The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutHeritage Commons PP 02-007Apdl 15, 2002 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING APPLICANT Bdghton Corporation Apdl 18, 2002 PP 02-007 ITEM NO. 1 0 REQUEST Public Hearing - Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 273 building lots and 12 other lots on 75.39 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Heritage Commons - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East Usfick Road and East McMillan Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATrORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: SANITARY SERVICE: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: See attached Comments "No Remarks" "No Commenl" See attached Comments See attached Comments See attached Comments OTHER: See Evaluation Sheet & lelters bom Mr. & Mrs. Young, Jim Moyer, & Leon Johnson Materials presented cd public meetings shoJl become property of the City of Mefldion. Joint School D!strict No. 2 911 Meridian Street · Meridian, Idaho 83642 (208) 888-6701 · Fax (208) 888-6700 SUPERINTENDENT Christine H. Donnell RECEIVED March 8, 2002 t,, ,AR 1 3 2002 City of Merldi.an City Clerk Office City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 Dear Planners: The Meridian School District has experienced phenomenal student growth the last ten years. The high schools, middle schools, and elementary schools throughout the district are operating over capacity. Approval of Heritage Commons Subdivision will have a significant impact on school enrollments at River Valley Elementary, Lowell Scott Middle, and Eagle High School. We can predict that these homes, when completed, will house seventy (70) elementary aged children, fifty-eight (58) middle school aged children, and fifty-two (52) senior high aged students. Additional students will further compound the current overcrowded situation. Residents cannot be assured of attending the neighborhood school, as it may be necessary to bus students to other schools across the district. School capacity is addressed in Idaho Code 67-6508. The Meridian School District is currently operating beyond capacity. Future development will continue to have an impact on the district's capacity. If you have any questions, please contact me at 888-6701. Sincerely, Wendel Bigham Supervisor of Facilities and Construction BOARD OF TRUSTEES Diane Anderson · Rex Harrison · Wally Hedrick · Holly Houlburg · David Wynkoop March 11, 2002 RECEIVED City Clerk- City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 MAR 1 5 2002 City of Meridian City Clerk Office Dear City Clerk - City of Meridian, SUBJECT: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT "HERITAGE COMMONS" In reviewing the application presented to the City of Meridian by the developers of "Heritage Commons," we had several concerns to address. The current proposed waterline is shown as located ten feet onto our property (Heron's Crossing Lane). This error needs to be corrected by the developer. Secondly, the volume of homes proposed (as well as the business sections purposed) will have a dramatic impact on the one lane, "Heron's Crossing". This lane is currently a private, single- lane, dirt road. The inevitable conversion of this road into a main thoroughfare should not be allowed to affect our current property. It is our feeling that any future expansion, easement and required privacy barriers (fencing and berms) of this property adjacent to the Heron's Crossing Lane be the sole responsibility of the developers. This will be important in the future for property owners of this development. We currently farm these adjacent acres (Heron's Crossing) in alfalfa. We also breed, raise and train horses for our private use as well as for sale. This means that we will have large farm equipment operating on our property as well as livestock. We are expressing our concern for the developer to address this in a proactive manner. It needs to be taken into consideration that these future homeowners may possibly complain of our farming or livestock activities, should there be no buffer zone provided into the building plans. We feel that the developer has not taken into account the fact that twb different zones will now have to coexist with one another. It is our suggestion that the City of Meridian require this Developer to resubmit new plans that will require these improvements, on their behalf. Sin Mr. & l~r?s. Young 4053 NORTH LOCUST GROVE ROAD MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 DISTRICT HEALT .H.D. EPARTMENT CENTRAL'Environmental Health D Rezone # Conditional Use # -"'- --.~5~-mreliminar~/Final/ Short Plat to: Boise Eagle: Garden City ,~lefidian Kuna ACZ Star I~ 1. We have No Objections to this Proposal. ~ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. Specitic knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require moredata concerning the depth of: ~ high seasonal ground water Q waste flow characteristics ~ or bedrock from original grade Q other ~ 6. This office will require a study to assess the impact of nutrients and pathogens to receiving ground waters and/or surface waters. 011. This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and water availability. After wdtt~ approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we Can approve this proposal for: ,/l~,.~ntral sewage CI community sewage system 13 communitY water well Q interim sewage /~[.centrel water CI individual sewage I~ individual water The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division o! Environmental Quality: ~ ~3r,.central sewage 13 community sewage system 13 community water '13 sewage dry lines J;~ntral water Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water Can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. 12. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage syStem MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. 1~13. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: Q food establishment 13 swimming pools or spas 13 beverage establishment 13 grocery store 13 child care center ..<"2~/'",,~~'-/~._ Date: 3 I/~.- I~__.~._ Reviewed By: Review Sheet I:ENTRAL DISTRICT DEPARTMENT MAIN OFFICE . 707 N. ARMSTRONG PI... BOISE, ID 83704~3825 . (208) 375-5211 0 FAX 327-8500 To prevent attd treat disease attd disability; to promote healthy lifestyles; and to protect attd protnote the health attd quality of our enviromnent. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that storm water be pre-treated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to ground water and surface water quality. The engineers and architects involved with the design of this project should obtain current best management practices for storm water disposal and design a storm water management system that is preventing groundwater and surface water degradation. Manuals that could be used for guidance are: State of Idaho Catalog of Stormwater Best Management Practices For Idaho Cities and Counties. Prepared bY the Idaho Division of Environmental Quality, July 1997. Stormwater Best Management Practices Guidebook. Prepared by City of Boise Public Works Department, May 2000. Ada / Boise County Office 707 N. Armsrong PI. Boise. ID 83704 Enviro. Health: 327-7499 · Family Planning: 327-7400 Immunizations: 327-7450 Son,or Nutrition: 327-7460 WIC: 327-7488 FAX: 327-85C0 Serving Valley, Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties Ada-WlC Satellite Office Elmoro County Oifice 1606 Robed St. 520 E. 8th Street N. Boise. ID 83705 Mountain Home. ID 83647 Ph. 334-3355 Enviro. Health: 587-9225 FAX: 334-G355 Family Health: 587-4407 WIC: 587-4409 FAX; 587-3521 Valley County Office 703 N. 1st Street P.O. Box 1448 McCall. ID. 83638 Ph. 634-7194 FAX: 634-2174 Meridian Fire Depam ent March 21, 2002 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Meridian Planning & Zoning Commissio~.~ RE Joseph Silva Deputy Chief Meridian Fire Department 540 E. Franklin Rd. Meridian, Id 83642 (208) 888-1234 CEIVED MAR 2 2 2UO2 ity Of Meridian ity Clerk Office The:following will be the requirements and/or concerns to provide minimum levels of fire protection for the proposed project: One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for a duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 400' apart. 1997 ~C: Appendix III-A 2::: ~ Operational fire hydrants and temporary or permanent street signs are required before ~ombustible construction begins. UFC 901.4.2 & 901.3 3. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Water Department. 4. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. 5. All radii shall be 28' inside and 48' outside radius for all intemal roads. 6. Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation per section 1103.2.4 of the Uniform Fire Code. 7. The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards with a minimum street width of 37'. UFC 902.2.1 8. The proposed 273-1ot subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 791 residents at build out. According to a report completed by Fire & Emergency Services Consulting Group in February of 2000 our requests for service are projected to reach 2800 in the year 2005 and 3800 by the year 2010, this is up from 2069 responses in the year 2000. March 21, 2002 Page 2 9. The proposed project lies outside the five-minute response zone goal. Achievement of this goal is subject to budgetary constraints and is intended to enhance the probability of a favorable outcome on a request for Basic Life Support. The budget constraints are typically defined as capital outlay for facilities that are located within 1.5 miles from a given location and sufficient operational funds to staff the facihties. 10. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have a mm around. 11. The Meridian would support the strict application of the Uniform Building Code for sideyard setbacks in Blocks 7, 8, 11,12 with no variances. This would limit the potential fire spread from building to building in those blocks. 12. The alleys in Blocks 7, 8, 11,12 have signed on each end stating "Fire Lane No Parking". Agency: Meridian Proposed Subdivision Name: Heritage Commons Subdivision Date reviewed: 3/21/2002 Preliminary/Final: preliminary Section/Township/Range: 4N1E31 File Number: PP 02-007 D ADA COUNTY STREET NAME EVALUATION MAR 2 ~1 2002 CiTY OF MERIDIAN CITy CLE'RK OF/-ICE The street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under the direction of the Ada County Sheriffs Department) regarding this development in accordance with the Ada County Street Name Ordinance. The following existing street names shall appear on the plat: "N. LOCUST GROVE ROAD" The following are denied due to duplication and/or too many letters: "HERITAGE COMMONS .... HERITAGE CROSSING" "LEGACY CROSSING .... VILLAGE COMMON" "HERITAGE" "HERONS CROSSING" "HERITAGE WOODS" "HERITAGE GREEN" LEGACY WOODS'~is ~lignzd with "CURT" and shall be "N. CURT A EN~d, 'E" ~%i4'fo~ ~'C The following street names are appro~ved and shall appear on the plat: "N. HERITAGE PARK WAY .... E. TRADITION 8-TRL~T~g."E. TRUTH STREET" "E. TRUST STREET .... E. ASIITON STREET~-"E. VILLAGE'"GREEN STREET" . LEGACY COMMON AVENUE .... E. VESTIGE DRIVE" ~ ~_ v./Art4A~-~ ~T. ' Community Planning Association Agency City~d/~ Fire District ~~' Ada County Highway District Ada County Sheriff Department Ashley Jimenez Representative Representative Representative Representative Date: ~¢~Date: Date: 83/28/2882 86:35 ~ ~MAYOR \.Rob~ D. Come CITY ~U~. CIL MEMBERS Will~'~'~ L. M. Nay Keith Bird Tammy drWeerd Cher,e McCandles~ 2888885852 SANITARY SERVICE HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDA HO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888.4~33 · Fax (208) 887-48 { 3 City Clerk Offic~ Fax (208) 888.4218 PAGE 83 LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 288.2d.99. Fax PUBLIC WORKS (308) 898.$500 - F~x 8S7. BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 88%2211. Fax. 887- l PLANNING AND ZONING (208) 88~:.5533. Fa~ TRANSMITTALS TO AGE'lES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure t~at your comments ancl recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, p!ease submit your comments an(/recommendations to Meridian City Clam's Office Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk, by: Ap~'il 11, 2002 Transmittal Date: March 6, 20~ Headng Date: April 18, 2002 File No.: PP 02-007 Request:Preliminary Plat apPi~o~at of 273 building lots and 12 other lots on 75.39 acres in a proposed R-8 z~for proposed Heritage Commons By: Brighton Corporation: Location of Property or Project: ' Westslde of North Locust Grove between East McMillan and East Ustlck Rds MAR 28 David Zaremba, P/Z (No VAR, VAG, FP) Jerry Centers, PIZ (No v,4e, v~c. Leslie Mathes, P/Z lNG VAR,:V,~C. FP) Keven Shreeve, P/Z (No ¥~R, VAC, Keith Borup, PIZ [No VAe. VAC. aP) Robert Corrie, Mayor Bitl Nary, C/C Tammy deWeerd, C/C Keith Bird, C/C Cherie McCandless, CIC Water Department Sewer Department Sanitary Service (No VAR. V~c, Building Department Fire Department Police Department City Attorney City Engineer City Planner Parks Department Meridian School Distdct (No FP) Meridian Post Office (FPIPP only) Ada County Highway District Community Planning Assoc. Central Distdct Health Nampa Meridian Irfig. Distdct Settlers Irrigation Distdct Idaho Power Co. (FP/PP only) U.S. West (FP/PP only) Intermountain Gas (FP/PP only) Bureau of Reclamation (~=P,~p only) Idaho Transportation Department Ada County (Anoexation only) YOur Concise Remarks: RECEIVED APR 01 2002 RECEIVED APR 01 2002 City Of Meridian City Clerk Office '02 86:35 2888885852 PAGE.83 Friday, April 05, 2002 City of Meridian, Planning and Zoning Commission 33 East Idaho Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 RECEIVED APR O 5 2002 City Of Meridian City Clerk Office Re: Rezoning and Annexation Planned Development for Heritage Commons Honorable Commission Members, An examination of the application of Brighton Corporation's preliminary plat for the development of Heritage Commons shows the following: (This is an example of the need for impact fees) The following conclusions were drawn from the information given on the plat. Total acres Open space Roads Commercial Lot Net Acres 75.39 Acres 6.65 Acres 5.4+- Acres .85 +- Acres 62.49 +- Acres 62.49/272=4.35 lots per acre(average) · Minimum square footage of the lot(s): 3,200 s.f. · No minimum square footage for structures. · Access to the Subdivision ............... one · Peak hour traffic generated ............. 5.7 vehicles Der min. · Additional traffic loads (given in the executive summary), on Locust Grove and adjacent roads, appear to create the need for additional upgrades to the road system. · There appears to be no provisions for structures required by Settler's Irrigation to proVide adequate pressure.irrigation. Conclusions: · Excessive density · Excessive traffic load on a single access creating traffic stacking · Expected population of 1000+- residents will overcrowd schools · Spread of commercial lots. · No evidence that the residents will have adequate landscape irrigation. Meridian is losing or has already lost its identity as a city with a definable center. The commercial lots should be promoted nearer to the city's commercial center. Thank Y,~fi?C Jim Mo~.(_..,/I/[~-~</c-~ 2015 E.~aradise Lan$ Meridian, Idaho 83642 RECEIV] 9 April 2002 William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 APR 1 0 2002 - City of Meridian City Clerk Office Dear Mr. Berg: In response to your Notice of Hearing dated 22 March 2002, regarding a public hearing scheduled for 18 Apdl 2002, to consider the application of Brighton Corporation for annexation and zoning change for the proposed Hedtage Commons, I submit this reply. It will not be possible for me to attend the hearing and provide oral testimony, yet I desire to place one of my concerns on record. Some of my property (Ada County Parcel # S0531449450) joins the proposed project property along a portion of its southern boundary and, since the installation of the irrigation system many years ago, the waste irrigation water from my property has drained onto and through the proposed project property. I hereby respectfully request that any grading, landscaping or other changes in the development of the proposed project not impede the continued flow of waste water from my property. Beyond this concern, I have, at this time, no further objections to the Heritage Commons Project. Sincerely, C. Leon Johnson 1570 East Ustick Rd. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Ph. 888-2014 cc: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meridian Public Works Department Brighton Corporation Meridian Fire Department April 16, 2002 Joseph Silva Deputy Chief Meridian Fire D~aruranl 540 IL Franklin Rd. Meridian, Id 83642 (208) 1188-1234 "lax ¢08)895:0390 .. RECEIVED APR 16 200 City Clerk Office TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Meridian Plalming & Zoning Commissio~ 0 Joseph Silva, Deputy Chief, Fh'e Prevention ~/ Heritage Commum Subdivision File # PP 02~007 The following will be the requirements and/or concerns to provide minimum levels of fire protection for the proposed project: 1, One and two family dwellings will require a fa'e-flow of 1,000 gallons per ngnute available for a duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 400' apart 1997 UFC Appendix III-A 2. Operational fir~ hydrants and temporary or permanent street signs are required before combust~le construction hegira. UFC 901.4.2 & 901.3 3. Acceptance of the water supply for f'a-e protection will be by the Meridian Water Department. Final Approval of the-fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. All radii shall b~ 2'8' imide and 48' outside radius for all kiternal roads. 6. Imure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained bee of combustible vegetation per section 1103.2.4 of the Uniform Fire Code, 7, The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards wifl~ a minimum clear st~'eet width of 20'. All 29' wide streets shall have resh'icted parking to one side. All 33' wide street sections shall also be posted no parking on one side to prevent encroachment on the required clear width of 20'. UFC 902.2.1 8, The proposed 273-1ot subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 791 r~idcnt~ at build out. According to a report completed by Fire & Emergency Services Consulting Group in February of 2000 our requests for service are projected to reach 2800 in the year 2005 and 3800 by the year 2010, this is up fi'om 2069 responses in the year 2000. ,4pri116, 2002 Page 2 9. The proposed project lies outside the five-minute response zone goal. Achievement of tltis goal is subject to budgetary conslzaints and is intended to enhance the probability of a favorable outcome on a request for Basic Life Suppm't. The budget constraints are typically defined as capital outlay for facilities that are located within 1.5 miles from a giveu location and sufficient operational timds to staffthe facilities. 10. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall bo requited to have a tam around. 11. The Meridian would support the strict application of the Umform Building Code lbr sideyard setbacks in Blocks 7, 8, 11,12 with no variances. This would limit the potential fire spread from building to building in those blocks. 12. The alleys in Blocks 7, 8, 11,12 have signed on each end stating "Fire Lane No Parking". 13. The driveway leading to the two lots on E Heron Crossing Dr at Heritage Green Way shall be 20' with not plu'king. APR 16 '02 14:16 [,,".e 1dian Parks & Recreation Memo From: Date: CC: Planning & Zoning Commission Tom Kuntz April 17, 2002 City Clerk & Planning & Zoning Staff RECEIVE[ APR 1 7 200Z CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OI=FICf Annexation and Zoning Request for Heritage Commons - File f/AZ 02-006 Conditional Use Permit for Heritage Commons- File #CUP 02-007 Preliminary Plat Approval for Heritage Commons- File #PP 02-007 The Parks and Recreation Staff have no recommendations to add at this time. C:~WlNDOWS~Temperary Internat FileslOI.J(B254~=Z Plat Comments Hertage Corn.doc Page 1 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET DATE PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME 18-Apr-02 Heritage Commons PP 02-007 NAME FOR A~NST APR 1 8 ZUU~ CITY OF MERIDIA~N To: Mayor, City Council, Planning & Zoning Commission, and Brighton Corporation From: Michael & Beverly Donahue 3775 N Locust Grove, Meridian, Idaho 83642 Re: Heritage Commons APR 1 8 2002 CITY OF MERIDIAN 1. We are requesting that the main constri~ction entrance be E Herons Crossing Drive due to area traffic and the school traffic. 2. We are requesting that a new curb cut be added on the south side of E Heritage Street (entry road), in alignment with the north curb cut to serve our property. 3. We are requesting that the sewer reach to and through the property line on the ~ side of our property (E Heritage.~treet) 4. We are requesting that the water rights remain as they exist until we see an agreeable and workable plan concerning our irrigation. (to date there was no plan available to review.) 5. We are requesting a block wall to surround the property measuring six feet in height to provide a sound buffer to the surrounding traffic at the enterance and rear of the property. 6. We are requesting that the commercial property be designated to professional offices only and that this be put into a written contract. 7. We also would like to request that the contractors maintain a clean construction site that is free of debris, excess dust, and excess noise. We are requesting that there be set hours of construction which will be maintained and honored by all personel involved work only during these hours. We are also requesting the maintenance of a clean road (on North Locust Grove). I.IJ Brighton Corporation April 18, 2002 To: Planning & Zoning Commission Re: Heritage Commons - Planned Development (AZ-02-O06) / (PP-02-O07) / (CUP-02-O07) APR 18 2002 CITY OF ~ERI~ ~ The following is a response to the Staff Report dated April 16, 2002. For ease of reference, please note the following: "No Comment" signifies agreement with the Staff Report. "Clarification" addresses a staff question or provides additional information, to further explain a concept or project intent. · "Disagree" states our position in objection to the StaffRepon. · "Requested Action" states how the issue should be resolved or conditioned. I. Annexation & Zoning (File No. AZ-02-O06) Staff Analysis, Pages 3 - 6 A. No Comment B. No Commem C. No Comment D. No Commem E. No Commem. F. No Comment G. H. ACHD Commission approved the project on April 17, 2002 No Comment Clarification. There will be some disruption during construction, but we will work with the neighbors to minimize the impact. The ingress / egress easement is non-exclusive, and we retain the right to use and improve it. No Comment No Comment Annexation & Zoning Comments, Page 6 1. NoComment 2. No Commem 3. No Comment 4. No Comment 5. No Comment 12426 W. Explorer Drive, Suite 220 · Boise, Idaho 83713 · TEL 208-378-4000 · FAX 208-377-8962 Heritage Commons - Applicant Response April 18, 2002, Page 2 II. Preliminary Plat (File No. PP-02-O07) Findings & Requirements, Pages 6 - 7 a. No Comment b. No Comment c. No Comment d. No Comment e. No Comment Additional Considerations, Pages 7 - 8 BULLET NO. 1: Staff Comment After reviewing the preliminary plat in light of the requested block length, staff does not support thc request flor block 21 to exceed the I, O00 foot maximum length], There is an existing private lane that extends north from Ustick Road in Patrick Subdivision (Ada Co.) that is in direct alignment with Lot 13, Block 21. Staff ant/c/pates that at least one of the three Ada County lots adjacent to this private lane (Ferguison parcel) will redevelop in the future because of its size (it exceeds 7 acres). There are no existing stub streets to this parcel from the west and it is unlikely that any stub street would be provided from the east. Upon future development of this parcel, a secondary access will be required and it could be provided via a stub in Heritage Commons somewhere between Lots 11 and 14, Block 21'. BLOCK LENGTH Applicant Comment Disagree: Wc do not agree with Staff's assessment that the block length is too long and an additional stub street to the south be provided. We have provided sufficient connections to the southern properties. If those properties develop in the future, they can provide each other secondary connections. Requested Action: Allow the block length to exceed 1,000 feet, and require no additional roadway connections. Delete Additional Considerations, Bullet Point No. 1 from the Staff Report. BULLETNO. 2: E. Staff Comment ACHD is requiring the Applicant to construct E. Herons Crossing Drive as a 36-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide sidewalk. However, this street section is currently shown at only 20 feet in width from Locust Grove to the second driveway in Crestwood Subdivision. The Applicant should be prepared to address this inconsistency at the P&Z Commission hearing and how the standard "half plus twelve" requirement of ACHD will be'met. HERON'S CROSSING Applicant Comment Clarification: We will construct a 29- foot street (back-to-back) with curb and gutter on both sides, and sidewalk only on the southern side orE. Heron's, This proposal was discussed with ACHD and satisfies the "half plus twelve" standard, as noted in the ACHD Staff Report Site Specific Condition No. 8, page 13. (Note: ACHD incorrectly identifies E. Heron's Crossing as E. Vestige.) Reouested Action: Recognize that the proposed 29-foot street satisfies ACHD's requirements. Heritage Commons - Applicant Response April 18, 2002, Page 3 BULLET No. 3: Staff Comment Traffic direction and movement of the alleys (i.e. one ways) How waste will be handled and if SSC has approved rear trash pick-up, etc. Demonstrate that a garbage truck will have adequate turning radius from a 29-foot street section onto a 16-foot wide alley section with on- street parking. "lessons learned" from alley-loaded streets at the Harris Ranch development. ALLEYWAYS Applicant Comment Clarification: 1. Traffic volumes on the alleys are minimal and will accommodate 2-way traffic. 2. The garbage trucks can easily provide pickup in an alley setting. 3. This is not an issue. Based on experience with Harris Ranch, and through observation of and discussion with other developments throughout the country, a garbage truck will be able to access the alleys. At Harris Ranch a 12-foot paved alley easily accommodates the residents and public services that use the alleys. Traffic flows are light, and there is sufficient "off-alley" parking, that the access is not blocked by cars or other obstructions. Requested Action: Approve the 12-foot alleys as proposed, allowing for two-way traffic and garbage collection. Site Soecific Comments (Preliminary Plat), Pa~es 8 - 11 1. No Comment 2. No Comment 3. No Comment 4. Clarification. The water line north of the subdivisiOn boundary is not correctly depicted. The water line will be included wholly within the boundaries of the subdivision and within a future roadway public right of way. It will be placed in the standard location for the roadway section. No easement should be required. A new preliminary plat has been provided to Staff for their review. Requested Action: Delete the first two sentences of that comment. Site Specific Comment No. 4 will now read: "Applicant shall be required to install a connecting water main in E. Heritage Street between S. Locust Grove and N. Heritage Commons Avenue." Heritage Commons - Applicant Response April 18, 2002, Page 4 o Disagree. We do not agree with staff' s recommendation for a curb cut to the property south of E. Heritage Street. That property already has legal frontage along a public road. Heritage Commons is improving the E. Heritage Street, a local road, at its own cost. If the property to the south is to take access, either primary or secondary, from E. Heritage Street, that property should be required to make its own arrangements for the access and improvements at its cost and pay for its proportionate share of improvements, including both roadway and landscaping, on E. Heritage Street. Requested Action: Delete Site Specific Comment No. 5. Disagree. We do not agree with Staff's assessment that Lot 4, Block 18 is a private street. It is a common driveway. Staffhas incorrectly interpreted the Planned Development Ordinance. The Ordinance states: "Driveways to one- and two-family dwellings shall not be less than nine feet (9') in width. Service driveways, drive-through lanes and escape lanes shall have a minimum of width of ten feet (10') per lane, without parking on either side." Requested Action: Delete Site Specific Comment No. 6 and replace with: "The shared driveway is a driveway and not a private street and therefore is not required to meet private street construction specifications." 7. No Comment 8. Clarification. The property is private property with a non-exclusive access easement granted to the property owners to the north. We will continue to provide access to those properties, but retain the right to use, improve and dedicate the access to ACHD. 9. No Comment 10. Disagree. We do not agree with the requirement for a 25-foot common lot adjacent to Locust Grove. This is a commercial site and it is appropriate that the landscape buffer be placed in an easement, to the benefit of each individual lot owner. This is the case with both the commercial projects of Silverstone and El Dorado, located on Eagle and Overland Roads. The bus stop can be accommodated in the right of way dedication and should not be part of a common lot or landscape easement. Furthermore, the bus stop is not a requirement, but a forward-thinking suggestion by the developer. Requested Action: Delete Site Specific Comment No. 10. 11. Disagree. We do not propose to have any micropaths located in Lot 1, Block 22, and Lot 1, Block 24. The open space is passive, and green space with no proposed sidewalks. Requested Action: Delete Site Specific Comment No. 11. Heritage Commons - Applicant Response April 18, 2002, Page 5 12. Disagree. While we intend to have street trees planted in the development within the planter strip, trees in the planter strips are not required by ordinance. This requirement is inappropriate. Requested Action: Delete Site Specific Comment No. 12. 13. Clarification. We ask that sight obscuring fencing adjacent to pathways or common areas not be more than 4' feet in height. Also, there are some areas on the perimeter of the property that may not require fencing or adjacent to neighbors, which require a different fence application. We request the flexibility to work on perimeter fencing with the Planning Director. Requested Action: Modify Site Specific Comment No. 13 to read: "Fencing details shall be submitted with each Final Plat application. Fencing adjacent to pathways or the common area lots shall not be over t!::-cc four feet in height if constructed ora solid material. A colld, 5-fool high pe,-"m.~tc:' fe'Tce chall be installed p:-ior roan)' build! ';g pe"'ni';- being is:,~:~d, unlcs~ agre?d to ~thr'~wis~ in ;vrith~g by '~e r'lam:;ng Director A_ perimeter fencing plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for future implementation." 14. No Comment 15. No Comment. Site plan was provided to staff on 4-18-02. 16. No Comment 17. No Comment 18. Clarification. We understand this Site Specific Condition means that the commercial site can develop at any point, and is not subject to the residential phasing plan. Requested Action: If this is the intent of Site Specific Condition No. 18, then no action is requested. 19. a. Common Lots. Clarification. The actual number of common lots is 11, not 12 as detailed in the application. The total of all "other lots" is 17. b. Minimum Lot Size. Clarification. The minimum house size for the alley-loaded lots is 1,101 s.f. The minimum house size for all other residential lots is 1,301 s.f. 20. No Comment 21. No Comment 22. Clarification. The pressure irrigation system is proposed to be owned and maintained by the Owner's Association. 23. No Comment 24. No Comment General Comments (Preliminary Plat), Pa~e 11 1. No Comment 2. No Comment 3. No Comment Heritage Commons - Applicant Response April 18, 2002, Page 6 4. Clarification. At the entrances, historical lighting may be appropriated. flexibility on appropriate street light selection for the entrances. 5. No Comment 6. No Comment 7. No Comment 8. No Comment We request III. Conditional Use Permit (File No. CUP 02-007) Findings, Pa~es 11 - 13 1. No Comment 2. No Comment 3. No b. C. 5. No Comment No Comment No Comment Clarification. A pedestrian / bikeway connection at that location is not necessary, and we will not be providing such. No Comment. Disagree. We do not agree with Staff's assessment of the commercial site plan. See below, Special Consideration, Bullet Point No. 1. Comment Standards for Conditional Uses A. No Comment B. No Comment C. Clarification: The water line north of the subdivision boundary is not correctly depicted. The water line will be included wholly within the boundaries of the subdivision and within a future roadway public right of way. It will be placed in the standard location for the roadway section. No Comment No Comment No Comment No Comment No Comment No Comment Do E. F. G. H. I. Heritage Commons - Applicant Response April 18, 2002, Page 7 Sl~ecial Considerations, PaRes 15 - 16 BULLET NO. 1: HERITAGE Staff Comment The proposed elevation for the Heritage Commons Commercial structure does not appear to match the proposed lot pattern and potential footprints in the commercial area on the plat... The Applicant shall clarify how the scale of the proposed commercial building will work within the proposed plat at the P&Z Commission hearing. Staff supports the single multi- tenant building concept (versus six individual pads) and recommends the conceptual plan be re-configured to demonstrate such a layout. The diagrams [developed by staff] are used simply to illustrate the concepts staffencourages and discourages. The applicant may submit a different conceptual site plan that addresses the comments. COMMONS COMMERCIAL Applicant Comment Clarification: The elevation submitted with the Conditional Use application would fit on a 150' X 270' lot. The intent of the elevation was to show the proposed design theme for the Heritage Commons Commercial Site. The buildings are designed for multiple tenants. The proposed site plan, could be reconfigured to be a 4-lot, 5-lot or 6-lot subdivision, allows for the greatest flexibility. Disa~,ree: We do not agree with Staff's assessment that the site be reconfigured. The layout allows for a strong visual relationship with all adjacent streets, including Locust Grove, and the neighborhood. It provides for pedestrian access, and its use will relate to needs of the residents. Staff Comment Staffdoes not support Child Care Centers be allowed without a CUP ... Staff recommends that no drive through facilities be permitted in this area. BULLETNO. 2: USES Applicant Comment Clarification: The applicant agrees to requiring a CUP for Child Care Centers. A bank would be a perfectly acceptable use in this area, and would certainly require a drive through facility. We agree that a drive through for a fast food restaurant would be inappropriate for this location. The Applicant shall submit a more detailed definition of "service related to the neighborhood." Clarification of "service related to the neighborhood." There might be a case where a use is proposed for this area, but not specifically identified with this conditional use permit, that is of a scale and size that relates to the neighborhood. Our intent was to provide some flexibility, and allow the planning director to make a decision, if and when such use is proposed. Recluested Action: None. Heritage Commons - Applicant Response April 18, 2002, Page 8 BULLET No. 3: Staff Comment [Staff] does not support any uses be permitted outright in Lots 3-6, Block 3. However, should a layout agreement be reached, certain uses may be permitted without a CUP if they comply with the conceptual plan. Said uses should be detailed within the Development Agreement. USES IN LOTS 3-6, BLOCK 3 Applicant Comment Disagree: We do not agree with Staff's position. All of the proposed uses with this Conditional Use Permit are appropriate for Lots 3 - 6, Block 3. No additional review of those lots outside of the building permit process, is necessary. Clarification of "service related to the neighborhood." There might be a case when a use is proposed for this area, but not specifically identified with this conditional use permit, that is of a scale and size that relates to the neighborhood. The intent is to provide flexibility, and allow the planning director to make a decision, if, and when, such use is proposed. Re~luested Action: State that the Site Plan and proposed uses are appropriate for this site, and no other CUP be required for development of Lots 3 - 6, Block 3. Site Sl~ecific Comments (Conditional Use Permit), Pa~es 16-17 1. No Comment 2. Clarification. The applicant agrees to require a CUP for Child Care Centers. And a drive through for a fast food restaurant or food service is inappropriate at this location. However, other drive through facilities, i.e., for a bank, are appropriate. Requested Action: Modify Site Specific Comment No. 2 to read: "The following uses are.permitted in the Heritage Commons Commercial Site Planned Development: · Health Care Facilities Clinic / Medical Dental Doctor's Office Pharmacy Optical Shop · Office · Retail Bank, with a drive-up Heritage Commons - Applicant Response April 18, 2002, Page 9 Dining and other food~ beverage related uses Personal services Retail store Restaurant Service related to the neighborhood, not identified above, but determined by the Planning Director to be of an appropriate size and scalefor this location. The following uses require a conditional use permit in the Heritage Commons Commercial Site Planned Development: · Child Care Facilities Drive through windows will not be permitted for fast food restaurant or related food services at this location." 3. Clarification. We agree with Staff's phasing plan for the community center and gazebo. Requested Action: Add a final sentence to that condition to read: "In the event of weather restriction, the applicant shall be allowed to bond for all required common area improvements, including landscaping, the community center and gazebo, prior to final occupancy of any unit. In that case, improvements shall be made as weather permits. " 4. No Comment 5. Clarification. The open space calculations for Heritage Commons is 6.34 acres, which excludes the required street landscape buffer along Locust Grove Road. 6. No Comment 7. No Comment 8. New Condition. Sales and Information Trailer. In the conditional use permit application, we specifically asked for a sales trailer. However, the report was "silent" on the issue. Requested Action: We propose approval of a new Site Specific Comment No. 8. A sales and information trailer for Heritage Commons is approved with the following conditions: a. A building permit for the temporary building must be obtained through Meridian's Building Department prior to placing the trailer on a lot. A site plan must accompany the building permit and be approved by Planning Department. b. Sanitary sewer service and domestic water service may be requested for the proposed use. Should a hook-up be requested, an assessment for sewer and water service will be determined during the building permit application process. Applicant will be required to enter into an Assessment Agreement with the City of Meridian. An assessment agreement is a vehicle that protects the City of Meridian and the Developer in the event that estimated assessments are not in line with actual usages. The agreement provides for reimbursement to the developer for overpayment of assessments and payment to the City of Meridian of any shortfall Heritage Commons - Applicant Response April 18, 2002, Page 10 in assessments. The overpayment/shortfall is determined after adequate historical usage. c. In accordance with City Ordinance 11-13-4. B. 2., underground year-round pressurized irrigation must be provided to all landscape areas on site. Please submit hook-up and design details based on the proposed landscaping. Applicant shall be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If City water is proposed as a secondary source, developer shall be responsible to pay water assessments for the landscaped areas. d. Applicant must provide the Public Works and Fire Departments with information on the method of fire protection to be used for the trailer. e. The trailer must not be placed anywhere within this front setback of the lot, and must conform with all setbacks as set forth in the Heritage Commons conditional use permit and preliminary plat. f. No off-street parking to serve the temporary trailer is proposed. The on-street parking will need to be closely monitored by Brighton Corporation and the City. No obstruction of a public right-of-way is permitted. g. Landscaping is required within the front setback area of the lot. The area of the lot behind the trailer must.be kept free from weeds or other potential fire hazards at all times. h. The timeframe for the sales and information trailer is for a period of 48 months. If Brighton Corporation requires an extension of this permitted period, Staff recommends they submit a status of their plans to the P&Z Department after 48 months of operation (starting from date of occupancy). City Council must approve of any time extension beyond 60 months via a modification of the CUP. This timeframe will apply to a single lot, not a combination of all future lots for the trailer use. i. The Applicant's request to site the same trailer under the above-stated conditions at other locations within future Heritage Commons phases is approved without a CUP modification. A new site plan and building permit for all future trailer locations must be submitted to the City for each future location, but a CUP should not be required for each future trailer location. Recommendation We respectfully request approval of Heritage Commons, Planned Development, including annexation / zoning, preliminary plat, and conditional use permit, with the modifications we have proposed.' Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 2 density is 3.62 d.u./acre. The plat includes 6.65 acres of open space, or 8.8% of the gross land area. No attached dwelling units are being proposed within the subdivision - all are detached. The Applicant has also requested approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development (PD) in order to allow alternative development standards, including reduced residential building setbacks, reduced landscape buffer, reduced lot sizes, reduced lot frontages, reduced dwelling sizes, and to allow one (1) block to exceed the maximum block length of 1,000 feet. The PD application is also necessary to allow the 3.86-acre non-residential site on Locust Grove. This site is proposed to have up to 44,000 square feet of office and/or retail space: The following is a side-by-side comparison of the City's minimum R-8 requirements and the reduced requirements that have been proposed by the Applicant through the PD application: Setbacks- City Requirements (R-8) Front: 20' Rear: 15' Side: 5'/per story Street side: 20' Proposed Setbacks Front: 10' (alley lots) and 15' (standard lots-living area only) Rear: 15' and 5' (if side entry garage) Side: 5' (no additional setback per story) Street side: 10' (alley lots) and 15' (standard lots) Landscape Buffer - City Requirement 20' min. (between office & single family residential) Proposed Buffer Width 15' min. Lot Size- City Requirements R-8 zone: 6,500 sq.ft. per dwelling unit Proposed Lot Sizes 3,520 sq. ft. (fOr alley-loaded units) 5,500 sq. ft. (for standard SFR units) Lot Frontage-City Requirements 65'minimum Proposed Frontage 32' min. (for alley-loaded lots) 50' minimum (for standard lots) House Size- City Requirements 1,301 sq. ft. min.* Proposed Minimum House Sizes 1,101 sq. ft. min. * 1,001 sq. ft. minimum house sizes are allowed if restricted to 10% of total lots) The Applicant is also proposing a network of nan'ow streets, ranging from a 29-foot street section to the standard 36-foot width. All street sections would still be placed within 50 feet of- public right-of-way. The reduced street sections are not a part of the PD request as the City's Subdivision Ordinance allows any public streets that comply with ACHD policies (Ord. 12-4- 2.C. 1). The 29-foot wide section is allowed under ACI-tD's policy for streets where the average trips per day does not exceed 1,000. The Meridian Fire Department and Staff met with the Applicant to review this proposal and the Fire Department has prepared separate comments specific to this request. AZ-02-006, PP -02-007, CUP02-007 H~litag~ Commcm. AZ. PP.CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 3 Additionally, as part of the PD request, the applicant has requested a twenty percent (20%) land use exception to permit the 3.86-acre office/commercial site on Locust Grove. This non- residential site is 5.1% of the total acreage. The PD's amenities include a club house, gazebo and private parks and a neighborhood-scale commercial site. LOCATION The property is generally located at the ½ mile between Ustick and McMillan Roads on the west side of N. Locust Grove Road. The property extends a ~A mile to the west and is within Section 31 ofT. 4N, R. 1E. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES North: South: East: West: Crestwood Subdivision, zoned RUT (Ada County), and unplatted agricultural land. Heron's Crossing Lane is a narrow, private street that courses along the property's north boundary from Locust Grove approximately 1,300 feet to the west and serves three existing driveways. There is also an existing City of Meridian sewer easement within this private lane, ingress/egress easement. Rural residential properties within Weaver Acres No. 2, zoned R-1 (Ada County) and Patrick Subdivision, zoned RUT (Ada County). Meridian Charter High School, zoned R4 (City). Rural residential and agricultural land, zoned RUT (Ada County). ANNEXATION & ZONING ANALYSIS According to Ordinance 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, both the P&Z Commission and Council are required "to review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed zoning amendment in terms of the following standards and shall find adequate evidence answering the following questions about the proposed zoning amendment." The following is the list of standards found in 11-15-11 and analysis by staff: Will the new zoning be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and, if not, has there been an application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment; Staff finds that the requested zoning designation of R-8 is harmonious with and in accordance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and Generalized Land Use Map, which designates the land to be "Single Family Residential". The PD Ordinance allows non-residential uses within the SFR areas up to a maximum of 20% of the gross land area. Be Has there been a change in the area or adjacent areas which may dictate that the area should be rezoned. For example, have the streets been widened, new railroad access been developed or planned or adjacent area being developed in a fashion similar to the proposed rezone area; AZ-02-006, PP =02-007, CUI~}2-007 H~aa~ Commons. AZ. PP.CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 4 Ce De Staff finds that the annexation and zoning of the Charter High School and Summerfield Subdivision on the east side of Locust Grove and the recent purchase of a future fire sub-station lot on the west side of Locust Grove would dictate that the adjacent property be similarly zoned and developed (as proposed). The subject development is also near the Sundance Subdivision, which was annexed in March 2002 to R-8. Additionally, ACHD recently improved and signalized the intersection of Locust Grove and Ustiek Roads. Will the proposed uses be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area; Staff finds that general vicinity provides a mix of public services and facility uses and standard estate and rural residential lots. The intended character of the vicinity, as noted on the Generalized Land Use Map, is for housing and it is assumed that other compatible, residential services would be permitted in the area as well. Staff finds that the proposed uses can be designed and constructed in a manner that will be harmonious with and appropriate in appearance with the existing and intended character of the surrounding area. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; The Commission and Council should rely on public testimony to determine whether or not the proposed use will be disturbing or hazardous to the neighboring uses. Staff does not anticipate that the proposed uses will be hazardous or disturbing to future or existing neighbors. Special attention will need to be paid to protect the existing agricultural uses to the north and the access of adjacent properties. Will the area be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed zoning amendment shall be able to provide adequately any of such services; Staff finds that the subject property will be served adequately by all essential public facilities and services, assuming the Meridian Fire Department responds favorably and considers this a serviceable area. Sewer service is dependent upon the extension of the White Drain Trunk, which is slated for construction this year. The Ada County Highway District staff has recommended approval of the project. AT.M)24106, PP--024107, CUP02-4~7 He~i~e Conunc~. AZ. PP.CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 5 Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Staff'finds that there will not be additional requirements at public cost and that the annexation and zoning will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. Ge Will the proposed uses not involve uses, activities, 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; Staff' finds that the proposed uses will create additional traffic, especially on Locust Grove and Ustick Roads. However, staff does not believe that the increase in traffic will be excessive. Staff does not anticipate that the proposed development will generate traffic, noise, smoke, odors or other nuisances that would be detrimental to the general welfare of the surrounding area. Will the area have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; Staff finds that the two proposed vehicular approaches on Locust Grove Road should not appreciably interfere with traffic on the surrounding streets. The north approach, E. Heron's Crossing Drive, is an existing private road and the developer must not interfere with this ingress/egress easement that serves the existing property owners to the north. Should the new roadway be designed and constructed in such a way as to protect these owners, the future roadway should actually improve the accessibility and traffic flow on E. Heron's Crossing since it will be a wider street and be paved. Ada County Highway District's comments should be considered when making this finding. L Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance; and Staff finds that no natural or scenic features of major importance will be lost or damaged by approval of this annexation request. Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of Meridian. (Ord. 592, 11-17-1992)" AZ-02-006, pp --0~4107, ClJi~-007 ~ C~almlom. AZ. PP,CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 6 Stafffinds that the annexation of this property would be in the best interest of the City by providing a variety of housing types, an innovative subdivision layout, and the addition of employment opportunities. ANNEXATION AND ZONING COMMENTS 1. The legal description submitted with the application appears to meet the requirements of the City of Meridian and State Tax Commission and places the parcel contiguous to existing city limits. 2. The requested zoning of R-8 is compatible with the City Comprehensive Plan and the Meridian Zoning Ordinances 3. The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area. Essential City services are available to the subject property. 4. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 5. A Development Agreement will be required as part of this annexation request. PRELIMI31ARY PLAT FINDINGS AND REOUIREMENTS Sections 12-3-3 1.2 and 12-3-5 D read as follows: "In determining the acceptance ora proposed subdivision, the Commission/Council shall consider the objectives of this title and at least the following: a. The conformance of the subdivision with the Comprehensive Development Plan; As noted above, staff finds that the subdivision appears to be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. b. The availability of public services to accommodate the proposed development; Stafffinds that public services are available to accommodate the proposed subdivision. c. The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement program; Staff finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. d. The public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; A7.~2-006, PP-02.007, CUP02-007 lteffiaS~ Conquers. AZ. PP.CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 7 Staff finds that the development will not require major expenditures for providing supporting services. e. The other health, safety or environmental problems that may be brought to the Commission's attention. Staff finds that there should not be any other health, safety or environmental problems associated with this subdivision that should be brought to the Council or Commission's attention. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS Block Length: The preliminary plat has one block (21) that exceeds the 1,000 foot maximum block length (MCC 12-4-5). However, because this plat is part of a PD, the Applicant has requested they be allowed to exceed this section of Code without the need for a variance application. After reviewing the preliminary plat in light of the requested block length, staff does not support the request. There is an existing private lane that extends north from Ustick Road in Patrick Subdivision (Ada Co.) that is in direct alignment with Lot 13, Block 21. Staff anticipates that at least one of the three Ada County lots adjacent to this private lane (Ferguison parcel) will redevelop in the future because of its size (it exceeds 7 acres). There are no existing stub streets to this parcel from the west and it is unlikely that any stub street would be provided from the east. Upon future development of this parcel, a secondary access will be required and it could be provided via a stub in Heritage Commons somewhere between Lots 11 and 14, Block 21. E. Herons Crossing Drive: ACHD is requiring the Applicant to construct E. Herons Crossing Drive as a 36-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide sidewalk. However, this street section is currently shown at only 20 feet in width from Locust Grove to the second driveway in Crestwood Subdivision. The Applicant should be prepared to address this inconsistency at the P&Z Commission hearing and how the standard "half plus twelve" requirement of ACHD will be met. Alleyways: Given that alleys are a fairly uncommon feature in Meridian's new residential developments and to help address potential Commission and Council concerns about alleys, the Applicant should be prepared to discuss the following at the P&Z Commission hearing: 1. Traffic direction and movement of the alleys (i.e. one ways) 2. How waste will be handled and ifSSC has approved rear trash pick-up, etc. 3. Demonstrate that a garbage truck WIll have adequate turning radius from a 29-foot street section onto a 16-foot wide alley section with on-street parking. 4. Any "lessons learned" from alley-loaded streets at the Harris Ranch development. Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 8 SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS (ureliminarv olat) Sanitary sewer service to this site shall be via the new White Drain Trunk, scheduled for construction this summer. Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer mains to and through this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Sewer manholes are to be provided to keep the sewer lines on the south and west sides of the centerline. The applicant has dedicated a 20-foot wide sanitary sewer easement to the City of Meridian along the northerly boundary; however with this development the applicant proposes re-routing the sewer through public right-of-ways. The Public Works Department supports this proposal and is working with the applicant's representatives on the design for the sewer trunk. A new easement will be required prior to final plat approval, and the existing easement will need to be vacated. Domestic water service to this site shall be via new main extensions from the existing mains adjacent to the property in Locust Grove Road (not shown on plat map.) Applicant will be responsible to construct water mains to and through this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Applicant to provide a 20-foot wide easement, centered on the water main shown north of the subdivision boundary in E. Herons Crossing Drive. The main shall be located in the standard location for the design roadway section. Applicant shall be required to install a connecting water main in E. Heritage Street between S. Locust Grove and N. Heritage Commons Avenue. Staff recommends a new curb cut be added on the south side of E. Heritage Street (entry road), in alignment with the north curb cut, to serve the unplatted parcel in order to provide the parcel with a secondary, shared access upon future redevelopment. This condition will involve the elimination of at least two (2) of the proposed shade trees on the conceptual landscape plan to accommodate the new access drive. Lot 4, Block 18 is a common driveway lot to serve Lots 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 of the same block. The Planned Development Ordinance (12-6-2.A.6.c.) requires such private streets to be a minimum of 24 feet wide with five-foot sidewalks located on both sides within an easement. The preliminary plat shows this lot as 20 feet wide. Applicant shall comply with Ordinance 12-6-2.A.6.c. for this lot. Staff recommends the common lot be widened by four feet to the east (on Lots 2 and 3, Block 18) to comply. Lots I and 10, Block 4 shall be restricted from having garage entrance directly onto E. Herons Crossing Drive and shall take access from Heritage Commons and Heritage Woods, respectively. There is an existing, 1,300 foot long, 20-foot wide ingress-egress easement adjacent to the north boundary which provides Locust Grove Road access for the two Crestwood A7_,-02-006, PP -O'2-007, CUP02-007 He~ ~. AZ. PP.CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 9 Subdivision lots and the unplatted parcel. The easement appears to lie entirely within the Heritage Commons boundary. The Applicant shall submit evidence that the easement of record permits the Applicant to dedicate a public road over the top of said easement without vacating the easement and without obtaining consent of the beneficiaries of the easement. A temporary vehicle turnaround shall be added to the north stub of N. Legacy Woods Ave. 10. Ordinance 12-13-10-3, Applicability of Street Buffers, requires that all street buffers at subdivision boundaries be placed on a common lot, maintained by a homeowner or business-owners association. Applicant shall submit a revised preliminary plat at least 10 days prior to the next public hearing that shows the 25-foot wide landscape buffer along Locust Grove Road within a common lot. The common lot will also facilitate the siting of the proposed bus stop so the stop is not located on an individual commercial lot. 11. The detailed landscape plans to be submitted with the Final Plat applications for each phase shall include standards for the micropath portions of Lot 1, Block 22 and Lot 1, Block 24. 12. The developer shall be required to install all parkway trees within each phase of the development prior to any Certificates of Occupancy being issued. 13. Fencing details shall be submitted with each Final Plat application. Fencing adjacent to pathways or the common area lots shall not be over three feet in height if constructed of a solid material, and shall not be more than 4 feet in height if it is non-sight obscuring. A solid, 6-foot high perimeter fence shall be installed prior to any building permits being issued, unless agreed to otherwise in writing by the Planning Director. 14. All adjacent agricultural uses shall be protected and a note added to the face of the plat regarding the Right to Farm Act. 15. Four (4) alley-loaded lots within the subdivision are shown with 32-foot wide frontages. At least 10 days prior to the next public hearing, Applicant shall submit to the P&Z Department a conceptual plot plan and floor plan of a 32-foot wide lot demonstrating how a 22-foot wide dwelling unit will be accommodated on the lot. 16. The required landscaping and irrigation system on Locust Grove Road shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any building on any lot created by the subdivision. Landscaping and fencing must be bonded for prior to applying for building permits. 17. No phasing lines were shown on the preliminary plat. If phasing is planned, applicant shall submit a revised plat prior at least 10 days prior to the next public hearing showing the proposed phase lines. AZ4}2-006, pp --02-007, CUP02-007 Her~e Connna~s. AZ. PP.CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 10 18. The phasing schedule shall apply to the residential portions of the subdivision only. If the applicant/developer determines that the office/commercial property can or should be developed in an order that is not consistent with the phasing schedule, they may request final plat approval of said phases in a non-sequential manner without revising the preliminary plat. All development, however, must be contiguous to a previously approved phase. 19. The public record should show that item #3 on page 1 of the Preliminary Plat application incorrectly shows 12 "other lots" within the subdivision. The number should be 17 lots. The Applicant should also confirm that item #7.1.A on page 1 of the Pre Plat application, which states that there are "no minimum required size requirements for dwellings," is incorrect and should be 1,101 sq. ii. 20. Please revise the preliminary plat map to show all easements of record (ditches and drainage ways). Show how the existing ditches are being continued, and all new easements needed for relocations. Provide all the above details on revised preliminary plat maps prior to the City Council hearing. Lots shall be configured to the edge of easement lines unless an encroachment agreement is granted. If the latter is the case, create a common area lot covering the balance of the easement width. 21. The preliminary plat map fails to show the how street drainage is being handled. Please revise the plat to show set-aside areas for drainage retention/detention. 22. Underground pressurized irrigation must be provided to all landscape areas on site. Applicant has not indicated whether the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to be owned and maintained by an association or the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. If the system is being proposed as a private system, plans and specifications for the irrigation system shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the development plan review process. A dra~ copy of the pressurized irrigation system O&M manual must be submitted prior to plan approval. 23. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year- round source of water, ifa creek or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinazy water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the Meridian City Engineer. 24. Staff recommends that any six-foot fences built in this subdivision be allowed to match the approved front and street-side building setbacks, instead of the standard fence setbacks required in 12-4-10 and 12-12-2. All other fence regulations will still apply. GENERAL COMMENTS (preliminary olat) Please submit a copy of the Ada County Street Name Committee's final approval letter for the subdivision name, and the lot and block numbering. Make any corrections necessary to conform. AZ-02-006. PP -02-QO~, CUP02-007 Hmta~ Conuncm. AZ. PP.CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 11 2. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. o A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all fencing, landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. Two-hundred-fifty and one-hundred-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13. The ditches to be piped should be shown on the site plans. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Sections 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 7. Slopes within drainage lots are not to exceed a ratio of 3:1. o Performance specifications for the common area pressurized irrigation system shall be submitted with each Final Plat application. FINDINGS FOR USE EXCEPTIONS WITI:HN A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT MCC 12-6-3 "Use Exceptions" require the Commission and Council to make the following findings in order to authorize specific uses that are not normally permitted by the use regulations of the zone in which the development is located (no more than 20% of the gross area of the gross project): The uses permitted by the exception are strongly related to the principal use of the development, and have the purpose of providing services or facilities useful or complementary to the primary use. Staff finds that the office/commercial uses are strongly related to the primary use of the development (R-8), assuming the future uses are as proposed in the application. The uses will provide services (medical, dental, optical, neighborhood retail, etc.) that will be complementary to the residents of the subdivision, and it may provide employment oppommities as well. AZ-02-006, pp -02-007, CUP02-007 He~ Connnms. AZ. PP.CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 12 No more than twenty percent (20%) of the total area of the project shall be devoted to the uses permitted by the exception. The percentage of use exception allowed will be determined by the Commission and Council based upon the size of the project and intensity of the use exceptions. Staff'finds that the office/commercial uses are approximately 5.1% of the total area of land included in the planned development. Staff finds that the size and intensity of the excepted uses is appropriate for this location and size of development, especially given the Charter High School across the street and meeting the needs of future students. The development will be phased so that construction of the excepted use or uses will be justified by construction of all or a proportionate amount of the principal or primary use or uses. Until a phasing plan is submitted, Staff is unable to determine this finding. However, the developer has stated that the office/commercial construction will occur after the principal use, residential, is well underway. 4. The uses permitted by the exception are integrated into the overall project by: Being located in proximity to and within convenient walking distance of the primary uses. Staff finds that the office/commercial uses will be within convenient walking distance of the private park and the majority of the future residents. No resident will be more than ½ mile from the uses permitted by the exception. Utilizing one or more of the main vehicular accesses to the primary use site as the main access to the exception site or interconnection through a system of private roadways and/or pathways. Staff finds that the site design incorporates interconnectivity through shared vehicular access points. Providing pedestrian and bicycle pathway connections with the primary use site. Pedestrian and bicycle connections are available to the office/commercial area via sidewalks and short block lengths. The applicant could provide a path between Lots 12 and 14, Block 3 to better connect the two uses, but the 550 foot long block is not unreasonable, even without the ped connection. Orienting buildings on the exception site to facilitate vehicular and/or pedestrian access from the primary use site. Stafffinds that the exceptec uses are located in a manner that will facilitate vehicular access from the residential uses. AZ-02-006, lap -02-007, C:UP02-007 He~a&e Coamaom. AZ. PP.CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 13 Continuing architecture, landscaping, and building bulk concepts from the primary use into the use of the exception site so they are consistent and harmonious throughout the development. Staff finds that the landscaping and proposed building elevations of the commercial complex, gazebo and community center are consistent throughout the development. However, the commercial building elevation (which staff supports) does not appear to match the conceptual site plan for the commercial area (which staff does not support). Applicant should clarify the discrepancy. The use(s) permitted by the exception are neighborhood or community serving in size and character and not regional, and are not detrimental to adjacent neighborhoods in location and character. Staff finds that the office/commercial use is not regional in size or character. STANDARDS FOR COlVOmONAL USES The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall fred evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11-17-3): That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, parking landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the requested use and all other required features. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; The current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the property as Single-Family Residential. The proposed mix of residential, commercial and office uses are harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. The project meets the requirements and objectives of the Planned Development Ordinance. Ce 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; Staff finds that there is a potential for the proposed E. Herons Crossing Drive to conflict with the three (3) existing property owners to the north. The water main shown on the neighboring property will need to be relocated in order to comply with this finding. Construction of the street and houses along the north boundary will need to take caution A7-,-02-006, Pp -02-007, CR,ff~2 -OW/ H~rila~ C, mmm~m. A~ PP.CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 14 to contain debris and mitigate any fugitive dust. Additionally, it could be argued that the proposed number of dwelling units at the southwest comer of the subdivision does not provide a transition for the larger, estate-size Weaver Acres and Patrick Subdivision residents. However, Heritage Commons is consistent with the intended character of this area and staff typically does not consider single-family residential adjacent to single- family residential to be incompatible uses, regardless of lot size. De That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; Staffdoes not anticipate that the proposed project will have an adverse impact on the surrounding property; however, the Commission and Council should consider any testimony given at the public hearings before making this finding. See comments in "C" above. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; Stafffinds that the proposed development can be adequately served by the essential public facilities and services listed above. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Stafffinds that the proposed use would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community, nor would it create the need for any new facilities or services to be paid for by the public. Ge 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 general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Staff finds that no excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors will result from the proposed use. Standard construction containment practices must be observed: He That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; Staff finds that the proposed use will not create significant interference with any traffic on the surrounding public streets. The Council and Commission should refer to the ACHD report for additional information concerning this finding. AZ-02-006, pP-02.~07, CUP0'2-007 ~ Conm~s. AZ. PP.CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 15 L 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'does not find that any natural or scenic feature will be lost, damaged or destroyed by issuance of this conditional use. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS The proposed elevation for the Heritage Commons Commercial structure does not appear to match the proposed lot pattern and potential footprints in the commercial area on the plat. The elevation reflects a row-type, multi-tenant structure while the conceptual layout shows individual building pads. Since the elevation is not scaled, this is difficult to determine. The Applicant shall clarify how the scale of the proposed commercial building will work within the proposed plat at the P&Z Commission hearing. Staff support§ the single multi-tenant building concept (versus six individual pads) and recommends the conceptual plan be re- configured to demonstrate such a layout. The diagrams below are used simply to illustrate the concepts staff encourages and discourages. The applicant may submit a different conceptual site plan that addresses the comments. DISCOURAGED ENCOURAGED · Individual, separated pad sites · Auto-oriented Does not match submitted elevation · Parking lot is in front of main entrances · Designed like a"conventional" office park · Parking si~anificantly interrupts pedestrian routes to the offiged¢ommorcial stmgO2r~ · Row-type multi-tenant structures · Pedestrian-oriented, but ag~ommodatgs autos, too. · Matches submitted elevation · Parking lot is in the rear of the buildings · Desigued like a miniature "tmditiorml' main street parking minimslly interrupts pedestrian routes to the Ot~Ce/comm©IciM struc'tur~ The applicant has proposed several uses be allowed in the office/commercial area without a Conditional Use Permit (see page 4 of the PD application). Staffdoes not support Child Care AZ-02-(}O6, Pl) -02.007, CUF02..Q0~ liedtala Commms. AZ. PP.CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 16 Centers be allowed without a CLIP. We also recommend no drive through facilities be permitted in this area. The Applicant shall submit a more detailed definition of the last bullet, "Service related to the neighborhood" at the P&Z Commission hearing for further discussion. Until further discussion occurs at the P&Z Commission and Staff has further opportunity to review the commercial layout, we do not support any uses be permitted outright in Lots 3-6, Block 3. However, should a layout agreement be reached, certain uses may be permitted without a CUP if they comply with the conceptual plan. Said uses should be detailed within the Development Agreement. SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS {Conditional Use Permit) Applicant shall meet all of the requirements of the preliminary plat as a cOndition of the Conditional Use Permit. All Child Care facilities will require a CUP application and no drive through facilities will be allowed within the office/commercial area of the project. Additionally, a detailed list of approved and conditional uses shall be included in the Development Agreement. The Applicant is proposing a Community Center on Lot 1, Block 23 and a gazebo on Lot 1, Block 9. However, no plot plan of the lots was provided nor when the structures will be constructed. The Applicant shall state during which phase of the subdivision the community center and gazebo will be constructed and a time, to be agreed upon by the City, included in the Development Agreement. Staff recommends the community center be constructed and receive a C.O. prior to 50°/6 of the subdivision's residential lots receiving final occupancy. A plot plan of the lot shall be submitted with a future Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the structure. The swimming pool shall be fenced. The gazebo and improvement of Lot 1, Block 9 should occur prior to final occupancy of any lots within that phase. All office or commercial uses proposed within the development not specifically listed in the Development Agreement shall be required to apply for a conditional use permit for a planned development prior to construction. At least 10 days prior to the next public hearing, the Applicant shall submit an open space calculations breakdown, listing which lots were included in the open space calculation shown on the face of the preliminary plat. Open space must exclude all required street buffers. All development shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. No building permits shall be issued within the development until a Final Plat has been recorded for the subdivision. Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 17 COMPREI~F~NSIVE PLAN POLICIES The subject property is located in an area designated as Mixed Residential in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The 1993 Comprehensive Plan contains a variety of goals and policies that are relevant to this application. Staff has selected the following sections that most directly apply to the proposed project. Goals Section Goal 4: To provide housing oppommities for all economic groups within the community. Goal 8: To establish compatible and efficient use of land through the use of innovative and functional site design. Goal 3: To encourage the kind of economic growth and development which supplies employment and economic self-sufficiency for existing and future residents, reduces the present reliance on Boise and strengthens the City's ability to finance and implement public improvements, services, and its open space character. Goal 8: To establish compatible and efficient use of land through the use of innovative and functional site design. Goal 9: To encourage a balance of land use patterns to insure that revenues pay for services. Economic Development 1.1 The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere that encourages.., commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. 1.3 The character, site improvements and type o£new commercial or industrial developments should be harmonized with the natural environment and respect the unique needs and features of each area. 1.5 Strip industrial and commercial uses are not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 3.1U - Approve quality housing projects that meet the needs of all economic levels. 3.2U - Encourage efforts to develop and maintain quality neighborhoods and housing... Land Use 1.10U Promote the design of attractive roadway entryway areas into Meridian which will clearly identify the community. 2.1U - Support a variety of residential categories for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities. 2.4U - Encourage sidewalks and paved streets for all existing neighborhoods... 4.3U Encourage new commercial development in under-utilized existing commercial areas. 5.9 The integrity and identity of any adjoining residential neighborhood should be preserved through the use of buffering techniques, including screen plantings, open space and other landscaping techniques. 5.12 Strip development within this mixed-use area is not in compliance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 5.13 Clustering of uses and controlled access points along arterials and collector streets will be required. AZ42-006, PP -02407, C'UI~-007 ~ C~mms. ,~. PP.CUP/PD Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council April 16, 2002 Page 18 Community Design 1.3 Open space areas within all development should be encouraged. 1.4 Major entrances to the City should be enhanced and emphasized. Unattractive land uses along these entrances should be screened from view. 2.1U Require businesses and government to install and maintain landscaping. 2.3U Encourage the beautification of streets, parking lots...etc. 6.2U - Pedestrian access connectors will be required in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood identity. 6.11U - Promote well-planned and well-designed affordable housing in all Meridian neighborhoods. Transportation Chapter 1.19U - Encourage proper design of residential neighborhoods to ensure their safety and tranquility. 1.18 - As Planned Development methods and standards are implemented by the City of Meridian, variations pertaining to planned development - maximum density, dimensional standards, and other requirements - shall not exceed 25% of the existing requirements, and shall be recommended when one or more of the Planned Development design and developmental objectives are met. RECOMMENDATION Staff'strongly supports the mixed-use and compact principles of this development. We support the mix of housing sizes and lot sizes and the pedestrian-friendly nature of the narrow streets with detached sidewalks and the alley-loaded blocks. The primary finding that Staff'recommends the P&Z Commission and Council particularly consider is "C' under the Conditional Use Permit section. Special discussion will need to take place regarding the proposed narrow street sections. We point out that ACI-ID's approval of the narrower street sections is contingent upon the Meridian Fire Department appwval. Further discussion is also needed regarding E. Heron's Crossing Drive and the existing ingress- egress easement and how the existing property owner's access will be accommodated. The design and layout of the proposed o~ce/commercial area needs particular discussion to ensure a pedestrian-friendly area, in line with the principles set forth in the balance of the project. Assuming agreement can be reached on this matters, Staff recommends approval of the Annexation and Zoning, PD and Preliminary Plat applications with the conditions noted above. MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT Station 1 540 E. Franklin Road Meridian, ID 83642 208-888-1234 Fax 208-895-0390 Station 2 2401N. Ten Meridian, ID; Fax 208-855. RECEIVED APR 1 8 2002 City Of Meridian City Clerk Office Fax: Pages: Phone: Date: Re: CC: Urgent ~) For Review I~ Please Comment l-I Please Reply E] Please Recycle · Comments: Meridian Fire Department Joseph Silva Depmy Chief Meridian Fire Department 5401:. Franklin Rd. Meridian, Id 836a2 (2os) Fax (208) 895,0390 April 16, 2002 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Meridian Planning & Zoifing Conunissio~ RECEIVEI APR 18 2002 City Of Meridian City Clerk Office The following will be the requirements and/or concerns to provide minimum levels of fn'e protection for the proposed project: 1. One and two family dwellings will require a fire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for a duration of 2 hours to service the entire project Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 400' apart. 1997 UFC Appendix IlI-A 2. Operational tim hydrants and temporary or permanent street signs are required before combustible construction begins. UFC 901.4.2 & 901.3 3. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will bc by the Meridian Water Department. 4. Final Approval of fl~e fire hydrant locations shall be by file Meridian F/re Department. 5. All radfi shall be 28' inside and 48' outside radius for all internal roads. 6. Insure that all yet undeveloped p~cels are maintained free of combustible vegetation per section 1103.2.4 of the Uniform Fire Code. 7. Thc wadways shall bc built to Ada Count), Highway Standards with a minimum clear street width of 20'. All 29' wide streets shall have restricted parking to one side. All 33' wide street sections shall also be posted no parking on one side to prevent encroachment on the required cleat' width of 20'. UFC 902.2.1 8. The proposed 273-1ot subdivision with an estflmted 2.9 residents pen' household would have a total estimated population of 791 residents at build out. According to a report completed by Fire & Emergency Services Consulting Group hi February of 2000 our requests for sen, icc are projected to reach 2800 in the year 2005 and 3800 by th~ year 2010, this is up from 2069 respOnses in thc year 2000. APR 18 '02 1J:53 8950390 PAGE.02 ,~pri116, 2002 Page 2 9. The proposed project lies outside the five.minute response zoue goal. Achievement of this goal is subject to budgetary constraints and is intended to enhance the probability of a favorable outcome on a request for Basic Life Support. The budget constraints are typically defined as capital outlay for facilities that are located within 1.5 miles from a given location and sufficient operational funds to staff the facilities. 10. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have a turn around. I 1. The Meridian would support the strict application of the Uv_iform Building Code for sideyard setbacks in Blocks 7, 8, 11,12 with no variances. This would lirmt the potential fn'e spread from building to building in those blocks. 12. The alleys in Blocks 7, 8, 11,12 have signed on each end stating "Fire Lane No P:u'king". 13. The driveway leading to the two lots on E Heron Crossing Dr at Heritage Green Way shall be 20' with not parking.