Loading...
CC - Commission Staff Report Recommendation to Council 11-17 STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 11/17/2020 Legend �o DATE: Project Location TO: Mayor&City Council FROM: Joe Dodson,Associate Planner � ' � � � 208-884-5533 � � ,� FFffT �� Bruce Freckleton,Development Services Manager ®� 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2020-0006 ; r Teakwood Place Subdivision ® �® LOCATION: The site is located at 1835 E. Victory �QJ ® � Road,approximately 1/4 mile east of S. _ Locust Grove Road,in the NW 1/4 of the EfEl F--] J®H NW 1/4 of Section 29,Township 3N., Range 1 E. L PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation&zoning of 7.35 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district and preliminary plat consisting of 2-9 22 building lots and 4 common lots,by Hesscomm Corp. IL SUMMARY OF REPORT NOTE: This protect was continued by Planning and Zoning Commission on May 7, 2020 to the date of June 4, 2020. Prior to that meeting, the Applicant requested a continuance to a future date to have more time to address issues presented at the Commission meeting and by Staff&qff ha"reeei d This project was heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission on 711612020 and the Commission recommended denial of the project to the Meridian City Council. Following this recommendation, the Applicant made a request to the City Council to be remanded back to P&Z with a revised plat and open space pursuant to comments made within this stafteport and by Commissioners. The CitX Council agreed with this request and remanded the project back to P&Z. The main changes made bX the Applicant following the recommendation of denial are related to the open space con i uration and the removal of the Victory Road access for the existing home. Both topics are discussed and analyzed below in subsequent sections. A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 7.35 acres Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residential Page 1 Description Details Page Existing Land Use(s) Residential and Agricultural. Proposed Land Use(s) Residential Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 3-2 26 total lots—24 22 single-family residential;4 common lots. Phasing Plan(#of phases) Proposed as twe"�one(1)phase. Number of Residential Units(type 2422 single-family units(including existingh ome). of units) Density(gross&net) Gross—3-.95 2.99 du/ac.;Net—5.64 4.22 du/ac. Open Space(acres,total 52,737 39,988 45,560 square feet,or 4-.24 9.92 1.05 acres Further [%]/buffer/qualified) (42,n� o34cz95 37,842 square feet qualified open space; analysis pg. approximately'3.�09 11.82%) 7&8. Amenities ! amenity proposed ,0'..ulti , pathway N . it ,;s shown on the submitted^'^^s Water feature with seating area. Physical Features(waterways, Eightmile Creek runs along the northeast corner of the hazards,flood plain,hillside) property. Neighborhood meeting date;#of Oct. 30,2019—6 attendees. attendees: History(previous approvals) N/A B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD Commission No Action es/no Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via extension of a local street from the Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) west(E.Fathom St.). The existing home is requesting to maintain its access onto E.Victory Road,an arterial.An emergency access is proposed on the western boundary from E.Fathom St.to E.Victory Rd. Traffic Level of Service "F" Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross This subdivision's main access is from an existing stub Access street(E.Fathom St.)and is proposing a new stub street to the east for future development and future connectivity. Existing Road Network No - Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ None Buffers Proposed Road Improvements None Distance to nearest City Park(+ 1.6 miles to Renaissance Park(6.5 acres) size Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 1.3 miles from Fire Station#4 • Fire Response Time 3:00 minutes under ideal conditions(this meets Meridian's Fire response goal time of 5 minutes). • Resource Reliability Fire Station#4 reliability is 78%. • Risk Identification F Risk Factor 2—residential with hazards(open waterway) • Accessibility Proposed project meets all required access,road width,and turnaround requirements. Police Service See Agency Comments(Section VIII.D). Page 2 Description Details Page West Ada School District • Distance(elem,ms,hs) 0.6 miles to Siena Elementary;3.2 miles to Victory Middle School;2.3 miles to Mountain View High School. • Capacity of Schools Siena Elementary—800;Victory Middle— 1000;Mountain View—2268. • #of Students Enrolled Siena Elementary—970;Victory Middle— 1085;Mountain View—2237. Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services Directly adjacent • Sewer Shed South Black Cat Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 13.88 • Project Consistent with WW YES Master Plan/Facility Plan Water • Distance to Water Services Directly Adjacent • Pressure Zone 4 • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality Concerns None • Project Consistent with Water YES Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns None COMPASS(Communities in No comments submitted. Motion 2040 2.0) C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map .Aerial Map Legend 0 Legend Project Location Project Location Medium]Density LResibential Low�Density Resid n aI ® MLI-N .Zoning Map .Planned Development Map Page 3 Legend �� �� 0 Legend Project Location aProject Location 4;Lg-� � R-8 R-4 ;_, City Limits Planned Parcels RUT� R18 a , H VO ® J RUT ® __ I S ®- � ® Sfj� a MIE a RUT � EU III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Bruce Hessing,Hesscomm Corp. —6700 Linder Rd.,Meridian,ID 83646 B. Owner: Charles&Vickie Richardson— 1835 E.Victory Rd.,Meridian,ID 83646 C. Representative: Leavitt&Associates Engineers,Inc.— 1324 1st St. South,Nampa ID, 83651 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification ^/1�20 9/25/2020 10/30/2020 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet ^�'^"^�/2020 9/23/2020 10/30/2020 Site Posting 4/17/20?0 10/1/2020 11/4/2020 Nextdoor posting ^/t^�DiO 9/23/2020 10/30/2020 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(htt�s://www.meridiancity.org/compplan) Medium Density Residential—This designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as a park, school,or land dedicated for public services. The annexation area is near existing public services and not on the periphery of corporate city limits; existing City of Meridian zoning and development lay to its west, north, and south. The proposed land use of single family residential is consistent with the recommended uses in the FL UM designation. The proposed project has a gross density of 3-.93 2.99 du/ac and a net density Page 4 of 3.-64-4.22 du/ac, meeting the required density range listed above once the allowed rounding occurs. Therefore, Staff finds the proposed preliminary plat and requested R-8 zoning district to be generally consistent with the Future Land Use Map designation of Medium Density Residential. The City may require a development agreement(DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. In order to ensure the site develops as proposed with this application, staff recommends a DA as a provision of annexation with the provisions included in Section VIII.Al. The DA is required to be signed by the property owner(s)/developer and returned to the City within 6 months of the Council granting the annexation for approval by City Council and subsequent recordation. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https://www.meridiancity.orglcompplan): (Staff analysis is in italics after the cited policy) "With new subdivision plats,require the design and construction of pathways connections, easy pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, safe routes to schools, and the incorporation of usable open space with quality amenities"(2.02.01A). This new subdivision and plat offers additional pedestrian connection via attached sidewalks on the proposed local street extensions, and open space, and a new segment of multi use 19aMway that will help eanneet this 19rejeet to adjaeen sons but does not offer any new pathway connections at this time. Instead, the Applicant is now proposing an easement for a future multi-use pathway section. The Applicant is proposing open space that is better connected and usable as now proposed. This open space is also proposed with a water feature and seating which is seen as a quality amenity for this development. With all of the sidewalk connections proposed with this small development, Staff' finds that there will be adequate access to schools and parks for those who choose not to drive. is the /n� �/�, ,,,1,..;+7 this ,-. •,- ".�-r LDG 1 3G 3 standar , cl`l--epder f£N--an-epen&paee-let to be eensidered a 'be at least 20;000:9quarefeet above the required minimum - °T seedon and the o pen spaee is not large enough to quahfy as an antenily is no loiwr behm proposed and no other antenkr show on the rev&-dplans,StWis reeommendMg off additional a yyyyn!am, d on one of the eommen open spaee lots to meet UDC Stwis in the new Genip- rehensive Plan. "Establish and maintain levels of service for public facilities and services,including water, sewer, police,transportation, schools,fire, and parks" (3.02.01G).All public utilities are readily available to this project site due to the existing subdivision to the west. ACHD notes the excessive traffic that already exists on E. Victory Rd and nearby intersections but has also noted in their staff report(see Section HII.H) the low number of estimated vehicle trips from this subdivision will not require additional mitigation or road improvements. West Ada School District has offered comments on this project regarding school enrollment are Hetyet ever eqpae4y aeeerefing to their eFi�ginal letter and West Ada estimates 22 school age children will reside in this development. However, Staff has received letters from West Ada on more recent projects and Sienna Elementary and Victory Middle are now shown as overcapacity. Staff is aware of the overall overcrowding issues facing nearby public schools, however, the low number of school age children expected in this development should be easily absorbed in the district. School enrollment numbers of the closest schools to this development are listed above in Page 5 the Community Metrics section of this staff report.-and a table outlining recent historic and macro level data re ae rding school enrollment is part of the Agency Comments of the public record(see Section VIII.J). "Encourage infill development"(3.03.01E). Teakwood Place Subdivision is on the cusp of being an infill development by definition. Staff finds that the already annexed and developed properties residing to the north, west, and south make development of this property a logical and orderly progression of City limits. In addition, all public utilities and services are readily available for this subdivision including planned road improvements at the nearby intersection of E. Victory and S. Locust Grove. "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). The site design of this project proposes density that ma-tehes is lower than the subdivision to the west and is iust above the at the minimum density allowed in the underlying FL UM designation 0 Medium Density Residential. The subdivision to the south is of lower density zoning(R-4) but the Applicant has proposed lots with a majority of lot sizes that are more in line with the R-4 zoning district. the 6euth. Ovefflik, &afffiHdis theske design te meet the MteHt ef this eemprehensive plan pe4et- AHl Therefore, the revised plat offers a transition from existing developments of higher density to this subdivision and other county zoned parcels. The Applicant has also changed the location of the proposed open space and is now in the southeast corner of the site and abuts the backyards of some of the existing homes in Tuscany Lakes. "Reduce the number of existing access points onto arterial streets by using methods such as cross- access agreements, access management, and frontage/backage roads, and promoting local and collector street connectivity"(6.01.02B).Access into this subdivision is through an existing and developed subdivision (Tradewinds Sub)via an extension of a local street(E. Fathom Street. This will mean one less additional access point efr to E. Victory Road, alld a r,.htst r_,.ev-e Read, an arterial streets. 9. V4e y-Therefore, the proposed plat is using existing street networks for interconnectivity and meeting this policy by reducing access points to arterial streets. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is an existing home on this parcel that is proposed to remain u.-Ail Phase 2 deve ap and reside on its own building lot. In addition to the home,a number of accessory structures and two large barns currently exist. The largest barn that resides towards the southern part of the parcel will be removed upon development of Phase and the pole barn closest to the existing home will remain until Phase 2 deve ,,..me . All structures can be seen on the submitted plat and landscape plans. Any structures that remain on the property must comply with the dimensional standards of the R-8 zone or be removed. The existing access to Victory Road is analyzed below in Section V.F. D. Proposed Use Analysis: Detached single-family residential homes with local streets within the development and a new stub street to the east are being proposed. Single-family detached dwellings are listed as a principally permitted use in the R-8 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. Page 6 This subdivision is proposed to be developed in two (2)phases one phase. The fist prep phase will provide a4l pikhe streets and 24 of the 28 pfopesed biAding lots. The e*isfifig hem pr-epesed te r-emain un4i!Phase 2 develepmen4 a-ad then an additional 4 biiildifigs lots will b-e According to the revised plat,Tthe minimum property size in this development is approximately 4-,9094-,784 4,940 square feet with an average buildable lot size of approximately 7-,342- 10,318 square feet. In addition, each buildable lot appears to meet the minimum street frontage requirements,including-by providing no less than 30 feet of frontage for those lots that front on a curve or cul-de-sac. Therefore, according to the preliminary plat,all lots appear to meet the required UDC dimensional standards for the requested R-8 zoning district. Staff is not sWerdw 4the phasing p n aspmpesed-.Staff reeontmends the development eans"eted in one phase and the applieant antend the plat to inelmde the ex4ssing resideftee on E. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): All proposed lots and public streets appear to meet a14-UDC dimensional standards per the submitted preliminary plat for the requested R-8 zoning district. This includes property sizes, required street frontages, and road widths. In addition,all subdivision developments are also required to comply with Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards (UDC 11-6C-3)—the proposes revised preliminary plat adheres to the standards therein. F. Access(UDC 11-3A-3): Access is proposed via extension of a local street from the west(E. Fathom St.). The existing home is requesting te maintain its aeeess efAe E.Victer-y Dead, an at4efia4now proposin tg o take access from this local street. In addition, an emergency access is proposed on the northwestern boundary connecting from E.Victory Rd. south to E.Fathom St. However, in the reeeived sta*reigert#aniA CAP, they have--nen-ded I . aigigreve a maintgining-this aeees-s and s-W the low number of vehiele trips.fi;em one heme. &aff does not rt.��r. .U,yes that ifthe e ; dne aeeess doe of elos,,,.t to tine fthis a,,ve .,,w. . With the original submittal, the current home owners (that are to remain on the property ollowin development)evelopment) requested to maintain their access to E. Victory Road. This request was not supported by Staff or the Planning&Zoning Commission and was a factor in the Commission's recommendation of denial to the City Council. Following this recommendation, the homeowners agreed to close their access to Victory and instead take access from E. Fathom Street as recommended by Staff. The plat has been revised to show this internal access via a 12- foot wide driveway connection. Staff has had conversations with the Meridian Fire Department and there is a desire for this paved access to be slily wider to accommodate emergency response vehicles if a need were ever to arise. Therefore, Staff is recommending a condition of approval to amend the plat to show at least a 1 S-foot wide driveway connection. The Applicant has also proposed an emergency-only access en4,d4vew6ty that connects E. Fathom St. to E. Victory Road. E. Fathom St. is the only access into this development and therefore, Staff is recommending a DA provision that the emergency access Page 7 be constructed prior to any issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, this is commensurate with the condition of approval from the Meridian Fire Department(see Section VIII.A1). Access for this subdivision must go through the existing local street stub to its west, E. Fathom Street, because it is a lesser classified street than Victory, an arterial street. This is consistent with both Meridian comprehensive plan policies (as outlined above), UDC 11-3A-3, and with ACHD district policy.An additional factor of note is that Victory Road is already failing as a S- lane arterial street and any additional direct traffic e would exacerbate the problem. The proposed development is proiected to generate minimal peak hour vehicle trips which shows that there will be minimal impact to Locust Grove, the arterial that Tradewinds Subdivision connects to and subsequently where Teakwood Place would get to an arterial street. Public input has depicted Locust Grove as a busy street during peak hours do to the roadways failing north and east of the Locust Grove and Victory intersection. This intersection is in the ACHD Integrated Five Year Work Plan to be converted to a roundabout and Locust Grove will be widened to five() lanes. These two changes will have a cascading effect and increase tra fc flows south of this intersection including the point ofingress/egress for these two subdivisions.All of these factors matter in Staffsupporting the access for Teakwood via E. Fathom Street and out to Locust Grove. Pedestrian access in the development will be via extensions of 5-foot attached sidewalks on all local streets. The emergency access road will also function as a pathway and connects the sidewalks on the proposed extension of E. Fathom St. to E. Victory Road. Sta*49es.,Not plaee m eh vahteTntT prepose Staff reee N ends If the applicant constructs the required frontage improvements along Victory Rd. and prohibits vehicular access to said roadway in accord with UDC 11-3A-3, this pedestrian connection is a valuable addition to the development. In addition, because the Applicant is adding five feet of landscaping on each side of the 20 foot wide emergency access, the area of this common lot counts towards qualified open space. G. Parking(UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11- 3C-6 for single-family detached dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. Future development should comply with these standards.No parking plan was submitted with the application. One of the revisions made by the applicant is changing the type of cul-de-sac proposed in the south end of the development. The new plan shows a larger cul-de-sac that has a 57 foot radius. The larger radius turnaround allows an additional 9-feet ofpavement in the cul-de-sac which then allows on street parkingThe perimeter of the cul-de-sac that can be parked on (perimeter minus driveway curb cuts) is now approximately 200 feet which can accommodate approximately 8 on street parking spaces. The true amount of cars that could be parked within the cul-de-sac is wholly dependent on the size of the vehicles being parked. Therefore, Staffs estimates are based on general calculations and include the UDC noted parallel parking space dimension of 23 feet long. Some vehicles may take up more or less than this value. H. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway easement is being proposed along Eightmile Creek at the northeast boundary of the subdivision instead of building the actual pathway at this time. its Page 8 aeeer-d with the Mei4diaa Pa4hways Master-Plan; its developmefft is pr-epesed w4h Phase 2 a the existing home will be r-efneved in the same phase. The Applicant is proposing this as an easement that is partially located within the irrigation district easement for future development by the City. The logic behind this is two-fold: 1)to minimize the impact to the homeowner who is remainingon n the property since the pathway would encroach into their back porch if it were entirely on this subject prppeM and,perhaps more imperative to city code; 2)to not construct a pathway that would lead to nowhere for the foreseeable future since adjacent county_property owners have shown little intention on redeveloping in the near future. The .,ppli a fft is pr-epes�R the 10 feet mttlfi use pa4hway be leeated with a 14 feet wide pttbiie pedestfian easemen4 wit 20 feet wide eemmen let in Phase 2. The melti tise padiwa-y has other-pedestfian eenfleetie 5 feet vAtaehed sidewalks within the development. Staff is supportive of providing an easement that is shared between this property and the irrigation district to be constructed at a later date. Staff has spoken with the irrigation district and they are supportive of the easement so lon��as they have the space for their 18-foot wide access road. The pathway easement shall extend north into landscape buffer along E. Victory Road to provide for connection from the future Ei hg t Mile Pathway to the sidewalk at Victory Road. Due to context and space limitations, the easement maybe a minimum of 10'wide, as offset from the northeast property line()(This will provide enough additional width adjacent to the irrigation easement to allow for future construction o� pathway, fence, and irrigation access road). The Applicant is showing compliance with this on their revised plat. To ensure this small pathway section is built in the future, Staff is recommending a DA provision that the multi-use pathway shall be constructed when the lot with the existing home is redeveloped or subdivided in the future. issue. The niuki u;ye jqathifwy niqy not-yet have eanneetion with additional nides.ef-pathwaj,,but it I. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): Five(5)foot attached sidewalks are proposed along all internal local streets, in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17.Normally, as five-foot wide detached sidewalk is required to be constructed with the required frontage improvements along Victory Road. However, due to there being no sidewalks abutting the site to the east or west alongV ictory Road and the frontage is less than 300 linear feet, Staff can allow the sidewalk to be attached along the frontage. The Applicant is proposing to construct 7-foot attached sidewalk along the entire Victory Road street frontage with this revised plat and within ACHD right-of-way. This meets the intent and prescriptive standards of UDC 11-3A-17 and ACHD requirements outlined in their staff report. J. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 25-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to E.Victory Rd., an arterial street, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. A 25-foot wide landscape buffer easement. let is depicted on the plat Loth Bleek(the lot with the home that is g)his eemmen lot also houses the proposed multi use pathwa�,that will Fun alefig Eightmile Cr-eek. The eeffeet nttmber-ef trees appear-te be shew-a on the Wamitted!andseape plans (see Seetien 3,11I.F) and is proposed with a removal of eight(8) existing trees and to keep five 5)of the existing UDC requires that landscape buffers for residential developments be placed in a common lot, owned and maintained by a homeowner's association and also offers Applicants the opportunitX to provide the buffer within an easement if the existing home will not be subject to the CC&rs of the subdivision through the Alternative Compliance process. Therefore, Staff is recommending Page 9 a condition of approval to place the buffer in a common lot or apply for Alternative Compliance with the Final Plat submittal to place the buffer within an easement.In addition, UDC requires that trees be spaced at a density of one tree per thi , five (35)linear feet(UDC 11- 3B-7C.2). Because the existing trees that are to remain are bunched together on the site,they do not meet this requirement. Compliance with this code section is required and in order to comply, Staff recommends adding two (2) additional trees to the east half of the landscape buffer. These additional trees, spaced correctly,would add to the buffer and help the Applicant meet the landscaping requirements. Furthermore, landscape buffers are also required to be vegetated with shrubs, lawn, or other vegetativeground cover for at least 70%of the area at the time of plant maturity,with mulch used under and around the plants UDC 11-3B-5N). The landscape plans do not show compliance with this requirement and should be corrected prior to the City Council hearing. V iEBry-D , have to be iciorcc �i-via ci to virrtcra,ct�the i+a gc "�rvrciciAs rrtn-adetaehed sidewalk. Stag finds th4 the existine t-Fees do offer-a iA11q4fy-Ia4--------buffer-betwe Vietery a-ad the i3r-ei)esed s-Hbdivisiea. In addition,if this area alone Vietef-IF were to be iffinf-eved with detaehed sidewalk,the sidewalk wetild lead to new-her-e as there are ne sidewalk&-en4he �1,. '.a f Nl t„ D,,.,,1 �6}kCit�i�zc-vr-vzccvr�icvc�crviruir`r-iccrjuvcixc�jurccr8—nicicz City Getineil r-eattir-e the fteataee imi3r-evemet4s at a WeF date when this let 1:ede subdivides in4he4utufe-. standar-ds listed in UDG 11 3-B 12C2. The total lineal feet of pathways with the required and, proposed numbeF of trees should be ineluded in the Landscape Caleulations table.Staff is Common open space is required to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3G-3E. The total square footage of common open space should be^^""eeted in the and the required number of trees to demonstrate compliance with UDC standards is shown in the Landscape Calculations table. ,platprovided to staff.A eendition of approval regarding this eentment is in Seedon 14W.3. K. Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3G): A minimum of 10%qualified open space meeting the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B is required. Based on the proposed plat of 7.35 acres,a minimum of 0.74 acres of common open space should be provided. According to the Applicant's provided open space exhibit(Exhibit VII.D),the Applicant is proposing approximately 5'� 8-45,560 square feet(or 1.21 n 9 .,e fes`of open space (or 16.471' ^C, `with 37,842 square feet(or 11.82%overall)of this area shown as qualified open space. The qualified open space consistsing of ,common lots with open space, and half of the arterial street buffer to E. Victory Rd. The AppheaaVs b 1 labels 42 034 2 29- s e feet l.,ppr-,,..; 4l ,n '7A . eo f the 00.exhibit � , ae o spaee as qttalifying - . The open space is primarily proposed as two common open lots with one residing in the very southeast corner of the site and one more centralized but smaller lot that contains the required amenity. The open space is to be available at the time of development as the project is no longer being phased. s bot>,..hales with most provided i Phase ' u,,.,eve Staff notes that the open spaee ealettlation appears to duplicate area it appeafs to ineltide the P.-Wed emer-geney aeeess and does 4not�-�-.M-ove the paved afea from the I J. ...fh.f Page 10 does fi"t eoufA towards a+iy open spaee, ali fy ng" "t. The qualified open space is comprised of three 3) common lots (Lot 1 Block 2,Lot 7 Block 2, and Lot 11 Block 1)that are 4,410, 7-,70-514,012 (including the temporary turnaround), and 20,555 square feet in size,respectively. All lots appear to meet UDC requirements to count towards qualified open space. Tea Following the Commission meeting and the issues that were presented, the Applicant revised the open space to address Staff comments regarding the temporwyy turnaround lot and the lack o� continuity of the open space. The Applicant has now reconfigured the building lots to allow for common open space to connect from the cul-de-sac in the south of the property to the new east- west stub street while also incorporating a micro pathway connection on this lot. Staff finds that this open space configuration better connects the two main open space lots within the development. buik4able until the stub street is e�etended and Me ky removed wim a -I— open spaee deviets a iget&ifial is-sHe in the future. Will this!at be a fwtui;e eommon opeH so ee!at or 1 it A a hitur Auil& 1 1 let?Staff ifwnts to ens-ure 11 !tl open tuave , l r-S and-the number of buik4in:ew lots are eonfir-med pr4or to this applieation bebw developed. In ad'difielf, -Poe-ket of op t ideak *this is.the intended pumose 4this let, Staff-Egeommend-s that then rt;, Me at4aeent Let 45, 1?10 1 1 into a eammen opet!Taee let. That, „1,1-p -t I am Me s-out1 4the .to the-east ,vest stub street in the development and eanneet to the hiture opensigaee lot that holds the temiger-atmv tumaround, This use for Lot 19, Bleek 4, MeApplieant should revise the:o��exhibit to remove the area this lot frem all even spaee ealeulations. Staff finds that the proposed open space meets the minimum requirements. but is not premier, 0 0 proposed an one 4 the eamimen open spaee lots and Me 3 0 oo�wide entergeney aeees-s eas-emen land-seape thefivefeet on either side ef it Iger &DC-standat4s, this ai;ea eould be added baek buiaffbie lots to the souM of the laFge eammon lot .-P. kot-v 24 oi-22), more open vaee wou available te the residet4s in this subdivision. Staff reeemmend-s this ehaHge beeaHzge thei;e is qualoed open sjgaee ivouN be added to thk projeet with this reeemmendation. Byfouaiving appro,*inia�e�9-,200 mope squarefeet of qualified 6Ven spaee ivouN be added-, making a total Page 11 0 feet. Therefor,—,Staff is reeoimnendMg eonditions of approval to eopreet the open Vaee ealeulations to rejUet the usable open Vaee and then proWde Staff with a mw4ed open sp- a exhibit and rev&edpreUminary plat showing the new loeation of the temporary eul de sae least 10 dap prior to the City Geffn eil heating(see S'eetion f W.4)-. L. Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G): Based on the area of the proposed plat(7.35 acres),a minimum of one(1)qualified site amenity is required to be provided per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C. The .,ppli afft has re* pr-epesed one (1) "alified ameait)-,a 10 feet multi use path-way. This amenity meets does ae4 meet the minimum UPC; st aaaMs The Applicant has proposed one(1) qualifying site amenity within the central open space lot, a water feature with benches around it. The Applicant is also proposing a micro-path through this space lot to increase pedestrian connectivity between the open space lots despite it not countingas s a qualified amenity. Staff appreciates this added connection so that everyone in the development has easy sidewalk access to the water feature and seating area. Commission hearin�-, M. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-6): The Eightmile Creek is a protected waterway and runs along the northeast corner boundary of this development but is not on the subject parcel. The applicant is proposing to add a 10-foot multi- use pathway easement both outside of its easement and partially within it as an amenit-y to this- pr-ej a future extension of the multi-use pathway system. Because Eightmile Creek is not on this site,there can be no requirement to tile the waterway. In addition,Eightmile Creek is a protected waterway,tt and must remain open regardless.withdevelepffleR4-e additional r-equir-emen4s exist due to the or-eek being off site. N. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. Fencing is proposed as shown on the landscape plan and appears to meet UDC requirements. shall be eeffeeted per-the eenditions listed in this staff r-epeA(see Seetion 3,1111.3) for-the lots abtWiag the mier-e use pathway. la addition, open vision feneing along the proposed pathway faeifig Eightmile Gr-eek and anyeemmene-pens. oa O. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): The Applicant has submitted sample elevations of the single-family homes for this project(see Section VILE). The single-family homes are depicted as mostly single-story structures with a variety of finish materials with stone, stucco, and lap-siding combinations. Some homes depict extra-large spaces for at-home RV storage.All single-family homes appear to meet design and architectural standards. Page 12 VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation and zoning with the requirement of a Development Agreement and approval of the requested preliminary plat with the conditions noted in Section VIII.A per the findings in Section IX of this staff report. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on October 15, 2020.At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject Annexation and Zoning and Preliminary Plat requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing_ a. In favor: Dan Lardie,Project Engineer b. In opposition: Sandy Blaser,neighbor. c. Commenting: Dan Lardie; Sandy Blaser d. Written testimony: All written testimony was meant for older hearing dates but highlighted the similar issues of the proposed access point through Tradewinds,height of homes abutting Tradewinds, and site drainage concerns. e. Staff presenting application: Joseph Dodson f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony a. Concerns over increased traffic through the singular access through Tradewinds subdivision; b. Height of homes adjacent to Tradewinds; and C. Site drainage issues due to high groundwater. 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. The changes since the previous hearing are appreciated in that they show a commitment to listening to the required changes and concerns of both Staff and Commission; b. How will the elevations shown fit onto the proposed lots—concern over if they will be what actually,gets built; C. Commission is concerned with the viability of the ,groundwater numbers and hope new numbers can be obtained—Staff received new data from the Applicant that has resulted in the Land Development team updating their conditions of approval to accommodate higher,groundwater(see condition VIII.B.1.2; 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None 5. Outstandin issue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. Applicant has not provided updated elevations per the request of the Commission. C. City Council: To be heard at future date. Page 13 VII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit Map EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION FOR TEAKWOOD PLACE SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION A parcel of land located in the NW 114 of the NW 114 of Section 29,73N., R.1 E., B.M.,Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the NW corner of said Section 29 from which the N114 corner of said Section 29 bears North 89°59`41" East, 2,680.68 feet; thence along the North boundary line of said Section 29 North 89°59'41"East, 620.22 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing along said North boundary line North 89°59'41"East, 328.84 feet to a point on the approximate centerline of Eight Mile Lateral; thence along the approximate centerline of Eight Mile Lateral the following 2 courses and distances: thence leaving said North boundary line South 04°36'20"East, 80.22 feet; thence South 39°10'20"East,71.96 feet; thence leaving said centerline South 00*11'29" East,781.92 feet to a point on the northeasterly boundary line of Tuscany takes Subdivision No. 2 as filed in Book 94 of Plats at Pages 11,351 through 11,354, records of Ada County, Idaho; thence along said northeasterly boundary line North 73'13'33"West,420.37 feet to the northerly most corner of said Tuscany Lakes Subdivision No.2; thence along the East boundary line of Tradewinds Subdivision No. 1 as filed in Book 106 of Plats at Pages 14,594 through 14,596, records of Ada County, Idaho and the southerly extension thereof North 00°11'26"West,263.65 feet to the NE corner of Lot 6, Block 2 of said Tradewinds Subdivision No. 1, said point also being on the South boundary line of Lot 5, Block 2 of said Tradewinds Subdivision No. 1; thence along said South boundary line North 89°59'41"East, 21.79 feet; thence along the East boundary line of said Tradewinds Subdivision No. 1 and the northerly extension thereof North 00"11'29"West, 532.67 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 327,836 square feet or 7.53 acres, more or less. W S 4sG 77290 �2�25Izu1`'o OF 1p� Page 14 E. VICTORY RD. BASIS OF BEARING S.19 S.20 589'59'41"W 2680.68 1-�_45_24 S.30 S.29 620.22' N$9'S9'4t"E 32$.84'- 173t.62" V "5.28 L--- B 1 S4'36'20"E BLOCK 1 I 80.22' � G S39'10'20"E 71.96' 1 z 0 I { IN BLOCK 2 m o i 11335 E. VICTORY RD. I � O I 227636 s.f. 7.53 o.c. a a I I4 m G r11 1 I� R O �� a m n d�`�p ® I 1489-59'41"E tCENS 4`SGG I a I� a 7729 - 0 �Gl4YG.G�`� (D I l w � 0 (D , N at �r o'k �'5CAN),tA® N73j3 W 4z0�� I .IDO NO. IDAHO EXHIBIT _ DRAWING FOR 19-324 SURVEY o9y5•A �P 1,,'; TEAKWOOD PLACE SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION S'1 NO. B019E.IBAHO¢}'�Jn �aaeYdateea� GROUP LLC WCAIM IN THE NW K OF rKE NW 9 OF S[CTICN 29, T3N.,RAL.9-M., Mir,DATE 1 ADA COOWTY•IOAHO 1I2'3I202Q Page 15 B. Preliminary Plat(date: 3/25A20206/2440- 0 8/12/2O2O) 690t68L I80Z)3NOHd SNOISIA3tl aee o„va�vawvueea�e.roe eia3e.e. -�":•0�H�4:" goo e�ps� ler.�,,. loa�,-0 9t Ea OI Ntlldle3w °N�r OVOtl tl30Nll'N OOL9 _ JNIA3A&ns qt •4, "I.—wwo�55s 1. NOISIA10ans °�m�,atl3leaw opq III 3 F 3OVld OOOMNV31 oHval uma y 'DNI`52133N1`JN3 lm NOISIAIa9f153OVld OOOM71v I 931VIJ059V'8.LLIAV3-1 I ET - d � IY --- I Yj € §I a iI I� q _ PE�I ICI p �- � ✓III �"'.� -'['�" s I®I a I ®I ®.r.;�.1 ®al w,� I I s I ... Al CID lIt e, �, � �lz'. .a II� � •� �s_` ��#„ i ��se.�l ILI H FI J h z a E s Ls rwsb rHola 3 a r -w s oY f F .4 II iJ o CJm sx — - I '. o, �y£ �< � ,Y ,.`�. lye°• -_ � , -.Y-_-.—- M wm An gz a r Page 16 g �45K�i FhC[ 14.A54 * SnERBLg14r� n0 e6oK _,uW -_ #-_ ...... _ ..._ ae1GO,C l��' - �yfy by Jill EL � VR or — 4ie I l i]S 0.Y - Wi iF b ' 4„ r 41i dGEi Y 2 4 -`Y 0.L] 4 V# � I �l ... ..... ..__ xa�lr h 0.i Qp ' ' his J Y27S if J R -S 4ir Page 17 C. Landscape Plans(date: 'Q3/2020 6/25,QO20 Qn 3/20= 10/29/2020) l� G I Mqm I v x x r I x am so"� H H ii.'Jq 95 II �� oro D I U xl II I I r tdd 0 a q Z I � , x r tLj I= f ;, c I E - ml x G r I a m ti ro -- - I a I v e -ED g � II , � TrT p 1 4 b � y — � n p � A ? D � 8 Page 18 mm I � m I mym I I bd alb n - I 00 I r z m r - J x lv m r� troy � 4 _ . . yea tb+ ! if kmtv IT •� j e_ B-E. eC. 21) ` I m Lm �• m Z ®, I e m T ➢ b A 3 A i S W CIO o m a 3K0 i s ° gE A � s aC) y m r m bg a z : N i m ifi :.¢cgs S UJ D ,ti a2 ED s �IBM Nisz DM PRO _ �,F LEAV1 T&ASSOCIATES [ TEAKWOOD PLACE SUBDIVISION ENGINEERS,INC_ MERIDIAN.IDAHO TEAKWOOD PLACE DEVELOPMENT EXHIBIT srRucruRaL-av1� HESS....C.11 SURVEYING r- 6,DR N.LINHER ROAD Ni oA orvcHly.ory MERIDIAN,1033646 REVISIONS PHONE 12D611R9AR69 Page 19 �o PLANT SCHEDULE < -7- Z=,.Z=11- o &HRUB—NTINGDETAI , ECULDERPLAUEMENTUETAIL LANDSCAPE MOTES T"I L-_T IT I I I L I I T L 'L 4f,- DECIU-3 TREE PLANTING C ETAIL n GONIFE-5 TREE FL-1— SOUTH ew WIN BECK& BAIRD LT =,t"7 —h-N11 Page 20 D. Open Space Exhibit(date: 2Q4 2020 6 Q ION August 2020) b1morILY" L-43 . - 3147 =.r.1 'uL CEO 31 IC. 1 Fm n Flrc c acu�r r ti Ii Lf —- -—-- ia�w .}. e � y� I rt 4 Y 4 NUF Y X F IL! l ' E t •rl f E � •+R —'f � FE I i Jill 9� F ll u 1 M, i h L 1Ct1W d-- 1Y �1.R ti4 4 9 + F im- r TRW 9 a Page 21 E. Conceptual Building Elevations E _ S a ga 61 No I No a Page 22 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement(DA)is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption,and the developer. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat,landscape plan, open space exhibit, and conceptual building elevations included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. b. This subdivision shall be eenstmeted in one ('phase and appliea*t shall OR remove all of the existing s,,.,,et -es identified: ..hale 2 a- d develop t o fouf additional lots as proposed. c. If the existing home is to remain,the home shall connect to city services upon development. . ,it the first phase f development.-ad aeeess shall be provide d. The existing home shall close its driveway access to E.Victory Rd. and take access from E. Fathom Street with development of the subdivision. e. The fixture 10-foot multi-use pathway shall be constructed at such time that Lot 2,Block 2 is either redeveloped or subdivided in the future, of develepmen4 in accord with UDC 11-3A-8 and UDC 11-313-12. The Applicant shall submit a public access easement for the fixture multi-use Page 23 pathway_partially located on Lot 2,Block 2. Submit easements to the Planning Division for Council approval and subsequent recordation. The easement mu be a minimum of ten G 0) feet wide,as offset from the northeast propertX line(s).Use standard City template for public access easement. Easement checklist must accompany all easement submittals. Coordinate with Kim Warren from the City of Meridian Parks Department. f. All street frontage improvements and landscaping along E.Victory Rd. shall be constructed with Phase 1 of the development. g. An additional qua4ifyiag amenity(per-UDG 11 3G 3G) sha4l be added to the h. This development shall provide no less than 37,842 square feet, or 11.82%, of qualified open space. i. For-these bets abtxttifig E.3Actei=y e a�ential after-i-al roadway, baeks, .-ad pop outs),bays,b ading,per-ehes,baleenies material t"es, ether-integrated ar-ehiteetufal elemen4s te break"menetenetts wa4l plane j. The emergency access on Lot 1,Block 2 shall be constructed prior to any issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 2. The preliminary plat included in Section VILB, and dated OIQ5/20206Q4 i 8/12/2020, prepared by Leavitt Associates Engineers,Inc., shall be revised as follows prior to submittal of the final plat application. a. Revise the plat to show the tempefafy eii! de sae on the setiffi side ef the pr-epesed E. Ri ira., ol4 Let 21 or-22, v cc stating that said lot is fien btfildable uttil stteh time as E. Ri seaSt.is ext b. Add a note prohibiting direct lot access via E.Victory Road. Lot 2,Block 2 shall take access from E. Fathom St in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. e. The emergency aeeesrs on Lot c,Bxvezcz shall be cvirruetec prior-to d. The driveway access for the existing home located on Lot 2,Block 2 shall construct said driveway access with a width of at least 15-feet in width. e. Add an additional common lot alongV ictory Road to contain the required 25- foot wide landscape street buffer or apply for Alternative Compliance with final plat submittal to request the buffer to be within an easement. 3. The landscape plan included in Section VII.C, and dated "i-2n120 n 6/2-5 n2n 8/13/2020, shall be revised as follows at least 10 days prior to the City Council hearing: a. The Landseape Galeula4ioas/Requir-emen�s table shall inelude the following. 1)the total liftear-feet of pathways a-ad the required number-of tfees per-UPC 11 3B 12); a-ad 2)the Page 24 b. The-bandseape Plan shall be eefFeeted to r-efleet open vision feneing along all pathways • c. The La-adseape pla-m shall be revised to r-efieet a single phase per-the eenditions i d. Revise the-bandseape Plan to show landseaping along the emer-geney aeeess f:oad eemmen lot 5,Bleek 2. Said let sha4l be develeped with a 20 feet wide pa-ved stff�ee and of 4ndseap-ing onreaeh side in aeeewith UPC-11 3B-12. e. Revise the!a-adseape plan to m4eh the newly revised pr-eliminmy plat and show the proposed eel de sae with a r-adius of 57 feet a-ad with no par-king in the eenten f. Revise the landscape plan to show the required frontage improvements along E.Victory Road and within its own common lot Tot 2,Bleek 2. This should include at least two (2) more trees on the eastern half of the buffer and the required vegetativeground cover as required in UDC 11-313-5N and 11-313-7. Submit a revised plan (electronic copy)to the Planning Division at least 10 days prior to the City Council hearing. 4. The Open Space Exhibit included in Section VII.D eeffeetiens- shall be revised f hews_: is approved as submitted. a. Show the temp,,-afy,.,,l de s n Lets 2 or-22 Bleek , .. her-di a on the e open spaee lo+ b. calculation, the City Cotmed hearin�-, lets. 6. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for all the proposed R-8 zoning districts. 7. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family detached dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 8. Any structures that remain on the property must comply with the dimensional standards of the R-8 zone or they must be removed. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 The street naming and addressing of any structures proposed to remain,will change to the new naming and addressing with this subdivision. 1.2 The geotechnical investigative report prepared by SITE Consulting,LLC, dated December 19,2019,and supplemental update dated October 31,2020, indicates some very specific construction considerations due to soil conditions that result in perched groundwater. The applicant shall be responsible for the adherence of these recommendations to help ensure that groundwater does not become a problem within crawlspaces of homes.Although the Page 25 Geotech report indicates that either traditional crawl spaces or slab on grade foundations are acceptable,it is highly recommended that slab on grade foundations be installed within this development to avoid any groundwater intrusion. This is the best way to eliminate the possibility of water accumulation in crawlspaces. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department,and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code(MCC),the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s)for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A)and an 81/2"x 11"map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year- round source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available,a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required.If a single-point connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 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. Page 26 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures.Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit,cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for Page 27 surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit,cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=183649&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC iv D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=184717&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC iv E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancity.orelWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=191519&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=184507&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC iv G. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT(CDH) https:llweblink.meridianciU.otylWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=184494&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC iv H. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=185262&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC i &cr=1 I. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=183904&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC hty J. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCHOOL IMPACT REVIEW https:llweblink.meridiancily.ore/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=203757&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC hty IX. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-5B-3E) Page 28 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; Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment to R-8 and subsequent development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed districts, specifically the purpose statement; Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment will allow for the development of single-family detached homes, which will contribute to the range of housing opportunities available within the City consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose statement of the residential districts. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment will not result in an adverse impact on the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Commission finds the proposed annexation meets the minimum requirements but is in the best interest of the City per the Analysis in Section V and with the conditions of approval contained in Section VIII. B. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat,or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Commission finds that the proposed plat, with Staffs recommendations, is in compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density, transportation, and pedestrian connectivity. (Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies in Section V of this report for more information) 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Commission finds that public services will be provided to the subject property with development. (See Section VIII of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Page 29 Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at their own cost, Commission finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development based upon comments from the public service providers(i.e.,Police,Fire,ACHD, etc). (See Section Mfor more information) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health,safety or general welfare; and, Commission is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the platting of this property. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis and approves of the overall project. 6. The development preserves significant natural,scenic or historic features. Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. Page 30