HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Comments
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
Hearing Date: December 12, 2006
Mayor & City Council
Sonya Watters, Associate City Planner
Mike Cole, Development Services Coordinator
208-884-5533
~g /'rl'>'nl'
"'-/YLcridZtm
lVED
SUBJECT:
SpUlWing Patio Homes Subdivision DE
AZ-06-043 C 0 8 2006
Annexation and Zoning of20.65 acres from RR (Ada County) to C't OrM .d.i
R-8 (Medium Density Residential). city:Y Clerk&n..8n
ce
PP-06-045
Preliminary Plat approval of 73 single-family residential building lots and 6
common lots on 20.51 acres in a proposed R-8 zone.
V AR-06-020
Variance from UDC 11-6C-3F to exceed the maximum block face length
allowed in a residential district.
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, Spurwing Limited Partnership, is requesting concurrent approval for Annexation
and Zoning (AZ) of 20.65 acres of land to R-8 (Medium Density Residential), currently zoned
RR in Ada County; Preliminary Plat (PP) approval of 73 single-family residential building lots
consisting of 46 attached patio homes and 27 detached homes, and 6 common lots; and a
Variance (V AR) from UDC 11-6C-3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a
residential district. The site is located just north of Chinden Boulevard and northeast of the Ten
Mile Road/Chinden Boulevard intersection. Currently, the site consists of vacant land some of
which is improved for the golf course. The site is composed of one tax pared and is currt:ntly
platted as Lot 3, Block 1, of Spurwing Subdivision. This site also includes a portion of Lots 2 &
4, Block 1, of SpUlWing Subdivision. A Property Boundary Adjustment application that matches
the configuration of the property as shown on the proposed plat is currently in process at Ada
County and will be required to be completed prior to annexation ordinance approval by City
Council. The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area, but is outside of the
City's current Area ofImpact.
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
The subject applications (AZ, PP, V AR) were submitted to the Planning Department for
concurrent review. Below, staff has provided a detailed analysis for the requested Annexation and
Zoning, Preliminary Plat, and Variance applications. Due to the annexation path ofthis property,
the proposed plat layout and zoning requested, Staff is recommending denial of the proposed
SpUlWing Patio Homes Subdivision (AZ-06-043, PP-06~045, V AR-06-020) for the reasons listed
in the Analysis ofthe Staff Report. Note: The Commission is not required to make a
recommendation to City Council on the Variance application.
At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting un Octuber 19, 2006, the Commission
recommended that this project be continued until November 2, 2006 in order for Staff to prepare
Findings and Conditions of Approval. The original staff report did not contain Conditions Qf
Approval since Staff was recommending denial of the project. Staff has now included Conditions
of approval in Exhibit A and revised Findings in Exhibit C. Prior to the November 2nd meeting,
Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP.06-045/V AR-06-020
PAGE 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP ARTMENT STAfF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
the applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat, dated November 9, 2006, and requested that
the hearing he continued until Novemher ] 6, 2006.
The Meridian Plannin\! and Zonine: Commission heard these items on October 19. 2006.
November 2.2006. and November 16.2006. At the public hearin\! on November 16.2006
they moved to recommend denial.
a. Summary of Commission Public Hearine::
i. In favor: Becky McKay. Ene:ineerine: Solutions (applicant/owner's
representative): Jock Hewitt. Spurwine: Limited Partnership
(applicant/owner): Tina Rice: Myron Tucker: and Ed Davis (read letter
written bv Donna Larsen. General Manae:er Spurwine: Countrv Club. on
behalf of Spurwine: Country Club)
ii. In opposition: Ron Ashley. Ginna En\!le (also speakin\! for other
homeowners in Spurwine: Subdivision). Byron Brown (also speakinl! for
Beyerly Brown). JOY Compton. Bob Trerise. Grant Peterson. and Andrea
Nisi. Fifteen other people shIned their name:!; on the :>'';Iln-in sheet provided at
the meeting in opposition to the pro;ect but did not speak during the hearine
(see sien-in sheet from November 16.2006 meetinl!)
iii. Commentinl!: None
iv. Staff presentine: application: Sonya Watters
v. Other staff commentine: on application: Caleb Hood
b. Kev Issues of Discussion by Commission:
i. Proposed lot sizes/transition from existine: l-acre lots alone: the north
boundary:
ii. Proposed density:
iii. Increased traffic/access onto Chinden Boulevard:
iv. Resident opposition to proiect
c. Kev Commission ChanliZes to Staff Recommendation:
i. Commission voted to recommend denial of the proiect.
d. Outstandinl! Issue(s) for City Council:
i. The Planninl! & Zoniol! Commission is recommendinl! denial of the proiect.
Because the Commission's recommendation is for denial. no conditions are
included in this report.
ii. Applicant has submitted a revised plat. dated November 22. 2006 (see
paraeraph below).
Since the Commission meetinll on November 16'h. the applicant has submitted a revised
oreliminary olat. dated 11-22-06. which addresses some of the concerns that the Commission
and neiehbors had. The Drimarv chanlles to the plan are as follows:
1) Total lot count has been reduced bv 2 buildinelots to 69 buildinelots;
2) The buildine lots alone the northern boundary have increased in size Drovidine
more of a transition in lot sizes to the existine I-acre lots to the north:
3) The open SDace alone the northern boundary. west of the common area between
Lots 42 & 44. has been removed. Visibilitv of the common areas located behind the
huildin1! lots was noted as a concern hv the Police DeIJartment.
4) Some of the attached units orieinallv shown alone the north boundary have been
relocated to the west boundary.
Staff has reviewed the revised Dlat and all lots meet the dimensional standards of the prolJosed
R-8 'lone. However. Staff has not updated the staffreoort below to reflect the revised plat. as
Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045N AR-06-020
PAGE 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12,2006
the Commission reviewed and made a decision on the Drevious version. The Police
Deoartment has not commented on the revised olat. The Commission also has not reviewed or
commented on the revised olat.
3. PROPOSED MOTION (to he considered after the public hearing)
Recommend Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ-
06-043, PP-06-045, and VAR-06-020, as presented during the hearing of December 12, 2006
for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial of the annexation and
you must state specific reason(s) for the denial of the plat.)
Continuance
I move to continue File Numbers AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, and V AR-06-020, to the hearing date
of (insert continued hearing date here) to allow Staff to compose favorable findings and
conditions.
4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
a. Site Address/Location:
Parcel No.: R8081770030
Generally located northeast ofthe N. Ten Mile Road/Chinden Boulevard intersection;
S.W. ~ of Section 23, TAN., R.1 W.
b. Owner:
SpUlWing Limited Partnership/Pacific Links Ltd. Partnership
200 N. Fourth Street, Suite 203/6800 N. SpUlWing Way
Boise, ill 83702/Meridian, ill 83642
c. Applicant:
SpUlWing Limited Partnership
200 N. Fourth Street, Suite 203
Boise, ill 83702
d. Representative: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, LLP
e. Present Zoning: RR (Ada County)
f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential
g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting concurrent approval for
Annexation and Zoning of the subject 20.51 acres to R-8, Preliminary Plat approval of73
single-family residential building lots and 6 common lots, and a Variance from UDC 11-6C-
3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district. Forty-six of the
lots are proposed to be for attached patio homes and 27 are proposed to be for detached homes.
All of the proposed lots meet the minimum dimensional standards of the R-8 zone. The
average lot size in the proposed development is 9,067 square feet. The gross density of the
project is 3.56 dwelling units per acre; the net density is 4.45 dwelling units per acre. Open
space consists of 3 .69 acres or 18% of the site.
1. Date of preliminary plat (attached in Exhibit A): 6/20/06
2. Date oflandscape plan (attached in Exhibit A): 5/28/06
5. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application will in fact constitute an annexation as determined by City Ordinance.
Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045/V AR-06-020
PAGE 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is
required hefore the Planning & Zoning Commission and 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 5, a public
hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Conunission and City Council on this
matter.
c. The subject application will in fact constitute a Variance 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.
d. Newspaper notifications published on: October 2nd and 161\ 2006 (Commission); November
20th and December 4th, 2006 (Council)
e. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: September 22nd, 2006 (Commission);
November 17th, 2006 (Council)
f. Applicant posted notice on site by: October 7th, 2006 (Commission); December 2nd, 2006
(Council)
6. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use(s): The site is currently vacant.
b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This property in bordered on the north by 1-
acre lots in Ada County and is surrounded on the south, east, and west by Spurwing Golf
Course property. Further to the west, bordering the golf course, are also one-acre lots in Ada
County.
c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning:
1. North: Single-family I Racre lots within SpUlWing Subdivision, zoned RR (Ada
Cowlty)
2. East: Immediately to the east, Spurwing Golf Course, zoned RR (Ada County);
[urtht:r east, tht: propust:d Knight Sky Subdivision, zunt:d R-4, R-15, and C-C.
3. South: SpUlWing Golf Course, zoned RR (Ada County); South of Chin den, the
proposed Irvint: Subdivisiun, zoned R-8; rural residential property, zone RUT
(Ada County).
4. West: SpUlWing Golf Course, zuned RR (Ada County); further west, single-family
one-acre lots in Westwing Estates Subdivision and agricultural land, zoned
RR.
d. History of Previous Actions: The subject property is currently platted in Ada County as Lot 3,
Block 1, of SpUlWing Subdivision and also contains portions of Lots 2 and 4 of the same
subdivision. NOTE: A Property Boundary Adjustment is currently in process at Ada County
that will adjust the boundaries of these lots as shown on the proposed plat and described with
the annexation application.
e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities:
1. Public Works:
Location of sewer: This property is currently not serviceable. It is Master
Planned to flow to the North Black Cat Lift Station, through planned mains in the
annexed but undeveloped property to the west.
Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045N AR-06-020
PAGE 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARlMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
Location of water: In a cooperative agreement with United Water ofIdaho,
Meridian as agreed to allow United Water to !';ervice this property_
Issues or concerns: Sewerability ofthis property.
2. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: There are no major facilities coursing through this site. The
applicant shall be required to tile any ditch lying within this site.
3. Hazards: No hazards have been identified on this site.
4. Proposed Zoning: R-8 (Medium Density Residential)
5. Size of Property: 20.65 acres (AZ); 20.51 acres (PP)
f. Subdivision Plat Information:
1. Residential Lots: 73
2. Non-residential Lots: 0
3. Total Building Lots: 73
4. Common Lots: 6
5. Other Lots: 0
6. Total Lots: 79
7. Gross Density: 3.56 dwelling units per acre (net density is 4.45 dwelling units/acre)
8. Minimum House Size: 1,400 square feet (proposed by applicant)
g. Landscaping
1. Width of street buffer(s): N/A (A street buffer is not required on any ofthe internal,
local streets.)
2. Width ofbuffer(s) between land uses: N/A
3. Percentage of site as open space: 18% (3.692 acres)
4. Other landscaping standards: Common open space lots should include at least one
deciduous shade tree per 8,000 square feet (UDC 11-3G-3E2).
h. Amenities: Open space and common areas are proposed with ponds and connecting stream
channels.
i. Off-Street Parking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires single-family detached and single-family attached
dwellings with more than 1 bedroom to have 2 enclosed parking spaces (a garage) and a 20' x
20' parking pad in front of each garage.
J. Proposed and Required Residential Standards:
R-8 Dimensional Standards (in feet)
Setbacks
Proposed Required
Front Living Area (from back of sidewalk) 15 15
Side Accessed Garage (from back of sidewalk) 15 15
Front Accessed Garage (from back of sidewalk) 20 20
Side (5' public utility & drainage easement is required) 4 4
Rear 12 12
Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045N AR-06-020
PAGE 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
Frontage (detached, with garage facing street)
Frontage (attached)
50
40
50
40
5,000
4,000
35
Lot Size (detached, w/garage facing the front property line) 5,000
Lot Size (attached)
Maximum Building Height
4,000
35
* No changes to the dimensional standards in UDC Table 11-2A-5 were requested.
k. Proposed and Required Non-Residential: N/A
1. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: Access to the proposed subdivision will be
provided internally from the existing public street, W. Halata Court, which is accessed via N.
SpUlWing Way from Chinden Boulevard. Balata Court is currently improved as a 36-foot wide
street with curb and gutter. Sidewalk has been constructed on W. Balata Court in front ofthe
residential lots and the clubhouse lots west of the site and on the north side of the street but
none exists where the site abuts Balata or east of the proposed connection to Balata on the
south side. Access to the dwellings within this development will be via internal public streets
to be constructed with the subdivision. All of the internal streets will be local streets with 36-
foot wide street sections (measured back of curb to back of curb) and contain 5-foot wide
attached sidewalks within 50-feet of right-of~way. The applicant is not proposing any stub
streets since the surrounding property is currently a golf course and there are no existing stubs
on the north boundary from Spurwing Subdivision. Staff is generally supportive of the
proposed street system. NOTE: To satisfY the Fire Department requirement for secondary
access, the applicant is proposing an "emergency access only" road at the southwest comer of
the site from Chinden Boulevard directly north of the terminus ofN. Ten Mile Road.
ACHD has submitted conditions of approval for this development (see Exhibit B).
Tht: Idahu Transpurtatiun Dt:partmt:nt (ITD) has submittt:d a CUIllIIlt:nt that tht: applil,;ant has
not yet applied to ITD for the proposed emergency access from Chinden Boulevard with a
note that the main access at Spurwing will not be signalized in the future, so it is prudent to
consider how many households would be added to the intersection. Supposedly, the
predominant movement from the subdivision would be left turns onto the highway. Over time,
congestion on the highway will make this a more difficult movement (please see Exhibit B for
all ofITD's comments).
7. COMMENTS MEETING
On September 29,2006, a joint agency and departments meeting was held with service providers
in this area. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian
Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Meridian Police Department.
Staff has included comments, conditions and recommended actions in Exhibit B below.
8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
This property is designated "Medium Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future
Land Use Map. Medium density residential areas are anticipated to contain three to eight
dwelling units per acre (see Page 99 of the Comprehensive Plan). The proposed Preliminary Plat
includes 73 single-family lots on 20.51acres for a gross density of 3.56 dwelling units/acre. The
proposed density lies within the anticipated density of the Comprehensive Plan for this area.
Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045N AR-06-020
PAGE 6
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12,2006
Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply
to the proposed development (staff analysis in italics below policy):
Chapter Vll, Goal Ill, Objective A, Action I - Require that development projects have planned
for the provision of all public services.
When the City established its Area of City Impact, it planned to provide City services to the
subject property. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands proposed
to be annexed in the following manner:
. Sanitary sewer service will be extended to the project at the developer's expense,
although it is currently not available (water service will be provided by United Water).
. 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 SherifFs Office.
Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MPD).
. The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained by the
Ada County Highway District (ACHD). This service will not change.
. The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This service
will not change.
. The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service
will nut change and the Meridian Library District shuuld suffer nu revenue luss 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 Wastewater Department, the Meridian
Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company.
Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective D, Action 9 - Require new residential development to provide
permanent perimeter fencing to contain construction debris on site and prevent windblown debris
from entering adjacent agricultural and other properties_
The applicant is proposing to construct a solid manufactured stone wall fence along the northern
perimeter boundary and a 4-foot tall wrought iron fence along the west, south, and east perimeter
boundaries of this development. Prior to house construction, fencing should be constructed
around the perimeter of this site. See Analysis below and Exhibit B for more information.
Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 2. Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors
and arterial streets.
This parcel has limited frontage on Chinden Boulevard, an arterial street. The applicant is
proposing an emergency access only connection to Chinden Boulevard. The new public street
connection to W Balata Court has been reviewed and approved by ACHD. City Staff is also
supportive of the connection to W Balata Court; no additional access points to Chinden
Boulevard, except for the emergency access, shall be allowed. The Idaho Transportation
Department has yet to approve the proposed emergency access from Chinden. The Meridian
Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045/V AR-06-020
PAGE 7
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12,2006
Police Department is requiring that the plat be revised to include an additional stub street for
increased emergency access to this .<<ite.
Chapter VII, Goal TV, Objective C, Action 1 - Protect existing residential properties from
incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels.
The applicant is proposing a residential zone. Staff finds that the proposed development is
generally compatible with the existing single-family residential properties to the north in that
they are both residential uses; however, Staff does believe that there should be more of a
transition in density and lot sizes between the existing i-acre lots to the north and the proposed
attached units proposed on 4,595-6,042 squarefoot lots.
Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective D, Action 8 - Require new urban density subdivisions which abut
or are proximal to existing low density residential land uses to provide landscaped screening or
transitional densities with larger, more comparable lot sizes to buffer the interface between urban
level densitics and rural residential densities.
There are some existing low density residential land uses to the north. The applicant is proposing
to construct solid manufactured stone wall fence along the northern perimeter boundary of this
development to provide a buffer to the existing residences. Further, a landscaped common area
with a meandering c;reek and punds are also proposed along this boundary between the existing
homes and the proposed attached homes. Staff finds that the proposed fencing and common area
would assist in providing screening between the proposed urban development and the existing
surrounding rural residences.; However, Staffbelieves that the applicant should provide a better
transition in density and plat larger more comparable lot sizes adjacent to the existing i-acre lots
to the north, instead of the proposed landscape buffer and attached lots. Staff recommends that a
minimum i 0,000 square foot lot be provided along the north side of this property, to effectively
transition to the urhan den.<<ities proposed Further, although the applicant has provided a buffer
in theform of landscaped common area along this boundary, it is virtually inaccessible and
unusable to the residents of the subdivision because of the proposed ponds and meandering
creeks and does not meet the requirements of UDC ii-3G-3. Also, the Police Department is not
supportive of the design of the open space area on the north boundary as it does not offer natural
surveillance opportunities for the public areas and creates a potential safety hazard. Staff
recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any written or verbal testimony provided
from neighbors when determining if additional screening or if a different transition in density is
more appropriate.
Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 10 - 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 rangc of affordablc housing
opportunities.
The subject application includes a request for the R-8 zone. Spurwing Subdivision to the north
obtained an RR zone (J -acre lots) in Ada County. Staff finds that the requested zoning
designation contributes to the variety of residential zoning categories in this area and is
generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for this site; however, Staff
believes that more of a transition should be provided between the existing rural lots and the
proposed urban lots in the form of larger, more comparable lot sizes, and lower densities on the
north boundary of the subdivision. To provide an even better variety of residential zoning, and to
Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045N AR-06-020
PAGE 8
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12,2006
better transition between the one acre lots to the north, some R-4 zoning should be approved on
the northern portion of this property.
Stqff generally believes that the density prnpnw>.d with this project is appropriate. However, the design of
the development does not fit well into this established area. Staff recommends that the Commission and
Council rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when
determining if the applicant '.'I zoning and development request is appropriate jor this property.
9. UNU'lED DEVELOPMENT CODE
a. Schedule of Uses: Unified Development Code (UDC) 11-2A-2lists single-family attached and
detached homes as permitted uses in the R-8 zoning district.
b. Purpose Statement of Zone:
R~8 Medium Density Residential: The purpose ofthe 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.
c. General Standards: All lots shown on the proposed plat conform to the minimum dimensional
requirement of the R-8 zone per UDC 11-2A-2. No dimensional modifications are being
requested for the proposed development. Therefore, the applicant must meet all dimensional
standards.
10. ANALYSIS
a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation:
1. Annexation & Zoning Application: Based on the policies and goals contained in the
Comprehensive Plan, Staff believes that the requested R-8 zone is generally consistent
with what the Future Land Use Map calls for. However, Staff bdit:vt:s that WIring all 20
acres of this property to R-8 is not appropriate for this property-,- Please see Exhibit D and
the Comprehensive Plan Analysis above for detailed analysis of the required facts and
findings for annexation.
The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on Uctober 16,
2006 by David Marks, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate
boundary of the City of Meridian.
Although the annexation path of this property appears to comply with the requirements of
State Code, Staff believes that annexing the subject property will have the effect of
having City parcels in the middle of a County subdivision (a City enclave). Staff believes
that it is in the City's best interest to have additional properties included as part of
annexing this property. It does not seem appropriate to have a City-approved subdivision
of this size that is surrounded by property still in the County, which may or may not
annex into the City in the foreseeable future. Further, the applicant is actually processing
a property boundary application through the City to annex a small portion of the golf
course lots, to facilitate this development, but is leaving a vast majority of the golf course
lots out of the subject annexation and development request.
Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045/V AR-06-020
PAGE 9
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER \2,2006
At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on October 19, 2006, the Commission did
not have an issue with the proposed R-8 zone and the transition in densities provided
between the existing i-acre properties in Spurwing Subdivision and the proposed lots.
2. Preliminary Plat Application: The proposed preliminary plat substantially complies
with the Unified Development Code.
Special Considerations:
Density: As noted previously in this report, this area is designated for medium density
residential uses. Medium density residential is defined as 3 to 8 dwelling units per
acre. The submitted plat has a gross density of 3.56 dwelling units per acre. Althou2h
Staff has no problem with the proposed density, Staff believes that more of a
transition from the existing I-acre rural residential lots should be provided in the
form of larger lots and lower densities along the north boundary. The smaller,
attached lots should be relocated to the west, east, and south boundaries adjacent
to the golf course, with the lar2er lots serving as the transition between the I-acre
lots to the north and the attached lots further to the south.
Landscaping: The landscape plan prt:pared by Harvest Design, on 5-28-06, labeled
Sheet #LS-1 is not approved.
. Per UDC 11-3B-1O, the applicant should work with the City Arborist, Elroy
Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection and mitigation
plan for the existing trees on site.
· Per UDC-II-3G-3, the applicant must provide a minimum of 5% open space
that is accessible by all residents of the development including but not limited
to: open grassy areas of at least 50' x 100' in area, community gardens, ponds
or water features, or plazas. While the applicant is proposing ponds and
meandering creeks as water features, they are not readily accessible by all
residents of the development, and do not allow emergency service providers
good visibility into these public areas. Further, not all of the grassy areas
proposed meet the dimensional requirements statcd above for qualified open
space. Although the proposed open space calculations exceed the
requirements of the UDC, the actual qualified open space does not meet the
minimum requirements due to dimensions and location. Staff believes that the
common area should be more centrally located and provide more open area
without ponds for usability by the residents.
Applicant should clarify at the public hearing what height of fence is proposed
along the north boundary.
The applicant clurified ut the public hearing that a 6-foot tall masonry wall is
proposed along the northern perimeter boundary adjacent to the existing
Spurwing Subdivision.
A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect,
designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan upon
completion of the landscape installation. All standards of installation should apply
as listed in UDC 11-3B-14.
Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045N AR-06-020
PAGE 10
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
Access: Access to this site is currently provided by N. SpUlWing Way via W. Balata
Court, both local public streets within Spurwing Subdivision. An emergency access is
proposed from Chinden Boulevard at the southwest comer of the site for emergency
vehicles only. Direct lot access to Chinden Boulevard shall be prohibited except for
the emergency access point approved with this subdivision; a note shall be placed on
the final plat restricting access.
Stub Streets: The Police Department is requiring that an additional stub street be
added for increased emergency access to the site. Staff believes that this will be a
difficult condition to meet. Staff recommends that the applicant meet with Lieutenant
Bob Stowe to discuss this issue, prior to the next public hearing. As of the print date of
this report, the applicant was unable to make contact with Lieutenant Bob Stowe to
come to a resolution on an additional access to the site. Staff contacted the Lieutenant
and the Police Department still maintains that they would like to see an additional
access provided to the site. It appears that the applicant will be unable to provide one
based on the existing subdivision to the north that did not stub to this property and the
existing golf course that surrounds the site.
Existing ResidenceslBuildings: The site does not currently contain any residences or
buildings.
Fencing: The applicant is proposing to construct a manufactured stone wall fence
along the northern perimeter boundary of the subdivision adjacent to the existing
residences. A 4-foot tall wrought iron fence is proposed on the west, south, and east
perimeter boundaries. A detailed fencing plan should be submitted upon application
of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided before issuance of a building
permit, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the
perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path Imulti-use fencing shall be
designed according to UDC 11-3A-7.
Common Areas: Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the
SpUlWing Patio Homes Subdivision Home Owners' Association.
Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or
canals, exclusive of any natural waterway, that intersect, cross or lie within the area
being subdivided shall be covered.
Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems
be supplied by a year-round source of water. Thc 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 used, 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 all
landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-
15 and MCC 9-1-28.
Although the proposed plat and R-8 zoning would add to the variety of housing types
in the subj ect area, Staff believes that more of a transition in density and lot sizes
between the existing l-acre lots and the proposed attached units should be
provided along the north boundary. Staff doet! not oppose the overall density
Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045N AR-06-020
PAGE 11
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
proposed; however, believes that the higher density attached homes should be
relocated from the north boundary to the west, east, and south boundaries of the
subdivision. Further, Staff would like to see larger, more usable open space
areas, located centrally within the development. The Commission should consider
stafPs analysis and recommendation, and the layout of the proposed lots and
open space in relation to the existing and proposed homes when making
recommendation to the City Council.
At the Planning & Zoning Conunission meeting on October 19, 2006, the
Commission heard testimony, considered Staff's analysis, and discussed the
proposed common areas and did not have an issue with the amount of open space
provided, or the location and inaccessibility of some of the comrrwn areas Wi noted
by Staff in this report. The Commission also did not have an issue with the requested
R-8 zone or the transition in density and lot sizes proposed hetwf>l"H the existing mral
lots and the proposed lots. Although some of the proposed lot sizes are small, they
believed that since the proposed units would be attached and would be a minimum of
1,400 square feet per unit, the stmcture itself would be least 2,800 square feet,
comparable with the existing homes in Spurwing than smaller detached homes on
these lots would be. Therefore, the Commission requested that Staff prepare
Conditions of Approval for the subject applications (see Exhibit A).
3. Variance Application: The applicant has applied for a Variance from UDC 11-6C-3F to
exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district.
Special Considerations:
There are no existing stub streets or pedestrian connections from the existing surrounding
Spurwing Subdivision for this development to connect to. Since the land to the west,
south, and east is part of the SpUlWing Golf Course, no stub streets are proposed for
future connectivity although the Police Department is requesting a stub street be provided
to the property The irregular shape and size of the property also limits design alternatives
that would allow for shorter block lengths. Staff believes compliance with UDC 11-6C-
3F is not feasible in this case due to the site limitations stated above and that the required
Findings for a Variance can be met (see Exhibit D).
b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the subject applications, AZ-06-043, pp-
06-045, and V AR-06-020 per the comments stated in the staff report for the hearing date of
October 19, 2006. NOTE: Staff is recommending denial of the variance because the
recommendation is for denial of annexation into the City.
At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on October 19, 2006, the Commission
recommended that this project be continued until November 2, 2006 to allow Staff time to
prepare Conditions of Approval. The original staff report did not contain Conditions of
Approval since Staff was recommending denial of the project. Staff has now included
Conditions of approval in Exhibit A and Findings in Exhibit C. Prior to the November 2nd
meeting, the applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat, dated November 9, 2006, and
requested that the hearing be continued until November 16, 2006.
The Meridian Plannine aod Zooine Commission heard these items on October 19. 2006~
November 2. 2006~ and November 16.2006. At the public hearine: on November 16.
2006 they moved to recommend denial.
Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045N AR-06-020
PAGE 12
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12,2006
11. EXHmITS
A. Drawings
1. Vicinity Map
2. Preliminary Plat (dated: 6-20-06)
3. Landscape Plan (dated: 5-28-06)
B. CeBaitieBB of .^.f.lflFeval Al!encv/Department Conunents
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. Idaho Transportation Department
9. Central District Health Department
C. Legal Description & Exhibit Map
D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ.06-043/PP-06-045N AR-06-020
PAGE 13
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
A. Drawings
1.
Vicinity Map
j
~nr!
/!JjrLJ.. --~t
--'_J /
~'---"" ----l........
j ..
I
,=1
~-
~--l~
..()
.11tt:
.~
i
!
-.-...- l'
-- z
,
..ut
w. CHlNDEN BL~
~
pao~Otl.
RUT
...... ~
1MQ,'I;II\1I 0lIdaIMI
-..... t;"1II
- 10"
VICIN
SPURWlNG TOWNHOMES SUBDMSION
l.DCATED"1HE SW 114 OF SECTIOH 23, TAN.. R.1W. 8.11.
IIERIDIAN. ADA COUNTY; I)AHQ .
VICINITY MAP
~NGlNEERlNG
--SOLUTIONS .....
UU.Ii.....'Na:!!.T.~.
~~"'1S
"'-~.... ~~iIa-IM1'
Exhibit A - Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
2. Preliminary Plat (dated: 6-20-06)
"""1__ _ IIIiIIIIiI tDl__ (mQ _
I;llm 1J\'tI\lII"p;J; ml.ft: lJIlIa"JIICIIIII
f(jI'!Ii.",lt"Iu.'II. fGf_.Ii~'II_
_1In~~4I5IIIllJM1Ul~
.--[tW
- -
.- .
IIIlW1t lIQ1lI
...... .....
...--......---
.......r....._..
1:iJ!.~4r=.s:
I........i.nr. """a.:r-,.Jr'-::U~.
'].n'~*O:ft.:lIl/Ill
~'.I,IQ,)IIl/O''JIIIQDI i
n"ll'll"'I'n~t.~lIj111;~"1tlN.ll.I'I ~!~; W!
l.Vlo::l..IJ:AfNIWI1.ii11dd ~ ~. on a:. ~
tl()1SIAI0lI1l9 W' S a... -
SOOB OLlVd 5tl1AWd9 ~ W f I
~!~'1CIII1ll1IiIIi
~-'~
fIlr'll!l".ljIWo'll1l1
-"'-
"SII0UR7DB.
__,!!.'lIlllllfJlii
a~o:J3Ii ~o Sil3NMO
~3dOl3I\3CI
.lO>lNOO I ~.NN\I1d
II ill ;1 ill I 51 h
II
r- linn.' !I: H m
,.
i:U ~ ii =! ;;1 ii! !ill s
i"8.
1<1 ."idlt II · ~.!~
i~ Ii g: ..1 ~!!!:
~I .; ~.oI ..! .
Exhibit A - Page 2
~
@m
!=:~m
slmm
~.u!m
e.mm
Ullm
~ ~ .
~
I ~
~ il
-I ~
_I ~s
I:i
'1 ~
II ~
Pi
ItlbD1I1I1!I
~I
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
3. Landscape Plan (dated 5-28-06)
U lli'~I-lllMl (~) a-"J 'l~l\;\1 OlivO! ''If.()fJ D
i . Lil~ '3.,l:'l '.1.:3 /1~~ "1 OC~6 ;u;
dIHS~3NHl\Id 011 DNIM~nd 'i ~
IVld )"!!\lNI~ii3Md
NOISlAIQ8nS S31'40H Oll\ld DNIM~ndS ; I I i
~ :~'~:. '~~~~':~.~: '~'~~.~"~:' '~~~~.:~ -~:~~~'~~~~~:.~:~:.
.10"'11 111111""119'11.1111'''''''' "".111111111I ..~.........~_""'I<"\,o""
I
I I I lid
I Ihl II III 'I II
11111 IUlIII, II! 11ll!! III~;
"
i~
1!! ~ I. ill ,IlL
~ ~ 1'1 liIllIl'I!liI.hl'l
~ ~ I ,~'!~!!~H~!~I ~~~I
~~ I v 0 i 0 .
rJiJ
I'
I!
I tj I'
'i I
I. I .1
,1 ! !I
!!~ I ! II
:11 ~ II ! n
"I.iF ,I I il
Iii i3 I" !", II
~iI ~ , I i !!'~;!I
!{l,~: 11111!~11
egi !'l --"II
~g!:!'il Iii
'0' .; ~ dil!L . ...: !,i
Exhibit A- Page 3
~
~
'"
t
~
~~
.,;
~
~
I'" ,II
II",
I
~
, I
j l ~ll'
!I! ml,l.
II iii ~ l!
II ~. ,1li!iI! ....
\,,~'~ \,~d~ ~
. ~
/ .I!
I'" "I"i ~.
". I' I" lI>'
i.!i'" I', ..
. ," II ,
J
"
Il
. jl
il !:
II.ll ;
ii 1& I
\. \ '\
" . :
I~
, ~
"-
iil
~a
,// ,
ill il~
Ii d,.
1 ~;!l
5:2.11
,..;
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
B. Conditions of Appm'lal Agencv/Department Comments
1. Planning Department
1.1 The Planning Department and Commission are recommending denial of the subj ect applications.
Therefore, no conditions of approval are included with this document.
2. Public Works Department
2.1 The preliminary plat shows the sewer main proposed in this development ending at W. Chinden
Boulevard. At this time there are no sewer mains in or planned to be installed in Chinden
Boulevard. This property is master planned in the North Black Cat shed. This property is
currently not serviceable by the City of Meridian's sewer system and the City of Meridian does
not guarantee sewer service in the timelines outlined in the UDC.
2.2 This property is master planned to sewer to the North Black Cat Lift Station via mains that are
planned to be development driven in the property to the west. Ifthe applicant wishes to
commence development prior to the "Master Planned mains" being available they may proceed
under the following conditions:
a) This is conditional on there being available capacity within the Ten-Mile Trunk.
b) The applicant shall provide written permission from the owner of the Silver Leaf Lift
Station, granting access to use that lift station.
c) The applicant shall be responsible to prove capacity exists in the Silver Leaf Lift Station,
and be responsible for any upgrades necessary.
d) The applicant shall be responsible install the necessary off.site gravity mains from this
site to the Silver Leaf Lift Station. These mains shall not be eligible for reimbursement
agreements.
2.3 The applicant shall install sewer 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.
2.4 The applicant shall be responsible to install an all-weather access road per City of Meridian
standard specifications to all sewer mains not located within the right.of.way.
2.5 The applicant shall connect to a Municipal water system.
2.6 The applicant shall comply with all Department of Environmental Quality's Best Management
Practices separation requirements between storm facilities and private wells.
2.7 Any potential reimbursement agreements must comply with all requirements of City Code 9-1-13
and 9-4-19, which includes the preliminary agreement (which includes footage, size, and depth of
reimbW"sable pipe) being finalized prior to constmction plan approval. The detailed agreement
with the reimbursable amount shall be approved by Council prior to plat signature.
2.8 The applicant shall provide a 20-foot easement for all public water/sewer mains outside of public
right of way (include all water services and hydrants).
2.9 The applicant has indicatt:d that tht: P.I. syslt:m shall be an t:xlt:nsion or Spurwing's systt:m. Prior
to scheduling of a pre-construction meeting the applicant shall provide written approval from the
owner of that system.
Exhibit B - Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
2.10 All existing structures not meeting setbacks or meeting the dimensional standards of the UDC
shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer.
2.11 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.
2.12 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, that
intersect, cross or lie within the area being developed shall be tiled. 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 prior
to plan approval. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be
reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
2.13 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 thc Final
Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits.
2.14 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.
2.15 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.
2.16 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.
2.17 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.
2.18 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that
may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency.
2.19 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting
that may be required by the Anny Corps of Engineers.
2.20 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. Where mailboxes
are located on or near sidewalk the applicant shall comply with all American with Disabilities Act
requirements for unobstructed sidewalk access.
2.21 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.
2.22 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 ufhumt:s is allt:asl1-foot above.
2.23 One hundred watt, high~pressure sodium streetlights, on 25' pole shall be required on all public
residential streets. Two-hum.lrt:d and fifty watt high pressure sodium streetlights, on 30' pole
shall be required on subdivision entrances and collector roadways. Design of the streetlights shall
be approved by the Public Works Department. Decorative lights require a streetlight agreement
on file with Public Works prior to activation. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's
expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants, and no further than
400' distance in between locations. Final design locations and quantity are determined after
power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain
approval from the Public Works Department, and permit from Building Department prior to
Exhibit B - Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12,2006
commencing installations.
3. Fire Department
3.1 One and two family dwellings not exceeding 3600 square feet will require a frre-flow of 1,000
gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. One and two story
family dwellings 3600 square feet and greater will require a fIre flow of 1500 gallons per minute.
Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 5UU' apart. International Fire Code Appendix C
3.2 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.
3.3 Final Approval of the frre hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department.
a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 Y2" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle.
b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which docs not have addresses on it.
c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications.
d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing pennits.
e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'.
f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade.
g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements uf tht: IFe Section 509.5.
h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing
buildings within 1,000 feet of the project.
3.4 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside
radius.
3.5 The emergency access drive shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48'
outside and shall havt: a dt:ar driving surface which is 20' wide.
3.6 The emergency access drive shall have a 20' wide improved surface capable of supporting an
impust:d luad of 75,000 lbs. All roadways shall be marked in accordance with Appendix D
Section DI03.6 Signs.
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 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 frre 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 shaH be 600 feet (183).
a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183
m).
b. 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).
3.9 This project will be required to provide a 20' wide swing or rolling emergency access gate. The gate
shall be equipped with a Knoxbox Padlock which has to be ordered thtu the Meridian Fire
Department. A "No Parking, Fire Lane" emergency access sign shall be installed at the access gate.
Exhibit B - Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12,2006
4. Police Department
4.1 The proposed development and/or plat do not offer natural surveillance opportunities ofthe
public areas. Common areas are completely blocked from public view. Seventy-three home
sites with one primary access is not acceptable. 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.
4.2 To increase emergency access to the site, the applicant shall provide a stub street from the
property. Prior to the next public hearing, the applicant shall submit a revised plat/site plan to
reflect this requirement.
4.3 Any interior fencing shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if
solid fencing is used.
5. Parks Department
5.1 Standard for Mitigation of trees: The standard cstablished in the City of Meridian Landscapt:
Ordinance will be followed.
5.2 Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in
the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance will be followed.
6. Sanitary Service Company
6.1 sse has no comments related to this application.
7. Ada County Highway District
7.1 SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
7.1.1 Construct West Balata Court as one half ofa 36-foot street section within 50-feet of right-of-way
complete with curb, gutter and 5-foot attached concrete sidewalk.
7.1.2 Locate the entry road intersecting West Balata Court as proposed.
7.1.3 Construct all the internal roadways as 36-foot street sections within 50-feet of right-of-way
complete with curb, gutter and S.foot attached concrete sidewalk.
7.1.4 Locate and construct one knuckle on the south side of West Tramore Drive and one standard cul-
de~sac turnaround at the intersection of North Dunlay Way and North Castle Rar Way.
7.1.5 Construct emergency access at the southwest comer of West Tramore Drive, as proposed. Utilize
some restrictive device to inhibit the possibility for cut-thru or general use traffic within the
emergency access. The device used to control access on the emergency vehicle roadway shall be
approved by the Meridian Fire Department and submitted to ACHD in writing.
7.1.6 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval.
Exhibit B - Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12,2006
7.2 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside ofthe right-of-way.
7.2.2 Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACHD roadway or
right -of-way.
7.2.3 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be
borne by the developer.
7.2.4 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the
cunstruction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file
number) for details.
7.2.5 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width mtetim Policy.
7.2.6 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.
7.2.7 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.
7.2.8 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit
(or other required pennits), which incorporates any required design changes.
7.2.9 Construction, use and property dcvclopment shall be in conformance with all applicable
requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy.
7.2.10 Payment of applicable road impact fees is required prior to building construction in accordance
with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance.
7.2.11 It is the responsibility of the applicant 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 (1-800-342.1585) at least two full business days
prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic
Opt:rations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during
any phase of construction.
7.2.12 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 authorized
representative ofthe Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to
obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District.
7.2.13 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
Exhibit B - Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12,2006
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.
7.3 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
7.3.1 The proposed site plan is approved, if all of the Site Specific and Standard Conditions of
Approval are satisfied.
7.3.2. ACHD requirements are intended to assure that the proposed use/development will not place an
undue burden on the existing vehicular transportation system within the vicinity impacted by the
proposed development.
8. Idaho Transportation Department
8.1 The applicant shall apply to ITD for the emergency access to US 20/26 (Chinden Blvd.) shown
on the proposed plat.
Note: The main access at Spurwing will not be signalized in the future, so it is prudent to consider
how many households would be added to the intersection. The predominant movement from the
subdivision is suspected to be left turns onto the highway. Over time, congestion on the highway
will make this a more difficult movement.
9. Central District Health Department
9.1 After written approval from appropriate entities is submitted, we can approve this proposal for
central sewage and central water.
9.2 The following plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health &
welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: central sewage and central water.
9.3 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem.
Exhibit B - Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP ARlMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12,2006
C. Legal Description & Exhibit Map
frn
TEALEV'S LAND
SURVEVING
2501 Bogus Basin Ad, . Eloisa, Idahu fl3702
(208) 385-0636
Fex (208) aB5~96
Project. No.: 2981
Date: June 2; 2006
Rev~:AugU8t15,2006
ANNEXATlONDESCRIPll0N FOR
SPURWINO PATIO HOMES SUBDIVISION
A parcel of land being a pOrtion of Lots 2 and 4 and all of Lot 3 of Block 1 of
Spurwlng Subdivision, as filed for record in the office of the Ads County Recorder, Boise,
Idaho in Book 69 of Plats at pages 7104 thru 7108, snd a portion of the SW 1/4 of
Secllon 23, TAN., R, ,W" e.M" Ads County, Idaho Bnd more partlGul.1l1y describe(! as
follows:
BEGINNING at a brass cap marking the Southwest !;Orner of the eaid S~ion23;
thence along the Westerly bounclary of the .sald.SW 1/4 of Section 23: thence
North 00"20'40" East 324.83 feet to an Iron pin; thence saId Westerly boundary
South 89"39'20" East 30,00 feet to an iran pin markings point of curve; thence
continuing along an arc of a curve to the Ie", sald curve havIng a radius of 20,00 feet, a
~ntral angle 6f 104"21'18", a IlII'lgth of 36.43 feet arid e long ohard bearing
South 51"49'58" East 31.60 feet to an Iron pin mar:l(lng a point of tangent; thence
continuing
North 75"59'24" East 156,1 a feet to a~ Iron pin. thence continuing
North 00."'8'28" East 164.80 feet to an Iron pin. thence leaVIng said Westerly
boundary
North 10"58'41" East 673.'3 feet loan Iron pin marking the Northwest comer of
said Lot 3: thence along the Northerly Ilcundary of lIl!irl I.nt 3
SoUth 78"38'59" East 106.97 feet lei an iron pin; thEmce continuing
.SoUth 52"24'58" East 127,74 feet to an iron pin: thence continuing
South 50"13'58" East 125,67 feet to an iron pin; thence continuing
South 43.02"50" East 100.00 fSl;lt to;tO ;rOll pin; thtmca contlnulng
South 43"00'12" East 160,00 feet to an iron pin; thence continuing
South 52"28'14" East 222.39 feet to an ifOn pin; thence continuing
South 81"44'25" East 290.67 feet to an iran pin; thence continuing
North 54"48'27" Eaat242,01 feet to an Iran pin; thence continuing
North2e"4ij'22" East 166.21 feet to an Iron pin; thence continuing
North 19'22'35" East 116.G6 feel to an irOn pin; thence continuIng
North 43"1:134" Weet 2$5.26 feet to an Iron pin mar1dn9 a pain! of GlJrve; thence
cOntInuing along an arc of a curve to .the left, said curve hailing 8 radius of 20.00 feet, 9
cenlr8l angle of , 02'27'35", a length of 35.77 feet and a long chord bearing
South 85'33'38" Wast 31. , 9 to an Iron pin marlting a poWrt of ending of curve 0."
the South right-of-way 1I~ of Wast Balata Court; thence leaving Beid South light.of.way
fine
North 55"40'10" West 25.00 feet to a point on the centerlIne of said West Balata
Court marking a point of CUMl: thence along said centerline along the arc of fl. curVet<:>
the right, said curve havlng a radius of 350.00 feet, a central angle of 20"47'29", a length
of 127.01 feet and a longcl1~ bearing
<l_.....___.......
Exhibit C - Page)
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING 2&11 BlXlUSlIAS~ ROAD;BOISf.Il.\AHOU1ll2'(208)3lMl38
Project No.: 2961 Page 2.
Dale: June 2, 2006
Re\IIsed: August 16, 2006
North 44"43'35" East 126.31 feet to a point marking a point of ending of curve;
thence leaVing said centerline . .
South 34"52"40" East 25.00 feet to an iron pin on said South right-of-way line of
West Salata Court; thence leaving said South right-of-way line
South 05057'22" West 30.28 feet to an Iron pin; thence
South 43"12'34" East 266.19 feet to an iron pin marking a point fIf curve; thence
along the arc or a CUIVe to the right, said curve having e radius of 75.00 feet, a central
angle or 24020'33", a length of 31.86 feet aml a long chord bearlnlt
South 3'"02'18" East 31.63 feet to an Iron pin marking a point of tangent; mence.
SoUth 18052'01" EDt 77,34 teet to an Iron pinon the. East boundarv of said Lot
3; thenc;e along said East boundary
South 00"48'280 West 789.24 feet to an iron pin maJ1dlig the Sauthe8st comer of
salcl Lot 3; thence along the Southerly boundary of said Lot 3
NOrth 76"39'48" West 691,47 feet to an iron pin; thence continuing
South 82"16'37" West 505.59 feet to an Iron pin; thence continuing
North 85"08'24" Wll&t 300.62 feet to an iron pin: thence conUnulng
South 75059'24" West 194.94 feet to an Iron pin marking a polnt of curve;lhence
continuing along the af(; of a curve to the left. said curve havi1'lg a radius of 20.00 feet, iii
central angle of 75038'44", 81ength of 26.41 feet ands long chord bearing
. South 38"10'02" West 24.53 feet to an Iron pill marklng a point of tangent; thence
continuing
South 00020'40" West 177.61 feet to an iron pin marking a point of curve; thence
continuing along the arc of a curve to the Isft, said CUNe havin9 a radius of 20.00 feet, a
central alllile of 89"32'12", slength of 31.25 feetand a long chord bearing
. SOuth 44025'28" East 28.17 feet to an iron pin marking a point of ending of curve
on said North right,;gf-way line of State Highway 20; thence \eevlng said North rlght-of-
way line
South OtJ"4S'28" West 40.00 feet to a point on the South boundary of said
Section 23; thence al009 sald. South boundary
North 89"'11'32" Wellt e9.52 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Said parcel of land contains 20.65 acres, more or le$s.
~~~~~
'6'1~,
. It f'OElUc
lAe\'l\O~!jOl;:\'l.
.,,01'." ..
Exhibit C - Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12,2006
~
Sf'UflWlNIl SVa(li'lISION
--'-71
,
i
I
i',
Mi!.
a/
.
I, :j-
-.::;
~~
",'
. .~
"-
~~,
----I
.
~--I
is
I
I
I
"-
SPURWING. Sue011/fS1ON
,g
, ~
--~ ~
-!6 2S
~
l
'-'-
-,.,
~-
~~-
.~
.,:,.::
II
Ii/( :tON/Nt
CURVE DATA
aIM _ .... . __... ~_
n ... ..... ~I _ "... ......r
.M ._ ~ '!111\I .. :H." I;~.
~ am .... 111''' M.JI .ut . .fIID']5" I
o .. .,.. :!II.at tt. ~.., 1'.......1"
"QI .. ...... .4_. ~1:i1 l4.sa '......
co _ ..'" "" ,,~ alt '_1
.bI,< 10_
-.....q ~17{D1j WIb
.... "II an.
"" ''',
SPUBWlNG PATIO BOIII8 SUBDIVI8ION
PROPOSED MERIDIAN ANNEXATION
IlI'AltD III lItE . Ifur sa:IUl h; UK, 1i,'..-B.lL
1lEIIIlWI.." ailMrt, Iwto .
EIIS/IIEER/II'
'SDLUTIOIIS/JI
ISII I...... .$11l!'!:f.:!lIJIIE .
.~_._"
-OIIiO--."l)II!O._.
Exhibit C - Page 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARlMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
1. Annexation Findings:
Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation
and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation
and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings:
A. Tbe map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive
plan;
The applicant is proposing to zone all of the subject property to R-8. The Commission
finds that the proposed zoning map amendment does not comply with the applicable
provisions of the Comprehensive Plan_
B. The map amendment complies with tbe regulations outlined for the proposed
district, specifically the purpose statement;
As proposed, the Commission fmds that the development of this property would not
comply with the established regulations and purpose statement of the R-8 zone.
c. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety,
and welfare;
The Commission finds that the proposed zoning amendment may be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely
on any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this fmding.
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,
The Commission 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).
The Commission fi.nds that all essential services can be made available or will be
provided by the developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable
expenditure of public funds. The Commission finds that annexin2: the subiect property to
R-8 is not in the best interest of the City at this time.
2. Preliminary Plat Findings:
In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short
plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings:
A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan;
The Commission finds that the proposed preliminary plat does not conform to the
applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan.
Exhibit D ~ Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006
B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to
accommodate the proposed development;
The Commission finds that public services can be made available to accommodate the
proposed development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public
service providers.)
C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the
City's capital improvement program;
Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their
cost, the Commission fmds that the subdivision will not require the expcnditurc of capital
improvement funds.
D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed
development;
Statf recommends that the Commission & Council rely upon comments from the public
service providers (i.e., police, fire, ACHD, etc.) to determine this fmding. (See finding
Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings, and Exhibit B for more detail.)
E. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general
welfare; and
The Commission is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated
with the development of this subdivision that should be brought to the Council's
attention. ACHD and ITD consider road safety issues in their analysis. Staff recommends
that the Commission & Council rcfcrence any public testimony that may be pres~Iltt:d tu
determine whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or
environmental problems of which staff and the Commission is unaware.
F. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features.
The Commission is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features on this site.
Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed development will not result in the
dcstruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or histuric ft:ature(s) of major
importance. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council reference any public
testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed development
may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of major importance of which Staff
is unaware.
3. Variance Findings:
The City Council shall apply the standards listed in Idaho Code 67-6516 and all the
findings listed in Section 11-5B-4E ofthe UDC to review the variance request. Tn order to
grant a variance, the Council shall make the following findings:
A. The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that j" not otherwise allowed
in the district:
The UDC requires that no block face be more than 750-feet in length without an
intersecting street or alley or that no block face shall have a length greater than 1,300-feet
without a connecting pedestrian open space and pathway. Therefore, if the City grants the
Exhibit D - Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12,2006
variance it would allow a right or privilege not usually allowed in a residential district.
However. since the property is irregularly shaped and the existing surrounding
development does not stub or have pedestrian connections to this property, Staff believes
the variance requested should be granted. This site is such that full compliance with the
UDC standards would be relatively impossible and cause an undue hardship to the
applicant.
B. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site;
Staff finds that this is an irregularly shaped lot, which limits design alternatives that
would allow for shorter block lengths. Further, the existing surrounding development
does not provide any stub streets or pedestrian connections to this property which would
allow the applicant to comply with the UDC. For these reasons, Staff believes that a
variance would relieve an undue hardship to the applicant because of the characteristics
of the site.
C. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare.
Staff finds that granting the subject variance should not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, or welfare. Further, staff recognizes that this is an unusually shaped property and
existing site conditions restrict compliance with the ordinance. However, if the City grants
the variance it would allow a right or privilege not usually allowed in a residential district.
Staff believes that in this case, site conditions arc such that would cause an undue hardship
to the applicant and that a variance should be granted. Staff is recommending denial of
the Variance application solely because the recommendation is for denial of
annexation into the City. Staff further recommends that development of this property be
required to comply with all other dimensional standards of the UDC.
Exhibit D - Page 3