Document Star_doc_975b9380b0

NOTICE OF STAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING Star City Hall January 21, 2020 7:00 pm AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER (Welcome/Pledge of Allegiance) 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA (Approval of Agenda as it stands/Amend Agenda) Action Item 4. CONSENT AGENDA Action Items *All matters listed within the Consent Agenda have been distributed to each member of the Star City Council for reading and study, they are considered to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion of the Consent Agenda or placed on the Regular Agenda by request. A. Regular Meeting Minutes of: June 4, 2019 B. Regular Meeting Minutes of January 7, 2020 C. Confirmation of Transportation Committee Members – Jon Turnipseed, Chris Todd, John Tensen D. Confirmation of Beautification Committee Member – Stacey Camera 5. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Action Items A. Public Hearing: Rezone & Conditional Use Permit - Seneca Springs Development B. Public Hearing: Rezone & Planned Unit Development - 10362 State Street C. Public Hearing: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat Torchlight Estates Subdivision D. Transportation Improvement Program Items 6. REPORTS 7. ADJOURNMENT Action Item ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 1 Star City Council Meeting Minutes June 4, 2019 The regular meeting of the Star City Council was held on June 4, 2019 at 7:00 pm at Star City Hall, 10769 W. State Street in Star, Idaho. Mayor Chad Bell called the meeting to order and all stood for the Pledge of Allegiance. Roll Call: Councilmen David Hershey, Michael Keyes, Trevor Chadwick, and Kevin Nielsen were present. Approval of the Agenda: Chadwick moved to approve the agenda, Keyes seconded the motion. All ayes: motion carried. Consent Agenda: Chadwick moved to approve the consent agenda consisting of: Meeting Minutes for April 16, 2019, Workshop Notes of May 23, 2019, Claims Against the City for May 2019, Final Plat for Trident Ridge Subdivision, and Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law for Moon Valley Subdivision and Star RV Resort, Nielsen seconded the motion. Keyes stated when he read through the consent agenda there was an item in there that he had a question about, it was the development agreement between the Sundance Company and the City of Star and he consulted with staff and they indicated that was actually placed in there for us to review and was not meant to be approved on the consent agenda this evening, so I would ask that the motion be amended to except that development agreement outside of approval. Chadwick stated so moved, and Nielsen seconded. All ayes: motion carried. Presentations/Public Input: Committee Reports - Dana Partridge, Activities Committee Chair, stated they are working on the Hometown Celebration and everything is about ready. They have received approval from ITD for the parade, still working on the food, good on the kid games, fireworks are good, and they need more contestants for the talent show but the sign-up deadline in June 7th and they understand contestants usually signup at the last minute. They are now working on fundraising. The garden show was well attended last weekend. On June 11 they will have an orientation meeting at City Hall for the Mayor’s Youth Council. Movie night is June 14th at 8:00 pm and they have a new screen lined up. Mike Olsen, Beautification and Public Relations Committee Chair, gave an update on the military event held May 18th and stated it was adequately attended. They are in discussions on what to do next year for the military event. The Committee is working on a float for the Hometown Celebration and will begin working on Make Star Shine Day. Public Input - Richard Linhart, 484 S. Devon Avenue, Star, Idaho, stated he is a food animal veterinarian, lives in the Heron River Subdivision and is a bee keeper. He recently learned he is not compliant with Star's ordinances regarding farm animals, specifically the keeping of bees. He stated he is before the Council asking them to consider adopting a new ordinance regarding the keeping of honey bees within the City limits. He stated he had sent them by e-mail a proposed model beekeeping ordinance and had hard copies with him if they would like. ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 2 Chadwick suggested they hold a workshop so they could get a better understanding of what this is all about. Mayor Bell asked Linhart if he would be willing to come to a future meeting and give a presentation, to which Linhart stated he would. Dana Partridge, 1330 W. 2nd Street, Star, Idaho, stated that from her being at City Hall more frequently she has been hearing people asking for a new dog park and they are asking for consideration of fencing in the current dog park. Chadwick stated they have discussed dog parks at a workshop and the possibility of creating one in a new location. Old/New Business: Reconsideration – Iron Mountain Estates: Mayor Bell explained this is a public hearing for a public hearing previously held. This reconsideration for Iron Mountain Estates was brought by the City and the hearing was re-noticed and re-published in the paper. Chris Yorgason, Legal Counsel, stated the hearing could be held like a normal public hearing and let the applicant begin with their presentation. The Mayor asked Council if they had any ex-parte contact or conflicts of interest to disclose; Council stated none. Keyes stated that at the first hearing he disclosed that at one time he had had financial interest in a piece of property that was near this development and he no longer has an interest in that parcel and his interest had ended before this application was submitted to the City. He clarified that parcel adjoined this parcel to the east and because of his due diligence in the investigation of that project he may have knowledge that the other Councilmen may not have; and after learning more from Legal Counsel if it is pertinent to the matter at hand he may inject additional facts. Mayor Bell declared the public hearing open and asked Jay Walker, applicant's representative, to come forward and present. Applicant: Jay Walker, Alterra Consulting, 849 East State Street, Eagle, Idaho stated he represents Todd Campbell Construction and they are seeking annexation and rezone and preliminary plat approval. Since they were notified of the reconsideration they have met with staff where they learned specifically the reasons for the reconsideration. He stated he would address the three main concerns. One was the stub road location to the East and noted that staff, engineer, and developer have performed a site review and he will address further. In regards to the open space they have revised their plat and their landscape plans to comply with City ordinances. The third item was a section along N. Pollard Lane and consideration of safety. In regards to the location of the east stub road, they have continued at the location that was based on the topography survey, the engineer recommendation provided to the client and per review and approval from ACHD, have had site reviews with City staff, and all have agreed it is the softer of the slopes along that frontage and shared boundary. It is consistent with their plan and with their recommended phasing that the property owner has the liberty to take. In the common area they have added the minimum open space requirement with a shelter and connectivity to the perimeter sidewalk and pedestrian amenities. The shelter is located centrally in the island, has a landscaped berm, BBQ racks and an electrical outlet for public use. They felt with the larger lots that moms would prefer close vigilance of their children and if they did have a desire to go to a larger park area in proximity to their homes it would most likely be the public ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 3 amenity of the school; and staff agreed with that. They feel they are providing a little more useable amenity with the shelter and a gathering place as well as connectivity with the walking paths to the school area. Following meetings with ACHD, which started in 2018, Walker read from their letter noting the large canal along the east side of Pollard Lane adjacent to this project. The applicant as part of constructing Iron Mountain Ridge, a development across the street, has dedicated additional right-of-way to ACHD for the widening of Pollard Lane on the west side along with the school district. On the east side of the canal they have included a five foot concrete sidewalk consistent with their detached policy on a collector road such as N. Pollard Lane. They are proposeing to the easterly side of the canal and within the thirty foot easement associated with Farmers Canal, a guard rail between the extruded curve and the multi-purpose pathway and the abrupt edge of the rock wall that continues down into the canal. The other side has boulders and riff raft and there is no need for any maintenance. In meetings with the Board and Craig Waldell of the Farmers Union Canal they have committed to a ten foot, three quarter base access maintenance road with low vegetation, the five foot required sidewalk and then there is a ten foot landscape buffer on either side, with one ten foot landscape area with trees and a vinyl privacy fence against the back of the yards of the homes. Walker stated they feel this will provide a safe passage for multiple users along Pollard and to the school. They have two accesses and one of the accesses will have an access crossing to the school and they are working with ACHD for a bouncing ball indicator activated by a push button to cross Pollard Lane. Nielsen thanked them for coming back and looking at their concerns. He asked Walker if the guard rail is intended to extend all along the length of the property. Walker stated yes it is their intent, but it has to be approved by ACHD. The Mayor asked if any of the ditch is on their property. Walker stated very little of it is within the applicant's property; most of it is in ACHD's right-of-way. They do have the thirty foot easement that is wholly within the applicant's property. Keyes thanked them for reconsidering the open space and asked what percentage of open space is now in the plan. Walker stated he had not calculated that but previously was 5.8 percent in the previous presentation, and this is now in excess of that as they have added extensively to the open space, so are well within ordinance requirements. Keyes stated that some of the concern with the road to the east was not that the road was not compliant with ACHD but that it was located in a place that was least advantageous to the adjacent property owner. Chadwick commended them for coming back and creating more open space. As for Pollard he liked that they have taken steps to mitigate any issues there. Walker stated that for clarification both staff and he were inadvertent in the lack of open space. They had more in there until ACHD extended the cul-de-sac to the out parcels both north and south which removed the pocket parks and no one had realized it reduced the open space below what ordinances required. Mayor Bell asked if they still intended to phase the project in two phases as presented the last time. Walker stated that is the intention of the developer. The Mayor stated he was perplexed because the second phase is so small with only six or eight lots and not sure why they wouldn't ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 4 develop it at the same time? He asked what the reasoning was behind that. Walker explained there were two choices on this; the Fire Department requires two access points when there are twenty-nine homes and the two access points were the two crossings and connection points to Pollard Lane. If they do just the first tier of homes and the cul-de-sac, that didn't give enough product for the developer in a sizeable chunk without extending too much in infrastructure all at once. So it was either too little or more, but not the whole elephant at once, and he made a choice that that was where the cutoff would be. It would give them the two accesses for homeowners and construction and it was a financial decision on his part. Nielsen noted they are only talking about eight home lots and seventy-five or eighty feet of roadway. Walker stated it also includes a cul-de-sac and sewer and water and pressurized irrigation which adds cost very quickly. Walker noted it is a prerogative the developer has and he has never addressed it where an agency directed how much and the phasing. It was a financial decision for the most part and with consideration for the Fire Department and their requirements. Nielsen explained his concerns with phasing and used Saddlebrook Subdivision as an example of phases being sold off and not completed. He is concerned with such a small phase separated out and felt he would need to put a time limit on it and specify after so many homes were built in phase one then you have so much time to do the infrastructure and complete the second phase. Nielsen stated he needed a commitment that that phase is going to be done. Walker stated he needed to have a conversation the owner, it was not a decision he could make. Nielsen stated he wanted him to also hear what the public had to say when having the discussion with the owner. Public Testimony: David Worsley, 645 N. Star Road, Star, Idaho, stated he is the property owner of the property to the east of this development. He stated his major concern is the access point to his property for them for future development regardless of whether they do it now or how it plays into the development of the City and access to city services and the connectivity for the long term. He noted that they had already addressed a lot of his concerns as to why it's being phased and the purpose for that. Applicant Rebuttal: Walker stated in further understanding with the client he develops with cash, so the example Nielsen gave would not be the case here. There is no one who can foreclose on this property as he is operating on cash. What the developer told him was those eight lots with all the infrastructure is about $500,000.00 to $600,000.00. At the point he hits the second phase he has expended all of what he has in cash value to do this development. If Mr. Worsley would like to contribute pro-rata share based on acreage of the sewer and water, pathway connectivity, roads, curb, gutters and sidewalk, they could put a timeline on this and he can have a moratorium on that contribution financially then they would be glad to do it. If Mr. Worsley wants to come up and make that late comer agreement or whatever the City has in place, he can do it with Hank Day; and they have both done late comer fee agreements for situations like Mr. Worsley. Walker noted Mr. Worsley has another access point and probably is closer to sewer and water off of Floating Feather, but if he wants to participate financially in the infrastructure they would be willing to build out the whole thing at once. The Mayor explained this was also a concern for him and he has seen where there is a break in connectivity due to a down turn in the market. Then they see citizens without an additional ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 5 outlet. Walker reiterated that Mr. Worsley has another outlet, a legal access point onto Floating Feather Road. The Mayor stated it is hard for him that we have such a small piece and would like to see it develop at some point, possibly when you have fifty percent of phase one done so you would have infrastructure in for connection. Nielsen commended developer for developing with cash, but it is also part of his concern. Because of fluctuation with the market or whatever, if the cash isn't there then that phase may not get done. He stated for him to approve tonight he would like to work with the Council to put some sort of a time limit, possibly a bonding requirement that insures that phase gets done in a timely fashion. Walker asked if they could include in that a reimbursement agreement on a pro- rata share for infrastructure. The difficulty for the owner is in that he does have the cash and is willing to move forward with the development and put his neck on the line, and there are plenty of people who want to ride the coattail. There are other options and other locations where this property can gain both access and utilities; it's not that this is the only point. Nielsen stated that any agreement like that he would expect him to work it out with the neighboring property, it is not his job to work out the agreement. They need a street, cul-de-sac, and utilities to those homes regardless of what their neighbors do. Nielsen noted part of the goals of the City is connectivity between neighborhoods and they are not trying to benefit Mr. Worsley. He is looking at this application on its own merits and if they can strike an agreement with Mr. Worsley that would be good. Walker stated that if they take on mandating the number of developable lots in a phase that would suggest that you have that liberty to then mandate some kind of reimbursement agreement. There is no doubt the connectivity is there and they are not disputing that. What they are saying is the owner has the right to choose how much dollar he spends in infrastructure and how many lots he develops at a time. If the Council chooses to mandate a certain amount of development in a certain amount of time, then they can take the liberty and say there has to be a reimbursement agreement which also mandates him financially as you are mandating the developer. Walker stated they are providing connectivity per City ordinance and it is not going away. Nielsen stated he is open to another recommendation and noted the goal is to ensure that it gets done in a timely fashion. Walker stated he doesn't know what the market is going to do. Nielsen stated that is the point. Having lived through the last down turn and seeing the wreck Star was with unfinished subdivisions it's his intent to ensure that that doesn't happen. Walker asked to have Mr. Campbell come and address some of these concerns. Mayor Bell asked Legal Counsel to address the legality of the Council requiring phasing or not. Yorgason stated he has not had time to research, but noted the code allows phasing. It is up to the Council to decide approval as is or not. He's not aware of anything that allows the City to define where the phases are. In this particular application it seems it might be a little more straight forward where you can say you want it all done as one because you are only adding eight extra lots to the last phase; but the bigger question is what happens on the next application that comes before the City and the Council says it wants the phase to be here or here. He stated he believes it creates bigger problems on down the road defining the number of phases or even the order of phases. Nielsen stated he didn't feel anyone has suggested that they change the size of the phasing or the order of the phasing, just the desire to ensure that all of the phases are completed. Yorgason asked them at what point do you say to a developer that they put down money guaranteeing every phase is going to be built. Not sure how you'll say to a developer now ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 6 you've built one phase and then make them bond for all the rest of their subdivision because you want to make sure everything is done. Concerned with what you do with this one and how to apply it across the board to other projects coming before you, especially since they do not have anything in the code that says you are to bond or guarantee that those phases will be built somehow. If it's not in our code we cannot force them or mandate them to do something. Mayor Bell asked the applicant, Chris Todd, if he would like to speak. Chris Todd, Todd Campbell Construction, 247 W. Cadbury, Eagle, Idaho, stated the phasing is economic driven. He stated he felt they are over reaching, especially after several conversations with their legal counsel. Nelsen stated they are not overreaching by denying it; and Todd stated it was the Council’s prerogative to deny it. Todd stated he was here to work with them but they were not really trying to work with them. Council is trying to put in an overreaching statement that they are not ever going to develop this section. Nielsen stated they are asking for ideas from them as to what would help them to meet the goal to ensure that phase will be developed. Todd stated he could not give a guarantee as to when it would be built but could assure them the phase across the street is under development with cash and that cash will roll into developing the next phase and as they have cash available they will develop. Nielsen stated this is different than large developments because this is smaller than most phases in large developments and Todd has singled out the one thing that provides connectivity as Star develops. He is concerned with them ending that connectivity; to which Todd stated they are not ending that connectivity, it is there. They just cannot guarantee when it will happen. Mayor Bell closed the public hearing and they moved into deliberations. Keyes asked staff for clarification that the conditions they put in place the first time are still in place if they vote to move forward with this. Legal Counsel stated they could just add to the motion they are still included and for clarification sake recommended they list very one of them in the motion. Hershey stated he understood where Nielsen is coming from, but from what he is hearing from our Legal Counsel he feels they are asking for something they cannot do and it could have legal repercussions. He stated he liked what he was seeing for the preliminary plat and understood they were approving a whole subdivision and could not say how big a phase could be. There are no guarantees, but the fact they have a cash start is a sign for him that it's a financially healthy company. Keyes stated he felt the applicant had addressed the City's concerns with how things are working along the road; the open space is more than the minimum required and appears to be useable at this point. Keyes stated he was not crazy with where the road is connecting to the east but has not heard any public testimony not to proceed with it. Keyes motioned to approve this project including the conditions that were in the previous approval, Hershey seconded the motion. Nielsen stated he appreciated the applicant coming forward and addressing the issues that he raised in requesting this reconsideration and also agreed it is time to move forward. He stated a part of him still feels they should ask the applicant to go back and work with the neighbor and maybe come up with the financing for that. Not sure ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 7 if this could be a requirement or not and maybe a path forward for approval. Chadwick stated he feels it is a path between private entities and should not have the City involved in it. It’s an agreement they are going to have to reach together and not something the City should mandate. They could possibly put in there suggesting they work together on coming up with some sort of agreement. He questioned what the agreement means, are they asking him to pay the total $600,000.00 or for a stub for sewer and water to neighbors’ property. Nielsen stated his thought was not that they require it but would like to see a path forward working on an agreement for connectivity. Chadwick asked if Nielsen’s intent was to have an agreement before they can move ahead with this project. Nielsen stated no, he is saying perhaps they don’t make a decision tonight, let them go make an agreement, or they might make a decision to approve it with the requirement that some sort of an agreement is reached and if an agreement isn’t reached then it doesn’t get approved. Hershey stated it sounds like Nielsen is asking them to have an agreement in place even though they can’t mandate an agreement. Nielsen stated that was not what he was saying; that if they want to insure connectivity takes place then the applicant can go make an agreement and if unable to reach an agreement with the adjacent property owner then he doesn’t get the approval to move ahead. Chadwick stated he felt that was the same thing. He feels this is a problem between two private people or entities and they need to resolve it on their own. He stated he understands that we want that connectivity but can’t say Mr. Worsley and Mr. Campbell have to sit down and work out an agreement that they’ll have something in place before anything will happen because we haven’t done that with any property and is unsure if that is even legal. Nielsen stated they did do that with property on New Hope regarding a fencing issue and they did go and reach an agreement with the neighboring properties. Nielsen stated he is looking for the same thing and he has voiced he is in favor of moving ahead. Keyes stated he was sympathetic to Nielsen’s position and they have heard public testimony from Mr. Worsley and he didn’t actually ask us to put any agreement in place and per our attorney he doesn’t feel the City has a role in requiring an applicant to have an agreement in place with a landowner who is not a part of the application and who hasn’t requested any type of relief. Hershey stated he would like to add that this discussion is not over; but the fact is we have seen things and have decided to take action to change it as we can, such as the new Comp Plan and working on new ordinances. We see a problem we fix a problem. On thing being brought up is risk and you cannot alleviate all risk. From what he has seen and heard from this applicant is that the risk has been mitigated to some level and feels the risk is manageable. The Mayor noted they have a motion and second on the table to approve this application. Chadwick clarified they have the other conditions included. The Mayor stated yes, the original conditions were included. All ayes: motion carried. Public Hearing – TNT Fireworks (continued): Mayor Bell explained this a continuation of the fireworks conditional use for TNT Fireworks; they had already taken public testimony and his understanding is this is a continuation for deliberation only. Legal Counsel stated he believed that was correct, they did not leave the public hearing open for additional comments. Chadwick stated they had deliberated, and he had made a motion to table it for discussion tonight. Chadwick explained that last time the representative for TNT Fireworks stated they were going to be selling aerial fireworks and our code says we cannot have them sold in our City. Therefore, he feels it is unethical for them to approve an application that has that. Chadwick moved to deny the Conditional Use Permit for TNT Fireworks based on the fact they indicated they would be selling aerial fireworks here in town, Keyes seconded the motion. Hershey, Keyes, Chadwick ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 8 ayes, Nielsen nay. Motion carried three to one to deny conditional use permit for TNT Fireworks. Public Hearing – Family Fireworks: Mayor Bell explained for this public hearing they will have the applicant present, will take public comments and then applicant can rebut. The Mayor asked Council if they had any ex-parte contact or conflicts of interest, hearing none, Mayor Bell opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to speak. Applicant: Brooke Taylor, 3351 Summit Drive, Pocatello, Idaho, stated she is the representative for Family Fun Fireworks. She is requesting approval for a conditional use permit for a temporary fireworks stand at 9687 W. State Street in the Heron River Subdivision. It is a dirt lot which is allowed for commercial use and they would plan on being there for one month, but would only sell for the allotted time the Council approves. As the opening day is on a Monday they are requesting the five day extension State Code allows to include the week-end before. Taylor asked Council for approval of their application. Chadwick asked Taylor if they would be selling aerial fireworks. Taylor stated they would be willing to adhere to what's being allowed to be sold in firework stands currently in the City. So whatever the competition is selling, whatever is being allowed, that's what they would be selling. Keyes asked if they would be willing to promise not to sell aerial fireworks at their stand. Taylor stated it depends on how you define aerial fireworks and what is allowed to be sold from other firework stands. Keyes rephrased his question and asked if they would agree to not sell any fireworks whereby a signature is required by state law. Nielsen clarified asking them to agree not to sell anything where a signature waiver is required per State Code. Taylor stated if that was how they were interpreting aerial fireworks, and that's what's going to be enforced through all of the stand then they would comply; but it would be unfair to ask them not to allow the sale of something when other stands are allowed to. Chadwick pointed out the previous conditional use was approved years ago, and as he is looking at code today it talks about no aerial, and if they cannot guarantee they won't sell aerial fireworks then he could not approve their request. Nielsen stated he agreed with Chadwick and noted they intend to address this issue. The Mayor pointed out our code say's non-aerial fireworks. Taylor asked them to take into consideration their issue in enforcing the code. Whether the City changes the code or not they will follow it as long as it is fair for everyone. Taylor noted they would like to come to Star and have done business in the area for ten years. She asked for approval of her application and then once the code does change and come into play with everyone they will follow; they just want to be able to sell whatever the competitor is selling. Chadwick asked what they were selling in Boise as Boise only allowed the sale of safe and sane fireworks and the stands there were successful. He reiterated that if they are only going to sell safe and sane fireworks he could approve; if they are planning to sell aerial he could not approve. Brenda Pollard, 3351 Summit Drive, Blackfoot, Idaho, with Family Fireworks, shared an experience she had one year with the police confiscating fireworks. The issue came down to the interpretation of what is okay to sell and what isn't okay. She is concerned with the City's interpretation of what's okay to sell. She asked if they could have one person that's in charge, ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 9 whether it's the Chief of Police or someone from the fire department, to tell them what is allowed and that everyone is treated equally. Public Testimony: Kozi Holly, 9660 W. Wildbranch Drive, Star, Idaho, stated she lives within 300 feet of this property and thanked the Council for addressing the different types of fireworks. She is also concerned with the safety at the location as it is a dry lot with dry cheatgrass. Another concern is the ingress and egress is inadequate and one of them is not even a road. Parking is also a concern; concerned people will be parking on Plummer Road and on State Street near the drainage ditch. She pointed out there is no power, no water, and no sewer at the location. Mark Keyser, 224 S. Barkvine Way, Star, Idaho, stated he is concerned with safety and concerned with the applicant's statements that they will comply with City ordinances if it benefits them. As a retired law enforcement professional, he noted the letter of the law is very specific. He trusts the Council will do the right thing, trust the process, and protect the citizens of Star. He stated he hoped they would deny this permit. Applicant Rebuttal: Taylor addressed the ingress off of Plummer Road as they plan to put down some gravel. They will put NO PARKING signs on State Street and Plummer Road and have custom ordered some signage with directional arrows. They do enforce no lighting off of fireworks on site. They want to do business in Star and want a firework stand that is in compliance. The Mayor asked Taylor to address the weeds and dust abatement. Taylor stated that as part of the Fire Department regulations they will clear the weeds around the stand and gravel the dust entrance. There is a lot of gravel sites on the site so there shouldn't be a lot of dust as no one will be going fast. Nielsen again asked Taylor if they would commit to not selling fireworks for which you feel the need to require people to sign a waiver and if Fire Chief Timinsky or his representative asks you to remove fireworks from sale that you would do so. Taylor stated yes, they would comply with what the requests are to be in line and noted there should be a point person. Chadwick stated the point person would be Fire Chief Timinsky. The Mayor closed the public hearing and moved to deliberations. Keyes asked staff how close they were to having the Fireworks Ordinance ready to vote on. Legal Counsel stated it should be ready for the next agenda on June 18th, before sales start and it will apply to all the stands in Star. Chadwick asked if they could condition if Chief Timinsky discovers aerial fireworks per their definition can the stand be closed at that point without a public hearing. Legal Counsel stated the code has a process to revoke a permit and it takes a public hearing; you can't just automatically revoke it. They can put in place something that would allow the Chief to confiscate the illegal fireworks when he inspects. There should be a process to allow them to bring the business back into compliance without pulling the permit. ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 10 Nielsen moved to approve the Conditional Use Permit for Family Fun Fireworks with the stipulation that the applicant has agreed to not sell any fireworks for which the State waiver is signed and that they agreed to remove any fireworks for sale permanently as deemed necessary for removal by the Star Fire Chief. Keyes stated he is almost willing to second it and asked for an amendment that they add the mitigation of the dust and the weeds. It was noted this was in staff conditions of approval. Nielsen stated approval to include all the conditions of approval in the staff report, Keyes seconded the motion. Hershey stated they cannot fix the past on what has happened, and they have now found that they have this ordinance that says no aerial fireworks and that is how he has to go with this. And since the motion is to have nothing for which a waiver has to be signed, to him that is no aerial fireworks. No matter what, you cannot regulate choice, if people want to get fireworks they will, and if they want to shoot them off they will. He noted he is a small business advocate but truthfully in this case it is irrelevant. What we are talking about is fireworks and so if we have a fireworks clause coming and they agree to nothing sold that requires a waiver then he can see this being okay. Keyes stated his yes vote here will be based on the fact the applicant has indicated they will follow our ordinances, which is different than the last one where they indicated they wouldn’t, so he will vote in favor of this one. All ayes: motion carried. Chadwick asked if they can re-open TNT's hearing to give them the opportunity to do the same thing. It was the consensus that they should. Legal Counsel stated they don't have that process in our code, but under Roberts Rules as long as you are at the same meeting somebody who voted in favor of the motion could make a motion to reconsider that motion. If they do that they will have to re-open the public hearing, as it was obviously closed, and you can have this same conversation with the applicant and allow public comment if they choose to and then make a motion. So first you need a motion to reconsider by someone other than Councilman Nielsen who voted no, and if that motion is passed then you can re-open the public hearing and basically go through another public hearing to make another decision. Mayor Bell verified there was a representative for TNT still in the audience. Chadwick made a motion to reconsider TNT Fireworks, Hershey seconded the motion. All ayes: motion carried. Public Hearing – TNT Fireworks (reconsideration): Mayor Bell re-opened the public hearing and explained if anyone would like to speak after the applicant speaks they will be allowed to and he will add their name to the public input sign-up sheet. He asked the Council if they had any ex-parte contact or conflicts of interest, hearing none, he asked the applicant’s representative to speak. Carl Wilson, Boise, Idaho, stated he thought when they left the last meeting if they were going to let Fat City Fireworks sell whatever they’re going to sell they were going to allow them to sell. The Mayor stated that had been part of the conversation. And now they come back and the Council is saying they said they are going to sell aerials regardless, and that wasn't the case. If they (Fat City) get to sell them then everybody should get to sell them; he stated it's got to be fair. He felt that was where they left it last time and asked if that is still the case. Nielsen stated they have one Councilman who thinks lady justice has a blind scale for that purpose, but you have three that are not going to vote that way. Nielsen stated he has a choice to make and they have re-opened the public hearing for him to make a different choice than the way they answered last time. Mayor Bell explained they are in the process of making an ordinance ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 11 that will be on a public hearing two weeks from now that will ban aerials with everybody across the board. That ordinance is going to be put into place; they are not trying to make it unfair. Wilson stated he gets that, but if you go to Boise over the fourth, it really hasn't done them a lot of good to not sell aerials and Star's going to be the same way. Nielsen stated they have code that is written the way it's written and they intend to enforce it. He asked Wilson if he wants to open a stand here will they abide by their law or not. Wilson stated they can do that, but it needs to be fair for everybody. Nielsen noted it's not fair today but in two weeks it will be. Wilson asked if in two weeks they're okay to sell aerials. Chadwick stated no that's not correct. This has nothing to do with them; this has to do with what's coming down with the State. He noted he wasn't involved with what happened down there but he has to apply it to things as he sees it today. Chadwick asked Wilson if he would commit to not selling aerial fireworks here in our City? Nielsen stated he would ask him the same question he asked the last applicant - will he agree to not sell any fireworks for which the state waiver is required to be signed and if the Fire Chief asks you to remove any fireworks he deems not fit to be sold in the City of Star that you will do so. Wilson agreed they would do that. The Mayor pointed out that everybody is going to be asked that same question. Wilson stated he was still wondering if they are going to sell aerials with their conditional use. The Mayor stated they do not have a conditional use forever; they have the same permit his does. Whether or not they grant TNT a permit, the law is going to be the same across the board. Nielsen stated the only difference between what they have and what he is doing is he has to come back every year for the conditional use permit; where they have to get a permit from the Fire Department and come to the City for a building permit, and that all happens before any fireworks goes on sale and before any content can be inspected as to what is being sold. In our law we don't have a very good means of enforcing that and that is why we are conditioning your permit tonight. But in two weeks we will have the means by which our laws can be enforced and none of the stands in Star are going to be able to operate outside of our laws. Wilson asked if they have background checks done at Fat City because they always have to have them. The Mayor stated he was sure they do. Wilson stated he has never seen anybody wear the tags, and wondered if they even have to do that. Nielsen noted staff is nodding they have background checks. Nielsen stated they are here to discuss what they deem is necessary for TNT to get approval tonight; they are being given a second chance. Wilson stated they will take it. No one from the audience chose to speak. Mayor Bell closed the public hearing and moved to deliberations. Keyes made a motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit for TNT Fireworks subject to the conditions identified by staff. Nielsen asked if he would like to include the same conditions they applied to the last applicant. Keyes stated he amended his motion accordingly, Nielsen seconded the motion. All ayes: motion carried. Public Hearing – Greendale & Greendale Grove Subdivisions: Mayor Bell asked the Council if they had any ex-parte contact or conflicts of interest. Nielsen stated he had received a text message from Josh Austin regarding some comments from ACHD regarding this application; but ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 12 they did not have a discussion and he referred Austin to City staff. Mayor Bell declared the public hearing open and asked the applicant's representative, Becky McKay, to speak. Applicant: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, 1029 N. Rosario Street, Ste. 100, Meridian, Idaho, stated she is representing the applicant Providence Development. The Council had given them instructions last time concerning the existing five-acre lots to the east of their property and how they would take access onto the Beacon Light realignment and the possibility of reducing the density along there to provide some transitioning. She reviewed the new design, showing they went from 46 lots down to 26 lots in the 12.77-acre area along Wing Road. The five-acre parcels will be able to take access to Beacon Light along New Hope, which will be a collector road. Wing Road will still be eliminated and there will be twenty feet of landscaping along it as a buffer. McKay reviewed the lots being different sizes, increasing in size as they go east and they will be staggered, not in a line. She noted the open space had to be reduced to 6.76 acres but is still more than what is required, and they did not change any of the amenities or pedestrian pathways. On the northern portion, Greendale Grove, they did increase the number of lots up to 121 to a density of 3.13. They were able to move the stub street to the property to the east more to the south on the property for future interconnectivity for where Mr. Jones anticipates his future development will be needing access. They also were able to push a street more to the west to accommodate a low spot that catches drainage from the foothills into their open space. McKay noted they went from 237 buildable lots to 233, common area went from 12.31 acres to 11.40 acres, lot sizes changed, and the combined density went from 3.01 to 2.94. This puts them well within the neighborhood residential designation on the new adopted comprehensive plan land use map. Another concern that came up was the dark sky lighting and McKay showed pictures of proposed decorative lights which will be sixteen feet tall, meets the dark sky standards, and will be installed internally. The streetlights along Beacon Light typically will be a shoebox type and taller. McKay stated they took all the comments seriously and appreciated the opportunity to go back and rework the plats. She stated they feel they have a better product that will mesh with the existing neighborhood. Discussion was held that there is no access from the properties onto New Hope Road. McKay stated there is a ten-foot buffer along New Hope, properties will take access off of the cul-de-sac which intersects with Beacon Light to New Hope. There will be no direct load access to either Wing Road or New Hope from the twenty-six lots. Nielsen mentioned they had talked about the Austin property, the road going through it, and reimbursement to Mr. Austin for the property. McKay stated they had prepared an exhibit and Mitch Armuth met with Mr. Austin to talk about purchasing the right-of-way from him. At this time no decision has been made. If Mr. Austin does not accept Armuth’s offer, then ACHD would have to do an appraisal and make him an offer; and this process was discussed. A condemnation of the property would always be a last resort. ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 13 Nielsen stated he understood from Austin that ACHD does not have funds to purchase property. McKay stated that was correct; but now that they have the opportunity to realign Beacon Light they are putting it in the CIP and once that’s done they can move forward with that. Keyes brought up that ITD has been asking for funds from projects that may not be near them and they have been working with developers to collect some voluntary contributions to help mitigate their fair share and wondered if they had been approached by ITD. McKay explained in working with another piece of property that ACHD has offered to hold funds in trust for ITD for future improvements and they have not heard back from ITD. Another issue is ITD not being willing to go out and obtain right-of-ways and private parties do not have the power to go and ask somebody to sell then the right of way. It's going to take a lot of discussion between the various entities's to mitigate road improvements. McKay noted they have done a traffic study on this project and there was no mitigation for their traffic out at the ITD right-of-ways or at intersections. When they redesigned this project they sent it back to ACHD to review and Mindy Wallace said they were fine and had no additional comments. Keyes asked if they would be willing to pay a proportionate share into a trust fund for road improvements. McKay stated they now pay impact fees and so they would want to know what they quantify what their share would be for this particular project and what the dollar amount would be. Armuth stated they would want to know what is considered their fair share. Keyes asked if they were able to agree on what is fair, would they be willing to agree to participate and McKay stated yes. Keyes asked McKay that since they first came to them their Comprehensive Plan has changed and he believes they are asking for a change to the map only but the thing they are asking to change to in the application no longer exists and the thing that does exist in the new plan you are already compliant with; so he wondered where they go from here on that. Nickel stated he wanted to make sure that when they approve the Comp Plan amendment that they designated with the current Comp Plan designation which was a residential so they don't have a medium residential designation hanging out there for no reason. Keyes asked if they can amend the plan in real time by a motion so they make the Comp Plan change to the current designation. Legal Counsel stated they can amend the application as part of the process tonight to make sure it is comporting with the current terms used in the existing Comprehensive Plan. McKay stated they were okay with that and explained that at the time they submitted the new Comp Plan hadn't been adopted so they had no choice but to submit the comprehensive plan change. Now that the new Comprehensive Plan is in effect it is her understanding that they can voluntarily accept the new Comprehensive Plan as the applicable document, therefore there is no need for a comprehensive plan map change because the new Comprehensive Plan allows for the neighborhood residential. Or should they withdraw their application for a Comp Plan amendment. Legal Counsel stated the only concern he had was whether there was something else in the comprehensive plan amendment that they would want to keep when she talks about withdrawing. He felt as part of the motion, even if they agree to withdraw that comp plan application, I would make sure that as part of the motion there is a clear explanation as to why the application applies to the existing comprehensive plan; so there's some clarity there in case there were questions in the future. Keyes stated the only thing they do in the motion would be to adopt the current Comp Plan map; they are not asking to change adoption to the plan. Nielsen asked if it would be cleaner to just deny the comp plan portion of this. Legal Counsel stated he wouldn't deny it, they could agree to it being withdrawn. McKay inserted that they voluntarily agree to withdraw it, and that the current Comprehensive Plan applies to the other applications. ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 14 Public Testimony: Guy Jones stated he represents 9990 Beacon Light and he stood before them to confirm Greendale Grove Development has complied with all of their concerns. They have shown a willingness to develop responsibly, and for that reason they can support the development and encourages the Council to support. He expressed appreciation to Armuth and McKay for the work they have done and for being good neighbors. Steve Greene, 9999 W. Star Acres Drive, Star, Idaho, stated he has looked at this closely and felt they have done a good job in redesigning Greendale. He felt they had made a good effort in transitioning from five acre lots to the smaller lots. He felt the access to Beacon Light Road is adequate using the existing New hope Road and liked the fact they have wrapped sidewalks down Wing Road. He would recommend they take another look at the intersection at New Hope and Brandon Roads as they don't seem to be in line. Greene also recommended that some transitioning be done north of Beacon Light Road in the Greendale Grove Subdivision. Morris Campbell, 3251 N. Wing Road, Star, Idaho, stated he applauded Armuth and McKay for the mitigation for the people to the south and east of the Greendale development. But in all fairness those of us on the north and west should have equal mitigation as those to the south and east. Brittanie Austin, 10195 W. Beacon Light Road, Star, Idaho, noted they did great transitioning on the west side and would like to see transitioning done on the north side as well as they are part of that. She stated there has not been much discussion with them regarding the corner. They understood there was an agreement, but no offer or dollar amount has been made. When they talked to ACHD they were told their property was not needed to compete the subdivision and that they don't have this on their five-year plan. So they feel they could probably rework the plan in some way that there wouldn't need to be a taking of their corner piece. Will Eason, 10174 Star Acres Drive, Star, Idaho, stated he had had concerns with the piece to the west. and felt they did a good job of redesigning it and bring it into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan in making the transition. His is concerned with no transitioning in Greendale Grove on N. Beacon Light. The neighborhood residential designation recommendations in the Comprehensive Plan calls for densities not to exceed one to two units per acre. There needs to be some transitioning along Beacon Light with larger lots so they will be more compatible with the subdivision to the south. Bob Fahlau, 2203 N. Sunny Lane, Star, Idaho, stated he felt they had done a good job with changing the access into their neighborhood instead of the street cutting through their subdivision. Liked the fact they've curved the road to New Hope, and they do not have to take Beacon Light all through Greendale. He stated he felt they had done a great job on changing the lot sizes to make a transition. He noted they talked about a sidewalk and would like to know about the fencing; he does not want to see it be a six-foot white vinyl fence. He thanked them for looking at down lighting in the subdivision and was concerned with the lighting on Beacon Light. Mayor Bell explained collector roads have to be lit up more. Fahlau also felt the fifteen foot rear set back is too small. Mayor Bell stated that is the minimum setback allowed. Fahlau also mentioned that on page 10 it talked about weed abatement and he would like to see abatement done better in the future. ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 15 Joe Abreu, 2730 N. Rolling Hills Drive, Star, Idaho, pointed out there is another large development up North Wing Road and he is not hearing much about the increase in traffic from it. He is concerned with busing as parent's park on New Hope Road to meet their kids getting off the buses. He pointed out they had cut the number of lots to the south and had added them to the north piece. He is concerned with people flying through the subdivision using Beacon Light when coming off of Highway 16. Expressed concern that when coming out of his subdivision they have to turn into the subdivision and take another road to get to Beacon Light. He asked why they did not put in something that was more conducive to the area; something with half to one acre lots with more of a rural feel. Applicant Rebuttal – McKay pointed out the guiding document is the Comprehensive Plan and the new land use map. It provided for three to five units per acre and they have just under three. She pointed out there is a lot of expense that goes into developing one and two acre lots and they can't afford to extend the utilities and develop them. They try to utilize what they have to be best extent and within the comprehensive plan and land use maps. There were comments about Beacon Light and pointed out it is a major arterial and ACHD is asking that it comes through this project. She pointed out they will have 128 feet of right-of-way and landscaping between this development and Star Acres with lots that are 125 feet deep along the arterial road; that is separation. They have made an effort to be a neighborhood with the neighbors and pointed out their density is lower than Trident Ridge to the north. If they were to cut down the density anymore it will not be cost effective to cover the cost of land and infrastructure. In regards to the Austin property it has been on ACHD's master street map for realignment for many many years. She noted Armuth had had phone conversations and a meeting in his office with Mr. Austin and Armuth did make an offer to compensate them for the right-of-way. Mr. Austin wanted to make sure this roadway was stubbed to his property as he may redevelop in the future. McKay stated they have reworked the plan to the minimum density they can, they have three times the open space required and it meets all the ordinance and amenity requirements. She stated it is a good project and asked that the Council would support it. Once Beacon Light is improved it will enhance the transportation system. She stated Armuth will continue to work with the Austin's, but once ACHD adds this to their CIP then if nothing's been done then the ball will be in their court. She reiterated they don't have a choice as far as the realignment; it is exactly as ACHD wanted it designed. Keyes stated since it was brought up in public testimony he wanted to clarify that the Comprehensive Plan they are operating under is the one that was in place when they filed their application, but they are looking to comply with the new land use map only; not looking to comply with the entire new Comprehensive Plan. McKay stated that was a question for legal staff; she thought they had to comply with the whole Comprehensive Plan, not just apply the map and not the plan. Keyes stated when looking for a map amendment the map that existed when you applied doesn't exist anymore; so what he thought they were going to do was amend the map and the Comprehensive Plan she applied under is what she expects to develop under. Legal Counsel stated that part of the conversation before was that they would withdraw the request for the comp plan amendment so it would be subject to the entire Comprehensive Plan including the map as it exists today. Keyes stated if we're going to be subject to the entire Comprehensive Plan there are things in that plan that were not part of the plan when they applied that are going to completely change the way this subdivision looks. Legal Counsel stated the ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 16 subdivision is bound by the ordinances that are in place; so unless the ordinances have been changed they are still subject to the subdivision zoning ordinances that are in place when she submitted the application. Keyes stated the ordinances say they have to be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan as well. Legal Counsel asked what part of the subdivision ordinance he was speaking of. Keyes stated he is speaking specifically of the new Comprehensive Plan as there is a special use zone that encompasses the neighborhood here. It calls for some specific transitions for development that is adjacent to that and is not in the old Comprehensive Plan. Legal Counsel stated for those things to be applicable those changes need to be put in the ordinance; the ordinance is the law. So, unless the ordinances we have in place requires the special use to be applicable to this area, she would still be subject to the ordinances that were in place at the time her application was submitted. Keyes asked if it included the ordinance that says you have to comply with the Comprehensive Plan. Legal Counsel stated the applicant is saying she will be subject to the new Comp Plan which says neighborhood residential and three to five to the acre. The subdivision ordinance tells you how you have to develop the subdivision; the zoning ordinance in place tells you your density and setbacks. So when you rezone to a neighborhood residential to comply with the terminology in the Comp Plan they are going to be subject to the ordinances that apply to whatever that zone is. Keyes asked if the language around a special use zone that is in the new Comprehensive Plan would cover this property. Legal Counsel said yes if it is in the zoning ordinance. He pointed out they have changed the Comprehensive Plan and are now working to change the zoning ordinance to match what their Comprehensive Plan says and it will implement all that. Nickel stated it's the findings that requires you to make a finding that meets the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that maybe to avoid confusion they should probably approve the requested comprehensive plan to medium density residential and then when they go back to clean up the map, at that time they change it from medium density to neighborhood residential. So approve it tonight under the old Comprehensive Plan with the requested map designation of medium density residential. Then the City is going to initiate a comp plan map amendment to clean up some of the other properties that were missed, and they can clean that up at that time. That way the findings can be made that this meets the Comp Plan that was in place at the time it was submitted. Legal Counsel asked if what Keyes was referring to is part of the Comp Plan or the zoning ordinance. Nickel stated it is part of the rezone section of the code. Legal Counsel noted this kind of conflict can happen when you change a Comp Plan and have not yet changed your code to match. The code is always what governs; the Comp Plan is a plan with no force of law behind it. They have a plan in place and are working on bringing the codes to match. Until then the Comp Plan does not change any of the ordinances that are in place. Legal Counsel stated he was fine with following Nickel's recommendation. As he understands it, if they withdraw the application then you have the existing Comprehensive Plan so when you look at the zoning request, does it comply with the existing Comp Plan. If yes then you move onto the preliminary plat application; and does it comply with the standard in the unified develop code as it exists. If the answer is yes then you approve and if the answer is no then you can approve with conditions or deny it. He stated he felt it was appropriate to withdraw the comp plan amendment because it sounds like the zoning application is going to comply with the Comp Plan map and presumably the text. If not then he wouldn't withdraw it and approve it as Nickel suggested, based on everything was in place when the application was submitted. The applicant tonight is saying they would voluntarily withdraw their application and use the new Comp Plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 17 McKay noted the Comprehensive Plan and land use maps are guiding documents; the implementing tool is the ordinances. They are willing to do what Nickel recommends; however what they have here complies with the new Comp Plan. She had consulted with Mark Butler and Nickel when working on this project to make sure it did comply. Butler agreed that Beacon Light as an arterial road with landscape buffering is a transition. Transitioning is not just large lots. This application does comply with the new map, the application complies with the City's old Comp Plan and meets all of the design criteria under City ordinances. She asked that they support this application. Mayor Bell closed the public hearing and moved to deliberations. Nielsen stated he appreciated what the applicant has done and felt they complied with a lot of the requests from the public as well as what the Council requested. He is concerned with the situation with the Austin's and appreciated clarification on how ACHD is looking at this and that ACHD is looking at adding that to their CIP. It was his opinion that they should accept the applicant's withdrawal of the comp plan amendment portion of the application. It would be cleaner and they would not have to clean it up later. Chadwick stated he believed they have done a fantastic job of addressing the concerns of the citizens and neighbors. He understood their concerns with transition to the north but felt the arterial road and the buffering there is acceptable transitioning. He stated he was in favor of this new plan and recommended they move forward with this application. Keyes stated he felt the applicant has done everything they requested. He had asked many questions because he wanted to make sure there would not be coming back for an uncomfortable conversation on a request for reconsideration. He noted there were some additional points raised tonight and felt they had been addressed. He stated he was in support of this application. Hershey noted he had not been at the first hearing but had reviewed the packet and the minutes. He had had concerns with the transitioning, but felt that a hundred feet of road plus thirty feet of landscaping before hitting a property line was quite a distance. ACHD had done a traffic study and were okay with it; and ITD seems to have decided to stay silent. He stated he is in favor of what they have done, especially the lower half. Nielsen stated he appreciated the clarification on the compliance to the comprehensive plan and ordinances. He stated he felt they need to be more specific about what they consider to be transitional and in his mind doesn't feel a road necessarily becomes a transition. He recommended this should be something they consider when making the unified development code changes. Nielsen moved to approve this application recognizing the applicant has withdrawn CPA-18-08 and CPA-18-09, and to approve AZ-18-12 and AZ-18-13 Annexation and Rezone along with PP- 18-12 and PP-18-13 Preliminary Plat for Greendale Grove Subdivision and Greendale Subdivision with conditions as stated in the staff report, Chadwick seconded the motion. Keyes asked Nielsen to amend his motion to include the applicant's agreement to participate in a fair share agreement that may eventually come to pass between ACHD, ITD and the City or any of those parties for road mitigation. Nielsen stated that felt ambiguous to him and he's not sure he ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 18 is prepared to do that. He asked Chadwick and Hershey what they thought. Hershey stated that ITD has included that in the past which means they look at some of their applications, and he doesn't see anything in the packet from them and believes they have had their chance. Keyes stated they did ask for mitigation. Hershey asked if they can define fair and Nielsen said that was the part he was stuck on. If we say whatever is fair, how do we quantify it? Keyes stated they discussed briefly that fair is the percent of impact that this development is going to have on the intersection of question. Chadwick asked if it is necessary to put that in this application if ACHD decides that at a future date anyway. If they are collecting money as some sort of impact fee and put it into a holding account; at some point wouldn't ACHD have the authority to collect those monies from any development that is out there regardless of any development agreement that is put into place with the City? Keyes noted except this is for ITD and they can't collect impact fees. The Mayor pointed out ACHD is offering to collect for them. Chadwick stated this is where he is hung up on this thing; without some sort of deal in place with ITD he doesn't really know where you can go with that. He feels it is arbitrary and has no confidence in what is going on with them and he can't support that until it is more defined. Nielsen stated he was agreement with Keyes direction of thought but at this time doesn't believe he will amend the motion. Chadwick stated he too was in agreement with him but wants more clarification on how that's going to work. Keyes stated he would like that as well. All ayes: motion carried. Resolution 19-04 Boy Scouts of America – Mayor Bell explained this Resolution is for the City to sponsor a Scout Troop as we know it is not going to the Boy Scouts of America anymore, it will be the Scouts BSA. This is a proposal to do a Resolution for the City to actually sponsor a scout troop. Nielsen explained he was the one proposing this Resolution and the City would be chartering a group not sponsoring it. He stated they held workshop with a representative from the Ore-Ida Council doing a presentation. From the workshop he felt they were in agreement to move forward. Keyes stated he has been supportive from the beginning but has been unable to find a model of a city that has chartered a Scout Troop. He asked if there were not any of the traditional organizations in town that would be willing to do this. Nielsen stated there were no other organizations that have the ability to meet all of the requirements of being a charter organization. When he spoke with the National Council, they stated this would be a unique situation, but there was nothing they could think of that would prevent the City from being a charter member. The Mayor stated he felt this was a good cause but was hesitant with the dollar amount indicated in the resolution as this is taxpayer’s money. He is afraid this might set a precedence for other groups to come to the City asking to be sponsored and the City to fund them. He stated he was all for chartering and providing a location for them to hold meetings. Nielsen explained it takes a lot to set a troop up, especially if they don’t have any equipment, and fundraising takes a lot of time. Any equipment purchased would be City assets even though they would be dedicated for scouting purposes. With certain parameters and planning these assets could be used for other City outdoor recreational purposes. Keyes asked if they would be willing to amend the resolution with language stating the City would provide start-up funds as a donation not to exceed $15,000.00. Funding options and start-up equipment were discussed. Keyes moved to adopt Resolution No. 2019-04, amending the fourth resolved statement to read, “Be it further resolved that the City provides up to $10,000.00 as a one-time donation to be used for equipment, supplies, and other items required for establishing a new Scouts BSA unit” and ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 19 the rest as already written, Nielsen seconded the motion. Nielsen stated there was one other item on the resolution that warrants some discussion and that is in the fifth resolved paragraph, as he has added some language with a specific date and there was some advice from our Attorney on perhaps making that less specific. He stated he liked making it specific and asked if the Council had any concerns or thoughts on it. Chadwick asked Nielsen if he was talking about the two years. Nielsen stated is says “The City will, within two years of the effective date of this resolution, refurbish its property located at 960 S. Main Street in Star, Idaho to support scouting and other indoor/outdoor recreational activities as the locations primary purpose.” Keyes stated he was comfortable with that in so much as resolutions are easy to change, Nielsen seconded. All ayes: motion carried. Resolution 19-03 Remote Attendance & Accessibility Policy - Chadwick moved to approve Resolution No. 2019-03, Star City Council Public Meeting Remote Attendance and Accessibility Policy, Nielsen seconded the motion. All ayes: motion carried. Ordinance No. 287 Trapper Ridge Subdivision – Hershey moved that pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-902 the rule requiring an Ordinance to be read on three different days, with one reading to be in full, be dispensed with and that Ordinance No. 287 be considered after reading once by title only, Nielsen seconded the motion. Roll Call: Hershey – aye, Keyes – aye, Chadwick – aye, Nielsen – aye: motion carried. Chadwick moved to approve Ordinance No. 287, an Ordinance rezoning certain real property located in the incorporated area of the City of Star, Ada County, Idaho. Specifically located at 11650 W. New Hope Road, Star, Idaho; Ada County Parcel Numbers R6046660310, R6004666210, R604666320, and S0406121125, establishing the zoning classification of the properties as Residential (R3) of approximately 66.63 acres; owned by Endurance Holdings; directing that certified copies of this Ordinance be filed as provided by law; providing for related matters; and providing an effective date. Keyes seconded the motion. All ayes: motion carried. Ordinance No. 288 Mink Farm Subdivision – Hershey moved that pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-902 the rule requiring an Ordinance to be read on three different days, with one reading to be in full, be dispensed with and that Ordinance No. 288 be considered after reading once by title only, Keyes seconded the motion. Roll Call: Hershey – aye, Keyes – aye, Chadwick – aye, Nielsen – aye: motion carried. Chadwick moved to approve Ordinance No. 288, an Ordinance annexing and zoning to the City of Star certain real property located in the unincorporated area of Ada County, Idaho, and contiguous to the City of Star, specifically located at 425 N. Highway 44 and 8706 W. State Street; Ada County Parcel Numbers S0409428015, S0409428210, S0409438405, S0409438605, and S0409438805; establishing the zoning classification of the annexed properties as Mixed Use (MU) of approximately 48.48 acres, owned by Joseph A. & Lynn S. Moyle Trust; directing that certified copies of this Ordinance be filed as provided by law; providing for related matters; and providing an effective date. Keyes seconded the motion. All ayes: motion carried. Reports: Legal Counsel, Chris Yorgason, stated he had a request from the attorney for the Star Sewer & Water District wanting to see if the City would be willing to enter into a memorandum of understand regarding annexation. If there is no objection he will coordinate with their ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 6-4-19 20 attorney to get the process started. In regards to the appeal on the Willowbrook case, he will have a letter issued to the appellants that the application has been withdrawn. There were no objections from the Council. Council agreed, due the lateness of the hour and an Executive Session is next on the agenda, they would forego their reports. Executive Session: Chadwick moved to go into Executive Session under Idaho Statute 74-206 Evaluation of an Officer, Keyes seconded the motion. Roll Call: Hershey – aye, Keyes – aye, Chadwick – aye, Nielsen – aye: motion carried. The City Council exited the Executive Session at 10:58 pm. Adjournment: The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 11:00 pm. Approved: Respectfully submitted: Charlten Bell, Mayor Kathleen Hutton, Deputy City Clerk ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 1-15-19 1 Star City Council Meeting Minutes January 7, 2020 The regular meeting of the Star City Council was held on January 7, 2020 at 7:00 pm at Star City Hall, 10769 W. State Street in Star, Idaho. Mayor Chad Bell called the meeting to order and all stood for the Pledge of Allegiance. Roll Call: Councilmen David Hershey, Michael Keyes, Trevor Chadwick, and Kevin Nielsen were present. Approval of the Agenda: Chadwick moved to approve the agenda, Hershey seconded the motion. All ayes: motion carried. Consent Agenda: Chadwick moved to approve the Consent Agenda consisting of: Special Meeting Minutes of April 22, 2019 with a change on page one at the bottom the number 15,00 people should read 15,000 people, Regular Meeting Minutes of December 17, 2019, Claims Against the City for December 2019, Resignation of Mike Olson from the Beautification /Community Relations Committee, Keyes seconded the motion. All ayes: motion carried. Swearing in of Mayor: Mayor Bell had Trevor Chadwick place his hand on his family bible, raise his right hand and administered the Oath of Office for Mayor of the City of Star. Presentation by Mayor Chadwick: Mayor Chadwick presented a plaque and card to Mayor Bell and thanked him for his eighteen years of service to the City. Bell served as Councilman from 2002 through 2016 and as Mayor from 2016 through 2020. He served Star through two growth cycles and a recession, always working to leave Star in a better place. Mayor Chadwick also presented a plaque to his wife, Reba Bell, for her support of Mayor Bell for eighteen years. She has been a patriarch in Star for many years as an educator at Star Elementary, a church pillar and with her family. Swearing in of Council Persons: Mayor Chadwick asked Kevin Nielsen to raise his right hand and administered the Oath of Office for City Council for the City of Star. Mayor Chadwick asked Jennifer Salmonsen to place her hand on the bible her husband held, raise her right hand and administered the Oath of Office for City Council for the City of Star. Old/New Business: Election of Council President – Nielsen thanked Mayor Bell for his service and stated it had been an honor to serve with him and to be his friend. Nielsen moved to nominate David Hershey as Council President, Salmonsen seconded the motion. All ayes: motion carried. Authorization for Mayor Chadwick and Treasurer Ward to sign checks – Nielsen moved to approve authorization for Mayor Chadwick and Treasurer Ward to sign checks, Keyes seconded the motion. All ayes: motion carried. ---PAGE BREAK--- MINUTES 1-15-19 2 Reports: Staff - Nickel stated the Mayor and Council have Chapters 1-8 of the Code to review and asked they have comments back to him by Friday. Council – Hershey stated he wanted to personally thank Mayor Bell and his wife, Reba, for their service to the City. Keyes thanked Mayor Bell and his wife, Reba, for their dedication and service for many years. Salmonsen thanked Mayor Bell for his service and is honored to be able to serve for the next four years. Nielsen stated he had worked with Salmonsen on the Economic Development Committee and was looking forward to serving with Salmonsen in the next four years. Mayor – Mayor Chadwick invited everyone to stay afterwards for a reception and an opportunity to thank Mayor Bell. Chadwick thanked his family and everyone for supporting him while he ran for this office. He stated he is honored to serve the City as Mayor for the next four years. Adjournment: The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 7:20 pm. with reception following. Approved: Respectfully submitted: Trevor Chadwick, Mayor Kathleen Hutton, Deputy City Clerk ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 1 CITY OF STAR LAND USE STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor & Council FROM: Shawn L. Nickel, City Planner MEETING DATE: January 21, 2020 – PUBLIC HEARING FILE(S) AZ-20-02 Annexation and Zoning DA-20-01 Development Agreement CU-20-02 – State Street/Seneca Springs OWNER/APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE Property Owner (Annexation/Zoning/DA & CUP): Property Owner (Rezone/DA & CUP) Connie Jo Porter Craig Blanchard 10040 W. State Street 4404 Menall NE Star, Idaho 83669 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87110 Applicant: Representative: NorthWest Development Company Brad Marczuk 1980 S. Meridian Road Larson Architects Meridian, Idaho 83642 210 Murray Street Boise, Idaho, 83714 REQUEST Request: The Applicant is seeking approval of an Annexation and Zoning to CBD, Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit for a mixed-use development containing multi-family residential and commercial uses. The properties, located at 10040 & 10122 W. State Street in Star, consists of approximately 6.96 acres. The property will include commercial, office and apartment units. PROPERTY INFORMATION Property Location: The subject property is generally located on the northwest corner of W. State Street and N. Seneca Springs Way in Star, Idaho. Ada County Parcel -#S0408438900, S0408438855 and S0408438955. ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 2 Surrounding Land Use/Designations: Zoning Designation Comp Plan Designation Land Use Existing County (RUT) Mixed Use (M-U) Commercial (C-2) Central Business District Residential/SFD Vacant-Pasture Vacant Proposed CBD Central Business District Mixed Use Development North of site Residential (R-4) Neighborhood Residential Single Family Residential Rockbridge Subdivision South of site Residential (R-2-DA) Neighborhood Residential Single Family Residential Heron River Subdivision East of site Commercial (C-1) Central Business District Office/Commercial/Retail West of site County (RUT) Central Business District Residential SFD/Pasture Current Development Standards for Central District (CBD): Dimensional Standards CBD Front setback 0' Rear setback 0' Interior side setback 0' Street side setback 0' Maximum building height 35' Parking requirements See chapter 4, article C, "Off Street Parking And Loading Requirements", of this title Landscape requirements See chapter 4, article B, "Landscaping Requirements", of this title Current Development Standards for Higher Density Residential Districts (R-5 and Higher): R-5 And Higher Standard(s) Requirement Minimum street frontage 35 feet Front setback1 15 feet to living area and 20 feet to garage Rear setback 15 feet ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 3 Interior side setback 5 feet Street side setback1: Local 20 feet Arterial and collector 25 feet Street landscape buffer: Arterial and collector 35 feet corridor 40 feet Maximum building height 35 feet Existing Site Characteristics: The development includes three parcels with an existing single-family dwelling and associated accessory structures near the corner of State and Seneca Springs, with the remainder of the property being vacant, pasture ground. A 25’ landscaped common area lot owned by the Rockbridge Subdivision HOA is located along the entire eastern boundary of the property. This “spite strip” currently prevents access to N. Seneca Springs Way. Irrigation/Drainage District(s): Middleton Mill Ditch Co. Flood Zone: This property is outside of the flood zone. Special On-Site Features:  Areas of Critical Environmental Concern – No known areas.  Evidence of Erosion – No known areas.  Fish Habitat – No known areas.  Mature Trees – Yes  Riparian Vegetation – No known areas.  Steep Slopes – None.  Stream/Creek – None.  Unique Animal Life – No unique animal life has been identified.  Unique Plant Life – No unique plant life has been identified.  Unstable Soils – No known issues.  Wildlife Habitat – No wildlife habitat has been developed or will be destroyed.  Historical Assets – No historical assets have been observed. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS Pre-Application Meeting Held June 25, 2019 & July 26, 2019 Neighborhood Meeting Held August 21, 2019 Application Submitted & Fees Paid November 07, 2019 Residents within 300’ Notified November 11, 2019 ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 4 Agencies Notified November 12, 2019 Legal Notice Published November 15, 2019 Property Posted January 8, 2020 HISTORY Staff is unaware of any previously approved applications on any of the parcels involved in this application request. The western property along State Street was the previous location of Strickland Stone back in the early 2000’s. CODE DEFINITIONS / COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE: 8-3E-1 MIXED USE DISTRICT PURPOSE: The purpose of the mixed-use district is to encourage compact development that is sensitive to the environmental characteristics of the land and facilitates the efficient use of services. A traditional neighborhood district diversifies and integrates land uses within close proximity to each other, and it provides for the daily recreational and shopping needs of the residents. The purpose of the MU district is also to conditionally provide for a variety of residential land uses including attached and detached single-family residential, duplex, townhouse, and multi-family. Development in the MU district includes open spaces and promotes pedestrian activity through well designed and varied streetscapes that also provide for the safe and efficient movement of vehicular traffic. Vertically integrated residential projects are encouraged in all mixed-use neighborhood districts. (Ord. 215, 11-2-2011) 8-3E-2: USES IN MIXED USE DISTRICT: Table 8-3E-2(a) of this section lists permitted conditional and prohibited uses within each traditional neighborhood district. A. Permitted uses shall be reviewed in accord with chapter 5, "Specific Use Standards", of this title. B. Uses that are listed as C are subject to a conditional use permit approval through the public hearing process. Conditional uses shall be approved in accord with the procedures and regulations for conditional uses set forth in chapter 1, "Administration", of this title and the specific use standards in chapter 5, "Specific Use Standards", of this title. ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 5 C. Any use not explicitly listed in table 8-3E-2(a) of this section is subject to a conditional use permit approval through the public hearing process. Conditional uses shall be approved in accord with the procedures and regulations for conditional uses set forth in chapter 1, "Administration", of this title and the specific use standards in chapter 5, "Specific Use Standards", of this title. It shall be unlawful and a violation of this unified development code for any person to conduct any conditional use in a mixed-use district, unless such person shall first obtain a conditional use permit from the city. D. Interpretation of the inclusion or exclusion of allowed uses shall be made by the administrator and based on the administrator's findings in review of the criteria established in chapter 2, "General Regulations", of this title. E. For uses that may fall into more than one category, the administrator shall determine the most appropriate category based on the more restrictive standards. (Ord. 215, 11-2-2011) 8-3C-1: COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS PURPOSE: The purpose of the commercial districts is to provide for the retail and service needs of the community in accordance with the Star comprehensive plan. Four districts are designated which differ in the type, scale and mix of allowed commercial uses. TABLE 8-3C-1(a) PURPOSE AND USE IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS District Allowed Uses Central business district (CBD) Small scale retail, public, quasi-public and adaptive reuse of residential structures 8-3C-2: USES IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS: Table 8-3C-2(a) of this section lists permitted conditional or prohibited uses within each commercial district. A. Principal permitted uses shall be reviewed in accord with chapter 5, "Specific Use Standards", of this title. ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 6 B. Uses that are listed as C are subject to a conditional use permit approval through the public hearing process. Conditional uses shall be approved in accord with the procedures and regulations for conditional uses set forth in chapter 1, "Administration", of this title and the specific use standards in chapter 5, "Specific Use Standards", of this title. It shall be unlawful and a violation of this unified development code for any person to conduct any conditional use in a commercial district, unless such person shall first obtain a conditional use permit from the city. C. Any use not explicitly listed in table 8-3C-2(a) of this section is subject to a conditional use permit approval through the public hearing process. Conditional uses shall be approved in accord with the procedures and regulations for conditional uses set forth in chapter 1, "Administration", of this title and the specific use standards in chapter 5, "Specific Use Standards", of this title. D. Interpretation of the inclusion or exclusion of allowed uses shall be made by the administrator and based on the administrator's findings in review of the criteria established in chapter 2, "General Regulations", of this title. E. For uses that may fall into more than one category, the administrator shall determine the most appropriate category based on the more restrictive standards. (Ord. 215, 11-2-2011) Table 8-3E-2(a) Schedule of Uses In The Mixed-Use District: (as proposed) Use MU Dwelling: Multi-family1 C Notes: 1. Indicates uses that are subject to chapter 5, "Specific Use Standards", of this title. Table 8-3C-2(a) Schedule of Uses In The Central Business District (CBD): (as proposed) Use CBD Accessory structure C4 Adult business/adult entertainment1 N Agriculture, forestry, fishing N ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 7 Airport N Alley P Animal care facility1 C Artist studio1 P Arts, entertainment, recreation facility1 C Asphalt plant1 N Auction facility N Automated teller machine1,2 P Automotive hobby1 N Automotive mechanical/electrical repair and maintenance C Bakery P Bar/tavern/lounge/drinking establishment1 P Barbershop/styling salon P Bed and breakfast P Beverage bottling plant N Boarding house N Brewery N Brewpub C Building material, garden equipment and supplies1 N Campground/RV park1 C Cement or clay products manufacturing N Cemetery1 N Chemical manufacturing plant N Church or place of religious worship1 N Civic, social or fraternal organizations1 P Concrete batch plant N Condominium C ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 8 Conference/convention center P Contractor's yard1 N Convenience store P Dairy farm N Daycare center1 (more than 12) P Daycare, family1 (6 or fewer) P Daycare, group1 (7 - 12) P Drive-through establishment/drive-up service window1 P Drugstore P Dwelling: Multi-family1 C Secondary1 N Single-family attached C Single-family detached1 N Townhouse N Two-family duplex N Educational institution, private1 C Educational institution, public1 C Equipment rental, sales, and services1 C Fabrication shop N Farm N Farmers' or Saturday market P Feedlot N Financial institution1 P Fireworks stand3 C Flammable substance storage N Food products processing1 N ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 9 Food stand3 P Gasoline station1,2 P Gasoline station with convenience store1,2 P Golf course1 N Government office P Greenhouse N Greenhouse, commercial1 P Guesthouse/granny flat1 N Healthcare and social services P Heliport N Home occupation1 P Hospital1 C Hotel/motel1 P Ice manufacturing plant N Industry, information1 P Institution C Junkyard1 N Kennel N Laboratory C Laboratory, medical C Lagoon N Laundromat1,2 P Laundry and dry clean P Library P Manufactured home1 N Manufactured home park1 N Manufacturing plant N ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 10 Meatpacking plant N Medical clinic P Mining (except accessory pit1) N Mortuary N Museum P Nursery, garden center and farm supply1 C Nursing or residential care facility1 N Office security facility P Parking lot/parking garage2 P Parks, public and private2 P Pawnshop P Personal and professional services P Photographic studio P Portable classroom/modular building C Power plant N Processing plant N Professional offices P Public infrastructure C Public or quasi-public use P Public utility, major1 N Public utility, minor1 P Public utility yard1 N Recreational vehicle dump station1 P Recycling center1 N Research activities C Restaurant P Retail store/retail services P ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 11 Retirement home C Salvage yard N Sand and gravel yard N Service building P Shooting range2 N Shopping center P Solid waste transfer station N Stable N Storage facility, outdoor1 C Storage facility, self-service1,2 N Swimming pool, commercial/public P Swimming pool, private N Television station C Temporary living quarters1 N Temporary use3 P Terminal, freight or truck1 N Tower N Truck stop N Turf farm N Vehicle emission testing3 P Vehicle impound yard1 N Vehicle repair, major1 N Vehicle repair, minor1 C Vehicle sales or rental1 C Vehicle washing facility1,2 C Vehicle wrecking yard1 N Veterinarian office P ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 12 Vineyard N Warehouse and storage1 N Wholesale sales N Winery1 N Wireless communication facility1 C Yard sale P Notes: 1. Indicates uses that are subject to chapter 5, "Specific Use Standards", of this title. 2. Indicates uses that are subject to section 8-4A-23, "Self-Service Uses", of this title. 3. Indicates uses that are subject to chapter 4, article D, "Temporary Use Requirements", of this title. 4. See subsection 8-4A-3J of this title. (Ord. 215, 11-2-2011; amd. Ord. 223, 2-21-2012; Ord. 236, 7-15-2014; Ord. 252, 11-2-2015; Ord. 255, 4-19-2016) 8-5-3-36: MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING/DEVELOPMENT: Multi-family developments with multiple properties shall be considered as one property for the purpose of implementing the standards set forth in this section. A. Purpose: 1. To create multi-family housing that is safe and convenient and that enhances the quality of life of its residents. 2. To create quality buildings and designs for multi-family development that enhance the visual character of the community. 3. To create building and site design in multi-family development that is sensitive to and well- integrated with the surrounding neighborhood. 4. To create open space areas that contribute to the aesthetics of the community, provide an attractive setting for buildings, and provide safe, interesting outdoor spaces for residents. B. Site Design: 1. Setbacks: Buildings shall provide a minimum setback of ten feet (10') unless a greater setback is otherwise required by this title. Building setbacks shall take into account windows, entrances, porches and patios, and how they impact adjacent properties. ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 13 2. Areas Screened: All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas, waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. 3. Open Space Provided: A minimum of eighty (80) square feet of private, usable open space shall be provided for each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches, patios, decks, and/or enclosed yards. Landscaping, and other accessways shall not count toward this requirement. 4. Vehicular Circulation Areas; Parking Areas: For the purposes of this section, vehicular circulation areas, parking areas, and private usable open space shall not be considered common open space. 5. Storage Of Recreational Vehicles: No recreational vehicles, snowmobiles, boats or other personal recreation vehicles shall be stored on the site unless provided for in a separate, designated and screened area. 6. Parking: The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 4, "Regulations Applicable To All Districts", of this title. 7. Developments With Twenty Units Or More: Developments with twenty (20) units or more shall provide the following: a. A property management office. b. A maintenance storage area. c. A central mailbox location, including provisions for parcel mail, that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access. d. A map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. C. Common Open Space Design Requirements: A minimum area of outdoor common open space shall be provided as follows: 1. One hundred fifty (150) square feet for each unit containing five hundred (500) or less square feet of living area. 2. Two hundred fifty (250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred (500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet of living area. ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 14 3. Three hundred fifty (350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet of living area. 4. Common open space shall be not less than four hundred (400) square feet in area and shall have a minimum length and width dimension of twenty feet 5. In phased developments, common open space shall be provided in each phase of the development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units. 6. Common open space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets unless separated from the street by a constructed barrier at least four feet in height. D. Site Development Amenities: 1. All multi-family developments shall provide for the categories of quality of life, open space and recreation with amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows: a. Quality of life. b. Clubhouse. c. Fitness facilities. d. Enclosed bike storage. e. Public art such as a statue. f. Open space. g. Open grassy area of at least fifty by one hundred feet (50 x 100') in size. h. Community garden. i. Ponds or water features. j. Plaza. k. Recreation. l. Pool. m. Walking trails. n. Children's play structures. ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 15 o. Sports courts. 2. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of multi-family development as follows: a. A multi-family development with less than twenty (20) units, two amenities shall be provided from two separate categories. b. A multi-family development between twenty (20) and seventy-five (75) units, three amenities shall be provided, with one from each category. c. A multi-family development with seventy-five (75) units or more, four amenities shall be provided, with at least one from each category. d. A multi-family development with more than one hundred (100) units, the decision-making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development. 3. The city council shall be authorized to consider other improvements in addition to those provided under this subsection D, provided that these improvements provide a similar level of amenity. E. Architectural Character: 1. All building elevations shall have a minimum portion of the elevation devoted to architectural features designed to provide articulation and variety. These features shall include, but are not limited to, windows, bays and offsetting walls that extend at least two feet recessed entrances; and changes in material types. Changes in material types shall have a minimum dimension of two feet and minimum area of twenty-five (25) square feet. 2. Entrances which are the primary point(s) of entry, where the majority of building users will enter and leave, shall be designed as an obvious entrance and focal point of the building through architectural treatment, lighting, and address identification. 3. Entrances shall be adequately covered, recessed, or treated with a permanent architectural feature in such a way that weather protection is provided. 4. Roof forms shall be distinctive and include variety and detail when viewed from the street. Sloped roofs shall have a significant pitch. Flat roofs should include distinctive cornice treatments. 5. Exterior building materials and finishes shall convey an impression of permanence and durability. Materials such as masonry, stone, stucco, wood, terra cotta, and tile are encouraged. 6. Windows are required to allow views to exterior activity areas or vistas. Windows shall be provided in any building facing any common area used for children's recreation. ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 16 7. All roof and wall mounted mechanical, electrical, communications, and service equipment should be screened from public view from the adjacent public streets and properties by the use of parapets, walls, fences, enclosures, or by other suitable means. F. Landscaping Requirements: 1. Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 4, "Regulations Applicable To All Districts", of this title. 2. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The foundation landscaping shall meet the following minimum standards: a. The landscaped area shall be at least three feet wide. b. For every three linear feet of foundation, an evergreen shrub having a minimum mature height of twenty-four inches (24") shall be planted. c. Ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area. G. Maintenance And Ownership Responsibilities: All multi-family developments shall record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including, but not limited to, structures, parking, common areas, and other development features. (Ord. 215, 11-2-2011) 8-1B-4: CONDITIONAL USES: A. Purpose: The purpose of this section is to establish procedures that allow for a particular use on a particular property subject to specific terms and conditions of approval. B. Applicability: The provisions of this section apply to all uses identified as conditional use in chapter 3, "District Regulations", of this title, and as otherwise required by specific development standards in chapter 5, "Specific Use Standards", of this title. C. Process: 1. The applicant shall complete a preapplication conference with the administrator prior to submittal of an application for a conditional use. 2. An application and appropriate application fees, in accord with article A, "General Provisions", of this chapter, shall be submitted to the administrator on forms provided by the planning department. ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 17 3. The administrator may require additional information concerning the social, economic, fiscal or environmental effects of the proposed conditional use, prior to the scheduling of a public hearing. D. Standards: In approving any conditional use, the city council may prescribe appropriate conditions, bonds and safeguards in conformity with this title that: 1. Minimize adverse impact of the use on other property. 2. Control the sequence and timing of the use. 3. Control the duration of the use. 4. Assure that the use and the property in which the use is located is maintained properly. 5. Designate the exact location and nature of the use and the property development. 6. Require the provision for on site or off-site public facilities or services. 7. Require more restrictive standards than those generally required in this title. 8. Require mitigation of adverse impacts of the proposed development upon service delivery by any political subdivision, including school districts, that provides services within the city. 8-1B-4E. FINDINGS: The council shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Star comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 18 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 8.2.3 Land Use Map Designations: Central Business District The Central Business District is planned to be a vibrant downtown center for the community. Uses encouraged are commercial, retail, civic, private offices, and entertainment. High density housing is encouraged on the upper floors of mixed-use buildings and at the fringes of the land use designation. Developments in this district are to place an emphasis on pedestrian and bicycle access and compatibility. 8.3 Goal: Encourage the development of a diverse community that provides a mix of land uses, housing types, and a variety of employment options, social and recreational opportunities, and where possible, an assortment of amenities within walking distance of residential development. 8.4 Objectives: • Implement the Land Use Map and associated policies as the official guide for development. • Manage urban sprawl in order to minimize costs of urban services and to protect rural areas. • Encourage land uses that are in harmony with existing resources, scenic areas, natural wildlife areas, and surrounding land uses. 8.5.5 Policies Related Mostly to the Central Business District Planning Areas: A. The CBD zoning district should allow for a mix of commercial, office, institutional, and civic type uses with specific provisions for residential use in appropriate locations with compatible densities. ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 19 B. High density residential is suitable within the CBD in mixed use buildings with commercial or office type uses on the first floor and high density residential on upper floors. 8.5.9 Additional Land Use Component Policies: • Encourage flexibility in site design and innovative land uses. • Encourage landscaping to enhance the appearance of subdivisions, structures, and parking areas. • Require more open space and trees in subdivisions. • Work with Ada County Highway District (ACHD), Canyon Highway District #4 (CHD4), and Idaho Department of Transportation (ITD) for better coordination of roadway and access needs. • Support well-planned, pedestrian-friendly developments. • Dark sky provision should be adopted within the code to assure down style lighting in all developments and Star should consider joining the International Dark Sky Association. • The City should utilize the 2018 Treasure Valley Tree Selection Guide when requiring trees within developments. 18.4 Implementation Policies: E. Development Agreements allow the city to enter into a contract with a developer upon rezoning. The Development Agreement may provide the city and the developer with certain assurances regarding the proposed development upon rezoning. PROJECT OVERVIEW The applicant is requesting annexation and zoning approval for the corner parcel (10040 W. State Street), and rezone approval from an existing Commercial C-2 for the parcel to the west and adjacent to State Street (10122 W. State Street). The two parcels combined are a total of .93 acres. Both parcels would have a new zoning designation of Central Business District (CBD). This would be consistent with the current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map for the two properties. The applicant is further requesting that the parcel located to the north and containing 4.64 acres be approved for a conditional use permit to allow up to 84 multi-family units. Finally, the applicant requests a development agreement to encompass the entire development for the purpose of integrating the uses, providing cross access, a new public street, shared parking agreements and further consistency in the development. LAND USE: The submitted development site plan shows potentially three commercial buildings along the State Street frontage with associated parking and proposed landscaping. All future ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 20 commercial/office/retail uses will be subject to Table 8-3C-2(a) Schedule of Uses In The Central Business District (CBD), or any updated City codes in effect at the time of submittal of Certificate of Zoning Compliance and building permits. These future uses may be subject to additional land use applications and public hearings depending on the use as it is recognized in the Table. For example, the site plan indicates an auto parts store in one of the proposed uses along State Street. Retail store/retail services are listed as a principally permitted use in the CBD zone, which would require administrative approval. In addition to the commercial, the site plan shows multi-family residential from the edge of the commercial portion of the development north to the boundary separating the Central Business District from Neighborhood Residential land uses, including the existing Rockbridge Subdivision. ANNEXATION/REZONE: The annexation and zoning, and rezone of the two southern parcels to Central Business District (CBD) on the applicant’s property will allow for the property zoning to be consistent with the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan. The current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates this entire development property as Central Business District. The multi-family component is located entirely on a parcel that has a current Mixed-Use (M-U) zoning designation. This zoning designation, as indicated in Table 8-3E-2(a) Schedule of Uses In The Mixed-Use District, allows multi-family dwellings through the conditional use permit process. The requested land uses of commercial for the two southern parcels meets the intent of the zoning designation and Comprehensive Plan, in that “the CBD zoning district should allow for a mix of commercial, office, institutional, and civic type uses with specific provisions for residential use in appropriate locations with compatible densities” (Policy 8.5.5A). DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Through the Development Agreement process, the applicant is proposing to work with the City to provide further insurances that the development will be built as presented and/or modified by the Council through the review process. Items that can be considered by the applicant and Council include the following: • Cross access to adjacent properties through a public roadway (to be built by the applicant); • Landscaping and buffering of different land uses • Height and setbacks of structures • Shared parking ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 21 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: As previously written, multi-family developments are allowed in the Mixed-Use (M-U) zoning district through the conditional use permit process. As stated in 8-1B-4A Conditional Uses, the purpose of this section is to establish procedures that allow for a particular use on a particular property subject to specific terms and conditions of approval. Section 8-1B-4D further states that, “in approving any conditional use, the city council may prescribe appropriate conditions, bonds and safeguards in conformity with this title that: 1. Minimize adverse impact of the use on other property. 2. Control the sequence and timing of the use. 3. Control the duration of the use. 4. Assure that the use and the property in which the use is located is maintained properly. 5. Designate the exact location and nature of the use and the property development. 6. Require the provision for on site or off-site public facilities or services. 7. Require more restrictive standards than those generally required in this title. 8. Require mitigation of adverse impacts of the proposed development upon service delivery by any political subdivision, including school districts, that provides services within the city.” Regarding the proposed multi-family land use in the conditional use request, the applicant has provided a concept layout with associated parking, access and circulation and preliminary building elevations. If the land use is approved by Council, the applicant would be required to submit a Design Review and Certificate of Zoning Compliance application to the City in order for Staff to review the specific details including landscaping, parking, lighting, building style, open space and amenity requirements. At this time, the applicant is requesting that the land use be approved with conditions of approval and a development agreement. ADDITIONAL ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION: Transportation: 1. The applicant has been working with ITD regarding access onto State Street. Although a report from ITD has not been received as of the date of this report, Staff has been in contact with ITD Staff and access onto State Street will be allowed in the proposed location, as this is currently the only access to the properties until future development ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 22 occurs in the immediate area. 2. The City of Star previously adopted an Economic Corridor Access Management Plan that currently shows the area of these parcels as having cross-access to the adjacent property to the west and future access to State Street. Staff requested that the applicant work with the City to provide cross access not only to the west, but through the entire property for potential connection east to N. Seneca Springs Way sometime in the future. Currently, a 30’ landscaped common lot owned by Rockbridge HOA prevents any current access to the east. The applicant revised the original site plan to include the recommended roadway. AGENCY RESPONSES Central District Health Department November 19,2019 Ada County Development Services November 29, 2019 Keller and Associates November 27, 2019 ACHD December 13, 2019 PUBLIC RESPONSES Staff has provided Council with public comment exhibits as part of the application packet. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based upon the information provided to staff in the applications and agency comments received to date, the proposed annexation and zoning, rezone and conditional use permit meet the requirements, standards and intent for development as they relate to the Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. The Council should consider the entire record and testimony presented at their scheduled public hearing prior to rendering its decision on the matter. Should the Council vote to approve the applications, either as presented or with added or revised conditions of approval, Council shall direct staff to draft findings of fact and conclusions of law for the Council to consider at a future date. FINDINGS The Council may approve, conditionally approve, deny or table this request. In order to approve these applications, the Unified Development Code requires that Council must find the following: ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 23 ANNEXATION/REZONE FINDINGS: (Applies only to the two southern parcels) 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the Star Comprehensive Plan is to promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the City of Star and its Impact Area. Some of the prime objectives of the Comprehensive Plan include: ✓ Protection of property rights. ✓ Adequate public facilities and services are provided to the people at reasonable cost. ✓ Ensure the local economy is protected. ✓ Encourage urban and urban-type development and overcrowding of land. ✓ Ensure development is commensurate with the physical characteristics of the land. The goal of the Comprehensive Plan for the Central Business District is to encourage a vibrant downtown center for the community. Uses encouraged are commercial, retail, civic, private offices, and entertainment. High density housing is encouraged on the upper floors of mixed-use buildings and at the fringes of the land use designation. Developments in this district are to place an emphasis on pedestrian and bicycle access and compatibility. The City must find compliance with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically, the purposes statement. The City must find that the proposal complies with the proposed district and purpose statement. The purpose statement provides for allowed uses to include small scale retail, public, quasi-public and adaptive reuse of residential structures. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; and The City must find that there is no indication from the material submitted by any political agency stating that this annexation and zoning of this property will be materially detrimental to the public health, safety or 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. The City must find that it has not been presented with any information from agencies having jurisdiction that public services will be adversely impacted other than traffic, which will continue to be impacted as the City grows. 5. The annexation is in the best interest of the city. The property is already within the City limits. The City must find that this rezone is reasonably necessary for the orderly development of the City. ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 24 8-7-5: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS: (Applies only to the northern parcel) The Applicant is requesting Conditional Use approval for the multi-family component of the development per the Unified Development Code requirements. Upon recommendation from the administrator, the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant a conditional use request, the council shall make the following findings: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meets all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The Council must determine if the use, as presented and/or conditioned is large enough to accommodate the use and meet the City development standards. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Star Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. Council must determine if the use meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan as it relates to the Future Land Use Map but also with the Mixed-Use zoning currently on the property. 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Council must determine if the proposed land use is compatible with the surrounding area. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Council must determine if conditions of approval can be placed on the proposed use to address adverse impacts on other properties in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Staff has not received notification from any other agency having jurisdiction that the proposed use cannot be served adequately by essential services. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Council must determine if this proposed use will affect public facilities and services or will be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glares or odors. ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 25 Council must determine if this use will include any activity, process, material, equipment or conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any person, property or the general welfare of the public. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Staff has not been made aware of any natural, scenic or historic features on the property. Upon granting approval or denial of the application, the Council shall specify: 1. The Ordinance and standards used in evaluating the application; 2. The reasons for recommending approval or denial; and 3. The actions, if any, that the applicant could take to obtain approval. PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The development shall follow the specific details of the approved CUP site/development plan approved through this application. The approved CUP site/development plan shall further comply with all statutory requirements of applicable agencies and districts having jurisdiction in the City of Star. 2. The development, as approved, is for the specific uses and densities approved by Council. Any further uses proposed are subject to additional review by the City through the current Unified Development Code. 3. The property with the approved development plan shall be satisfactorily weed abated at all times, preventing a public nuisance, per Star City Code Chapter 3, Section 3-1-1 through 3- 1-7. 4. The approved development plan shall comply with the City of Star Unified Development Code regarding landscaping, both internal buffers and frontages, including street trees. 5. Applicant/Owner/Developer shall submit a streetlight and parking lot lighting plan/design prior to Certificate of Zoning Compliance. All lighting shall comply with the Star City Code and the Dark Sky standards adopted by the City. 6. All new structures shall comply with the effective building and zoning requirements at time of building permit issuance, unless otherwise amended in the CUP or Development Agreement. 7. Any requirements from the Star Sewer & Water District shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 8. All State, Federal and Local rules and regulations regarding development in the Special Hazard Areas (Floodplain/Floodway) shall be adhered to, if applicable. 9. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the Star Fire District regarding, but not limited to fire slow and emergency access to the property. 10. A separate sign permit shall be approved for any signage for the proposed use. 11. Prior to submittal of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance or any future land use applications, the applicant shall satisfy all concerns and requirements of the City Engineer. 12. Any additional site-specific conditions and considerations as required by Staff or Council. ---PAGE BREAK--- STATE ST/SENECA SPRINGS – FILE # AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU- 20-02 26 COUNCIL DECISION The Star City Council File #AZ-20-02/DA-20-01/CU-20-02 for State Street/Seneca Springs on 2020. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 10174 W. STATE STEET ZONE: RUT 20'-0" 300'-0" LANDSCAPE 30'-0" 7 12 SIDEWALK 6'-0" 26'-7 1/2" 35'-0" 60'-0" TOTAL ITD ROW CENTER OF ROW 60'-0" EX PL NEW PL 676'-2 1/2" 10'-0" 18'-0" 40'-0" 30'-0" FUTURE CROSS ACCESS 12'-0" 216'-0" 120'-0" STATE STREET LANE 30'-0" MIDPOINT OF RADIUS 8'-0" 96'-0" DECELERATION LENGTH GAP/TAPER LENGTH LANDSCAPE 60'-0" N. SENECA SPRINGS WAY 10'-0" 30'-6" SIDEWALK 120' ROW 8'-0" 18'-0" 7'-0 1/2" EMERGENCY EXIT - GATE 30'-0" SIDEWALK 9 2,800 SF 10 18'-0" 5'-1" 4 26'-0" 30'-6" 28'-0" 11 14 60'-0" 7,225 sf AUTO PARTS 3,570 sf LEASE 7 5 7 7 25'-0" 85'-0" 85'-0" 28'-0" 22'-0" 85'-0" 6'-0" 19'-0" 25'-0" LEASE 8'-10" 25'-0" 8 5 8 12 10 4 10 LANDSCAPE SETBACK - REF LANDSCAPE PLAN 11 10 8 7 13 11 9 30'-0" LANDSCAPE STRIP LANDSCAPE STRIP COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING 20'-0" 20'-0" 28'-0" TYP 20'-0" 28'-0" TYP APARTMENT #1 12 UNITS APARTMENT #2 12 UNITS APARTMENT #3 12 UNITS APARTMENT #4 12 UNITS APARTMENT #5 12 UNITS APARTMENT #6 12 UNITS APARTMENT #7 12 UNITS APARTMENT #8 12 UNITS 28'-0" 26'-0" 3 14 14 9 9 10 25'-0" 3 8 APARTMENT & GUEST 96 UNIT 197 PARKING PROVIDED 192 PARKING REQUIRED 4,215 SF / FL 4,215 SF / FL 5,200 SF / FL 5,200 SF / FL 5,200 SF / FL 5,200 SF / FL 5,200 SF / FL 5,200 SF / FL SERVICE 8'-0" 20'-0" 25'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 8'-0" DRIVE AISLE DRIVE AISLE SHED &TENANT STORAGE 208.70' 208.70' 208.70' 208.80' 208.70' 208.80' 56.00' PYLON SIGN APARTMENT & GUEST APARTMENT & GUEST 79'-6" NORTH W. STATE STREET FOR ALL SITE LANDSCAPING REFERENCE LANDSCAPE PLAN ON SITE INFILTRATION ON SITE INFILTRATION ON SITE INFILTRATION ON SITE INFILTRATION ON SITE INFILTRATION ON SITE INFILTRATION ON SITE INFILTRATION ON SITE INFILTRATION WATER, SEWER & PRESSURE IRRIGATION OFF STATE STREET. STAR DEVELOPMENT STAR, IDAHO 83669 10122 W. STATE STREET 1--22-19 SP-1.0 SITE PLAN OPTION A 1" = 30' ---PAGE BREAK--- 9 10 N. SENECA SPRINGS WAY EMERGENCY EXIT - GATE 9 10 4 11 14 7 7 7 8 5 8 12 10 4 10 11 10 8 7 13 10 8 LANDSCAPE STRIP LANDSCAPE STRIP COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING COVERED PARKING APARTMENT #1 12 UNITS APARTMENT #2 12 UNITS APARTMENT #3 12 UNITS APARTMENT #4 12 UNITS APARTMENT #5 12 UNITS APARTMENT #6 12 UNITS APARTMENT #7 12 UNITS 3 14 12 9 9 9 3 8 APARTMENT & GUEST 4,215 SF / FL 4,215 SF / FL 5,200 SF / FL 5,200 SF / FL 5,200 SF / FL 5,200 SF / FL 5,200 SF / FL 5,200 SF / FL SERVICE SHED &TENANT STORAGE 208.70' 208.70' 208.70' 208.80' 208.70' 208.80' 56.00' PYLON SIGN APARTMENT & GUEST APARTMENT & GUEST W. STATE STREET 208.70' 3 EXISTING HOA EXISTING HOA APARTMENT #8 12 UNITS 6 JM 10 PV 4 PC 2 VB 4 BT 6 RR 2 AP 3 JM 5 AP 24 RR 8 BT 8 PC 15 PV 8 VB 1 FC 18 PX 3 VB 3 RX 2 PD 3 HS 2 AP 8 HS 3 FC 5 RX 5 VB 2 PD 37 PX 2 AP 8 HS 3 FC 5 RX 5 VB 2 PD 37 PX 2 AP 2 FC 1 PD 3 RX 3 VB 1 AP 22 PX 6 HS 2 ZS 1 JM 1 GT 3 PV 3 CA 3 EP 4 PX 3 CA 3 EP 6 RR 2 PS 5 PV 1 VB 3 CA 33 EP 4 PX 3 CA 3 EP 3 CA 3 EP 4 PX 3 CA 3 EP 33 EP 4 PX 3 CA 3 EP 3 CA 3 CA 3 EP 4 PX 3 CA 3 EP 33 EP 4 PX 3 CA 3 EP 3 CA 3 RR 3 PO 5 BT 6 HS 4 PV 8 ED 3 PO 1 VB 7 BT 3 RR 6 HS 4 PV 8 ED 3 RX 3 PO 5 BT 1 VB 7 BT 3 RX 3 PO 3 BM 1 GT 3 SJ 1 JM 3 BM 1 GT 3 SJ 1 JM 2 ZS 6 BM 2 SJ 3 JM 1 GT 6 RX 2 PS 5 PV 1 VB 2 ZS 6 RR 2 PS 5 PV 1 VB 6 HS 4 PV 3 RR 5 BT 1 VB 7 BT 3 RR 8 ED 3 PO 3 PO 1 ZS 2 PC 3 BM 1 GT 3 SJ 2 JM 4 AP 3 BM 1 GT 3 SJ 1 JM 6 JM 13 RG 6 EP 10 SM 3 BM 1 GT 3 SJ 1 JM 6 BM 2 GT 6 SJ 2 JM 2 BM 1 GT 1 SJ 1 JM 4 PC 3 BM 3 SJ 1 TC 1 JM 3 BM 1 TC 1 JM 15 JS 9 JS 2 AU 7 TC 10 ED 3 PS 1 AU 10 CA 4 AU 3 JS 3 AU 3 PS 3 PO 3 ED 6 PS 1 GT 5 PO 5 AU 2 PS 1 GT 1 AU 3 PS 1 GT 7 AU 5 PO 3 PS 1 GT 3 PO 3 AU 2 PS 1 GT 1 AU 3 PS 3 PO 1 GT 3 AU 3 AU 1 GT 3 PS 2 PO 1 AU 1 GT 2 PS 3 PO 1 GT 6 PS 5 AU 1 GT 3 PO 3 AU 3 PS 1 ZS 1 ZS 3 BM 2 JM 3 SJ 1 GT 4 PC 2 AP 18 BT 5 JS 6 JM 1 TC 13 SM 7 EP 17 RG 1 PC 15 RR 1 PD 3 BM 1 JM 1 GT 3 SJ 3 PC 12 FG 6 BT 3 RX 3 VB 1 TC 3 BM 3 SJ 1 JM 1 TC 3 BM 1 GT 2 JM 6 SM 3 SJ 2 JM 3 SJ 1 GT 3 BM 11 CA 11 CA 3 SM 3 HS 13 PV 8 RX 10 SJ 5 PV 2 VB 3 BM 1 GT 1 JM 6 BT 1 GT 3 BM 7 BM 5 SJ 1 JM 1 GT 3 SJ 1 JM 1 GT 3 BM 3 SJ 3 JM 3 AU 2 PO 1 GT 2 PS 3 PS 1 AU 1 GT 2 PO 1 PS 1 AU 1 GT 1 GT 2 AU 2 RX 3 PV 2 PS 2 PS 1 GT 1 AU 3 PO 1 GT 3 AU 2 PS 3 CA 3 EP 11 PX 7 JS 3 EP 3 CA 6 RX 5 BT 6 HS 4 PV 6 ED 6 RX 1 VB 7 BT 33 EP 4 PX 3 CA 3 EP 3 CA 5 PX 33 EP 4 PX 3 CA 3 EP 3 CA 3 RX 3 CA 3 EP 4 PX 3 EP 3 CA 3 RX 7 PV 7 HS 1 ZS 3 RX 5 SJ 3 RX 2 PV 4 HS 2 PV 9 SM 1 VB 7 SJ 4 PV 5 SJ 3 RR 6 EP 4 CA 4 PX 6 EP 4 CA 4 PX 3 RX 4 PV 3 HS 3 RX 3 PV 3 HS 3 RX 1 ZS 8 SM 1 VB 2 PV 6 SJ 3 RX 3 SJ 6 EP 4 CA 4 PX 6 EP 4 CA 4 PX 2 RR 2 RR 5 PX 6 RX 2 PS 3 PV 1 VB 5 PX 3 PO 1 VB 1 RX 1 VB 5 JM 3 PO 3 RX 6 ED 4 HS 5 PV 3 HS 2 ZS 6 EP 4 CA 4 PX 6 EP 4 CA 4 PX 2 RX 5 PX 6 RR 3 PO 1 VB 1 RX 1 VB 3 JM 3 PO 3 RX 7 ED 4 HS 5 PV 3 HS 2 RX 2 PS 3 PV 1 VB 5 PX 17 FG 6 RX 6 TC 9 BT 3 FC 6 VB 2 ED 2 ZS 3 PV 2 VB 15 JS 4 PV 1 JM 1 GT 5 BM 8 ED 3 TC 10 CA 4 RX 4 FC 1 GT 8 BM 2 ZS 1 L1.5 3 L1.5 2 L1.5 4 L1.5 5 L1.5 PLANT SCHEDULE - OVERALL QTY KEY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE NOTES DECIDUOUS TREES 20 AP Acer truncatum x A. platanoides 'Warrenred' Pacific Sunset Maple 2" CAL. B&B Class II - 30'H x 25'W 36 GT Gleditsia triacanthos 'Draves' Street Keeper Honeylocust 2" CAL. B&B Class II - 45'H x 20'W 26 PC Prunus cerasifera 'Cripoizam' Crimson Pointe Plum 2" CAL. B&B Class I - 25'H x 10'W 21 TC Tilia cordata 'Corzam' Corinthian Linden 2" CAL. B&B Class II - 45'H x 15'W 19 ZS Zelkova serrata 'JFS-KW1' City Sprite Zelkova 2" CAL. B&B Class II - 30'H x 20'W CONIFEROUS TREES 8 PD Picea glauca 'Densata' Black Hills Spruce 6-7' HGT. B&B 20'H x 10'W SHRUBS/PERENNIALS/ORNAMENTAL GRASSES 53 AU Arctostaphylos uva-ursi 'Wood's Compacta' Wood's Compact Kinnikinnick #1 3"H x 4'W 99 BT Berberis thunbergii 'Helmond Pillar' Helmond Pillar Barberry #2 4'H x 2'W 79 BM Buxus japonica 'Winter Gem' Winter Gem Boxwood #2 4'H x 4'W 138 CA Calamagrostis x acutiflora 'Karl Foerster' Karl Foerster's Feather Reed Grass #1 6'H x 2'W 109 EP Echinacea purpurea 'Kim's Knee High' Kim's Knee High Purple Coneflower #1 1.5'H x 1.5'W 66 ED Erica x darleyensis 'Mediterranean White' Mediterranean White Winter Heath #1 1.5' H x 2.5' W 29 FG Festuca glauca 'Elijah Blue' Elijah Blue Fescue #1 8"H x 1'W 16 FC x intermedia 'Mindor' Show Off® #2 5'H x 5'W 85 HS Helictotrichon sempervirens 'Saphirsprudel' Sapphire Fountain Blue Oat Grass #1 4'H x 3'W 59 JM Juniperus sabina 'Monard' Moor-Dense® Juniper #2 1'H x 5'W 55 JS Juniperus scopulorum 'Blue Arrow' Blue Arrow Juniper #5 12'H x 2'W 120 PV Panicum virgatum 'Rotstrahlbusch' Rotstrahlbusch Switch Grass #1 6'H x 3'W 214 PX Phlox subulata 'Emerald Blue' Emerald Blue Creeping Phlox 36" O.C. 6"H x 3'W 64 PO Physocarpus opulifolius 'Hoogi021' Little Joker Ninebark #2 3'H x 4'W 63 PS Pinus strobus 'Blue Shag' Blue Shag Eastern White Pine #5 4'H x 4'W 95 RX Rosa x 'Radcon' Pink Knock Out Rose #5 4' H x 4' W 97 RR Rosa x 'Radtko' Red Double Knockout Rose #2 3'H x 4'W 30 RG Rudbekia fulgida var. sullivantii 'Goldsturm' Goldsturm Black-eyed Susan #1 2'H x 2'W 66 SM Salvia x sylvestris 'May Night' May Night Salvia #1 1.5'H x 1.5'W 95 SJ Spirea japonica 'Neon Flash' Neon Flash Spirea #2 2'H x 3'W 55 VB Viburnum x burkwoodii Burkwood Viburnum #5 8'H x 6'W Phlox subulata 'Emerald Blue' - 1 gallon container - 36" o.c. 10-16-19 STAR DEVELOPMENT STAR, IDAHO 83669 10122 W. STATE STREET LP L-1.0 LA-16654 S T A T E O F I D A H O L I C E N S E D L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T B E N J A M I N S H A W S E M P L E PRELIMINARY NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT LANDSCAPE PLAN NORTH reandpartners.com + [PHONE REDACTED] + 1014 S. La Pointe, Boise, Idaho 83706 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE + URBAN DESIGN + LAND PLANNING + GRAPHIC COMMUNICATION + PROJECT MANAGEMENT CALLOUT NOTES # LANDSCAPE LEGEND 2 QC LANDSCAPE NOTES: 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL REPORT TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ALL CONDITIONS WHICH IMPAIR AND/OR PREVENT THE PROPER EXECUTION OF THIS WORK, PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK. 2. NO MATERIAL SUBSTITUTIONS SHALL BE MADE WITHOUT THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL. ALTERNATE MATERIALS OF SIMILAR SIZE AND CHARACTER MAY BE CONSIDERED IF SPECIFIED PLANT MATERIALS CAN NOT BE OBTAINED. 3. COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH ALL OTHER SITE RELATED DEVELOPMENT DRAWINGS. 4. COORDINATE WORK SCHEDULE AND OBSERVATIONS WITH LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION START-UP. 5. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE INSTALLED AS PER DETAILS. 6. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO THE AMERICAN NURSERYMAN STANDARDS FOR TYPE AND SIZE SHOWN. PLANTS WILL BE REJECTED IF NOT IN A SOUND AND HEALTHY CONDITION. 7. IN THE EVENT OF A PLANT COUNT DISCREPANCY, PLANT SYMBOLS SHALL OVERRIDE SCHEDULE QUANTITIES AND CALL OUT SYMBOL NUMBERS. 8. ALL PLANTING BEDS SHALL BE COVERED WITH A MINIMUM OF 3" DEPTH OF 2" MINUS BARK MULCH OVER APPROVED TOPSOIL . CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY A PRE-EMERGENT HERBICIDE SUCH AS CASARON OR APPROVED EQUAL PRIOR TO THE INSTALLATION OF MULCH. 9. SUBMIT SAMPLE FOR APPROVAL. 10. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR BEGINNING AT THE DATE OF ACCEPTANCE BY THE OWNER. REPLACE ALL PLANT MATERIAL FOUND DEAD OR NOT IN A HEALTHY CONDITION IMMEDIATELY WITH THE SAME SIZE AND SPECIES AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. 11. FINISH GRADES SHALL PROVIDE A SMOOTH TRANSITION WITH ADJACENT SURFACES AND ENSURE POSITIVE DRAINAGE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SITE CIVIL GRADING PLAN. 12. AMEND EXISTING APPROVED TOPSOIL AT A RATIO OF THREE CUBIC YARDS OF APPROVED COMPOST PER 1000 SQUARE FEET. ROTO-TILL ORGANIC MATTER A MINIMUM OF 6 INCHES INTO TOPSOIL. 13. FERTILIZE ALL TREES AND SHRUBS WITH 'AGRIFORM' PLANTING TABLETS. QUANTITY PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. 14. ALL PLANTING BEDS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM 18" DEPTH OF TOPSOIL. LAWN AREAS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM 12" DEPTH OF TOPSOIL. SPREAD, COMPACT, AND FINE GRADE TOPSOIL TO A SMOOTH AND UNIFORM GRADE 3" BELOW ADJACENT SURFACES OF PLANTER BED AREAS, 1-1/2" BELOW ADJACENT SURFACES OF TURF SOD AREAS, AND 1" BELOW ADJACENT SURFACES OF TURF SEED AREAS. SEE TOPSOIL NOTES. 15. IMMEDIATELY CLEAN UP ANY TOPSOIL OR OTHER DEBRIS ON THE SITE CREATED FROM LANDSCAPE OPERATIONS AND DISPOSE OF PROPERLY OFF SITE. 16. TREES SHALL NOT BE PLANTED WITHIN THE 10'-0" CLEAR ZONE OF ALL A.C.H.D. STORM DRAIN PIPE, STRUCTURES, OR FACILITIES. TREES SHALL NOT BE PLANTED WITHIN 5'-0" OF AN A.C.H.D. SIDEWALK. 17. SEEPAGE BEDS AND OTHER STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES MUST BE PROTECTED FROM ANY AND ALL CONTAMINATION DURING THE CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION OF THE LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION SYSTEM. 18. IN THE EVENT OF A DISCREPANCY, NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY. 1. PROPOSED SODDED LAWN AREA. 2. VISION TRIANGLE. 3. TRASH ENCLOSURE. SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS. 4. EXISTING ADJACENT LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS. TREES / PLANTS TO BE INSTALLED CUT EDGING AS DETAILED PROPOSED SODDED LAWN OVER APPROVED TOPSOIL QUANTITY PLANT IDENTIFICATION KEY CALLOUT NUMBERS REFER TO NUMBERED NOTES BELOW 3" DEPTH OF 2"-MINUS BARK MULCH OVER APPROVED TOPSOIL 1. ALL LANDSCAPED AREAS SHALL HAVE AN AUTOMATIC UNDERGROUND SPRINKLER SYSTEM WHICH INSURES COMPLETE COVERAGE AND PROPERLY ZONED FOR REQUIRED WATER USES. EACH HYDROZONE IS TO BE IRRIGATED WITH SEPARATE INDIVIDUAL STATIONS. 2. PLANTER BEDS AND LAWN AREAS ARE TO HAVE SEPARATE HYDRO-ZONES. PLANTER BEDS SHALL BE IRRIGATED USING INLINE EMITTER DRIP TUBING. 3. POP-UP SPRINKLER HEADS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM RISER HEIGHT OF 4 - 6 INCHES AT LAWN AREAS. 4. ELECTRONIC WATER DISTRIBUTION/ TIMING CONTROLLERS ARE TO BE PROVIDED. MINIMUM CONTROLLER REQUIREMENTS ARE AS FOLLOWS: a. PRECISE INDIVIDUAL STATION TIMING b. RUN TIME CAPABILITIES FOR EXTREMES IN PRECIPITATION RATES c. AT LEAST ONE PROGRAM FOR EACH HYDROZONE d. SUFFICIENT MULTIPLE CYCLES TO AVOID WATER RUN-OFF e. POWER FAILURE BACKUP FOR ALL PROGRAMED INDIVIDUAL VALVED WATERING STATIONS WILL BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED TO PROVIDE WATER TO RESPECTIVE HYDRO-ZONES. 5. INDIVIDUAL VALVED WATERING STATIONS WILL BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED TO PROVIDE WATER TO RESPECTIVE HYDRO-ZONES. 6. SPRINKLER HEADS SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO REDUCE OVER SPRAY ONTO IMPERVIOUS SURFACES (BUILDINGS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, AND ASPHALT AREAS). IRRIGATION NOTES: LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS STAR CITY, IDAHO CODE - CHAPTER 11-07-05: LANDSCAPING, FENCES, WALLS, AND SCREENING TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA: 21,749 S.F. (24.1% OF SITE) MINIMUM PLANT SIZES SHALL BE USED: SHADE TREES: 2 INCH CALIPER ORNAMENTAL TREES: 2 INCH CALIPER EVERGREEN TREES: 6 FOOT HEIGHT WOODY SHRUBS: 2 GALLON POT A MINIMUM OF ONE CLASS II TREE SHALL BE PLANTED EVERY 35 LINEAR FEET OF STREET FRONTAGE. 388 L.F. ON SOUTHERN BOUNDARY (STATE ST./HWY 44): REQUIRED CLASS II: 12 PROPOSED CLASS II: 12 A MINIMUM OF ONE TREE PER 35 LINEAR FEET SHALL BE PLANTED ALONG PROPERTY BOUNDARIES ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL USES. 636 L.F. ON EASTERN BOUNDARY (MU) ROCKBRIDGE SUBDIVISION LANDSCAPE STRIP: NO BUFFER REQUIRED 20 EXISTING TREES AND LAWN 472 L.F. ON NORTHERN BOUNDARY 14 TREES REQUIRED 14 TREES PROVIDED 636 L.F. ON WESTERN BOUNDARY (RUT): 19 TREES REQUIRED 19 TREES PROVIDED A MINIMUM OF ONE TREE PER 35 LINEAR FEET SHALL BE PLANTED ALONG PARKING LOT PERIMETER 682 L.F. OF PARKING LOT PERIMETER 20 TREES REQUIRED 20 TREES PROVIDED A MINIMUM OF ONE TREE PER INTERIOR SINGLE ROW PARKING PLANTER OR TWO TREES PER DOUBLE ROW PARKING PLANTER SHALL BE PLANTED IN THE INTERIOR OF THE PARKING LOT 45 PARKING LOT PLANTERS 45 TREES REQUIRED 45 TREES PROVIDED TOTAL NUMBER OF TREES REQUIRED: 112 TOTAL NUMBER OF TREES PROPOSED: 112 TOTAL NUMBER OF TREE SPECIES REQUIRED: 5 TOTAL NUMBER OF TREE SPECIES PROPOSED: 5 ALL LANDSCAPED AREAS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH AN UNDERGROUND AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM. NO TREE MITIGATION IS REQUIRED ON-SITE. EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 SANDSTONE BOULDERS 2'-4' DIAMETER ---PAGE BREAK--- STAR DEVELOPMENT STAR, IDAHO 83669 10122 W. STATE STREET 9-17-19 A-1.0 APARTMENT ELEVATION - SIMILAR CONCEPT APARTMENT ELEVATION - SIMILAR CONCEPT THREE STORIES PROPOSED THREE STORIES PROPOSED APARTMENT ELEVATION - SIMILAR CONCEPT THREE STORIES PROPOSED ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Star P.O. Box 130 Star, Idaho 83669 P: [PHONE REDACTED] F: [PHONE REDACTED] Conditional Use Permit Application Form #510 Rev 10-2015 Page 1 of 8 ***All applicable information must be filled out to be processed. Applicant Information: PRIMARY CONTACT IS: Applicant Owner Representative Applicant Name: Applicant Address: Zip: Phone: Fax: Email: Owner Name: Owner Address: Zip: Phone: Fax: Email: Representative architect, engineer, developer): Contact: Firm Name: Address: Zip: Phone: Fax: Email: Property Information: Site Address: Parcel Number: Requested Condition(s) for Conditional Use: Zoning Designation Comp Plan Designation Existing Proposed North of site South of site East of site West of site CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FILE NO.: Date Application Received: Fee Paid: Processed by: City: North West Development Company 1980 Meridian Road #140, Meridian Idaho 83642 [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Brad Marczuk Larson Architects 210 Murray Street Boise, Idaho 83642 [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Craig Blanchard S0408438900 1.06 AC S0408438855 4.978 AC 10122 W. State Street MU & C2 MU & C2 Residential State Street C-2 RUT - Neighborhood Residential (R-4) Single Family Residential Land Use Central Business District Central Business District Central Business District Central Business District Central Business District 4404 Menall NE Albuquerque New Mexico 87110 [PHONE REDACTED] Applicants ---PAGE BREAK--- Conditional Use Permit Application Form #510 Rev 10-2015 Page 2 of 8 Site Data: Total Acreage of Site: Proposed Percentage of Site Devoted to Bldg Coverage: Proposed Percentage of Site Devoted to Landscaping: Number of Parking spaces: Proposed Required Requested Front Setback: Requested Rear Setback: Requested Side Setback: Requested Side Setback: Requested Side Setback: Existing Site Characteristics: Number and Uses of Proposed Buildings: Location of Buildings: Gross Floor Area of Proposed Buildings: Describe Proposed On and Off-Site Traffic Circulation: Proposed Signs – number, type, location: (include draft drawing) Public Services (state what services are available and what agency is providing the service): Potable Water - Irrigation Water - Sanitary Sewer - Schools - Fire Protection - Roads - Application Requirements: (Applications are required to contain one copy of the following unless otherwise noted.) Applicant Description Staff Pre-application meeting with Planning Department required prior to neighborhood meeting. Copy of neighborhood meeting notice sent to property owners within 300 feet and meeting sign-in sheet. (Applicants are required to hold a neighborhood meeting to provide an opportunity for public review of the proposed project prior to the submittal of an application.) Completed and signed Conditional Use Application Fee Narrative fully describing the existing use, and the proposed project. (must be signed by applicant) Legal description of property (paper and electronic version with engineer’s seal)  Submit two paper and one electronic copy Copy of warranty deed. x $1,150 CU Site = 201,994 SF = 4.64 AC 39,630SF = 39,630 SF 197 192 60' 20' 10' 10' NA Vacant Lot - Flat 8 Apartment Buildings North section of development - facing the North and East De-acceleration lane off State Street. 30'-6" main drive to circulation loop. Emergency access onto State Steet. 1 pylon sign off State Street at the access drive aisle. School District #2 Star Fire State Street - Idaho Transportation City of Star City of Star x x x x x Existing pressurized irrigation, ditch along north property line ---PAGE BREAK--- Conditional Use Permit Application Form #510 Rev 10-2015 Page 3 of 8 If the signature on this application is not the owner of the property, an original notarized statement (affidavit of legal interest) from the owner stating the applicant is authorized to submit this application. Name and addresses, printed on address labels, of property owners within three hundred feet (300’) of the external boundaries of the property being considered as shown on record in the County Assessor’s office. List of names(s) and address(es) of all canal or irrigation ditches within or contiguous to the proposed development. Two 11” X 17” vicinity maps showing the location of the subject property One 8 ½” X 11” vicinity map showing the location of the subject property Two bound 24” X 36” copies of site grading & drainage plans, if applicable Two Electronic versions of the vicinity map, site plan, landscape plan, site grading & drainage plans, and building elevations in PDF format submitted on disks with the files named with project name & plan type. We encourage you to also submit at least one color version for presentation purposes. If applying for approval of a public school, provide additional information as required by the Public School Facility supplemental checklist per §67-6519 Signed Certification of Posting with pictures. (see attached posting requirements and certification form) Site Plan (If applicable): Site Plan – Two 24” X 36” copies (folded to 8 ½” X 11” size) The following items must be included on the site plan:  Date, scale, north arrow, and project name  Names, addresses, and phone number of owner(s), applicant, and engineer, surveyor or planner who prepared the site plan  Existing boundaries, property lines, and dimensions of the lot  Relationship to adjacent properties, streets, and private lanes  Easements and right-of-way lines on or adjacent to the lot  Existing and proposed zoning of the lot, and the zoning and land use of all adjacent properties  Building locations(s) (including dimensions to property lines)  Parking and loading areas (dimensioned)  Traffic access drives and traffic circulation (dimensioned)  Open/common spaces  Refuse and service areas  Utilities plan, including the following: Sewer, water, irrigation, and storm drainage (existing & proposed) One 8 ½” X 11” copy of site plan Landscape Plan (If applicable): Landscape plan – Two 24” X 36” copies (folded to 8 ½” X 11” size) The following items must be included on the landscape plan:  Date, scale, north arrow, and project name  Names, addresses, and phone numbers of the developer and the person and/or firm preparing the plan  Existing natural features such as canals, creeks, drains, ponds, wetlands, floodplains, high groundwater areas, and rock outcroppings  Location, size, and species of all existing trees on site with trunks 4 inches or greater in diameter, measured 6 inches above the ground. Indicate whether the tree will be retained or removed. Pending. Will be provided. NA X X X NA x x NA X x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x ---PAGE BREAK--- Conditional Use Permit Application Form #510 Rev 10-2015 Page 4 of 8  Existing buildings, structures, planting areas, light poles, power poles, walls, fences, berms, parking and loading areas, vehicular drives, trash areas, sidewalks, pathways, storm water detention areas, signs, street furniture, and other man-made elements  Existing and proposed contours for all areas steeper than 20% slope. Berms shall be shown with one-foot contours  Sight Triangles as defined in 8-4 A-7 of this Ordinance  Location and labels for all proposed plants, including trees, shrubs, and groundcovers (trees must not be planted in City water or sewer easements). Scale shown for plant materials shall reflect approximate mature size  Proposed screening structures  Design drawings(s) of all fencing proposed  Calculations of project components to demonstrate compliance with requirements of this ordinance, including:  Number of street trees and lineal feet of street frontage  Width of street buffers (exclusive of right-of-way)  Width of parking lot perimeter landscape strip  Buffer width between different land uses  Number of parking stalls and percent of parking area with internal landscaping  Total number of trees and tree species mix  Mitigation for removal of existing trees, including number of caliper inches being removed One 8 ½” X 11” copy of landscape plan Building elevations showing construction materials SIGNS (If applicable): All signs will require submittal of a sign application. FEE REQUIREMENT: I have read and understand the above requirements. I further understand fees will be collected at the time of filing an application. I understand that there may be other fees associated with this application incurred by the City in obtaining reviews or referrals by architect, engineering, or other professionals necessary to enable the City to expedite this application. I understand that I, as the applicant, am responsible for all payments to the City of Star. Applicant/Representative Signature Date **NOTE: All presentation boards, material boards, and documentation that are a part of the public hearing shall become property of the City of Star. 10-25-19 x x x x x x x x Ref: Architectural similar concept ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK---   1 State Street & Seneca Springs/ STAR19-0012/ AZ-20-12/ DA-20-01/ CU-20-02 Development Services Department Project/File: State Street & Seneca Springs/ STAR19-0012/ AZ-20-12/ DA-20-01/ CU-20-02 This is an annexation, rezone, development agreement and conditional use permit for a mixed-use development on 7 acres. The site is located at the northwest corner of State Street and Seneca Springs Way. Lead Agency: City of Star Site address: 10040 & 10122 W State Street Staff Approval: December 13, 2019 Applicant: Brad Marczuk Larson Architects 210 Murray Street Boise, ID 83642 Owner: Northwest Development Company 1980 Meridian Road, Ste 140 Meridian, ID 83642 Staff Contact: Dawn Battles Phone: 387-6218 E-mail: [EMAIL REDACTED] A. Findings of Fact 1. Description of Application: The applicant is requesting approval for annexation, rezone from MU (Mixed-Use), C-2 (General Business) and RUT (Rural-Urban Transition) to CBD (Central Business District), a development agreement and a conditional use permit to allow for a mixed-use development that will provide 13,595 square feet of commercial/office and 96 apartment units. The applicant’s proposal to rezone to CBD is consistent with the City of Star’s comprehensive plan. 2. Description of Adjacent Surrounding Area: Direction Land Use Zoning North Medium Low Density Residential R-4 South Low Density Residential R-2-DA East Mixed Use & Neighborhood Business MU & C-1 West Rural-Urban Transition (Ada County) RUT 3. Site History: ACHD has not previously reviewed this site for a development application. 4. Adjacent Development: The following developments are pending or underway in the vicinity of the site: • Archway, a 19-lot residential subdivision located south of the site was approved by ACHD in August 2018. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 State Street & Seneca Springs/ STAR19-0012/ AZ-20-12/ DA-20-01/ CU-20-02 5. Transit: Transit services are not available to serve this site. 6. New Center Lane Miles: The proposed development includes 0 centerline miles of new public road. 7. Impact Fees: There will be an impact fee that is assessed and due prior to issuance of any building permits. The assessed impact fee will be based on the impact fee ordinance that is in effect at that time. The impact fee assessment will not be released until the civil plans are approved by ACHD. 8. Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)/ Integrated Five Year Work Plan (IFYWP): • Star Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 5-lanes from Chinden Boulevard (SH-20/26) to State Street (SH-44) between 2031 and 2035. • The intersection of State Street (SH-44) and Star Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 4-lanes on the north leg, 5-lanes on the south, 5-lanes east, and 5-lanes on the west leg, and signalized between 2031 and 2035. B. Traffic Findings for Consideration 1. Trip Generation: Below is a list of land uses and estimated trip generation rates for the uses that may be included within the site, based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 10th edition. Use Avg. Daily Trips Avg. PM Peak Hour Multi-family Housing (Mid-rise) (per unit) 5.44 0.44 General Office (per 1,000 sf) 9.74 1.15 Medical/Dental Office Building (per 1,000 sf) 34.80 3.46 Automobile Parts Sales (per 1,000 sf) 55.34 4.91 2. Condition of Area Roadways Traffic Count is based on Vehicles per hour (VPH) ACHD does not set level of service thresholds for State Highways. 3. Average Daily Traffic Count (VDT) Average daily traffic counts are based on ACHD’s most current traffic counts. • The average daily traffic count for State Street (SH-44) west of SH-16 was 19,485 on July 24, 2019. • The average daily traffic count for Seneca Springs Way north of State Street (SH-44) was 2,339 on March 5, 2019. Roadway Frontage Functional Classification PM Peak Hour Traffic Count **State Highway 44 State Street 472-feet Principal Arterial 1,128 Seneca Springs Way 0-feet Local 133 ---PAGE BREAK--- 3 State Street & Seneca Springs/ STAR19-0012/ AZ-20-12/ DA-20-01/ CU-20-02 C. Findings for Consideration 1. State Highway SH-44 /State Street SH-44/State Street is under the jurisdiction of the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). The applicant, City of Star, and ITD should work together to determine if additional right-of-way or improvements are necessary on SH-44/State Street. 2. Seneca Springs Way a. Existing Conditions: Seneca Springs Way is improved with 2-travel lanes, vertical curb, gutter, 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk and a landscape spite strip abutting the site. There is 68-feet of right-of-way for Seneca Springs Way (35-feet from centerline). b. Staff Comments/Recommendations: There is a landscape strip abutting the site’s east property line adjacent to Seneca Springs Way owned by the Rockbridge Subdivision Homeowner’s Association. Therefore, the site does not have frontage on Seneca Springs Way and the applicant is not required to make any frontage improvements. Typically, access should come from a lesser classified street abutting the site. In this case the site has frontage on Seneca Springs Way, a local street. However, direct access to Seneca Springs Way is not feasible due to a common lot owned by the Rockbridge Homeowner’s Association between the site and Seneca Springs Way that was platted in 2002 as part of the Rockbridge Subdivision Phase 1; and is not owned by the developer. Therefore, a waiver is not required as part of this application. ACHD would encourage the developer to work with the Rockbridge Subdivision Homeowner’s Association to obtain access through the common lot, thereby providing additional ingress/egress to the site for residents and emergency services. 3. Tree Planters Tree Planter Policy: Tree Planter Policy: The District’s Tree Planter Policy prohibits all trees in planters less than 8-feet in width without the installation of root barriers. Class II trees may be allowed in planters with a minimum width of 8-feet, and Class I and Class III trees may be allowed in planters with a minimum width of 10-feet. 4. Landscaping Landscaping Policy: A license agreement is required for all landscaping proposed within ACHD right-of-way or easement areas. Trees shall be located no closer than 10-feet from all public storm drain facilities. Landscaping should be designed to eliminate site obstructions in the vision triangle at intersections. District Policy 5104.3.1 requires a 40-foot vision triangle and a 3-foot height restriction on all landscaping located at an uncontrolled intersection and a 50-foot offset from stop signs. Landscape plans are required with the submittal of civil plans and must meet all District requirements prior to signature of the final plat and/or approval of the civil plans. D. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. Payment of impact fees is due prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. E. Standard Conditions of Approval 1. All proposed irrigation facilities shall be located outside of the ACHD right-of-way (including all easements). Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the ACHD right-of-way (including all easements). ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 State Street & Seneca Springs/ STAR19-0012/ AZ-20-12/ DA-20-01/ CU-20-02 2. Private Utilities including sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within the ACHD right-of-way. 3. In accordance with District policy, 7203.3, the applicant may be required to update any existing non- compliant pedestrian improvements abutting the site to meet current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The applicant’s engineer should provide documentation of ADA compliance to District Development Review staff for review. 4. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 5. A license agreement and compliance with the District’s Tree Planter policy is required for all landscaping proposed within ACHD right-of-way or easement areas. 6. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 7. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-[PHONE REDACTED]) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 8. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District’s Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 9. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the ACHD Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Standards unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 10. Construction use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of ACHD prior to District approval for occupancy. 11. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant’s authorized representative and an authorized representative of ACHD. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from ACHD. 12. If the site plan or use should change in the future, ACHD Planning Review will review the site plan and may require additional improvements to the transportation system at that time. Any change in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with ACHD Policy and Standard Conditions of Approval in place at that time unless a waiver/variance of the requirements or other legal relief is granted by the ACHD Commission. F. Conclusions of Law 1. The proposed site plan is approved, if all of the Site Specific and Standard Conditions of Approval are satisfied. 2. ACHD requirements are intended to assure that the proposed use/development will not place an undue burden on the existing vehicular transportation system within the vicinity impacted by the proposed development. G. Attachments ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 State Street & Seneca Springs/ STAR19-0012/ AZ-20-12/ DA-20-01/ CU-20-02 1. Vicinity Map 2. Site Plan 3. Utility Coordinating Council 4. Development Process Checklist 5. Appeal Guidelines ---PAGE BREAK--- 6 State Street & Seneca Springs/ STAR19-0012/ AZ-20-12/ DA-20-01/ CU-20-02 VICINITY MAP ---PAGE BREAK--- 7 State Street & Seneca Springs/ STAR19-0012/ AZ-20-12/ DA-20-01/ CU-20-02 SITE PLAN ---PAGE BREAK--- 8 State Street & Seneca Springs/ STAR19-0012/ AZ-20-12/ DA-20-01/ CU-20-02 Ada County Utility Coordinating Council Developer/Local Improvement District Right of Way Improvements Guideline Request Purpose: To develop the necessary avenue for proper notification to utilities of local highway and road improvements, to help the utilities in budgeting and to clarify the already existing process. 1) Notification: Within five working days upon notification of required right of way improvements by Highway entities, developers shall provide written notification to the affected utility owners and the Ada County Utility Coordinating Council (UCC). Notification shall include but not be limited to, project limits, scope of roadway improvements/project, anticipated construction dates, and any portions critical to the right of way improvements and coordination of utilities. 2) Plan Review: The developer shall provide the highway entities and all utility owners with preliminary project plans and schedule a plan review conference. Depending on the scale of utility improvements, a plan review conference may not be necessary, as determined by the utility owners. Conference notification shall also be sent to the UCC. During the review meeting the developer shall notify utilities of the status of right of way/easement acquisition necessary for their project. At the plan review conference each company shall have the right to appeal, adjust and/or negotiate with the developer on its own behalf. Each utility shall provide the developer with a letter of review indicating the costs and time required for relocation of its facilities. Said letter of review is to be provided within thirty calendar days after the date of the plan review conference. 3) Revisions: The developer is responsible to provide utilities with any revisions to preliminary plans. Utilities may request an updated plan review meeting if revisions are made in the preliminary plans which affect the utility relocation requirements. Utilities shall have thirty days after receiving the revisions to review and comment thereon. 4) Final Notification: The developer will provide highway entities, utility owners and the UCC with final notification of its intent to proceed with right of way improvements and include the anticipated date work will commence. This notification shall indicate that the work to be performed shall be pursuant to final approved plans by the highway entity. The developer shall schedule a preconstruction meeting prior to right of way improvements. Utility relocation activity shall be completed within the times established during the preconstruction meeting, unless otherwise agreed upon. Notification to the Ada County UCC can be sent to: 50 S. Cole Rd. Boise 83707, or Visit iducc.com for e-mail notification information. ---PAGE BREAK--- 9 State Street & Seneca Springs/ STAR19-0012/ AZ-20-12/ DA-20-01/ CU-20-02 Development Process Checklist Items Completed to Date: Submit a development application to a City or to Ada County The City or the County will transmit the development application to ACHD The ACHD Planning Review Section will receive the development application to review The Planning Review Section will do one of the following: Send a “No Review” letter to the applicant stating that there are no site specific conditions of approval at this time. Write a Staff Level report analyzing the impacts of the development on the transportation system and evaluating the proposal for its conformance to District Policy. Write a Commission Level report analyzing the impacts of the development on the transportation system and evaluating the proposal for its conformance to District Policy. Items to be completed by Applicant: For ALL development applications, including those receiving a “No Review” letter: • The applicant should submit one set of engineered plans directly to ACHD for review by the Development Review Section for plan review and assessment of impact fees. (Note: if there are no site improvements required by ACHD, then architectural plans may be submitted for purposes of impact fee assessment.) • The applicant is required to get a permit from Construction Services (ACHD) for ANY work in the right-of-way, including, but not limited to, driveway approaches, street improvements and utility cuts. Pay Impact Fees prior to issuance of building permit. Impact fees cannot be paid prior to plan review approval. DID YOU REMEMBER: Construction (Non-Subdivisions) Driveway or Property Approach(s) • Submit a “Driveway Approach Request” form to ACHD Construction (for approval by Development Services & Traffic Services). There is a one week turnaround for this approval. Working in the ACHD Right-of-Way • Four business days prior to starting work have a bonded contractor submit a “Temporary Highway Use Permit Application” to ACHD Construction – Permits along with: a) Traffic Control Plan b) An Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative & Plat, done by a Certified Plan Designer, if trench is >50’ or you are placing >600 sf of concrete or asphalt. Construction (Subdivisions) Sediment & Erosion Submittal • At least one week prior to setting up a Pre-Construction Meeting an Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative & Plan, done by a Certified Plan Designer, must be turned into ACHD Construction to be reviewed and approved by the ACHD Stormwater Section. Idaho Power Company • Vic Steelman at Idaho Power must have his IPCO approved set of subdivision utility plans prior to Pre-Con being scheduled. Final Approval from Development Services is required prior to scheduling a Pre-Con. ---PAGE BREAK--- 10 State Street & Seneca Springs/ STAR19-0012/ AZ-20-12/ DA-20-01/ CU-20-02 Request for Appeal of Staff Decision 1. Appeal of Staff Decision: The Commission shall hear and decide appeals by an applicant of the final decision made by the Development Services Manager when it is alleged that the Development Services Manager did not properly apply this section 7101.6, did not consider all of the relevant facts presented, made an error of fact or law, abused discretion or acted arbitrarily and capriciously in the interpretation or enforcement of the ACHD Policy Manual. a. Filing Fee: The Commission may, from time to time, set reasonable fees to be charged the applicant for the processing of appeals, to cover administrative costs. b. Initiation: An appeal is initiated by the filing of a written notice of appeal with the Secretary and Clerk of the District, which must be filed within ten (10) working days from the date of the decision that is the subject of the appeal. The notice of appeal shall refer to the decision being appealed, identify the appellant by name, address and telephone number and state the grounds for the appeal. The grounds shall include a written summary of the provisions of the policy relevant to the appeal and/or the facts and law relied upon and shall include a written argument in support of the appeal. The Commission shall not consider a notice of appeal that does not comply with the provisions of this subsection. c. Time to Reply: The Development Services Manager shall have ten (10) working days from the date of the filing of the notice of appeal to reply to the notice of the appeal, and may during such time meet with the appellant to discuss the matter, and may also consider and/or modify the decision that is being appealed. A copy of the reply and any modifications to the decision being appealed will be provided to the appellant prior to the Commission hearing on the appeal. d. Notice of Hearing: Unless otherwise agreed to by the appellant, the hearing of the appeal will be noticed and scheduled on the Commission agenda at a regular meeting to be held within thirty (30) days following the delivery to the appellant of the Development Services Manager’s reply to the notice of appeal. A copy of the decision being appealed, the notice of appeal and the reply shall be delivered to the Commission at least one week prior to the hearing. e. Action by Commission: Following the hearing, the Commission shall either affirm or reverse, in whole or part, or otherwise modify, amend or supplement the decision being appealed, as such action is adequately supported by the law and evidence presented at the hearing. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- M&M/J&E STATE STREET – FILE # RZ-20-01/PUD-20-01 1 CITY OF STAR LAND USE STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor & Council FROM: Shawn L. Nickel, City Planner MEETING DATE: January 21, 2020 – PUBLIC HEARING FILE(S) RZ-20-01 Annexation and Zoning PUD-20-01 – 10362 & 10366 W. STATE STREET OWNER/APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE Property Owner/Applicant: M&M – J&E Properties 2303 W. Bellagio Drive Meridian, ID 83646 Representative: Jason Martin 9628 W. State Street Star, Idaho, 83669 REQUEST Request: The Applicant is seeking approval of a Rezone from Commercial (C-2) to Central Business District (CBD), and a Planned Unit Development for a proposed car dealership, live/work mixed use and a residential duplex. The property located at 10362 & 10366 W. State Street in Star and consists of .71 acres. The property will include a car lot, office with living space and a residential duplex and detached garage. PROPERTY INFORMATION Property Location: The subject property is generally located on the north side of W. State Street, east of N. Taurus Way in Star, Idaho. Ada County Parcels - #S0408438480 & S0408438560. ---PAGE BREAK--- M&M/J&E STATE STREET – FILE # RZ-20-01/PUD-20-01 2 Surrounding Land Use/Designations: Zoning Designation Comp Plan Designation Land Use Existing Commercial C-2 Central Business District Commercial/Residential Proposed CBD-PUD Central Business District Mixed Use Development North of site Commercial (C-2) Central Business District Vacant-Pastureland South of site Limited Office (L-O) Central Business District Vacant East of site Commercial (C-2) Central Business District Commercial – Star Vet Clinic West of site Commercial (C-2) Central Business District Commercial – Point S Tire Center Current Development Standards for Central District (CBD): Dimensional Standards C-1 C-2 L-O CBD Front setback 0' 0' 20' 0' Rear setback 20' 20' 20' 0' Interior side setback 0' 0' 0' 0' Street side setback 20' 20' 20' 0' Maximum building height 35' Parking requirements See chapter 4, article C, "Off Street Parking And Loading Requirements", of this title Landscape requirements See chapter 4, article B, "Landscaping Requirements", of this title Existing Site Characteristics: The property currently contains an office with attached living area and a residential duplex. Irrigation/Drainage District(s): Middleton Mill Ditch Co. Flood Zone: This property is outside of the flood zone. Special On-Site Features:  Areas of Critical Environmental Concern – No known areas.  Evidence of Erosion – No known areas.  Fish Habitat – No known areas.  Mature Trees – Yes ---PAGE BREAK--- M&M/J&E STATE STREET – FILE # RZ-20-01/PUD-20-01 3  Riparian Vegetation – No known areas.  Steep Slopes – None.  Stream/Creek – None.  Unique Animal Life – No unique animal life has been identified.  Unique Plant Life – No unique plant life has been identified.  Unstable Soils – No known issues.  Wildlife Habitat – No wildlife habitat has been developed or will be destroyed.  Historical Assets – No historical assets have been observed. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS Pre-Application Meeting Held June 14, 2019 & October 8, 2019 Neighborhood Meeting Held October 29, 2019 Application Submitted & Fees Paid November 12, 2019 Residents within 300’ Notified November 20, 2019 Agencies Notified November 20, 2019 Legal Notice Published November 20, 2019 Property Posted January 10, 2020 HISTORY The property has been used in the past as various office/commercial uses, including the Galaxy Motors car dealership. CODE DEFINITIONS / COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE: Definitions (Section 8-2 B-1): Dwelling or Dwelling Unit: Any structure, or portion thereof, providing independent living facilities for one “family” as herein defined, including provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation. Residential (R-5) Zoning: Five dwelling units per acre. USE CBD C-1 C-2 L-O Dwelling: Multi-family1 C N N N Secondary1 N N N N ---PAGE BREAK--- M&M/J&E STATE STREET – FILE # RZ-20-01/PUD-20-01 4 Single-family attached C N N N Single-family detached1 N N N N Townhouse N N N N Two-family duplex N N N N 8-7-1: PURPOSE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS: A. The purpose of the planned unit development (PUD) requirements is to provide an opportunity for exemplary site development that meets the following objectives: 1. Preserves natural, scenic and historic features of major importance; 2. Allows for innovative design that creates visually pleasing and cohesive patterns of development; and 3. Creates functionally integrated development that allows for a more efficient and cost-effective provision of public services. B. It is not the intent that the PUD process be used solely for the purposes of deviation from the dimensional standards in the district. (Ord. 215, 11-2-2011) 8-7-4: STANDARDS: The council may approve planned unit developments, in accord with the following standards: A. General Use Standards: 1. Deviations From Underlying District Requirements: Deviations from the development standards and/or area requirements of the district in accord with chapter 3, "District Regulations", of this title may be approved. The exception is that along the periphery of the planned development, the applicable setbacks as established by the district shall not be reduced. 2. Allowed Uses: Applicant may request that specific conditional use(s) be allowed in the district as principal permitted use(s). 3. Private Streets And Service Drives: The uses within the planned unit development are interconnected through a system of roadways and/or pathways as appropriate. Private streets and service drives may be permitted, if designed and constructed to the transportation authority standards and in accord with chapter 4, article E, "Private Street Requirements", of this title. ---PAGE BREAK--- M&M/J&E STATE STREET – FILE # RZ-20-01/PUD-20-01 5 4. Buildings Clustered: Buildings shall be clustered to preserve scenic or environmentally sensitive areas in the natural state, or to consolidate small open spaces into larger, more usable areas for common use and enjoyment. B. Private Open Space: In addition to the common open space and site amenity requirements as set forth in chapter 4, "Regulations Applicable To All Districts", of this title, a minimum of eighty (80) square feet of private, usable open space shall be provided for each residential unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches, patios, decks, and enclosed yards. Landscaping, and other accessways do not count toward this requirement. C. Residential Use Standards: 1. Multi-Family: Notwithstanding the provisions of chapter 3, "District Regulations", of this title, multi-family dwellings may be an allowed use when approved through a planned unit development. 2. Housing Types: A variety of housing types shall be included within a single planned development, including attached units (townhouses, duplexes), detached units (patio homes), single-family and multi-family units, regardless of the district classification of the site, provided that the overall density limit of the district is maintained. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 8.2.3 Land Use Map Designations: Central Business District The Central Business District is planned to be a vibrant downtown center for the community. Uses encouraged are commercial, retail, civic, private offices, and entertainment. High density housing is encouraged on the upper floors of mixed-use buildings and at the fringes of the land use designation. Developments in this district are to place an emphasis on pedestrian and bicycle access and compatibility. 8.3 Goal: Encourage the development of a diverse community that provides a mix of land uses, housing types, and a variety of employment options, social and recreational opportunities, and where possible, an assortment of amenities within walking distance of residential development. ---PAGE BREAK--- M&M/J&E STATE STREET – FILE # RZ-20-01/PUD-20-01 6 8.4 Objectives: • Implement the Land Use Map and associated policies as the official guide for development. • Manage urban sprawl in order to minimize costs of urban services and to protect rural areas. • Encourage land uses that are in harmony with existing resources, scenic areas, natural wildlife areas, and surrounding land uses. 8.5.5 Policies Related Mostly to the Central Business District Planning Areas: A. The CBD zoning district should allow for a mix of commercial, office, institutional, and civic type uses with specific provisions for residential use in appropriate locations with compatible densities. B. High density residential is suitable within the CBD in mixed use buildings with commercial or office type uses on the first floor and high density residential on upper floors. 8.5.9 Additional Land Use Component Policies: • Encourage flexibility in site design and innovative land uses. • Encourage landscaping to enhance the appearance of subdivisions, structures, and parking areas. • Require more open space and trees in subdivisions. • Work with Ada County Highway District (ACHD), Canyon Highway District #4 (CHD4), and Idaho Department of Transportation (ITD) for better coordination of roadway and access needs. • Support well-planned, pedestrian-friendly developments. • Dark sky provision should be adopted within the code to assure down style lighting in all developments and Star should consider joining the International Dark Sky Association. • The City should utilize the 2018 Treasure Valley Tree Selection Guide when requiring trees within developments. 18.4 Implementation Policies: E. Development Agreements allow the city to enter into a contract with a developer upon rezoning. The Development Agreement may provide the city and the developer with certain assurances regarding the proposed development upon rezoning. ---PAGE BREAK--- M&M/J&E STATE STREET – FILE # RZ-20-01/PUD-20-01 7 PROJECT OVERVIEW LAND USE: This property includes an existing office/commercial building that also includes a dwelling unit attached to it. The intent of the applicant is to improve the property and bring it into compliance with City Code and open a vehicle sales lot and office. Vehicle sales is a conditional use in the CBD and may be approved as part of this PUD request. The dwelling unit attached to the office will provide a live/work opportunity on the property. In addition, an existing residential duplex is located in the northern portion of the property. The applicants long-term plan is to redevelop the northern portion of the property with additional uses that will be permitted in the CBD zoning at the time of development. In the interim, the applicant wishes to maintain the residential duplex as it currently exists. REZONE: The rezone request from Commercial C-2 to Central Business District (CBD) on the applicant’s property will allow for the property zoning to be consistent with the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan. The current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates this property as Central Business District. The requested land uses of commercial with the inclusion of the existing, specific residential uses within the proposed PUD meets the intent of the zoning designation and Comprehensive Plan, in that “the CBD zoning district should allow for a mix of commercial, office, institutional, and civic type uses with specific provisions for residential use in appropriate locations with compatible densities” (Policy 8.5.5A). PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: Included with the rezone is an application for a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The current PUD ordinance states that “a variety of housing types shall be included within a single planned development, including attached units (townhouses, duplexes), detached units (patio homes), single-family and multi-family units, regardless of the district classification of the site, provided that the overall density limit of the district is maintained”. And while the Central Business District prohibits two-family duplexes, “Deviations from the development standards and/or area requirements of the district” may be requested as part of the PUD process. “The exception is that along the periphery of the planned development, the applicable setbacks as established by the district shall not be reduced”. As proposed, this planned unit development would include the following exceptions and conditional uses within the CBD zone: • Commercial/Office Use – Car Dealership, other, allowed, CBD non-residential uses • Live/Work concept • A Residential Duplex • Detached Accessory Structure ---PAGE BREAK--- M&M/J&E STATE STREET – FILE # RZ-20-01/PUD-20-01 8 ADDITIONAL ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION: Transportation: 1. The applicant is working with ITD regarding access onto State Street. As of the date of this report, Staff has not received a response to the application from ITD. 2. The City of Star has adopted an Economic Corridor Access Management Plan that shows the area of these parcels as having cross-access to adjacent properties. Staff has worked with the applicant, and a 20’ cross access has been recognized by the applicant and included on the proposed site plan along the northern boundary of the property that would provide for cross access to the east and west, either as a driveway connection or a future public street. This access may be required to be constructed in future development phases by the applicant as this property, and others adjacent to it redevelop. Site Development Plan: The site plan submitted indicates that the southern half of the property , including the front and side areas of the existing, southern live/work structure is to be paved, striped and provided with landscaping that will meet the standards set required in the Zoning Ordinance. The remaining, northern portion of the property will remain gravel, as the owner intends to redevelop the northern portion of the property in the future. Locations for decorative streetlights along State Street are not reflected on the site plan and may be required by the Council as part of this development. In addition, the applicant should be prepared to address on-site parking, including lighting in the parking lot. Locations shall be addressed along with design and description of said lights. Dark sky lighting standards shall apply. A sidewalk along State Street was discussed with Staff, including the possibility of bonding for sidewalk until ITD widens State Street in the future. The Star City Engineer has recommended that sidewalk be constructed with this development application. With the surrounding properties along State Street currently developing and the ability to provide safe pedestrian circulation through the Central Business District, Staff is also recommending sidewalk be completed as part of this development. An accessory garage structure is included on the site plan to provide covered parking to the residential uses. Accessory structures are a conditional use in the current CBD zoning and can be approved as part of this PUD. The structure shall meet the residential side yard setback requirement of a minimum of 5’ and shall be located outside of the required cross-access easement on the north boundary of the property. ---PAGE BREAK--- M&M/J&E STATE STREET – FILE # RZ-20-01/PUD-20-01 9 The Star Fire District has reviewed the application and is requiring an emergency turn-around near the residential duplex and future garage area. The applicant shall work with the Fire Chief in the design and approval of this request. AGENCY RESPONSES Department of Environmental Quality November 27, 2019 Keller and Associates November 27, 2019 ACHD December 9, 2019 Star Fire District December 18, 2019 PUBLIC RESPONSES No responses have been received from the public. STAFF ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Staff is supportive of this proposal as submitted and believes that approval of this application by the Council will accomplish several goals in the redevelopment of the downtown and the Central Business District. Staff understands that the future goal of the CBD is to phase out traditional residential uses in favor of office, commercial and other uses that will make for a vibrant downtown, but also believes that the applicant’s intent for the current and future uses on this property meet that goal. The applicant has two parcels and could easily adjust the lot lines, separate out the existing duplex from the rest of the development and keep it in its current condition while developing the southern portion along State Street with the car dealership. By processing both parcels as a PUD now, the entire property is cleaned up and improved, emergency access is upgraded, sidewalks are completed along the entire frontage, and most importantly, a key cross-access point easement is provided on the northern boundary that will provide for the future transportation needs of the community. The applicant intends to redevelop the northern portion of the property in the future and will retain the existing residential use until that time comes. Based upon the information provided to staff in the applications and agency comments received to date, the proposed rezone and planned unit development meets the requirements, standards and intent for development as they relate to the Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. The Council should consider the entire record and testimony presented at their scheduled public hearing prior to rendering its decision on the matter. Should the Council vote to approve the applications, either as presented or with added or revised conditions of approval, Council shall direct staff to draft findings of fact and conclusions of law for the Council to consider at a future date. ---PAGE BREAK--- M&M/J&E STATE STREET – FILE # RZ-20-01/PUD-20-01 10 FINDINGS The Council may approve, conditionally approve, deny or table this request. In order to approve these applications, the Unified Development Code requires that Council must find the following: REZONE FINDINGS: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the Star Comprehensive Plan is to promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the City of Star and its Impact Area. Some of the prime objectives of the Comprehensive Plan include: ✓ Protection of property rights. ✓ Adequate public facilities and services are provided to the people at reasonable cost. ✓ Ensure the local economy is protected. ✓ Encourage urban and urban-type development and overcrowding of land. ✓ Ensure development is commensurate with the physical characteristics of the land. The goal of the Comprehensive Plan for the Central Business District is to encourage a vibrant downtown center for the community. Uses encouraged are commercial, retail, civic, private offices, and entertainment. High density housing is encouraged on the upper floors of mixed-use buildings and at the fringes of the land use designation. Developments in this district are to place an emphasis on pedestrian and bicycle access and compatibility. The City must find compliance with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically, the purposes statement. The City must find that the proposal complies with the proposed district and purpose statement. The purpose statement provides for allowed uses to include small scale retail, public, quasi-public and adaptive reuse of residential structures. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; and The City must find that there is no indication from the material submitted by any political agency stating that this annexation and zoning of this property will be materially detrimental to the public health, safety or 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. The City must find that it has not been presented with any information from agencies having jurisdiction that public services will be adversely impacted other than traffic, ---PAGE BREAK--- M&M/J&E STATE STREET – FILE # RZ-20-01/PUD-20-01 11 which will continue to be impacted as the City grows. 5. The annexation is in the best interest of the city. The property is already within the City limits. The City must find that this rezone is reasonably necessary for the orderly development of the City. 8-7-5: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS: Upon recommendation from the administrator, the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant a planned development request, the council shall make the following findings: A. The planned unit development demonstrates exceptional high quality in site design through the provision of cohesive, continuous, visually related and functionally linked patterns of development, street and pathway layout, and building design. B. The planned unit development preserves the significant natural, scenic and/or historic features. C. The arrangement of uses and/or structures in the development does not cause damage, hazard, or nuisance to persons or property in the vicinity. D. The internal street, bike and pedestrian circulation system is designed or the efficient and safe flow of vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians without having a disruptive influence upon the activities and functions contained within the development, nor place an undue burden upon existing transportation and other public services in the surrounding area. E. Community facilities, such as a park, recreational, and dedicated open space areas are functionally related and accessible to all dwelling units via pedestrian and/or bicycle pathways. (Not Applicable) F. The proposal complies with the density and use standards requirements in accord with chapter 3, "District Regulations", of this title. G. The amenities provided are appropriate in number and scale to the proposed development. (Not Applicable) H. The planned unit development is in conformance with the comprehensive plan. (Ord. 215, 11- 2-2011) Upon granting approval or denial of the application, the Council shall specify: 1. The Ordinance and standards used in evaluating the application; 2. The reasons for recommending approval or denial; and ---PAGE BREAK--- M&M/J&E STATE STREET – FILE # RZ-20-01/PUD-20-01 12 3. The actions, if any, that the applicant could take to obtain approval. PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The development shall follow the specific details of the approved PUD site/development plan approved through this application. The approved PUD site/development plan shall further comply with all statutory requirements of applicable agencies and districts having jurisdiction in the City of Star. 2. A revised site/development plan shall be submitted to the administrator showing sidewalk to be constructed along State Street, garbage enclosure location, and streetlight location. 3. The development, as approved, is for a car dealership with attached residential unit, the continued use of the existing duplex structure and one new accessory structure only. Any further uses proposed are subject to additional review by the City through the current Unified Development Code. 4. The property with the approved development plan shall be satisfactorily weed abated at all times, preventing a public nuisance, per Star City Code Chapter 3, Section 3-1-1 through 3- 1-7. 5. The approved development plan shall comply with the City of Star Unified Development Code regarding landscaping, both internal buffers and frontages, including street trees. 6. Applicant/Owner/Developer shall submit a streetlight and parking lot lighting plan/design prior to Certificate of Zoning Compliance. All lighting shall comply with the Star City Code and the Dark Sky standards adopted by the City. 7. All new structures shall comply with the effective building and zoning requirements at time of building permit issuance, unless otherwise amended in the PUD or Development Agreement. 8. Any requirements from the Star Sewer & Water District shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 9. All State, Federal and Local rules and regulations regarding development in the Special Hazard Areas (Floodplain/Floodway) shall be adhered to, if applicable. 10. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the Star Fire District regarding emergency access to the property. If required, an emergency turn-around shall be constructed per Fire District standards. 11. All new structures and tenant improvements shall require a building permit. 12. A separate sign permit shall be approved for any signage for the proposed use. 13. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance, a stormwater narrative, drainage calculations, and drainage section details shall be submitted and approved by the City Engineer. The development shall further meet all specific requirements of the City Engineer. 14. Any additional site-specific conditions and considerations as required by Staff or Council. COUNCIL DECISION The Star City Council File #RZ-20-01/PUD-20-01 for 10362 & 10366 W. Street on 2020. ---PAGE BREAK--- 11/4/2019 Map Scale: Legend 0.09 Miles 5,122.79 Railroad Roads (4,000 - 8,000 sc Interstate Ramp Principal Arterial Collector Minor Arterial Local Parks Alley Driveway Parks Townships Sections Condos Parcels AdaOrthos2016 Red: Band_1 Green: Band_2 Blue: Band_3 Ada County Assessor This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for general reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION OR LEGAL PURPOSES. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION – FILE # AZ-20-01/PP- 20-01 1 CITY OF STAR LAND USE STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor & Council FROM: Shawn L. Nickel, City Planner MEETING DATE: January 21, 2020 – PUBLIC HEARING FILE(S) AZ-20-01 Annexation and Zoning PP-20-01 Preliminary Plat – Torchlight Estates Subdivision OWNER/APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE Property Owners: Tyler Monroe & Yvette Butler 9990 Beacon Light Road Star, Idaho 83669 Applicant/Representative: Guy Jones Alliance Building, LLC 11543 Purple Sage Road Middleton, Idaho 83644 REQUEST Request: The Applicant is seeking approval of an Annexation and Zoning (Residential R-2) and a Preliminary Plat for a proposed residential subdivision consisting of 39 residential lots and 4 common lots. The property located is at 9990 W. Beacon Light Road in Star, Idaho, and consists of 20.26 acres with a proposed density of 1.92 dwelling units per acre. PROPERTY INFORMATION Property Location: The subject property is generally located on the north side of Beacon Light Road, east of Wing Road in Star, Idaho. Ada County Parcel No’s R5981000100 & R5981000200. ---PAGE BREAK--- TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION – FILE # AZ-20-01/PP- 20-01 2 Comprehensive Plan Map, Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: COMP PLAN DESIGNATION ZONING DESIGNATION LAND USE Existing Neighborhood Residential Rural Transition (RUT) – Ada County Agricultural ground and contains two single- family dwellings. Proposed Neighborhood Residential Residential (R-2) Single Family Residential Subdivision North of site Neighborhood Residential Residential (R-3) Currently Annexed – Agricultural Use South of site Neighborhood Residential Rural Transition (RUT) – Ada County Single Family Dwelling/Agricultural East of site Neighborhood Residential Rural Transition (RUT) – Ada County Single Family Residential/Ag West of site Neighborhood Residential Residential (R-3) Greendale Grove Approved Subdivision Current Dimensional Standards for Residential R-1 And R-2 Standard(s) Requirement Minimum street frontage 35 feet Front setback1 30 feet Rear setback 30 feet Interior side setback 10 feet plus 5 feet for each additional story Street side setback1: Local 20 feet Arterial and collector 25 feet Street landscape buffer: Arterial and collector 35 feet corridor 40 feet Maximum building height 35 feet ---PAGE BREAK--- TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION – FILE # AZ-20-01/PP- 20-01 3 Existing Site Characteristics: The property is currently being used as Ag/farming ground and contains two single-family dwellings. Irrigation District(s): Middleton Mill Ditch Company; Farmers Union Ditch Company Flood Zone: This property is not located in a Special Flood Hazard Area. Special On-Site Features:  Areas of Critical Environmental Concern – No known areas.  Evidence of Erosion – No known areas.  Fish Habitat – Existing pond may contain stocked fish.  Mature Trees – Yes  Riparian Vegetation – No known areas.  Steep Slopes – None evident.  Stream/Creek – None.  Unique Animal Life – No unique animal life has been identified.  Unique Plant Life – No unique plant life has been identified.  Unstable Soils – No known issues.  Wildlife Habitat – No sensitive wildlife habitat has been observed.  Historical Assets – No historical assets have been observed. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS Pre-Application Meeting Held April 8, 2019 Neighborhood Meeting Held May 28, 2019 Application Submitted & Fees Paid October 29, 2019 Residents within 300’ Notified December 5, 2019 Agencies Notified December 5, 2019 Legal Notice Published December 17, 2019 Property Posted January 11, 2020 HISTORY Staff is unaware of any previous City zoning applications on these two parcels. With the existence of a private road Hardway Lane), it would appear that the properties were created as part of an Ada County lot split and private road application sometime in the past. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/CODE DEFINITIONS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 8.2.3 Land Use Map Designations: Neighborhood Residential ---PAGE BREAK--- TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION – FILE # AZ-20-01/PP- 20-01 4 Suitable primarily for single family residential use. Densities in the majority of this land use area are to range from 3 units per acre to 5 units per acre. Densities not exceeding 1 to 2 units per acre are to be encouraged in areas of the floodplain, ridgeline developable areas, hillside developable areas, and where new residential lots are proposed adjacent to existing residential lots of one acre and larger where those existing larger lots are not likely to be subdivided in the future. 8.3 Goal: Encourage the development of a diverse community that provides a mix of land uses, housing types, and a variety of employment options, social and recreational opportunities, and where possible, an assortment of amenities within walking distance of residential development. 8.4 Objectives: • Implement the Land Use Map and associated policies as the official guide for development. • Manage urban sprawl in order to minimize costs of urban services and to protect rural areas. • Encourage land uses that are in harmony with existing resources, scenic areas, natural wildlife areas, and surrounding land uses. 8.5.3 Policies Related Mostly to the Urban Residential Planning Areas: • The Neighborhood Residential Land Use is to encourage urban style development densities to limit urban sprawl. 8.5.9 Additional Land Use Component Policies: • Encourage flexibility in site design and innovative land uses. • Encourage landscaping to enhance the appearance of subdivisions, structures, and parking areas. • Require more open space and trees in subdivisions. • Work with Ada County Highway District (ACHD), Canyon Highway District #4 (CHD4), and Idaho Department of Transportation (ITD) for better coordination of roadway and access needs. • Support well-planned, pedestrian-friendly developments. • Dark sky provision should be adopted within the code to assure down style lighting in all developments and Star should consider joining the International Dark Sky Association. • The City should utilize the 2018 Treasure Valley Tree Selection Guide when requiring trees within developments. ---PAGE BREAK--- TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION – FILE # AZ-20-01/PP- 20-01 5 18.4 Implementation Policies: E. Development Agreements allow the city to enter into a contract with a developer upon rezoning. The Development Agreement may provide the city and the developer with certain assurances regarding the proposed development upon rezoning. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE: Definitions (Section 8-2 B-1): Dwelling or Dwelling Unit: Any structure, or portion thereof, providing independent living facilities for one “family” as herein defined, including provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation. Residential (R-2) Zoning: Two dwelling units per acre. 8-4F-3: STANDARDS FOR COMMON OPEN SPACE AND SITE AMENITY REQUIREMENTS: A. Open Space And Site Amenity Requirement: 1. 1. The total land area of all common open space shall equal or exceed five percent of the gross land area of the development. Open Space – Open space shall be designated as a total of 15% per application with 10% being useable space. – Approved by Ordinance 290, July 16, 2019 (uncodified) 2. One additional site amenity shall be required for each additional twenty (20) acres of development area. B. Qualified Open Space: The following may qualify to meet the common open space requirements: 1. Any open space that is active or passive in its intended use, and accessible by all residents of the development, including, but not limited to: a. Open grassy area of at least fifty feet by one hundred feet (50' x 100') in area; b. Community garden; c. Ponds or water features; or d. Plaza. ---PAGE BREAK--- TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION – FILE # AZ-20-01/PP- 20-01 6 2. Additions to a public park or other public open space area. 3. The buffer area along collector streets may be included in required common open space for residential subdivisions. 4. A street buffer with a minimum of ten feet (10') in width and street trees planted in accord with section 8-4B-7, "Landscape Buffers Along Streets", of this chapter may count up to fifty percent (50%) of the requirement. 5. Parkways along local residential streets that meet all the following standards may count toward the common open space requirement: a. The parkway is a minimum of eight feet in width from street curb to edge of sidewalk. b. The parkway is planted with street trees in accord with section 8-4B-7, "Landscape Buffers Along Streets", of this chapter. c. Except for alley accessed dwelling units, the area for curb cuts to each residential lot or common driveway shall be excluded from the open space calculation. For purposes of this calculation, the curb cut area shall be a minimum area of twenty-six feet (26') by the width of the parkway. 6. Parkways along collector and arterials that are a minimum of ten feet (10') in width from street curb to sidewalk can be counted toward the open space requirement. 7. Stormwater detention facilities when designed in accord with section 8-4B-11, "Stormwater Integration", of this chapter. C. Qualified Site Amenities: Qualified site amenities shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 1. Quality of life amenities; 2. Clubhouse; 3. Fitness facilities; 4. Enclosed bike storage; 5. Public art; 6. Picnic area; or ---PAGE BREAK--- TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION – FILE # AZ-20-01/PP- 20-01 7 7. Additional five percent open space; 8. Recreation amenities: a. Swimming pool. b. Children's play structures. c. Sports courts. d. Pedestrian or bicycle circulation system amenities meeting the following requirements: The system is not required for sidewalks adjacent to public right of way; The system connects to existing or planned pedestrian or bicycle routes outside the development; and The system is designed and constructed in accord with standards set forth by the city of Star; 9. Provision of transit stops, park and ride facilities or other multimodal facilities to encourage alternative automobile transportation. D. Location: 1. The common open space and site amenities shall be located on a common lot or an area with a common maintenance agreement. 2. Common open space shall be grouped contiguously with open space from adjacent developments whenever feasible. E. Required Improvements And Landscaping: 1. Common open space shall be suitably improved for its intended use, except that natural features such as wetlands, rock outcroppings, ponds, creeks, etc., may be left unimproved. 2. Common open space areas shall include (at a minimum) one deciduous shade tree per eight thousand (8,000) square feet and lawn, either seed or sod. F. Maintenance: 1. All common open space and site amenities shall be the responsibility of an owners' association for the purpose of maintaining the common area and improvements thereon; or ---PAGE BREAK--- TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION – FILE # AZ-20-01/PP- 20-01 8 2. Land designated as common open space may be conveyed to the city, where the city council agrees to accept conveyance. (Ord. 215, 11-2-2011) PROJECT OVERVIEW Annexation & Rezone: The annexation and zoning request from County Rural Urban Transition (RUT) to Low Density Residential (R-2) on the applicant’s property will allow for the subdivision of the property to urban densities that, while lower than the minimum density anticipated, will otherwise be consistent with the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan Map. The overall density of the proposed development is 1.92 dwelling units per acre. The current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates this property as Neighborhood Residential, with an anticipated density of 3 to 5 dwelling units per acre. The requested density falls in the middle of this designation. The requested zoning designation and density proposed falls below the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. However, the Comprehensive Plan also recognizes and encourages the development of a diverse community, including housing types. Having larger lots mixed in with smaller lots in adjacent subdivisions creates a good mixture of home sizes, open area, reduced traffic and a better quality of life for the citizens of Star. Preliminary Plat: The Preliminary Plat consists of 39 single family residential lots and 4 common lots. One of the two existing dwellings will remain and be platted as an individual lot in the subdivision (Lot 1, Block The other dwelling located near the western boundary of the property, in addition to the existing private road, accessory structures, well and septic system, will be removed as part of the development. The new residential lots proposed range in size from 10,766 square feet to 22,991 square feet (existing dwelling lot), with an average lot size for the new dwellings at 13,626 square feet. The existing home lot will be 2.26 acres in size. The preliminary plat includes a total of 3.04 acres (15.2%) total open space. Within the total open space, at least 10% of the open space will be usable. The current Unified Development Code requires one site amenity for each 20-acres of development area (total of 1 amenity required). Proposed amenities within this development proposal includes the following: 1. Quality of Life Amenities – Proposed pathways and ponds, and detached sidewalks throughout the subdivision; 2. Picnic Area with gazebo, BBQ and picnic table and benches ---PAGE BREAK--- TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION – FILE # AZ-20-01/PP- 20-01 9 Additional Development Details: Irrigation to the property will be provided by the Middleton Mill Irrigation District. The applicant has been working with the district. The ingress/egress will be taken from W. Beacon Light Road. The design shows future street connections to adjacent properties, including connection to the Greendale Grove development and to future development to the north and east. Locations for decorative streetlights are not reflected on the preliminary plat. Locations shall be addressed along with design and description of said lights in the final plat application. Dark sky lighting shall apply. No subdivision sign locations have been designated for this development. A sign permit application shall be submitted prior to any sign installation. If a pump house is proposed, a location needs to be called out on the site plans and identified in the “Notes”. Fencing is not shown on the submitted plat or landscape plan. A fencing plan shall be submitted with the final plat application. The applicant should be prepared to discuss fencing with the Council during the public hearing. All internal roads shall be 36’ from back of curb to back of curb. All block are less than the maximum requirement of 750 feet. The applicant has not indicated if the subdivision will be built in multiple phase. The applicant shall submit a phasing plan prior to the Council public hearing. The application does not indicate location of mailbox clusters in the subdivision. The applicant should contact the postmaster in Star to coordinate location. AGENCY RESPONSES Dept. of Environmental Quality December 12, 2019 Idaho Dept of Water Resources December 16, 2019 Star Fire District December 18, 2019 Central District Health December 19, 2019 Farmers Union Ditch Company December 19, 2019 Keller and Associates December 23, 2019 ACHD January 10, 2020 ---PAGE BREAK--- TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION – FILE # AZ-20-01/PP- 20-01 10 PUBLIC RESPONSES Barbara Moyle, 9800 W. Beacon Light Road, Star, Idaho 83669 STAFF ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Staff is supportive of this proposal as submitted and believes that this lower density residential subdivision will provide a needed inventory of larger lots in an area that has seen development approvals closer to the three dwelling unit per acre density range. The development is providing quality open space and amenities, including detached sidewalks. Staff has read the letter from the property owner to the east (Moyle) and believes that proper transition of lot sizes has been provided as currently designed. The applicant has provided a 2.26-acre lot immediately adjacent to the neighbors existing home. Further, it is anticipated through the current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, that the neighbor’s property, in addition to the properties on all adjacent boundaries (Neighborhood Residential designation with 3-5 dwelling unit per acre), will develop in the future at higher densities. The property to the north of the neighbor’s property and the subject property is already annexed and zoned Residential R-3 and Staff has met with several developers regarding the parcels on each side of the neighbor. Based upon the information provided to staff in the applications and agency comments received to date, the proposed annexation and zoning, and the preliminary plat meets the requirements, standards and intent for development as they relate to the Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. The Council should consider the entire record and testimony presented at their scheduled public hearing prior to rendering its decision on the matter. Should the Council vote to approve the applications, either as presented or with added or revised conditions of approval, Council shall direct staff to draft findings of fact and conclusions of law for the Council to consider at a future date. FINDINGS The Council may approve, conditionally approve, deny or table this request. In order to approve these applications, the Unified Development Code requires that Council must find the following: Annexation/Rezone: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the Star Comprehensive Plan is to promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the City of Star and its Impact Area. Some of the prime objectives of the Comprehensive Plan include: ✓ Protection of property rights. ---PAGE BREAK--- TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION – FILE # AZ-20-01/PP- 20-01 11 ✓ Adequate public facilities and services are provided to the people at reasonable cost. ✓ Ensure the local economy is protected. ✓ Encourage urban and urban-type development and overcrowding of land. ✓ Ensure development is commensurate with the physical characteristics of the land. The goal of the Comprehensive Plan for Residential Districts is to encourage the development of a diverse community that provides a mixture of land uses, housing types, and a variety of employment options, social and recreational opportunities, and where possible provides an assortment of amenities within walking distance of a residential development. The City must find compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically, the purposes statement. The City must find that proposal complies with the proposed district and purpose statement. The residential purpose statement states that the purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Star comprehensive plan. Connection to the Star sewer and water district is a requirement for all residential districts. 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. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; and The City must find that there is no indication from the material submitted by any political agency stating that this annexation and zoning of this property will be materially detrimental to the public health, safety or 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. The City must find that it has not been presented with any information from agencies having jurisdiction that public services will be adversely impacted other than traffic, which will continue to be impacted as the City grows. 5. The annexation is in the best interest of the city. The City must find that this annexation is reasonably necessary for the orderly development of the City. Preliminary Plat: 1. The plat is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION – FILE # AZ-20-01/PP- 20-01 12 The City must find that this Plat follows designations, spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan regarding residential development and meets several of the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan such as: 1. Designing development projects that minimize impacts on existing adjacent properties, and 2. Managing urban sprawl to protect outlying rural areas. 2. Public Services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development. The City must find that Agencies having jurisdiction on this parcel were notified of this action, and that it has not received notice that public services are not available or cannot be made available for this development. 3. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The City must find that they have not been notified of any deficiencies in public financial capabilities to support this development. 4. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; The City must find that it has not been presented with any facts stating this Preliminary Plat will be materially detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. Residential uses are a permitted use. 5. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features; The City must find that there are no known natural, scenic, or historic features that have been identified with this Preliminary Plat. Upon granting approval or denial of the application, the Council shall specify: 1. The Ordinance and standards used in evaluating the application; 2. The reasons for recommending approval or denial; and 3. The actions, if any, that the applicant could take to obtain approval. PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The approved Preliminary Plat for Torchlight Estates Subdivision shall comply with all statutory requirements of applicable agencies and districts having jurisdiction in the City of Star. 2. The property with the approved Preliminary Plat shall be satisfactorily weed abated at all times, preventing a public nuisance, per Star City Code Chapter 3, Section 3-1-1 through 3- 1-7. 3. The applicant shall provide a sign, to be located at all construction entrances, indicating the rules for all contractors that will be working on the property starting at grading and running through home sales that addresses items including but not limited to dust, music, dogs, ---PAGE BREAK--- TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION – FILE # AZ-20-01/PP- 20-01 13 starting/stopping hours for contractors (7a.m. start time). Sign shall be approved by Staff prior to start of construction. 4. All signed Irrigation District Agreements with the Irrigation Districts shall be provided to the City of Star with each subsequent Final Plat application. 5. Pressurized irrigation systems shall comply with the Irrigation District(s) and the City of Star Codes. Plans for pressurized irrigation systems shall be submitted to, and approved by the City of Star Engineer, prior to installation. 6. The approved Preliminary Plat shall comply with the City of Star Unified Development Code regarding landscaping, both internal buffers and frontages. (See Section 8-4 B Landscaping Requirements) 7. Applicant/Owner/Developer shall submit a streetlight plan/design with each subsequent Final Plat application. Streetlights shall comply with the Star City Code and shall be of the same design throughout the entire subdivision. 8. A plat note supporting the “Right to Farm Act” as per Idaho Code Title 22, Chapter 45, shall be shown on the Final Plat. 9. A plat note shall state that development standards for residential development shall comply with the effective building and zoning requirements at time of building permit issuance, unless amended in the Development Agreement. 10. The subsequent Final Plats shall comply with and be in accordance with the current City of Star Code, with the exception of any waivers granted by Council. 11. Requested surety shall be required at 120% of the total estimated installed cost, as approved by the City Engineer or Administrator. The term of approval shall not exceed 180 days. (See Section 8-1 C-1 of the Unified Development Code for a list of eligible items.) Bonding shall only apply to landscaping during winter months as defined. 12. A copy of the CC&R’s shall be submitted to the City of Star at Final Plat. 13. A letter from the US Postal Service shall be given to the City at Final Plat stating the subdivision is in compliance with the Postal Service. 14. A form signed by the Star Sewer & Water District shall be submitted to the City prior to the signature of the Final Plat stating that all conditions of the District have been met. 15. All State, Federal and Local rules and regulations regarding development in the Special Hazard Areas (Floodplain/Floodway) shall be adhered to, if applicable. 16. Any additional conditions required by staff or the Council. COUNCIL DECISION The Star City Council File #AZ-20-01 Annexation-Zoning/PP-20-01 Preliminary Plat for Torchlight Estates Subdivision on 2020. ---PAGE BREAK--- New Hope Road Beacon Light Road Wing Road ---PAGE BREAK--- 20,500 S.F. 18,600 S.F. R-3 Zoned Property 14,100 S.F. TRANSITION TO NEIGHBOR’S PROPERTY ---PAGE BREAK--- IR PJB TBM # CO T PM WR MB W W TRNS IR TBM #1 PJB CO IR IR TBM #2 PJB TBM #5 PM WR TBM #3 T MB MB W MB MB MB T W TRNS T WR TBM #4 PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR LOTS 1 AND 2 BLOCK 1 NASH ESTATES SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN THE SE 1/4 SECTION 32, T.5N, R.1W, B.M. CITY OF STAR, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2019 VICINITY MAP 1000' PROJECT SITE GENERAL LEGEND LAND SURVEYOR CIVIL ENGINEER DEVELOPER CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! 37.0' 1-4% VARIES 17.0' 5.0' VARIES SIDEWALK SD-709 4" CONCRETE 2" 3/4" MINUS CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE 2 1/2" OF ASPHALT PAVEMENT 4" OF 3/4" MINUS AGGREGATE 14" OF 6" MINUS PIT RUN C/L R/W 13.0' BEACON LIGHT ROAD STREET SECTION -NTS- 1 1 2 Revisions TORCHLIGHT ESTATES SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT UTILITY REPRESENTATIVES PHONE REPRESENTATIVE UTILITY TELEPHONE SEWER WATER ROADS ELECTRICITY GAS IRRIGATION FIRE (208) 385-2144 (208) 286-7388 (208) 286-7388 (208) 454-8135 (208) 388-6320 (208) 377-6839 (208) 870-6967 (208) 286-7772 CENTURY LINK STAR SEWER & WATER DISTRICT ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT IDAHO POWER INTERMOUNTAIN GAS FARMER'S UNION DITCH COMPANY STAR FIRE DISTRICT STAR SEWER & WATER DISTRICT D E S N E C I L O H A D I F O E T A T S 17887 SCALE IN FEET 0 60 30 60 120 1"=60' RSC -NTS- DEVELOPMENT FEATURES: BUILDING SETBACKS: NOTES: PROJECT BENCHMARKS: 2.0' LOCAL STREET SECTION (PUBLIC) STAR, ID. BORROW DITCH SHEET INDEX ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK---   1 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19-0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 Development Services Department Project/File: Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19-0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 This is an annexation, rezone and preliminary plat application to subdivide 20.26 acres into 39 residential lots and 4 common lots. Lead Agency: City of Star Site address: 9990 W. Beacon Light Rd. Staff Approval: January 10, 2019 Applicant: Guy S. Jones Alliance Building, LLC 11543 Purple Sage Road Middleton, ID 83644 Representative: Same as applicant Staff Contact: Paige Bankhead Phone: 387-6293 E-mail: [EMAIL REDACTED] A. Findings of Fact 1. Description of Application: The applicant is requesting approval of an annexation and rezoning of 20.26 acres of Rural Urban Transition (RUT) to low density residential (R-2) with a preliminary plat application to allow for the development of 39 residential building lots and 4 common lots on 20.26 acres. The City of Star’s comprehensive plan designates this area as low density residential. 2. Description of Adjacent Surrounding Area: Direction Land Use Zoning North Medium Low Density Residential (Ada County) R-3 South Rural Urban Transition – Residential (Ada County) RUT East Rural Urban Transition – Residential (Ada County) RUT West Medium Low Density Residential R-3 3. Site History: ACHD has not previously reviewed this site for a development application. 4. Adjacent Development: The following developments are pending or underway in the vicinity of the site: • Greendale Grove Subdivision, SPP18-0014, 131 single family building lots and 11 common lots on approximately 40 acres, west of the site was approved by ACHD on April 4, 2019. Vicinity Map ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19-0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 • Trident Ridge, consisting of 324 single family building lots and located to the northwest of the site was approved by ACHD on December 6, 2017. 5. Transit: Transit services are not available to serve this site. 6. New Center Lane Miles: The proposed development includes 3.09 centerline miles of new public road. 7. Impact Fees: There will be an impact fee that is assessed and due prior to issuance of any building permits. The assessed impact fee will be based on the impact fee ordinance that is in effect at that time. The impact fee assessment will not be released until the civil plans are approved by ACHD. 8. Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)/ Integrated Five Year Work Plan (IFYWP): There are no roadways, bridges or intersections in the general vicinity of the project that are in the Integrated Five Year Work Plan (IFYWP) or the District’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). B. Traffic Findings for Consideration 1. Trip Generation: This development is estimated to generate 369 additional vehicle trips per day (10 existing); 39 additional vehicle trips per hour in the PM peak hour (1 existing), based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 10th edition. 2. Condition of Area Roadways Traffic Count is based on Vehicles per hour (VPH) * Acceptable level of service for a two-lane minor arterial is (575 VPH). From the traffic impact study for Greendale Subdivision, west of the site. There are no recent ACHD traffic counts for this segment of Beacon Light Road. 3. Average Daily Traffic Count (VDT) • The average daily traffic count for Beacon Light Road east of Wing Road was 2,249 on 09/18/18, as noted in the staff report for Greendale Subdivision. There are no recent ACHD traffic counts for this segment of Beacon Light Road. C. Findings for Consideration 1. Purple Sage/Beacon Light Alignment Study The Purple Sage Road/Beacon Light Road alignment study is the result of a regional alignment study that was done in a collaborative effort between the Ada County Highway District (ACHD) and the Canyon Highway District #4 (CHD4). The study identifies Purple Sage Road/Beacon Light Road corridor is located in northeastern Canyon County and northwestern Ada County. The study was undertaken in response to Communities in Motion, the long-range transportation plan for southwest Idaho prepared by the regional planning organization, Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho (COMPASS). Communities in Motion identified the corridor as a location that is expected to experience more traffic, serving as a reliever to State Highway 44. The purpose of the study is to identify a connection between Purple Sage Road and Beacon Light Road and make plans for corridor preservation. Roadway Frontage Functional Classification PM Peak Hour Traffic Count PM Peak Hour Level of Service Beacon Light Road 660-feet Minor Arterial 122** Better than ---PAGE BREAK--- 3 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19-0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 On June 28, 2008 the ACHD Commission approved the Purple Sage/Beacon Light Alignment Study which included a preferred alignment for the roadway and determined that Beacon Light Road would be extended as a 3-lane minor arterial roadway. The study notes that right-of-way dedication and construction of the roadway will occur incrementally as development occurs. 2. Beacon Light Road a. Existing Conditions: Beacon Light Road is improved with 2-travel lanes, with 24-feet of pavement and no curb, gutter or sidewalk abutting the site. There is 52-feet of right-of-way for Beacon Light Road (25-feet from section line and 22-feet from centerline). b. Policy: Arterial Roadway Policy: District Policy 7205.2.1 states that the developer is responsible for improving all street frontages adjacent to the site regardless of whether or not access is taken to all of the adjacent streets. Master Street Map and Typology Policy: District Policy 7205.5 states that the design of improvements for arterials shall be in accordance with District standards, including the Master Street Map and Livable Streets Design Guide. The developer or engineer should contact the District before starting any design. Street Section and Right-of Way Width Policy: District Policy 7205.2.1 & 7205.5.2 states that the standard 3-lane street section shall be 46-feet (back-of-curb to back-of-curb) within 74 feet of right-of-way. This width typically accommodates a single travel lane in each direction, a continuous center left-turn lane, and bike lanes. Right-of-Way Dedication: District Policy 7205.2 states that The District will provide compensation for additional right-of-way dedicated beyond the existing right-of-way along arterials listed as impact fee eligible in the adopted Capital Improvements Plan using available impact fee revenue in the Impact Fee Service Area. No compensation will be provided for right-of-way on an arterial that is not listed as impact fee eligible in the Capital Improvements Plan. The District may acquire additional right-of-way beyond the site-related needs to preserve a corridor for future capacity improvements, as provided in Section 7300. Sidewalk Policy: District Policy 7205.5.7 requires a concrete sidewalk at least 5-feet wide to be constructed on both sides of all arterial streets. A parkway strip at least 6-feet wide between the back-of-curb and street edge of the sidewalk is required to provide increased safety and protection of pedestrians. Consult the District’s planter width policy if trees are to be placed within the parkway strip. Sidewalks constructed next to the back-of-curb shall be a minimum of 7-feet wide. Detached sidewalks are encouraged and should be parallel to the adjacent roadway. Meandering sidewalks are discouraged. A permanent right-of-way easement shall be provided if public sidewalks are placed outside of the dedicated right-of-way. The easement shall encompass the entire area between the right- of-way line and 2-feet behind the back edge of the sidewalk. Sidewalks shall either be located wholly within the public right-of-way or wholly within an easement. Frontage Improvements Policy: District Policy 7205.2.1 states that the developer shall widen the pavement to a minimum of 17-feet from centerline plus a 3-foot wide gravel shoulder adjacent to the entire site. Curb, gutter and additional pavement widening may be required (See Section 7205.5.5). ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19-0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 ACHD Master Street Map: ACHD Policy Section 3111.1 requires the Master Street Map (MSM) guide the right-of-way acquisition, arterial street requirements, and specific roadway features required through development. This segment of Beacon Light Road is designated in the MSM as a Residential Arterial with 3-lanes and on-street bike lanes, a 46-foot street section within 74-feet of right-of-way. c. Applicant Proposal: The applicant has proposed to dedicate 37-feet of right-of-way from centerline and improve Beacon Light Road with 17-feet of pavement from centerline, with a gravel shoulder, borrow ditch, and a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk 30-feet from centerline within right-of-way. d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant’s proposal meets District Policy and should be approved, as proposed. However, the right-of-way dedication and the construction of improvements should be from the section line of Beacon Light Road because the centerline and section line do not align on this segment of Beacon Light Road. This segment of Beacon Light Road is not listed in the CIP or the IFYWP. If the applicant chooses to move forward with this development application prior to the completion of ACHD’s 2020 CIP updated, then the applicant would not be compensated for the Beacon Light Road right-of-way dedication. Depending on the timing of this development, this segment of Beacon Light Road may be included in the next CIP update estimated to be completed in late 2020. If this segment of roadway is included in the 2020 CIP prior to the dedication of right-of-way, then the applicant may be reimbursed for impact fee eligible costs associated with the dedication of right-of-way. 3. Internal Local Streets a. Existing Conditions: There are no local roads within the site. There is a local street proposed to stub to the site’s west property line with the Greendale Grove Subdivision development. b. Policy: Local Roadway Policy: District Policy 7207.2.1 states that the developer is responsible for improving all local street frontages adjacent to the site regardless of whether or not access is taken to all of the adjacent streets. Street Section and Right-of-Way Policy: District Policy 7207.5 states that right-of-way widths for all local streets shall generally not be less than 47-feet wide and that the standard street section shall be 33-feet (back-of-curb to back-of-curb). Standard Urban Local Street—33-foot Street Section and Right-of-way Policy: District Policy 7207.5.2 states that the standard street section shall be 33-feet (back-of-curb to back-of- curb) for developments with any buildable lot that is less than 1 acre in size. This street section shall include curb, gutter, and minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks on both sides and shall typically be constructed within 47-feet of right-of-way. For the City of Kuna and City of Star: Unless otherwise approved by Kuna or Star, the standard street section shall be 36-feet (back-of-curb to back-of-curb) for developments with any buildable lot that is less than 1 acre in size. This street section shall include curb, gutter, and minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks on both sides and shall typically be constructed within 50-feet of right-of-way. Continuation of Streets Policy: District Policy 7207.2.4 states that an existing street, or a street in an approved preliminary plat, which ends at a boundary of a proposed development shall be extended in that development. The extension shall include provisions for continuation of storm drainage facilities. Benefits of connectivity include but are not limited to the following: • Reduces vehicle miles traveled. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19-0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 • Increases pedestrian and bicycle connectivity. • Increases access for emergency services. • Reduces need for additional access points to the arterial street system. • Promotes the efficient delivery of services including trash, mail and deliveries. • Promotes appropriate intra-neighborhood traffic circulation to schools, parks, neighborhood commercial centers, transit stops, etc. • Promotes orderly development. Sidewalk Policy: District Policy 7207.5.7 states that five-foot wide concrete sidewalk is required on both sides of all local street, except those in rural developments with net densities of one dwelling unit per 1.0 acre or less, or in hillside conditions where there is no direct lot frontage, in which case a sidewalk shall be constructed along one side of the street. Some local jurisdictions may require wider sidewalks. The sidewalk may be placed next to the back-of-curb. Where feasible, a parkway strip at least 8-feet wide between the back-of-curb and the street edge of the sidewalk is recommended to provide increased safety and protection of pedestrians and to allow for the planting of trees in accordance with the District’s Tree Planting Policy. If no trees are to be planted in the parkway strip, the applicant may submit a request to the District, with justification, to reduce the width of the parkway strip. Detached sidewalks are encouraged and should be parallel to the adjacent roadway. Meandering sidewalks are discouraged. A permanent right-of-way easement shall be provided if public sidewalks are placed outside of the dedicated right-of-way. The easement shall encompass the entire area between the right- of-way line and 2-feet behind the back edge of the sidewalk. Sidewalks shall either be located wholly within the public right-of-way or wholly within an easement. Cul-de-sac Streets Policy: District policy 7207.5.8 requires cul-de-sacs to be constructed to provide a minimum turning radius of 45-feet; in rural areas or for temporary cul-de-sacs the emergency service providers may require a greater radius. Landscape and parking islands may be constructed in turnarounds if a minimum 29-foot street section is constructed around the island. The pavement width shall be sufficient to allow the turning around of a standard AASHTO SU design vehicle without backing. The developer shall provide written approval from the appropriate fire department for this design element. The District will consider alternatives to the standard cul-de-sac turnaround on a case-by-case basis. This will be based on turning area, drainage, maintenance considerations and the written approval of the agency providing emergency fire service for the area where the development is located. c. Applicant’s Proposal: The applicant has proposed to construct the internal local streets as a 36-foot wide local street section, with rolled curb, gutter, within 50-feet of right-of-way and 5- foot wide detached concrete sidewalk located outside of the right-of-way in an easement. The applicant has also proposed to construct 2 cul-de-sac turnarounds with a 48-foot radius. The applicant has proposed to extend the street that is proposed to stub to the site’s west property line into the site. d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant’s proposal meets District Policy and should be approved, as proposed. If street trees are desired, then 8-foot wide planter strips should be provided. 4. Roadway Offsets a. Existing Conditions: There are no existing roadways on site. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19-0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 b. Policy: Local Street Intersection Spacing on Minor Arterials: District policy 7205.4.3 states that new local streets should not typically intersect arterials. Local streets should typically intersect collectors. If it is necessary, as determined by ACHD, for a local street to intersect an arterial, the minimum allowable offset shall be 660-feet as measured from all other existing roadways as identified in Table 1a (7205.4.6). Local Offset Policy: District policy 7207.4.2, requires local roadways to align or provide a minimum offset of 125-feet from any other street (measured centerline to centerline). c. Applicant’s Proposal: The applicant has proposed to construct one local street, Bristol Terrace, to intersect Beacon Light Road, located approximately 1,750-feet to the east of Wing Road. Bristol Terrace is proposed to align with an existing residential driveway located on the south side of Beacon Light Road across from the site. d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant’s proposal meets District Policy and should be approved, as proposed. 5. Stub Streets a. Existing Conditions: There are no stub streets to or from the site. A local street is proposed to stub to the site’s west property line with the Greendale Grove development. b. Policy: Stub Street Policy: District policy 7207.2.4.3 states that stub streets will be required to provide circulation or to provide access to adjoining properties. Stub streets will conform with the requirements described in Section 7207.2.4 except a temporary cul-de-sac will not be required if the stub street has a length no greater than 150-feet. A sign shall be installed at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE.” In addition, stub streets must meet the following conditions: • A stub street shall be designed to slope towards the nearest street intersection within the proposed development and drain surface water towards that intersection; unless an alternative storm drain system is approved by the District. • The District may require appropriate covenants guaranteeing that the stub street will remain free of obstructions. Temporary Dead End Streets Policy: 7207.2.4.4 requires that the design and construction for cul-de-sac streets shall apply to temporary dead end streets. The temporary cul-de-sac shall be paved and shall be the dimensional requirements of a standard cul-de-sac. The developer shall grant a temporary turnaround easement to the District for those portions of the cul-de-sac which extend beyond the dedicated street right-of-way. In the instance where a temporary easement extends onto a buildable lot, the entire lot shall be encumbered by the easement and identified on the plat as a non-buildable lot until the street is extended. c. Applicant Proposal: The applicant is proposing to extend the stub street into the site, as well as to construct stub streets to the north and east. The stub street to the north, Monroe Terrace, is proposed to be located approximately 200-feet east of the west property line and is 180-feet in length as measured from Nash Creek Court, and the stub street to the east, Torch Pond Drive, is proposed to be located approximately 553-feet to the north of the south property line and is 213-feet in length as measured from Bristol Terrace. d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant’s proposal to construct one stubs street to the north and one to the east meet District policy and should be approved, as proposed. The applicant should be required to install a sign at the terminus of each stub street stating that, “THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE.” ---PAGE BREAK--- 7 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19-0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 Both stub streets extend greater than 150-feet in length requiring the construction of a temporary turnaround. The applicant should be required to construct paved temporary turnarounds meeting the dimensional requirements of a standard cul-de-sac at the terminus of both stub streets. The applicant should be required to grant a temporary turnaround easement to the District for any portion of the cul-de-sac which extend beyond the dedicated street right- of-way. In the instance where a temporary easement extends onto a buildable lot, the entire lot shall be encumbered by the easement and identified on the plat as a non-buildable lot until the street is extended. 6. Driveways 6.1 Bristol Terrace a. Existing Conditions: There is an existing private road, Hardway Lane, that intersects Beacon Light Road near the west property line. b. Policy: Driveway Location Policy: District policy 7207.4.1 requires driveways near intersections to be located a minimum of 75-feet (measured centerline-to-centerline) from the nearest local street intersection, and 150-feet from the nearest collector or arterial street intersection. Successive Driveways: District Policy 7207.4.1 states that successive driveways away from an intersection shall have no minimum spacing requirements for access points along a local street, but the District does encourage shared access points where appropriate. Driveway Width Policy: District policy 7207.4.3 states that where vertical curbs are required, residential driveways shall be restricted to a maximum width of 20-feet and may be constructed as curb-cut type driveways. Driveway Paving Policy: Graveled driveways abutting public streets create maintenance problems due to gravel being tracked onto the roadway. In accordance with District policy, 7207.4.3, the applicant should be required to pave the driveway its full width and at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway. c. Applicant’s Proposal: The applicant is proposing to close to the private road, Hardway Lane, with a borrow ditch and sidewalk. d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant’s proposal to close the driveway/private road onto Beacon Light Road is approved, as proposed. 7. Traffic Calming a. Speed Control and Traffic Calming Policy: District policy 7207.3.7 states that the design of local street systems should discourage excessive speeds by using passive design elements. If the design or layout of a development is anticipated to necessitate future traffic calming implementation by the District, then the District will require changes to the layout and/or the addition of passive design elements such as horizontal curves, bulb-outs, chokers, etc. The District will also consider texture changes to the roadway surface (i.e. stamped concrete) as a passive design element. These alternative methods may require maintenance and/or license agreement. b. Applicant’s Proposal: The applicant has proposed to construct the stub streets Torch Pond Drive approximately 660-feet in length and Monroe Terrace approximately 636-feet in length. c. Staff Comments/Recommendations: Torch Pond Drive and Monroe Terrace will likely be extended in the future so that the roads are longer than 750-feet in total length. The applicant should be required to redesign the length of the roadways or include passive design elements for traffic calming. The applicant could potentially remove the stub for Torch Pond Drive that stubs to the east and extend Robin Court to the east property line instead. ---PAGE BREAK--- 8 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19-0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 Speed humps/bumps and valley gutter will not be accepted as traffic calming. The applicant should be required to resubmit a revised preliminary plat showing the redesigned roadways for review and approval prior to ACHD’s signature on the first final plat. 8. Tree Planters Tree Planter Policy: Tree Planter Policy: The District’s Tree Planter Policy prohibits all trees in planters less than 8-feet in width without the installation of root barriers. Class II trees may be allowed in planters with a minimum width of 8-feet, and Class I and Class III trees may be allowed in planters with a minimum width of 10-feet. 9. Landscaping Landscaping Policy: A license agreement is required for all landscaping proposed within ACHD right-of-way or easement areas. Trees shall be located no closer than 10-feet from all public storm drain facilities. Landscaping should be designed to eliminate site obstructions in the vision triangle at intersections. District Policy 5104.3.1 requires a 40-foot vision triangle and a 3-foot height restriction on all landscaping located at an uncontrolled intersection and a 50-foot offset from stop signs. Landscape plans are required with the submittal of civil plans and must meet all District requirements prior to signature of the final plat and/or approval of the civil plans. 10. Other Access Beacon Light Road is classified as a minor arterial roadway. Other than the access specifically approved with this application, direct lot access is prohibited to this roadway and should be noted on the final plat. D. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. Dedicate additional right-of-way to total 37-feet from the section line of Beacon Light Road abutting the site. The applicant will not be compensated for this right-of-way dedication unless this segment of Beacon Light Road is included as part of the 2020 CIP update. 2. Improve Beacon Light Road with 17-feet of pavement from section line with 3-foot wide gravel shoulder and barrow ditch within right-of-way, as proposed. 3. Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk located a minimum of 30-feet from the section line of Beacon Light Road abutting the site. 4. Construct the internal streets as 36-foot wide street sections with rolled curb, gutter, and 5-foot attached sidewalks, as proposed. 5. Construct Bristol Terrace onto Beacon Light Road located 1,750-feet east of Wing Road. 6. Construct 2 cul-de-sac turnarounds with a minimum radius of 45-feet. 7. Construct one stub street to the east, Torch Pond Drive, located 553-feet north of the south property line, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE.” Construct s paved temporary turnaround meeting the dimensional requirements of a standard cul-de-sac at the terminus of the stub street. Provide a temporary turnaround easement to the District for any portion of the cul-de-sac which extend beyond the dedicated street right-of-way. In the instance where a temporary easement extends onto a buildable lot, the entire lot shall be encumbered by the easement and identified on the plat as a non-buildable lot until the street is extended. 8. Construct one stub street to the east, Monroe Terrace, located 200-feet east of the west property line, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE.” Construct a paved temporary turnaround meeting the dimensional requirements of a standard cul-de-sac at the terminus of the stub street. Provide a ---PAGE BREAK--- 9 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19-0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 temporary turnaround easement to the District for any portion of the cul-de-sac which extend beyond the dedicated street right-of-way. In the instance where a temporary easement extends onto a buildable lot, the entire lot shall be encumbered by the easement and identified on the plat as a non-buildable lot until the street is extended. 9. Close the existing private road on to Beacon Light Road, Hardway Lane with pavement widening, barrow ditch and sidewalk to match the improvements on either side, as proposed. 10. Redesign Torch Pond Drive and Monroe Terrace to reduce the length of the roadways or include passive design elements for traffic calming and submit a revised preliminary plat showing the redesigned roadways for review and approval prior to ACHD’s signature on the first final plat. Speed humps/bumps and valley gutter will not be accepted as traffic calming. 11. Other than access specifically approved as part of this application, direct lot access to Beacon Light Road is prohibited and shall be noted on the final plat. 12. Submit civil plans to ACHD Development Services for review and approval. The impact fee assessment will not be released until the civil plans are approved by ACHD. 13. Payment of impact fees is due prior to issuance of a building permit. 14. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. E. Standard Conditions of Approval 1. All proposed irrigation facilities shall be located outside of the ACHD right-of-way (including all easements). Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the ACHD right-of-way (including all easements). 2. Private Utilities including sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within the ACHD right-of-way. 3. In accordance with District policy, 7203.3, the applicant may be required to update any existing non- compliant pedestrian improvements abutting the site to meet current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The applicant’s engineer should provide documentation of ADA compliance to District Development Review staff for review. 4. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 5. A license agreement and compliance with the District’s Tree Planter policy is required for all landscaping proposed within ACHD right-of-way or easement areas. 6. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 7. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-[PHONE REDACTED]) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 8. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District’s Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 9. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the ACHD Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Standards unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. ---PAGE BREAK--- 10 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19- 0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 10. Construction use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of ACHD prior to District approval for occupancy. 11. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant’s authorized representative and an authorized representative of ACHD. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from ACHD. 12. If the site plan or use should change in the future, ACHD Planning Review will review the site plan and may require additional improvements to the transportation system at that time. Any change in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with ACHD Policy and Standard Conditions of Approval in place at that time unless a waiver/variance of the requirements or other legal relief is granted by the ACHD Commission. F. Conclusions of Law 1. The proposed site plan is approved, if all of the Site Specific and Standard Conditions of Approval are satisfied. 2. ACHD requirements are intended to assure that the proposed use/development will not place an undue burden on the existing vehicular transportation system within the vicinity impacted by the proposed development. G. Attachments 1. Vicinity Map 2. Site Plan 3. Utility Coordinating Council 4. Development Process Checklist 5. Request for Reconsideration Guidelines OR Appeal Guidelines ---PAGE BREAK--- 11 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19- 0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 VICINITY MAP ---PAGE BREAK--- 12 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19- 0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 SITE PLAN ---PAGE BREAK--- 13 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19- 0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 Ada County Utility Coordinating Council Developer/Local Improvement District Right of Way Improvements Guideline Request Purpose: To develop the necessary avenue for proper notification to utilities of local highway and road improvements, to help the utilities in budgeting and to clarify the already existing process. 1) Notification: Within five working days upon notification of required right of way improvements by Highway entities, developers shall provide written notification to the affected utility owners and the Ada County Utility Coordinating Council (UCC). Notification shall include but not be limited to, project limits, scope of roadway improvements/project, anticipated construction dates, and any portions critical to the right of way improvements and coordination of utilities. 2) Plan Review: The developer shall provide the highway entities and all utility owners with preliminary project plans and schedule a plan review conference. Depending on the scale of utility improvements, a plan review conference may not be necessary, as determined by the utility owners. Conference notification shall also be sent to the UCC. During the review meeting the developer shall notify utilities of the status of right of way/easement acquisition necessary for their project. At the plan review conference each company shall have the right to appeal, adjust and/or negotiate with the developer on its own behalf. Each utility shall provide the developer with a letter of review indicating the costs and time required for relocation of its facilities. Said letter of review is to be provided within thirty calendar days after the date of the plan review conference. 3) Revisions: The developer is responsible to provide utilities with any revisions to preliminary plans. Utilities may request an updated plan review meeting if revisions are made in the preliminary plans which affect the utility relocation requirements. Utilities shall have thirty days after receiving the revisions to review and comment thereon. 4) Final Notification: The developer will provide highway entities, utility owners and the UCC with final notification of its intent to proceed with right of way improvements and include the anticipated date work will commence. This notification shall indicate that the work to be performed shall be pursuant to final approved plans by the highway entity. The developer shall schedule a preconstruction meeting prior to right of way improvements. Utility relocation activity shall be completed within the times established during the preconstruction meeting, unless otherwise agreed upon. Notification to the Ada County UCC can be sent to: 50 S. Cole Rd. Boise 83707, or Visit iducc.com for e-mail notification information. ---PAGE BREAK--- 14 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19- 0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 Development Process Checklist Items Completed to Date: Submit a development application to a City or to Ada County The City or the County will transmit the development application to ACHD The ACHD Planning Review Section will receive the development application to review The Planning Review Section will do one of the following: Send a “No Review” letter to the applicant stating that there are no site specific conditions of approval at this time. Write a Staff Level report analyzing the impacts of the development on the transportation system and evaluating the proposal for its conformance to District Policy. Write a Commission Level report analyzing the impacts of the development on the transportation system and evaluating the proposal for its conformance to District Policy. Items to be completed by Applicant: For ALL development applications, including those receiving a “No Review” letter: • The applicant should submit one set of engineered plans directly to ACHD for review by the Development Review Section for plan review and assessment of impact fees. (Note: if there are no site improvements required by ACHD, then architectural plans may be submitted for purposes of impact fee assessment.) • The applicant is required to get a permit from Construction Services (ACHD) for ANY work in the right-of-way, including, but not limited to, driveway approaches, street improvements and utility cuts. Pay Impact Fees prior to issuance of building permit. Impact fees cannot be paid prior to plan review approval. DID YOU REMEMBER: Construction (Non-Subdivisions) Driveway or Property Approach(s) • Submit a “Driveway Approach Request” form to ACHD Construction (for approval by Development Services & Traffic Services). There is a one week turnaround for this approval. Working in the ACHD Right-of-Way • Four business days prior to starting work have a bonded contractor submit a “Temporary Highway Use Permit Application” to ACHD Construction – Permits along with: a) Traffic Control Plan b) An Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative & Plat, done by a Certified Plan Designer, if trench is >50’ or you are placing >600 sf of concrete or asphalt. Construction (Subdivisions) Sediment & Erosion Submittal • At least one week prior to setting up a Pre-Construction Meeting an Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative & Plan, done by a Certified Plan Designer, must be turned into ACHD Construction to be reviewed and approved by the ACHD Stormwater Section. Idaho Power Company • Vic Steelman at Idaho Power must have his IPCO approved set of subdivision utility plans prior to Pre-Con being scheduled. Final Approval from Development Services is required prior to scheduling a Pre-Con. ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19- 0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 Request for Appeal of Staff Decision 1. Appeal of Staff Decision: The Commission shall hear and decide appeals by an applicant of the final decision made by the Development Services Manager when it is alleged that the Development Services Manager did not properly apply this section 7101.6, did not consider all of the relevant facts presented, made an error of fact or law, abused discretion or acted arbitrarily and capriciously in the interpretation or enforcement of the ACHD Policy Manual. a. Filing Fee: The Commission may, from time to time, set reasonable fees to be charged the applicant for the processing of appeals, to cover administrative costs. b. Initiation: An appeal is initiated by the filing of a written notice of appeal with the Secretary and Clerk of the District, which must be filed within ten (10) working days from the date of the decision that is the subject of the appeal. The notice of appeal shall refer to the decision being appealed, identify the appellant by name, address and telephone number and state the grounds for the appeal. The grounds shall include a written summary of the provisions of the policy relevant to the appeal and/or the facts and law relied upon and shall include a written argument in support of the appeal. The Commission shall not consider a notice of appeal that does not comply with the provisions of this subsection. c. Time to Reply: The Development Services Manager shall have ten (10) working days from the date of the filing of the notice of appeal to reply to the notice of the appeal, and may during such time meet with the appellant to discuss the matter, and may also consider and/or modify the decision that is being appealed. A copy of the reply and any modifications to the decision being appealed will be provided to the appellant prior to the Commission hearing on the appeal. d. Notice of Hearing: Unless otherwise agreed to by the appellant, the hearing of the appeal will be noticed and scheduled on the Commission agenda at a regular meeting to be held within thirty (30) days following the delivery to the appellant of the Development Services Manager’s reply to the notice of appeal. A copy of the decision being appealed, the notice of appeal and the reply shall be delivered to the Commission at least one week prior to the hearing. e. Action by Commission: Following the hearing, the Commission shall either affirm or reverse, in whole or part, or otherwise modify, amend or supplement the decision being appealed, as such action is adequately supported by the law and evidence presented at the hearing. ---PAGE BREAK--- 16 Torchlight Estates Subdivision/ SPP19- 0010/ AZ-20-01, PP-20-01 Request for Reconsideration of Commission Action 1. Request for Reconsideration of Commission Action: A Commissioner, a member of ACHD staff or any other person objecting to any final action taken by the Commission may request reconsideration of that action, provided the request is not for a reconsideration of an action previously requested to be reconsidered, an action whose provisions have been partly and materially carried out, or an action that has created a contractual relationship with third parties. a. Only a Commission member who voted with the prevailing side can move for reconsideration, but the motion may be seconded by any Commissioner and is voted on by all Commissioners present. If a motion to reconsider is made and seconded it is subject to a motion to postpone to a certain time. b. The request must be in writing and delivered to the Secretary of the Highway District no later than 11:00 a.m. 2 days prior to the Commission’s next scheduled regular meeting following the meeting at which the action to be reconsidered was taken. Upon receipt of the request, the Secretary shall cause the same to be placed on the agenda for that next scheduled regular Commission meeting. c. The request for reconsideration must be supported by written documentation setting forth new facts and information not presented at the earlier meeting, or a changed situation that has developed since the taking of the earlier vote, or information establishing an error of fact or law in the earlier action. The request may also be supported by oral testimony at the meeting. d. If a motion to reconsider passes, the effect is the original matter is in the exact position it occupied the moment before it was voted on originally. It will normally be returned to ACHD staff for further review. The Commission may set the date of the meeting at which the matter is to be returned. The Commission shall only take action on the original matter at a meeting where the agenda notice so provides. e. At the meeting where the original matter is again on the agenda for Commission action, interested persons and ACHD staff may present such written and oral testimony as the President of the Commission determines to be appropriate, and the Commission may take any action the majority of the Commission deems advisable. f. If a motion to reconsider passes, the applicant may be charged a reasonable fee, to cover administrative costs, as established by the Commission. ---PAGE BREAK--- STAR FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Office of the Fire Chief Greg Timinsky 11665 W State Street Suite B Star, ID 83669 December 18, 2019 To: City of Star File#: AZ-20-01 PP-20-01 Development: Torchlight Estates Subdivision From: Chief Greg Timinsky The Star Fire Protection District has reviewed and approved with conditions listed below on the above referenced Annexation & Zoning R-2 and PP plat for Torchlight Estates Subdivision. Connectivity of northern portion above Torch Pond Dr. Based off of other Fire District reviewed plats the development to the West will need to be connected before building permits are issued above Torch Pond Dr. over 30 lots with 1 access. (IFC 2019 appendix D Section D106) The min. fire flow and flow duration for one- and two-family dwellings shall be as specified in Appendix B of the 2018 IFC. The fire hydrant spacing shall be no less than 400’ and shall be approved and witnessed by Star Fire Protection District prior to any building permits being issued. All street signage shall be installed and approved prior to the issuance of any building permit. NOTE: All fire department access roadways in the development shall remain clear and unobstructed during construction of homes in the development. Additional parking restrictions may be required as to maintain access for emergency vehicles at all times. Any questions please feel free to contact me, [PHONE REDACTED] Sincerely, Greg Timinsky, Fire District Chief Original to Requester/ Copy retained by Chief W:\Work\S\Star Fire Protection District 25382.00\FORMS\Development Inquiry Informal Preliminary Reply_kjg edits.docx ---PAGE BREAK--- STAR FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Office of the Fire Chief Greg Timinsky 11665 W State Street Suite B Star, ID 83669 ---PAGE BREAK--- Ada County Courthouse 200 West Front Street Boise ID 83702 [PHONE REDACTED] Fax [PHONE REDACTED] www.adacounty.id.gov Department Divisions Building Community Planning Engineering & Surveying Permitting Strategic Planning Ada County Commissioners Diana Lachiondo, First District Rick Visser, Second District Kendra Kenyon, Third District Megan M. Leatherman, MCRP Director ADA COUNTY Development Services Department December 13, 2019 Via Email: [EMAIL REDACTED] Shawn Nickel City of Star Planning & Zoning Department 10769 W. State Street Star, ID 83669 RE: Annexation & Preliminary Plat / Torchlight Estates Subdivision / 9990 W Beacon Light Rd / AZ-20-01 & PP-20-01 Shawn, The City of Star has requested feedback regarding an annexation and preliminary plat for the Torchlight Estates Subdivision, consisting of 39 buildable lots on 20.26 acres located at 9990 W. Beacon Light Road. The County thanks you for this opportunity and is in support of jurisdictions within the Treasure Valley working together to create a better quality of life for all residents. Ada County supports the application due to its conformance with the City of Star Comprehensive Plan, as adopted by the County, which designates the property as Low Density Residential. The Low Density Residential land use category allows for a density of up to two dwelling units per acre, and the proposed development includes a density of 1.92 units per acre. Public infrastructure and utilities are located within close proximity to the site, and future residents will have nearby access to existing parks, schools, and retail services within Star. Thank you for this opportunity to provide feedback. Sincerely, Brent Moore, AICP Community & Regional Planner Ada County Development Services cc: Megan Leatherman, Director, Ada County Development Services Mitra Mehta-Cooper, Strategic Planning Manager, Ada County Development Services ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- GROWING POSSIBILITIES 131 SW 5th Ave, Suite A Meridian, ID 83642 (208) 288-1992 203010-338/19-426 December 23, 2019 Mayor Chad Bell City of Star P.O. Box 130 Star, ID 83669 Re: Torchlight Estates Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application Dear Mayor: Keller Associates, Inc. has reviewed the Preliminary Plat for the Torchlight Estates Subdivision dated November 19, 2019. We reviewed the applicant’s package to check conformance with the City’s Subdivision Ordinance and coordinated our review with Cathy Ward. We have the following comments and question based on our review. 1. Initial bearing length specified in legal description does not match with the Preliminary Plat drawings (1316.80 verses 1317.82). Text describing bearing and bearing length along Northern end of property is very difficult to read. Please ensure the legal description matches the Preliminary Plat drawings and all bearings and are legible. 2. Grading Plan and Preliminary Plat show 2-foot contours, City of Star code requires 1-foot contours to be shown on Preliminary Plat drawings. 3. Street lighting shall be in accordance with ISPWC and the City of Star Supplementals. Cut sheet for lights and light poles shall be approved in writing by the City prior to installation. Please provide proposed street lighting. 4. The letter accompanying the Preliminary Plat submittal included information about a proposed irrigation system that includes either creating an irrigation pump and associated system or sharing with the Greendale Grove property. Please provide preliminary irrigation layout on the plans. 5. Historic irrigation lateral, drain, and ditch flow patterns shall be maintained unless approved in writing by the local irrigation district or ditch company. There appears to be an existing irrigation ditch on the Southeastern portion of the property located from Lot 2 to Lot 6 of Block 1 of the subdivision. Please clarify the future use of the existing ditch. 6. Landscape plans including fencing, buffer areas, and street trees will have to conform to the City subdivision ordinance. Royal Red Maple trees are specified to be used, ensure this species of tree remains outside of the right-of-way as it is considered a prohibited species within the right-of-way according to City of Boise. 7. Construction plans for a subdivision-wide pressure irrigation system will be required for each final plat. Plan approvals and license agreements from the affected irrigation and/or canal companies will be required. DocuSign Envelope ID: 12AA0C35-9253-42A7-8DC5-A432423DA29E ---PAGE BREAK--- 203010-338/19-426 8. Finish grades at subdivision boundaries shall match existing finish grades. Runoff shall be maintained on subdivision property unless otherwise approved. 9. 10-foot easements for pressure irrigation lines will need to be shown once the applicant determines the alignment location(s) for the facilities. Show all ditch and drainage easements. We recommend that the conditions 1 and 6 listed above be addressed prior to approval of the Preliminary Plat. Any variance or waivers to the City of Star standards, ordinances, or policies must be specifically approved in writing by the City. Approval of the above-referenced Preliminary Plat does not relieve the Registered Professional Land Surveyor or the Registered Professional Engineer of those responsibilities. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Keller Associates at (208) 288-1992. Sincerely, KELLER ASSOCIATES, INC. Ryan V. Morgan, P.E. City Engineer cc: File DocuSign Envelope ID: 12AA0C35-9253-42A7-8DC5-A432423DA29E ---PAGE BREAK---