Loading...
CC - Commission Recommendations and Staff Report 4-28 Page 1 HEARING DATE: April 28, 2020 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Bill Parsons, Current Planning Supervisor 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0133 Lupine Cove LOCATION: 4000 N. McDermott Rd., in the NW ¼ of Section 33, Township 4N., Range 1W. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation of 7.09 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district and Preliminary Plat consisting of twenty-eight (28) buildable lots, seven (7) common lots and two (2) other lots on 7 acres of land in the proposed R-8 zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Description Details Page Acreage 7 acres Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residential (MDR) (3-8 units/acre) Existing Land Use Residential/agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family residential (SFR) development Current Zoning RUT in Ada County Proposed Zoning R-8 Lots (# and type; bldg/common) 28 buildable; 7 common & 2 other Phasing plan (# of phases) 1 Number of Residential Units (type of units) 27 new and 1 existing (SFR detached homes) Density (gross & net) 4 gross/7.46 net Open Space (acres, total [%] / buffer / qualified) Based on the applicant’s calculations 0.81 of an acre (11.7%) is being proposed. Page 2 B. Community Metrics Access (Arterial/Collectors/State Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) One (1) access proposed via N. McDermott Rd., a collector street Traffic Level of Service Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Access A stub street was required to the subject property from the Aegean Subdivision to the north, but the plan as submitted doesn’t contemplate extension with this development. A stub street is proposed at the south boundary. Existing Road Network None Amenities Children’s play equipment, gazebo and basketball court Physical Features (waterways, hazards, flood plain, hillside) The Five Mile Creek runs along the northern boundary of this site. The McFadden Drain runs along the east boundary. Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: August 28, 2019; 9 attendees History (previous approvals) None Description Details Page Ada County Highway District  Staff report (yes/no) Yes  Requires ACHD Commission Action (yes/no) No Page 3 Fire Service  Distance to Fire Station 3 miles from Fire Station #2  Fire Response Time 5 minutes under ideal conditions; can meet the response time goals  Resource Reliability 81% from Fire Station #2 – does meet the target goal of 80% or greater  Risk Identification Risk factor of 2 – current resources would not be adequate to supply service to this project (see comments in Section VIII.C)  Accessibility Project meets all required access, road widths and turnarounds  Special/resource needs An aerial device is not required; the closest truck company is 12 minutes travel time (under ideal conditions) – Fire Dept. can meet this need in the required timeframe if needed.  Water Supply Requires 1,000 gallons per minute for 1 hour; may be less if buildings are fully sprinklered  Other Resources NA Police Service  Distance to Police Station 8.5 miles  Police Response Time 5:30 minutes  Calls for Service 241 for Reporting District M7 19 (1/1/2019 – 12/31/2019)  Accessibility No issues with the proposed access  Specialty/resource needs This proposed development is on the edge of the city limits. The Meridian Police Department already serves this area with the Oaks Development and Jump Creek. As of now no additional resources are needed at this time. Once all the surrounding developments build out such as Gander Creek, Aegean Estates and Owyhee High School it will require future additional police resources in this geographic area.  Crimes 241 (1/1/2019 – 12/31/2019)  Crashes 3 (1/1/2019 – 12/31/2019)  Other The Meridian Police Department has no outstanding issues concerning this development application. All qualified open space provided in the development, to include all amenities, must be in an open area in order to allow for natural obser vation opportunities. Pathways and landscaping should not create hiding spots or blind spots that would promote criminal opportunities. The Meridian Police Department will support all Community Development Staff recommendations, Traffic Impact Studies from ITD and or ACHD to improve access, roadways, intersections, pathways and sidewalks before the project if fully completed. Wastewater  Distance to Sewer Services 0 feet  Sewer Shed North McDermott Trunkshed  Estimated Project Sewer ERU’s See application  WRRF Declining Balance 13.81 Page 4  Project Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan Yes  Impacts/Concerns The maximum slope of sewer mainlines is 5.0% due to limitations on our collections televising equipment. Please revise sewer grade between existing SSMH (within McDermott) and the upstream manhole, SSMH A1. Water  Distance to Water Services 0 feet  Pressure Zone 1  Estimated Project Water ERU’s See application  Water Quality Concerns Yes - this development results in a long deadend water main which may result in poor water quality. This deadend won't be eliminated until the Count parcels to the south are developed.  Project Consistent with Water Master Plan Yes  Impacts/Concerns The water mainline in McDermott Road must be extended to the southern property line extended. Water mainline sizes were not indicated on the plans, however the McDermott line must be 12-inch diameter and the Lupine Lane line as shall be 8-inch diameter. Page 5 C. Project Maps III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Penelope Constantikes, Riley Planning Services PO Box 405 Boise, ID 83701 B. Owner: Justin Fishburn Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Page 6 4000 N. McDermott Rd. Meridian, ID 83646 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date City Council Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 1/31/2020 4/10/2020 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 1/28/2020 4/8/2020 Public hearing notice sign posted on site 1/10/2020 4/17/2020 Nextdoor posting 1/28/2020 4/8/2020 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS (Comprehensive Plan) (Note: This project was submitted prior to the new Comprehensive Plan being adopted; therefore, this project is being evaluated under the previous Plan.) The Future Land Use Map (FLUM) contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Medium Density Residential (MDR). The purpose of the MDR designation is to allow small lots for residential purposes within City limits. Uses may include single-family homes at gross densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. As noted above, the submitted plat consists of 28 building lots on approximately 7 acres of land which is 4 dwelling units to the acre. Staff finds the proposed density is within the density parameters of the MDR land use designation. The following Comprehensive Plan Policies are applicable to this development:  “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 single-family detached homes will contribute to the variety of residential categories in the City; Staff is unaware how “affordable” the units will be.  “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) City services are available and will be extended by the developer to the proposed lots upon development of the site in accord with UDC 11-3A-21.  “Require useable open space be incorporated into new residential subdivision plats.” (3.07.02A) The proposed plat depicts a total of 0.81 of an acre (or 11.7%) of qualified open space, however much of the qualified open space is ether developed with imperious surface or ponds which lacks creativity in the design per the purpose statement in UDC 11-6A-1.  “Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening, transitional densities, and other best site design practices.” (3.07.01A) On the south boundary are rural county lots in excess of 4 acres. The applicant has not provided Page 7 any real transitional lot sizes along this boundary. The two (2) most impacted rural lots have a 5:1 and 3:1 lot ratio respectively.  “Require new urban density subdivision 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) Staff does not believe the transition proposed is adequate to the rural residential lots to the south.  “Review new development for appropriate opportunities to connect local roads and collectors to adjacent properties (stub streets).” (3.03.020) A stub street was approved at the north boundary of this property with the Aegean Subdivision preliminary plat which is required to be extended on this property with development. This street would provide local street access to this development in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. The proposed plat does not depict a stub street in the location of the stub street approved with the Aegean Subdivision.  “Incorporate creek corridors as an amenity in development design.” (5.09.01E) The City’s mapping depicts the Five Mile Creek on the north boundary and the McFadden Drain on the east boundary of the development. The submitted plans depicts minimal improvements or enhancements in these areas. Staff believes these areas should be improved as an amenity for the development.  “Develop and implement programs to encourage and promote tree health and preservation throughout the City, including along waterways and within proposed development.” (5.01.01E) The subject property contains many mature trees that will be retained or removed with development of the subdivision. The proposed landscape plan indicates that 1,958 caliper inches of mature trees exist on the site. Many of them will be removed for various reasons. The plan indicates of the 1,958 caliper inches, only 184 caliper inches will be mitigated and 134 caliper inches of existing will be retained on the site. If the plat were designed with less density, staff believes more of the existing mature trees could be preserved with the development. Staff believes the proposed development plan is consistent with the vision of the Comprehensive Plan in regards to land use and density. However, because the plat lacks transitional lots sizes on the south boundary and does not adequately address the transportation and open space elements of the Plan, Staff recommends denial. VI. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS A. ANNEXATION & ZONING The Applicant requests annexation of 7.09 acres of land, which includes land to the section line of N. McDermott Rd., with an R-8 zoning district consistent with the Medium Density Residential (MDR) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation in the Comprehensive Plan. The legal description and exhibit map for the area proposed to be annexed is included in Section VIII.A below. Proposed Use: The Applicant proposes to develop the site with 27 new single-family detached homes; the existing home is proposed to remain on a lot in the proposed subdivision. Single-family detached dwellings are listed as a principal permitted use in the R-8 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. Page 8 The proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property and is within the Area of City Impact Boundary. A legal description and exhibit map for the annexation area is included in Section VII.A. A development agreement is not being recommended as part of the annexation request because staff is recommending denial. B. PRELIMINARY PLAT The proposed preliminary plat consists of 28 buildable lots (include the lot where the existing home is proposed to remain), 7 common lots and 2 other lots on 7 acres of land in the proposed R-8 zoning district. Lots range in size from 4,500 to 12,674 square feet (s.f.). The plat is proposed to develop in one phase. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is one (1) existing home and some accessory structures on this site; the existing home is proposed to remain on Lot 13, Block 2 – all accessory structures that don’t comply with the setbacks of the district are required to be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. If the annexation and subdivision is approved, the existing residence should connect to City services and obtain a new address. Dimensional Standards: Compliance with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 district is required. The minimum property size in the R-8 district is 4,000 square feet with a minimum street frontage of 40 feet. All of the lots conform the dimensional standards in UDC Table 11-2A-6. Access (UDC 11-3A-3): One access is proposed via N. McDermott Rd., a collector street; local street access is not available to this property at this time, however a local stub street was planned from the Aegean Subdivision to the north. The applicant is not proposing the extension of the roadway due to the cost associated with crossing over the Five Mile Creek for the extension of the roadway. ACHD did not require half the cost of the crossing from the developer of the Aegean project. Therefore, the crossing half the cost would be absorbed by the subject developer with long term maintenance by ACHD. ACHD is requiring the extension of the road consistent with their policy. Staff believes these two projects should be connected with a public street connection. UDC 11-3A-3 requires access to local streets when available and the Comprehensive Plan requires interconnectivity and the extension of stub streets with development. The stub street to the north is not shown on the proposed plat which is not consistent with the UDC or the Plan. The local street being proposed (Lupine Lane) does stub at the south boundary. This street does not meet the naming convention of the City and “Lane” should be removed from the street name as this nomenclature is reserved for private streets, not public streets. In addition to the stub street not being extended, approximately half of the residential lots take access from common driveways. The long term maintenance of the common driveways will be the responsibility of the HOA. Further, Public Works Department is being less supportive of common driveways because of the separation requirements between the services. They also oppose the extension of any mains (water or sewer) in said driveways as currently proposed by the applicant. Per UDC 11-6A-1, one of the objectives of subdividing land is to promote the extension public streets to improve vehicular network. Staff finds excluding the extension of the stub street and the excessive number of common driveways does not meet this objective of the subdivision regulations in the UDC. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): There are no pathways depicted on the Pathways Master Plan for this property. The applicant is proposing a mircopath (Lot 7, Block 2) along the south boundary, preserving pedestrian connectivity in Page 9 the future. Common Lot 7, Block 2 must be developed in accord with UDC 11-3A-8 and UDC 11-3B- 12. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): A 5-foot wide detached sidewalk is required along the frontage of this site adjacent to N. McDermott Rd. The proposed plat depicts the 5-foot wide sidewalk outside of the required landscape buffer adjacent to McDermott Road. The applicant should relocate the sidewalk in the 35-foot wide landscape buffer to ensure compliance with the UDC. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): A 35-foot wide street buffer is required along N. McDermott Rd. (measured from back of curb), landscaped per the standards in UDC Table 11-3B-7C. The proposed landscape plan depicts the buffer in a common lot as required by the UDC and landscaped in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C. Landscaping is required in common open space areas in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G- 3E. Trees are proposed far exceeding UDC standards. Tree mitigation is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-10C. As noted above, the property contains many mature trees that are proposed to be removed or retained as part of the project (approximately 1,958 caliper inches). The applicant is proposing to retain 134 caliper inches in the form of existing trees and mitigate 184 caliper inches. The remaining 1,320 caliper inches are not being mitigated. UDC 11-3B-10C.5(a) requires 100% replacement of the caliper inches. The mitigation plan as proposed by the applicant depicts mitigation of 184 caliper inches which does not comply with UDC standards. The applicant should coordinate with the City Arborist on the mitigation plan to ensure the development can accommodate as many caliper inches as possible. Qualified Open Space & Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G): Because the area of the preliminary plat is above 7 acres in size, the qualified open space and site amenity standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3 apply. The applicant has provided an open space exhibit to show how she derived at the qualified open space for the development. In reviewing the submitted plan, some of the areas, the applicant is counting towards qualified open space does not meet UDC standards as follows: 1. Lot 7, Block 2 is not landscaped in accord with UDC 11-3B-12. 2. Lot 6, Block 1 is not improved with an amenity (parking lot does not count as an amenity) or meet the dimensional standards (50’ X 100’) to count towards qualified open space. 3. Lot 15, Block 2 is proposed to be developed with ACHD temporary turnaround. This area must be removed from the open space calculations. If this area is not dimensioned 50’ x 100’ with the removal of imperious surface, this area does not meet the City’s open space standards. 4. Lot 13, Block 1 depicts a pond greater than 25% of the common lot and does not meet UDC standards in accord with UDC 11-3G-3B.7 and 8. 5. Lot 1, Block 1 is not included in the open space calculation. If this area was enhanced and improved in accord with City and the irrigation standards and integrated in the subdivision design as envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant could include this lot in the open space calculations. Without this lot, staff finds that the qualified open space proposed with this project does not comply with the standards set forth in UDC 11-3G-3. Amenities for the development include a gazebo, tot lot and basketball court in excess of UDC standards. Page 10 Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7. The landscape plan submitted with the application details the fencing proposed for the project. Six-foot tall vinyl fencing is proposed along the west, south and a portion of the north boundary. The portion of 6-foot solid fencing along the north boundary is adjacent to a common lot and cannot be 6-foot tall solid fencing as proposed by the applicant. The fencing along the entire north boundary of the buildable lots, including Lot 14 and 15, Block 1, must be constructed as a 6-foot tall semi-privacy fence as proposed along the interior common lots within the subdivision. Six-foot tall semi-privacy fencing is proposed along the internal common lots and the northern boundary of Lots 16-22, Block 1 in accord with UDC standards. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is proposed in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. See Section VIII.B below for Public Works comments/conditions. Pressurized Irrigation System (UDC 11-3A-15): An underground pressurized irrigation (PI) system is required to be provided for each lot within the development as set forth as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. If a PI pump station is required on the developed property, such station shall be on a lot solely dedicated to that pump station and shall be owned by the entity that owns and maintains the PI system as set forth in UDC 11-3B-6E. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. Storm drainage will be mitigated with private drainage ponds at the end of the proposed common driveways and public street drainage is proposed to accommodate in common Lots 2 and 13, Block 1. Because ACHD drainage ponds are proposed within common lots, the proposed ponds must be designed in accord with UDC 11-3B-11 or removed from the open space calculations. Building Elevations: Conceptual building elevation photos were submitted for the proposed homes, as shown in Section VII.E. Building materials are proposed to consist of a mix of stucco, wood, and stone wainscot. Field and trim materials are distinguished by color and texture; window and door openings are accentuated with trim. Because the rear and/or side of 2-story structures on lots that abut N. McDermott Rd. will be highly visible, Staff recommends those elevations incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g. projections, recesses, step-backs, pop-outs), bays, banding, porches, balconies, material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends denial of the proposed Annexation & Zoning and Preliminary Plat in accord with the Findings in Section IX. B. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on March 19, 2020. At the public hearing, the Commission voted to recommend denial of the subject AZ and PP requests. Page 11 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Penelope Constantikes b. In opposition: None c. Commenting: Gennie Fishburn d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s) of discussion by Commission: a. b. c. d. Extension of the stub street from the Aegean development to the north. Compliance with UDC open space standards in 11-3G. Excessive use of common driveways. Redesign the the plat with less density and more open space. 3. Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation: a. None 4. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council: a. After the Commssion hearing, the applicant redesigned the plat based on the discussions that occurred with the Commission’s deliberations on the application. With the Commission recommendation of denial, staff has not analyzed the revised plat based on their recommendation. In the applicant’s request for continuance last week, they are requesting the Council remand this application back to P/Z to try and gain a favorable recommendation from the Commission on the new plat. Staff recommends that the Council act on the merits of the application as originally submitted. Page 12 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation & Zoning Legal Description and Exhibit Map Page 13 Page 14 B. Preliminary Plat (date: 11/7/2019) Page 15 C. Landscape Plan (date: 10/16/2019) Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 D. Qualified Open Space Exhibit (date: 11/7/2019) – NOT APPROVED Page 19 E. Conceptual Building Elevation Photos Page 20 Page 21 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS (NO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DUE TO STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL) A. PLANNING DIVISION B. PUBLIC WORKS C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=181295&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=182011&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity E. NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT (NMID) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=182431&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity F. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT (CDHD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=181358&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity G. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (DEQ) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=181368&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity&cr =1 H. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT (WASD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=183096&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity I. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT (ACHD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=183480&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity X. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone (UDC 11-5B-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission, the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Commission finds the proposed development is consistent with the vision of the Comprehensive Plan in regards to land use and density however, the plat lacks transitional lots sizes on the south boundary and does not adequately address the transportation and open space elements of the Plan in order to support the proposed plan. (See section V. above for more information.) 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment and development complies with the purpose statements of the residential districts in that it will contribute to the range of housing opportunities for the community consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Page 22 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed residential uses should be compatible with adjacent existing and future residential uses in the area, if transitional lot sizes are provided along the south boundary and more open space is preserved with the development. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including, but not limited to, school districts; and The Commission finds City services are available to be provided to this development. 5. The annexation (as applicable) is in the best interest of city. The Commission finds the proposed annexation is not in the best interest of the City as the proposed development is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and UDC standards. B. Preliminary Plat (UDC 11-6B-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision making body shall make the following findings: (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; (Ord. 08-1372, 7-8-2008, eff. 7-8-2008) The Commission finds the proposed plat is not in conformance with the UDC because the proposed development does not show a stub street to the north boundary in alignment with the Aegean Subdivision, incorporates an excessive amount of common driveways, lacks adequate transition from the rural subdivision to the south and does not comply with the landscape and open space standards. (see section VI. above for more information). 2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The Commission finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; The Commission finds the proposed plat is in substantial conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City’s CIP. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The Commission finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, however the development would better serve the public interest if the plan increased the lots sizes along the southern boundary, eliminated the excessive use of common driveways, enhanced the surrounding waterways on the north and east boundary and provided more useable open space. Page 23 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The Commission finds there are natural features (Five Mile Creek and McFadden Drain) that need to be preserved and enhanced as part of the development.