Loading...
Grau property MDA-11-009CITY OF MERH)LAN FINDBVGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER ~~yl E IDIAN~-- fDAH® In the Matter of the Request to Modify the Existing Development Agreement for the Grau Property to Extend the Time Period Allowed for the Agreement to be Signed, Located at 4135 W. Cherry Lane, by Bill Grau. Case No(s). MDA-11-009 For the City Council Hearing Date of: September 27, 2011 (Findings on October 11, 2011) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of September 27, 2011, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of September 27, 2011, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of September 27, 2011, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of September 27, 2011, 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 (LC. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted April 19, 2011, Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governrnental 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. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). MDA-1 ]-009 I- 6. That the City has granted an order of approval 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 Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of September 27, 2011, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA 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 a development agreement modification to extend the time period in which the agreement can be signed is hereby approved per the provisions in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of September 27, 2011, attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two (2) Year Development Agreement Duration The amended development agreement shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the City within two (2) years of the City Council granting approval of the modification (UDC 11- SB-3D). 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 two (2) year approval period (UDC 11-SB-3F). E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, denial of a development application entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 2. 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 maybe 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 date of September 27, 2011 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). MDA-] ]-009 -2- By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the I ~_ day of ~~~._ , 2011. COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAVID ZAREMBA COUNCIL VICE PRESIDENT BRAD HOAGLUN COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIlZD MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) Attest: ee Clerk Q~pTBD C~ Q~ ~~ Mayo. City of E IDIAN~ ,~ ioaNo ~~ ~. ~~ ~~~ a ..~~~ de Weerd VOTED U~~ Q -- -- VOTED VOTED__6~ VOTED VOTED Copy served upon Applicant, The Planning Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. BY~ Dated: (~ ' ~ Z, - 2, O l ~ Cit}~ Jerk' O CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). MDA-11-009 -3- EXHIBIT A STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: September 27, 2011 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Sonya Watters, Associate City Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: MDA-11-009 -Grau (~~E IDIAN~-- IDAHO I. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, Bill Grau, requests approval to modify the existing development agreement (MDA) to extend the time period allowed for the agreement to be signed. See Section IXAnalysis for more information. II. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the proposed MDA to extend the period in which the agreement must be signed until September 27, 2013. as ummarv of City Council Pnblic Hearing: i. In favor: None (no one testified) ii. In onnosition: None iii. Commenting: None fiY. Written testimonv: None y, Staff nresentinp, aRnlication: Bill Parsons Yi. Other staff commenting on annlication: None lr. ev issues of Discussion by ConnciF 1. L~IOne s, Keg Council Changes to Staff/Commission Recommendation L None III. PROPOSED MOTION Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number MDA-11- 009 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 27, 2011, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny MDA-11-009 as presented during the hearing on September 27, 2011, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial.) Continuance I move to continue File Number MDA-11-009 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) IV. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS A. Site Address/Location: The subject property is located at 4135 W. Chevy Lane, in Section 10, Township 3N., Range 1W. EXHIBIT A B. Owner(s): Bill Grau 4135 W. Cherry Lane Meridian, ID 83642 C. Applicant: Same as owner D. Representative: Same as owner/applicant E. Applicant's Statement/Justification: Please see applicant's narrative for this information. V. PROCESS FACTS A. The subject application is for a development agreement modification. A public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter, consistent with Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 5. B. Newspaper notifications published on: September 5, and 19, 2011 C. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: September 1, 2011 D. Applicant posted notice on site by: September 14, 2011 VI. LAND U5E A. Existing Land Use(s) and Zoning: The current land use of this property is single-family residential, zoned Rl in Ada County. B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Golf View Estates Subdivision, zoned R-4; Cherry Lane Village Subdivision, zoned R-4 2. East: Rod's Parkside Creek Subdivision, zoned R-4 3. South: Cherrywood Village Subdivision, zoned R-8 4. West: Cherrywood Village Subdivision, zoned R-8 C. History of Previous Actions: • In 1999, Ada County Development Services approved an in-home occupation for a hair salon to operate on the subject property as an accessory use to the residential use of the property. • In 2007, the City Council approved an annexation and zoning (AZ-07-003) request for the subject property consisting of 1.0 acre from the Rl zoning district in Ada County to the L-O (0.32 acre) and R-8 (0.68 acre) zoning districts. A development agreement was required as a provision of annexation; however, the applicant has not yet signed the agreement. Therefore, annexation of the property was not fmalized and the property remains in Ada County. D. Utilities: 1. Public Works: a. Location of sewer: Not Applicable with this application. b. Location of water: Not Applicable with this application. c. Issues or concerns: None EXHIBIT A E. Physical Features: 1. Canals/Ditches Irrigafion: NA 2. Hazards: NA 3. Flood Plain: NA VH. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This property is designated "Medium Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. This designation allows smaller lots for residential purposes within the city limits. Uses may include single-family homes at densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The previously approved R-8 zoning far the rear portion (0.58 acre) of this property complies with the medium density residential designation for this property. At the discretion of City Council, areas with a residential Comprehensive Plan designation may request office uses if the property has frontage on an arterial street or a section line road and is 3 acres in size or less in size. In this instance, no ancillary commercial uses are permitted. Because the subject property has frontage on an arterial street, Cherry Lane, and is less than 3 acres in size (1.0 acres), Council deemed it appropriate for the front portion (0.48 of an acre) of the property to develop with office use(s) with an L-O zoning district. VHI. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE A. Purpose Statement of Zone: 1. Residential Zoning: The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. 2. Commercial Zoning: The purpose of the L-O zone is to permit the establishment of groupings of professional, research, executive, administrative, accounting, clerical, stenographic, public service and similar used which shall not involve heavy testing operations of any kind or product manufacturing of such a nature to create noise, vibration, or emissions of a nature offensive to the overall purpose of the District. B. Zoning Schedule of Use Control (IJDC 11-2A): R-8 District UDC 11-2A-21ists single-family dwellings as a principal permitted use in the R- 8zoning district. 2. L-O District: UDC Table 11-2B-2 lists several uses as pemutted and conditional uses in the L-O zoning district. Office (professional service) uses are listed as a principle permitted use in the L-O zoning district. IX. ANALYSIS A. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: The request is for a modification to the Development Agreement (DA) to extend the time period allowed for the applicant to sign the agreement. The applicant did not submit a conceptual development plan with the annexation & zoning (AZ) request. However, a preliminary plat was approved concurrently with the AZ that consisted of one commercial office building lot & one common lot (street buffer) on the front 0.32 acre portion of the site approved to be zoned L-O; and three single-family residential building lots on EXHIBIT A the rear 0.68 acre portion of the site approved to be zoned R-8. The preliminary plat has since expired. A provision is included in the DA that requires development to conform to the preliminary plat & landscape plan. Because the plat has expired which was proposed to divide the property in accord with the zoning boundary between the R-8 and L-O districts, annexation of the property with two zoning districts would result in a split-zoned parcel. To remedy this, staff recommends a new provision be added to the DA that requires the applicant to obtain approval of a preliminary & final plat and subsequently record a final plat that is consistent with the zoning boundaries approved with the annexation prior to submittal of any development applications for the property. This provision would replace the current provision that states, "That development of this property shall generally conform to the Preliminary Plat and Landscape Plan prepared by Stanley Consultants, Inc., and Brooks Design Group, respectively." The applicant would like an extension to sign the DA in order to keep the zoning entitlement that was approved for this property. Staff recommends approval of the applicant's request. X. EXHIBITS A. Drawings/Other 1. Vicinity Map 2. Previously Approved Zoning Boundary Map 3. Staff Recommended Changes to Development Agreement EXHIBIT A Exhibit A.1: Vicinity Map EXHIBIT A Exhibit A.2: Previously Approved Zoning Boundary Map 4 3 s es•+4'n~-e` W. ,CHERRY LANE 219588' m • ' 9 10 ~~~' S 89'44'11" E ~~n 124.90' __- 0 O -__--_ ~ -. ~ + appRC7YAL -----~ - - ,..._._ ~ i I 5Y ~J I ~ n~~ i ;i .Er~,~ I IAN PUBLIC w Q I~ fw i ~~p,1~1`~~51~ . _ _ .13x.9$' N 88'52'03" 1~ y ---------- ----------- MFJ~Ip ~I WORK6OgPL Z~1NE L ~ I Q ~~ 2 ~'.~ t1VPLATIED' ---~ ~ C 475 4CRE~ ~ ~ V+ u~] I ,O M ~ G! s s9'27'32'` w _ _L ivs5, ! ~ I 3 I~ BL C1C!( 7 ~ ~~ -. ~ -~ - F.111 ~~ •- as I~~ ~~ o \` aim 4 m ~ ~ ~ ZONE 1?8 Q-584 ACMES _- ~ I ' ~~. dV~ G~4E Y ~ ~ ~ ~4G~ ~ ~ 1y~_ EXHIBIT A 3. Proposed Changes to Development Agreement Staff recommends the following changes to the development agreement: 1. The time period in which the agreement must be signed by the owner shall be extended until September 27, 2013. 2. Replace the current provision that states, "That development of this property shall generally conform to the Preliminary Plat and Landscape Plan prepared by Stanley Consultants, Inc., and Brooks Design Group, respectively" with, "The owner shall obtain approval of a preliminary & final plat and subsequently record a fmal plat that is consistent with the zoning boundaries approved with the annexation prior to submittal of any development applications for the property."