The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMemo from PlanningProject: Tree Farm and Jayker RECEIVEI MAR 13 1007 City of Meridian Location: north side of Chinden Boulevard, approximately %2 mile east of Black Cat Road City Clerk Office extending east to approximately Ten Mile Road (if it were extended north across Chinden Blvd). Applications: DA Modification and preliminary plat Highlights of Proposed Development:: PP approval of 277 single-family residential building lots, 27 common lots and 1 commercial/common lot (which will contain the proposed community center) in the existing R-2, R-8, R-15 and C-N zones. All of the homes within the development are proposed to be single-family, and can broken down into the following categories: 28.2% (78 building lots, R-2) estate homes; 33.6% (93 building lots, R-8) single family detached housing; and 38.2% (106 building lots, R-15) lifestyle housing (attached units). There is a great range of lot sizes being proposed, with lots as large as 29,000 square feet and as small as 4,000 square feet. Approximately 39.1 acres (27%) of the site is being set aside for open space. Gross Residential Density: 1.93 dwelling units per acre. A number of stub streets are also proposed as part of this development. The recommendation includes relocating two of these stub streets. Both are to the Henkel property —a 25.85 acre non- farm subdivision open space lot. Silverlace Drive stubs to the east and King Maple Avenue stubs to the south. Staffs (City and ACHD) have asked the applicant to shift the stub street coming from north of the Henkel property approximately 100 feet to the west to offset Double Eagle Lane. Staff also has concerns about the proposed location of the Sliverlace Drive stub street. Because the stub street is only located 300 feet from the northern property line, it appears that any future redevelopment of the Henkel property would result in block lengths that exceed the 750 foot maximum in the UDC. To avoid this scenario, staff recommends that the stub street shift south approximately 200 feet. DA Modification: At the time this property was annexed and zoned the applicant did not have a detailed plat design that depicted the exact location of roads and lots within the development. Due to that lack of detailed information, the zoning district boundaries were drawn as a "best guess" based on future development plans and the approved concept plan for this site. Now that those more precise locations are identified (through the current preliminary plat application) staff and the applicant believe it is necessary to "clean up" the zoning designations to more accurately reflect the specific development that is proposed with the current preliminary plat application. Realigning the zoning district boundaries so that they do not bisect lots has various benefits including but not limited to: 1) The setback requirements and use restrictions, as described in the UDC, are clear and not confused by dual zoning designations; 2) The tax designation of the lot is not skewed by an inconsistent zoning designation. Furthermore, UDC 11-1-5C1 states that where a district boundary approximately follows a property line, such property line shall be construed as the district boundary. Staff believes that zoning district boundaries should coincide with the proposed property (lot) lines or the center lines of the streets adjacent to said properties. Due to the fact that the zoning boundaries are only being adjusted slightly, and that revised boundaries would still be generally consistent with the approved concept plan for this property, staff in consultation with the applicant and the legal department, determined that a standard rezone application would not be necessary in this situation. In place of the rezone application, we felt that the most effective and efficient way to adjust the zoning boundaries would be through a modification of the original development agreement on this property. Through this request to modify the original development agreement, the applicant has submitted new zoning legal descriptions that adjust the boundary lines to coincide with property lines or the center lines of streets. NOTE: If the subject DA agreement is approved, new zoning ordinances will have to be recorded for the subject property. Elevations: No (They are part of the DA.) Commission Recommendation: approval at February 1, 2007 public hearing. Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Gary Henkel, Sherry Ewing, Tuck Ewing, Linda Lazaris ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Written testimony: None Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. Access to properties served by Basco Lane ii. Crossing of the Phyllis Canal; and, iii. Location of the stub streets to the Henkel property to the east Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: Modified conditionl .1.11 to allow the 10 foot pathway along Chinden to be placed within the ITD preserved right of way area. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: none known. Written Testimony since Staff Report: none. Notes: Project: Jayker Subdivision (PP-06-0058) Location, size of Rroprty and existing zoning The applicant, Treehaven, LLC, has applied for preliminary plat approval of 277 single-family residential building lots, 27 common lots and 1 commercial/common lot (which will contain the proposed community center) in the existing R-2, R-8, R- 15 and C-N zones. The site is located on the north side of Chinden Boulevard, approximately %2 mile east of Black Cat Road extending east to approximately Ten Mile Road (if it were extended north across Chinden Boulevard). Adjacent Land Use and Zoning 1. North: Phyllis Canal; Rural residential; Agricultural, zoned RR and RI (Ada County) 2. East: One -acre lots in Spurwing Subdivision and WestWing Subdivision, zoned RR (Ada County) 3. South: Several rural properties in Ada County, zoned RUT (Ada County) 4. West: Agricultural and rural residential, zoned RR (Ada County) Applications: Preliminary Plat Overall Project Description & Subdivision Information: 1. Residential Lots: 277 2. Non-residential Lots: 1 (commercial/common lot, which will contain the proposed community center) 3. Total Building Lots: 277 4. Common Lots: 27 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots: 305 7. Gross Density: 1.94 units per acre Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: The applicant is proposing to construct various public streets as part of this project. Two collector streets are planned for this development, Tree Farm Boulevard and Jayker Way. Tree Farm Boulevard, which acts as the main entry into this development, intersects with Chinden Boulevard at the half mile point between Ten Mile Road and Black Cat Road. Jayker Way runs through the center of the development and continues along the northern boundary of the subject preliminary plat. Jayker Way is proposed to have an eight foot wide sidewalk along the north side of the street and no side walk on south side of the street (see section 10 for a more detailed analysis of Jayker Way). A number of stub streets are also proposed as part of this development. These stub streets include: Jayker Way (stubs to the west, future phase of this development); Jayker Way (stubs to the north, Teco One Property, parcel # 50422314800; Silverlace Drive (stubs to the east, Henkel property, parcel #R9323930190); and, King Maple Avenue (stubs to the south, Henkel property, parcel #R9323930190). Landscaping: 1. Width of street buffer(s): Per City Code (UDC 11-2A) and the Comprehensive Plan, a 35-foot wide landscape street buffer is required adjacent to Chinden Boulevard, an entryway corridor. Per the UDC a 20-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to the proposed collector streets Tree Farm Boulevard and Jayker Way.. .2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: N/A 3. Percentage of site as open space and any amenities: 39.1 acres (27 %) 4. Open space and pathways: Various pathways are included with this proposing including multiuse pathways along Jayker Way and Chinden Boulevard. Comprehensive Plan Designation "Medium Density Residential", "Low Density Residential", and a small portion is designated "Mixed Use Community". Compliance with Comprehensive PlanYes Compliance with UDC: Yes History of Previous Actions: This area was previously annexed and zoned as part of the Tree Farm Annexation (AZ-06-004). As part of that annexation, the property owner was required to enter into a development agreement for this property, which is recorded in the Office of the County Recorder as instrument number 106151218 on September 21, 2006. As part of that development agreement the applicant agreed to develop this area in general compliance with the conceptual plan that was submitted with the annexation application. The subject preliminary plat is the first phase of development in this area, which encompasses the eastern portion of the conceptual plan. Elevations: No Other: As currently depicted on the preliminary plat there are several lots within the proposed subdivision that are split between two zoning districts. At the time this property was annexed and zoned the applicant did not have a detailed plat design that depicted the exact location of roads and lots within the development. Due to that lack of detailed information, the zoning district boundaries were drawn as a "best guess" based on future development plans. Now that those more precise locations are identified (through the subject preliminary plat) staff believes it is necessary to "clean up" the zoning designations to more accurately reflect the specific development that is proposed with the subject plat. The recommended solution to this issue is described at length in the staff report. Outstanding Issues) for Commission Condition 1.1.11 should be amended to allow the 10 foot wide pathway to be placed within the preserved right-of-way area (the 90-100 feet from the centerline of Chinden Boulevard). It was not until after the print deadline for the staff report that ITD affirmed that the pathway could be located in the preserved right-of-way area. Staff Recommendation: Staff is recommending approval of the proposed Jayker Subdivision P-06- 058) with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. Notes: