Z - Findings for Pope's Garden AZ PP CUP FLUM H-2016-0006 Denial - REV 8/9Since the request to amend the future land use map has been denied, the request for
annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, conditional use permit are no longer needed and are
therefore denied.
2016.
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the I , day of August,
ROLL CALL:
COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD VOTED U
COUNCILMAN JOE BORTON VOTED IAe
COUNCILMAN LUKE CAVENER VOTED 0
COUNCILWOMAN GENESIS MILAM VOTED (�
COUNCILMAN TY PALMER VOTED
COUNCILMAN ANNE LITTLE ROBERTS VOTED
MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED
DATED
MOTION:
ATTEST:
P,/g /A)
APPROVED:
JAYCEIR HOLMAN, CITY
DISAPPROVED:
7EpA�GAYOR MY DE WEERD
sr
�•��' 0r W
DAHD
Copy served upon Applicant, the Community Development Department, Public Works
Department, and City Attorney.
By:_�--�6y (�) k& Dated:
City Clerk's Office
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL FOR ANNEXATION;
PRELIMINARY PLAT; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND FUTURE LAND USE AMENDMENT Case No. H-2016-0006
PAGE 4 OF 4
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 1
STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: July 26, 2016
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Sonya Watters, Associate City Planner
208-884-5533
Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager
208-887-2211
SUBJECT: Pope’s Garden – AZ, CPAM, CUP, PP (H-2016-0006)
I. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT’S REQUEST
The applicant, Iron Mountain Real Estate, has submitted an application for the following:
An amendment to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) contained in the Comprehensive Plan
(CPAM) to change the land use designation on 5.28 acres of land from Office to Medium
High Density Residential;
Annexation and zoning (AZ) of 5.28 acres of land from the RUT zoning district in Ada
County to the R-15 zoning district;
Preliminary plat (PP) consisting of 20 19 building lots, 4 common lots and 1 other lot on 5.28
acres of land in the R-15 zoning district; and,
Conditional use permit (CUP) for a multi-family development consisting of 79 76 dwelling
units in the R-15 district.
See Section IX of the staff report for more information.
II. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the proposed CPAM, AZ, PP and CUP applications in accord with the
conditions of approval in Exhibit B and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Exhibit D.
The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on March 3 and 17, 2016. At
the public hearing on March 17th, the Commission moved to recommend denial of the subject
AZ, CPAM, CUP and PP requests.
a. Summary of Commission Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Kevin Amar, Kent Brown
ii. In opposition: John Stefan; Mary Rockrohr; David Ballard; Ron Peterson; Kelly
Buchanan; Ian Sodine; Gary McAllister; Jerry Todd; Kelly Barbour; John Overton;
Roger Tebo; Ty Vendenakker; Catherine Jones; Brent Belliston; Lori Somazzi; Kelly
Ketlinski; Clare Gaylord; Jim Barnes; Honor Harris; Sandra Overton; Kevin Elhe;
Robin McCulley; and Mario Marisi.
iii. Commenting: None
iv. Written testimony: David Ballard; Brent and Diane Belliston; petition from
Woodbridge HOA
v. Staff presenting application: Sonya Watters
vi. Other staff commenting on application: None
b. Key issue(s) of Public Testimony:
i. Traffic – cut-through traffic through Woodbridge and Greenhill Estates subdivisions;
opposition of the extension of Hickory Way from Greenhill Estates subdivision to Magic
View Drive; pedestrian safety due to lack of sidewalks and street lights in Greenhill
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 2
Estates and along Magic View; congestion at the E. St. Luke’s Street/Eagle Road traffic
light and at the E. Woodbridge Drive/Locust Grove intersection.
ii. Opposition of the land use change from office to medium high density residential.
iii. Lack of transition in density/zoning from Greenhill Estates subdivision (R1 to R-15).
iv. Concern regarding the sale of the individual structures and common management &
maintenance.
v. Request for a berm and restriction for single-story structures along the northern
boundary of the site;
vi. Concern that future residents will use common areas/site amenities in adjacent
developments.
vii. Concern that if an amendment to the FLUM is approved for this property to allow a
multi-family development, the other adjacent Office designated properties may follow
suit.
viii. Concern that property values will lower with the multi-family development.
c. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission:
i. Desire for additional right-of-way to be dedicated to allow Magic View Drive to
“straighten out” more where it intersects Wells Street and drops to the south.
d. Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation:
i. None
e. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council:
i. None
This project was scheduled for a public hearing before the City Council on May 17, 2016. On April
25, 2016, the applicant submitted a request to City Council for the project to be remanded back to
the Commission. The reason was because ACHD required the public street right-of-way (Hickory
Way) along the west boundary of the site to be removed from the plat. This change allowed the
applicant to modify the site plan to create a better buffer between the site and the Greenhill Estates
neighbors to the north. The applicant felt these changes were significant and addressed many of
the concerns the Commission had when they reviewed the project. The Council approved the
applicant’s request to remand the project back to the Commission for review and a new
recommendation from Commission based on the revised plans.
The applicant has submitted a revised preliminary plat and landscape plan based on the
aforementioned changes. Staff has updated the staff report based on the revised plans and ACHD’s
report; updated areas are shown in strike-out/underline format.
The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items again on June 23, 2016. At the
public hearing, the Commission moved to recommend denial of the subject AZ, CPAM, CUP,
and PP requests.
a. Summary of Commission Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Kevin Amar, Kent Brown
ii. In opposition: John Overton; Jim Voorhees; Mary Rockrohr; Kelly Barber; Ian
Sodine; John Stefan; Dale Sharp; Ron Peterson; Katie Smith; Lorrie Somazzi; Kathryn
Jones; Ronald Vance; Celeste Fox; David Ballard; Andrea Stoffle; Kelly Ketlinski;
Kevin Ehle; Brent Belliston; Roger Tebow; Gloria Nanney; Larry Andrews; Gene Fox;
iii. Commenting: None
iv. Written testimony: Petition from neighbors (see public record); Walter Poly
v. Staff presenting application: Sonya Watters
vi. Other staff commenting on application: None
b. Key issue(s) of Public Testimony:
i. Objection to the change to the FLUM from Office to Medium High Density Residential;
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 3
ii. Not enough transition from the R1 neighborhood to the north to the proposed multi-
family development;
iii. Increased traffic generated by multi-family development and impact to adjacent
residential areas;
iv. Concern regarding management of the apartments if the structures are on separate lots
under different ownership.
c. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission:
i. The appropriateness of a multi-family development in this area vs. office as currently
designated;
ii. Traffic impacts on adjacent developments and streets generated by development of this
property.
iii. Maintenance of the back side of the berm along the north boundary of the site.
d. Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation:
i. The Commission voted to deny the subject applications based on maintaining the
integrity of the current plan and addressing traffic issues in this area before any zoning
changes happen.
f. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council:
i. The Commission requested the Mayor and City Council send a letter to ACHD
requesting a traffic study be done in this area to address access and traffic issues.
The Meridian City Council heard these items on July 26, 2016. At the public hearing, the
Council denied the subject CPAM, AZ, CUP and PP request.
a. Summary of City Council Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Kevin Amar; Kent Brown
ii. In opposition: John Overton; Celeste Fox; Catherine Jones; Gene Fox; Mario Marisi;
Ian Sodine; Helen Sharp; Vanessa Cornelius; David Ballard; Ronald Vance Sr.; Kelli
Ketlinski; Ron Peterson; Kelly Barbour; Larry Andrews; Roger Tebow; Gary
McAllister; Karri Townsend; Robert Parker; David Roberts; Carol Johnson; Lorrie
Somazzi; and Jerri Henry.
iii. Commenting: None
iv. Written testimony: Petition from residents of Woodbridge Subdivision with 227
signatures and a petition from residents of Greenhill Estates with 42 signatures
requesting denial of project.
v. Staff presenting application: Sonya Watters
vi. Other staff commenting on application: None
b. Key issue(s) of Public Testimony:
i. Proposed plan does not provide enough transition from R1 zoned lots to the north to the
proposed R-15 zone;
ii. Increased traffic in the area generated by the proposed development;
iii. Negative effect on established neighborhoods and infrastructure;
iv. Preference for office uses per the current plan.
c. Key Issues of Discussion by Council:
i. The proposed land use change from Office to MHDR;
ii. Location of the proposed project and detriment it will have on neighboring areas and
traffic.
d. Key Council Changes to Commission Recommendation
i. Council concurred with the Commission’s recommendation to deny the proposed
applications based on unwillingness to amend the FLUM designation from Office to
MHDR.
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 4
ii. Council requested the Mayor send a letter to ACHD requesting a traffic study of this
area to explore alternatives to address access and traffic issues long term in this area.
III. PROPOSED MOTION
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City
Council of File Number H-2016-0006, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of June 23,
2016, with the following modifications: (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 H-2016-0006, as presented during the hearing on June 23, 2016, for the
following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2016-0006 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date
here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.)
IV. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
A. Site Address/Location:
The site is located at 2662 E. Magic View Drive, in the northeast ¼ of Section 17, Township 3
North, Range 1 East. (Parcel #: R5443010050)
B. Owner(s):
Harless McMikle
12158 W. Silverking Court
Boise, ID 83709
C. Applicant:
Iron Mountain Real Estates
3681 N. Locust Grove Road, Ste. 100
Meridian, ID 83646
D. Representative:
Kent Brown, Kent Brown Planning
3161 E. Springwood Drive
Meridian, Idaho 83642
E. Applicant’s Statement/Justification: Please see applicant’s narrative for this information.
V. PROCESS FACTS
A. The subject application is for a comprehensive plan map amendment, annexation and zoning,
preliminary plat and a conditional use permit. A public hearing is required before the Planning &
Zoning Commission and City Council on these applications, consistent with Meridian City Code
Title 11, Chapter 5.
B. Newspaper notifications published on: February 15 and 29, 2016 (Commission); April 25 and
May 9, 2016 (City Council); June 6 and 20, 2016 (Commission)
C. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: February 5, 2016 (Commission); April 18,
2016 (City Council); May 26, 2016 (Commission)
D. Applicant posted notice on site(s) on: February 22 and March 7, 2016 (Commission); May 6,
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 5
2016 (City Council); June 13, 2016 (Commission)
VI. LAND USE
A. Existing Land Use(s) and Zoning: This site consists of rural residential property with an existing
home, zoned RUT in Ada County.
B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning:
1. North: Rural residential homes in Greenhill Estates, zoned R1 in Ada County
2. East: Rural residential property with a home, zoned RUT in Ada County
3. South: E. Magic View Drive and two rural residential properties, zoned RUT in Ada County
4. West: Single-family attached homes in the development process (Waverly Place), zoned R-8
C. History of Previous Actions: This property is included in the Amended Magic View Subdivision
plat as Lot 5.
D. Utilities:
1. Public Works:
a. Location of sewer: Sanitary sewer mains intended to provide service to the subject site
currently exists in E. Magic View Drive.
b. Location of water: Water mains intended to provide service to the subject site currently
exist in Magic View Drive.
c. Issues or concerns: None
E. Physical Features:
1. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: There are no waterways on this site.
2. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards that exist on this property.
3. Flood Plain: This site is not located in the Meridian Floodplain Overlay District.
VII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
LAND USE DESIGNATION (CURRENT): The subject property is currently designated Office on the
Future Land Use Map (FLUM) contained in the Comprehensive Plan. Office designated areas provide
opportunities for low-impact business areas, including offices, technology and resource centers;
ancillary commercial uses may be considered (particularly within research and development centers
or technological parks).
LAND USE DESIGNATION (PROPOSED): The applicant proposes to amend the FLUM to change the
land use designation on 5.28 acres of land from Office to Medium High Density Residential
(MHDR). Areas designated MHDR allow for the development of a mix of relatively dense residential
housing types including townhouses, condominiums and apartments. Residential gross densities
should range from 8 to 15 units per acre, with a target density of 12 units per acre. These are
relatively compact areas within the context of larger neighborhoods and are typically located around
or near mixed use commercial or employment areas to provide convenient access to services and jobs
for residents. Developments need to incorporate high quality architectural design and materials and
thoughtful site design to ensure quality of place and should also incorporate connectivity with
adjacent uses and area pathways, attractive landscaping and individual project identity.
TRANSPORTATION: The Master Street Map (MSM) depicts an industrial collector street along the
west boundary of this site extending from the north in Greenhill Estates subdivision (S. Hickory
Way). However, the ACHD is only Commission did not requiringe right-of-way (ROW) for Hickory
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 6
Way to be dedicated or the street extended as a local street with a reduced street section and sidewalk
only on the east side to allow for a larger buffer on the west side with development of this site; if the
property does not develop as proposed, the extension of Hickory will be evaluated on a case by case
basis with future development applications and may be required. ACHD will pay for the off-site
extension of Hickory from E. Autumn Way to the north boundary of this site. Regardless of the type
of use that develops on this site, Hickory will be required to be extended to Magic View as a
provision of development.
The proposed MHDR land use would generate fewer trips per unit than typical development within
the existing Office land use. The subject site is also within ¾ mile walking distance of an existing
inter-county bus route (Route 42), and walking and biking distance to regional employers developed
in the surrounding area.
DESIGN: The design of future structures on this site are required to comply with the design standards
listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual. The development
should incorporate high quality architectural design and materials consistent with the MHDR
designation. Vehicular and pedestrian connectivity will be provided with the extension of S. Hickory
Way along the west boundary of the site. Pedestrian and emergency vehicle access will be provided at
the northwest corner of the site via improvement of the Hickory Way right-of-way in Greenhill
Estates per the ACHD Commission’s decision.
The applicant submitted a development plan that depicts (19) 4-plexes and (1) tri-plex structure
containing a total of 79 76 dwelling units – all with 2 bedroom/2 bath units – at a gross density of
14.96 14.39 units/acre and a net density of 26.3 26+/- units/acre. The proposed density falls at the
high end but within the density range desired in MHDR designated areas. The site abuts rural
residential one acre lots to the north [designated Low Density Residential (LDR)], rural residential
properties to the east (designated Office) and south (designated Office and Commercial) and urban
density single-family attached homes in the development process to the west (designated MDR).
GOALS, OBJECTIVES, & ACTION ITEMS: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to
be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property (staff analysis in
italics):
“Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, medium-high 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.” (3.07.01E)
The proposed medium-high density residential development will contribute to the variety of
residential categories that currently exist in this area (i.e. low and medium density). Staff is
unaware of how “affordable” the units will be.
“Provide housing options close to employment and shopping centers.” (3.07.02D)
Because of its location in close proximity to St. Luke’s medical center and hospital, nearby
shopping centers (The Village and Crossroads at Eagle/Fairview), and major transportation
corridors (I-84 and SH-55/Eagle Road), this property is ideal for providing higher density
housing options.
“Locate high-density development, where possible, near open space corridors or other
permanent major open space and park facilities, Old Town, and near major access
thoroughfares.” (3.07.02N)
The proposed medium-high density development is located in close proximity to major access
thoroughfares (i.e. I-84 and SH-55/Eagle Road) within the City. It’s also within a couple
miles of Kleiner Park, a regional 60-acre City park northeast of this site.
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 7
“Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent
parcels.” (3.06.01F)
Although staff believes the proposed multi-family residential use of the property is generally
compatible with existing single-family residential uses, staff does recommend more of a
transition in density and housing types is provided along the north boundary of the site in
addition to the proposed landscape buffer as this area is designated to remain low density
residential. The proposed landscape buffer and solid fencing will assist in protecting the
rural lot to the east which is designated on the FLUM as Office.
Because the proposed use is residential, it should be generally compatible with abutting
residential low and medium density residential uses. The applicant proposes a 50-foot wide
landscape buffer to the three 1- acre lots to the north in Greenhill Estates with a 3-foot tall
berm and 6-foot tall vinyl fence. The residential lots to the west are single-family attached
units from which 4-plexes are a good transition. The 5 acre residential property to the east is
designated on the FLUM for Office uses. Although the abutting uses are both residential,
staff recommends a dense landscape buffer is provided along the east boundary of this site in
accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C.
Note: A petition was submitted by adjacent homeowners objecting to the proposed change
from Office to MHDR (see public record).
“Require all new and reconstructed parking lots to provide landscaping in internal islands and
along streets.” (2.01.04B)
Landscaping is proposed within planter islands in the parking areas on this site as shown on
the landscape plan attached in Exhibit A.4.
“Require common area in all subdivisions.” (3.07.02F)
Common area is proposed within the development consisting of a plaza, stormwater
detention facilities constructed in accord with UDC 11-3B-11, and passive open space in
accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B.
“Permit new development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time
of final approval and development is contiguous to the City.” (3.01.01F)
This property is contiguous to land that has already been annexed into the City. Urban
services can be provided to this property upon development.
“Consider the adopted COMPASS regional long-range transportation plan in all land-use
decisions.” (3.03.02G)
The proposed development supports a number of policies statements within the Communities
in Motion long-range transportation plan. Some of these include:
o Encourage development to occur around existing transit and encourage new,
transit‐ready development consistent with transit plans. (1.4.1)
o Encourage infill development and more compact growth near community-identified
activity centers. (2.3)
o Implement mixed‐use residential developments along established and planned transit
routes, especially where vacant land is available for infill development. (2.3.1)
o Encourage mixed-use neighborhoods, town centers, and other development types that
include a variety of housing options to meet the transportation and housing needs of all
socio-economic groups.(3.1)
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 8
o Build attractive high‐density development in locations that can be supported by transit
and are easily accessible to jobs, schools, services, parks, etc. (3.1.2)
“Amend the Unified Development Code and Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to
ensure a wide variety of housing types can be developed and properly zoned and land is
available” (3.07.01A)
The area in the vicinity of Eagle Road and the I-84/Eagle Road interchange is limited in
housing options. The proposed project would promote housing diversity and provide greater
opportunities for residents to live near their place of employment and shopping centers.
“Adopt land use designations that will allow for housing opportunities for all income levels.”
(3.07.01D)
Few of the major employment areas within the City are adequately supported with enough
housing options. Density near employment centers allow for workforce housing and promote
community resiliency, potentially reducing commute times and expenses, and allowing for
increased community and economic engagement.
“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 densities and rural
residential densities.” (3.05.02F)
The proposed 2450-foot wide landscaped buffer with trees, a 3-foot tall berm and a 6-foot tall
vinyl fence along the northern boundary of the site, in addition to the existing conifer and
deciduous trees on the adjacent rural lots to the north in Greenhill Estates, will assist in
screening the site; this area is designated on the FLUM as Low Density Residential. Staff
also recommends larger lots with less density are provided along the north property
boundary to provide more of a transition to existing lots.
A 15+’ wide landscaped buffer with a 6-foot tall vinyl fence is proposed along the east
boundary of the site adjacent to the 5-acre rural residential property; this property is
designed on the FLUM as Office. Staff recommends a dense landscape buffer is provided
along this boundary to buffer between urban and rural densities.
STATE REQUIRED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS
Idaho’s counties and cities are required by law, Idaho Code 67-6508, to prepare, implement, review,
and update a comprehensive plan which outlines goals and policies for land use. Fourteen elements
which must be addressed in the plan are listed in the Code. It is the detailed ordinances that then spell
out how these policies are to be achieved.
The order in which the following policies are presented implies no order or priority.
a. Property Rights
The purpose of this element is to ensure that the land use policies, restrictions, conditions, and
fees do not unconstitutionally violate private property rights, and establish a consistent review
process that enable the City to ensure that any proposed actions will not result in an
unconstitutional taking of private property without due process of law. Staff finds that the
requested Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map change would not unconstitutionally violate
private property rights. A neighborhood meeting was held on January 12, 2016 of which 8 people
attended (see sign-up sheet included in application).
b. Population
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 9
The City of Meridian must ensure that population growth is accommodated in an orderly pattern.
Residential and commercial developments must be easily served by City infrastructure and public
services. Necessary services are currently available to the subject site and should still be available
upon development of the site.
c. School Facilities and Transportation
The purpose of this element is to direct new residential development to areas with adequate
school facilities and student transportation. A letter was received from the West Ada School
District stating that the proposed development is predicted to generate approximately 78 school
aged children (spread over all grade levels) which West Ada School District claims will have a
significant impact on schools in the district most of which are already operating at or over
capacity.
d. Economic Development
Meridian’s economic base has been gradually shifting over the last 20 years from a farming-based
economy to a retail, service, and manufacturing-based economy. During this time, local policy
with regard to the types of lands needed to support the economic and employment needs of the
community has also changed. The Comprehensive Plan forecasts the need to continually adjust
the provision of commercial lands in order to gradually broaden economic opportunity throughout
the City.
The subject property is currently identified as appropriate for office uses. However, because the
site is located near major transit corridors (I-84 and Eagle Road/SH-55) and commercial and
employment uses and services, Staff finds the proposed MHDR designation is appropriate for this
site.
e. Land Use
The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map is a graphic representation of applicable policies
and goals of Meridian’s Comprehensive Plan. The Map has been prepared to identify suitable
areas for future residential, commercial, and industrial development. The Map is designed to be a
projection of growth patterns for the City. Therefore, the Map is to be used as a guide for
decisions regarding requests for land use changes.
f. Natural Resources
The purpose of this element is to promote conservation of areas of natural significance, where
appropriate. Staff is not aware of any natural resources that exist on this site that would be
impacted by the proposed development.
g. Hazardous Areas
The purpose of this element is to ensure regulation of development in hazardous areas, such as
floodplains, unstable slopes, etc. Staff is unaware of any hazardous areas on this site.
h. Public Services, Facilities, and Utilities
City water and sewer service is available to the subject property and will be extended upon
development by the developer.
i. Transportation
The purpose of this element is to promote an efficient and safe transportation system within the
City. The proposed development will increase traffic within this area of the City; however, the
nearby traffic corridors (i.e. Eagle Road/SH-55 and I-84) should provide efficient and safe
transportation to and from the development. The proposed development is also within walking
and biking distance of many services, employment centers, public transit and public parks.
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 10
j. Recreation
Recreation resources within Meridian include 19 developed City parks totaling approximately
240 acres. The City is in the process of developing new park facilities. The City also maintains
several pathways. This site is not formally designated for recreational purposes. However, the site
is located within a couple of miles of Kleiner Park, a 60-acre regional park (Fairview Ave./Eagle
Rd.) and Storey Park, a 16+/- acre city park (Franklin Rd/Main St.)
k. Special Areas or Sites
The subject amendment does not directly impact any lands designated for open space, natural
resources, or scenic areas, nor does the parcel contain any known significant or sensitive natural
resources.
l. Housing
The City of Meridian is charged with ensuring an adequate and attractive living environment
which meets the needs of City residents of different ages, family sizes, lifestyles, and income
levels. To accomplish this, the plan identifies areas appropriate for residential development and
areas not appropriate. This site is currently designated for office uses which do not allow
residential uses. The applicant proposes to change the land use designation on this property to
MHDR and develop multi-family residential uses on the site at a gross density of 14.96 14.39
units/acre. Staff believes the proposed change will provide housing opportunities near
employment, shopping and medical offices in close proximity to major transportation corridors
(i.e. I-84 and Eagle Road/SH-55).
m. Community Design
The purpose of this element is to ensure a pattern of planned growth resulting in orderly and
attractive developments within the City of Meridian. The intended use of this property is a
medium high-density residential development consisting of (19) 4-plexes and one tri-plex. To
ensure quality design, all future structures will be required to comply with the City’s design
standards contained in UDC 11-3A-19 and the City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual.
n. Agriculture
The subject amendment does not impact areas being used for farming activities although a large
portion of the property does appear to be used as pasture/grazing land.
o. Implementation
The City provides the necessary staff and facilities to administer and enforce the policies and
goals of the Comprehensive Plan. The City of Meridian Planning Division will administer the
Comprehensive Plan and its policies through the Unified Development Code. The Planning &
Zoning Commission is also authorized by the Council to review, approve and make
recommendations on proposals affecting the public’s interest in land use. The City Council is the
ultimate decision making authority on most land use applications.
p. National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors
This site is not designated for a high-voltage transmission line corridor.
q. Public Airport Facilities
This site is not designated for a public airport facility.
SUMMARY: Because this site is located near Eagle Road/SH-55 and I-84, major transportation
corridors in the City, and is in close proximity to shopping, employment and service uses, staff
believes the MHDR designation and proposed development is appropriate for this property with
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 11
staff’s recommended changes. Further, it may be appropriate for additional lands in Magic View
subdivision that are currently designated for Office uses that abut residential uses to be developed
with higher density residential uses to provide a transition between low density residential and
office/commercial uses.
If the change to the FLUM is approved, the proposed development will contribute to the mix of
housing types in this area at a density desired in MHDR designated areas. The development will also
provide a transition from existing single-family homes to future office and commercial uses to the
south and east and will provide housing options near commercial and employment areas located along
Eagle Road and in the general vicinity. Convenient access to services and jobs for residents would
also be provided.
VIII. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC)
A. Purpose Statement of Zoning District:
The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities
consistent with the Meridian comprehensive plan. 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 (UDC 11-2A-1). The medium high-density residential (R-
15) district allows a maximum gross density of 15 dwelling units per acre.
B. Schedule of Use: UDC Table 11-2A-2 lists the principal permitted (P), accessory (A), conditional
(C), and prohibited (-) uses in the proposed R-15 zoning district. Any use not explicitly listed is
prohibited. A multi-family development is listed as a conditional use in the R-15 district.
C. Dimensional Standards: Development of the site should be consistent with the dimensional
standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 district.
D. Landscaping: Landscaping is required within parking areas in accordance with the standards
listed in UDC 11-3B-8C and within common areas in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27F.
E. Off-Street Parking: Off-street parking is required in accord with UDC Table 11-3C-6 for multi-
family dwellings.
IX. ANALYSIS
Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation:
A. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment (CPAM):
The applicant proposes to amend the FLUM contained in the Comprehensive Plan to change the
land use designation on 5.28 acres of land from Office to MHDR.
For the reasons stated in Section VII above, Staff is in support of the applicant’s request.
B. Annexation & Zoning (AZ):
The applicant requests approval to annex & zone 5.28 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district
consistent with the proposed FLUM designation of MHDR.
The applicant has submitted a site plan, included in Exhibit A.4, that depicts (19) 4-plex and (1)
tri-plex structures with a total of 79 76 dwelling units. The proposed R-15 zoning district will
accommodate the proposed multi-family development with a gross density of 14.96 14.39
dwelling units per acre.
The proposed R-15 zoning provides a transition in zoning and uses from the west from Waverly
Place subdivision with attached single-family homes and R-8 zoning (and further to the west from
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 12
Woodbridge Subdivision with single-family detached homes and R-4 zoning) and from the north
from Greenhill Estates subdivision with single-family detached homes and R1 zoning in Ada
County (designated as Low Density Residential on the FLUM) to future office and commercial
uses to the east and south. The proposed R-15 zoning and use will provide a less intense transition
to the rural residential property to the east than a commercial office use as currently designated;
the parcel to the east is designated for Office uses on the FLUM.
The legal description submitted with the application, included in Exhibit C, shows the boundaries
of the property proposed to be annexed and zoned. The property is contiguous to land that has
been annexed into the City and is within the Area of City Impact boundary.
The City may require a development agreement (DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant
to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. In order to ensure the site develops as proposed and
recommended by staff with this application, staff recommends a DA is required as a provision of
annexation with the provisions included in Exhibit B.
C. Preliminary Plat (PP):
The applicant proposes to re-subdivide Lot 5, of the Amended Magic View Subdivision. A new
preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 20 19 building lots, 4 common area lots and 1 other lot
for access and parking on 5.28 acres of land in the proposed R-15 zoning district.
Existing Structures: There is an existing home and accessory structures on this site. All
structures are required to be removed prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat.
Dimensional Standards: Staff has reviewed the proposed plat for compliance with the
dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A.7 for the R-15 zoning district. All of the lots
comply with the minimum standards. Construction of buildings on the site should comply with
the setback and dimensional standards for the R-15 district.
Access: Access to streets is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-3. The
UDC (11-3A-3) requires access to be taken from a local street when available.
The proposed plat depicts two accesses for the development via E. Magic View Drive, at the
southern boundary of the site and at the west boundary via S. Hickory Way. Magic View is
designated as a local street west of S. Wells Street and as a collector street east of Wells where
the eastern access is proposed. Council approval of the east access via E. Magic View Drive is
required. ACHD staff is requesting Hickory be constructed as a local street section rather than a
collector; it’s scheduled before the ACHD Commission on March 30th. Driveways are proposed
for internal access to the proposed lots.
Stub Streets/Street Improvements: There is unopened right-of-way (ROW) that stubs to the site
at the northwest corner in Greenhill Estates Subdivision. The Master Street Map (MSM) depicts
an industrial collector street (S. Hickory Way) between E. Autumn Way and E. Magic View
Drive along the west boundary of this site.
However, ACHD is only requiring S. Hickory Way to be extended as a local street with a reduced
street section and sidewalk only on the east side to allow for a larger buffer on the west side.
ACHD plans to construct Hickory where the existing ROW is located between E. Autumn Way
and the north boundary of the site. Whether this site develops as proposed or with another use,
this street will be required to be extended with development.
At the ACHD Commission hearing on March 30, 2016, the Commission passed a motion to
approve the development without right-of-way (ROW) being dedicated for the extension of
Hickory Way on this property. The developer is required to construct the section of Hickory Way
from the site’s north property line to Autumn Way as a minimum 20 -foot wide pedestrian,
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 13
bicycle, and emergency access within 50 feet of ROW. Although the City would prefer to see
Hickory Way constructed to provide more interconnectivity and access via E. Franklin Road,
staff is not pursuing the extension in light of ACHD’s decision.
Traffic Impact Study (TIS): A TIS was not required by ACHD for this development.
Landscaping: Street buffer landscaping is required to be provided along collector streets as set
forth in UDC Table 11-2A-7 per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C; buffers are not required
along local streets in the R-15 zone. A 20-foot wide street buffer is required along E. Magic View
Drive, east of S. Wells Street and is required to be in a common lot maintained by the
homeowner’s association per UDC 11-3B-7C.2a; the plat should be revised accordingly as
proposed.
To assist in providing a transition between the proposed development and the rural residential
parcel to the east, staff recommends dense landscaping is provided along the east boundary of the
site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C, Landscape Buffers to Adjoining Uses.
The applicant proposes to construct a 3-foot tall berm along the north property line along with a
6-foot tall fence on top of the berm to assist in buffering the abutting rural lots in Greenhill
Estates. Because erecting a fence on top of the buffer will make the area on the back side of the
buffer hard if not impossible to maintain, staff recommends a retaining wall instead of a buffer if
desired to provide a higher visual buffer. However, staff is not requiring either.
Open Space: A minimum of 10% (or 0.53 of an acre) of the area of the site is required to consist
of qualified open space in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B in addition to that
required by UDC 11-4-3-27 for multi-family developments (see CUP analysis below).
A total of 1.08 1.13 (or 21.5%) acres of qualified open space is proposed consisting of a plaza,
stormwater detention facilities and active & passive open space consistent with UDC standards
(see Exhibit A.4). Stormwater detention facilities must comply with the standards listed in UDC
11-3B-11.
Site Amenities: A minimum of one qualified site amenity that meets the requirements listed in
UDC 11-3G-3C is required to be provided within this development in addition those required by
UDC 11-4-3-27 for multi-family developments (see CUP analysis below).
A tot lot and half basketball court fitness facility in the leasing office are proposed as recreation
amenities, one of which satisfies the amenity requirement in UDC 11-3G-3C.
Pathway: No multi-use pathways are designated on the Pathways Master Plan for this site.
Sidewalks are proposed adjacent to parking areas which provide access to neighboring units,
common areas and site amenities. Pathways are proposed through common areas from the
internal sidewalks out to the sidewalk along Magic View Drive.
Waterways: There are no open ditches on this site.
Fencing: A 6-foot tall solid vinyl fence is depicted on the landscape plan along the north, west
and east boundaries. All fencing should comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. No
fencing may be constructed between lots within the subdivision so that open space is
accessible by all residents within the subdivision. Further, CC&R’s should allow all
residents access to all common areas depicted in Exhibit A.4.
Sidewalks: Sidewalks are required to be provided with development in accord with the standards
listed in UDC 11-3A-17 along E. Magic View Drive; and S. Hickory Way attached sidewalks are
required along local streets and detached sidewalks are required along collector streets.
An attached sidewalk is depicted along the frontage of this site on Magic View; because Magic
View is designated as a collector street east of Wells Street, a detached sidewalk is required along
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 14
that portion of Magic View in accord with UDC standards. A sidewalk is only proposed along the
east side of Hickory and not on the west. ACHD has approved the sidewalk to only be provided
on the east side of the street in order to provide more of a buffer to the west. Staff agrees with the
intent of this proposal based on existing site conditions (i.e. the location of the existing right-of-
way (ROW) to the dictates the location of the street and the resulting buffer on the west);
however the UDC requires sidewalks on both sides of the street unless Council approves
otherwise. Note: Continuous sidewalks exist off-site to the east and west for access to Locust
Grove and Eagle Roads with the exception of across the frontage of the 5 acre rural parcel to the
east. Because there isn’t a nearby school necessitating pedestrian access for school children,
staff isn’t recommending the applicant construct an off-site sidewalk as an improvement with this
development although there appears to be adequate ROW for an attached sidewalk along Magic
View.
Utilities: Street lights are required to be installed along public streets adjacent to the
development in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. All
development is required to connect to the City water and sewer system unless otherwise approved
by the City Engineer in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Adequate fire protection shall be required in
accord with the appropriate fire district standards.
Pressurized Irrigation: An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided
for the development in accord with UDC 11-3A-15 as proposed and will be served by the Nampa
& Meridian Irrigation district.
Storm Drainage: An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord
with the City’s adopted standards, specifications, and ordinances, per UDC 11-3A-18. An Two
ACHD storm drainage ponds as well as a site storm drainage area is depicted on the landscape
plan within common area along E. Magic View Drive. In order for these areas to count toward the
qualified open space requirements, they must be constructed in accord with the standards listed in
UDC 11-3B-11.
D. Conditional Use Permit (CUP):
A CUP is requested for a multi-family development in the proposed R-15 zoning district as
required by UDC Table 11-2A-2.
The proposed multi-family development consists of 79 76 dwelling units consisting of within (19)
4-plex structures and (1) tri-plex – all containing 2 bedroom/2 bath units. The (2) 4-plexes and (1)
tri-plex at the north end of the development are proposed to be constructed as townhouse style
units with living space upstairs and downstairs for each unit for a transition to existing single-
family detached homes to the north.
As discussed above in Section VII, staff recommends more of a transition in lot sizes and density
along the northern property boundary is provided adjacent to the existing 1-acre lots in Greenhill
Estates. As proposed, 7 units on Lots 17 & 18 abut one unit to the north; and 4 units on Lot 19
abut one unit to the north. The number of units in this area should be reduced, the lot sizes
increased, and the open space area on Lot 16 shifted to the east to provide more of a transition in
density and lot sizes and distribution of units adjacent to rural lots. Additionally, staff
recommends the 4-plex and tri-plex structures on Lots 17-19 are changed to (3) duplex or single-
family attached structures with a maximum of 6 units.
Specific Use Standards: The specific use standards for multi-family developments listed in UDC
11-4-3-27 apply to development of this site as follows: (Staff’s comments in italics)
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 15
A minimum of 80 square feet (s.f.) of private useable open space is required to be
provided for each unit. All of the floor plans depict 80 s.f. of private usable open space
consisting of patios and balconies for each unit in accord with UDC standards.
Developments with 20 units or more shall provide a property management office, a
maintenance storage area, a central mailbox location with provisions for parcel mail that
provides safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access and a directory map of the development
at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. An on-site
property management office is proposed in the fitness building, a central mailbox
location and a directory and map of the development is depicted on the site plan. and
maintenance storage area is proposed within one of the units; the The site plan submitted
with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should depict the exact location of
such a maintenance storage area. A central mailbox location with provisions for parcel
mail and directory map of the development should also be depicted on the site plan.
At a minimum, 250 s.f. of common open space is required for each unit containing more
than 500 s.f. and up to 1,200 s.f. of living area. Because all of the proposed units (79 76)
contain between 500 and 1,200 square feet of living area, a minimum of 19,750 19,000
s.f. (or 0.45 0.44 of an acre) of common open space is required to be provided in addition
to that (0.53 of an acre) required by UDC 11-3G-3B. A total of 1.08 1.13 acres of
common open space is proposed consisting of active and passive common areas at least
400 square feet in area in accord with UDC standards. Based on the revisions to the site
plan recommended by staff, which results in a reduction of units to 74, a minimum of
18,500 square feet (0.42 of an acre) of common open space is required in addition to that
required (0.53 of an acre) by UDC 11-3G-3B for a total of 0.95 of an acre.
For multi-family developments with 75 units or more, 4 site amenities are required to be
provided with at least one from each category listed in UDC 11-4-3-27D. For
developments with more than 100 units, the decision making body shall require
additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development. Because 79
76 units are proposed, 4 amenities should be provided for the site with at least one from
each category (i.e. quality of life, open space, recreation) in addition to those (1)
required by UDC 11-3G-3C. The applicant proposes to provide a tot lot with a children’s
play structure and a half basketball court as a recreation amenitiesy; and a hardscaped
plaza area with seating, and (3) 50’x 100’ open grassy areas as an open space
amenityies; and a fitness facility as a quality of life amenity in accord with UDC
standards. Based on the proposed number of units, one additional amenity should be
provided from the quality of life category (i.e. clubhouse, fitness facilities, enclosed bike
storage, public art such as a statue) and one other amenity should be provide from any of
the categories. Based on the reduction in the number of units proposed by staff, only one
additional amenity is required from the quality of life category.
The architectural character of the structures shall comply with the standards listed in
UDC 11-4-3-27E. The conceptual elevations included in Exhibit A.4 incorporate
windows and offset walls for variety and articulation; main entrances are designed as a
focal point of the building and are covered for weather protection; rooflines have a
significant pitch; and building materials consist of horizontal lap siding, vertical board
and batten siding, stone veneer accents, and architectural shingles in accord with these
standards. Windows should be added on elevations that face the open play area and the
basketball court and any other areas used for children’s recreation to allow views of
these areas. All roof and wall mounted mechanical, electrical, communications, and
service equipment should be screened from public view from the adjacent streets and
properties. Administrative design review is required with the Certificate of Zoning
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 16
Compliance application(s) to ensure final design of structures comply with this
requirement and the City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual. See Building
Elevations section below for more information.
Landscaping is required to comply with UDC 11-4-3-27-F. All street facing elevations
shall have landscaping along their foundation as follows: the landscaped area shall be at
least 3-feet wide and have an evergreen shrub with a minimum mature height of 24
inches for every 3 linear feet of foundation. The remainder of the area shall be landscaped
with ground cover plans. The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning
Compliance should comply with this requirement for the sides of the structures that
face S. Hickory Way and E. Magic View Drive.
The development is required to record legally binding documents that state the
maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development,
including, but not limited to, structures, parking, common areas, and other development
features. The applicant should submit documentation of compliance with this
requirement with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application or prior to issuance
of Certificate of Occupancy at the latest.
Parking: For multi-family developments, off-street parking is required in accord with the
standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6. Based on (79 76) 2-bedroom units, a total of 158 152
parking spaces are required for the multi-family development – 79 76 of which are required to be
in a covered carport or garage. The site plan depicts a total of 158 171 parking spaces – 135 165
standard stalls, 4 and 6 handicap van-accessible stalls; 70 of which are covered carport spaces.
and 19 compact stalls, none of which appear to be covered on the site plan although the
applicant’s narrative states one carports space will be provided for each unit. Compact stalls are
only allowed to be provided above the number of required parking spaces.
For non-residential uses such as the property management office/fitness facility, a minimum of
one space is required to be provided for every 500 square feet of gross floor area in accord with
the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6B. Based on 984 1,050 square feet, a minimum of one
parking space is required to be provided for the leasing office/fitness building.
Based on the revisions to the site plan recommended by staff, w hich reduces the number of
units to 74, a total of 148 spaces would be required with 74 of those in a covered carport or
garage with one additional space for the office. Staff recommends the site plan is revised prior
to the Commission meeting to demonstrate how/if parking can be provided in accord with UDC
standards.
A minimum of one bicycle parking space for every 25 proposed vehicle spaces or portion thereof
is required to be provided on the site per UDC 11-3C-6G in accord with the standards listed in
UDC 11-3C-5C. Based on 148 170 vehicle spaces required to be provided, a minimum of 6 7
bicycle spaces are required. The applicant proposes landscape plan depicts (2) 7-space bicycle
racks in compliance with this requirement; however, staff is unable to locate them on the
plan. The plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should
depict the location of the bicycle racks.
Landscaping: Parking lot landscaping is required to be provided in accord with the standards
listed in UDC 11-3B-8C as proposed. A buffer to adjoining land uses is not required as the
existing and proposed uses are all residential in nature and the proposed zoning is R -15. Street
buffer landscaping is not required to be provided either as buffers are not required adjacent to
local streets in the R-15 zoning district; however, a 20-foot wide street buffer is required along
collector streets. Therefore, a 20-foot wide street buffer is required along the portion of E. Magic
View Drive that is east of Wells Street that is designated as a collector street.
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 17
A 2450-foot wide landscape buffer with trees is proposed along the northern boundary of the site
to the adjacent low density County subdivision (Greenhill Estates); and a 15+’ wide landscape
buffer is proposed adjacent to the rural 5 acre lot to the east. Staff recommends additional
landscaping is provided within the buffer area to the east in accord with the standards listed in
UDC 11-3B-9C, Landscape Buffers to Adjoining Uses as follows: the buffer area shall be
comprised of, but not limited to, a mix of evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, lawn, or other
vegetative groundcover. Fences, walls and berms may also be incorporated into the buffer area as
set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C.2c.
Mitigation: There are existing trees on this site. The applicant is required to comply with the
mitigation standards listed in UDC 11-3B-10C.5 for any existing trees 4-inch caliper or greater that
are removed from the site. Contact Elroy Huff, City Arborist (208-371-1755), prior to removal of
any existing trees from the site.
Building Elevations: The architectural character of the structures shall comply with the standards
listed in UDC 11-4-3-27E as noted above, and the City of Meridian Architectural Standards
Manual.
One Bbuilding elevations and floor plans were was submitted for the proposed multi-family 4-
plex structures within this development as shown in Exhibit A.5. Building materials consist of
horizontal and vertical lap siding, vertical board and batten siding, with stone veneer accents, and
architectural shingles. Three different Only one designs of residential 4-plex structures are is
proposed consisting of two (2) 4-plex and one (1) tri-plex townhouse style structures on the north
end of the site and seventeen (17) typical 4-plex structures on the remainder of the site. The
townhome style units are proposed along the north boundary to provide a transition to the single-
family homes to the north. As noted above, staff recommends duplex or attached homes are
provided instead for more of a transition and to reduce the massing of rooflines along the north
boundary. Prior to the City Council meeting, the applicant should submit conceptual
elevations for the recommended 2 unit structures. Staff recommends additional building
elevations are submitted prior to the City Council hearing that demonstrate variety in
design, color and/or form in accord with the Architectural Standards Manual.
Certificate of Zoning Compliance: The applicant is required to obtain approval of a Certificate
of Zoning Compliance application for establishment of the new use and to ensure all site
improvements comply with the provisions of the UDC and the conditions in this report prior to
construction, in accord with UDC 11-5B-1.
Design Review: The applicant is required to submit an application for Design Review concurrent
with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application in accord with UDC 11-5B-8. The site and
building design is required to be generally consistent with the elevations and site plan submitted
with this application and the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the City of Meridian
Architectural Standards Manual.
In summary, Staff recommends approval of the proposed CPAM, PP and CUP applications with
the conditions included in Exhibit B and approval of the proposed AZ application with a
development agreement that includes the provisions listed in Exhibit B of this report in accord
with the findings contained in Exhibit D.
X. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings/Other
1. Vicinity/Zoning Map
2. Existing & Proposed FLUM
EXHIBIT A
Pope’s Garden – CPAM, AZ, PP, CUP H-2016-0006 PAGE 18
3. Proposed Preliminary Plat (dated: 1/17/2016)
4. Proposed Landscape Plan (dated: 1/18/2016)
5. Proposed Building Elevations & Floor Plans
B. Agency & Department Comments/Conditions
C. Legal Description & Exhibit Map for Annexation & Zoning Boundary
D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
EXHIBIT A
Exhibit A Page 1
A. Drawings/Other
Exhibit A.1: Zoning Map
EXHIBIT A
- 2 -
Exhibit A.2: Existing and Proposed Future Land Use Map
EXHIBIT A
- 3 -
Exhibit A.3: Proposed Preliminary Plat (dated: 1/17/2016)
NOT APPROVED
EXHIBIT A
- 4 -
REVISED Preliminary Plat (dated: 6/10/16)
EXHIBIT A
- 5 -
Exhibit A.4: Proposed Landscape Plan (dated: 1/18/16) & Open Space Exhibit (dated: 1/17/16)
NOT APPROVED
EXHIBIT A
- 6 -
EXHIBIT A
- 7 -
REVISED Landscape Plan (dated: 1/18/16)
REVISED Open Space Exhibit (dated: 6/10/16)
EXHIBIT A
- 8 -
Exhibit A.5: Proposed Building Elevations & Floor Plans
EXHIBIT A
- 9 -
EXHIBIT A
- 10 -
TOWNHOME STYLE 3-PLEX
FRONT
REAR
EXHIBIT A
- 11 -
EXHIBIT A
- 12 -
4-PLEX
EXHIBIT A
- 13 -
EXHIBIT A
- 14 -
B. EXHIBIT B - AGENCY & DEPARTMENT COMMENTS/CONDITIONS
1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1.1.1 A Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior
to the annexation ordinance approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,
the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer.
Currently, a fee of $303.00 shall be paid by the applicant to the Planning Division prior to
commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the
Planning Division within six (6) months of the City Council granting annexation. The DA shall,
at minimum, incorporate the following provisions:
a. The existing home and associated outbuildings shall be removed from the site prior to
signature by the City Engineer on the final plat.
b. Future development of this site shall substantially comply with the preliminary plat and
site/landscape plan included in Exhibit A and the conditions contained herein.
c. The subject property shall be subdivided prior to issuance of any building permits for the site.
d. A maximum of 74 76 residential dwelling units shall be constructed within this development.
e. South Hickory Way shall be extended along the west boundary of this site The developer
shall construct the section of Hickory Way from the site’s north property line to Autumn Way
as a minimum 20-foot wide pedestrian, bicycle, and emergency access within 50 feet of right-
of-way with development in accord with ACHD requirements.
f. Future development shall comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the
City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual. Windows are required on all elevations
that face the open play area, the basketball court and any other areas used for children’s
recreation to allow views of these areas. All roof and wall mounted mechanical, electrical,
communications, and service equipment should be screened from public view from the
adjacent streets and properties.
g. Site amenities shall be provided for this development from each of the amenity categories as
follows: a tot lot with a children’s play structure as a recreation amenity; a hardscaped plaza
area with seating and (3) 50’x 100’ open grassy areas as open space amenities; and a fitness
facility as a quality of life amenity in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C and
11-4-3-27D.
1.1.2 The developer shall comply with the specific use standards for multi-family developments listed
in UDC 11-4-3-27, including but not limited to the following:
a. The applicant shall record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and
ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including, but not limited
to, structures, parking, common areas, and other development features, per UDC 11-4-3-27G.
A recorded copy shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy
for the first structure within the development.
1.1.3 The revised preliminary plat included in Exhibit A.3, dated 1/17/16 6/10/16, shall be revised as
follows: is approved as submitted.
a. The footprint of the 4-plex and tri-plex structures on Lots 17-19 shall be changed to (3)
duplex or single-family attached structures with a maximum of 6 units and the common area
on Lot 16 should be shifted to the east to provide more of a transition in density and
distribution of units.
b. A 20-foot wide street buffer is required along the portion of E. Magic View Drive that is
EXHIBIT A
- 15 -
classified as a collector street east E. Magic View Drive and is required to be in a common lot
maintained by the homeowner’s association in accord with UDC Table 11-2A-7 and 11-3B-
7C.2a.
1.1.4 The revised site/landscape plan included in Exhibit A.4, dated 1/18/16, shall be revised as
follows:
a. The footprint of the 4-plex and tri-plex structures on Lots 17-19 shall be changed to (3)
duplex or single-family attached structures with a maximum of 6 units and the common area
on Lot 16 should be shifted to the east to provide more of a transition in density and
distribution of units. Staff recommends the site plan is revised prior to the Commission
meeting to reflect this change.
b. Depict a central mailbox location with provisions for parcel mail that provides safe pedestrian
and/or vehicular access, per UDC 11-4-3-27B.7. (Shown on revised site plan)
c. Depict a directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those
entering the development, per UDC 11-4-3-27B.7. (Shown on revised site plan)
d. Depict the location of the property management office and maintenance storage area required
by UDC 11-4-3-27B.7. (Shown on revised site plan)
e. Depict landscaping along the foundation of all street facing elevations in accord with the
standards in UDC 11-4-3-27-F.
f. Depict one (1) additional site amenity from the “quality of life” category (see UDC 11-4-3-
27D) in addition to the tot lot with children’s play equipment, half basketball court, and
hardscaped plaza with seating already proposed. This amenity should be identified at or
prior to the Commission hearing.
g. Depict the location of two (2) 7-rack bicycle racks on the site as proposed. (Shown on revised
site plan)
h. Depict a minimum of 149 standard parking stalls on the site, which may include handicap
stalls; 74 of which shall be in a covered carport or garage in accord with UDC 11-3C-6B and
Table 11-3C-6. Compact stalls may be provided above and beyond the required number.
Staff recommends the site plan is revised prior to the Commission meeting to demonstrate
how/if parking can be provided in accord with UDC standards. (Revised site plan complies
with UDC standards)
i. Relocate the trash enclosure proposed at the southern boundary of the site as required by
Republic Services (see condition #5.1 below). (Shown on revised site plan)
j. Depict a minimum 5-foot wide sidewalk along the west side of S. Hickory Way per UDC 11-
3A-17, unless otherwise waived by Council.
k. Depict a 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along the portion of E. Magic View Drive that is
classified as a collector street east of S. Wells Street.
l. Provide landscaping along the east boundary of the site in accord with the standards listed in
UDC 11-3B-9C, Landscape Buffers to Adjoining Uses.
1.1.5 No fencing is allowed to be constructed between lots within the subdivision so that open space is
accessible by all residents within the subdivision.
1.1.6 CC&R’s for the development shall state that all residents have access to all common areas
depicted in the open space exhibit in Exhibit A.4.
EXHIBIT A
- 16 -
1.1.7 A minimum of 0.95 1.13 of an acres of qualified open space shall be provided within the
development in accord with UDC 11-3G-3B and 11-4-3-27C as shown on the approved landscape
plan in Exhibit A.4. Include detailed calculations along with an exhibit demonstrating compliance
with these standards.
1.1.8 Submit a detail of the proposed children’s play equipment for the tot lot and a detail of the seating
proposed in the plaza area with the final plat application.
1.1.9 Prior to the City Council meeting, the applicant shall submit conceptual elevations for the 2 unit
structures (duplex or attached single-family dwellings) along the north boundary of the site.
1.1.9 All fencing shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7.
1.1.10 All storm drainage areas included in the qualified open space calculations shall comply with the
standards listed in UDC 11-3B-11, Stormwater Integration.
1.1.11 Staff recommends additional building elevations are submitted prior to the City Council
hearing that demonstrate variety in design, color and/or form in accord with the
Architectural Standards Manual.
1.2 General Conditions of Approval
1.2.1 Comply with all bulk, use, and development standards of the applicable district listed in UDC
Chapter 2 District regulations.
1.2.2 Comply with the provisions for irrigation ditches, laterals, canals and/or drainage courses, as set
forth in UDC 11-3A-6.
1.2.3 Install lighting consistent with the provisions as set forth in UDC 11-3A-11.
1.2.4 Provide a pressurized irrigation system consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-
15, UDC 11-3B-6 and MCC 9-1-28.
1.2.5 Comply with the sidewalk standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17.
1.2.6 Install all utilities consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-21 and 11-3B-5J.
1.2.7 Construct all off-street parking areas consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-5I,
11-3B-8C, and Chapter 3 Article C.
1.2.8 Construct the required landscape buffers consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-
7C (streets).
1.2.9 Construct storm water integration facilities that meet the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-
11C.
1.2.10 Protect any existing trees on the subject property that are greater than four-inch caliper and/or
mitigate for the loss of such trees as set forth in UDC 11-3B-10.
1.2.11 Provide bicycle parking spaces as set forth in UDC 11-3C-6G consistent with the design
standards as set forth in UDC 11-3C-5C.
1.2.12 Comply with the outdoor service and equipment area standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-12.
1.2.13 Construct all required landscape areas used for storm water integration consistent with the
standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-11C.
1.2.14 Comply with the structure and site design standards, as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19 and the
guidelines set forth in the City of Meridian Standards Manual.
EXHIBIT A
- 17 -
1.2.15 Comply with all provisions of UDC 11-3A-3 with regard to maintaining the clear vision triangle.
1.2.16 Low pressure sodium lighting shall be prohibited as an exterior lighting source on the site.
1.2.17 All fencing constructed on the site shall comply with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7
and 11-3A-6B as applicable.
1.3 Ongoing Conditions of Approval
1.3.1 The conditional use may only be transferred or modified consistent with the provisions as set forth
in UDC 11-5B-6G. The applicant shall contact Planning Division staff regarding any proposed
modification and/or transfer of ownership.
1.3.2 The applicant and/or property owner shall have an ongoing obligation to prune all trees to a
minimum height of six feet above the ground or sidewalk surface to afford greater visibility of the
area.
1.4 Process Conditions of Approval
1.4.1 No signs are approved with this application. Prior to installing any signs on the property, the
applicant shall submit a sign permit application consistent with the standards in UDC Chapter 3
Article D and receive approval for such signs.
1.4.2 The conditional use approval shall be null and void if the applicant fails to 1) commence the use
within two years as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F1 or 2) gain approval of a time extension as set
forth in UDC 11-5B-6F4.
1.4.3 The applicant shall submit and obtain approval of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design
Review application from the Planning Division, prior to submittal of any building permit
application.
2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
2.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval
2.1.1 Applicant shall be responsible for the installation of a 10-inch water main in S. Hickory Way,
from E. Magic View Drive to the north subdivision boundary, however the portion of the main
from the western entrance to the development to the north subdivision boundary is for future
extension to the north. The developer will not be required to install this section of main at this
time, but instead shall deposit with the city 125% of the bid cost for the installation. The city will
then use these funds in the future when the extension is needed.
2.1.2 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan
requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy
of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272
2.2 General Conditions of Approval
2.2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works
Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide
service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover
from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in
conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications.
2.2.2 Per Meridian City Code (MCC), the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water
mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement
agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5.
EXHIBIT A
- 18 -
2.2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of
way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a
single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but
rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian’s standard forms. The
easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed
easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho
Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement (marked
EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2” x 11” map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for
review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO
NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be
submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval.
2.2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or
well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point
connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,
the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to
prior to receiving development plan approval.
2.2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat
by the City Engineer.
2.2.6 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.
Plans shall 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’t be obtained, alternate plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the Meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature.
2.2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per
City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at
(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic
purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources
Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190.
2.2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance
Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and
inspections (208)375-5211.
2.2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and 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.
2.2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted
fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc., prior to signature on the final plat.
2.2.11 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer and water, fencing, micro-
paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining
certificates of occupancy.
2.2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction
inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan
approval letter.
2.2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with
EXHIBIT A
- 19 -
the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act.
2.2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting
that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
2.2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office.
2.2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H.
2.2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building
pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material.
2.2.18 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 1-foot above.
2.2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or
drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district
or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in
accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate
of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project.
2.2.20 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per
the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved
prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project.
2.2.21 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount
of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water and reuse infrastructure
prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by
the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash
deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the
Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for
more information at 887-2211.
2.2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of
20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, water and reuse infrastructure for
duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the
owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash
deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the
Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for
more information at 887-2211.
3. POLICE DEPARTMENT
3.1 The Police Department has no comments on this application.
4. FIRE DEPARTMENT
4.1 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department in accordance
with International Fire Code Section (IFC) 508.5.4 as follows:
a. Fire hydrants shall have the 4 ½” outlet face the main street or parking lot drive aisle.
b. Fire hydrants shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it.
c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications.
d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits.
e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10’.
f. Fire hydrants shall be placed 18” above finished grade to the center of the 4 ½” outlets.
g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of IFC Section 509.5.
EXHIBIT A
- 20 -
h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing
buildings within 1,000 feet of the project.
4.2 In accordance with International Fire Code Section 503.2.5 and Appendix D, any roadway greater
than 150 feet in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved
turn around. Phasing of the project may require a temporary approved turn around on streets
greater than 150' in length with no outlet.
4.3 All entrances, internal roads, drive aisles, and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28’ inside and 48’
outside, per International Fire Code Section 503.2.4.
4.4 All common driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28’ inside and 48’ outside and
have a clear driving surface of 20’ in width capable of supporting an imposed weight of 75,000
GVW, per International Fire Code Section 503.2.
4.5 Provide signage (“No Parking Fire Lane”) for all fire lanes in accordance with International Fire
Code Sections 503.4 & D103.6.
4.6 Ensure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation as set forth
in International Fire Code Section 304.1.2.
4.7 Fire lanes, streets, and structures (including the canopy height of mature trees) shall have a
vertical clearance of 13’6 as set forth in International Fire Code Section 503.2.1.
4.8 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs, and access roads with an all-weather
surface are required to be installed before combustible construction material is brought onto the site,
as set forth in International Fire Code Section (IFC) 501.4 and Meridian amendment to IFC 10-4-2J.
4.9 Commercial and office occupancies will require a fire-flow consistent with International Fire
Code Appendix B to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix C.
4.10 Maintain a separation of 5’ from the building to the dumpster enclosure as set forth in International
Fire Code Section 304.3.3.
4.11 Provide a Knox box entry system for the complex prior to occupancy as set forth in International Fire
Code Section 506.
4.12 The first digit of the Apartment/Office Suite shall correspond to the floor level as set forth in
International Fire Code Section 505.1.
4.13 The applicant shall work with Public Works and Planning Department staff to provide an address
identification plan and a sign which meets the requirements of the City of Meridian sign ordinance
and is placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the
property, as set forth in International Fire Code Section 505.1.
4.14 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 as set forth in International Fire Code Section 503.1.1.
4.15 Buildings over 30’ in height are required to have access roads in accordance with the International
Fire Code Appendix D Section D105.
5. REPUBLIC SERVICES
5.1 Republic Services has requested the trash enclosure be relocated. Please coordinate with Bob
Olson, Republic Services (208-345-1265) and obtain approval of the trash enclosure location
prior to submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application.
EXHIBIT A
- 21 -
6. PARKS DEPARTMENT
6.1 The applicant is required to comply with the mitigation standards listed in UDC 11-3B-10C.5 for any
existing trees 4-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site. Contact Elroy Huff, City
Arborist (208-371-1755), prior to removal of any existing trees from the site.
7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
7.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval
7.1.1 Construct Magic View Drive as one-half of a 36-foot wide street section with curb, gutter,
minimum 12-feet of pavement on the other side, and either 7-foot wide attached sidewalk or 5-
foot wide detached sidewalk abutting the site.
7.1.2 Provide a permanent right-of-way easement for any public sidewalks placed outside of the
dedicated right-of-way. The easement shall encompass the entire area between the right-of-way
line and 2-feet behind the back edge of the sidewalk.
7.1.3 Construct the section of Hickory Way from the site’s north property line to Autumn Way as a
minimum 20-foot wide pedestrian, bicycle, and emergency access within 50-feet of right-of-way.
Enter into a license agreement for the use and maintenance of the unopened right-of-way.
7.1.4 Construct a 26-foot wide curb return driveway on Magic View Drive located 130-feet east of
Wells Street/ Magic View Drive intersection. Pave the driveway its full width, and at least 30-feet
into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway.
7.1.5 Construct a 26-foot wide driveway on Hickory Way located approximately 235-feet north of
Magic View Drive. Pave the driveway its full width, at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge
of pavement of the roadway.
7.1.6 Other than the access specifically approved with this application, direct lot access is prohibited to
Magic View Drive and should be noted on the final plat.
7.1.7 Payment of impacts fees are due prior to issuance of a building permit.
7.1.8 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval.
7.2 Standard Conditions of Approval
7.2.1 All proposed irrigation facilities shall be located outside of the ACHD right-of-way (including all
easements). Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the ACHD right-of-way
(including all easements).
7.2.2 Private Utilities including sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within the
ACHD right-of-way.
7.2.3 In accordance with District policy, 7203.3, the applicant may be required to update any existing
non-compliant pedestrian improvements abutting the site to meet current Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The applicant’s engineer should provide documentation of
ADA compliance to District Development Review staff for review.
7.2.4 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.
7.2.5 A license agreement and compliance with the District’s Tree Planter policy is required for all
landscaping proposed within ACHD right-of-way or easement areas.
EXHIBIT A
- 22 -
7.2.6 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be
borne by the developer.
7.2.7 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 (1-811-342-1585) 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.
7.2.8 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.
7.2.9 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the ACHD Policy Manual, ISPWC
Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD
Standards unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall
prepare and certify all improvement plans.
7.2.10 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable
requirements of ACHD prior to District approval for occupancy.
7.2.11 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 of ACHD. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of
any change from ACHD.
7.2.12 If the site plan or use should change in the future, ACHD Planning Review will review the site
plan and may require additional improvements to the transportation system at that time. Any
change in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the
applicant to comply with ACHD Policy and Standard Conditions of Approval in place at that time
unless a waiver/variance of the requirements or other legal relief is granted by the ACHD
Commission.
EXHIBIT A
- 23 -
Exhibit C: Legal Description & Exhibit Map for Annexation & Zoning Boundary
EXHIBIT A
- 24 -
EXHIBIT A
- 25 -
D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
1. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 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 amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan, the Council shall make the following findings:
a. The proposed amendment is consistent with the other elements of the Comprehensive
Plan.
The City Council finds that the proposed changes to the Future Land Use Map are not
consistent with elements of the Comprehensive Plan pertaining to transition in zoning and
uses and compatibility with adjacent land uses.
b. The proposed amendment provides an improved guide to future growth and
development of the city.
The City Council finds that the proposal to modify the Future Land Use Map to allow for
medium high-density residential uses is not be compatible with existing residential uses in
the nearby vicinity.
c. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the Goals, Objectives and
Policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
The City Council finds that the proposed amendment is not internally consistent with the
Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan pertaining to transition in zoning,
land use and compatibility with existing residential land uses.
d. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified Development Code.
The City Council finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified
Development Code in that an amendment to the MHDR FLUM designation is necessary in
order to rezone the property to R-15 to develop multi-family residential uses on the site.
e. The amendment will be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses.
The City Council finds the proposed amendment will not be compatible with adjacent
existing and future residential uses per the public testimony provided at the hearing.
f. The proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities.
The City Council finds that the proposed amendment would not burden existing and planned
service capabilities in this area of the city. Sewer and water services are available to be
extended to this site.
g. The proposed map amendment (as applicable) provides a logical juxtaposition of uses
that allows sufficient area to mitigate any anticipated impact associated with the
development of the area.
The City Council finds the proposed map amendment does not provide a logical
juxtaposition of uses and does not allow sufficient area to mitigate the impacts of the
proposed development.
h. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City of Meridian.
For the reasons stated above, the City Council finds that the proposed amendment is not in
the best interest of the City.
EXHIBIT A
- 26 -
2. ANNEXATION & ZONING 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, t he
Council shall make the following findings:
a. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive
Plan;
The City Council finds that the proposed map amendment to R-15 is not consistent with the
existing Office FLUM designation for this site or compatible with existing and future uses in
the area without a change to the FLUM of which the City Council does not approve.
Therefore, the City Council finds the amendment is not consistent with the applicable
provisions of the Comprehensive Plan (see section VII above for more information).
b. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
The City Council finds that the proposed map amendment to the R-15 zoning district is
consistent with the purpose statements of the residential districts as detailed in Section VIII
above. However, it is not consistent with the current Office designation on the FLUM for this
property.
c. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety,
and welfare;
Based on testimony provided at the public hearing, the City Council finds that the proposed
zoning amendment would be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
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 City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment would 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).
Based on testimony provided at the public hearing, the City Council finds the proposed
annexation of this property is not in the best interest of the City.
3. PRELIMINARY PLAT:
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 City Council finds that the proposed plat is not in substantial compliance with the
adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, transportation, and circulation.
b. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to
accommodate the proposed development;
The City Council finds that public services can be provided to the subject property with
development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service
providers.)
EXHIBIT A
- 27 -
c. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the
City’s capital improvement program;
Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the developer at
their own cost, the City Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of
capital improvement funds.
d. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed
development;
Based on comments from the public service providers (i.e., Police, Fire, ACHD, etc.) the
Council finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed
development. (See Exhibit B for more detail.)
e. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare;
and
The City Council is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated
with the development of this property. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis.
Based on public testimony, the City Council finds the development will be detrimental to the
public safety and general welfare due to increased traffic on internal subdivision streets.
4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each
proposed conditional use in terms of the following, and may approve a conditional use permit if
they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish:
a. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the
dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located.
The City Council finds that the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and
meet the dimensional and development regulations of the R-15 zoning district and the
specific use standards for multi-family developments.
b. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and
in accord with the requirements of this Title.
The City Council finds that the proposed multi-family residential use is not harmonious with
the FLUM designation of Office for this property or with existing residential uses.
c. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other
uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the
general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of
the same area.
The Commission finds that the general design, construction, operation and maintenance of
the multi-family use will not be compatible with existing residential uses in the vicinity and
with the existing and intended character of the area based on testimony provided a the public
hearing.
d. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will
not adversely affect other property in the vicinity.
The City Council finds approval of the proposed project will adversely affect other properties
in the vicinity based on testimony provided at the public hearing from nearby residents.
EXHIBIT A
- 28 -
e. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and
services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage
structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer.
The City Council finds that sanitary sewer, domestic water and irrigation can be made
available to the subject property. Please refer to comments prepared by the Public Works
Department, Fire Department, Police Department and other agencies.
f. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
The City Council finds that the applicant would be responsible to pay to extend the sanitary
sewer and water mains into the site and pay impact fees if the project were approved.
g. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general
welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
The City Council finds that the production of excessive traffic from the development will be
detrimental to residents in the area based on testimony provided at the public hearing from
area residents.
h. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural,
scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance.
The City Council finds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss
or damage of any natural feature(s) of major importance.