any phase of construction.
7.21 No change in the tenus and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing
and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authurized
representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to
obtain written confmnation of any change from the Ada County Highway District.
7.22 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this
application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulatioll~, ordinances, plans, or
other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest
advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless
a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect
at the time the change in use is sought.
Exhibit B Page 8
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20106
8. Settlers' Irrigation District
8.1 All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to
function. The facilities involved are Bisby Lateral (20' easement), Harrell Lateral #12 (20'
easement). Contact SID for additional requirements.
8.2 A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals.
8.3 A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any SID facilities, or
within its easements.
8.4 Any Change to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, water delivery, tiling, and
landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District's Board of Directors.
8.5 All storm drainage must be retained on-site.
8.6 The development must supply pressure irrigation access to all lots within the above-mentioned
subdivision from the current delivery point. If the developer wishes to have SID own, operate,
and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement must be in place prior to the pre-
construction meeting.
Exhibit B Page Y
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAff REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
Exhibit C. Legal Description
.Legal Description
Cedarcreek Subdivision - Annexation
RUT to RB Zoned
A parcel located in the S 112 of the SW 1/4 of the SE % of Section 25, Township 4 North,
Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as
follows; .
BEGINNING at a brass cap monument marking the southwest corner of said S 1,12 of the
SW % of the SE '/4 (1;.1 corner), from which 5/8 inch diameter iron pin marking the
southeast corner of said S Y2 of the SW 1;4 of the SE 1,4 bears S 89"54'20" E a distance
of 1340.90 feet;
Thence N O'US'40" E along the westerly boundary of said S V2 of the SW % of the SE ~14
a distance of 660,04 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin marking the northwest corner of
said S Y2 of the SW '4 of the SE 1/4;
Thence S 89 "54'17" E along the northerly boundary of said S V2 of the SW 1,4 of the SE
1;4 a distance of 1339.99 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin marking the northeast
corner of said S V2 of the SW 1.4 of the SE 114;
Thence S O'UQ'5S" W along the easterly boundary of said S Y2 of the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4
a distance of 660,02 feet to the southeast corner of said S lf2 of tho SW lf4 of the SE 114;
Thence N 89"54'20" W along the southerly boundary of said S V2 of the SW 1/4 of the SE
1.4 a distance of 1340.90 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Excepting therefrom the following described parcel;
Commencing at a brass cap monument marking the southwest corner of
said S V2 of the SW lf4 of the SE V4 (1,4 corner), from which 5/8 inch
diameter iron pin marking the southeast corner of said S 1/2 of the SW % of
the SE V4 bears S 89"54'20" E a distance of 1340.90 feet;
Thence S 89"54'20" E along the southerly boundary of said S Vz of the SW
'/4 of the SE 1;.1 a distance of 50.20 feet to a point;
Thence leaving said southerly boundary N 0"05'40" E a distance of 30.00
feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin and the POINT OF BEGINNING;
Thence continuing N 0 "05'40" E a distance of 290.40 feet to a 5/8 inch
diameter iron pin;
Thence S 89"54'20" E a distance of 150.00 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron
pin:
..' .-) .
LaflclSol Lft1 ons
L".,-".,_. l.,lrlQ ~"'P/t.''liml ~m, f~.r.'~"llfl~
Ced;u.'(N!k Subdivi:;,e".
Job No, 04-43
Exhibit C Page l
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
Thence S 0"05'40" W a distance of 290.40 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron
pin;
Thence N 89"54'20" W along a line 30.00 leet north of and parallel to the
southerly boundary of said S 1/2 of the SW V. of the SE V. a distance ot
150_00 feal to thG POINT OF BEGINNING.
This parcel contains 19.31 acres and is subject to any easements existing or in use,
Clinton W. Hansen, PLS
Land Solutio"v, PC
January 11 , 2006
~S~iW Af'p~OIJAL ,
" ---.~
nV _.-~.
i'llBLIC
MER\Q\P,t\ OEPT.
Vi(lf\ItS
.. :)
L<'J'l1dSolutjons
L. _ ~_~t'I.'i''1",,,,r''''''.h~Q
Ced:tr{.'{(,:er. Suh(i!,,'I~;(lr
.Job No. 04-43
Exhibit C Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
~~
1f~'lj:i '''-'''~-li!!
AlIA.", I!l "~:'''I -: ~
.,u I I
,I
11 I I
I I / 1
I. I
II I I
II I I
siJ
~i1 J
11 II
I ~ Ii
~ I
\ _.r- I
I I
It' I j
'ii ~'I,,, J
"0._1..,._. __l~_ __" r ,., _J, _~_ ,
s~ It' ~ 1'f''OIJ'~.j-.-V "'17a1'l$"f v' ~!;
~ ~~ Ii
~ ?
~-' b ~.
..- --- .- -,~-- - ~-- -.. -<0
"'~I-'~~-If ...,..,~~/') ~~7r:1J ~ ~
~i
T
....."'"
"0 n '-Qi QU .., 3" ~." - -----"...jPofc
.i~ P tj~ ~~~ f. f~! ~ ~! ....:;:...c
!~ 3,1 q~ 'fi d~i . ~_ "'i,------y.
"" ,; ,-.! 'If >~ - ,~ t~ ijJ3
;; H ~~ ~~ ~:: ~~ I~" ill 81~
~; 'I ~i f;: Sl} 1, 'L- ~ --1-
,; J'"~ ~~ !i .-11 ~~ t N(l/B"40-r
t~:~ ~5 H l~iq~ I i
h g' 1- ;..;1 h .
~ -;~ :2 II H 1 ~,~ , I
l~. !i ;> ~'I J' II
1 19 !l "I ~l_ ., ,
~ ~~ ,Ii ~;!H ~i :
;.i ii'" Jj ~;~ 'f' i"
.'_ .'.: . Ii' .1 ~
. : .: ~ I i ~. . r.:
:, }., " U,; i f
H ~~ ~'i ,I I I
, ~i ~~ Q: ! .i.l,~
, ~ l~ i! ~~ . ~'~~Ii
~ , 2" ,~ '. ~ ~,~,'
, i!l!i
~~ ~ ~ ~ U H gr,l_' II':
i'~ ~ ~ ~ ~i ;.1 i;.~
1;;.~1.~~~i" 'I
" -> ; .. ~~ 1; ~. I ~ I
a~~ii2-~'~~~ .
" ~ 5 ~~; iI n,' ~, I I
:~ ~ ~ , ( · ~~ ~ t'.
il1 n f U;t J ~j I
d. ,~, ~ ~J- i f I
", ~: l ~ l 'l.~ I
::). ~ ;, '=l .. ~ ~ 11 '
C,:H -I' ~ !iii, i
t.:I" ,l ..... , .
~~.~j:l; "~i .
.t"l .~ . '", .i ?,
'f 1 : 1 i ~< ~~;.:
!!.1 i~ ..' __~_~ ,,_ _~
,~I, r: .~ < ,
. .. ,~ J hj :
1 ~ $' ~."
!; ~.~ < ~
, ~!.
i~~ ~~.
J. tr
r 1;;- ~ HW~ ~ < 1
'. .~ ' ~~;.m ;I . I
~ ';J\ , fH~IH l~ : I
-; !i> ~~ -'.'" e ~ ~
;~~ 6. ~, ~&~..~ 5~~~~? <;; f
m ~ ~: \!( ~ -~1 nH5~ ~
:"::.~" -- '(1;r'kCll l" ~.~....;r"'i.:: 1"
~,; ! ~~'~~ i~~m ~
'- '" ,.-', I Ij~H~ I ~
21..' ~.-~i~:>
:: .",!;.oIi~
~~. .~ ,=.~;~
i ::: :1 ~ i:;:~
i1:
:ern
02;1
Sl~
(1)%
~~
z-'.-
o
~tg~! 'j'
, 'II.~'" 'Ii':
* H ~ ~}
;;~'?' ~ ~~
.~~ /,21 l'
;~ ~ II~ Ii.:
H Ii;;! ~1
i"~' }!
~
;:.
Exhibit C Page 3
~I
I
~
I
I
j,
"'~iC
~~ ~
og~ ~
~l',Jz 0
;;:~:I' ';]
1"1'1-1"1"11 -I.
1 :i2~"':r:
.';', ~2S m
c ~fo 0
~... 1\J>=a""'" >
go...;rr c:
V'!-:Pzm ()
I 8g~ ~
~ ~~-<:: ili
~ -~~o '"
- - <::"!'! -I
, 3?~i1 f2
I J:"!'!'"'tl
o~"' '"
I . m: 0
~rt;; ;g
0",
":<
'"
m
n
o
AJ
I:"'""~ ~
;i Ilit-€F- ~
1 II t ~
? I
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
EXHIBIT D:
Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
Anncution Findings: UDe 1l-SB-3E
Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and
shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or
rezone, the Council shall make the following findings:
A. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
The applicant is proposing to zone the subject property to R.8 Medium Density Residential District.
Staff fmds that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the
comprehensive plan. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, 'medium density' is defined as
areas including single.family homes at densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre; 'low
density' consist uf single~family homes at densities of three dwelling units or less per acre. Staff
finds that the requested residential zoning designation, R-8, is harmonious with and in accordance
with the 2005 North Meridian Comprehensive Plan amendment and Future Land Use Map, which
designates the SW comer of the SW comer S25 4N 1 W at McMillan and Meridian Roads to be
medium density residential. The density proposed with the preliminary plat is consistent with
previuus Commission and Council actions and generally conforms to the goals, objectives, and
action items contained in the Comprehensive Plan for these low density areas with a request for a
'step up' in density_
Staff fmds that the proposed zoning is in general conformance with the comprehensive plan (please
see Section 8 of the Staff Report for detailed analysis of specific comprehensive plan action items
that apply to this development).
B. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
Concurrent with the annexation and zoning application, the applicant has submitted a preliminary
plat that proposes single-family detached residential products on the subject site (PP-06-007- dated
December 21, 2005). Staff does not anticipate that the applicant plans to rezone the subject property
in the future if the accompanying PP application is approved. Staff finds that the single-family
homes would be allowed (pennitted) within the requested R-8 district. The entire: site is being
proposed as residential and upon build-out staff would not anticipate changes of usage for this site.
C. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare;
The applicant has not submitted elevations for the proposed units which are anticipate:d to be
designed and constructed to meet similar architecture to the single family detached residences of
the near vicinity. Staff believes that the design of these single family attached dwelling units will be
compatible with the adjoining uses and transitional in nature to anticipated lower density uses north
of the site in the Paramount development and the adjacent subdivisions also in the medium density
comprehensive designations. Staff fmds that the proposed development will changt: the existing
character of the area, which is still largely rural. However, the proposed development is generally
harmonious with the intended character envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan. Staff does not find
that the proposed zoning/uses will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
Further, staff does not anticipate that the proposed uses will be hazardous as long as the applicant
complies with the conditions contained in Exhibit B and all City Code provisions. Staff
recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that may be
provided when determining this finding.
Exhibit D Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20106
D. 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,
There have been no recent street improvements in the area. The abutting roadway McMillan Road
is not in ACHD's Five Year Work Program or CIP (20-year plan) for road widening. The subject
property is generally surrounded by rural residential acreages. Staff does not fInd that there has
been a change in the area that dictates that this property should be rezoned. Staff recommends that
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.
Other urban services, such as water, are near to this site and the applicant should he able to extend
such services to the site. Staff finds that the subject site is proposed for development in a fashion
similar to other properties in the area.
The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay park and highway impact fees.
ACHD has submitted a statt report with site specific and standard conditions as attached in Exhibit
B7.
On February 24, 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, staff finds that except for sanitary sewer, the public
services listed above can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. The
Commission and Council should reference any written and/or verhal testimony submitted by any
public service provider, regarding their ability to adequately service this project.
Staff does not find that there has been a change in the area that dictates that this property should be
rezoned. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on staff s analysis, public
testimony received and any comments submitted from any other agencies or departments regarding
whether this property should be annexed. Staff fmds that the proposed zoning amendment will not
result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing
services to this site.
E. The annexation is in the best ofinterest ofthe City (UDC 11-5B-3.E).
Due to the residential nature of the ~eneral vicinitv. the proiect's conformance to the Unified
Development Code. and the aoolicant's agreement to abide by the conditions of approval contained
in this staffreoort. stafffmds that the annexation and zoning of this property to R-8 would be in the
best interest ofthe City.
2. Preliminary Plat Findings:
In determining the acceptance of a proposed subdivision, the Commission shall consider the
objectives ofthis Title and at least the following:
A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan;
Please see Annexation Findin~s Item A above.
B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate accommodate the
proposed development;
Please see Annexation Findings Items C and D above
Exhibit D Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
C. The plat il> in conformance with I>cheduled public improvements in accord
the City's capital improvement program;
Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, the
subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds.
D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development;
Please see Exhibit B for comments and conditions from other agencies and departments.
E. The development will not be detrimental to the public heath, safety or general welfare; and
Staff is not aware of any health, safety or general welfare 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. Staff recommends that the Commission and
Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the
proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which staff is
unaware.
F. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features.
Staff is not aware of any natural, scenic or historic features which require preservation.
The applicant will be required to improve all waterways on this site.
Exhibit D Page 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 04/20/06
Exhibit E Page 1
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 16. 2006
Page 46 of 82
Moe: Second.
Rohm: Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we continue Items No. AZ 06-011
and PP 06-009 to the regularly scheduled meeting of April 6, 2006. All those in favor
say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. Thank you for coming in.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 12:
Item 13:
Public Hearing: AZ 06-012 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.43
acres from RUT to R-2 for Hendrickson Subdivision by Kingsbridge
Subdivision, LLC - 4240 East Batt Lane:
Public Hearing: PP 06-010 Request for a Preliminary Plat with 18 single-
family residential lots and 4 common lots for Hendrickson Subdivision
by Kingsbridge Properties, LLC - 4240 East Bott Lane:
Rohm: Okay. Okay. At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing of AZ 06-012 and
PP 006-010, both relating to Hendrickson Subdivision, for the sole purpose of
continuing these items to the regularly scheduled meeting of April 6, 2006.
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we continue AZ 06-012 and PP 06-010, both relating the Hendrickson
Subdivision to our regularly scheduled meeting of April 6, 2006, to allow us to receive
and assimilate the ACHD report and have full discussion at that time.
Moe: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue Items AZ 06-012 and PP 06-010 to
April 6, 2006, regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. All
those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 14:
Item 15:
Public Hearing: AZ 06-009 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 19.57
acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Cedarcreek Subdivision by Centennial
Development, LLC - 470 West McMillan Road:
Public Hearing: PP 06-007 Request for a Preliminary Plat with 85 single-
family residential lots and 12 common lots for Cedarcreek Subdivision
by Centennial Development, LLC - 470 West McMillan Road:
Meridian PI<lnning & Zoning
March 16. 2006
Page 47 of 82
Rohm: Okay. At this time I'd like to open the public hearing on AZ 06-009 and PP 06-
007. Both of these items are related to Cedarcreek Subdivision and begin with the staff
report.
Guenther: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The Cedarcreek
Subdivision is located approximately one quarter mile east of Meridian Road on
McMillan Road. As you can see here it Is bounded by Paramount to the north and this
is the undeveloped section of Paramount through here. This long narrow strip is a
collector road from Paramount. This is Solitude, Amber Creek, and there is vacant
property to the west of the site. As you can see, there is one small parcel right here that
is an out parcel. The site is currently all agricultural with a -- I believe there is two
residences located in here. I guess I'm being indicated there is only one residence, but
there is multiple buildings in there. With this there is a request for 85 single family
residential lots and 12 common lots. The applicant is meeting the R-8 standards of the
ordinance. Most of these lots are 5,000 square foot lots, with the required landscape
buffer to McMillan Road. And all of the connections to Paramount, as well as to the
east and to the north to Paramount, as well as to a stub street to the undeveloped
parcel, which would provide for future connections in that location. Again, this is one of
those staff reports that has ACHD conditions of approval that are pending. Staff doesn't
know what else this applicant could do, since they are connecting to all their stub streets
that are required of the site, but this will go to tech review tomorrow, same as Basin
Creek. Probably would have conditions next week for -- in a draft format. The main
issue with this subdivision is the out parcel here. I wish I had a blow up of it. You can
kind of see that this neck right there is left out. This is, actually, most of the -- there is a
canal here and there is a maintenance road in there that is along that canal. And that
also serves a purpose of being the driveway for this parcel. In this one you can see the
-- their house is right off this property line. My guess is that is five or six feet to that
property line and their garage is right here, which is almost right on the property line for
what is going to be the future common lot in this location. Now with that there are two
other lots in here, one for future right of way and, then, one for the required 25 foot
landscape buffer to McMillan Road. Now, if the applicant does -- the applicant will be
required to adhere to the City of Meridian UDC, which says that they are required to
provide that 25 foot landscape buffer, which is, essentially, going to take that driveway
access away. So, that will limit the use of this -- this residential property here and they
most likely will have to make application to ACHD for another access point to McMillan
in the future. Or some other resolution needs to be adhered to. But those are mostly
off-site improvements that staff has not brought into this staff report at this time. The
applicant's agent is here and I would request that they address that in greater detail.
The only real comments that were conditions would have been that this is landscaped,
which is what staff is requiring and that the common lot be maintained by the
homeowners association. The other comment was that this alley is shown as a
common -- or as a common lot. The alley should be dedicated to the public right -- or
as public right of way as conditioned in the staff report. Staff Is -- has prepared findings
for approval and conditions accordingly and is recommending approval of this project
with -- I guess there is some contingencies of hoping to try and get some resolution with
this project here and get some off-site improvements, namely, similar comparable
Meridian PIQnning & Zoning
March 16, 2006
Page 48 of 82
conditioning as what Solitude recently did and Amber Creek, which would be to provide
the sidewalk connection at a minimum across the frontage here in order to better
facilitate any type of pedestrian access across the front of these properties on out
parcels. However, that would be, again, off-site improvements. Staff has not made any
conditions, but that could be requested or offered by the applicant and the out parcel
residents who are here tonight. And at that I will stand for questions.
Rohm: Any questions of staff?
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, just one, and if you said this I didn't hear it, but I will ask the
question that City Council will ask. Are we absolutely certain that the out parcel is
owned by people who have no relation to what we are studying now?
Guenther: That is correct. The first thing that I asked the applicant to do was to provide
deeds that predated 1984 and they give me a deed for this property at approximately -- I
believe 1981.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Rohm: Any other questions? At this time would the applicant like to come forward,
please?
Nickel: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. Shawn Nickel, 838 East
Winding Creek Drive in Eagle, here tonight representing Centennial Development and
the Cedarcreek Subdivision. Staffs done a good job of explaining the whatnots of the
project. We are in agreement with the conditions of approval. Again, this does meet
the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinance -- the current zoning ordinance as
far design, density, compatibility. As staff stated, we are providing stub streets to
existing approved stub streets. We do have a tech review meeting in the morning with
ACHD. I have reviewed our report, they did get that to me today, and it's a pretty
straight forward staff report. We would like to, obviously, continue to move. but it
sounds like your advice from your staff is to continue this on. So, I'll leave that with you.
But we are confident and receptive of the draft staff report from ACHD. Again, we are in
agreement with staff's recommendations. I guess the only outstanding issue that we will
probably discussion tonight is this out parcel and I think staff has done the right thing
with his conditions or his recommendations and that is that we work with the property
owners on issues of sidewalk and issues of the driveway, the existing driveway, and we
will continue to do that. The developer has had some discussions with the
representative for the Reidermans and I believe they are here tonight, so let them speak
and, then, we can continue on the conversation. And I'll stand for any questions you
have right now.
Moe: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Moe.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 16. 2006
Page 49 of 82
Moe: Shawn, in the report staff noted that the landscape plan that's been prepared and
was not accepted. Is there another one planned or are you just going to take care of
the conditions that are noted?
Nickel: What we will do, Commissioner, we will revise that prior to City Council, rather
than waiting until the final plat, once we figure out -- or get your recommendation and
incorporate what needs to be incorporated, we will get that revised.
Moe: Okay.
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Zaremba.
Zaremba: Mr. Nickel, I know, as you have indicated, that you have read the staff report,
but I just wanted to point out on page three, public works comment, that this
development isn't sewerable until Paramount brings sewer to and through. I just want
you to be -- to make sure that you have seen that and you're aware of whatever risk
you're taking in delay waiting for Paramount to act.
Nickel: We are aware of that.
Zaremba: Okay. That was it.
Rohm: I guess my only comment at this point in time -- and I'm sure we will receive
testimony from the Reidermans, but I would think that with that out parcel being so
much involved with this project, that there would have been greater effort put forth to
resolve all outstanding issues with the Reidermans before this meeting and I would just
strongly suggest that that would have been my preference to you folks early on. And
with that being said, I think we will just close it at that and we will take testimony from
the Reidermans and move forward.
Nickel: Great.
Rohm: Thank you, Shawn. At this time would Carl Reiderman like to come forward,
please?
Reiderman: Carl Reiderman, 770 West McMillan, the out parcel in this project, and
what else. Anything else?
Rohm: Just your address.
Reiderman: Oh. 770 West McMillan, which is the out parcel. We have tried numerous
times, without any success whatsoever, to communicate and have discussions and
resolve this issue with the applicant. They have said no to everything we have
proposed to them. We have proposed to them to buy us out. We have proposed that
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 16. 2006
Page 50 of 82
we could possibly develop this at the same time they are doing this with them and
somehow in cooperation with them. They have turned us down. We have offered to
take this out parcel, this extra 50 foot, off their hands, because we have been using it for
eight years as a driveway. The owner Chester Dallas -- Dallas Chester -- I'm a little
nervous -- promised to us many many times that he would not cut off access to our
shop. That's exactly what they are proposing to do. The landscape plan that we see --
get my little pointer here. These trees right here block off the doors to our shop. It's on
their landscape plan that our shop is there and that's where the doors are. They have
been out to survey this many times. And almost feel like they are acting in spite against
us, somehow or other. I don't know why. We have tried to negotiate. They just keep
saying no to us. Paramount has told us they want to do this ditch in cooperation with
the developers and they got up and walked out of the meeting with them. Paramount
has no plans to bring sewer to them within the next three to five years. They have told
us that. So, my understanding is the application is null and void after two years. Why
would you approve it when he's not going to get sewer to it? That's one of the
questions. We would just as soon that he just buy that from us and we could go away.
We are not real happy with 85 lots going in next to us, when all of Paramount has much
larger homes, much nicer homes than what Corey Barton is going to be putting in here.
So, we are really opposed to this and at bare minimum we would like them to work with
us, which they have not -- not shown any good faith whatsoever to do that. Any
questions?
Rohm: That's pretty straight forward. Thank you for your testimony.
Reiderman: Thank you.
Rohm: Bonnie Reiderman, would you like to speak, too?
B. Reiderman: My name is Bonnie Reiderman and I'm at 770 West McMillan Road.
And I am the owner, my name is on this property, and we had talked with them in
regards to buying us out. Again, they wouldn't pay us. The property to the left here,
which is -- we are surrounded by it. When we originally bought the property, the owners
of the parcel that we bought said that we own all the way out. Well, we found out we
didn't, you know, and so in the meantime we had already had a shop out there,
because, you know, we thought where we were at and we weren't and so, anyhow, now
they are trying to cut us off and they put landscaping coming down the road there.
There is -- we have two shops out there. They have put trees and kind of at the shop.
They wanted to cutoff the back of us at one point in time and give us this other side and
I said, no, we don't want that, because there is encumbrances on it, because there is
easements, there is -- I'm not really sure. There is two different easements on the west
side of us. And so they said, no, there isn't. Well, we had it researched by the Idaho
Power Company and they said there is, actually, four owners of that parcel. So, I don't
know, I'm concerned as to what's happening to us, because we are surrounded by all
four corners of this. Okay? Even on the front we are surrounded by -- and so if they go
and do this to us, that means where the lane goes down and cuts into our property,
there will have to be a cul-de-sac in there. Okay? And which means if we would ever
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 16. 2006
Page 51 of 82
develop, we don't have enough land to develop to make it worth our time and so it's just
-- you know, everything we do it ~- it cuts us off our shop, you know, that's our living, you
know. I don't know. I'm concerned that he's taking away our livelihood and I don't want
him to do that. You know, if he wants to buy it out, we would be happy to sell to him.
We don't want to fight with these people, but we want to have a fair evaluation of what's
going on.
Rohm: Thank you.
B. Reiderman: Is there any other questions you might--
Borup: Yes, Mr. Chairman, a couple. You had not addressed staff report's comment
about the sidewalk in front of your property.
B. Reiderman: I was not aware of that.
Borup: Okay. Do you have any problem with them putting a sidewalk along the
property that would continue on --
B. Reiderman: Well, first of all -- I'm sorry. On the front of our place we have these big
beautiful blue spruce trees and everything. I don't know what's going to happen. We
have been told it would be three lanes when McMillan -- or we have been told it will be
five lanes. We are not sure what's going to happen. If it happens, they will take off our
front carport and our -- part of our -- our office to our house. That means that we have
to remodel our house, turn it around, remodel the back of it and, you know, again, a lot
of expense to us, because of what this project is doing to us and so -~
Borup: But you're talking about ACHD widening the road. The comment -- the question
right now is just the sidewalk along there.
B. Reiderman: Well, I was not even aware of the sidewalk issue. Nobody has--
Borup: That's what I'm asking you right now.
B. Reiderman: Oh. I don't know. It depends on where it goes.
Borup: Okay.
B. Reiderman: Where is it going? Is it going to take our carport off? What's it going to
do?
Borup: No. No. The sidewalk would be out -- further out and it wouldn't -- it would just
be within that buffer, the highway buffer. I don't know. They'll need to work that out.
B. Reiderman: There is not very much --
Meridi;m Planning & Zoning
March 16, 2006
Page 52 of 82
Borup: It hasn't been addressed. It sounds like when you -- when you bought your
property you did not have it surveyed; is that correct?
B. Reiderman: Well, we were told that if we had it surveyed, we would have had to
survey 640 acres. That was an awful big expense to survey--
Borup: So, you didn't even have property pins or anything?
B. Reiderman: We had -- the owner stated out there -- we said to the pins and they said
yes. No, we did not.
Borup: Okay. Thank you.
Rohm: I have a question for you. What is your current access to your shop that's out
on the north end of the property -- northwest corner? Do you have an easement to -- on
that strip of land to gain access to the shop area?
B. Reiderman: No, we didn't. We do not have easements, but we went to Chester
Dallas, which was our neighbor, and we said could we buy it from you and he said, no,
but we said can we use it and he said, well, I'll never cut you off of it. And so the
previous people that owned that had used it for -- that road for 27 years. We have now
used it for going on eight years and we have maintained it. We have landscaped it. We
have done everything to take care of that and so I don't know what our next move is.
We are trying to -- what your wishes are, sir.
Rohm: Okay. Well, I was just curious if you had an easement or if it was by -- I can't
remember what kind of -- what's the right way when you have been using it for a
number of years?
B. Reiderman: Adverse possession.
Baird: Prescriptive easement, Mr. Chair. I don't want to give legal advice to these
individuals and I would certainly hope that they have sought their counsel on that
matter. But it's -- it's not something for the city to declare.
Rohm: Right. I understand that. Thank you. I appreciate your testimony.
B. Reiderman: Thank you.
Rohm: Doug Eden.
Eden: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, fellow Commissioners. My name is Doug
Eden, 1735 North Mansfield, Eagle, Idaho. And I've known the owners of this out parcel
for quite some time. I have, actually, been the realtor involved with them on several
dealings, including this particular parcel. We have tried to have communications with
the developer for over five months. Over five months ago I pointed out to the developer
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 16, 2006
Page 53 of 82
that that particular piece of ground right there had been used open and notoriously for
over 30 years by the owners of that particular parcel. The folks that own it now have
used it for over eight years. They were under the understanding that they owned that
property up until it was recently surveyed for this development about two years ago.
When it was surveyed for the development, that's when they realized they didn't own
the property. That's when they went to the owner at that time and said could we buy the
property from you and the owner at that time was already in negotiations with the
developer and didn't want to cut off another half acre that he might get 100,000 dollars
per acre for. So, he said, no, you can't buy it, but I'll never cut you off of it. These folks
-- and, then, talked to -- we have talked to -- I've, actually, tried to initiate these
discussions with the developer and several times I even said to the point was just make
us any offer, any offer at all. And their exact quote was we are not making you any
offer. Period. You know, we don't want the house, we don't want to buy the house. We
don't want to make you an offer. And in regards to this -- this over here, I've actually
gone over with the developer, I have told them this is notorious, this is prescriptive
easement, yeah, I have gone to real estate school also and know this. You can go talk
to your attorney and find out about it and they were like you can buy it from us, but we
don't have to buy it from you. I mean we don't have to give it to you, we don't have to
do anything, so -- and as for the sidewalk issue, if you put a buffer zone and a sidewalk,
you will be cutting off their only access to the property, you will also be cutting off
probably about three or feet of their carport, because they have a carport on the east
side of the property, in addition to the Shop on the north side. So, you will be cutting off
their carport and you will be cutting off the upper piece. And it's really a very ill-
conceived how this subdivision fits in with this other piece. And the only other issue I
have with this property is, you know, we have got -- compared to the last subdivision we
reviewed, you have got the same amount of lots and ten acres less ground. Thirty
percent less ground. These are 5,000 square foot lots. My three minutes are up.
Thank you so much.
Rohm: Thank you. Okay. Shawn, you want to come back up? Before -- let me ask if
there is anybody else that would like to offer testimony on this application? Seeing
none, Shawn.
Nickel: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. Again, for the record, Shawn
Nickel. What I just passed out is a little history of correspondences that have gone on
between the developer and the folks in the out parcel. There has been approximately
eight attempts at talking -- or communications back and forth, including one as late as
this afternoon, from what I understand. And this is -~ this is a tough situation when you
got a piece of property like this and you have got an existing house that's situated where
it is. However, in -- and if the staff could put up the plan that I gave them. We, actually,
have revised this plan and it was supposed to be in the file. It does show the
landscaping out of this, which does indicate that we are willing to work with the
Reidermans on resolving this. However, you know, a couple of the issues were -- you
know, there was some verbal agreement from the previous property owner as to access
to their house over his property. There was an attempt early on at swapping property --
trying to swap this piece here for an equal piece right there, which was denied by the
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 16, 2006
Page 54 of 82
neighbors. From what I understand from my developer there was a -- there was a -- an
amount given by the Reidermans to the developer that the developer felt was too high
to purchase that property, so there were other things that have been gone on. We have
provided a stub to the western boundary of our development to provide for future
access, not knowing what is ultimately going to come out. But as I stated earlier, I think
staff did a good job at -- at recommending that we work with the out parcel neighbors,
which we will do, as I have indicated on that revised plan. We are not trying to cut them
off. We can't be forced to buy a piece of property that is either overpriced or can't be
utilized by the developer. If it's something that has to go to court, it has to go to court,
unfortunately. I'm hopeful that my developer is going to work with the Reidermans and
get this resolved. But, in any event. it's my understanding that we can't -- we could not
extend the sidewalk and line up with our sidewalk, because it would go through their
carport. So, I know what -- I don't know what to do on that -- on that issue with sidewalk
on a piece of property that we have no control over. Our intentions are to do our proper
landscaping and everything along our portion of our frontage, which at this time is this
piece of property. How that is -- how that ultimately comes out I don't know, but I think
we are on the right path as far as the city is concerned, in that something's going to
have to be worked out between the two property owners. It's just going to have to be.
So, I'll stand for any questions you have or suggestion, advice.
Mae: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Moe.
Mae: Based upon your correspondence that you just handed out, am I to assume, then,
that the -- the other property owners have not gotten back to you or your developer in
regards to that -- purchasing their property?
Nickel: I think they talked to the developer this afternoon about 4:30. I wasn't involved
with that conversation. I have not been involved with most of these conversations. The
developer has.
Mae: Okay. I was just getting the understanding that there was no communication
going on and I read this, now I see that there has been some communication. I don't
know how close they are getting to that, but --
Nickel: You know, it probably hasn't been the best communication with either side, but
there has been communication from both sides and it's something that's going to have
to continue -- going to have to continue on to resolve whatever it ultimately is.
Rohm: Thanks, Shawn.
Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair?
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman?
Meridian Plonning & Zoning
March 16, 2006
Page 55 of 82
Rohm: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay.
Newton-Huckabay: What's this one?
Nickel: Where did that come from?
Newton-Huckabay: It was attached to this thing you gave me.
Nickel: Oh. Probably--
Borup: We have all got a copy of that.
Nickel: Oh, it's an old -- yeah, it's a very old plan.
Newton-Huckabay: Well, it looks a little more beneficial to the property to the
southwest.
Nickel: Yeah. I think that was the plan if we were to swap the property. That's what it
would have looked like if we would have swapped the -- now it's all coming back to me.
If we would have swapped this piece right here with that piece right there, that's what
the design would have looked like. I didn't realize that was part of your packet.
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, yeah. And, Mr. Nickel, I was only going to comment that I
believe what was worked on in the agreement across the street about a sidewalk across
an out parcel was not that it aligned with their permanent sidewalk, but that it, actually,
was a temporary sidewalk, even of asphalt, totally within ACHD's right of way. And it's
just to make a connection for people walking and bicycling to school and it wouldn't cut
off a driveway or access or -- it, actually, wouldn't be on their property.
Nickel: And I -- and, Commissioners, I think that would be appropriate, as long as it's
understood that that's what it would be, a temporary sidewalk or pathway that wouldn't
necessarily line up with the permanent concrete sidewalk along the rest of the
development, so -- because if it did, it would definitely go through their carport.
Zaremba: Staff can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's what the resolution was
across the street.
Guenther: Chairman Zaremba, your recollection is correct. I know that across the
street was -- in Solitude that had to go around a bunch of large trees as well and they
did not create the sidewalk connection that would have been fully within their 25-foot
required landscape buffer.
Nickel: And the Amber Creek one, actually, was on the other side of a ditch, so --
Zaremba: Uh-huh.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 16, 2006
Page 56 of 82
Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair?
Rohm: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay.
Newton-Huckabay: I just have one comment regarding this development. I think that
the developer needs to work with the neighbor and maximize the design to the west that
will most allow the neighbor to develop -- if they don't want to purchase their property, to
develop it in the maximum way possible. The connectivity -- and I agree with
Reidermans, that what they have now most likely would require a cul-de-sac, which
would take up a huge amount of what's left of their property. I do believe that your client
is in the power position in this point and I think that something needs to be -- they need
an opportunity to developer their land as well and I don't think the connectivity that's
provided now allows them to do that and get maximum use of their land. I think some
other design maybe similar to the one you have here would possibly work better, but I
think at the end of the day we are going to end up with a development that looks really
weird, for one, because you're going to have Cedarcreek and, then, you're going to
have this little out parcel and what's going to go on that little out parcel?
Nickel: Okay. But you do understand that we have no control over that out parcel.
Newton-Huckabay: I understand you have no control over the out parcel, but you do
have control over how you proVide access to that out parcel and you can work with that
neighbor, just like you would work with neighbors in any other development that you
have done, I believe. I mean you have to -- you can't look at that and say, oh, they have
a multitude of opportunities left here. I mean we are kind of creating a bizarre in-fill area
and I think that we are in a position that could be avoided, potentially.
Nickel: And not to be -- I'm not trying to argue with you, but if you do look at that sheet
that I had on that last page, that did show the opportunity to do that and the neighboring
property owners choose not to work with the developer on the swap that would have
created what you would call a better design or a better ability for them to develop. So,
we only can do what we can do, which is to provide them with the best possible access,
which if you look, that is the best possible access for them to redevelop their property
and we have looked at that. We did not -- you know, we did not locate it down here, it's
not located over there, it's located in the area that could be cul-de-sac'd and would
retain their -- their house. So, there is not -- it's not that big of a piece of property that's
left over, so there is only so much you can really do to proVide them secondary access.
So, we have tried to do that. We will continue and, obviously, we are going to be tabled
for the ACHD issue, so I'll make sure the developer is aware of the comments and we
will give it another go with trying to speak with the neighbors.
Newton-Huckabay: I mean could you give them a stub on the north and a stub on the
west -- or on the east?
Zaremba: That would make it worse to develop it.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 16, 2006
Page 57 of 82
Nickel: It would be worse. It would take out more property.
Guenther: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, , just would like to bring up the overall
aerial photo again one more time. I'm sorry.
Nickel: And, again, "m not trying to argue with you and we will -- we will look into this
before the next meeting.
Newton-Huckabay: Well, , mean -- but it looks to me that in -- I think that Commissioner
Rohm made the point early on is that all the right people haven't sat at the same table
and so, then, these arguments and disagreements come to the Planning and Zoning
Commission and me personally, this is the type of thing that I find really annoying.
Borup: Well, it's only about an acre.
Newton-Huckabay: Well -- and that's fine if it's only about an acre, but my point being is
that you still have an acre surrounded by development and what are you going to do
with it?
Guenther: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, that's what I'd like to address here
quickly. What we could proceed on is this parcel is completely undeveloped and this
road is most likely going to have the stub to here, because there is no other connection
across at this point and, then, there is a Paramount stub at this location. If this is
stubbed to the west here, then, they potentially could continue the 5,000 square foot lots
across the front and, then, two more lots in this area, which is probably the maximum
benefit that that parcel's ever going to get anyhow. That's mostly going to be an ACHD
call for tomorrow of how they would like to see that redevelop. Unfortunately, this spite
strip is what this is turning out to be --
Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh.
Guenther: -- and that's the biggest problem that we have and that's why the -- these
two -- the applicant and the Reidermans need to work together to resolve how that's
going to redevelop. That's as staff foresees as being the biggest problem.
Nickel: And, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners -- and that's one reason I did revise that
after looking at it today, because I didn't want to give the impression that we were
planting trees and trying to cut them off. Unfortunately, that's going to get downloaded
on the --
Rohm: Well, just from my perspective it looks like that's exactly what was taking place,
is that they were being cut off. But that's just from -- from my perspective looking at the
development as it currently is drawn, so --
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 16. 2006
Page 58 of 82
Nickel: With this layout no trees on this -- or landscaping at all on the strip. Is that what
you are referring to?
Rohm: Well, with the trees that were shown.
Nickel: Right. And, again, that's why I did present that. And, again, we will give it
another shot to work with them, but I just -- just so you know, when we come back in
two weeks it might not be resolved. It's an issue that might have to be resolved outside
of the city.
Rohm: I think the -- I think we have examined this long enough.
Nickel: Okay.
Rohm: Both parties know that it's this body's position that you get it resolved. We are
not here to resolve that for you.
Nickel: Okay_
Rohm: And I think that's enough said about that. Okay. Thanks, Shawn.
Nickel: Okay. Thanks.
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I would comment that I agree with I think what everybody else
is saying, that hopefully in the interim while we are waiting for the ACHD report that the
parties will resolve this, but I would also suggest whatever happens when this comes
back, we will probably have further discussion and where I'm going with that is I would
rather suggest we move this to April 20th, rather than April 6th.
Rohm: I concur with that.
Zaremba: April 6th is pretty full and we have already moved a bunch of them there, so -
- that being said, Mr. Chairman, I move that we continue AZ 06-009 and PP 06-007,
both relating to Cedarcreek Subdivision, to our regularly scheduled meeting of April
20th,2006.
Moe: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we continue AZ 06-009 and PP 06-007 to
our regularly scheduled meeting of April 20th, 2006. All those in favor say aye.
Opposed same sign? Motion carried. Thank you all for coming in.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 16:
Public Hearing: AZ 06-013 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 21.77
acres from RUT to R-15 zone for Canterbury Commons Subdivision by
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
~~~/
rJP'\"
(; V ")If; f~l /"';f4"i 7"\ '"-'~j-'--\ '
. {~..~-j \~ ~.:./.l (1.1 ~ r'
APr? 1 0 2006
;:;.: t\' OF MERIDll\f',;
STATE OF IDAHO
)
) 9
)
! ---- ~ _.~";,' ~...~; .c q ~< r"'. ~~: r=- .; :--. ~'
COUNTY OF ADA
I,
Mike Arnold,
(name)
Prp.mier Signs, Inc, /.100 E FF.lirvip.w Avenue, Suite 7
(address)
855-0380
(phone)
Meridian
( city)
Idaho
(state)
, being first duly sworn upon
oath, depose and say:
I personally posted the subject property with the hearing notice sign 10 days prior to the public
hearing for the Cedarcreek Subdivision -' Preliminary PI;lt for 85 residential lots, with
common lots; Annexation and Zoning to R-R on 19 57 acres.
Dated this 7th
day of
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me the day and year first above written.
............~
"''''.... CAME~ "'"
",,,,,,, ~. ........ 0..... ~~
:; ~ .. .... y '.0
~ , .e --,. ~
i 2} l O"\A.R Y \.. \
:~:~.' .:
- . " "'j' .
-. ".....
\. \ P\J~" ~l
., ... ~ '" ~
". J" ........ '.. ,<) ,...0;
.... J'){ TE -O~ ",..0;
,# .,tj
.,.,.'.........
'cTL-
tary Public f~ Idah ,
esiding at Ii AA .-:1< A '--"
(
My Commission Expires: 2/-:lj - r~ ()t!J.9
Master\affid-posting
PP 06-007
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING
March 16, 2006
APPLICANT Centennial Development, LLC
ITEM NO.
15
REQUEST Preliminary Plat approval of 85 single family residential building lots and 12
common lots for Cedarcreek Subdivision - 470 West McMillan Road
AGENCY
COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
See Staff Comments in Al Packet
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
No Comment
.~
~~
CITY WATER DEPT:
McRILJIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
See comments in Al Packet
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS'IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
Date:
Phone:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
)
-~
Q.ccl~
RECEIVED
MAR 1 6 2006
City of Meridian
City Clerk Office
Reidennan Visits & Corres-pondence
November 2005 - Meet at Reidennan's house w/Doug Edens (their realtor). The
Rcidcnnan's gave us a tour of their home ami their property. They discussed how we
could change the property to fit into the subdivision and our possible purchase of their
property.
December 2005 - Meet at Reidennan's house w/Doug Edens. We explained to them
that it would not be feasible to the project to purchase their property but proposed a
different idea to them. We offered to trade the South West strip of Chester property with
a Northern strip of their property. They told us they would consider it but would rather
we purchase their property. Doug reminded us that the Reidennans' were developers
themselves and maybe we could consider doing a joint venture tu develop their property
and incorporate it into Cedarcreek subdivision.
January 2006 - Called Doug Edens to set up an appointment to discuss another
alternative and asked him if we should meet with the Reidennans' or just him and he said
they would prefer that we meet with him alone. He said the Reidermans' were not too
happy with any of our alternatives thus far and it would probably be better if we just meet
with him and he will convey our thoughts.
January 2006 - Meet with Doug Edens at our office. We presented Doug with the idea
of allowing the Reidermans' to purchase the South- West strip of ground from us. He said
that they might consider that and he would talk with them and get back with me.
February 2006 - Called Doug Edens to see ifhe had heard anything from the
Reidermans' there was no answer so I left a message.
February 2006 - Doug called me back and said that the Reidermans have been busy but
he wanted me to know that he had not forgotten about our proposal and would let me
know as soon as he heard anything.
March 2006 - Called Doug to see if he had heard anything yet, no one answered so I left
a message.
March 2006 - Called Doug, no answer, left message.
* * Reiderman recommendations
* * Centemrial Development recommendations
..
;0
CD
--
0-
CD
-'"
3
Q)
:J
-
en
-u
..,
o
-0
CD
~
yz
~z
:::0
OJ
N
N
c-
eo
....,
~
()
....,
o
CIJ
en
--
:=1
co
..-...
:;:0
CD
--
. c..
CD
; ....,
:3
.. OJ
:=1
... '-""
'"
..
. ,',:,';.
......... -.;- -.
.,'~,._. .:.::'.....;:.-;.~: ",,"::-
. , . :..':i......~..::.: :. ':..::,~~2:..;..,,____----.~~~__
'" :;:.,:.,'" "
.:\J;;j~W;!'i'...,;;;,
"'5o:'
\~.~,~~,~}<,.i
"n',,:.,:..
!-
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
!
I
!
I
I 6
! 2
I
I
I
I
il
i:
I
I
i
i
i
!
i
i
I
!
Ln
. ". :'>',':',.::.;;,.,
" :., :'?:; .:'~. ".~:' . I ..
.<A.......<...
.~ :....:~/.:-..'''.,
.elli" .'....
-r
n
"")
(1)
rD
^
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
STAFF REPORT
TO
Hearing Date: March 16, 2006
Planning Commission
<+k
ji;;":;', ~,,:iP"
~f'rY',' i{i.l,
.. .~; "<>-"
.' erliiit;[}z""jl;
L),\H('
FROM:
Joe Guenther, Associate City Planner
Meridian Planning Department
Cedarcreek Subdivision
SUBJECT
AZ-OG-009
Annexation of 19.57 acres from RUT to R-8
PP-06-007
l~l~J ( I hi'; (\/lJll"''-::1'
-'>.. '- - '-"'-' ~-. , ."-'.J. ..~,./."
__ . __" ,M'::, () '!' (I 20D6
__~:_i ',' I,.JF MER/iliA! i
" ' ! .... ""~-E P;< C!~:-' i (' r-:-
85 Single.family residential lots and 12 other lots
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The request is for annexatiun and zoning of 19.57 acres of land that is currently zoned RUT in Ada
County. The applicant is seeking an R-8 zone (Medium Density Residential District) for the entire parcel.
The applicant has submitted a preliminary plat for the subject property for 85 single-family lots all with
detached products, and 12 common/other lots on 19.57 acres. Amenities for the development include an
open space lot with a tot lot and parkway planters adjoining the streets.
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending approval of the subject annexation and
zoning (AZ-06-009-Revised), preliminary plat (PP-06-007-Revised) for the reasons listed herein and
subject to the conditions of approval listed. The applicant proposes to sewer this development via
extensions of mains in Paramount Subdivision and water mains in McMillan Road.
PROPOSED MOTIONS (to be considered after the public hearing)
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move tu n;:l;ummend approval to the
City Council of File Number(s) AZ-06.009/PP-06-007 as presented in the staff report for the
hearing date of March 16,2006, and the preliminary plat labeled C-1, dated December 21,2005
with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed modifications).
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the
City Council of File Number(s) AZ.06-009/PP.06-007 as presented in the staff report for the
hearing date of March 16, 2006, for the following reasons: (you should state specific reasons for
denial of the annexation or plat and you must state specific reason(s) for denial of the conditional
use permit.)
Continuance
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Number(s)
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the
fullowing reason(s): (you should state specific reason(s) tor continuance.)
3. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
a. Site Address/Location:
N central location off of McMillan Road and 1/4 mile west of Meridian Road
S1/2 of the SW1/4 of the SW y,. of 4Nl W25
b. Owner
Dalice Chester
470 W. McMillan Rd
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ~06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
Meridian, Idaho 83642
c. Applicant:
Centennial Development, LLC
36 E. Pine Street
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Agent: Shawn Nickel
Land Consultants Inc.
52 N. 2nd street
Eagle, Idaho, 83616
d. Representative: Shawn Nickel, Land Consultants, lnc
e. Present Zoning: COUNTY w RUT
f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation:
Medium Density Residential- North Meridian Comprehensive Plan Amendment
g. Description of Applicant's Request:
1. Date ufprdiminary plat (attached as Exhibit AI): December 21,2005.
2. Date oflandscape plan (attached as Exhibit A2): January 13,2006
h. Applicant's Statement/Justification: The proposed overall density (4.34 dwellings per acre) of
the project complies with the City's designation of Medium Density Residential, which
allows for residential densities which allows 3 to 8 dwellings per acre. We believe the use
of the project will provide a development which will complement the surrounding land
uses and will be a compatible continuation ofthe Paramount project north and east ofthe
site.
4. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application will in fact constitute an annexation and/or rezone as determined
by City Ordinance. By reason ofthe provisions ofthe Meridian City Code Title 11
Chapter 5, 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 11 Chapter 6, a
public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter.
c. Newspaper notifications published on: March 13,2006 and February 27,2006
d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: February 22, 2006
e. Applicant posted notice on site by: February 27,2006
5. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use(s): Agricultural
b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area:
AgriculturallUrbanizing
c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning
1. North: Paramount Subdivision, R-8
2. East: Paramount Subdivision, R~40
3. South: Cedar Springs Subdivision #4 and #5~ R-8 and L-O
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007 PAGE 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
4. West: Agricultural Ada County RUT
d. History of Previous Actions: N/A
c. Existing Constraints and Opportunities
1. Public Works
Location of sewer: This property is planned to sewer to future mains extended
from the Paramount Subdivision to the north.
Location of water: There is currently water main in W. McMillian Road, and
future connections from planned mains in Paramount.
Issues or concerns: This development is not sewerable until Paramount brings
sewer mains down to this development.
2. Vegetation: Agricultural/Irrigated
3. Flood plain: NA
4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: Lemp Canal Local Lateral
5. Hazards: None Identified
6. Proposed Zoning: R-S
7. Size of Property: 19.57 acres
8. Description of Use: 85 single family residential lots
f. Subdivision Plat Information
1. Residential Lots: 85
2. Non-residential Lots: 4- Future ROW lots
3. Common Lots: 8
4. Total Lots: 97
5. Gross Density:
g. Landscaping
1. Width of street buffer(s): 30 feet (25 required) on McMillan Road.
2. Width ofbuffer(s) between land uses: none required (all residential)
4.34 units per acre
3. Percentage of site as useable open space:
The applicant has defined 1.12 acres or 5.7% open space, Lot 18 Block 6, Lot 14
Block 2, and parkways (See section 5-h for additional analysis)
4. Other landscaping standards:
The landscape architect shall certify that one tree per 8,000 square feet oflawn
has been provided on the landscape plan.
Lot 9, Block 1 shown as a non-buildable parcel to be retained by the developer
this lot shall be landscaped with lawn or other vegetative undercover until such time as
the parcel may be incorporated into a larger open space lot or platted as a buildable lot.
The existing canal on Lot 9 Block 1 shall be tiled as per UDC 11-3A-6.
h. Rt:4uin:u Opt:n Spar.;t::
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
The applicant is required to provide a minimum of five percent qualified open space. UDC
ll-3G-3 A and B. The applicant is showing:
Public Open Space Area:
Lot 8 Block 3 as 36,786 sq/ft
Collector Buffers:
Lot 14 Block 2 - 2,700 sq/ft
Lot 18 Block 6 - 2,550 sq/ft
Parkway planters along strcets - 1.14 acres or 49,658 sq/ft total. Minus 26'x 8' x 69 '=
14,352 sq/ft for 35,306 qualified sq/ft for the parkways on single-family detached, street
loaded products.
The total open space qualified is 77,342 sq/ft for 9.0% qualified open space.
1. Amenities:
The applicant is required to provide one qualified amenity for single family residential
subdivisions that are under 20 acres in area.
The applicant is showing qualified site amenities as follows:
11-3G-3C-1 - Quality of Life Amenities - None
ll-3G-3C-2 - Recreation Amenities - children's play structures
11-3G-3C-3 - Pedestrian Amenities - None
Amenities shall be generally located in centrally accessible locations and all common areas
shall be maintained by the Cedarereek Homeowners Association. The applicant is proposing
the tot lot as the required amenity.
i. Proposed and Required Residential Standards
R-S (Standards)
Setbacks (*all streets local)
Proposed
** measured from back of sidewalk
Street setback to Living Area ** 15
Side Accessed Garage** 15
Front Accessed Garage** 20
Side 4
Rear 12
Street frontage-
With garage facing street
With alley loaded
Lot Size -SF detached
With garage facing street
Alley Loaded
Maximum Duilding Height
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009!PP-06-007
50
40
5,000
4,680
35
Required
15
15
20
4
12
50
40
5,000
4,000
35
PAGE 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
1. Proposed and Required Non-Residential
Non.residentiallots are to be used for amenities and open space. Except the lots
proposed to be retained by the developer which shall comply with the required
improvements listed in this report. Lots to be retained by the developer for future right of
way acquisition shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval.
ill. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.):
Direct lot access to McMillan is to be prohibited, including Lot 9 Block 1. Access to
Paramount subdivision IS as proposed with connections at Seel Way, Silverspruce and
Street E. A stub street with full services shall be provided to the property excluded at the
south west listed as Reiterman property and shown as Ramsbrook Street.
For a detailed report on the public streets and access points to public streets, please the
attached staff report from the Ada County Highway District (Exhibit C).
6. AGENCY COMMENTS MEETING On February 24,2006 staff held an agency comments
meeting, all agencies attending provided comments as attached in Exhibit B.
Staff has included all comments and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the
attached Exhibit B.
7. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
The subject site is designated 'Medium Density Residential' on the North Meridian
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The Council approved the North Meridian
Comprehensive Plan Amendment on March 7, 2006. In Chapter VII of the 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 proposed density of (4.34 d.u.lacre) for the subject
application conforms with the North Meridian Comprehensive purpose and intent. In the
applicant's submittal letter, dated January 13, 2006 several Comprehensive Plan policies are
listed (please see applicant's letter).
Staff also 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, Objective 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 pruject ut the
developer's expense.
· The subject lands current(v 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,
· The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriff's
Offire Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Aleridian Police
Department (MPD).
· The western roadway adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and
maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACHD). This service will not
change.
Cedurcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/I6/06
· The northern roadway adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and
maintained by the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). This service will not
change.
· The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridiun Schuul District #2. This
service will not change.
· The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian. Uhrary 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.
· "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal
IV, Objective D, Action item 2)
Staff finds that McMillan Road will serve as the main access point for all the properties in
this subdivision as well as a connection into the future collector road for Paramount
Subdivision to the East of the site.
The applicant is requesting to retain Lot 1, Block 6, Lot 9 Block 5, and Lot 11 Block 1 of the
design dated Decemher 21, 2005. This lot should he noted rm the plat that it is for fiJture
right of way reservationfor when ACHD roadway improvements occur. The width of right of
way reservations shall be as set forth by A CHD
. "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridors (setback,
vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.)." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 4)
As depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, the applicant is proposing to
construct a 30-foot wide landscape buffer along McMillan Road. Staffis supportive of these
widths. as long as the entire buffer lies outside the ultimate right-aI-way. S
See Site Specific Conditions in the Preliminary Plat section below in Exhibit C.
. "Consider "Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recorrrrnended Approach"
from the National Center for Bicycling and walking in all land use decisions." (Chapter VI,
Goal II, Objective A, #3)
This publication encourages jurisdictions to establish bikeway and walkway facilities in new
construction and reconstruction projects, in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient.
The sidewalk connections shown on the landscape plan are disconnected by the out parcel
along McMillan Road. Staff has asked the applicant to work with the owners of the out
parcel to facilitate a sidewalk connection through this site as it lies very near a future school
site. This would be consistent with other out parcel developments in the near vir:inity
(Solitude Subdivision and Amber Creek Subdivision)
. Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent
parcels (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1)
Cedarcreek SubdiVision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 6
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
All of the properties adjacent to the subject site are designated for medium density residential
or mdghborhood center uses on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map.
· 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 North Meridian Future
Land Use Map which identifies this area as an appropriate area for medium density
residential development. This proposal meets the Comprehensive Plan definition of medium
density, with a gross density of 4.34 dwelling units per acre. Staff has reviewed Cedarcreek
Subdivision under the Medium Density Residential North Meridian Future Land Use Map
designation unt! finds the application consistent with the comprehensive designation.
Stafffinds that the proDosed zoning and subsequent uses (sinl!le-familv homes) will be
harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan.
8. ZONING ORDINANCE
a. Allowed Uses in the Residential Districts: UDC Table 11-2A-2 lists single-family residential
development uses as permitted uses in the R-8 zoning district.
h. Purpose Statement of Zone:
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (R.8) The purpose of the residential districts is
to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
Connection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential
districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre
and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. Residential
land uses are also allowed within the O-T, TN-C, and TN~R districts as set forth in Chapter 3
Article D.
c. 11-3G-l:
Common Open Space and Amenity Requirements
The regulations of this Article are intended to provide for common open space and site amenities
in residential districts that improve the livability of residential neighborhoods, buffer the strect
edge, and protect natural amenities.
9. ANALYSIS
9a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation
1. ANNEXATION & ZONING ANALYSIS; Based on tht;: policies and goals contained in the
Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Zoning
Ordinance, staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed Single Family Residential
products. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings.
Cedarcrcck Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06.007
PAGE 7
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
1.1 The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on January 11,
2006 by Clinton Hansen, PI's) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corpurate
boundary ofthe City of Meridian.
1.2 Any future subdivision, uses and construction on this property shall comply with the City
of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time.
1.3 That the applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water
service extension. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will
have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when
services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic
purposes such as landscape in-igation.
1.4 That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance
with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. All future uses shall not
involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will
be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive
production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
1.5 UDC 11-5B-3D2 provides the P&Z Commission and City Council the authority to require
a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Meridian that may
require some written commitment for all future uses. Due to the homogenous nature of only
residential uses, the submission of a development proposal (PP-06-007). and the compliap.ce
with Meridian City Unified Development Code, staff believes that a Development Agreement
is not necessary to ensure that this property is developed in a fashion that is consistent with the
comprehensive plan designation and does not ncgativelv impact nearby properties. If the
Commission or Council feels a development agreement is necessary staff recommends a clear
outline of the commitments of the developer being required.
2. PRELIMINARY PLAT SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
2.1 Public Streets and Access:
(Connectivity Paramount Subdivisions)
The stub street from Paramount Subdivision shall connect from N. Seel Way and again from
Street E. The subdivision is constrained by previous development in the areas east and north
of the site and is bound by ACHD policies of inter connectivity. No direct access is allowed
to McMillan Road is approved outside of the point of connection permitted by ACHD.
(Connectivity Out Parcel)
A new stub street has been proposed to the Reitennan property in the southwest comer of the
site. This stub street shall have future public service connections from Ramsbrook Street.
Alley -
A new alley is proposed on Lot 9 Block 4. The UDC does not allow alleys to be placed on a
lot and this lot should be dedicated to ACHD as it will not meet the standards for a private
street as required by UDC 11-3F.
2.2. Landscaping: Staff is generally supportive of the landscaping design with the following
considerations:
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 8
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
The 30 feet of right-of-way landscaping on McMillan Road shall be maintained by the Home
Owners Association.
A sidewalk connection along McMillan Road shall connect to the right of way for the future
Paramount collector road.
If Lot 14 Block 2 and Lot 18 Block 6 are not vacated then they shall be landscaped as
perimeter buffers with open vision fencing to the east.
The landscape plan shall show trees in the parkways compliant with UDC ll-3B-7
Prior to final plat the applicant shall submit a landscape plan depicting the required changes
to the landscape plan as detailed by this report.
2.3 Tree Mitigation: Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be
replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees
that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees
for those trees that are removed. The applicant should coordinate a tree protection/mitigation
plan with Elroy Huff at the Meridian Parks Department.
2.4. Ditches. Laterals, and Canals: All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of
natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being
subdivided shall be tiled. Settlers Irrigation District has a local lateral from the Lemp Canal
on this site and has commented on the proposal as showing compliance with the required
improvements.
2.5 Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be
supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to utilize 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 utili:t:;eu, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments
for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An
underground, pressurized irrigation system should he installed to all landscape areas per the
approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11 ~3B-6. See Site Exhibit B below.
2.6. Fencing: The applicant is proposing to construct a minimum of a six foot tall solid fence
around the perimeter of the site with four-foot solid fencing along common areas. A detailed
fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the final plat. Additional standards for
fencing and details of fencing material shall be submitted at the time of the final plat. If
permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be
installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fences should taper
down to 3 feet maximum within 20 feet of all right-of-way. All fencing should be installed in
accordance with City Code in effect at the time the permit is issued. The applicant shall
comply with all fencing standards as listed in UDC 11-3A-7.
2.7 Unimproved Right-of-Way: Meridian City Code requires a 10~foot wide gravel shoulder
abutting right~of-way where the unimproved portion of the right-of-way is greater than 13
feet (measured from the edge of pavement to the edge of sidewalk or property line), and road
widening is not in the ACHD Five Year Work Program. The remainder of the unimproved
right-of-way should be landscaped with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. McMillan
Road is shown as 37' from edge of pavement to the required landscape buffer. The applicant
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 9
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAPF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
shall construct a 10' gravel shoulder with the remaining portion of the future right~of-way
lots being landscaped with lawn or other vegetative groundcover.
2.8 Amenities: UDC 11-3G-3 is the qualified site amenity requirement. Amenities are to be
provided as part of each plat based on number of acres per site. The proposed amenities for
the subject development include: a tot lot. The proposed open space is shown to make up
9.0% of the site; if an additional I % open space is provided the applicant may is count open
space as a quality of life amenity.
2.9a Common Open Space:
The applicant is requireu lu provide a minimum of five percent qualified open space. UDC
11-3G-3 A and B.
The applicant is showing:
Public Open Space Area:
Lut 8 Block 3 as 36,786 sq/ft
Collector Buffers:
Lot 14 Block 2 - 2,700 sq/ft
Lot 18 Block 6 - 2,550 sq/ft
Parkway streets -1.14 acres or 49,658 sq/ft total. Minus 26'x 8' x 69 = 14,352 sqift for
35,306 qualified sq/ft for the parkways on single-family detached, street loaded products.
The total open space qualified is 77,342 sq/ft for 9.0% qualified open space.
2.9b Qualified Site Amenities:
Quality of Life Amenity: None Provided
Recreation Amenities: Tot Lot
Pedestrian or bicycle circulation system amenities: None Provided.
2.10 Special Considerations:
Lot 14 Block 2 and Lull8 Block 6 are proposing to place the required perimeter fencing at
the rear lot lines of lots in Blocks 2 and 6 along the eastern property boundary. The
proposed Paramount Subdivision is showing a 20' landscape strip along a future
commercial/multifamily access street which has yet to be developed. The 10' ingress/egress
easement is not anticipated to continue when the existing residences are removed. The
easement will also not be allowed to take access to McMillan Road in the future and should
be landscaped as per UDC ll-3F.
Perimeter Sidewalk: In 2007, a middle school (Heritage Middle School) is planned to open
on the northeast comer of Meridian Road and McMillan Road. At past meetings, the City
Council and the public have expressed concerns over the lack of sidewalks adjacent to arterial
streets and how difficult it is for children to walklbike to nearby schools. In light of these
concerns, staff recommends that the applicant be required to contact thc owner of the out
parcel to discuss the construction a 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along their frontage of
McMillan Road, prior to issuance of building permits in the first phase of the development as
similarly agreed upon in Ambercreek and Solitude Subdivisions. rfthe applicant offers to
construct an off site improvement then the commission/council should require a development
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/PP-06-007
PAGE 10
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
agreement for Cedarcreek subdivision with the same provisions as listed in Ambercreek
Subdivision.
11. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings
1. Preliminary Plat (dated: December 21,2005)
2. Landscape Plan (dated: January 13, 2006)
B. Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
2. Public Works Department
3. Fire Department
4. Police Department
5. Parks Department
6. Sanitary Service Company
7. Ada County Highway District
8. Settlers Irrigation District
C. Legal Description
D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
Cedarcreek Subdivision
AZ-06-009/P p -06-007
PAGE 11
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
A. Drawings
1. Preliminary Plat (dated: December 21,2005)
i!l
i~
..
fi
,t:
! :Ji : j I
:i: li;
I,I]'!,
"iI:~...
1; lmW illiFj lut
iWHH lUi;1fim
1 i; ;1\'1' h
~ ~ ~ r~
~1J:"!<f..:'bf.~~O' ~ ~ ~ '"
t.~~;~~~~JtiI'lr~
0,' ,dlj~jil
ld ; n I',
'I" H
t
"{; .~. ~ I
: ~;. I: :"i'~:
;) ~. ""'
;' ~. .'. :< .(~ t~ . { ~
:"....;
i:.'.,.<',' ~.
....<<:.. .
,',
.,,/, ._"
~"'. \ ' ,..;_i:: ,\~!~, ~,I '
" :;; 'tlJltt:: ;:<;:i !
':~11~~J '
tl'
'1 i
;~i '
./'
~ f;~~
~ .~1~
N iz
;1 :I~
"
H
r~~ ~
'I
~:';~;"
...." i~:;~;" v "o'l_o :::...
'~~
f~
"'
{{
-!l
~;~/::"'~'A ~I
~: H....;'OC.~:..: _.1. ~,~,"'~;,:'<
:.ghij;';r
~%i[, ii,
,~::.:i)" I' "
C1j~ jl, I '," i
;!~:j!!i:JU",
ii it:,,!? \';"1:1:\:
'J)' ,- ~ ,'~~'jH"I"YJI~Fr'n~",^ "-
~Hi'ijf i ,';,.,;.:,t.";lr~ '~l~J:;! I,!,'I";,:.'..;.';,~.I.gi~,:t,,.'; ~
;:~:'! ii' . ,. . i,;;
~}>!g~ ",
"" Ws ~
..~L(:~::,..?,..,....
Cedarcreek Subdivision
Exhibit A Page I
mm '''~:9:rm'1~~(
w""l ':1 ~
~ .L.un,.. ....~,~
....- j ~......'~~~
Yr:"',~f"""''):i~
f' f : I
J; 'm' ';~m" Imm
""::"fi~=tl::7
j '.'
f.
_..",.,'~.~~::-..~
j;:."
Wi!iW::
'''it],! ""t
ij;lfi1'iJ
iiljl'~:
f'
~ ~~t ~ ;
I' ,.-'-'._,~:.:"-.
, , ,
~ ~ ~ .:~
l,~~ .~
".! .
ilJ
ii ']E!.i!
~ I :""fj
l:j~' i
'"".~j~ i :
!;fi,l;:i'S
Un I. ;'Ir ~[::
r '::I:l'lt.,
tL'
,,(,-,
,~~~~
.~;:M 12: ~
'OM" ''<J::;
'm;~
~:li~ ~
~)
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
2. Landscape Plan (dated: January 13,2006)
~.J.f~V$" - ':~,F{iS:'i('T' -' "7'f...,'~, ~--,--::.. .-. ,-: 'i,,:r,c;;::'~:~':-'-:;0_~- ;;:::-~;_"L,~__ ,'0-- "
IJI~~ " fi i;Lf ,I' :"'~~'~ '.:;,/,;" '. .IOr / : ,: "/> i -;.-
~ l,.~ i ': I ;l'~~.:"f"~' ....";~I1_,_.fi.___ciJ.i .;, ; i / i "
I". '" !" 1 '" ': . "r:-or"-. . I .:" ' I .- I, '
J< '<'liB d ~ I J t~ /y ~ c:1. t" i] L , r-::::-'/,; , ,
fll1if,t1ll [I. ,; II :~~ t .. '-fr'~~ i r' ,,- . '-'-'x \,>/1,\ ,1 ::) /, ///'1
l,>,.l!s:: t. ,. ': '.!'i,' ~ ... ,':.-'''' ". (~ ,/
1;1I( Jfa r",'I' I~ ~l ,f!. - ,-- ~"-'; "I' (~, ,//,u," ^', \\,/ . i
111.!~ ~'j I AJ~- "~ri /, . -'-', --~m'f I .,,',
~'I!ij ;"",IUJtI",-~ I~' 'I ;. \' ',I :
i I .'H ."~ ."k . ' ~ ,.'/ ,\," L__ _, .J I
;; · 41j^ 1 t ~'1 b. I~ ..ft'"S.,.....t: ^ <~" ~~/; < l \., \ _."f< ~ 1
" i'i, I ii, , '''I'~T'' -~/f''''''''''" '-''"1""'' ;l" ,,~-. '",'\ I ,.,' '. I
r~ l I : ,~ ! j ~ ';.~j/, ~ J: > J I ! \ I f~~ I ...==" ;
;!. ': : J;11~1' I CL,t:::.).i! ':' Ii' Ie; I' .111 ,I' i-:"'" ..:. ..-:! i:i
i': -,1 i I ~~ ! '.. :> (:: j: I ' '~':.' . I:;') I j fJ.....~~.........._... ".m.....~ ie.
",' !:'. i~i ~/ ~T ---} ,,~-,:"I' '1' i;'"......:::~'- -'. ..~_L,_" ..',) .. (j):' \ /1 '{
: II" W'f l',' /! ei:, (i>J"'-: '''''1 "" ,,"-~ i~_m__:""''''--h:::
:~.I.'''':'''':''''"" j. " l ;;;
!'::;
C) j I @) '" i'
I~ : II '( _ . _! I~; '. (,) ~.. J ',')~! I ,f;~;'" Ii";
, "' J------ '!J,J
1 ('(, c:! I,'" "i(
i" . ,,'it ,r;;.,,"'--~""'!I~
tl) ,C' 1 "'. '-"
, ":"':"'1",j~""'.. .% ,,:tl-, ',,_~j _;~ H ~'~I "I"'..... """1...."-"" '~'(~""'."":-'--ji-.'..'...J'i.!iif..'.'..'i;..,i.'. i:j'.......... v,, i..,. "~~_~.
-: 11;~' '1"fr,j~1 ~l~:;!ii",: _;. -;--',' !,
'(!JI!Ji.r'j-~ '~I:, -{j~-IJ ~[~tj '!;
}\j ~-f ;jl'W -:~ i ,'-~
1;'v~,"'-;~;"'~' .... nf/-l,~fH .1"\')'-;"'-- .. III :fc
il! ,;". J. '~ 1;,/ l~j . r' .~: ~~';. (<';\0, t., ','I' (....,>
l~," . i,.I""II:l'~~' '. """ 'ri ..
?~,~:;;(~ ",I:'ii \"~;'II 'i:f~ i.. " ....~-;--.-' ......1!;,:r .1______"___.
I" ',.; :{ll,),~ "~ "~}~ I'::::' ~.."):. ~;, ~~ .', l:,:~~ ". il ~ ~~! :' dKl :
'It 'Yi i,I' ,I "':~~ 1;;'...:~:"..:..."m_m,- ,r ji I' r ::;H'______.' --
:, -J k) " .... -- I' '.:~ (;;;1" ,.
~ _ '!~r:~'~()f,rl<:f~}(j\': .(f S'] jr !:~j' II"~~~,,,,~:'._--~
:~', _,~C.,I:i,,: ti"€--~""-.-"1 ,,'" . 0:', ':
'~~TT I ':t":': " (;,.'! I ,~"' --
! ~ rl :,!;! rl~i i;';' . . '''r, ':' ~~;~','M Ii L ~~' "
:"~(;I'\:i'(i';>'cl~rl(.lil f 'It]':)1 --~:~i!il 1:,1:"'
iZ .11~~jl ~ rll;'~1 ~ ... . 't. ~ > " l:::{, ./:..:' ",... T
:,,1 '. I " I ~ " I f I..' " (.-..I) ':1': 'j; ,I .....'r -I-. Ii". ,. ..
~ > ;,' _ r ~ r I I ill 1\ III ,... ". ~!" ~>~", :',' :.;' ,"::'~ > ~i ~.::: ...
, 'I,..' 1[1/ , 1'1 -, .. d C'..... '.., F ". " I .
i~,~ N ,I, : i I ; i i i'; j ;11 .j' .tj~):\rtI3~'J F;~6'i:;':~ ..
',," I'll III" i:1 'S] I -'tf.....f'.,.,. ".\, '
( - ~ I 1 I ~ ~ i~! l 1M r . "... . . . . ... I
: .....,.. ';. .' ~. .' ..' I' f!~: J. ::; ~ :: ..'
~'!I;jr
j::::ft~: 'flil~
Ie",
. \.t_~"
;l'
Cedarcreek Subdivision
Exhibit A Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
B. Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
1.1 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT
1.1.1 The preliminary plat labeled as C-l prepared by Bailey Engineering, dated Decemher 21, 2005, is
approved, with the required amendments and conditions listed herein. All comments/conditions
of the accompanying Annexation/Zoning (AZ-06-009-Revised) shall also be considered
conditions of lhe Preliminary Plat (PP-06-007-Revised).
1.1.2 The applicant shall construct a 30-foot landscape buffer along McMillan Road, the sidewalks
within these buffers shall be placed as to line up with existing buffers in neighboring
subdi visi ons.
1.1.3 The Plat shall be revised to show Lot 9 Block 4 as a public alley.
1.1.4 That the applicant shall certify that Lots 7, 8 and 12 of Block 1 have the required 30 feet of
frontage as required by UDC 11-2A.
1.1.5 The applicant shall comply with the requirements of no direct lot access for any lots adjacent to
McMillan Road as required by ACHD.
1.1.6 That portion of the detached sidewalk which lies outside of the right-of-way shall be contained in
an easement which dedicates pedestrian cross-access and is in favor of the Ada County Highway
District, and said easement shall be depicted on the [mal plat or an instrument number referenced
in a plat note.
1.1.7 A landscape plan shall be submitted prior to final plat showing the landscaping in relation to the
changes required by this report. The landscape plan shall be modified to reflect the conditions
contained in lhis report and the revised preliminary plat and shall be submitted WIth the final plat
application.
1.1.8 A detailed fencing plan in accordance to UDC 11-3A-7 shall be submitted with the final plat.
1.1.9 The submitted landscape plan prepared by Bailey Engineering, dated January 13, 2006 is not
approved. The following should be included in a revised landscape plan:
· Lot 1 Block 6, Lot 9 Block 5 and Lot 11 Block 1 shown as future rights of way on shall be
landscaped with lawn or other vegetative undercover until such time as ACHD has acquired
the property for future roadway improvements.
· The applicant shall show a sidewalk in Lot 11 Block 1.
· The applicant shall provide perimeter landscaping in Lot 14 Block 2 and Lot 18 Block 6. If
the ingress/egress easemenl is tu be used lo buffer the future collector roadway in Paramount
Subdivision
· All parkway landscaping shall be consistent with UDC 11 ~3B~ 7
· Where the BIsby/Harrell Laterals are to be covered, all vegetation shall be installed as
required by the UDC 11- 3B. If the Settlers Irrigation District restricts the type and quantity
Exhibit B Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
of vegetation, the landscape buffers shall be increased as to accommodate the plan as
approved or the applicant may apply for alternative compliance.
· The applicant shall certify that one tree per 8,000 square feet oflawll has been provided.
· All parkway trees shall be Class II trees.
· A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or
qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and submitted prior to City Council
signature of the Final Plat. All standards of installation shall apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-
14.
Other than the changes listed above, the approved landscape plan is not to be altered without prior
written approval of the Planning Department.
1.1.10 All road drainage shall be contained on site in the drainage swales/areas as depicted.
1.1.11 Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Cedarcreek Subdivision
Homeowners' Association.
1.1.12 Other than the public street access approved by ACHD, direct lot access to McMillan Road is
prohibited. A note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access to McMillan Road.
1.1.13 Construct all alleys to comply with ACHD' s requirements for public alleys. All alleys shall
contain at least 20 feet of pavement within a 24-foot right-of-way, as proposed, and include 28-
foot inside and 48-foot outside turn radii where the alleys intersect the public streets.
1.1.14 The planter strip between the curb and the near edge of the sidewalk along all the internal streets
with four-foot wide detached sidewalks shall be a minimum of eight-feet wide and include Class
II trees.
1.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT
1.2.1 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision
pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17.
1.2.2 All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All
stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subject to UDC 11-
3A-18 and shall be fully vegetated WIth grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other non-vegetated
surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as permitted under UDC 11-3B.
Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has rcvicwed
such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as
proposed by staff. If the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved
open space and still meet the standards of UDC llw3A-18, then the applicant shall relocate the
facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of
the developer to comply with ACHD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at
the time of final construction.
1.2.3 The applicant shall submit a detailed fencing plan with the final plat application fur lhe
subdivision. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain
debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fencing
should be installed in accordance with City Code.
Exhibit B Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 031I6/06
1.2.4 Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing
additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed.
Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to
be mitigated.
1.2.5 All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or
lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per UDC 1l~3A-6,
unless otherwise approved by Settlers Irrigation District. Plans will need to be approved by the
appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written
approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department If lateral users association
approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer
prior to final plat signature.
1.2.6 Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation/plat does
not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance.
1.2.7 Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC 11-6B.
2. Public Works Department
2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension of mains planned in
Paramount Subdivision. The mains will be extended on the developer's time line and the City of
Meridian does not guarantee sewer service in the timelines outlined in the UDC.
2.2 The applicant shall install mains to and through this proposed development; applicant shall
coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms
of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. 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.
2.3 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in W. McMillian Road and
future mains in Paramount Subdivision to the north. The applicant shall be responsihle to install
water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public
Works, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide
serVlCe.
2.4 The applicant has not indicated who will own and operate the pressure irrigation system in this
proposed development. If it is lo be maintained as a private system, plans and specifications will
be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the construction plan review. A "draft
copy" of the operations and maintenance manual will be required prior to plan approval with the
"final draft" being required prior to final plat signature on the last phase of this project.
If it is to be owned and maintained by an Irrigation District then evidence of a license agreement
shall be submitted prior to scheduling of a pre-construction meeting.
2.5 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water (UDC 11-3A-6). 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 lu lhe 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
signature on the final plat hy the City Engineer.
2.6 If there is going to be a pressurized irrigation pump station of this property it must be located in a
common lot, and cannot encroach into any required landscape buffers.
Exhibit B Page 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
2.7 Prior to signature on the final plat vacate the ingress/egress easement shown on the preliminary
plat.
2.8 All existing structures shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer.
2.9 Meridian Public Works specifications do not allow any large landscaping within a five foot radius
of water meters. The applicant shall make the necessary adjustments to achieve this separation
requirement and comply with all landscape requirements.
2.10 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from
domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9.4-8. Wells may be used for non-
domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
2.11 The applicant has not indicated how the storm drainage from the proposed private alley will be
disposed. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required
and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all improved surfaces. Storm
water treatment and disposal shall be designed in accordance with Department of Environmental
Quality 1997 publication Catalog of Storm Water Best Management Practices for Idaho Cities
and Counties and City of Meridian standards and policies. Off-site disposal into surface water is
prohibited unless the jurisdiction which has authority over the receiving stream provides written
authorization prior to development plan approval. The applicant is responsible for filing all
necessary applications with the Idaho Department of Water Resources regarding Shallow
Injection Wells.
2.12 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed,
drainage lots constructed, road base approved by thc Ada County Highway Di~tri(;l and the Final
Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits.
2.13 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required fur all uncompleted
fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to
signature on the final plat.
2.14 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths,
pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to ohtaining
certificates of occupancy.
2.15 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction
inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat
per Resolution 02-374.
2.16 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.
2.17 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that
may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency.
2.18 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting
that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
2.19 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office.
2.20 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.
2.21 The 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 I-foot above.
Exhibit B Page 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
2.22 One hundred watt, high~pressure sodium streetlights shall be required at locations designated by
the Public Works Department_ All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical
locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are
determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light
contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior to
commencing installations.
3. Fire Department
3.1. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water
quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing.
3.2 One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration
of2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500 feet apart.
International Fire Code Appendix C.
3.3 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department.
a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 Yz" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle.
b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it.
c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec.
d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted rcd 10' to each side of the
hydrant location.
e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits.
f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'.
g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade.
h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements uf lhe IFe Section 509.5.
3.4 Entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 4R' outside radius_
3.5 All common driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and
shall have a clear driving surface which is 20' wide.
3.6 Provide a 2Q-foot wide Fire Lane for all internal roadways all roadways shall be marked 111
accordance with Appendix D Section DI03.6 Signs. Lot 9 Block 4.
3.7 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather
surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site.
3.8 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one and two story construction.
3.9 The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall
have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29'
slreet width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side.
These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension.
3.10 The proposed 85~10t subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total
estimated population of247 residents at build out.
3.11 All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as
measured around the perimeter of the building.
Exhibit B Page 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 031J6/06
3.12 Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the
jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured
by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains
shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an
approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3 .1.1 or 903.3 .1.2 the
distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183).
For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m).
For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in
accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m).
4. Police Department
4.1 Any interior fencing shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if
solid fencing is used.
4.2 Lots 9+ 1 0 of Block 1 create residences that will be isolated from their surrounding neighbors.
Such areas have an increased crime potential. Prior to the next public hearing, the applicant shall
work with the Police Chief and/or Planning Staff to revise the plat/site plan such that the
houses/dwelling units in the general area are oriented toward one another and encourage
interaction between more neighbors. The plat/site plan shall be revised in accord with those
discussions.
4.3 The proposed development and/or plat do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the
public areas. Prior to the next public hearing, the applicant shall meet with the Police Chief and/or
Planning Staff to discuss features that increase visibility, including but not limited to: doors and
windows that look out on the public areas, front porches, and adequate nighttime lighting. The
site plan and/or landscaping plan shall bc rcviscd in accord with those discussions.
5. Parks Department
5.1 Standard for Mitigation of trees: The standard established in the City u[ Meridian Landscape
Ordinance (UDC 11-3B.1O) will be followed.
5.2 Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in
the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance (UDC ll-3B-IO) will be followed.
6. Sanitary Service Company
6.1 sse will not provide trash pick-up services utilizing the common driveway. The
developer shall install a concrete pad at the end of the common drive no more than five
(5) feet behind the sidewalk. The pad shall be of sufficient area to accommodate the
receptacles of the residences that take access from the common driveway.
6.2 Please contact Bill Gregory at SSC (888-3999) for detailed review of your proposal and submit
stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application.
7. Ada County Highway District
Site Specific Conditions of Approval
PJ2:NDING- ACHD will have comments on Lots fronting McMillan Road and for the alley widths which
Exhibit 8 Page 6
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
will be incorporated into this report.
8. Settlers' Irrigation District
8.1 All irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to
function. The facilities involved are Bisby Lateral (20' casement), Harrell Lateral #12 (20'
easement). Contact SID for additional requirements.
8.2 A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals.
8.3 A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any SID facilities, or
within its easements.
8.4 Any Change to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, water delivery, tiling, and
landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation Districl's Board of Directors.
8.5 All storm drainage must be retained on-site.
8.6 The development must supply pressure irrigation access to all lots within the above-mentioned
subdivision from the current delivery point. If the deyeloper wishes to have SID own, operate,
and maintain the pressure irrigation syslem an agreement must be in place prior to the pre-
construction meeting.
Exhibit B Page 7
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
Exhibit C. Legal Description
'/"'~lDe_sc;:riptiol1
Cedarcreek Subdivision - Annexation
RUT to RB Zoned
A parcallocated in the S 1/2 of the SW 14 of the SE J/4 of Section 25, Township 4 North,
Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. more particularly doscribed as
follows;
BEGINNING at a brass cap monument marking the southwest corner of said S V2 of the
SW 14 of the SE 1/4 (v.. comer), from which 5/8 inch diameter iron pin marking the
southeast corner of said S V:2 of the SW 1/4 of the SE v.. bears S 89"54'20" E a distance
0(1340.90 feet;
Thence N 0"05'40" E along the westerly boundary of said S Y:.~ of the SW '/4 of the SE '/4
a distance of 660.04 feet to a 5/B inch diameter iron pJn marking the northwest corner of
said S 1f2 of the SW'I4 of the SE %;
Thence S 89'54'17" E along the northerly boundary of said S Y2 of the SW % of the SE
Y4 a distance of 1339.99 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin marking the northeast
corner of said S % of the SW 1;4 of the SEIA;
Thence S 0''00'55'' W along the easterly boundary o( said S 1/2 of the SW % of the SE 1/4
a distance of 660.02 feet to the southeast corner of said S V2 o( the SW ',{, of the SE \4;
Thence N 89"54'20" W along the southerly boundary 01 said S 112 of the SW 114 of the SE
% a distance of 1340.90 leet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Excepting therelrom the following described parcel;
Commencing at a brass cap monument marking the southwest corner of
said S Vii of the SW % of the SE '/4 (% corner), from which 5/8 inch
diameter iron pin marking the southeast corner of said S 1f~ of the SW V4 of
the SE 1/4 bears 8 89"54'20" E a distance of 1340.90 feet;
Thence S 89"54'20" E along the southerly boundary of said S V2 of the SW
~/4 of the SE 1J. a distance of 50.20 teet to a pOint;
Thence leaving said southerly boundary N 0 "05'40" E a distance of 30.00
leel to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin and the POINT OF BEGINNING;
ThenCl:i continuing N 0'{lS'40" E a distance of 290.40 feet to a 5/8 inch
diameter iron pin;
Thence S 89054'20" E a distance of 150.00 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron
pin:
. .0"'_""
L",11/J f.lSo 1 LJ ti {) n:;
""'-.... ,.. ,., ; <)(;<'~ ~;'j> ~....~.II' 0 ",..,,+ ~::~t>w'~~>'~
C~~rh.l"(JI';; d.'~ SL~b'~:~h/Jk;i'~
JOb Nc. 0.\,,4;1
Exhibit C Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
Thence S 0005'40" W a distance of 290.40 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron
fJifl;
Thence N 89"54'20" W along a liM 30.00 feet north of and parallel to the
southerly boundary 01 said S 'h of tho SW ',I.. of the SE 'i. i'l distance of
15000 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
This parcel contains 19,31 acres and is subject to any easements existing or in II<;P..
Clinton W. Hansen, PLS
Land Solutions, PC
January 11, 2006
l~eVlt-W t,I',?!,9V;'~., -- ,.
ny._J.;,.:;~.."":::_",,,__~.m-"'~-
'.',oIjl/"N rJur~~J(;
\'-;\~~;-(.;'py~S OEP f.
,,' ...--.--")
lJl.r.t d5~)ILI'HLH'lJ;
l..w"=",, . ,-- .~)t,...,..! :!:;i'~' ;"::<0;< ;<<.<~ ;~.~"'~:;:l';='A
CHd8l"tfuuk Subd\!iskn
Job No. 04-43
Exhibit C Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
,....~~-~""..~~~~.........-..~"',...~._~~
:~ I .(
:.'ti
i~~ fi ,~'"" ~i
, f ~ , , I', '0<
i! Ii iii ill m Ijr ~;r; , ---mz;:-~"'-~~~r~-~@ij&i~-ryi'
p;; ,,'~i ;t~~ I~ i~ I ~~ {~i "I~ I" I
" '. ., l~ H~ ~: I;: I ~* jBi ~I~ [' ! i !
n.: ~~ H iJ.P I ~ "" h'l . ,
.... j, ?,~ !i! i' . ."--.~:.:::,---r I
j~ l} ei ~) ~~~ e: I' i , !
.~~ ~~ ~: h m ~, j I
~ '{ J~ f. ~jj~ ~J ;
i ';~ Ii ". ~p " I I "
n~ ~f ~nt~ H I I !
, IiI," ~l "~i " I ;
,~q ~l \~;.~. q::~ ~J ii,
:i ,"I " ..,' ,I P ."', I'
tt P H ~! ~ : 1:' 1
31 i: ' Q Z I . r.} ( ~
r,/" " H i d~', ';, ~ I.J
.~,\.'~"" '-II ~
n ,~,i,; H~r'':I! ~I~ 1
'I' Jr- I n ~
'.;' i U ~PH~d r~ ,II' ",f;li 'l"'-~'~ 1"1'
,'.;.' ,: ;, I, >. '; ~~i ;' jl 8<!! ""
~ .\ Ij"~ -~ t~,l;I:' ;tIO ~
, t; t ~~ 1. ~t,.. j .' ~.:f> J
. ~ ~ ~ ,', '1~ ~. ~ ~...l ',OO :. =.',',.1 ........... J' I ~.
,.;>,:,:i;j',-.,,,.~,' /. (1):% ,.lj I'
'1 ~ i ~ ::, ,.,~ "'lJ 1 I' . ' ~(g ) "" '
LUdf iH",5 f I ~lttl'e5 "
~H n Ii Lid ~ t.1" :-l~:.J )'i
~n H j i HH ~, , 'J" I i I
~< ~ 1 ~ · ,8}~' I : i i
:)! ;. .' ( x g ~/ ' ! I
ii q ~ e ;: fi~ I ' ~H 'l' I
~H H J pj~ ~.,,~~ i -il J'. ",' /.
i, . I 1 ~ "ii~ ~,~. ~! +
t; . 1 ~~ ~". . ".L"""""":".'""="''''~."," ."""".""",,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,...- t ,..".); '....I.~" AI"
.~~ : ~ ~,t f~~~:7:~ ~ y" .~,,~ ,.....;...:;.:x'5.~~:" 'r' ~ ....'~'t,~r f'.....' t.~
l' i ; It \Ih ._"" . 11,. ~i
! ! ~ r~ :'t; ii' it "
, j l' pf~ ~~~" <.n. --~ -'d,;;:'" \ i ~
rE~'" ~l'..' m,;.~~i~.t_;~ :1" ~ ~ I" ~.~!-; R' .-..: g
>:3, \ ,1,,'li~~;~ li~ ~, I l :';j i~ II~ .~~~ .~ j ! "SO'!i, ' g
~ :"~0 0fj/~1~ ~~}!n f;; I ~ ,1,1';'" ilm ~, I ,.' I~ /""\, '" ;:; I
Jt- H H ~~"~~_._".
~ ~ ~f.~
~ ".,<Ii~ ~ )1" ,;~:r B, -
g I.,; ~i1~,~if.~! :~.~'~.l. ~iP 0. J
J ~;I' .
- - --'---
~I
"
i
~
I;
t
m~ll~
".,;;1/'1<:
"'50,rn
Qzzl--<
~~~~I,Q
~O:;!'I-I
; 5~_II
. I ~~?-';::;;I,"'"
!~I :Z!QI'~
gfJ~~ c
~1 )> Z m ()
,.., 0"" rn
g:1<;"/f"\
z r..:;:: i.J:
.~~;;ir::
fj Z "':Ini
).. Cl ;!~.;o
i3 ':: m'l"
. ~dl'"
,"_'0
"~II~
II
I;;
i
'.
I;
lL~"".
Exhibit C Page 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
EXHIBIT 0:
Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
Annexation Findings: UDC 11-5B-3E
Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and
shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or
rezone, the Council shall make the following findings:
A. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
The applicant is proposing to zone the subject property to R-8 Medium Density Residential District.
Staff finds that the proposed :.wning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the
comprehensiye plan. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, 'medium density' is defined as
areas including single-family homes at densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre; 'low
density' consist of single-family homes at densities of three dwelling units or less per acre. Staff
finds that the requested residential zoning designation, R-8, is harmonious with and in accordance
with the 2005 North Meridian Comprehensive Plan amendment and Future Land Use Map, which
designates the SW comer of the SW comer S25 4N 1 W at McMillan and Meridian Roads to be
medium density residentiaL The density proposed with the preliminary plat is consistent with
previous Commission and Council actions and generally conforms to the goals, objectives, and
action items contained in the Comprehensive Plan for these low density areas with a request for a
'step up' in density.
Staff finds that the proposed zoning is in gencral conformance with the comprehensive plan (please
see Section 8 of the Staff Report for detailed analysis of specific comprehensive plan action items
that apply to this development).
B. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
Concurrent with the annexation and zoning application, the applicant has submitted a preliminary
plat that proposes single-family detached residential products on the subject site (PP-06-007- dated
December 21, 2005). Staff does not anticipate that the applicant plans to rezone the subject property
in the future if the accompanying PP application is approved. Staff finds that the single-family
homes would be allowed (pt:rmitted) within the requested R-8 district. The entire site is being
proposed as residential and upon build-out staff would not anticipate changes of usage for this site.
c. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare;
The applicant has not submiUed elevations for the proposed units which are anticipated to be
designed and constructed to meet similar architecture to the single family detached residences of
the near vicinity. Staff believes that the design ofthese single family attached dwelling units will be
compatible with the adjoining uses and transitional in nature to anticipated lower density uses north
of the site in the Paramount development and the adjacent subdivisions also in the medium density
L:umprehensive designations. Staff finds that the proposed development will change the existing
character of the area, which is still largely rural. However, the proposed development is generally
harmonious with the intended character envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan. Staff does not find
that the proposed zoning/uses will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
Further, staff does not anticipate that the proposed uses will be hazardous as long as the applicant
complies with the conditions contained in Exhibit B and all City Code provisions. Staff
recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that may be
provided when determining this finding.
Exhibit D Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
D. 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,
There have been no recent street improvements in the area. The abutting roadway McMillan Road
is not in ACHD's Five Year Work Program or CIP (20-year plan) for road widening. The subject
property is generally surruunded by rural residential acreages. Staff does not find that there has
been a change in the area that dictates that this property should be rezoned. Staff recommends that
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.
Other urban services, such as water, are near to this site and the applicant should be able to extend
such services to the site. Staff finds that the subject site is proposed for development in a fashion
similar to other properties in the area.
The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay park and highway impact fees.
ACHD has submitted a staff report with site specific and standard conditions as attached in Exhibit
B7.
On February 24, 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, staff finds that except for sanitary sewer, the public
services listed above can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. The
Commission and Council should reference any written and/ur verbal testimony submitted by any
public service provider, regarding their ability to adequately service this project.
Staff does not find that thcrc has been a change in the area thal dictates that this property should be
rezoned. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on staffs analysis, public
testimony received and any comments submitted from any other agencies or departments reganiing
whether this property should be annexed. Staff finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not
result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing
services to this site.
E. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11-5B-3.E).
Due to the residential nature of the general vicinity, the proiect's conformance to the Unified
Development Code, and the applicant's agreement to abide bv the conditions of approval contained
in this staff [court, staff finds that the annexation and zoning ofthis property to R -8 would be in the
best interest of the City.
2. Preliminary Plat Findings:
In determining the acceptance of a proposed subdivision, the Commission shall consider the
objectives of this Title and at least the following:
A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan;
Please see Annexation Findings Item A above.
B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate accommodate the
proposed development;
Please see Annexation Findings Items C and D above
Exhibit D Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord
the City's capital improvement program;
Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, the
subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds.
D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development;
Please see Exhibit B for comments and conditions from other agencies and departments.
E. The development will not be detrimental to the public heath, safety or general welfare; and
Statl is not aware of any health, safety or general welfare 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. Staffrecommends that the Commission and
Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the
proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental prohlems of which staff is
unaware.
F. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features.
Staff is not aware of any natural, scenic or historic features which require preseryation.
The applicant will be required to improve all waterways on this site.
Exhibit D Page 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 03/16/06
Exhibit E Page 1
Joint School District No.2
Yll Meridian Road · Meridian, Idaho 83642 · (208) 855-4500 · Fax (208) 888-6700
SUPERINTENDENT
Dr. Linda Clark
'f"';..'E; ~,--",<;: f -\ r~~4 'i'r'i\
iti~ ..iL_l '-,I .J.":,,1 J_, 1.,; t, .'
.t,~J "
'.1 'Ii ','::, 'J"'\P6'
f{i/...r, '.L~j
March 8, 2006
i~ : ',"," Cj F !\/I E ;1] ! A, I,'
. -'. ~ .~r.' / '::~'~' ~= ;L; ~ ,( (-I .--~ l"-:
~"", :- -
City of Meridian
660 E. Watertower Lane
Suite 202
Meridian, In 83642
Dear Planners:
The Meridian School District has experienced phenomenal student growth the last ten
years. The high schools, middle schools, and elementary schools throughout the district
are operating over capacity.
Approval ofthe Cedarcreek Subdivision will have a significant impact on school
enrollments at Hunter Elementary. Sawtooth Middle and Eagle High Schoo1.
We can predict that these homes, when completed, will house thirty (30) elementary aged
children, twenty-three(23) middle school aged children, and sixteen (16) senior high aged
students. Additional students will further compound the current overcrowded situation.
Residents cannot be assured of attending the neighborhood school, as it may be necessary
to bus students to other schools across the district.
School capacity is addressed in Idaho Code 67-6508. The Meridian School District is
currently operating beyond capacity. Future development will continue to have an impact
on the district's capacity. If you haye any questions, please contact me at 855-4500.
Wendel Bigh
Building & Construction Manager
2: !
,," III .1
- I "Lf
At.-- C~D~E~~TATR~~Tc~~JN~ CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT
-.11 Environmental Health Division
Conditional Use #
Preliminary! Final! Short Plat
C ~Jo..-crtG-Le..
pp O(P - 007
5 v b J; \/ 1~5 ; 0 V\
Return to:
o Boise
DEagle
o Garden City
.;a-Meridian "
o Kuna
DACZ
o Star
Rezone #
A 2.. 0 10 - 00 C;
o 1. We have No Objections to this Proposal.
o 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal.
o 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal.
o 4. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment.
o 5. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more data concerning the depth of:
o high seasonal ground water 0 waste flow characteristics
o or bedrock from original grade 0 other
o 6. This office will require a study to assess the impact of nutrients and pathogens to receiving ground waters and/or
surface waters.
07.
This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and
water availability.
~
After writ~pproval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for:
.a central sewage 0 community sewage system 0 community water well
o interim sewage ~central water
o individual sewage 0 individual water
~ The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare,
Division I;>f pnvironmental Quality:
AO central sewage Qj:ommunity sewage system 0 community water
U sewage dry lines .12Sr central water
~. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem.
o 11. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other
considerations indicate approval.
o 12. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State
Sewage Regulations.
o 13. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any:
o food establishment 0 swimming pools or spas 0 child care center
o beverage establishment 0 grocery store
o 14. Please see attached stormwater management recommendations
o 15. Reviewed By'
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
--R'lf' (:;1--'~1 f-V."-E~"r \~
., ';J -" ...LI. ~,
r
FEB 2 7 2006
,crrv OF MERID/Ati
..~ r-f' \ "" 1.~~,.r 1::' D ' '
<l:,' , <, _ t .. ' ,,1/ r", r-.- i ("""'~-
.. '.'.'-- .1\!~, .._ir,'--, r..
-- . I . .,
STATE OF IDAHO )
) ~
COUNTY OF ADA )
I, Mike Arnold. PremierSians. Inc. 21001;.. Fairview Avenue. Suite 7 855-0360
(name) (address) , (phone)
Meridian
(city)
Idaho
(state)
r being first duly sworn upon
oath, depose and say:
Dated this ~17th. day of
Februarv ' ,2006
~~/
SUBS~RIBED AND, SWORN to before me the day and year first above written.
- ~
~
~
RUTH ZAHORIK
NOTP!;~V PUBLIC
STATE nf,; IDAHO
My Commission' Expires:
7)d/~0?t:
........
Master\affid~posting
1