Compass Pointe Subdivision H-2020-0100 Findings for Denial Item#8.
CITY OF MERIDIAN
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW E IDIAN�'
AND DECISION& ORDER
In the Matter of the Request for Annexation and Zoning of 7.69 acres of land with a request for the
R-15 zoning district; a Preliminary Plat consisting of 37residential building lots and 10 common
lots on approximately 4.69 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district; and,Alternative Compliance to
connect a private street directly to an arterial street,by A-Team Land Consultants.
Case No(s). H-2020-0100
For the City Council Hearing Dates of: 3/23/2021, April 27, 2021, and May 25,2021 (Findings on
June 8,2021)
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing dates of 3/23/2021, April 27, 2021, and
May 25, 2021, incorporated by reference)
2. Process Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing dates of 3/23/2021,April 27,2021,and
May 25, 2021, incorporated by reference)
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing dates of 3/23/2021,
April 27,2021, and May 25,2021, incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code(see attached Staff Report for the hearing
dates of 3/23/2021,April 27,2021, and May 25, 2021, incorporated by reference)
B. Conclusions of Law
1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the"Local Land Use
Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65, Title 67,Idaho Code(I.C. §67-6503).
2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified as
Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has,by
ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian,
which was adopted December 17,2019,Resolution No. 19-2179 and Maps.
3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A.
4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction.
5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose
expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed.
6. That the City has granted an order of denial in accordance with this Decision,which shall be
signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant,the
Community Development Department,the Public Works Department and any affected party
requesting notice.
FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER
FOR(Compass Pointe Subdivision—FILE#H-2020-0100) - I - Page 227
Item#8.
7. That this denial is subject to the Findings in the attached Staff Report for the hearing dates of
3/23/2021,April 27,2021,and May 25,2021, incorporated by reference.
C. Decision and Order
Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-5A and based upon
the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that:
1. The applicant's request for Annexation and Zoning,Preliminary Plat, and Alternative
Compliance are hereby denied per the Findings in the Staff Report for the hearing dates of
3/23/2021,April 27,2021, and May 25,2021, attached as Exhibit A.
D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits
Notice of Preliminary Plat Duration
Please take notice that approval of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or
short plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to obtain the city engineer's signature
on the final plat within two (2)years of the approval of the preliminary plat or the combined
preliminary and final plat or short plat(UDC 11-613-7A).
In the event that the development of the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an
orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat,
such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of two (2)years,may be considered for
final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval(UDC 11-6B-7B).
Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord
with 11-6B-7.A,the Director may authorize a single extension of time to obtain the City
Engineer's signature on the final plat not to exceed two(2)years. Additional time extensions up
to two (2)years as determined and approved by the City Council may be granted.With all
extensions,the Director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined
preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of Meridian City
Code Title 11. If the above timetable is not met and the applicant does not receive a time
extension,the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again(UDC 11-
6B-7C).
Notice of Conditional Use Permit Duration
Please take notice that the conditional use permit,when granted, shall be valid for a maximum
period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time,the applicant
shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the
requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and
commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For
conditional use permits that also require platting,the final plat must be signed by the City
Engineer within this two(2)year period.
Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord
with 11-5B-6.G.1,the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the
use not to exceed one(1)two(2)year period. Additional time extensions up to two(2)years as
determined and approved by the City Council may be granted. With all extensions,the Director
FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER
FOR(Compass Pointe Subdivision—FILE#H-2020-0100) -2-
Page 228
Item#8.
or City Council may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian
City Code Title 11(UDC 11-5B-6F).
Notice of Development Agreement Duration
The city and/or an applicant may request a development agreement or a modification to a
development agreement consistent with Idaho Code section 67-6511A. The development
agreement may be initiated by the city or applicant as part of a request for annexation and/or
rezone at any time prior to the adoption of findings for such request.
A development agreement may be modified by the city or an affected party of the development
agreement. Decision on the development agreement modification is made by the city council in
accord with this chapter. When approved, said development agreement shall be signed by the
property owner(s) and returned to the city within six(6)months of the city council granting the
modification.
A modification to the development agreement may be initiated prior to signature of the
agreement by all parties and/or may be requested to extend the time allowed for the agreement
to be signed and returned to the city if filed prior to the end of the six(6)month approval
period.
E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis
1. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian.
When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521,any affected person being a person
who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the
governing board may within twenty-eight(28)days after the date of this decision and order
seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code.
F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing dates of 3/23/2021,April 27, 2021, and May 25, 2021.
FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER
FOR(Compass Pointe Subdivision—FILE#H-2020-0100) -3 - Page 229
Item#8.
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 8th day of June
2021.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT TREG BERNT VOTED
COUNCIL VICE PRESIDENT BRAD HOAGLUN VOTED
COUNCIL MEMBER JESSICA PERREAULT VOTED
COUNCIL MEMBER LUKE CAVENER VOTED
COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED
COUNCIL MEMBER LIZ STRADER VOTED
MAYOR ROBERT SIMISON VOTED
(TIE BREAKER)
Mayor Robert E. Simison 6-8-2021
Attest:
Chris Johnson 6-8-2021
City Clerk
Copy served upon Applicant, Community Development Department,Public Works Department and City
Attorney.
By: Dated: 6-8-2021
City Clerk's Office
FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER
FOR(Compass Pointe Subdivision—FILE#H-2020-0100) -4- Page 230
►tem#s. EXHIBIT A
STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY
N --
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING 3/23/2021,April 27,2021, and May 25. Legend _ M:HTR
DATE: 2021
Project Location !
TO: Mayor&City Council ;
FROM: Joe Dodson,Associate Planner _
208-884-5533
SUBJECT: H-2020-0100
®�
Compass Pointe Subdivision
® _4'
LOCATION: The site is located at 3247 S. Locust ®K:
Grove Road, in the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 ofmr—
Section 30, Township 3N.,Range 1E. Ffi -
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project was heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission on December 3,2020 and the
Commission recommended denial of the proiect 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 staff report and by
Commissioners. The City Council agreed with this request and remanded the proiect back to P&Z.
The main changes made by the Applicant following the recommendation of denial are related to
the number of residential units proposed, the road layout, the amount of usable open space, and no
longer requesting a Planned Unit Development. In addition, the Applicant is no longer requesting
a Planned Unit Development.All revisions are discussed and analyzed below in subsequent
sections and delineated by strikethrough and underline changes throughout the staff report.
• Annexation and zoning of 7.69 acres of land with a request for the R-15 zoning district;
• Preliminary Plat consisting of 4-9-3-8 37residential building lots and q 10 common lots on
approximately 4.69 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district;
• Alternative Compliance to connect a private street directly to an arterial street;
• Planned Unit Development to r-eduee the Year-setbaek of the R 15 zening distr-iet for-a peftion of
by A-Team Land Consultants.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details Page
Acreage 7.69 acres
Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residential
Pagel
Page 231
Item#8.
Description Details Page
Existing Land Use(s) County Residential
Proposed Land Use(s) Attached single-family and townhomes
Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 5749 47 total lots—49 38 37single-family residential;and
910 common lots.
Phasing Plan(#of phases) Proposed as one(1)phase.
Number of Residential Units(type 4838 37 total units—483433 single-family attached
of units) townhome units and 4 single-family detached units.
Density(gross&net) Gross—6-.24 4.94 du/ac.;Net—4-3-.4 9.82 du/ac.
Open Space(acres,total 338 3.72 acres total—2-.84 3_4 acres of qualifying open
[%]/buffer/qualified) space(or approx.35.6844.2%qualified accordingto o the
submitted open space exhibit)much of the qualified open
space is the creek and landscape buffers
Amenities 3 amenities Climbing rocks for children,walking loop,
and shaded picnic area.
Physical Features(waterways, Tenmile Creek runs along the western property boundary
hazards,flood plain,hillside) with most of its easement on this property.Portion of the
property within the easement shows area of flood hazard.
Neighborhood meeting date;#of September 8,2020; 1 attendee.
attendees:
History(previous approvals) N/A
B. Community Metrics
Description Details Page
Ada County Highway District
• Staff report(yes/no) Yes Section
VIII.H
• Requires ACHD No
Commission Action
es/no
Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Proposed access is from S.Locust Grove,an arterial. The
Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) proposed access is via a new private street and all internal
roadways are proposed as private streets.
Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross No stub streets are proposed due to site constraints.
Access
Existing Road Network E.Victory Road and S.Locust Grove Road,arterial streets,
are existing with 2 travel lanes.
Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ No
Buffers
Proposed Road Improvements No road improvements are proposed by the Applicant due
to all abutting right-of-way to the subject site being
scheduled for widening by ACHD.The intersection of
Locust Grove and Victory is to be a roundabout in
2022-23 with Locust Grove Rd.being widened to 5
lanes north of the intersection and Victory Road being
widened to 3 lanes on either side of the intersection by
2025.
Fire Service
• Distance to Fire Station 1.5 miles from Fire Station#4
• Fire Response Time Proposed development falls within the 5 minute response
time goal.
• Resource Reliability 77%(below the target rating of 80%)
Page 2
Page 232
Item#8.
Description Details Page
• Risk Identification Risk Factor 2—Residential with hazards; current resources
would not be adequate to supply service to this project due
to nearby waterway if a water emergency were to occur.
• Accessibility Proposed project meets all required access,road widths,
and turnarounds.
The project will be limited to 30 homes until the entire
emergency access to Victory Road is constructed.
Police Service
• Distance to Police Station 2 miles
• Response Time Estimated response time of 4.5 minutes(Goal of 3-5
minutes)
• Accessibility MPD has no concerns with access into this development;
the MPD can service this development if approved.
• Additional Comments Between 8/1/2019 and 7/31/2020,MPD responded to 636
calls for service within one mile of this proposed
development.The crime count on those calls was 79.
Between 8/1/2019 and 7/31/2020,MPD responded to 30
crashes within 1 miles of this proposed development.
West Ada School District
• Distance(elem,ms,hs) No comments submitted.
• Capacity of Schools
• #of Students Enrolled
Wastewater
• Distance to Sewer N/A
Services
• Sewer Shed South Black Cat Trunk Shed
• Estimated Project Sewer See application
ERU's
• WRRF Declining Balance 13.98
• Project Consistent with YES
WW Master Plan/Facility
Plan
• Additional Comments N/A
Water
• Distance to Water Services 0'
• Pressure Zone 4
• Estimated Project Water See application
ERU's
• Water Quality Concerns None
• Project Consistent with YES
Water Master Plan
• Impacts/Concerns • See the attached water markup for more details;
•Connect water main north to Victory Road;
•At the end of Navigation Road provide a meter pit for a
1"service and a 4"sleeve to the northeast at the proposed
edge of the future roundabout. This will be used for a
future water service to the roundabout used by Parks for
landscaping.
Page 3
Page 233
1 1 1
NO
. - . ■■ EE■E■ -
■11:::r, ■nm �
• . - • • • i I�Fii i� anin � • - • • • �. -I
♦ ♦ In unn ■ {
■■■■W i�1\ - ♦ �a n■n f
no ■ * ■■ E, pEii p -nnu ion
a E - ■ 1111111 I ■ ■■■■u■ ■ .. .. ..
! 1■ 1111111`II ■■ MINI
If■■r . �i11t••�^r���~- � �■,�O�liumll mn a c_ l r��w _ '` p� -
_ n■mnn � ■�1 \`a.Yl J•1 ,pnunnm a - ay
�'-
A1111111= ■ . ___ .` IN
-
11 IIIIIIIID=■■iiiill■IAA= _ - ... `
= IIIIIIII_�niiillml�r IIn 7 �J
QII OI■■� n111IIIn FIIIII:11■ ■■III'M --
�noon■�IlIIII/III -nnum - '` �/lnLIf111f
unn.11111EEnnI nnnm - �� �u1uu1■■/' - 11;
�n�nn!■ 111111 C IIInn/il■■■■■I - .-.-AI7 oi11i1r
�llji.•• vu nu ■lnnunm nnua �■■ n■■■■■■■ _,
III�' ♦•I T.7C7n.n � �!■ Ihna /ItYu■
11■ I � I J
111' �. � \►um nmuuui \ Si■O■ rl _ EEE!a��'' *' _ -� �'
i■■■■I■■■■li • Illly 1111111111111■ EEC ■ 1■■m - I }_, � ,��-�� � � `�
— m1 IIE►��i�� q�y '_-= Y��i � ■=iiiin � _� c}" ` �•
I I I 1 I I 1 1 I I 1
li■is
■■ z3cal
■IEEEE
• • - • • • Ij• \�'�al ■hill 1■■■Iu , ' • - • • • I ��-uiifill 1■niO
nn■�►i I+ n u IIII in11■ Ninon n u Illlii p nnu ioMEN
n '
■■■PI■: �■nnI ■■■ ■■■. nod inl ■7t ■n. nil_
6141111
■m 11- it■m
� 1 lilfll 11 ■i! :::� : ■ :�-1�.� ■14111111 ■�! ::::___=
' 11, ■■ ■ .non I _u - 131 • r -
■�:■■�r� s non a all �■/:-.!'..:.-- ■ � s � ��- . ..----
111• . + 11 nm ��■ I�IIIr ~ i�. '" -- - ■��Ia■quum n.n
r� � Innn r•�� III • 1/3GTORY- 11111111■I �►� I�V'I ;� i�wYZi� - -- -
--Ai�AIA1 ==�e � --- - = IIIIIIII= Ei�1■III
'�niiill■11�= _ ,,, -- _1111111111�niiill■Ilf?�? ,,' �- ,�,-nu
-■IIIIIIII■ rr IIn 7 Illllm -Ell■illliil-r�Iln- ._ - "�
QII■ill Il■IIImf■IIIIIIII■IIIIIIII�11■ - � �\
noon_Gmn O�nnum - - noon_�i■nu non O�nnum - i.11a_
► mn.n��m�nnq p noon 1 nm.Illlnnnq p nnnm t
unnmm nnm - nm � � mmmn num - nnm m
�Iwu nu-■non■m 11 I� �■1■In11■ I�t \I�•�w nu =�mi■unn m - ��CL:C7:L7c
■nnu -nnnu ■ - • ..Enna a nu■- moon nIIIII • ..Enna
.::' �p� u •I. non■ q -l l ��■:- .u ■■
•nnm � i ■■ � -mnni 5i m �■�■ ■■
p ■nm _� � ln■ 4 ti '.lnu nnm non �� liu.■.
-`� �%�i� pNnunnn 1 �� ■ � �■ � �i�i .i�nunnn m �. r �■
IIE 1 �i .. ■■- :.
.' + I..::7C:n:1 ■■ I 'y� pa E ilil;q � �',,,+��I..::..-n:n � � na
111 L. ►NI■■Mill ■ ■I� 111h\�V�i� ►um nnl■1 :f.l� 4_
nn■■■■m 1 Inn■ annuli h nn■nmI■�1 nm nm
— n 1 IIE � -:a �� ■ nun — n11 IIE 'y '�' ■ nun
�► `�■■■■■ �� �i, a ' ■�■■■■■
ME "'• - Innn
I l � 1 1 i ■' � � i• ♦ i
i
I I -
- � 11
Item#8.
IV. NOTICING
Planning&Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Newspaper Notification 1�'�20 01/29/2020 3/5/2021
Radius notification mailed to
properties within 500 feet
"1�'�20 01/26/2020 3/2/2021
Site Posting 1/ 02/01/2020 3/10/2021
Nextdoor posting 1 4W2 01/26/2020 3/4/2021
V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS
A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https:llwww.meridianciU.or /g 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 proposed annexation area is an undeveloped corner of land with existing medium density
development to its west and east across Locust Grove. Specifically, this parcel of land is at the
southwest corner of Victory Road and Locust Grove Road. There is existing City of Meridian
zoning to the west, east, and northeast located at the northeast corner of the same intersection.
All existing development most adjacent to the subject site is zoned R-8. There is a large county
zoned parcel directly to the north of this site that has not yet received development approval but
has two streets stubbed to its western property line so no access will be taken to Victory or Locust
Grove. In addition, its future land use designation is Low Density Residential(LDR)dictating
that it will likely have less density than this site.
The proposed land use of attached single-family residential, and townhomes would be a new type
of dwelling in this immediate area and is therefore consistent with policies noted in the
Comprehensive Plan for all residential future land use designations, including Medium Density
Residential(MDR), to contain different types of dwellings. MDR, as noted above, also allows
gross densities of 3-8 units per acre; the Applicant haste revised this project to reduce the
number of units with and is now proposed with a gross density of 4-.24 4.94 du/ac. Staff finds that
the proposed project meets the density requirements of the Comprehensive Plan.
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 LVA1. 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.A final plat will not be accepted until the DA is executed and the AZ
ordinance is approved by City Council.
B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan):
The applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are cited below with Staff analysis in italics.
"Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for
diverse housing types throughout the City"(2.01.01 G). The proposed R-15 zoning and proposed
land use of single family attached and townhomes would be a new dwelling type in the immediate
area surrounding this development. R-8 zoning abuts the subject site to the south and west and
across Locust Grove to the east. This policy, and the comprehensive plan, calls for a variety of
Page 5
Page 235
Item#8.
housing types in any one geographical area. So, adding 48 units of a different product type to the
area shows congruency with this comprehensive plan 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). The Tenmile Creek runs adjacent to this property
on its western boundary and the entirety of its 100'easement is located on the subject site.
Because of this, the Applicant has proposed to utilize this area as a natural open space and place
a 5-foot wide path adjacent to the easement. In addition, the Applicant is proposing sidewalks
adjacent to the internal private streets with connections to the path along the creek and out to
Locust Grove and Victory Roads. These connections create a continuous walking path through
the development creating easy pedestrian and bicycle access within and out of the proposed
development.
Despite the Tenmile Creek qualifying as open space per the UDC, it is the majority of the
proposed open space and is not an active open space area. The Applicant has not been able to
enter into a license agreement with the irrigation district to beautify the creek but code does
allowfor this ivate�qvqy to notes that this is one of the waterways encouraged to be left natural.
There are other small pockets of open space within this development that the Applicant has
enlarged since the first Commission meeting that can accommodate active uses and the Applicant
has chosen to place them throughout the project to encourage use by all future residents;eu-ly
one three of these areas is are large enough to be qualified open space(meets the 50'x 100'
requirement). Despite the inclusion of a large area of qualified open space in terms of percentage
of the site, Stafffinds theme revised project and reduced unit count utilizes the laekingin
usage proposed open space more than the previous layouts and is in better alignment with this
op -icy.
"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" (6.01.0213).Due to the triangle shape of this parcel and its location
being constrained directly by the Tenmile Creek and two arterial streets, strict compliance with
this policy is not feasible. There are no streets (public or private)stubbed to this property and
this parcel also cannot stub to any other parcel due to these constraints. The Applicant is only
proposing one access for the development and is locating it as far away from the intersection as
physically possible. Despite not being able to comply with this policy, Staff appreciates that only
one access to an arterial is proposed. The access to Victory Rd. is for emergency access only.
"Require all new residential neighborhoods to provide complete streets, consistent with the
Transportation and Land Use Integration Plan."(2.02.01 C). The Applicant is not proposing to
construct complete streets with this development and therefore does not comply with this policy.
Instead, the Applicant is proposing to construct private streets at their minimum standard width
of 24 feet but with 5-foot attached sidewalk on one both sides of the street along the main access
road, shown as Compass Lane on the submitted plans. Both ACHD and the Applicant believe
private streets are the preferred street type in this development because there is no opportunity
for road connectivity to adjacent parcels due to the site constraints outlined above. The Applicant
is not required to construct private streets and public streets would be accepted by the highway
district if proposed as compliant with their standards. However;public streets require more
right-of-way than private streets and if this were to be constructed with public roads instead, a
redesign of the project would be required and would likely result in a large reduction in building
lots and usable land.
"Annex lands into the corporate boundaries of the City only when the annexation proposal
conforms to the City's vision and the necessary extension of public services and infrastructure is
Page 6
Page 236
Item#8.
provided."(3.03.03). The proposed development and use adhere to the vision established by the
underlying future land use designation in that it should offer an additional housing option for the
immediate area.Attached single-family and townhomes are permitted uses in the R-I5 zoning
district. In addition, all infrastructure extensions will be paid for by the Applicant and not the
taxpayers.
"Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land."
(3.07.00). The proposed development is not like any of the detached single-family homes adjacent
to the subject site and this distinction is encouraged in the comprehensive plan in order to offer
different housing options at different price points and to different types of home buyers. The open
space within the development has been improved by being lamer than previous layouts and
should also be more usable due to the Applicant proposing ten (10) fewer units than previously
may leave .emet'ing to be esir a but In addition, the development has landscape buffers (both
natural and otherwise) on all three sides of the development to minimize any conflict that may
arise from having an attached product in an area dominated by detached single-family homes. M
men,�The Applicant is also proposing only one access to the development which should help
minimize traffic impact on adjacent streets, especially once the arterial network surrounding this
development is widened and improved in the coming years.
Staff finds this development to be generally consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies and
objectives.
VI. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW
A. Planned Unit D&velepment-.-
The Applieant is r-equesting to eenstpaet this s4division as a Planned Unit Development(PU-D)
in line with UDC standards and findings (UDC 11 7). PUD's ha-ve speeifie pur-pose statements-,
standafds, a-ad findings that the Applieant should meet in order-to gaffler-an approval. The
proposed pr-ejeet fneets the appheability requirements and the following purpose statements
should also be eemplied with; Staff analysis is in italie-si
A. The pwpese of the planned nait d&velepnient(PUD)requirements is to provide
eppei:timity for-exemplafy site development tliat meets the following objeetives:
Preserves > ;
The en&e western
ptWerty boundary of the sffbjeet site is made up of the Tenmile Creek and its easement-.
The,4ppUeant is ehoosMg to kwve this watenwy in its nahitwl state to preserve its
2. Allows for-innovative design that er-eates vistially pleasing and eehesive pattems o
development(including,but not limited to,residential development at densities greater-than
9 nnits per-aer-e where design pidelines afe in plaee for-development and where gar-age
densisy greater than 8 ffnits per aere(appFoximately 13 dm1ae) after area is repnovedfir
ereek easement to be non buU&ble and should be rmovedfrom the densil�y ealeida
he genetwl Onee this orea is removed-, fhe density is 8-.6 units per aer,-, helping to mee
this design mquirepnent-. The ne�density is higher than that of the iminediak*
sur-roHnding neighbor-hoods beeause of this but the site will be buffered on all thpee side
firom adjaeent subdivisions preeisely beeaffse of the site eonstraints whieh should help
mitigate a presented by the higher-deff
Page 7
Page 237
Item#8.
Aspresented-> the overall site design is laeking ipf hmovatioif,
units ape garage dominate jvhieh does not meet thePUD standoMm. Ilowever-,Staff has
sethaek Peqiiest only appheable tofive(5) ifnits instead of 17 and allow these Hnits to be
the,R 15 zoning distr4etfor afley loaded units. Seeondfy-, onee these tinits beeome alley
loaded-, they shouldfrow on the internal miero path that is already proposed between
ean look andfeel modern while maintaining a smaU eommunityfeel and offep adequate
open sp- aee-.
of the Pepopt below Pegarding open spoee, ,
3. Cfeates ftinetionally integrated development that allows for-a more efficient and eost
the requirement to offer adeqHate vehietilar aeeess to the site.As noted-, the site
eonstmints severely Untit the point of aeeessfop this development to the one loeatioll
the site-. However-, this intemeetion shoHld be eonst-ptieted and inippoved with a milld
the road andpedeshian network with a more effieient tr-qffie pattern and adequate roa
B. it is not the intent that the PUP proeess be used solely for-the pur-poses of deviation from
the dimensional standards in the distr-iet.Pr4op to ineopporating the meonintende
additional ehanges as disetfssed above, the one speetTwirequest made by the,Whean
,Wheant4 intent op)Wnetion to do this only to have a largep home on thepmposed Iwo.-
Appheont states that Mis sethaek PeUef is needed to provide the innovoth-e pFoduef t"e,
pedestrian eipeidation, and street layow while maintaining eontpUanee with e R MS
and sidejv
Bloek 3.
The standards preser-ibed within the PUD eode are as follows; Staff analysis is in itaUes:
A. General Use StandaFd-&.
Page 8
Page 238
Item#8.
Regulations", of this title may be appr-oved. The exeeption is that along the per-iphel=y o
the planned development, the applieable setbaeks as established by t4e distr-iet shall not be
eontain pen)9hery lots due to the odd triangle shape of the subjeet sit&. TheAppliean
eentmi to the developm-nt.
making a Pequest in fine with this standard so Stafffind-s it not appUeable in this eas-e.
3. inter-eafifieeted Uses: The uses�,N,ithin the platified unit development afe ifitefeefineeted-
thfough a system of roadways and/of pathways as appfopfiate. Pfivate stfeets and serviee
drives may be permitted, if designed and constmeted to the transportation atithofity
1. Deviations From Under-lying Distr-iet Requir-ementsi Deviations ffefo t4e developm
Pr-ivate Street Requir-ements", of this
title. The subjeet site is pro
posed to be eonstrueted with private streets that appear-Mo
paths-. Ilowever-, the omoHnt of Hsoble open spoee and housing"es within
otom Hsoble open spaee, an additional housing"e in thefom of ofley loaded hoines,
sensitive afeas in the natw-al state, or-to eansolidate small open spaoes into lafger-,fneFe
usable areas for-eommon use and enjoyment. BHikhngs within the development ar
of eighty (90) squafe feet of private, usable open spaoe shall be pfovided fof
residential-Emit. This r-e' * .be satisfied throtigh per-ehes,patios, deeks, an
show eomphanee with this standard by gpaphieagy depieting the dintensions of th
Page 9
Page 239
Item#8.
G. Residential Use St naafds.
"Distfiet "
, of this
title,multi family d-wellings may be an allowed use when appr-e-ved through a pla*ned tmit
2. Housing T"es: A variety E)f housing t-�Tes shall be ineluded within a single planfie
development, ineluding attaehed units > >
detaehed units (patio
homes), single family and multi family tmits,regardless of the distriet elassifieation o
the site,pfevided that the evefall density limit of the distr-iet is maintained.As noted
theApplieant needs to inehide an additional housing Ope that is more dontinant than
thefew remnant unit types noted-.As diseussed above,-Staff reeommends the eentm
12 units of dif-ftrmt type than the gatwV dontinated townhomes euiwndy proposed-.
Mqjvevei�> >
additional eondWons be ineluded that inerease or deerease one or more other hous
types in this development-.
3. Density Fomi�dla� Residential density in a plafmed development shall be ealettlated by
ffmitiplying the net ftsideatial area(gfess aer-eage less the area of nonfesidefitial uses)b
the maximum"mbef of dwelling tinits per-aer-e allowed for-the distfiet in whieh the site-ffii
pittent but
believes the ereek easement should be mmovedfirom the density ealeuladon as M&a
use&signadon but Shfff is only using M&ealeidadon to show eompUanee with the
4. Density Bonus.! A fesidential density bei+us may be given for-dedieafiens of!a-nd fe
publie use stieh as sehaal,park, fire station E)r-r-eefea4ienal f4eility provided to the p4he
example, if ten per-eea4 Skiff Peeommends
shall be ten pefeent ) of the total pr-opefty is being dediemed,the density befms
). However-, in no ease shall the beaus exeeed tkVefity f4Ve pefeef4
bonus;Stafffmds this standard not affUeable in th&ease.
statements and standaMs Ueablefor this pmjeef rf- the,AWheaw makes the revisions
B. Private Streets/Access:
Access for this development is proposed via a private street connection to S. Locust Grove in the
southeast corner of the site aligning with E. Coastline St. on the east side of Locust Grove (the
access into Tradewinds Subdivision). All private streets appear to meet UDC dimensional
standards for width,number of units, and turnarounds.
Because the site is a triangle shape, bordered on two sides by arterial streets and on one side by
the Ten Mile Creek, there is no opportunity for connectivity to any adjacent site and so ACHD
prefers private streets within the development. Consequently, because private streets take less
right-of-way than public streets and most notably because of the constraints just noted,-L the
Page 10
Page 240
Item#8.
Applicant agrees with this assessment and has proposed private streets throughout the
development.
City code requires that private streets are to be used in either a mew or gated development and
so this Applicant has proposed neith to construct a gated entry into the development with the
revised layout.
beeeme alley loaded garages off of the pi-ivate street by requesting to eliminate the required
parking pad through theN i;equest. Onee theAppliewit does this, the units ean be 19ushe
eommon lot and beeome a mew. Thus, the develeptnent would inelude a mew and meet the
The access point into the development does not meet ACHD district policy but they are modifying
their policy to accommodate access into the development because this is the best place for an
access to a residential development. This is largely because of the site constraints already
outlined above. The Applicant is proposing to construct private streets that are 24'wide with 5'
attached sidewalk on ene both sides of the main private street t reughe the pr-e e t and on one
side of the other two private streets within the development. Staff supports the proposed inehtsien
of tyre sidewalk layout on one side to ensure adequate pedestrian access in the development
except Staff believes an additional pedestrian connection to Locust Grove is necessail from near
the center of development. Since the Commission meeting the Applicant has also revised the
street layout to have the main street bend and meander through the site. This desi nn offers some
natural traffic calming and also changes where setbacks are taken from because setbacks are
measured from the back of sidewalk. On the submitted site plan (Exhibit VIII.E) the Applicant has
not appeared to take full advantage of these varying setback lines. Therefore, Staffisis
recommending a condition of approval that the Applicant vary the build-to-lines throughout the
development to eliminate any monotonous wall plane; this should occur with every other
structure showing a diLferent wall plane.
At the north end of the main street within the development(labeled as Compass Lane on the
landscape plans) the Applicant is proposing an emergency only access to Victory Road. This
access is required if more than 30 homes are to be constructed. Staff is not aware of the kind of
emergency access proposed but Meridian Fire prefers bollard type accesses for added efficiency
in emergency situations;Meridian Fire has approved the requested preliminary plat for fire
access, turnarounds, and road widths.
Page 11
Page 241
Item#8.
Near the center of the development the Applicant is showing a hammerhead type turnaround
because that dead-end street is longer than 150'and therefore is required to have a turnaround
for emergency vehicles. Since the hammerhead does not take up the full length of a buildable lot,
the Applicant is proposing the rest of that lot to be a small area of open space. WWh&ate
beeente par4 of the tar-ger eommon open Vaee mew lot. Further ana4wis is below in the Op
Vaee To remove the need for this hammerhead and the incentive to use this turnaround
as parkin spaces, Staff recommends revisions to this area of the site. The Applicant should
connect the two private streets shown as Galileo Road and Navigation Road along the eastern
property line, as shown below. This requires the applicant to remove two building lots and revise
� I
\ e
the plat and all other plans to show this connection. However, if these two roads connect, there is
no need for the hammerhead turnaround and the small proposed open space area at its terminus
and the Applicant could then add a unit to that lot resulting in a net loss of one unit. Staff finds
that this recommended revision makes for a more complete road network and allows better
circulation within the site for both residents and emer eenncy services.
As noted, the Applicant is now proposing to construct this development as a gated community to
meet the Private Street Standards. According to the revised preliminaryplat, the Applicant is
proposing the gate to be located approximately 130'into the private street access and after a set
ofguest parking, spaces. Sta(fappreciates the desire of the Applicant to add additional guest
parking but these parking spaces should be removed in lieu of a turnaround area so that anyone
who may pull into this private road on accident has the ability to turnaround safely. This is
needed because private streets are too narrow to safele turnaround within its 24 feet of ri h�t-o -
way. The Applicant should remove these 3 guest spaces and show a turnaround area in this area
instead.
Page 12
Page 242
Item#8.
C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements:
There appears to be an existing home on the propertyi this building will be demolished at the
time of development, according to the Applicant. There are no other site improvements known at
this time.
D. Proposed Use Analysis:
The proposed use is attached single-family and townhomes which are listed as principally
permitted uses in the R-15 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. There is one are four detached
units proposed and a better mix of duplex and triplex style townhomes shown on the revised plans
for elesest to the eat-- nee of the development.
As discussed in the comprehensive plan section above, the proposed use of attached single-family
homes would be a new type of residential use within almost a square mile in every direction of
this development. So long as the Applicant complies with the recommended conditions of
approval, including those regarding the road layoutadding an alley, loadedproduet op Staff
finds that the proposed use will be a welcomed addition to the City of Meridian and add more
housing options in this area of the City.
E. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2):
The proposed lots and the private streets appear to meet all UDC dimensional standards per the
submitted preliminary plat. This includes property sizes,required street frontages, and road
widths for the requested R-15 zoning district.Note: The City of Meridian does not have
maximum lot coverage or floor area ratio requirements so proposed homes can theoretically
more living area than proposed lot area or be close in area.
prepesed IoAq iviMin Me subdivision. This is the enlyrequest the,�ppkeant is making that w
adjHst the requhvd dintensional z9fandard-s. If thePUD request is appreved-, then all lets will be in
In addition, all subdivision developments are also required to comply with Subdivision Design
and Improvement Standards(UDC 11-6C-3). Stafffinds the proposed project meets these
standards.
F. 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 and attached dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per
unit. Future development should comply with these standards.No parking plan was submitted
with the application.
The proposed street sections(29 24 feet wide with attached sidewalks) of the private streets
within the development,shown on the submitted preliminary plat, CANNOT accommodate
parking on either side of the street. The entirety of the private streets will be required to be
labeled as `No Parking,"per the Meridian Fire recommendations. Each unit will be required to
meet the off-street parking standards and Staff encourages the developer of this site to include
provisions within their HOA bylaws that prohibit garages being used as storage. This would help
alleviate some of the parking issues seen throughout the City and especially in areas where no
on-street parking is allowed. The PUB-Site Map submitted by the applicant appears to show
compliance with the parking standards with a two-car garage for each unit and a parking pad.
we k4 lose theirj9a4dngpad through a P1,D ivquest to eliminate that requirement as hloit'P-4
Page 13
Page 243
Item#8.
The Applicant is also showing guest parking alone the main private street to total 9 additional
parking Spaces (does not include the 3 spaces outside of the entry gate that Staff is recommending
be removed in lieu of a turnaround area). Lot 3, Block 4 is proposing 6 guest spaces within an
open space lot that is not quali Being because it combines remnant areas that Staff does not find
meets UDC open space standards. Because of this, Staff encourages the Applicant to add
additional guest spaces in this area to better utilize the area.
G. Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8):
No multi-use pathways are proposed or required with this development because the required
multi-use pathway is already constructed on the west side of the Tenmile Creek on an adjacent
parcel.
This Applicant is proposing a 5-foot wide pathway on this side of the creek and behind the
proposed homes. This pathway connects to the private streets at the southern end of the project
and thru the common open space lot located midblock on the west side of the site. This pathway
also continues north and connects to the required sidewalk along Victory Road creating a
continuous pedestrian circulation path for the development.
H. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17):
Five-foot attached sidewalks are proposed along at least one side of all internal lee4_private
streets. Sidewalks are not required when constructing Private Streets. There is no existing
sidewalk along Victory Road or Locust Grove;and none are proposed with this project because
both arterial streets are scheduled to be widened as part of the roundabout project at this
intersection in 2021-22, according to ACHD, as stated above.
Detached sidewalks are required along arterial roadways per UDC 11-3A-17. The Applicant has
already agreed to dedicate additional right of way to ACHD for the roundabout and future
widening of Victory and Locust Grove.ACHD is requiring the Applicant to road trust for the
sidewalk improvements as the roundabout and associated improvements will likely be constructed
prior to construction of this site. In addition, this will ensure any improvements made by the
Applicant will not have to be removed to make the planned roundabout improvements. Therefore,
Staff is recommending that the Applicant comply with the ACHD conditions of approval for the
arterial sidewalks instead of constructing them with this project.
As discussed, the Applicant is proposing 5-foot attached sidewalks on at least one side of the
internal private streets to accommodate better pedestrian access through the development. Staff
recommends that Me&e all sidewalks and every expected pedestrian crossing be constructed with
pavers, stamped concrete, or similar to clearly delineate the sidewalks from the driving surface
and to subsequently help with pedestrian safety. In addition, Staff is recommending that with the
recommended road layout changes the Applicant add an additional sidewalk connection to
Locust Grove to improve pedestrian accessibility to the arterial sidewalks.
Page 14
Page 244
Item#8.
I. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B):
A 25-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to E. Victory and S. Locust Grove because they
are arterial streets. This buffer should be landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C
and placed into a common lot that is at least 25-feet wide. In most cases this common lot should
also contain the detached sidewalk required along all arterial roadways but in this case the
sidewalk abutting this site will be built with the ACHD roundabout project.
The submitted landscape plan and preliminary plat depict a 25 foot wide landscape buffer; the
correct number of trees appear to be shown on the submitted landscape plans (see Section
HIT C). However, there is no landscape calculations table as required by code. The Applicant
shall be required to submit revised plans that include a calculation table depicting the linear
footage of the landscape buffers, the required number of trees, their common name and their
scientific name, the class of tree, and the dimensions of the tree canopy at maturity; each type of
shrub proposed to be used should also be included in the calculations table.
the trees.shewn abNtting the inter-nal VMwte streets will be able te be 191aeed there. This eeneem
water and sewer main leeatiens�e aUeviate th&is-sue by redueing the everall wid4h ef th
easement.
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 is not included because there is no
Landscape Calculations table on the submitted landscape plans demonstrating compliance with
UDC standards. However, Staff can graphically see that the open space lots are vegetated
according to UDC standards. Still, the Applicant will be required to add a calculations table with
the recommendation noted above and revise the landscape plan to show the addition of the mew
between Lots 2-14, Block 2 as recommended by Staff.
The proposed pathway located behind the homes and adjacent to the Tenmile Creek is also
required to be landscaped with a tree every 100 feet per UDC 11-3B-12. However, the Applicant
did not include a 5-foot wide landscape bed on either side meant for the required trees. The
Applicant will need work with the irrigation district to obtain a license agreement to include at
least 5 feet of landscaping on one side of this pathway. Otherwise, the Applicant will need to
apply for Alternative Compliance with the Final Plat submittal so show an equal or better means
of compliance with this requirement.
J. Qualified Open Space(UDC 11-3G):
A minimum of 10%qualified open space meeting the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-313 is
required.According to the property size of 7.69 acres,the Applicant should supply at least 0.77
acres of qualified open space, or approximately 33,500 square feet. The applicant is proposing
3.2591 acres of open space, of which 2-84 3.4 acres is shown as qualifying open space on the
s4mitte revised open space exhibit(see Section VIII.D).
Some of the area listed as qualifying open space by the Applicant does not meet UDC standards
due to their size not being at least 5,000 square feet or being near the 50'x 100'dimensions.
Once this area is removed, the qualified open space proposed is 2.6897 acres-d
the Applicant should revise the open space exhibit to correctly label the qualified open space b
removing Lot 23, Block 1, Lot 1, Block 2, Lot 4, Block 3, and Lot 3 Block 4. Afere the
Page 15
Page 245
Item#8.
The open space for this development is vastly made up of the Tenmile Creek easement(2.12
acres) and the arterial street buffers (19,J&,k158 square feet of qualifying area).All of this area is
qualifying but the Tenmile Creek will be left natural(no improvements) and will be a buffer and
more of a visual amenity than usable open space for the development.
Abutting the creek and generally mid-block, the Applicant is proposing an open space lot that is
approximately 5,4- 700 square feet. This open space lot contains one set of the amenities and a
micro path that connects the private street to the pathway along the creek. This open space lot
and micro path offers a clear connection to one of the other miere paths in the develepment tha
runs beA�,een the homes in the eenter of Me development an the attached sidewalks throughout
the development and an additional open space area centrally located within the development.
ise the open spaee ealeulations to show this additienal eommon open Vaee lot eontaining the
mew between Lets ' 4 lee ' In general, the Applicant has increased the usable open space
areas throughout the site following the Commission's recommendation of denial and comments
regarding a desire to have more usable open space. With the reduction in unit count and
additional centralized open space, Sta finds the proposed open space not only in excess of code
requirements but also an improvement from previous layouts.
K. Qualified Site Amenities(UDC 11-3G):
Based on the area of the proposed plat, 7.69 acres, a minimum of one (1)qualified site amenity is
required to be provided per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C. The applicant has proposed
four(4) qualifying amenities in multiple locations: gazebos, seating around small plazas,
climbing rocks, and walking paths.
The proposed amenities exceed the minimum UDC requirements and Staff finds them to be
applicable for a community of this kind due to the variety of activity levels they can
accommodate.
L. 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 shown on
the landscape plan along the subdivision boundary and around the central open space lot along
the western portion of the site but no other fencing is shown. Fencing shown next to any open
space shall be open-vision or semi-private fencing per UDC requirements.
According to the Applicant, the exclusion of fencing between homes is purposeful despite the
homes being a for sale product. The Applicant intends for the open areas between homes to be a
more shared space than what is normal within a subdivision.
a niewfep seme ef Me units lends itself te Mis design as.Me units weuk4fi�nt en the mew an
Fencing is not required in these areas so Staff
has no conditions regarding this. However, there should be open-vision fencing along the western
edge of the pathway adjacent to the Tenmile Creek to ensure the safety of pedestrians, especially
children. Staff is recommending a condition of approval to show this additional fencing.
M. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 1 Architectural Standards Manual):
The Applicant has submitted sample elevations of the attached,triplex, single-family homes for
this project(see Section VIII.F).
The submitted elevations show all two-story attached structures with two-car garages and
imil finishing materials of wood and stone. In addition, the elevations show modern
architecture designs with shed roofs, second story patios with glass railings, and stone accents
that go the full height of the proposed homes. Staff has also not received elevations for the en
Page 16
Page 246
Item#8.
detached homes but detached homes do not normally require design review; if the Commission or
Council determine design review is needed for these detached units, Staff recommends an added
condition to require the entire property obtain design review as a blanket condition. 1fai-the e
duple i-t. However, attached single-family homes require design review approval prior to
building permit submittal and at that point, Staff will ensure compliance with the Architectural
Standards Manual. The submitted elevations for the townhome units appear to meet the
architectural standards but with the design review application for the site, the Applicant will be
required show additional styles and colors for these units. In addition, Staff recommends the
Applicant provide a different design for the units fronting on the recommended mew.
VII, DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation and zoning with the requirement of a
Development Agreement, and the preliminary plat, and plaimea „„it deve ,,..men with the
conditions noted in Section VIJI.A per the findings in Section IX of this staff report. The Director
has approved the private street and alternative compliance applications.
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on February 18,2021.At the
public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject Annexation,
Preliminary Plat, and Alternative Compliance requests.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing
a. In favor: Steve Arnold,Applicant Representative,
b. In opposition: Rhonda Unruh,neighbor; Stan Unruh,neighbor;John Buckner,neighbor;
Julie Edwards; Galen Mooso,neighbor;
C. Commenting: Steve Arnold,
d. Written testimony: None
e. Staff presenting application: Joseph Dodson,Associate Planner
f Other Staff commenting on application:None
2. Key issue(s) public testimony
a. Density of project and additional traffic that would be added to the adjacent intersection
and streets;
b. Does the project comply with the comprehensive plan in that it is a different We of
residential than the surrounding residential area;
c. Proposed density is high-density residential when adjacent neighborhoods are not—in
fact,the proposed project is not high density according to the City's definitions and
comprehensive plan.
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
a. The density of the revised project following the loss of 11 building lots;
b. How do the latest revisions (showing staff s recommended changes)affect the project;
C. Clarification on how the project meets the Private Street findings;
d. Review of the changes that have occurred followingthe he original recommendation of
denial by the P&Z Commission;
e. Staff s level of concern with the Applicant's recommended changes to the conditions of
approval;
f. Timeline of the ACHD roundabout and road widening projects being sooner than
previously. anticipated.
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. Modify Conditions VIII.A.Le and A.3.f to strike"sidewalk"from those conditions;
b. Add additional guest parking spaces along the common areas;
Page 17
Page 247
Item#8.
c. The Applicant work to provide an easement for a future mass transit stop along_its
perimeter.
5. Outstandingis for City Council:
a. A few of the conditions of approval regarding_ the preliminM plat and landscape plan
were not revised and presented to Staff at least ten(,10)days prior to the Council
hearing—However,the remaining issues can be handled prior to submittal of the Final
Plat.
C. The Meridian City Council heard these items on March 23,2021,April 27,2021, and May 25,
2021.At the public hearing.the Council moved to deny the subject Annexation and Zoning and
Preliminary Plat requests(the other requests are Director level and were approved by Staff: these
approvals are null and void following the overall denial by City Council). Multiple hearings were
held on this project due to the City Council pause on annexations while the state legislature
decided on new legislation;the three hearings are condensed and captured in this singular hearing
summary.
1. Summary of the City Council public hearing:
a. In favor: Steve Arnold.Applicant Representative;
b. In opposition: A number of people spoke out against the proposed project:please see the
public record and meeting minutes for the specific names.
c. Commenting: See above note.
d. Written testimony: More than 120 entries of public testimony were submitted against
this project from September 2020 to May 25,2021. Please see the public record here for
those comments.
e. Staff presenting application: Joseph Dodson,Associate Planner.
f. Other Staff commenting on application: Bill Parsons,Planning Supervisor
2. Key issue(s) of public testimony:
a. Density of project and additional traffic that would be added to the adjacent intersection
and streets:
b. Does the project comply with the comprehensive plan in that it is a different twe of
residential than the surrounding residential area;
C. Proposed density is high-density residential when adjacent neighborhoods are not—in
fact,the proposed project is not high density according to the City's definitions and
comprehensive plan.
d. Desire for Meridian to take a pause on growth altogether—at a minimum only approve
"smart growth."
3. Key issue(s) of discussion by City Council:
a. Review of the changes that have occurred following the original recommendation of
denial by the P&Z Commiss.
b. Location of sidewalks and any parking_proposed within the project despite not being_
required by code for Private Streets:
C. How is no on-street parking enforced if the streets are private instead of public—
d. Meridian PD has jurisdiction to issue parking tickets for violation even on private
streets:
e. What are the plans and the timeline for the ACHD roundabout project at Locust Grove
and Victory—does Staff have concerns with this timeline and the associated widening
adjacent to the subject site:
f. What is the proposed timing of the development in relation to the ACHD roundabout
project for the purnose of knowing whether the traffic issues at the adjacent intersection
will be mitigated or not:
Page 18
Page 248
Item#8.
g_ Probability of ACHD allowing an additional access to Victory to help with the traffic
and ingress/egress concerns presented by members of the public:
h. With timeline of the ACHD roundabout project not set in concrete and its current delay.
the existing and worsening traffic concerns at Locust Grove and Victory,and with no
other access points allowed by ACHD, should the City annex the subject property at
this time and add additional traffic to this area of the City,•
4. City Council change(s)to Commission recommendation.
a. Council denied the project so no changes were noted.
Page 19
Page 249
Item#8.
VIII. EXHIBITS
A. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit Map
a
DAVID EVANS
AND ASSOC I ATES INC
DESCRIPTION FOR
COMPASS POINTE SUBDIVSION
REZONE&ANNEXATION
The following describes a parcel of real property lying within the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter(NE1/4 NE1/4),Section 30,Township 3 North,Range 1 East,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,
Ada County,Idaho being more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the northeast corner of said NE1/4 NE1/4;Thence,along the east boundary line of said
NE1/4 NE1/4,South 00'14'11"West,1070.48 feet;
Thence,departing said east boundary line,North 30"12'47"West,1235.02 feet to the nortFi boundary
line of said NE1/4 NE1/4;
Thence,along said north boundary line,North 89'42'20"East,625.91 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING,
containing 7.69 acres more or less.
l
�w F
0
13 x
sF r a 1oP e�
P.SULL��P
Page 20
Page 250
Item#8.
625.91
n89°4220"e
Title: Date:05-19-2020
Scale: 1 inch=200 feet File:COMPASS POINTE SUB REZONE ANNEXATION.des
'tract 1: 7.690 Acres: 334998 Sq Feet:Closure—s72,0359w 0.00 Feet Precision>1/999999: Perimeter—2931 Feet
001=00.1411w 1070.48 003=n89.4220e 625.91
002=00.1247w 1235.02
Page 21
Page 251
Item#8.
EXHIBIT MAP OF
COMPASS POINTE SUBDIVISION
RE—ZONE & ANNEXATION
A PORTION OF THE NE 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 30,
T. 3 N., R 1 E., S.M.,
CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO
2020
E VICTORY RD
N $9'42'20" E 625.91'7h
PLS 8444 NE COR, SEC. 30
FOUND 1/2 REBAR FOUND BRASS CAP
28.95' WC
I
\ I
00
p
O w�
2 � 7
O
�p 7.69 ACRES± I O
a o
N.
I
FOUND 5/8 REBAR
ILLEGIBLE 1"=200'
DAVID EVANS o _
Q ANoASSOCIATES INC. a 1 4 6
0 9179 W Black Eagle Dr 'tc9
��19 D
Boise Idaho 7 °
Phone: 208-585-5858 s F F►oP�e�
qNP SU1L�`1P
Page 22
Page 252
B. Preliminary Plat(dated: 11/2/2020IQt ism,,- 2/l8/2021)II 12� D 1202 A 12
F 2
LLj
HIM'-
Lill al
Mid
q
Jl�
M
n
Page 23
Item#8.
C. Landscape Plan(dated: ' 12/20201/2, 0-2 2/18/2021)"Tarr n 12M2OV D
al
a 7 � y � _
� j u
J w
� e
o
,
I
�i
Page 24
Page 254
Item#8.
D. Open Space Exhibit(dated: ' 1 02i202n, 2 02 2/18/2021)NOT APPROVED
or
x
0
— �
f
F
U \
CO z
w N ° z am \ \F \F
w �
❑ \
w d O =
of z
O _
--
U
Page 25
Page 255
E. Site Plan—'TUD Map"(dated: 11,102/20201,12442424-2/18/2021)INCII: A 12M2 OVER
a
q F I F
V t
il L-I I
A
\C
�\ \ J\ �� ` z�u 3' N
up
I'A
Page 26
Item#8.
F. Conceptual Building Elevations
WHITE CLOUD
COLOR OPTION 1 - F' `4V'� STtDICS
.�s ....._..��,..... MORE.
w
ll LL
x�aw
O
Rm��
COLOR OPTION 7 - _ -- - - —RF'm 42 Q
COLOR OPTION 9
Mn
COLOR OPTION 447:1- 1p
3a f u3
AhTeAMrm
■ COVER SHEET
■ - . tee
WHITE C—D
sTUDios
® ® �LL
X (;w
j 6)
z Q F lJ
mal
�a
N-_�tK
a�, W
13 0 on j)
m r.
0 � y MIMI
111111
® e�
0-1
ELCVAYIONe
Page 27
Page 257
Item#8.
WHITE GLO'Jn
STucaos
COMPASS POINTE CONTEMPORARY MODERN aoT.aE.�E.o
2 BEDROOM 2112 BATH DUPLEX DUPLEX M�.s°.�
1689 50 FT
W
o'
- z
}} }; IL Q
r }
U
i
Telm
_ E
WHITE GLOWP
STUDlor
— W
_ 1
U
ELEVATK**
C;a'=,�a�
s
Page 28
Page 258
Item#8.
WHITE CLOUD
S TUD�IOS
COMPASS POINTS COLOR OPTION 1
3 BFDROOM 2 112 BATHROOM - 1951 90 FT
2 BEDROOM 2 112 BATHROOM TRIPLEX - Ia55 SQ 1=T
w
0
z o
T '�'• TAN STUCCO SIDING- Q
17
u.
I i
, cove SWEET
WHTE CLOUD
5TUDI
L:3-
-----
d)J Q
OOP
U
E SYA=!
AA 201 u
Page 29
Page 259
Item#8.
WHITE CLOUD
STUDIOS
COMPASS POINTE CONTEMPORY MODERN
3 BEDROOM 2 1/2 BATHROOM DUPLEX
Me SQ FT.
W
- o
OfjW
0 0
TePM
covm B"m
0�30>
u1HITE GLOIIn
sruvlos
O
iU O
- m.o� z27
m z
fj�}W
U
�.
TeAM
sELEYAYION6
Page 30
Page 260
Item#8.
IX. 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 approved
Preliminary Plat,PUD NUpafte Plan, Landscape Plan, and conceptual building
elevations for the development, especially the attached single-family dwellings,
included in Section VIII and the provisions contained herein.
b. The Applicant shall comply with the ordinances in effect at the time of
application submittal.
c. Direct lot access to E. Victory Road and S. Locust Grove Road shall be
prohibited.
d. The entire frontage improvements along E.Victory Road and S. Locust Grove
Road shall be completed with the first phase of development except for the
required sidewalks,per the conditions of approval by ACHD.
e. All sidewalks a-ad-pedestrian crossings within the subdivision shall be
constructed with pavers, stamped concrete,or similar to clearly delineate the
pedestrian pathways throughout the development and to add to the character of
the private development.
f Lots 2 14,Bleek 2 shall ha�ve redtieed par-king standards to inelude only th-e
required two (2) gar-age spaees pef the Planned Unit Development request.
2. The Appheant shall r-evise their-Planned Unit Develepmea4 r-eqttest to! 1)r-edtiee the lots
being asked for-a r-ear- yar-d sethaek relief, 2)r-equest an elimina4ion of the par-king-pad
r-equir-emefft of the off s#eet pafkiag standards (UPC 11 3C 6) for-Lots 2 >Bleek >
ifielude a mew at least 20 feet wide between these lots to meet the PUD and Private Str-ee
standards.
3. At least ten(10)days prior to the City Council hearing,the preliminary plat included in
Section VIILB, dated 1111 02QO201/21/2021, shall be revised as follows:
a. R&vise note#4 to list the biiilding lots that have a r-edueed r-eaf yafd sethaek per-the PUD
request(Lots 2 121,,,,E '21
0
1. Devise the plat t remove the guest a-ki outside of the gated eatfy a ifi to.,,l de et
t,,.-,,.,,-,,,,,,,1 area. show Lot 71 721,,,.E 2 as Tot 4 721,,..E 2 t coffeet a labeling mistake
e. Revise the plat to show Galilee Read and Navigation Read eenneet in the afea-,hewn-as
Lots 7 & 8, Bloek 3. show Lots 2 14 as alley leaded hemes that fFent on the centfal MeA
Page 31
Page 261
Item#8.
hammer4pe-Add fellewinR the ewmeetion of Galilee and Navii4afiea Read. Lot
5,Block 2 as at least a 20 foot wide eoffffaen lot ereating a mew and een4aining the
proposed fflier-0 path.
f Revise the plat to show all sidewalks an expected pedestrian crossings to be constructed
with pavers, stamped concrete, or similar to clearly delineate the pedestrian pathways
throughout the development and to add to the character of the private development.
g. Show additional guest parking on Lot-13,Block 24.
4. At least ten(10)days prior to the City Council hearing,the landscape plan included in
Section VIII.C, dated l l/�201/21/2021 shall be revised as follows:
a. Include a landscape calculations table that includes the following information at a
minimum: the linear footage of the landscape buffers,the required number of trees,their
common name and their scientific name,the class of tree, and the dimensions of the tree
canopy at maturity; each type of shrub proposed to be used should also be included in the
calculations table with the same accessory information as is required for the proposed
trees.
b. Show open vision fencing on the west side of the pathway abutting the Tenmile Creek;
all fencing shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7.
c. Revise the landseape plan to show the weemmeaded iayeut ehanges; any ehange
landseape ealeula4ions shall also be r-efleeted in the ealeula4ioas table.
d.
leemiens to allevia4e this issue by r-edueing the over-all width of the titility easement.
e. Show the required landscaping on the western side of the pathway abutting the Tenmile
Creek per UDC 11-313-12.
5. ,
open spaee per-the standards in UDG 11 3 G 3 and per-the revisions r-eeefliffiefided by Staffi.
6. Future development shall be consistent with the R-15 dimensional standards listed in UDC
Table 11-2A-7 for all buildable lots exeept for-these lots given o,l.,ee re thaek with.
7. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table
11-3C-6 for single-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit_except fer
•
8. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval as noted in Section IX.H.
9. The Applicant shall work with the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District to obtain a license
agreement to include a 5-foot wide landscape strip and the required landscaping(including
trees)per UDC 11-313-12 prior to applying for the Final Plat application; IF the Applicant can
prove this agreement could not be reached,the Applicant shall apply for Alternative
Compliance at the time of Final Plat application submittal for the required landscaping.
Page 32
Page 262
Item#8.
10. Administrative Design Review application is required to be submitted and approved prior to
submittal of any building permit applications for single-family attached dwellings as
applicable.
11. ,usable open spaee shall be pr-&vided for-eaeh d-welling
unit; this r-e"ir-emeat ea-a be satisfied thr-ough per-ehes,paties, deeks and enelesed yards a
few in UDG-11 7 4B. Future homes along the proposed"Compass Lane" shall provide
variation in building setbacks to provide for an attractive streetscape; a master-plan depicting
varying building setbacks shall be submitted with the required design review application(s).
12. The Ten Mile Creek that resides along the western boundary of the subject site shall be
protected during construction.
13. The Applicant shall comply with and maintain all applicable standards for the proposed
Private Streets as outlined in UDC 11-317.
14. "No Parking"signs shall be erected on both sides of the private streets throughout the
development; coordinate with Joe Bongiomo of the Fire Department if you have any questions
regarding this condition.
15. The pr-oposed development shall have a r-edueed r-ear- yar-d sethaek of no less than ten(10) fee
fer-Lets 1 6,Bleek 3 per-the Planned Unit Development fe"est.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.1 Connect the Compass Lane water main north to the water main in Victory Road.
1.2 At the end of Navigation Road,provide a meter pit for a 1"service and a 4"sleeve to the
northeast at the proposed edge of the future roundabout. This will be used for a future water
service to the roundabout for landscaping.
1.3 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan
requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. A streetlight future
installation agreement will be required for the streetlights on Locust Grove and Victory.
Locust Grove and Victory are scheduled to be improved by ACHD and streetlights will be
installed during the improvements. Contact the Transportation and Utility Coordinator for
additional information.
1.4 The geotechnical investigative report prepared by SITE Consulting,LLC dated April 6, 2020,
indicates some specific construction considerations and recommendations. The applicant
shall be responsible for the strict adherence of these considerations and recommendations
to help ensure that homes are constructed upon suitable bearing soils, and that groundwater
does not become a problem with home construction.
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.
Page 33
Page 263
Item#8.
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.
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.
Page 34
Page 264
Item#8.
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
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(MFD)
https:llweblink.meridianciU.or lWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=216616&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty
Page 35
Page 265
Item#8.
D. POLICE DEPARTMENT(MPD)
https:llweblink.meridianci(y.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=216663&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty
E. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCHOOL IMPACT TABLE
https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=216459&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty-
F. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ)
https:llweblink.meridiancioy.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=216673&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty
G. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT(CDH)
https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=216532&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty-
H. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https:llweblink.meridiancit E.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=217090&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC
Lty-
X. FINDINGS
A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E)
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;
Council finds the proposed zoning map amendment to R-I5 and proposed residential uses are
not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, regardless of if all provisions of the
Development Agreement and conditions of approval are complied with.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed districts,
specifically the purpose statement;
Council finds the proposed zoning map amendment will allow for the development of single-
family attached homes which will contribute to the range of housing opportunities available
within the City and especially in the area immediate to this site, consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, and the purpose statement of the residential district.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety,
and welfare;
Council finds the proposed zoning map amendment sheet will 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
Page 36
Page 266
Item#8.
Council finds the proposed zoning map amendment will fret 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.
Council finds the proposed annexation is no-Lin the best interest of the City per the Analysis
in Section VI.
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;
Council finds that the proposed plat, , is not in substantial
compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density,
transportation, and pedestrian connectivity. (Please see Comprehensive Dan a', � n
2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate
the proposed development;
Council finds that public services will be provided to the subject property with development.
(See Section IX 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;
Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at
their own cost, Council 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;
Council 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-T MX for more information.)
5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare;
and,
Council 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 project with specific conditions of approval relating to the scheduled road improvements
adjacent to the subject site. Council finds the project would be detrimental to the public health,
safety, or general welfare.
6. The development preserves significant natural,scenic or historic features.
The Applicant is preserving the Tenmile Creek that resides on the subject property; therefore,
Council finds the Applicant meets this finding.
C. Private Street Findings:
In order to approve the application,the Director shall find the following:
1. The design of the private street meets the requirements of this Article;
Page 37
Page 267
Item#8.
The design of the proposed private streets complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-
4. See analysis in Section VI for more information.
2. Granting approval of the private street would not cause damage hazard,or nuisance,or
other detriment to persons,property, or uses in the vicinity; and
Staff does not anticipate the proposed private streets would cause any hazard, nuisance or
other detriment to persons,property or uses in the vicinity if they are designed as proposed
and constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC I1-3F-4B.
3. The use and location of the private street shall not conflict with the comprehensive plan
and/or the regional transportation plan.
The location of the private streets does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and/or the
regional transportation plan despite needing Alternative Compliance for its connection
directly to an arterial street. With the constraints detailed and analyzed for this development,
Staff finds that local street access has been provided via a private street.
4. The proposed residential development(if applicable)is a mew or gated development.
The proposed Fesid-ential development does not inehide a mew or gates. The Appheant Sha
fthe eend;tions of apprev ' re aa' red*e The Applicant is proposing to construct the
residential development as a gated community and so. Stafffinds this development in
compliance with this finding.
D. Alternative Compliance:
In order to grant approval for alternative compliance to allow Private Streets directly off an
arterial,the director shall determine the following findings:
1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements is not feasible; OR
Access to this development is provided by a private street and the UDC restricts access to
both Victory Road and Locust Grove Road, arterial streets. There are no available local
street connections to the subject property due to it being a triangle shape bordered on two
sides by arterial streets and the other by the Tenmile Creek. Because the property is not
served by public local street streets and any public street would not be able to be extended to
any adjacent property, the Director finds strict adherence to the UDC is not feasible and
approves the request for the private streets to directly connect to S. Locust Grove Road, an
arterial street.
2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the
requirements; and
The Director finds the development proposed by the applicant as a whole provides an equal
or superior means for meeting the requirements in that it contributes to the unique character
of the area and provides diversity in housing types available within the City.
3. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair
the intended uses and character of the surrounding properties.
The Director finds that the proposed alternative means will not be detrimental to the public
welfare or impair the intended use%haracter of the surrounding properties and will
contribute to the character and variety of housing types in this area of the City.
Page 38
Page 268
Item#8.
shall,F. Planned unit Developmenti
Upon meommendation f-Fom the eommission,the eouneil shall make a full investigation
at the public hearing,
review the application. in order-to grant a planned developmen
request,the eouneil shall make the following findings�
1. The planned unit development demORStFates exeeptional high quality in site design
through the provision of > continuous,
development, visually related and funetionally linked
patterns of street and pathway layout, and building design;
2. The planned unit developmentpreserves the significant natural, scenic and/or hist- k
features;
,.t.,,,.1f ,.t,.,-eLs o/'the site ,. 1,,,;,,.,.p ,,,7
damage,3. The arrangement of uses and/or structures in the development does not eause
;
Stfffffii4s Ho proof that the proposed tises a,-st-FHettires will eatise damage, hazat4, o
4. The internal street, bike and pedestf!ian eireulation system is designed for the effiei
and safe flow of vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians without having a disruptive
influenee upon the aetivities and Nnetions eontained within the development, nor place
an undue bUFden upon existing transportation and otheF publie seFviees in
surrounding area;
If all eoHditioHs-of a
f;, et; ;t7, t7 ,d„ elO It O Hd-
park,5. Community facilities, such as a reereational,
and dedicated open spnee aFeas
NnetioRally Felated and aeeessible to all dwelling units via pedestrian and/or-bieyele-
pathways;
;ts, ;tl; the ,.,1„i,;
6. The proposal complies with the density and use standards requirements in accord with
ehftpteF
tl 1t
7 Regulations , of this title;
RegideiWab
Page 39
Page 269
Item#8.
8. The planned unit development is in eOHfOFmanee with the eompr-ehensive plan.
As.noted-in Seetien V of Mis-staff report, S4afffiw&Me development to be in eei*fomianee
with the eomprehensiveplai*.
Page 40
Page 270