Hacienda East - PP-12-011CITY OF MERIDIAN
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
AND
DECISION & ORDER
~E IDIZ IAN'S
~J
In the Matter of Preliminary Plat Consisting of 17 Residential Lots on 2.14 Acres for Hacienda East
Subdivision, Located on the East Side of N. Meridian Road, South of Chinden Boulevard by Jayo
Development.
Case No(s). PP-12-011
For the City Council Hearing Date of: November 7, 2012 (Findings on November 20, 2012)
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of November 7, 2012, incorporated
by reference)
2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of November 7, 2012, incorporated
by reference)
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of November 7,
2012, incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing
date of November 7, 2012, 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 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 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.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). PP-12-011
-1-
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 November 7, 2012, 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 preliminary plat is hereby conditionally approved per the conditions
of approval in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of November 7, 2012, 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 11-6B-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).
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 may be filed.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). PP-12-011
-2-
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 may be adversely affected by the final action of the
governing board may within twenty-eight (28) days a$er 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 November 7, 2012
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). PP-12-011
-3-
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the day of
2012.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BRAD HOAGLUN
COUNCIL VICE PRESIDENT CHARLIE ROUNTREE
COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA
COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BHZD
MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD
(TIE BREAKER)
VOTED ~/ ~
1% `.
VOTED
VOTED "~'
VOTED_ l~
_._=-
VOTED
~~~1-ter. ~i~,%,/~~ ~~
~~
e Weerd
~~°~A~L~~~c s ~
0
Attest: ~~~' ~~Q~
~~ of
E IDIAN~-
lOANO
• rF S +
aycee Hol n, City Clerk .~
y
F ~
~Dfr~e7'B~AS~~
Copy served upon Applicant, The Planning Department, Public .Works Department and City Attorney.
~~ ~(~ ~~
• d•
Date .
Ci le fice
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). PP-12-O11
-4-
EXHIBIT A
STAFF REPORT
Hearing Date:
TO:
FROM:
E IDIAN~--
IDAHO
SUBJECT:
November 7, 2012
Mayor and City Council
Bill Parsons, Associate City Planner
208-884-5533
PP-12-011 -Hacienda East
I. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, Jayo Development, has applied for preliminary plat (PP) approval for 17 residential
lots on 2.14 acres in an R-8 zone.
IL SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the proposed PP application based on the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law in Exhibit C of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning & Zoning
Commission heard this item on October 4, 2012. At the public hearing, the Commission voted to
recommend approval of the subiect PP request.
a. Summary of Commission Public HearinE:
i. In favor: Jon Breckon
ii. In opposition: None
iii. Commenting: None
iv. Written testimony: None
v. Staff presentinE application: Bill Parsons
vi. Other staff commenting on application: None
b. Kev Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission:
i. None
c. Kev Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation:
i. None
d. OutstandinE Issue(s) for City Council:
i. None
~, ummarv of City Council Public Hearin:
i. In favor: Jon Breckon
il. In on_nosition: None
ill. Commentin.~: None
lY. Written testimony: None
y. Staff nresentin,~ annlication: Bill Parsons
yy Other staff commenting on annlication: None
]~ ev Issues of Discussion by Council•
i= None
~_ Key Council Changes to Staff/Commission Recommendation
is None
Hacienda East Subdivision - PP-12-011 PAGE 1
EXHIBIT A
III. PROPOSED MOTION
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number PP-12-011
as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 7, 2012, with the following
modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number PP-12-011, as
presented during the hearing on November 7, 2012, for the following reasons: (You should state
specific reasons for denial.)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number PP-12-011 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here)
for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.)
IV. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
A. Site Address/Location:
The site is located on the east side of N. Meridian Road; south of Chinden Boulevard in the
northwest'/4 of Section 30, Township 4 North, Range 1 East.
B. Applicant:
Jayo Development
10564 W. Business Park Lane
Boise, Idaho 83709
C. Owner:
Same as applicant
D. Representative:
Jon Breckon, Breckon Land Design, Inc.
181 E. 50~' Street
Garden City, Idaho 83714
E. Applicant's Statement/Justification: Please see applicant's narrative for this information.
V. PROCESS FACTS
A. The subject application is for a preliminary plat. A public hearing is required before the Planning
& Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter, consistent with Meridian City Code Title
11, Chapter 5.
B. Newspaper notifications published on: September 17, and October 1, 2012 (Commission);
October 15, and 29, 2012 (City Council)
C. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: September 27, 2012 (Commission);
October 12, 2012 (City Council)
D. Applicant posted notice on site by: September 24, 2012 (Commission); October 25, 2012 (City
Council
VI. LAND USE
A. Existing Land Use(s): This property is currently vacant residential property.
Hacienda East Subdivision - PP-12-011 PAGE 2
EXHIBIT A
B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning:
1. North: Holy Apostles Church; zoned RUT (Ada County)
2. East: Saguaro Canyon Subdivision; zoned R-4.
3. South: Single Family Residence; zoned RUT (Ada County)
4. West: Single Family Residences and Paramount Subdivision; zoned RUT (Ada County) and
R-8.
C. History of Previous Actions:
• The subject property received annexation (AZ-04-034), preliminary plat (PP-04-043), and
conditional use permit/planned development (CUP-04-052) approval in 2004. The approved
preliminary plat consisted of 96 residential lots (patio homes and townhomes) and 28
common lots on 19.63 acres.
The approved conditional use permit/planned development allowed reduced lot sizes, lot
frontages and zero lot lines to construct townhomes. A majority of the townhome lots are
being re-platted with the subject application to develop patio homes consistent with the other
single family detached homes constructed in the development. Currently, two townhomes
consisting of 4 units each are constructed within the development.
• The Hacienda final plat (FP-OS-031) was approved by City Council on May 24, 2005 and
recorded on August 6, 2006. The final plat consisted of 96 residential lots and 28 common
lots on 19.63 acres of land; zoned R-8.
D. Utilities:
a. Location of sewer: currently installed and approved.
b. Location of water: currently installed and approved.
c. Issues or concerns: None
E. Physical Features:
1. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: The North Slough was tiled with the Hacienda Subdivision.
2. Hazards: NA
Flood Plain: This property does not lie within the floodplain or flood way.
VII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
The subject property is designated "Medium Density Residential" (MDR) on the future land use
map. The MDR designation allows smaller lots for residential purposes within City limits. Uses
may include single-family homes at densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The applicant is
re-platting the twenty-nine (29) existing townhome lots along the south and east boundary to
create seventeen (17) single family detached single family lots on 2.14 acres. The gross density of
7.94 dwelling units per acre proposed with the subdivision is consistent with the MDR
designation and the R-8 zone.
Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and
apply to the proposed use of this property (staff analysis in italics):
• Permit new development where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final
approval and development is continuous to the City (Chapter 3, page 45).
Hacienda East Subdivision - PP-12-011 PAGE 3
EXHIBIT A
City services were extended with the original Hacienda Subdivision. Because this is a re plat
of the existing townhome lots a certain number of utilities need to be abandoned to
accommodate the new plat design.
• Require new residential development to meet development standards regarding landscaping,
signage, fences and walls, etc.
The proposed plat includes reducing the amount of open space approved with the planned
development however; the overall project still exceeds the minimum 10% open space
requirements of the UDC. Overall open space for the Hacienda Subdivision is 14%.
Additionally, fencing is required along the perimeter as part of the planned development in
2004.
• Require street connections between subdivisions at regular intervals to enhance connectivity
and better traffic flow (Chapter 3, page 48).
The existing street network is not changing with the subject application.
In summary, Staff is of the opinion the proposed plat is appropriate for the property based on the
applicable comprehensive plan policies.
VIII. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
A. Purpose Statement of Zone: Per UDC 11-2A-1, 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.
B. Schedule of Use: Unified Development Code (UDC) Table 11-2A-2 lists the principal permitted
(P), accessory (A), conditional (C), and prohibited (-) uses in the R-8 zoning district. Any use not
explicitly listed, or listed as a prohibited use is prohibited. The proposed use of the property is for
single-family detached dwellings, a principally permitted use in the R-8 zoning district.
C. Dimensional Standards: Development of the site must be consistent with the dimensional
standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district.
D. Off-Street Parking: Off-street parking is required in accord with UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-
family dwellings.
IX. ANALYSIS
A. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation:
PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP): A preliminary plat is proposed for 17 building lots on 2.14 acres of
land in an existing R-8 zoning district. The intent of the new plat is to convert the remaining
twenty-nine (29) townhome lots and three (3) common lots platted with the Hacienda Subdivision
into single family patio home lots. Lot sizes range between 5,061 and 5,993 square feet. All of the
proposed lots conform to the R-8 dimensional standards.
With the loss of the common lots, staff has evaluated the overall open space requirements for the
Hacienda Subdivision to ensure the project still complies with the 10 percent open space required
by the planned development. Even with the loss of the common lots, the site contains 14% open
space. The 35-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to Meridian Road will remain in accord with
the original Hacienda approval. Amenities within the development include passive open space
lots, internal pathways, clubhouse and a pool.
Hacienda East Subdivision - PP-12-011 PAGE 4
EXHIBIT A
Access to the proposed lots is provided from the existing street system developed with the
Hacienda Subdivision. No changes are proposed to the existing street network.
Since the proposed plat complies with the R-8 dimensional standards and open space
requirements, Staff recommends approval of the proposed PP request for this site with the
recommended conditions listed in Exhibit B of this report in accord with the findings contained in
Exhibit C.
X. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings
1. Vicinity Map
2. Proposed Preliminary Plat
B. Agency Comments/Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
2. Public Works Department
3. Fire Deparhnent
4. Police Department
5. Republic Services
6. Parks Department
7. Ada County Highway District
C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
Hacienda East Subdivision - PP-12-011 PAGE 5
EXHIBIT A
Exhibit A.1: Vicinity Man
~~. _ -.-~
~~ ~. ,. " W PPoduc'er dr ' ~"'
~-
ps ~ ~ v 1 '
`ti ss
~~ f ~ I~
1
~~, w
i
~;
Exhibit A PAGli 1
EXHIBIT A
Exhibit A PAGE 2
Exhibit A.2: Proposed Preliminary Plat
EXHIBIT A
B. Conditions of Approval
1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.1.1 The applicant shall construct all fencing consistent with the fencing plan approved with the
Hacienda Subdivision. Perimeter fencing may be constructed with the home construction as
approved with MFP-08-006.
1.2 General Conditions of Approval
1.2.1 Comply with all bulk, use, and development standards of the R-8 zoning district listed in UDC
11-2-A-6.
1.2.2 Provide a pressurized irrigation system consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-
15, UDC 11-3B-6 and MCC 9-1-28.
1.2.3 Comply with the sidewalk standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17.
1.2.4 Install all utilities consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-21 and 11-3B-SJ.
1.2.5 Construct all off-street parking areas consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3C-6
for single-family dwellings.
1.2.6 Protect any existing trees on the subject property that are greater than four-inch caliper and/or
mitigate for the loss of such trees as set forth in UDC 11-3B-10.
1.2.7 Comply with all provisions of UDC 11-3A-3 with regard to maintaining the clear vision triangle.
1.3 Ongoing Conditions of Approval
1.3.1 The applicant and/or assigns shall have the continuing obligation to provide irrigation that meets
the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-6 and to install and maintain all landscaping as set forth
in UDC 11-3B-5, UDC 11-3B-13 and UDC 11-3B-14.
1.3.2 All common open space shall be maintained by an owner's association as set forth in UDC 11-
3 G-3F 1.
1.3.3 The project is subject to all current City of Meridian ordinances and any applicable conditions of
approval associated with this site (AZ-04-034; PP-04-043; CUP-04-052 and FP-OS-031).
1.3.4 The applicant and/or property owner shall have an ongoing obligation to prune all trees to a
minimum height of six feet above the ground or sidewalk surface to afford greater visibility of the
area.
1.3.5 The applicant has a continuing obligation to comply with the outdoor lighting provisions as set
forth in UDC 11-3A-11.
1.3.6 The applicant and/or property owner shall have an ongoing obligation to maintain all landscaping
and constructed features within the clear vision triangle consistent with the standards in UDC 11-
3A-3.
1.3.7 Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved Hacienda
development does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance.
1.4 Process Conditions of Approval
1.4.1 The applicant shall complete all improvements related to public life, safety, and health as set forth
in UDC 11-SC-3B. A surety agreement may be accepted for other improvements in accord with
UDC 11-SC-3C.
Exhibit B PAGE 1
EXHIBIT A
1.4.2 The final plat, and any phase thereof, shall substantially comply with the approved preliminary
plat as set forth in UDC 11-6B-3C2.
1.4.3 The applicant shall obtain approval for all successive phases of the preliminary plat within two
years of the signature of the City Engineer on the previous final plat as set forth in UDC 11-6B-
7B.
1.4.4 The preliminary plat approval shall be null and void if the applicant fails to either 1) obtain the
City Engineer signature on a final plat within two years or 2) gain approval of a time extension as
set forth in UDC 11-6B-7.
2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
2.1 All services that will not be used will need to be abandoned back to the city main.
3. FIRE DEPARTMENT
3.1 The proposed project has no Fire Department concerns.
4. POLICE DEPARTMENT
4.1 The Police Department has no concerns related to the site design submitted with the application.
5. REPUBLIC SERVICES
5.1 Republic Services has no comments related to this application.
6. PARKS DEPARTMENT
6.1 The Parks Department has no comments related to this application.
7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
7.1 ACRD has no site specific conditions related to this application.
Exhibit B PAGE 2
EXHIBIT A
C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
1. 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:
In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat,
the Council shall make the following findings:
A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with this
unified development code;
The Council finds that the proposed plat generally complies with the comprehensive plan
and is consistent with the UDC. The Council finds the proposed plat comports to the
dimensional standards of the R-8 zoning district and the subdivision regulations set forth
in the UDC (please see Section 7 and Section 9 of the Staff Report for detailed analysis
that apply to this development).
B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to
accommodate the proposed development;
The Council finds that services can be made available to accommodate the proposed
development.
C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the
City's capital improvement program;
Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their
cost, the Council finds that the subdivisions will not require the expenditure of capital
improvement funds.
D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed
development;
Staff recommends the Commission and Council rely upon comments from the public
service providers (i.e., police, fire, ACHD, etc.) to determine this finding.
E. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general
welfare; and
The Council is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with
the development of the subdivision that should be brought to their attention. ACHD
considers road safety issues in their analysis. Staff recommends that the Council
reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the
proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or an environmental problem of which
Commission is unaware.
F. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features.
The Council is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features on this site. Therefore,
the Council finds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or
damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. The Council
should reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not
the proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of major
importance of which Commission is unaware.
Exhibit C PAGE 1