HomeMy WebLinkAboutSutherland Farm PP 02-004June 17, 2002 PP 02-004
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING June 20, 2002
APPLICANT Sutherland Farm, Inc. ITEM NO. 5
REQUEST Confined Public Hearing from May 16, 2002 - Request for Preliminary Plat approval of
308 building lots and 30 other Iofs on 127.64 acres in a proposed L-O, C-G and R-4 zones for
proposed Sutherland Farm -- east of South Eagle Road and north of East Victory Road
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
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:
OTHER:
Contacted:
See Previous Item Packet
See/~emorandum of Understanding with Sutherland Farms & Sassers
Date: Phone:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian.
06/~7/02
14:59
J-U-B ~IG.
BOISE
~O01/OOZ
FP, OM:
DAI'~
CC:
MEMORANDUM
{V~TDIAN PLANNTNG AND ZONING COMN~}$$ION
~rlr~ ~,s~d to I,,-i~t ~u~cdou uound d~ babmcu cd' the boundmry, we ,n~e~[ n~c vhe
Commission include a a~ndition oirspp~oval l/miring homes zo s single story' on Lot~ 8 ~c 9, Block 16
~nd Lot 19, Block 15 m pr~s~vc dsc vieu~ of ndghbo~in~ p~opc~dff.
JUN 17 '02 15:18 888 6854 PAGE.O1
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Thi~ Memorandum of Undezstandhg tn hereby entered/nto between the developer of
5uR~.rland Farm Subdivision, ~Uth,~rl~.~ F~'rn/m.(Developer), and Mx G~le
('Pr~ Owner), the owner of real property adjoining gutherhnd Farm Subdivision at a
common boundary beginning ~t V'ictox7 Road and extending north approximately 730 feet to a
point, thence ~,ndiag east approxirnnt~ly 300 feet to a point.
Th~ parti~ agre~ that it is tn tl~ir mulual interest to a~ to a design treatment for their
common boundary prior to comtraction of the d~velopmr, nt. To that end, both parties
agrge that thr following elements con~tinu, e a mutually acceptable design for the common
boundary between Sutherland Farm Subdivision and the Sasser prol~rty:
·
A restrict/on to ~tngle story homes on Lots 12, 13, & 14; Block 9 (to tl~ north of tl~
Sa.~er property) and Lots 5 & 6; Block 9 (~o the west of r.~ Sass~ pzoperty);
An eight foot cedar fence alon~ the entire I~'ngth of the western and notmhcm property
boundaries;
Both parties agree to exmnsivc landscaping on their re,~pectiv~ sides of the property line
consisting of e d,.-n~e mixture of ~vergreen and d~ciduous ~'ee~. The developer intrnds
to install a staggered, double row of fazt~ and $1ov~r growing tr~¢s, to be
professionally des{geed. The partirs will contifl,,,, to Woflc together to develop a
mutually a~c~ptable hnd,~l~ plan for the property line',
· * An increased rear setback of ~ feet (30') for lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8; Block 9.
B.qth partiez furt~ agr~ that no additional mea,ures are warrant~ r.o ensure compatibility
and that the preceding d~ign elen~ should bc includ~ withia thc Condittom of Approval
imposed upon the drvdopment by the City of Merid/an.
~8s)5 ~dr~ Lane
Mefl~ian, ~ 83642
Gale Sasser
3516 E. Victory Road
Meridian, ID 83642
~l~hnm~f~ll~.~oj~.tMmn~,r~&t.~116'7{l~Ad,nin~Sl.or M0tLda¢
888 ~854 PAGE.02
May 13, 2002
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING
APPLICANT Sutherland Farm, Inc.
May 16, 2002
ITEM NO. 6
PP 02-004
REQUEST Contined Public Hearing from April 4, 2002 -- Request for Preliminary Plat approval of
308 building lots and 3O other lots on 127.64 acres in a proposed L-O, C-G and R-4 zones for
proposed Sutherland Farm -- east of South Eagle Road and nodh of East Victory Road
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
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:
OTHER:
Contacted:
See Previous Item Packet
Date: Phone:
Materials presented at public mee#ngs shall become properly of the City of Meridian.
Sharon Smith
From: Dave McKinnon [mckinnod(~ci.meridian.id.us]
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 2:05 PM
MAY I 6 2002
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY CLERK
06- i & -o~
To: 'Sharon Smith'; William G. Berg Jr.; 'Daren Fluke'; jcenters~mandtbank.com; 'Shari Stiles'; Steve
Dear Commissioners,
It looks like I made a mistake on the Sutherland Farms Staff Report.
Beginning on page three (p.3) of the staff report, I wrote down all of the general standards applicable to zoning
amendments (MCC 11-15-11) in Bold with staff analysis in normal font. For some reason I neglected to include
two of the standards (B and C of the actual sections of 11-15-11) in the staff report. The two standards are as
follows, and should be included/inserted into the staff report:
Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the future;
Staff is unaware of any plans to re-zone the property in the future, and d°es not anticipate
receiving one in the future.
Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be developed in the fashion
that would be allowed under new zoning- for example, a residential area turning into a
commercial area by means of conditional use permits.
Staff finds that Sutherland farms will be developed in a manner that that will be allowed under the
new zoning and according to the Planned Development standards.
I am sorry about the mistake and any confusion that it may have caused.
Good luck with the meeting tonight.
Dave McKinnon
Planner II
5/16/02
May 11, 2002
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commissioners
33 E. Idaho
Meridian, ID 83642
OF MERIDIAN
CLERK OFFICE
Dear Commissioners:
We are writing to express our concerns over the proposed Sutherland Farms Subdivision
as it has been presented by the developer. Changes we would recommend are:
· Elimination of commercial and limited office development, since there is already
a surplus in the proximity of one square mile. Commercial and limited office
could be replaced by patio homes, retirement homes, townhoUSes and apartments,
more dense housing that could be located in the center of the subdivision.
· Density of single family detached dwellings should be no greater than 1.9 per acre
to make it more consistent with the adjacent subdivisions of Muir Woods and
Ranchos Los Altos.
· All lots adjacent to Ranchos Los Altos should be limited to single story homes, to
blend with the existing single story homes of Ranchos Los Altos, as well as to
protect and respect the investment and mountain view of existing homes.
· The land that was recently built up 6 to 8 feet east ofKnapp Ln. and adjacent to
Ranchos Los Altos, should be lowered to its original elevation, level with the
pastureland to the west and south of it. Please see photos enclosed. At the
current elevated height, total mountain view will be obstructed by any new
construction of homes.
· Berms and attractive fencing should be constructed along the south border of the
development, bordering Ranchos Los Altos subdivision. The natural flow of our
flood irrigated fields flows directly onto Sutherland Farm, and a berm would help
protect their homes. Another main concern is the increased liability due to people,
especially children, trespassing onto our property. There is risk of drowning in
existing ponds and pools, as well as injury from livestock. Hopefully proper
fencing and caution stated in their development covenants would address these
dangerous possibilities.
· Existing waterways and ponds should be retained in their present natural state and
developed into park-like settings to enhance the development.
Please
thoughtfully planning the quality of life for those to come.
assist us in preserving the peaceful quality of life of our current home, as well as
Sincerely,
Beverly K,~
Scott H. Pressman, M.D.
April 1,2002
PP 02-004
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING April 4, 2002
APPLICANT Sutherland Farm, Inc. ITEM NO. 8
REQUEST Public Hearing - Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 308 building lots and 30 other
lots on 127.64 acres in proposed L-O, C-G and R-4 zones for proposed Sufherland Farm - east of
South Eagle Road and north of East Victory Road
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEFT:
SANITARY SERVICE:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
"No Remarks"
See attached Comments
See attached Comments
See attached Comments
See atfached Petitions from neighbors
Maferldb presented at public meetings shall become properly of ttm Oily of Meridian.
Joint School !strict No. 2
911 Meridian Street · Meridian, Idaho (208) 888-6701 · Fax (208) 888-6700
SUPERINTENDENT
Christine H. Donnell
February 28, 2002
RECEIVED
NAR- 20O2
City of Meridisn
City Clerk Offiee
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 Sutherland Farm Subdivision will have a significant impact on school
enrollments at Lake Hazel Elementary. Lake Hazel Middle. and Meridian High School.
We can predict that these homes, when completed, will house eighty-nine (89) elementary
aged children, eighty-one (81) middle school aged children, and sixty-seven (67) 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 Bigharfi
Supervisor of Facilities and Construction
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Diane Anderson · Rex Harrison · Wally Hedrick · Holly Houfourg · David Wynkoop
-(/~ CENTRAL
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT
Environmental Health Division :E]:)
""*"'"'"' RECEIV
Rezone # t4AR 1 8 gg?
Conditional Use #
..~eliminarv) Final/Short Plat
--~.._.___ --
j jt~ ot Meridian
ty Clerk
Return to:
I~ Boise
CI Eagle
I~ Garden City
,~;~eridian
CI Kuna
C~ ACZ
I~ Star
02.
03.
04.
05.
06.
07.
011.
1~12.
1~13.
We have No Objections to this Proposal.
We recommend Denial of this Proposal.
Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be pm'vidal before we can comment on this Proposal.
We will require mom data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment.
Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require mom data concerning the depth of:
O high seasonal ground water [3 waste flow characteristics
O or bedrock from odginal gradeC3 other
This office will require a study to assess the impact of nutrients and pathogens to receiving ground waters and/or
surface waters.
This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and
water availability.
After written
_, approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this prOposal for:
~!L. central sewage C} community sewage system O community water well
g3 intedm sewage ~central water
C3 individual sewage C} individual water
The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare,
Division of Environmental Quality:
~L~entral sewage C3 community sewage ~ Q community water
CI 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 he determined if other
considerations indicate approval.
If restroom facilities am to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State
Sewage Regulations.
We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any:
O food establ~hmant O swimming!pools or spas [3 child cam center
O beverage establishment O grocery store
Date: 3.~/~ / ~_~_2.~
Reviewed By:
Review Sheet
CENTRAL
DISTRICT
DEPARTMENT MAIN OFFICE. 707 N. ARMSTRONG PL. ' BOISE, ID 83704-0825 · (208) 375-5211. FAX 327-8500
To preveat and treat disease attd disability; to protnote healthy lifestyles; and to protect attd protnote the health attd quality of our environment.
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 Guideboolc
Prepared by City of Boise Public Works Department, May 2000.
Ada / Boise County Office
707 N. Armsrong Pl.
Boise, ID 83704
Enviro, Health: 327-7499
Family Planning: 327-7400
Immunizations: 327-74,50
Senior Nutrition: 327-7460
WIC: 327-7488
FAX: 327-8500
Serving Valley, Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties
Ada-WlC Satellite Office Elmore 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: 334-3355 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
To~
'xDe~opers of Suthe~arm Subdivision, Meridian, Idaho
C/o lV~l~aren ~ Planning Associate
J-U-B En~e~s, Inc.
250 So~k'Bee"c~ood Ave., Suite 201
Boise,'ID 83709-09~
From:
Neighbors adjacent to proposed Sutherland Farm Subdivision
(Names, addresses, and phone numbers are attached. Contact
persons: Spregg and Joyce Roundy, 4178 Los Altos Dr.,
Meridian, ID 83642. Phone (208) 362-9828)~.
Subject: Requests and Suggestions regarding .Sutherland Farm Subdivision
Date: January 26, 2002
After the January 17 neighborhood meeting held by Mr. Fluke, those who
attended that meeting were invited to further discuss and "solidify" some of
their desires regarding Sutherland Farm. Those of us who chose to come,
met at the Roundy home Thursday, January 24, 2002, for this purpose.
We respectfully submit the attached requests and suggestions resulting fi:om
this meeting and to which all those attending agreed.
There were many neighbors who could not attend the meeting, yet voiced
some of our same concerns. We will be circulating this document and
obtaining their signatures in the form of a petition, which we shall forward
to you.
. Our signatures follow.
MEETING OF NEIGHBORS ADJACENT TO
SUTHE~~ FARMS SUBDIVISION
THURSDAY, JANUARY 24, 2002
We submit the following requests and suggestions to the
Developer of Sutherland Farms Subdivision:
e
Provide a major north-south traffic artery into the heart of this
"landlocked" subdivision, going through the (future) commercial
development and feeding traffic onto Overland Rd.
'Such traffic arteries have been required at other subdivisions, such as
Bristol Heights and Hiawatha, and have added to the desirability of
these subdivisions.
This artery would carry traffic in the direction it would naturally flow
to reach the I~eeway, hospital, grocery stores, etc., reducing need for
traveling on Eagle Road, which is already overloaded.
Also, such an artery would reduce the need for Sutherland residents to
use Muir Wood Subdivision as their route of travel.
We find the exit throueh Muir Wood objectionable. However, it
would be less so if
~a) the density of dwellings near Muir Wood were less, and if
b) there were more exits from Suthefland, such as the one suggested
in item # 1, above.
Eliminate commercial/limited office development from Sutherland
Farms.
Since there is abundant commercial/limited office development going
in nearby, there is a) no need for more, and b) it would add to traffic
congestion on Eagle Rd. And Eagle Rd. akeady is almost impossible
to travel'at some times of day!
m
To compensate for the revenue that commercial/limited office
building would bring to the developer, we would suggest replacing it
· Patio homes
· Retirement homes
· Townhouses.
Density ofsingle family detached dwellings be no greater than 1.9 per
acre.
Sutherland is adjacent to Muir Woods on the east, whose density is
1.9 dwellings per acre. On the south and west, Sutherland is adjacent
to dwellings that sit on 2-5 acres each!
Sutherland lots adjacent to existing 2- to 5-acre lots be no smaller than
½ acre each, and be limited to only single story dwellings.
Without such limitations property value of the existing homes on 2- to
5-acre lots would be severely decreased by more dense building and
by obstruction of view.
To compensate for lower density of homes in the east and south parts
of Sutherland, we suggest more dense dwellin~ a) On the north side
of Sutherland, along the canal and adjacent to Silverstone commercial
development, b) along Eagle Rd. (see item #2, above), and c) toward
the center of Sutherland development. These more dense dwellings
could be townhouscs, patio homes, retirement homes, and houses on
smaller lots. Clustering of some of these around open spaces and
waterways could be very appealing.
The home of Gale and Sherry Sasse~' is under construction on a 5-acre
lot, facing Victory. Rd., south of Sutherland development. As the
plans for Sutherland are now drawn, the Sass,rs' home will be
bordered by 13 honses on small lots! This is far from a gradual
transition in lot sizes!
We ask that the Sassers' property be surrounded by lots no smaller
than ½ acre each. limited to a single story heist, and that berms and
attractive fencing be placed between Sassers and their Sutherland
neighbors.
e
Farm land in the south part of Sutherland, east ofKnapp Ln., was
built up 6-8 feet a few years ago by bringing in soil to improve flow
of irrigation water. If houses are built on the present ground height,
they will severely block the view of existing homes on the south side
of Sutherland, no matter how many stories the new homes may be.
We request that ground level be restored to its former height before
building begins.
We request berms and attractive fencing along the south side, between
Sutherland development and the 2- to 5-acre lots adjoining it there.
There is one exception: The beautiful home of Beryl Holtry was built
· very close to his north property line, to maximize his present view of
fields, ponds, and mountains. A berm along his property line would
completely block any remaining view. Therefore, we request fencing,
but no berming along the Holtry property line. (See attached map.)
A very practical reason for fencing is to prevent dangerous trespassing
onto properties with animals, ponds, and several swimming poo!s.
At present along the south side of Sutherland there is a large pond
resulting from irrigation drainage. This pond, with the trees around it
and the wildlife it attracts, could be an attractive part of Sutherland
subdivision. We would like to see this pond, the natural drainage
waterways, and the trees remain and be enhanced to add beauty to the
proposed subdivision. Then we existing residents can continue to
enjoy them as well.
10.In the present plans for Sutherland, there is a barricade
proposed where Knapp Ln. meets Sutherland. We would prefer a cul-
de-sac at that point in the Sutherland development instead of a
barricade. Surely a cul-de-sac would be more appealing than a
barricade, to residents of Sutherland also.
11. In the present plans the southernmost exit from Sutherland
onto Victory Rd. will direct traffic toward the front yard, front
window and front door of a house directly across Victory Rd., the
home of Rodney and Amber Reyes (3465 S. Victory). We request
that this exit be altered to cause no such unpleasant circumstances for
existing homes.
12.The home of Herb and Kathleen Papenfuss is at 2680 Eagle Rd. The
road entering Suthefland Farms from Eagle Rd. will run along the
southern border of their property (see map). This road will probably
be named Easy Jet. We request that the Papenfuss property have
access to Easy Jet. so that they can enter or exit their property by way
of Easy Jet.
/
/
/
/
!ti
Ill ~lli
RECEIVED
City of Meridian
City Clerk Office
1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395
FAX # 208-463-0092
19 March 2002
Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S.
J-U-B Engineers, Inc.
250 S. Beechwood Ave., Suite 201
Boise, ID 83709
Phones: Area Code 208
OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861
SHOP: Nampa 466-0663
RE: Land Use~ange Al~pi[~[i°n Z S~therl~nd Fa-r~nsUb~iivisiOh
Dear Mr. Lee:
Enclosed please find a Land Use Change Application for your use to file with the Irrigation
District for its review on the above-referenced development. If this development is under a
"rush" to be finalized, I would recommend that you submit a cashier's check, money order or
cash as payment of the fees in order to speed the process up. If you submit a company or
personal check, it must clear the bank before processing the application.
Should this development be planning a pressure urban irrigation system that will be owned,
operated and maintained by the Irrigation District, I strongly urge you to coordinate with John P.
Anderson, Water Superintendent for the Irrigation District, concerning the installation of the
pressure system. Enclosed is a questionnaire that you must fill out and return in order to initiate
the process of contractual agreements between the owner or developer and the Irrigation
District for the ownership, operation and maintenance of the pressure urban irrigation system.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to call on me at the District's
office, or John P. Anderson, at the District's shop.
Sincerely,
Donna N. Moore, Asst. Secretary/Treasurer
NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
DNM/smc
CC:
enc.
File
Water Superintendent
Will Berg, Meridian City
Sutherland Farm, In~.~, PO Box 1338, Sa~.Mateo, CA-9440'['_
APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES
RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000
BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000
RECEIVED
2 ! 200
City of Meridian
City Cle~l;~Office
1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395
FAX # 208-463-0092
March 18, 2002
Phones: Area Code 208
OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861
SHOP: Nampa 466-0663
Will Berg, City Clerk
City of Meridian
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: PP 02-004 Preliminary Plat approval for proposed Sutherland Farm Subdivision
Dear Commissioners:
The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District requires that a Land Use Change/Site
application be filed. Please contact Ms. Donna Moore, Asst. Secretary/Treasurer at the
District's main office at 466-7861.
All laterals and waste ways must be protected and all municipal surface drainage must be
retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation
District must review drainage plans. The developer must comply with Idaho Code §31-
3805. It is recommended that irrigation water be made available to all developments
within the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District.
Sincerely,
:Bill Henson, Asst. Water Superintendent
NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
BH: din
Cc:
File- Shop
File - Office ·
~Water Superintendent
APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES
RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000
BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000
I
RECEIVED
Petition re. SOUTHERLAND FARM SUBDMSION
Eagle Rd., between Victory and Eagle.~AR 2 9 2002
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY CLERK OFFICE
We, the undersigned, make the following requests with
regard to the Southerland Farm subdivision, proposed to be
built on Eagle Rd., between Victory and Overland:
1. No commercial or office space be included south of the
canal becanse
---Already there are commercial/office de{,elopments
planned or being built nearby, and we see no need for
more; and"
---Already Eagle Rd. is overburdened with traffic, and
commercial/office development would make it worse.
Density of single family detached dwellings be no greater
than 1.9 per acre where adjacent to existing homes,
becanse
.... This would be a fair transition density from existing,
adjacent lot sizes, which are ½ to 5 acres each; and
.... This could lessen the number of trips through the
existing Muir Woods subdivision.
Limit to a single story, the height of homes adjacent to
existing homes to create an amicable transition, especially
where existing homes are single story.
ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPOSED
SUBDIVISION:
4. Return g~ound to its original level, 6-8 feet lower than at
present,.before building begins (it was raised by infilling a
few years ago).
5. Retain and integrate the existing pond, waterways, and
trees, to add beauty'to Southerland Farms and to maintain
some of the beauty that we in existing homes now enjoy.
M. AYOR
Robert D. Corrie
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Tammy deWeerd
Keith Bird
Chefie McCandless
W'flliam L. M. Nary
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208) 888-4433- FAX (208) 887-4813
City Clerk Office Fax (208) 8884218
t 0 q, ooo o
MEMORANDUM:
March 20, 2002
To:
From:
Re:
Mayor, City Council and Planning & Zoning Commission
David McKinn°n' Planner II ~ ~
Brace Freckleton, Senior Engineering Tech'
Sutherland Farm
· Annexation and Zoning of 127.64 Acres from RUT and R-1 (Ada County) to
R-4 (Low Density Residential) and C,G (General Retail and Service
Commercial Dist ct), by Sutherland F igc (Fa, No. , Z-02-004).
'.
· Preliminary Plat Appr°Val of.308 Building)Lots and 30 "Other" Lots on
127.64 Acres on Land ReqUested to be Rezoned to R-4 and C-G, by
Sutherland Farm, Inc (File No. PP-02-O04).
· A Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development to Allow a 20% Land
Use Exception (Office/High Density Uses in a Proposed R-4 Zone), Reduced
Lot Sizes, Reduced Frontage Requirements, Reduced Setbacks, Reduced
Home Sizes and to Exceed Block Length Requirements, by Sutherland Farm,
Inc (File No. CUP 02-00.9
We have reviewed the aforementioned applications and now offer the following comments,
as conditions of approval.' These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly
modified Or deleted by motion of the Meridian City Council:
APPLICATION SUMMARY
The Applicant, Sutherland Farm Inc., has requested the annexation and zoning 127.64 acres of
land adjacent to the east side of Eagle Road, and the north side of Victory Road. Approximately
eleven (11) acres of the subject property is located on the north side of the Ridenbaugh Canal.
The land is presently zoned RUT and R-1. The Applicant has requested that upon annexation, all
of the property south of the Ridenhaugh Canal be zoned R-4, and that all property to the north of
the canal be zoned C-G.
The Applicant's preliminary plat approval request is for 308 building lots (260 single-family
detached lots, 32 single-family attached lots (alley-loaded), 11 office/multiple family lots, and 5
commercial lots) and 30 other lots. The "other" lots include a four-acre park/pond area, a thirty-
foot wide pathway adjacent to the Ridenbaugh Canal, alleys, an irrigation lot, tot lots, and
AZ-02-004, PP-02-004, CUP02-005 Sutlm'imd F~nm AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 2
required landscaping. The five (5) commercial lots will be located north of the Ridenbaugh
Canal.
The Applicant has also requested approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned
Development in order to allow reduced development standards including reduced setbacks,
reduced lot size, reduced frontages, reduced dwelling sizes, and to allow the Applicant's request
to exceed block length requirements. The following is a side-by-side comparison of the City's
minimum requirements and the reduced requirements that have been proposed by the applicant:
Setbacks- City Requirements (1t.4) Proposed Setbacks (Townhomes)
Front: 20' Front: 10'
Rear: 15' Rear: 5'
S~de. 0 ?~'~
Side: 5'/per story ' · '
Street side: 20' Street side:..0'
Lot Size- City Requirements Proposed Lot Sizes ~.. ' : · ' '
R-4 zone: 8,000 sq.fL 3,829-5,711i~i~. ~;:(T6 .wnhouses)
Per Dwelling Unit 6,500 sq.fL (D~hed Single-family)
Lot Frontage-City Requirements ~'~"~'Proposed Frontage
80'minimum 42'.minimum (townhoUSe)
(Additional note: out of residential lOts do n0 ' m ii e, minimum R-4 standards)
Additionally, as part of th;'::'~]~;d development request, th; applicant has requested a twenty
percent (20%) land useexceptioii:.'io permit offic~multi-family housing and attached single-
family housing in the R4 zone. "~
The planned d~;ei0pment's ~nities ineiude ~ (2) tot lots, a four (4) acre park/pond area, a
pathway and an additional .open space/drainage lot.
The property~ north of the Ridenhaugh Canal (requested C-G zoning) is not a part of the Planned
Development request.
LOCATION ~
The property is located apProximately ½ a mile south of Overland Road on the east side of S.
Eagle Road. The property emends easterly along the Ridenbaugh Canal for approximately 3,600
feet. The southern boundary of the property provides access to Victory Road, approximately
1,000 feet east of the intersection of Eagle and Victory Roads.
SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
North:
South:
East:
Silverstone and Silverstone 1I, zoned C-C and C-G:
Rural residential properties, zoned RUT and R-1 (Ada County).
Muir Woods Subdivision, zoned R-4 (Ada County).
AZ-02-004, pp -02-004, CUP02.00$ Sutl~dand Farms AZ~ PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 3
West: Thousand Springs Subdivision, zoned
ANNEXATION & ZONING ANALYSIS
According to Ordinance 11-15-11, General Standards ~lpplicable 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 analys)s bY staff:
"A. 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 deSisnafionS,.~R-4 to south of the Ridenbaugh
Canal and C-G to the north of the Rid~nbaugh C~al, is harmonious with and in
accordance with the adopted Comprehe~n?'~y?~'Plan and Generalized Land Use
Map, which designates the land to be "Miied Residential" and "Single Family
Residential". -'" :::~'
Uthoush, the Schedule of Use:c6 ol: ccl -S2i) states that oray detached
single-family dwellings are permit{ed"~';~thin."the R-4 zone, the Planned
Developmenti~:i::;Ordinance allows?a mixture of different housing types,
(townhouses, dUpl6Xes and detached single2family dwellings) within a single
planned degelopment, regardless of, the underlying zone, so long as the overall
density °ftlie underlying zone is not exceeded (MCC12-6-4 A).
AcCOrdingly, the": overall deriSity of the residential portion of the planned
developmem is approximately three dwelling units per acre (292units + 97acres =
3.01 units/acre).
B. ltas 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 Slmilar to the proposed rezone area;
Staff finds that recent approval oftha annexation and zoning of Silverstone II on
the north side of the Ridenbaugh Canal would dictate that the adjacent property be
similarly zoned and developed (as proposed). The Canal provides a natural
buffer/separation between land uses.
Muir Woods Subdivision to the east has provided a stub-street at the Sutherland
Farm western property line in expectation of similar development.
AZ-02-004, Pp -02.004, ~2UP02-0~
AZ. PP.CUPfPD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 4
Ce
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;
De
Staff finds that general vicinity provides a mix of commercial uses and standard
to estate sized residential lots. The intended character of the vicinity, as noted on
the Generalized Land Use Map, is for mixed housing projects, detached single-
family lots and mixed uses north of the Ridenbaugh Canal. 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 fdisturbing or hazardous to the
neighboring uses. -. '
Staff does not anticipate that the proposed uses will be hazardous or disturbing to
future or existing neighbors. "
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, with the exception of water service. Computer
modeling indicates that. existing available fire flows and pressures will not be
adequate to serve the Planned Unit Development area. The City of Meridian will
be bringing a new supply well on line in the Silverstone project within the next
six to eight months, and with the development of the Silverstone project, a new
main will extend under the Ridenbaugh Canal. According to the computer model,
once these two items are complete fire flows and pressures will be adequate to
serve the higher demands of the PUD area.
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.
AZ-02-O04, Pp-02-O0~, CUP02-O0~ Suth~rland Farms.4Z PP. CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 5
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 on both Eagle and
Victory 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 proposed vehicular :'~ro~h-- on .Eagle Road aligns with the
existing entry into Thousand Springs SubdiVision, and should not appreciably
interfere with traffic on the surrounding streets. The other access (Victory) and
stub-streets provided for within the plat do not appear to be designed in a manner
that would create interference with traffic on surrounding streets.
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. The overall design of the subject
property includes a pathway adjacent to the Ridenbaugh Canal.
J.
Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of
Meridian. (Ord. 592, 11-17-1992)'
Stafffinds that the annexation of this property would be in the best interest of the
City by providing a variety of housing types, the addition of employment
opportunities and the creation of additional recreation facilities (pathways and a
community park).
ANNEXATION AND ZONING COMMENTS
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.
AZ.02-004, PP.-02-004, C~-005 Sulh~lnnd Fana~ AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 6
2. The requested zoning of R-4 and C-G 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.
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.
PRELIMINARY PLAT FINDINGS AND REOUIREMENTS
Sections 12-3-3 J.2 and 12-3-5 D read as follows: ,In determining the acceptance of a proposed
subdivision, the Commission/Council shall consider, ithe objectives of this title and 'at least the
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(gfpnblic services to accommodate the proposed development;
Staff finds that public services are available to accommodate the proposed subdivision.
c. The ¢ontinuity,:'of the proposed development with the capital improvement
program; ~
Staff finds that the Subdivisionwill not require the expenditure of capital improvement
d. The public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed
development;
Staff finds t~t~':"~e 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.
AZ-02-O04, pp-02-O04, CUP02-O05 Sutl~hnd Farms .AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 7
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
The preliminary plat has a number of blocks (9, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19) that exceed the 1,000 foot
maximum block length 0VlCC 12-4-5). However, because this plat is pan of a planned
development the Applicant has requested that they be allowed to exceed this section of Code
without the need for a variance.
After reviewing the preliminary plat in light of the requested block lengths, staff would feel
comfortable allowing the 1,000+ foot long block lengths if the following modifications are
included on a revised plat:
The addition of a micro-path, in accordance with the
· LaudScape~Ordinance, that runs
between Lots 4, 5 and Lotsl6 and 17 of Block 18..
· The addition of a micro-path, in accordance with the Landscape Ordinance, that
separates Lots 9 and 10 of Block 19. The ~cro-pathshall continue thOugh Lot 1 of
Block 19. ~'~:~.~:ii::'~.
Planning and Zoning staff have additional concerns wltli.;,ithe constmctton of homes that
effectively surround the proposed park ~0~ 54, Block 1) and:~?~ffice buildings that surround the
large open space/drainage lot located adjacent to thepathway in the northwest area of the project
(Lot 12, Block 1). Surrounding the open space with l/~ild~gs decreases the visual appeal of the
open space, reduces the accessibility of the Open sp'a~!:~t°..Jthose homeowners that do not live
adjacent to the open space, andmay create a safety risk, as the'~olice department will not be able
to view the open space from the public right-of-way.
Staff recommends that the Commission and the City Council consider reducing or eliminating
the seven (7) homes located on the southeast, corner of Lot 54, Block 1. The reduction or
elimination of the.hOuses would create larger, open and usable park for the entire subdivision
Staff further recommends that the Commission and Council consider increasing the visibility of
Lot 12, Block 1, by providing'additional open space along the east side of Lot 11, Block 1, or by
the requiring Lot 11 to become part of Lot 12 (thus increasing the visibility and amount of open
space provided)~ :':,'-: '~
·
SITE SPECIFIC coMMENTS Ivreliminarv ~)iat}
1. Sanitary sewer and water service to this site shall be via new main extensions from the
existing mains adjacent to the pwperty.
The submitted landscape plan includes conifers located in the requked street buffer along
Eagle Road. This is in violation of the Landscape Ordinance; however, staff supports the
inclusion of the pine trees at this location because conifers have been permitted as pan of
the Silverstone Corporate Center landscaping, immediately adjacent to the Sutherland
Farms project on Eagle Road.
AZ-02-0O4, pP-02.1104, CUP02.00$ Suflledand Faints AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 8
10.
ll.
Fencing details shall be submitted with the Final Plat application. Fencing adjacent to
pathways or the Private Park shall not be over three feet in height if constructed ora solid
material, and shall not be more than 4 feet in height if it is non-sight obscuring.
Performance specifications for the common area pressurized irrigation system shall be
submitted with the Final Plat application.
The addition of a micro-path, in accordance with the LandscaPe Ordinance, that runs
between Lots 4, 5 and Lots16 and 17 of Block 18.
The addition of a micro-path, in accordance with the Landscape Ordinance, that separates
Lots 9 and 10 of Block 19. The micro-path shall continue though Lot 1 of Block 19.
There shall be a minimum separation often (10)feet between unattached buildings.
Add a note to the face of the plat requiring all single family detached houses to provide a
minimum of 1,400 square feet of living space, ex~lfiain~ the garage.
The required landscaping and irrigation system on Victory 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
p nm-er--:'s. ' :" '"'"""' ~
The Applicant sh~ll coordinate pathway construction requirements along the Ridenbaugh
Canal with the City's Parks Director, Tom Kuntz
The applicant shall inordinate ACI-ID concerning the requirements and construction of
the Bridge over the Ridenbaugh Canal
GENERAL COMMENTS (ureliminarv ulat)
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.
Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department.
A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all fencing,
AZ-02-00,t, pp-02.004, CUP02-005 Suflt~dand F~uns AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 9
landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the
final plat.
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.
5. 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, excluding the Ridenbaugh Canal. 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.~..
6. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project Will have to be
removed from their domestic service per city0..r.,dinance Sections 9-1-4 andg-4-8. Wells
may be used for non-domestic purposes such ~:i~caPe: irrigation.
7. Slopes within drainage lots are notto exceed a ratio 6f3:1.
FINDINGS FOR USE EXCEPTIONS WITltlN A PLANNED DEvELOPMENT
MCC 12-6-3 '*Use Exceptions" require the CommissiOn:aiidCouncil to make the following
findings in order to authorize spec!tic 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)::
1. 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
complemehtarY to.the P~ary use.
Stafffinds that the office/multiple'family housing uses are strongly related to the primary use
of the d~elopment (R-4)~ The office uses will provide services (medical, dental, optical
etc...) that :~l! be complementary to the residents of the subdivision, and it will provide
employment Opportunities ~ well.
Staff finds that mUltiple'family housing adjacent to the higher density townhouses is
appropriate within the overall development of this subdivision. The mixing of residential
uses and commercial uses will encourage the office development to be constructed in a
manner that will be pedestrian friendly. High-density housing will provide an immediate
consumer base for the office development.
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.
AZ-02-004, PP-0~-004, cLrp02-005 Suthefland Fanta AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 10
Staff finds that the townhouse and the office/multiple-family housing uses are approximately
15.5% of the total area of land included in the planned development.
(32 townhouses * 4,271 sq. ft. average q- 43,560) + (11 office lots * 59,155sq. ft. average +
43560) --- 18.08 acres of land devoted to excepted uses.
18.08 acres of excepted uses + 116.6 gross area of planned development (in acres) * 100
15.5% of the planned development will be devoted to excepted uses.'
Staff finds that the size and intensity of the excepted uses is apProPriate for this location and
size of development · ~: .~.:~
3. 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. ,~ ~-~:?~i!i~ '!i;~,~
The townhouse use is projected as part of the first p~?gthe development and that the
office/multiple-family housing will be ,the final two ph~'~,.~tnff finds that upon completion
of the townhouses and detached singl~family dwellings, th~"l~sidents of the subdivision will
desire services that can be provided by later pha~s of this development.
4. The uses permitted by the exception nrc integrated into the overall project by:
a. Being located in proximity to and within convenient walking distance of the
primary uses.
Staff finds tl~at the office/multiple-family/townhouse uses will be within convenient
walking distance of the parkand open space provided within the residential
...development. -
.b. 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 though shared
vehicular access points. The applicant has provided a pathway system that wood
connect the excepted uses with the R-4 residential uses.
Providing pedestrian and bicycle pathway connections with the primary use
site.
Staff finds that the applicant has not provided pathway connections with the
commercial use.
Orienting buildings on the exception site to facilitate Vehicular and/or
pedestrian access from the primary use site.
Staff finds that the excepted uses are located in a manner that will facilitate
vehicular access fi.om the residential uses.
AZ.-02-004, PP -02-004, CUP02-00.~ ~ Fmms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 11
e. 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 is consistent throughout the development.
Architectural and building bulk concepts will be hard to maintain, as this is
primarily a residential neighborhood with a variety of lot sizes, housing options and
lot dimensions: The Commission and Council should determine what, if any,
architectural/design concepts should, be incorporated into all buildings within this
development.
5. The use(s) permitted by the exception are neighborh6°d or community serving in
size and character and not regional, and are not '~etrimental to adjacent
neighborhoods in location and character.
Staff finds that the office use is not regional :in'ii~ or character.
STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USES
The Commission and Council shall revieW the"!l~lar factSii~d circumstances of each
proposed conditional use in terms of the following and~y,appr°Ve a conditional use permit if
they shall find evidence pre~nted at the hearing(s)is adeqUate,to establish (11-17-3):
Ao
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
stafffinds thafthe subject'property is l~ge enough to accommodate the requested use
and all other required features~
Thatthe proposed ~ and de~'elopment plan will be harmonious with the Meridian
comp~hensive Plan.~d in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance;
The current COmprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the property as "Mixed
Residential and 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;
A~.02-004. PP-02-004, CUFO2-005 Suth~md Fanta A~ PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 12
Staff finds the design concept to be compatible with the intended character of the area.
The Generalized Land Use Map indicates that this area is intended for mixed residential
and single-family dwellings. The existing neighborhood to the southeast of this project is
currently large estate sized housing ranging in size from 2-5+ acres and the existing
neighborhood to the east is consists of approximately ¼ acre lots. All lots that area
adjacent to the east and southeast either meet or exceed the lot dimensions required by
the R-4 zone.
Ee
That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,
will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity;
Staff does not anticipate that the proposed project will :have an :adverse impact on the
surrounding property; however, the Commission and COuncil sh6uld consider any
testimony given at the public hearings before makin~g"~this finding...
That the proposed, use will be served adeqUhtely by ~sential public faciliti~ and
services such as hnghways, street, police, and'~ ProteCtion, drainage Structures,
refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person~'~POnsible for the establishment of
proposed conditional use shall be able to provide 'adequately any such services;
Staff finds that the proposed development canbe 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;
Staff finds 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.
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;
Stafffinds thatn° eXcessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors will result from
the proposed use.
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
ACffD report for additional information concerning this finding.
AZ-02-O04, PP -02-00~. CUPO~-OOJ
Smtt~tand From P,Z. PP,CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 13
I.
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. The Ridenbaugh Canal is to remain open and
improved with a pathway.
SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS ~Conditional Use Permit) ~
1. Applicant shall meet all of the requirements of the prelimin~rplat as a condition of the
Conditional Use Permit. ~:;~?
2. All office or multiple-family housing uses prop~l within the d%elopment shall be
required to apply for a conditional use permit for a planned development prior to
construction. ;"~' "';~'~:?:' :'~
3. No more than 101 building permits shall be Sutherland Farm Subdivision
until a secondary emergency vehicle access to is completed.
4. E. Easy Jet Drive shall be (includi~:i!.7~rbs, gutter, sidewalks,
landscaping, and irrigation prior) prior to the';~issu~ce of~ occupancy permit for any
building constructed within Phase five (5) of the SUbdivision. Additionally, all required
improvements adjacent;to Eagle Road shall be complete prior to occupancy of any
building within Phase Five (5) of the subdivision.
5. Ail site improvem¢~ (landScaping and irrigation) for the tour-acre park/pond area, and
the pathway (Lot ?5)'Connecting;the park/pond area to Eagle Road shall be complete
pri0r.tOl, tbe issuance of the l 0l't oCCUpancy permit within Sutherland Farm Subdivision.
The-aPplicant !'~l .be required to maintain the pond in a manner that will prevent the
water fi-om becoraing stagnant or public nuisance (a mosquito breeding ground).
6. Th~'::~¢maining secti°as of the pathway (east of the 4-acre park/pond area) shall be
develoPed, in accordance with the phasing schedule for the SUbdivision.
sha~
7. Ail devel°P~nt 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 this subdivision.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES
AZ-02-O04, PP-02.004, CU~240~ Smhedand F~nm AZ. PP,CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 14
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 :t6.finance and implement
public improvements, services, and its open space ~har~ter.
Goal 8: To establish compatible and efficient use ofla~hd 'thrOugh the'~e'of innovative and
functional site design. ~ ~' ~
Goal 9: To encourage a balance of land use patterns to insure that revenues pay for services.
~ ~ ::'2~,. :: '.. ~'
Economic Development
1.1 The City of Meridian shall m&e every effort t0'?::~eate a positive atmosphere that
encourages...commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian.~
1.3 The character, site improvements and type of new commercial or industrial developments
should be harmonized with the natural envir6nment and respect the unique needs and
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 oppOmmities.
2.4U - Encourage sidewalks and paved streets for all existing neighborhoods...
3.7 Industrial uses which'require the storage or the production of explosive or hazardous
materials should not be located near residential areas, and should conform to disposal,
spill and storage.meaSUres as outlined by the U.S. EPA.
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.
AZ-02-004, PP -02-004, CUP02-005 Sulheflmd F~ms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 15
5.14
Because these areas are near 1-84 and Franklin Roads, high-quality visual appearance is
essential. All development proposals in this area will be subject to development review
guidelines and conditional use permitting procedures.
Natural Resource & Hazardous Areas
2.1U Development along major drainage ways will be restricted to ensure that development
does not cause additional ground or surface water contamination.
3.1U Manage and prevent unsuitable uses along dralnageways and protect the flood plain of
creeks and drains.
3.2U Protect the potential beauty and recreational trail oppOrtunities of all Meridian
waterways.
1.3 Open space areas within all development should.b~:~c°uraged.
1.4 Major entrances to the City should be e~~ and emphasized, unattracfiveJand uses
along these entrances should be screened fr°&i:i~ew.
2.1U Require businesses and government to install ~d~i~maintai~"'landscaping.
2.3U Encourage the beautification of streets, parking
6.2U - Pedestrian access connectors vail be required m all n6~v development to link subdivisions
together to promote neighborhood identity.
6.11U - Promote well-planned and well'design~ affordable i: h0using in all Meridian
neighborhoods.
Transportation Chapter <:
1.19U - Encourage proper design
of residential neighborhoods to ensure their safety and
1.14 - Design and perforce standards should be applied to infilling development in order to
reduce adverse impacts upon existing adjacent development.
1.18 - As P~:;~iDeyeloPment, meth°ds':and standards are implemented by the City of
Meridian, q;~afions p~ng 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
deSignand developmental objectives are met.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff supports the concept of developing this area with a medium-low density residential and
office uses, as proposedlbY the applicant. ACHD has not yet issued a report concerning this
application; therefore, Staff would recommend continuing the public hearing until the report from
ACHD is available for review. Nevertheless, staff recommends resolving the following issue
prior to recommending approval:
Visib~ty/Usability/Accessibility of Open Space: as noted above in the "Additional
Considerations" section of this report (pg 7), staff has concerns with surrounding the
southeast comer of the park with houses and with surrounding the large
common/drainage (Lot 12, Block 1) lot with office buildings and houses.
AZ-02-00,1, PP-02-004, CUPO'2.005 b'u~he~umd Fmms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2002
Page 16
Phasing: Staffneeds to review the new phasing schedule prior to recommending
approval or denial.
Upon review of the ACHD report and the resolution of the above issues, staffwill be able to
make a recommendation of this project.
AZ-02-004, PP -02.004~ CUP0~-005 Suflu~iand Farms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
MERIDIAN PARKS & RECREATION
Memorandum
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
From: Tom Kuntz. Meridian Parks & Recreation
CC: Meddian Park & Recreation
Re: Sutherland Farms Sub. Preliminary Plat
RECEIVED
APR - ~ 2OO2
City of Meridian
City Clerk Office.
The Parks and Recreation Commission and staffmspectf~y submit the following
comments for you consideration in regards to Sulherland Farms Subdivision:
1. We support and commend the developer for including a functional pathway
system and private Neighborhood Park wiltfin the subdivision design.
2. The neighborhood park lo~t~ in Block 1, Lot 54 would be far more functional
and appealing as a subdivision amenity if the seven lots in the south east comer
were e 'lmfinated. It would expand the visibility corridor and increase the park
size to approximately 5 acres. The Parks department has a 5-acre minimum for
a city owned Neighborhood Park. If the maintenance costs for the 5-acre private
park were a burden for the homeowners in the futura, the Parks department
would consider maintaining the site if it was deeded to the city.
3. The Pathway should be constructed as follows:
a. Ten-foot wide hard surface with ground sterilent, 6 inch compacted mad
mix, and 2 inches of asphalt (specs available).
b. Path should be located at the base of Ridenbaugh Canal bank or adjacent to
the canal maintenance road.
c. A 6-foot high medal fence should be installed between the path and the
canal.
d. Path should be a minimum of 10 feet from the back property lines.
· Page 1
Property line fencing adjacent to path should be see through or a maximum
of 4 feet high if solid.
Bollards, garbage cans, and benches should be installed per park department
· Page 2
'. I
RECEI~ED
. APR - 3 2002
City of Meridian
City Clerk Office
PUBLIC HEARING
SIGN-UP SHEET
DATE
PROJECT NUMBER
PROJECT NAME
APR - ~ 2002
C]~1~' OF ~4EP~D~U~
FOR
AGAINST
Sharon Smith
From: Tara Green
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 9:34 AM
To: Sharon Smith
RECEIVED
APR - 9 2002
CiTY OF MERIDIAN
CITY CLERK OFFICE
Subject: FW: For P&Z Commissioners Keith Borup and Jerry Centers
..... Original Message .....
From: Spreggroundy@aol.com [mailto:Spreggroundy@aol.com]
Sent.' Tuesday, April 09, 2002 9:23 AM
To-' Clerk~ci.meridian.id.us
Subject: For P&Z Commissioners Keith Borup and .lerry Centers
Mr. Borup and Mr. Centers:
At our meeting with you last Thursday evening, April 4, re. the Sutherland Farm subdivision, Annette DeAngelis
stood and spoke before your commission, expressing in a clear, respectful, and articulate manner concerns of
those of us residing in her neighborhood. Your response to her was extremely rude and disrespectful. We
couldn't believe what we were headng, nor could we discern what she had said or done to elicit such a response
from the two of you. You owe her an apology in the same forum in which you treated her so.
Sincerely,
Spregg and Joyce Roundy
4/9/02
Meridian Planning & Zoning Meeting
Apdl 4, 20O2
Page 62 of 77
Shreeve: That's it.
Walsh: Yeah. I haven't seen it, but--
Borup: Anything else, Mr. Walsh? Your time is up.
Walsh: Just one quick thought. Walt Lander has paid 35,000 dollars for a crosswalk at
Muir Ridge and Cloverdale. That has been bonded, I believe. Seeing how it's Boise it's
different, but when we with him he was telling us he had set aside 35,000 dollars for a
crosswalk at Muir Ridge and Cloverdale. That was a requirement of him to get his
subdivision. Eventually we may see some additional traffic. I realize it's down the road
and in the event we don't get an extension through there, if could we get a proposal for
a traffic light?. Half of it's paid for.
Shreeve: Where?
Walsh: On Cloverdale and Muir Ridge, which is the access to Muir Wood Subdivision.
Shreeve: You mean to the --
Walsh: Cloverdale to the east. Yes.
Shreeve: I think that would be something you'd have to talk with ACriD about. That
would be out of this body's hands.
Walsh: Okay.
Borup: Thank you. Do we have anyone else? Come on up.
Hapenfus: My name is Herbert Hapenfus. I own the three acres there that's on Eagle
and would also belong - yeah. Right in there. The only question I have is in checking
this at the office last week they mentioned it would be both gravity and pressurized
irrigation and so as long as we are looking at this right now and it's going to come back,
I just want to see that they don't forget that I need irrigation there with that - those three
acres and that's basically all that I'm concerned with dght now.
Borup: And that is a requirement. They will not interrupt your water supply. So they are
required to continue water supply to your property.
Hapenfus: Okay.
Borup: Come on up.
Deangelis: My name is Annette Deangelis and I'm on the board of the Southwest Ada
County Alliance and I'm also in the Rancho Los Altos Subdivision. My first comment
would be in regard to Mr. Fluke's statement about limited access into the subdivision. It
Meridian Planning & Zoning Meeting
Apdl 4, 2002
Page 63 of 77
seems to me if on Victory -- kind of like Boulder Creek. Do you know where Boulder
Creek is? Five Mile and -- when you enter at Boulder Creek it's green on both sides and
you go in kind of like a wonderful corridor and the Sassers, then, would have a lovely
berm without houses right there and that would be a lovely entrance and it would be
much more accessible and traffic would flow much nicer in and out onto Victory and the
same I would say on Eagle Road. If you leave that to future development or you leave it
undecided what's going to happen there, I mean you have 200 and something homes
or whatever is in there and you entered by the what, vacant fields or unidentified
territory. I mean --
Borup: Ma'am, when the read goes in it will need to be landscaped at that time.
Deangelis: Right. Right. But-
Borup: So if there is no road there wouldn't be, but once the road goes in there will be.
Deangelis: But what is adjacent to the road is so beneficial I -- you know, as a plus or
minus to that particular development. As was mentioned, the open space -- since there
is existing pond and existing open space to the south, it kind of would logically flow to
want to leave part of it there, also continue it down and then you have access more to --
contiguous throughout the entire subdivision. Compatibility is a large issue and I don't
care if your house is worth a million dollars or 65,000 dollars, they are building this
subdivision with our subdivision with open space, which I mean that's fine for the
developer, but when you walk through our subdivision you will see nothing but
backyards and probably barking dogs and old cars and whatever. So I do think that
there should be some respect and I don't care how much, you know, they charge for
these homes, but there should be a degree of respect and compatibility for those folks.
I mean I see it with Muir Woods right now and if Mr. Lander gets his office on the
corner, we will get to see his limited office. The rest of Muir Woods probably won't,
because he's going to build a big berm he says, but we will be able to see it, so here we
are - and, again, the Sassers o- boy, that is just unreal. Oh. And as far as not being
able to sell one acre -- I mean single story homes, one of the contingencies upon
building in Rancho Los Altos -- and they are between two and five acres, is you have to
be a single story home and we are all single stodes. Thank you.
Borup: Any questions? I had one, ma'am. You talked about the lot sizes against Los
Altos. Was the same concern expressed with Muir Woods?
Deangelis: Oh, indeed. Indeed. And, you know, the folks there are lovely and if you walk
down our street -- and, actually, there is one home that was totally impacted and they
can see what the folks are having for breakfast in the morning and we bought out there,
you know, with open space in mind and, yes, development is inevitable, but, wow, I
mean literally you can see what they are having - and they have -- I think it's three or
four homes that they, you know, can look dght in through there. And vice-versa.
Borup: So you objected Muir Woods going in also, just as much as this?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Meeting
Apdl 4, 2002
Page 64 of 77
Deangelis: Well, but in a positive way. We tried to make positive suggestions. We really
did. And wa are still in the process, since 1997, we are still going for the Muir Woods
thing, so --
Borup: A lot of old cars in their backyards and stuff, is that --
Deangelis: Well, not in Muir Woods. Not -- no. I mean that was an exaggeration, but I
mean --
Borup: Okay.
Deangelis: But there are barking dogs, you know.
Centers: Mrs. Deangelis?
Deangelis: Yes.
Centers: You would have to agree that it would be almost impossible to put acreage
subdivisions back to back.
Deangelis: Oh, absolutely.
Centers: Or half acre subdivisions back to back, unless - unless you had landowners in
between that you told you cannot sell your land unless you develop it into half acre lots.
So -- and that's what we are faced with. You look at subdivisions throughout the
Treasure Valley, R-8 backs up to R-4, R-4 backs up to half acre subs that might be in
the Boise impact area. I mean it's virtually impossible to keep them compatible so
everyone is totally happy. It can't be done. Impossible.
Deangelis: No. And I would agree there.
Centers: Thank you.
Deangelis: But as far as salability of large lots -- large lot subdivisions -- and I'll use Mr.
Lander as an example, he needs to developed Hialeah, which was half acre plus and,
you know, they were sold right away.
Centers: And I would tend to agree there is probably a good market for that, but if you
can find the land at the price.
Deangelis: Right. Well - and, again, without having dollars and cents in front of me, I
do contend that if he's going to say these apartments or townhomes or whatever and
have it, you know, pretty dense near the entrance there -- and I hope it's not going to be
office and commercial -- he's going to recover his dollar value -- and, actually, he will
probably enhance his subdivision and be able to get a better return on his dollars,
because it will be - they will be upscale sections. And, again, I think it sounds like
Meridian Planning & Zoning Meeting
A, pdl 4, 2002
Page 65 of 77
you're a snob, but you don't lose money by adding amenities if you do it within reason
and his surrounding area adds to that reasoning. I mean he's not backing up to the
Beverly Hillbillies. I don't know.
Centers: Well, I don't think you or I want to tell him how to develop it, though.
Deangelis: But if he's developing in my backyard I think I have a right, because he's
going to make money on my open space and everybody else's in this room.
Borup: But then would you also want them to tell you what you can do with your
backyard?
Deangelis: But they did. Before we could build in our subdivision we were told.
Borup: No. I mean your neighbor. That's the subdivision you chose to move in. Would
you want your neighbors saying they don't want you to put a swing set up out there or -
Deangelis: But they would and they do.
Borup: Your neighbors do?
Deangelis: Well, I mean -- okay. But there is enough mutual respect. But I thought that
that was the whole purpose of this, to have some sort of a meeting of the minds. I mean
-- because I guess if you can develop -- as long as you've bought it, you can put
whatever you want there, and that defeats the purpose of -
Centers: No. No. That's not true.
Deangelis: Okay.
Centers: It meets the Comprehensive Plan, the mixed use development, they have met
that criteria, that's why we are able to come here tonight.
Deangelis: Right.
Centers: And there is certain things that we want to make note of -- I certainly made
note of that northerly exit, you know, but my point is it's tough to satisfy adjoining
landowners where if you sit on two acres and you're going to have four or five houses
behind you, as you said - your key statement: I realize growth is inevitable.
Deangelis: Right.
Centers: Quote, unquote. And that's - you know, that's the unfortunate thing. Or
fortunate. I don't know.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Meeting
April 4, 2002
Page 66 of 77
Deangelis: But in the comp plan, both Boise's and Meridian's, I think it states
compatibility and so if the term compatibility is in there, it must mean something.
Borup: The definition of compatible would be like type zoning, residential against
residential. The buffering is needed for something that's not compatible, like commercial
against residential. That's where the buffering aspects kick in.
Shreeve: Mr. Chairman -- and just -- you know, compatibility, but I guess the word is
transition is one of the words that maybe I would use and I think, Commissioner
Centers, that you're fight, they are not going to have two acre lots butting up against
there, that's not practical, nor is that preoposed, obviously, but I just seem to think that
there is some reom for making those lots just a smidgen larger for a more transitional
size of lots between those lots there on the south. And so I guess that's where I use --
not so much compatibility, as much as it is just a transition and that is also in our
ordinances that we look to some -- there is some - I have to use the word compatibility,
some transition, at least consideration there anyway. And that's why I guess my earlier
comment would be that -- my opinion would be that the developer look at -- you know,
for example, there on Los Altos Subdivision you got, what, two, four, six -- maybe six
lots there.
Centers: How many do you want him to have?
Shreeve: One.
Centers: Five? One?
Shreeve: No.
Borup: You mean the lots bordering the other lots?
Shreeve: Right. Well, I think it just needs to be looked at, to be considered. Because
right now they are quarter acre lots right now. Roughly if you removed one, made five,
say it would be less than a half acre -- you know, maybe -- I don't know. Of course, if
you removed one -
Centers: A quarter acre is a good size lot.
Shreeve: Yeah. But butted up against a two to five acre lot? Well, that's all I'm
resenting, is I believe that there needs to be more of a transition.
Borup: Do we have anyone else that would like to come forward. Come on up.
McKibbin: I'll be brief. My name is Dennis McKibbin. I live at 1820 S. Eagle Road. I live
on the southwest side up there and I own a commercial dog kennel there, which nobody
has mentioned, and I haven't had any problems with noise, but the development with
the commercial there - I talked to Daren there about it briefly and the only problem that
March 25, 2002
RECEiVE .,
~4AR 2 7 2002
C.lty of Meridia~
Czty Clerk Offie~-
To:
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commissioners
From:
Muir Woods home owners adjacent to the proposed Sutherland Farms
Subdivision. Morris and Elaine Bastian, 2727 South Mayflower Way,
i3oise, idaho, 83/09, phone 229-6352.
Subject:
Concern and fear about ~e impact proposed Sutherland Farms
subdivision will i~ave on Muir Woods; specifically the heavy traffic that will
be routed through Muir Woods in order for drivers to get to Sutherland
Farms.
Attached are the names and addresses of residents in Muir Woods who were shocked
and surprised when they learned Muir Woods is being recommended as a main
entrance and exit to the newly proposed by Sutl~erland Farm subdivision. (Daran
Fluke is the planning associate.)
Problem:
Most residents of Muir Woods moved in less than a year ago, thinking they had moved
into a small, quiet subdivision surrounded by a horse ranch. Now Mis horse rancrt is
being replaced by a 308 home subdivision with townhouses and commercial
development; and Sutherland Farms is proposing that Muir Woods be its primary
entrance and exit from the east (Cioverdale).
Sutherland Farms ts a land-locked subdivision adjacent to Muir Woods. It lies south of
Overland between Eagle and Cloverdale Roads. Sutherland Farms wants to use the
streets and roads in surrounding subdivisions as entry ways; therefore traffic routed
into Sutherland Farms doubles the traffic in Muir Woods.
Two critical objections:
1. Heavy traffic to and from Sutherland Farms will be will be entering or exiting
Muir Woods in order to get to t13eir (testinations in Boise/Meridian, etc. (Muir
Woods has only one entrance/exit, that being Muir Ridge. A potential
bottleneck in the making.)
2. Children's safety will be at risk. Parents in Muir Woods have a huge fear
that if Muir Ridge becomes the pdmary entrance into Sutherland Farms from the
east, extremely heavy traffic will be poudng through their subdivision and
neighborhood.
Proposal:
Eliminate any possible east/West road system that will connect Eagle and Cloverdale
Roads through Muir Wood's and Sutherland Farm's subdivisions. Drivers entering
Muir Woods or Sutherland Farms subdivisions must exit the same way they come in.
There are a number of subdivisions in Boise with that safety feature because it helps to
limit the number of cars coming through a given neighborhood. Examples:
1. Lewis Street and Warm Springs Hallow: In that subdivision drivers must
enter and exit at the same entrance. Drivers can't drive straight through one
subdivision into another. This has helped keep traffic to a minimum in that area
of Boise.
2. Morningslde Subdivision: Drivers can't drive straight through Morningside
and over the hill to its neighboring sut~ivision. They must retrace
their steps and enter from ~ opposite side in order to get into the neighboring
subdivision.
3. Ann Morrison Park: Initially drivers could drive from Capitol to Americana Blvci
through Ann Morrison Park. But college students and citizens took
advantage of tl~e park road system and begen using it as a short cut and an
alternative route to east or west i~ise. The safety and serenity of the park
became jeopardized and the park was closed to through traffic.
Most of the signers of the attaci3ed petition will be at ~ public 13earing April 4. 2002 to
express their fears and concerns regarding Muir Ridge being proposed as a primary
entrance and exit to Sutherland Farms.
We will be circulating this petition among the remaining residents of Muir Woods
between now and April 4 because we feel they have similar concerns and fears about
the impact Sutherland Farms will have on the safety and serenity Muir Woods. All
those who have signed thus far are planning on atte/~g the April 4th meeting.
Sincerely, . . /
Morris and ~lalne Oastian
2727 Soutl~ Mayflower Way (Muir Woods Subdivision)
Boise, Ida~ 83709
ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPOSED
SUBDIVISION:
City of Met/di '-~
City C1
Return ground to its original level, 6-8 feet lower than at
present, before building begins (it was raised by infilling a
few years ago).
Retain and integrate the existing pond, waterways, and
trees, to add beauty to Southerland Farms and to maintain
some of the beauty that we in existing homes now enjoy.
PUBLIC HEARING
SIGN-UP SHEET
DATE
PROJECT NUMBER
16-May-02
PP 02-004
PROJECT NAME
Sutherland Farm
NAME
H~¥ 1 6 2002
CITY OF MERIDIAN
FOR
AGAINST
MAYOR
Robert D. Corde
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
T~nmy deWeexd
Keith Bird
Cherie McCaadless
William L. M. Naly
HUB OF TREASURE V~4LLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208) 888-4433- FAX (208) 887-4813
City Oerk Office Fax (208) 8884218
DEPARTMENT
(208) 884-5533. FAX 888-6854
MEMORANDUM:
May 15, 2002
To:
From:
Mayor, City Council and Planning & Zoning Commission
David McKinnon, Plalmer II ~J~
Bruce Freckleton, Senior Engineering Tech
Sutherland Farm
RECEIVED
IdAY I 5 2002
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY CLERK OFFICE
Annexation and Zoning of 127.64 Acres fxom RUT and R-1 (Ada County) to
R-4 (Low Density Residential)and C-G (General Retail and Service
Commercial District), by Sutherland Farm, Inc (File No. AZ-02-O04).
Preliminary Plat Approval of 308 Building Lots and 30 "Other" Lots on
127.64 Acres on Land Requested to be Rezoned to R-4 and C-G, by
Sutherland Farm, Inc (File No. PP-02-O04).
A Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development to Allow a 20% Land
Use Exception (Office/High Density Uses in a Proposed R-4 Zone), Reduced
Lot Sizes, Reduced Frontage Requirements, Reduced Setbacks, Reduced
Home Sizes and to Exceed Block Length Requirements, by Sutherland Farm,
Inc (File No. CUP 02-005)
We have reviewed the aforementioned applications and now offer the following comments,
as conditions of approval. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly
modified or deleted by motion of the Meridian City Council:
APPLICATION SUMMARY
(This report is to replace the original "draft" report that was used at the last public
hearing. All new language has been underlined.)
The Applicant, Sutherland Farm Inc., has requested the annexation and zoning 127.64 acres of
land adjacent to the east side of Eagle Road, and the north side of Victory Road. Approximately
eleven (11) acres of the subject property is located on the north side of the Ridenbaugh Canal.
The land is presently zoned RUT and R-1. The Applicant has requested that upon annexation, all
of the property south of the Ridenbaugh Canal be zoned R-4, and that all property to the north of
the canal be zoned C-G.
AZ-02-004, PP-02004, CUP02-005 Sutherland Farms AZ PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 2
The Applicant's preliminary plat approval request is for 308 building lots (260 single-family
detached lots, 32 single-family attached lots (alley-loaded), 11 office/multiple family lots, and 5
commercial lots) and 30 other lots. The "other" lots include a four-acre park/pond area, a thirty-
foot wide pathway adjacent to the Ridenbaugh Canal, alleys, an irrigation lot, tot lots, and
required landscaping. The five (5) commercial lots will be located north of the Ridenbaugh
Canal.
The Applicant has also requested approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned
Development in order to allow reduced development standards including reduced setbacks,
reduced lot size, reduced frontages, reduced dwelling sizes, and to allow the Applicant's request
to exceed block length requirements. The following is a side-by-side comparison of the City's
minimum requirements and the reduced requirements that have been proposed by the applicant:
Setbacks-
City Requirements (R-4)
Front: 20'
Rear: 15'
Side: 5'/per story
Street side: 20'
Prol~osed Setbacks (Townhomes)
Front: 10'
Rear: 5'
Side: 0'
Street side: 0'
Lot Size-
City Requirements
R-4 zone: 8,000 sq.ft.
Per Dwelling Unit
Prol~osed Lot Sizes
3,829-5,711 sq. ft. (Townhouses)
6,500 sq.ft. (Detached Single-family)
Lot Frontage-City Requirements
80'minimum
Proposed Frontage
42' minimum (townhouse)
(Additional note: 105 out of 292 residential lots do not meet the minimum R-4 standards)
Additionally, as part of the planned development request, the applicant has requested a twenty
percent (20%) land use exception to permit office/multi-family housing and attached single-
family housing in the R-4 zone.
The planned development's amenities include two (2) tot lots, a four (4) acre park/pond area, a
pathway and an additional open space/drainage lot.
The property north of the Ridenbaugh Canal (requested C-G zoning) is not a part of the Planned
Development request.
LOCATION
The property is located approximately ½ a mile sonth of Overland Road on the east side of S.
Eagle Road. The property extends easterly along the Ridenhaugh Canal for approximately 3,600
feet. The southern boundary of the property provides access to Victory Road, approximately
1,000 feet east of the intersection of Eagle and Victory Roads.
SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
AZ-02-O04, PP ~O2-004, CUP02-O05 Sutherland Farms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 3
North: Silverstone and Silverstone II, zoned C-C and C-G.
South: Rural residential properties, zoned RUT and R-1 (Ada County).
East: Muir Woods Subdivision, zoned R-4 (Ada County).
West: Thousand Springs Subdivision, zoned R-4.
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:
"A.
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;
Stafffinds that the requested zoning designations, R-4 to south of the Ridenbaugh
Canal and C-G to the north of the Ridenbaugh Canal, is harmonious with and in
accordance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and Generalized Land Use
Map, which designates the land to be "Mixed Residential" and "Single Family
Residential".
Although, the Schedule of Use Control (MCC11-8-1) states that only detached
single-family dwellings are permitted within the R-4 zone, the Planned
Development Ordinance allows a mixture of different housing types,
(townhouses, duplexes and detached single-family dwellings) within a single
planned development, regardless of the underlying zone, so long as the overall
density of the underlying zone is not exceeded 0VICC12-6-4 A).
Accordingly, the overall density of the residential portion of the planned
development is approximately three dwelling units per acre (292units + 97acres =
3.01 units/acre).
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;
Staff finds that recent approval of the annexation and zoning of Silverstone II on
the north side of the Ridenbaugh Canal would dictate that the adjacent property to
the east should be similarly zoned and developed (as proposed). The Ridenhaugh
Canal provides a natural buffer/separation between land uses.
AZ-02-004, PP-02-004, CUP02-005 Suthertand Farms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 4
Muir Woods Subdivision to the east has provided a stub-street at the Sutherland
Farm western property line in expectation of similar development.
Co
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 commercial uses and standard
to estate sized residential lots. The intended character of the vicinity, as noted on
the Generalized Land Use Map, is for mixed housing projects, detached single-
family lots and mixed uses north of the Ridenbaugh Canal. 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.
De
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.
ge
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, with the exception of water service. Computer
modeling indicates that existing available fire flows and pressures will not be
adequate to serve the Commercial/office/multi-family area of the subdivision at
present. The City of Meridian will be bringing a new supply well on line in the
Silverstone project within the next six to eight months, and with the development
of the Silverstone project, a new main will extend under the Ridenbaugh Canal.
According to the computer model, once these two items are complete fire flows
and pressures will be adequate to serve the higher demands of the above
mentioned areas.
Fe
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;
AZ4Y2-004, PP-02-004, CL~024105 Sutbe*hmd Farms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 5
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 on both Eagle and
Victory 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.
He
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 proposed vehicular approach on Eagle Road aligns with the
existing entry into Thousand Springs Subdivision, and should not appreciably
interfere with traffic on the surrounding streets. The other major access (Victory)
and stub-streets provided for within the plat do not appear to be designed in a
manner that would create interference with traffic on surrounding streets.
The Applicant has provided a number of stub-streets to other properties for
interconnectivity in the future.
Staff does not agree with the Ada County Highway District Commission's
recommendation requiring connection to existing stub streets (Hollandale to the
east and Knapp to the south) with the placement of temporary bollards in the
middle of the street until a northern connection to Overland Road is completed.
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. The overall design of the subject
property includes a pathway adjacent to the Ridenbaugh Canal.
Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of
Meridian. (Ord. 592, 11-17-1992)"
Staff finds that the annexation of this property would be in the best interest of the
City by providing a variety of housing types, the addition of employment
AZ-02-004, PP -02.004, CUP02-005 Suiherland Farms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 6
opportunities and the creation of additional recreation facilities (pathways and a
subdivision park).
ANNEXATION AND ZONING COMMENTS
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-4 and C,G 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.
Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be
removed firom 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.
PRELIMINARY PLAT FINDINGS AND REQUIREMENTS
Sections 12-3-3 J.2 and 12-3-5 D read as follows: "In determining the acceptance of a 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;
Staff finds that public services are available to accommodate the proposed subdivision.
c. The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement
program;
Staff fmds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement
funds.
d. The public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed
development;
AZ-02-004, PP-02-004, CUP02-005 Sutherland Fam~ AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 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
The preliminary plat has a number of blocks (9, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19) that exceed the 1,000 foot
maximum block length (MCC 12-4-5). However, because this plat is part of a planned
development the Applicant has requested that they be allowed to exceed this section of Code
without the need for a variance.
After reviewing the preliminary plat in light of the requested block lengths, staff would feel
comfortable allowing the 1,000+ foot long block lengths if the following modifications are
included on a revised plat:
· The addition of a micro-path, in accordance with the Landscape Ordinance, that runs
between Lots 4, 5 and Lotsl6 and 17 of Block 18.
· The addition of a micro-path, in accordance with the Landscape Ordinance, that
separates Lots 9 and 10 of Block 19. The micro-path shall continue though Lot 1 of
Block 19.
Planning and Zoning staff have additional concerns with the construction of homes that
effectively surround the proposed park (Lot 54, Block 1) and office buildings that surround the
large open space/drainage lot located adjacent to the pathway in the northwest area of the project
(Lot 12, Block 1). Surrounding the open space with buildings decreases the visual appeal of the
open space, reduces the accessibility of the open space to those homeowners that do not live
adjacent to the open space, and may create a safety risk, as the police department will not be able
to view the open space from the public right-of-way.
Staff recommends that the Commission and the City Council consider reducing or eliminating
the seven (7) homes located on the southeast corner of Lot 54, Block 1. The reduction or
elimination of the houses would create larger, open and usable park for the entire subdivision
Staff further recommends that the Commission and Council consider increasing the visibility of
Lot 12, Block 1, by providing additional open space along the east side of Lot 11, Block 1, or by
the requiring Lot 11 to become part of Lot 12 (thus increasing the visibility and amount of open
space provided).
AZ-02-004, PP-02-004, CUP02-005 Sutherland Farms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 8
Staff recommends the full connection of the existing stub streets (Hollandale Street and Knapp
Street) without bollards. The City is not required to adopt the ACHD Commission's
recommendation.
SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS (preliminary plat)
Sanitary sewer and water service to this site shall be via new main extensions from the
existing mains adjacent to the property.. Computer modeling indicates that existing
available fire flows and pressures will not be adequate to serve the
Commercial/office/multi-family area of the subdivision at present. The City of Meridian
will be bringing a new supply well on line in the Silverstone project within the next six to
eight months, and with the development of the Silverstone project, a new main will
extend under the Ridenbaugh Canal. According to the computer model, once these two
items are complete fire flows and pressures will be adequate to serve the higher demands
of the above mentioned areas.
The submitted landscape plan includes conifers located in the required street buffer along
Eagle Road. This is in violation of the Landscape Ordinance; however, staff supports the
inclusion of the pine trees at this location because conifers have been permitted as part of
the Silverstone Corporate Center landscaping, immediately adjacent to the Sutherland
Farms project on Eagle Road.
e
Fencing details shall be submitted with the Final Plat application. Fencing adjacent to
pathways or the Private Park 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.
Performance specifications for the common area pressurized irrigation system shall be
submitted with the Final Plat application.
The addition of a micro-path, in accordance with the Landscape Ordinance, that hms
between Lots 4, 5 and Lotsl6 and 17 of Block 18.
The addition of a micro-path, in accordance with the Landscape Ordinance, that separates
Lots 9 and 10 of Block 19. The micro-path shall continue thOugh Lot 1 of Block 19.
7. There shall be a minimum separation often (10) feet between unattached buildings.
Add a note to the face of the plat requiring all single family detached houses to provide a
minimum of 1,400 square feet of living space, excluding the garage.
The required landscaping and irrigation system on Victory 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.
AZ-02-004, PP -02-004, CUP0'2-O05 Sutherland Farms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 9
10.
The Applicant shall coordinate pathway construction requirements along the Ridenbaugh
Canal with the City's Parks Director, Tom Kuntz
11.
The applicant shall coordinate ACHD concerning the requirements and construction of
the Bridge over the Ridenhaugh Canal
12.
The phasing schedule shall apply to the residential portions of the subdivision only. If the
applicant/developer determines that the office/multi-family or C-G zoned 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.
GENERAL COMMENTS (oreliminarv ola0
Please submit a copy of the Ada County Street Name Committee's fmal approval letter
for the subdivision name, and the lot and block numbering. Make any corrections
necessary to conform.
2. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department.
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.
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.
o
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, excluding the Ridenhaugh Canal. 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.
FINDINGS FOR USE EXCEPTIONS WITHIN 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
AZ-02-004, PP-02-004, CUP02-005 Sutherland Farms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 10
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/multiple-family housing uses are strongly related to the primary use
of the development (R-4). The office uses will provide services (medical, dental, optical
etc...) that will be cornplementary to the residents of the subdivision, and it will provide
employment opportunities as well.
Staff finds that multiple-family housing adjacent to the higher density townhouses is
appropriate within the overall development of this subdivision. The mixing of residential
uses and commercial uses will encourage the office development to be constructed in a
manner that will be pedestrian fi:iendly. High-density housing will provide an immediate
consumer base for the office development.
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 townhouse and the office/multiple-family housing uses are approximately
15.5% of the total area of land included in the planned development.
(32 townhouses * 4,271 sq. ft. average + 43,560) + (11 office lots * 59,155sq. ft. average +
43560) = 18.08 acres of land devoted to excepted uses.
18.08 acres of excepted uses + 116.6 gross area of planned development (in acres) * 100 =
15.5% of the planned development will be devoted to excepted uses.
Staff finds that the size and intensity of the excepted uses is appropriate for this location and
size of development.
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.
The townhouse use is projected as part of the first phase of the development and that the
office/multiple-family housing will be the final two phases. Staff finds that upon completion
of the townhouses and detached single-family dwellings, the residents of the subdivision will
desire services that can be provided by later phases of this development.
4. The uses permitted by the exception are integrated into the overall project by:
AZ-02-O04, PP-02-004, CUP~-O0~ Suth~'land Farms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 11
Being located in proximity to and within convenient walking distance of the
primary uses.
Staff finds that the office/multiple-family/townhouse uses will be within convenient
walking distance of the park and open space provided within the residential
development.
be
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 though shared
vehicular access points. The applicant has provided a pathway system that would
connect the excepted uses with the R-4 residential uses.
Providing pedestrian and bicycle pathway connections with the primary use
site.
Staff finds that the applicant has provided pathway connections with the
commercial use.
de
Orienting buildings on the exception site to facilitate vehicular and/or
pedestrian access from the primary use site.
Staff finds that the excepted uses are located in a manner that will facilitate
vehicular access from the residential uses.
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 is consistent throughout the development.
Architectural and building bulk concepts will be hard to maintain, as this is
primarily a residential neighborhood with a variety of lot sizes, housing options and
lot dimensions. The Commission and Council should determine what, if any,
architectural/design concepts (residential and/or commercial) should be
incorporated into all buildings within this development.
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 use is not regional in size or character.
STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USES
AZ-02-004, PP -02-004, CUP02-005 Sutherland Farms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 12
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 find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11-17-3):
Ae
De
That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and ali 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.
Eo
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 "Mixed
Residential and 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.
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;
Stafffinds the design concept to be compatible with the intended character of the area.
The Generalized Land Use Map indicates that this area is intended for mixed residential
and single-family dwellings. The existing neighborhood to the southeast of this project is
currently large estate sized housing ranging in size firom 2-5+ acres and the existing
neighborhood to the east is consists of approximately ¼ to ½+ acre lots. All lots that area
adjacent to the east and southeast either meet or exceed the lot dimensions required by
the R-4 zone.
That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,
will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity;
Staff does 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.
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;
AZ-02-004, pP-02-004, CUP024105 Sutherland Farms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 13
Staff finds that the proposed development can be adequately served by the essential
public facilities and services listed above.
Fe
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;
Staff finds 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;
Stafffinds that no excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors will result from
the proposed use.
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.
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.
Staffdoes not find that any natural or scenic feature will be lost, damaged or destroyed
by issuance of this conditional use. The Ridenbaugh Canal is to remain open and
improved with a pathway.
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 office or multiple-family housing uses proposed within the development shall be
required to apply for a conditional use permit for a planned development prior to
construction.
No more than 101 building permits shall be issued within Sutherland Farm Subdivision
until a secondary emergency vehicle access to Eagle Road is completed.
AZ-02-004, PP-02004, CUP02-00$ Sutherland Farms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 14
E. Easy Jet Drive shall be fully improved (including curbs, gutter, sidewalks,
landscaping, and irrigation prior) prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for any
building constructed within Phase five (5) of the subdivision. Additionally, all required
improvements adjacent to Eagle Road shall be complete prior to occupancy of any
building within Phase Five (5) of the subdivision.
All site improvements (landscaping and irrigation) for the four-acre park/pond area, and
the pathway (Lot 75) connecting the park/pond area to Eagle Road shall be complete
prior to the issuance of the 101~t occupancy permit within Sutherland Farm Subdivision.
The applicant shall be required to maintain the pond in a manner that will prevent the
water from becoming stagnant or public nuisance (a mosquito breeding ground).
The remaining sections of the pathway (east of the 4-acre park/pond area) shall be
developed in accordance with the phasing schedule for the subdivision.
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 this subdivision.
COMPREHENSIVE 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 opportunities 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 of 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.
AZ-02-004, PP ~)2-004, CUP02-005 Sutherland Farms AZ PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 15
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...
4.3U
5.9
5.12
5.13
5.14
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...
3.7 Industrial uses which require the storage or the production of explosive or hazardous
materials should not be located near residential areas, and should conform to disposal,
spill and storage measures as outlined by the U.S. EPA.
Encourage new commercial development in under-utilized existing commercial areas.
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.
Strip development within this mixed-use area is not in compliance with the goals and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
Clustering of uses and controlled access points along arterials and collector streets will be
required.
Because these areas are near 1-84 and Franklin Roads, high-quality visual appearance is
essential. All development proposals in this area will be subject to development review
guidelines and conditional use permitting procedures.
Natural Resource & Hazardous Areas
2.1U Development along major drainage ways will be restricted to ensure that development
does not cause additional ground or surface water contamination.
3.1U Manage and prevent unsuitable uses along drainageways and protect the flood plain of
creeks and drains.
3.2U Protect the potential beauty and recreational trail opportunities of all Meridian
waterways.
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 fi~om 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.
Transvortation Charter
1.19U- Encourage proper
tranquility.
design of residential
neighborhoods to
ensure their safety and
AZ4)2-004, PP -02-004, CUP02-005 Suthexland Farms AZ. PP.CUP/PD
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
May 15, 2002
Page 16
1.14 - Design and performance standards should be applied to infilling development in order to
reduce adverse impacts upon existing adjacent development.
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 supports the concept of developing this area with a medium-low density residential and
office uses, as proposed by the applicant.
Staffdoes not agree with ACHD's final Development Application Report site-specific comments
15 and 16 (pg 13&14) regarding the extension of existing stub streets into Sutherland Farms, but
then blocking offthe streets with bollards until an access to Overland Road is constructed. Stub-
streets are intended to encourage intereonnectivity, not prevent it until an undeterminable date.
Staffrecommends that if the Commission decides to make a motion to approve this subdivision
it should include the elimination of the ACHD site-specific comments 15 and 16, and to allow
the connection of the existing stub-streets (the City has the ability to override an ACHD
requirement).
The Applicant has addressed the issue of providing more visible open space at the last meeting
by submitting a new plan that relocating the seven houses that surrounded the park on the south
east comer of the park.
A number of new issues were raised at the last meeting that remain unresolved, and should be
dealt with prior to making a recommendation for approval. The following is a list of those issues:
· The placement of fill dirt on the southern side of Sutherland Farm's property, that has
raised the elevation on the property.
· The possible shifting of the roadway adjacent to the Sasser's property (the Victory
road access).
· Possible berming and fencing plans adjacent to Los Altos Subdivision.
The Applicant's representative, Darren Fluke, stated at the last meeting that he would address the
aforementioned issues at this meeting.
Staffrecommends approval of the project.
AZ-02-004, PP -02-004, CUP02-005 Sutherland Fro'ms AZ PP.CUP/PD
Sent By:
To: CiSy CierE
8884218
888 6854; May-15-02 12:46PU;
Page 1
P~ Plat -
Sutherl~,'d Farms
MCUP02-O0S/IVIAZ02-0004
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
Plannin8 and Development Division
DeveJopme~ Application Report
Eagle Road and Victory l~ad
RECEIVED
HAY 1 5 2002
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY CI I:::~K
308-1ot mixed use subdivision
This app~cation has been referred to ACHD by the City of Meridia~ for review snd comment. The
applicang is requesti~ annexation, rezoae, coaditimug u~ ~ad pmlimiaa~ plat approval for a 308-1ot
commerciial/office/residential subdivision on 127.64-a~res. The 127.64-acre site is located on the east
side ofF~:'. ~le Road approximately iA of a mile south of Overland Road. This development is estimated
to 8enexate ! 2,414 addilimml vehicle trips per day (20-existing) based on the Institute of Trs~portation
£ngineer~ Trip Generation Manual.
Roads impacted by fltis development: Easlc Road
Victory Road
Koapp Drive
HollamflOe Streei
Muk Ridge Drive
East Copper Point Way
ACHD Commission Dat~ - May 8, 2002 - 6:30 p.m.
5-[b-og-
Faets and Findinp:
General Information
Owner - Sutherland Fam~s, Inc.
Applicant - Sutherland Farms, Inc.
Representative - JUB ]~q~nee~ Inc. - Gary Lee
R-4, L-O and C~3 - Proposed zoning
127.64 - Acres
308 - Proposed building lots
292 - residential lots
1 ] - office lots
5 - conu'nercial lots
13 - Proposed conunon lots
West Ada - Impact Fee Servicc Area
Meridian - Impact Fee Assessment District
MAY 15 02 12:39 888 ~854 PAGE. O1
Sent By: Uer~lan P&Z; 888 0854; Uay-15-02 12:47PM; Page 2
S~M~ Farms
~ Ro~ ~ ~ Road
~ ~ ~ SubOrn
S~la~ F~.cmm
Sent @y: Meri01an P&Z; 888 6854; May-15-02 12:47PM; Page 3
Minor arterial with bike lane desifpuUion
Traffic count on Eagle ROad south ofl-S4 was 24,SS3 on $-?-Ot.
"C" south of 1-84 and "F" north of 1-84 -Existi~ Level of Sowice
"C" south of 1-84 and "F" north of I-B4 -Existing plus project build-out Level of Service
~0 -f~t offroma~
50 .feet existing riffht-of, wsy (25-feet from camtcrline)
96 -feet required rig~-of-wey (48 -feet fi'om cente'line)
F-.itffle Road is improved with 2-traffic lanes with no curb, gutter or sidewalk abuttin~ the site.
Victory Road
Minor arterial with bike hme designation
'lYaffi¢ count east of Eagle Road was 4,692 on 2-2-00.
"C" -Existing Level of Service
"C" -Existing plus project build-out Level of Service
or
58-feet existing right-of, way (2S-feet from centerline)
96-feet required right-of-way (4S-feet from centertine)
Victory Road is improved with 2-traffic lanes with no curb, butter or sidewalk abuttins the site.
~ street
Traffic cou~ was not available
:~0 -fe~ of
:~0 -fe~ =ds~ rish~-of-way
linapp Drive is improved with 2-traffic lanes ~ no curb, llutter oF sidewalk abutting the site.
Traffic cou~ was .or
$0 -f~-t of
JO-feet existil~ risht-of-way (25-f~ f~om cent~)
No additional right-of-way required
HOtlandale sm~ is imPm,~xl with 2-tr~mc laaes wi~ no curb, ~u~r or sid.~alk abutting the
Muir Ridie Drive
Local street
Page 3
MAY 15 '02 12:39
~en~
By: ~erzo~an
888 8854;
May-15-02 12:47PM;
Page
Traffic count was not available
50-feet existing right-of-way (25-feet fi.om centerline)
Nhir ~clse Drive is improved with 2-traffic lanes with curb, gutter and concrete sidewalk
aliutting the ~e.
]E~t Copper Point Way
Cbnuncrciai / Industrial street that was approved with the Silverstone Corporate Center H
Ti'affic count was not available
50 -feet of frontage
50-feet existing right-of-way (2S-feet eom centerline)
NO additionnJ right-of-way required
East Copper Point Way Wn~ npproved as a commercial / industfiaJ roadway that was approved
With the Silverstone Corporate Center. It will be consUucted,as a standard commercial /
intel roadway with a 40-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot concrete sidewaJk.
D~elopment patterns in the surrmmdin8 area are camme~¢ial 9nd residential. To the north of the
site is the Silverstone Corporate Center and a vacant parcel. To the south of the site is single
famil.' ' y residential. To the west of the site is Thousand Sprin~s Subdivision. To the east of the
si~ is Muir Woods Subdivision md Ranchos Los Altos Subdivision. Based on development
patterns in this ama and tho resulting traffic geoeration~ staff anticipates that the transportation
s~ will be adequnte to ac~onnnodate additionn[ tr~ generated by this proposed
deVelopment at accepted levels of service.
SeVeral improvements are scheduled to occur within the next five years. The followinB
improvements axe pro~anuned in the District's Five Year Work Program.
· Overland Road, Eagle Road to Cloverdale Road will be reconstructed as a 5-lane
urban section.
.,,,.~
· ~) Intersection al Victory ~ and Eagle l[oad will be reconstructed with left turn
lanes and will become si~nli~.~cl in the year 2005.
/~ Intersection at Victory Road and Cloverdale Road will bo rebuilt and will become
si/pmlized in the year 2005.
~ March 11, 2002, the District J~mnin8 and Devdopment sfa~inspected this site and evaluated
t~ transportation system in the vicinity, On lVlarch April 26, 2002, the stafFmet as the District's
Technical Review Committee and reviewed the impacts of this proposed development on the
District's ttansportetion s~tem. The resul~ ofthat analysis constitute the following Facts and
Fmdin~ and recommended Site Specific ~ents.
T,he applicant hired EartTech Engineering to perform a traffic analysis of this site. The analysis
has identitled the followin~ conclusions, and this information has been verified by District siafl~
INM~d Devdol~nentand Land Use: ~ -'[ ~-~,~.~
MAY 15 '02 12:40
sen~ ~:
P&Z; 888 ~854; May-15-02 12:48PU; Page 5
MAY 1S
Sutherland Farms SUbdivision is a proposed development contairiing 258 single-family
homes, 32 residemiai townhouses and 540,000 square feet of oirac~retail space all on a 127-
acre site located on the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Eagle Road and Overland
Road. As shown in the preliminary gte plan, the development proposes three full-access
entrauces on Eagle Road, and one fun access entrance on Victory Road. A stub street on
the east of the development will allow iaterconnectivity with the Muir Woods Subdivision.
site is currently zoned as R-I and RUT and is going to be rezoned as~-~. ~-' ~[ ~"~
The Surrounding Area:
The study will include the intersections o£Ea~le Road and Overland Road, Ea~le Pond and
the 1-84 Eastbound .Off'Ramp, Easle Road (Sit 55) and the 1-84 Westbotmd Off'Ramp,
EngJe Road and Victory Road, Overland Road and Cloverdale Road, and Cloverdale Road
and Muir Woods Subdivision entrance.
ACRD and ITl) are.planninE improvements to the mad system in the area. ACHD is
plannin~ on comtru~ion of Locust Grove Road between Franklin Road and Overland Road,
including an overpas~ owr 1-84 (20~0, and they are planning on widenin~ Overland Pond
between Eagle Road and Linder Road (2003 & 2007). The intersection of Cloverdale l~l.
and Or, and Rd. is going to be widened to five lanes (2003). lTD is planning to install a
signal at the intersection of Eagle RoM and the eastbound 1-84 offramp (2004, with the
po~biltty to be move ahead of that sche~le). In addition the tntersect~on of Eagle &
Overland is being w~'dened in 2003 and a ,~i~al is programmed for insto/~affon in 20fJS..at
Eagle dc YWtory, as w~ll as lite addi#on of lefl mm lane~
Based on the new traffic infi~rmstion, it is apparent that Eagle Road north of the Lnterstate is
already over planning threshold ~or LOS E. It is obvious '~tt some improvements will be
required whether th~ subject project is consmmted or not. The F. agle and Franklin Roads
Corridor Study identified four alternate improvement scenarios, which would improve the
LOS on Basle Pos. d. ACI-ID does have plans to improve Franklin Road and the intersection
of Franklin Road and Ea~ie Road in 2004. Eagle Road is a State Highway; therefore impact
~-es cannot be used to nm~ imps to this road. It appears that the solution to this
area is to amend th~ State Transportation Improvement Plan and include capacity
enhancement to Eagle Road.
/~ne intersection of Ea~le Road and Overland Road is currently operatix~ st LOS F tbr both
~ and PM peak ]'~=nu' trn~c. It will opiate nta LOS F und~ bac~ traffic
conditions with or without the site. With the improvements proposed the intersection will
function at a LOS F under the AM and LOS D under the PM build out trat~c. These
~,,improvements will decr~me the vehicle delay by 53 seconds per vehicle.
The intersection of Overland Road and Cloverdale Road will operate at LOS C under A~
and PM bac~ trattic. With the addition of the site tra~c the AiV[ trMtic will continue
to operate at a LOS C and the PM Uaffic will operate at LOS D. This asaunes tha~ the
intersection is reco~ed as pimned in the Vr,'e Year Work Program.
i2:40
Sutherland Farms.c'mm
Page
Sent By: Meriaian P&Z; 888 6854; May-15-02 12:48PM; Fage o
The intersection of.Eagle Road and Victory Road will operate at LOS C under the AM and
LOS C under the PM background traffic. The intersection will operate at LOS D under the
AM and LOS D under the PM build out traffic.
The intersection of CIoverdale Road and the entrance to Muir Woods Subdivision at West
Muir Ridse Drive will operate at a LOS C under AM and PM background trnffic. With the
addition of the AM site trafftc the intersection will continue to operate at a LOS C and the
PM operations will be a LOS D. The LOS operations will improve when the south entrance
along Cloverdnle Rd, to the Muir Woods subdivision is connected. In addition, some traffic
fi.om Muir Woods Subdivision will tra-,M through the proposed site, therefore reducing the
traffic to the Cloverdale emmn~.
The supplemental comments indicate that Overland Road west of' Eagle Road will operate at
a LOS C after the adqifion of the site trat~c at build-out. The same LOS is a~ticipated to
Overland Road enst 0fEagle Road for the same time frame. The analysis includes the
proposed improvemmts for Overland Road.
The same supplemental comnamts indicate that tia$1e Road south o£ Overland Road will
operate at a LOS C at, er the addition of'the site traftic at build-out. A LOS F is projected
for the section of' .Eagle Road north of.!-84. As previously stated, this roadway is under the
jurisdiction ITD.
· '. The on-site roadway~ will ope~te above LOS C with a two lane with p~rking confisurafion.
The north ,n~gnnli~l emrance along Eagle Road will operate at a LOS C and LOS F under
the AM and PM build-out traffic. The PM peak ho~r traff~ wsrrants a signnl under warrant
#11 Peak Hour mmlysis (1998 MUTCD). With a signal the vehicle delay increases by 5
seconds. At this time a signal instnihtion is not justified with the proposed traffic volumes.
~ pot~tialfor str~p~ng the ~xisttng acceas may ne~d to be cmluatedfor ttUs ~ntersect~on
~o see if tl~ LOS cue be Iow~red from LOS F.
The middle unsign~ized enmmce along Eagle Road will operate at a LOS C for both AM
and PM build out traffic.
by6seconds.
volumes.
The south=umignslized entrance along Engle Pond will operate at a LOS D under AM and
LOS C under PM build-out traffic. The PM peak hour traffic warrants a signal under
wnrrant #11 peak hour analysis (1998 MUTCD). With a silk, al the vehicle delay increases
At this time a signal installation is not justified with the proposed traffic
'.B~ad System:
·
Ea~le Road, south of Overland Road is under the jm'isdiCti°n'°f ~ Ada County [-Ttghway
District. [t is ¢¼sRfied as a xninor arterial. The road consists.0f .tWo t2-f.oot lanes and s
rmn'ow shoulder. [t is posted at 50 mph.
St~land F~rms.cmm
12:41
Sen~ By: ~er[~[an P&Z; 888 6854; May-15-02 12:48PM; Page
Eagle Road north ofi-84 is designated as SH55 under the jurisdiction of lTD. It is
classified as a major aftexial. The road consists of five 12-foot lanes and g-foot shoulders,
It is posted at 50 mph.
~d Road is under the jurisdiction ofthe ACHD. It is classified as a minor arterial.
The road consists oftwo 12-foot lanes and a narrow shoulder, with turn lanes at major
/ntersecfions. It is posted at 45 mph.
Cloverdale Road is under the jurisdiction of the ACHD. It is classified as a minor arterial.
The road consists of two 12-foot lanes and a narrow shoulder, with turn lanes at major
intersections. It is posted a~ 45 mph.
V"~ory Road is under the jurisdiction of the ACHD. It is classified as a minor arterial. The
road consists of two 12-foot la~es and a narrow shoulder, with turn lanes at major
intersections. It is posted at 45 mph.
1-84 is classified as ~tn hterstate I-F~hway. At this location, it consists of six lanes. The
interstate connects with Eagle Road with a nm&fled diamond interchange. The imerchanse
differs from a traditional diamond interchange on the eastbound on-ramp, which is a loop
ramp.
Si. e Access:
The site is served by three approaches on Eagle Road and one approach on Vi~ory Road
and one access throush the Muir Woods subdivision. The developer has proposed to widen
Eagle Road to 5-lanes to just south ofthe south entrance. All access to the site will be
unsign~ti-ed stop controlled, All approaches will have a one in/one out full access
contis~-ation, except the south entrance along Bngle Road. This approach will have a left
turn bay included. Capacity analysis was completed for ali of the site access intersections.
2'he north approach on Eagle Rood (E, Copper Point Way) was analyzed to operate at a
LOS F ~nder tl~s conflgural~on. T~.,add~tions of an additional lane may ~¢d~o.he
evaluated to see Jf ~ LOS can be.
Sigrml warfares were compl~ for all of the access intersections and only the north
entrance alxl south ~sm'ance along Eagle Road warrant a sil~sl. The PM build-out u'aflic
for both inuwsecliom met the criteria for ~ Peak Hour Analysis Warrar~ itl I (1998
MUTC~). Howeve~ the installation of glpmls at these intersections increases the average
vehicle delay by 6 seconds per vehicle. At this lime a signal installation is not justi§ed with
the proposed traffic volumes,
Alignment consider$tions need W be addre~ to the west slims EasJe P. oad with Thousand
Springs ~oa~ Spa~ing ofthe approaches is in compliance with the requirements of
the ACHD Development Policy Manual.
Suflw. rland F~m~cmm
Page 7
Sent By: P&Z; 6854; · Ma¥-15-02 12:49PM; Page 8/17
The applicant should be required to construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Eagle
ROad located 2-feet within the new fight-of, way. Coordinate the location and elevation of the
sidewalk with District staff. If the sidewalk meanders outside of the right-of-way, provide an
ea~.'~ for the sidewalk
~ applicant should bc required to construct a S-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on
Vi~ol7 Road located 2-feet within the new right-of, way. Coordinate the location arid elevation
of ~e sidewalk with District sta~, If thO sidewalk lnsandet~ outside of the right-of-way, provide
an ,asanent for thc sidewalk
T~, traffic study did not address ifthe criteria had been met for either left or right turn auxiliary
lane's for this development, The volumes at the Eagle Road access points indicate that the criteria
is m~ct for at least the leR-mm lanes. The applic~.t w~ ~ to have their Traffic Fngin~r
review to reevaluate whether tbe criteria had been met for the auxiliary lanes. The issue oftiming
was also discussed to evalUate when these warrants are triggered to see if the improvements can
be fled to the phasing. According to the District's review of peak hour trips, the applicant should
be r~equired to construct a center turn lane on Eagle Road for the East Easy Jet Drive, the
proposed shared drivewayiand F~st Copper Point Way intersections. The mm lane should be
cotistructed to provide a minimum of 100-f'e, et of storage with shadow tapers for both the
ap~oach and departure directions, Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff.
OniMay 8, 2002, tha Coramisaion ~ed that th~ a~iic~nt should construct OR road trust
for!the cost of the c,~nter turn lane on Eagle Road.
Th~ applicant is proposing to construct a shared-driveway on Eagle Road for Lot 3, Block 2 and
Lei 4, Block 2. This propOsed shared-driveway is located on Eagle Road approximately 300-feet
so '.~th oftho north property line. This proposed driveway meets District policy and should be
apiarY' eyed with this application.
Graveled driveways abuttins publi~ st~ets create maint~ce problems due to gravel bans
tra,f, ked onto the roadway. In accordance with District policy, the applicant should be required to
pa~ the driveway on Eagle Road that sc-v~s Lot 3, Blor, k 2 and Lot 4, Block 2 its full width of
30 to 35-feet and at Wast 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pav~m~ ot'Eage Road and
install pavement tapers with 1S-foot radii abutxing the existing roadway edge.
Th.k applicant is proposins to construct two main entranc~ tO the subdivision. The proposexi
main ~ntrance location meet current District policy and should be appmv~ with this application.
Ea~t Easy Jet Drive is proposed to be located on Eagle Road approximately 850-feet south of the
no~th property line and is proposed to align with Easy let Drive. East Easy let Drive should be
d~..~'gned with 21-foot street sections on either side ofa c,e~or median. The median should be
constructed a minim~m of 4-feet wide (maximum 12-feet wide) to total a minimum ora 100-
sqtiare foot area. The applicant will be required to dedicate 54-feet of right-of-way plus the
ad~ ifional width of the median.
. · h ,~, ~-~,..~ ,
MRY 15 82 12:42 888 5854 PAGE.e8
Sent By: MerZ0[an P&Z; 888 6854; May-15-02 12:49PM; Page
No
SoUth Bay Star Way is proposed to be located on Victory Road approximately 800-fe,~t east of
EaSe Road. South Bay S~. Way should be desil~-,d with 21-foot street sections on either side
ora o~tea' median. The median should be co~smicted a minimum of 4-.feet wide (tr~sximum 12-
foe~ wide) to total a mioimUm of a ! 00-squar~ foot arei The applicam will be r~tuired to
dedicate $4-feet of risht-of-way plus the additional width of the median.
Th~ applicant is proposing to construct Easy let Drive west of South Nephrite Way as a
co .mmel'cial / imtustrial roadway. The roadway is proposed to be constructed as a 40-foot street
section with curb, ~tter, 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk within 54-[eet of right-of-way.
Eagy let Drive betwe~ South Nephrite Way and South Proud Way should b~ desisnated as &
re, s'~e, agal collector street with no f~out-on housinS, bee, ause the aaticipaled tra[~ volumes
exol~ed 1,000 vehicle trips per day. The acce~ restricli_~p$ for these str~'t sesments should be
sta/ed on the final plat. District policy roquires thai the~ street segments be constnicted as 36-
fo~ ~ sections with e.~rb, Sum~ and ~-tx~t wide coner~te sidewalks. U~ess otherwise
no .t~d, parkin/t should be p~ohibited on these street s,~m,o~lts. Coordimue the signase plan with
Distri~ staff.
Th~ applicant is proposing to co~uuct a commercial / industrial roadway that imerseclz Eas~
Coi~,r Point Way approxlm~dy l$0-fooi ~ of South Cobblestone Way. District policy
re~, ' es local / commercial roadways lo align or off, et a miltimum of 12~-feet. The commercial /
indlmtrial roadway that is proposed to inlerse~ with East Copper Point Way meizs District policy
and.,' should be approved with this application. The roadway should be constructed as a 40-foot
str~ section with curb, ~ttez, 5-foot wide concrete si~ within 54-ft~,t of right-of-way.
Unless otherwise approved, the applicant should be required to constm~ all public roads within
theisubdivbion as 36-foot ~treet seclions with curb, gutter, and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks
wi ~thin SO.feet ofri~-of~way.
Th} applicant is propo~i~ to ~xte~[ Holl~dal~ Stre~ an existing stub streei, imo the site at the
~ property line, thai is a pan ofthe Muir Woods Subdivisiou. Sta~supports the conn~,Xioa of
thili stroet. On May 8, 2002, the Commis~on mad a formal action requiring tho applicant to
co~tmct Hollandale Strut as a stub street The stub street should be constructed with
tempor~y bollards until apubli¢ road connection to Overland Road is obtaiaed. Asisn should be
plaid on the bollaixis lha~ sta~s, "this road will be~omv an open connectio~ when a public road
to Overland Road is constmat~d."
$~l~-laad Farms. cram
P~e9
MAY 15 02 12:42 888
Sent By: Met[alan P&Z; 888 6854; May-15-02 12:50PM; Page 10/17
Th~ applicant is proposing to extend Knapp Drive, an existing stub street, into the site at the
so~ property line, Staff Supports the connection of this .street. On May 8, 2002, the
Commission mad a formal!aciion requiria8 the applicant to construct Knapp Lane as a stub street.
Th{~ stub street should be ¢onstru~ted with temporal7 bollards umil a public road connection to
Overland Road is obtained. A sign should be placed on the bollards that states, "this road will
become an open eimn~on when a public road to Overland Road is constructed."
T~ applicant is proposing to construct five stub streets, Two of the proposed stub street stub to
thelsouth property line one stub street is proposed to stub to the west propm7 line nnd two stub
streets are proposed to stub to the north properly line.
o The firsi stub street South Pond Way, is proposed to stub to the south property line
approxinmely l!100-f~t east Of EaSle Road.
o The second stub Street, South Muay~ Way, is proposed to stub to the south property
line approximately 500-feet e. sst of Eagle Road.
o The third stub strut, East Publisher Street, is proposed to stub to the west property line
approximately 730-feet north of Victory Road.
o The fourth stub street, North Knapp Avenue is proposed to stub to the north property
line approximately 1,000-foet of the east property line. This stub strut is proposed to
cross the Ridenbaugh Canal
o The fifth stub streeg East Copper Point Way is proposed to remain as a stub at the
north pmpc, ty line approximatdy 1,250-feet west of the east property line.
Di~ ~trict staff supports the location of the proposed stub streets. District policy requires temporary
tut ~lrounds at the gild of stub streets that serve more than one lot, or are greater than ! 50-feet in
length. The applicant should not be ruluired to provide a paved tempormy turnaround at the end
of ~Eas! Publisher Street or South Proud Way but should be required to provide a paved
tempo~ turrmround at the end of South Mureyah Way. The applicant should provide the paved
temporary turnaround at the south end of the stub street with a temporary easement provided to
the~': District. The applicant should be requital to install a sign at the terminus of the roadway
stating thai, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTF..NDED IN THE H.1TURE". Coordinate the sign
pla~ for the stub street, and the design of the turnaround with District staff.
N~ Knapp Avenue is proposed to cross the Ridenb~ugh Canal at the north property line. The
api~.'iicant should submit p~qimiamy drawings for the cost of constructing the bridge. The
apl}fie, ant should then road trust for onqrlts~: pf,~t~.,cost of the plans, material and labor to
co~tmct the bridge. North Knapp Av~Ue'ii~"antici~.edi~° carry traffic volumes in excess of
1, ..000 v~hicle trips per day when K~pp i~R~t~l. ~,~ to the anticipated volumes of Notch
Ka~ p Avenue, the applicam should be d~i~. ~?i'."ri~b~y as a residential collector street
wi~ no front-on housing. The accesll.~'_~~i~i~ ',(s~e street segments should be stated on
the final plat. District policy requires~ii~t~'st/~ segments beconstructed as 36-foot street
Farms. cram
Page 10
r,lCtY :1.5 '02 12:42 888 6,854 PClGE. 10
sent By: Meridian P&Z; 888 §854; May-15-02 12:50PM; rage ~/~,
sections with curb, gutter and S,foot wide concrete sidewalks. Unless otherwise nmed, parking
sh .°hld be prohibited on these street segments. Coordinate tho signage plan with District staff.
T. The applicant is proposing to mmtmct an alley located on South Nophrite .W...ay north of East
Ro.{fe Street. District poll°] 7204.10 requires the tnininutm fight-of-way width for all
re~ alleys lo be 16-feet. Dedicatioa of dear title ~o the right-of-way, improvement et'the
alley, and acceptan~ of the improvement by the District as me~ing its consUuction standards are
req?ired for all alleys contaiaed in a proposed developmeat. The alley shall be improved by
paxi~8 the ~ width and lenl~ of the risht-of-way.
U. Construct ACHD approved tumarounds at the end ofF, asr Shersar Court, East Moner Court,
Fait Spur Court, South Halo Pla~e, East Hiilis Court, East Lfl~l Place and the unnamed cul-de-
sac}roadway that extead~ South from East Copper Pohtt Walt. Submit a desitin of the turnarou~
for~ew and approval by Distrim sla~.
V. Thl residential tumarotmds should be ~nstructed to provide a minimum turning radius of 45-f~et
and the ~mm~rc, ial turnaround$ should be e, onsml~d to provide a minimum turning radius of
SS-feet. The applicator should ~ho be required to provide a minimum of A 29-foot street ~tion
on ~ith~r ~ide of ~ny propo~l center i~land~ within the tumtm~xls. The mediam should be
co~tructed a minimum of4-f~ wid~ to tota~ a mlnlm, m ora 100-square foot re'ea. Dedicate
54-~'eet of right-of-way plus ti~ additional width of the median.
W. An~ proposed !aM~,pe islands/~ within the publi~ riser-of-way dedicated by this
shi~uld be owned and rrtsinl~ned by a homeowners as$oc/alion. Notes of th/s should be required
on ,the final phi.
c~s~ ~ of the proposed development. Conta~ Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file
nurabe0 for details.
Y. ~ existing irrigation facilities should be r~lormed outside ofth~ right-of-way.
Z. Uti~i,'ty street cuts in pavement loss than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing
by the District. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file numbers) ~or details.
AA. All!utility rdocation oosts associated with improving street frontages abuttin~ the site should be
bo/ne by the developer.
BB. Ba'.Sed on development patterns in this area and the resulting traffic generation, staff' anticipates
th~. th, tr~nsporl~tion sy~ena will be *d~uate ~o ~'ommodato ~lditiomfl tmffi¢ 8~er~l~l by
thil proposed ~.lopm,a~t with tbe r~uir___~a_~ t~ outlin~ within this r~or~.
The foll6win8 Site Specific Requirements and Standard Requirements must be met or provided
for prioF, to ACHb approval of the final plat. '~'" :" ""~ [ v ~':', 'i"~
Site Spe~c RaluiFementl:
Sull~rland Farms.cram
Page Il
~flY 15 '02 12:43 @8~ BBS4 PAGE. 11
Sen~ By: Mer[a~an P&Z; 888 6854; May-15-02 12:51PM; Page 12/17
J
De'dicato 48-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Eagle Road abutting the parcel by means
o~a warranty deed. The right-of-way purchase and sale agreement and deed must be completed
a~l signed by the applicai~t prior to scheduling the tinai plat for signature by the ACHD
C~mmission or prior to issuance ora building permit (or other required permits), whichever
OOCurs first. AlJow up to30 business days to process the fight-of-way dedication after receipt of
~ requested material. The owner will be paid the ~r market value of the right-of-way
de~licated which is an additioa to exisfin~ ACHD fight-of-way if the owner submits a letter of
ap~lJr, ation to the impact fee ~dmini~rator prior to breakin8 8round, in accordance with ACHD
~inance # 195.
D~dicate 4S-feet of fight-of-way from the centafline of Victory Road abuttin8 the I~trcel by
m~ans of'a wamtmy deed. The risht-of-way purchase and sale agreement and deed must be
ce~npleted and signed by the applicant prior to scheduling the final plat for sis~ature by the
ACI4D Commission or prior to issuance of a buildin8 permit (or other required permits),
w.~chever occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the fight-of-way dedication
~e~ receipt of ail requested material. The owner will be paid the fair market value of the right-
of?way dedicated which is an addition to existi~ ACI-]D right-of-way if the owner submits a
le~er of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breakin8 ground, in accordance with
ACHD Ordinance #195,
CensUuct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Eagle Road located 2-feet within the
n~' right-of-way. Coordinate the location and elevation ofthe sidewaik with District staff, ff
th~ sidewalk meanders oUtside of the right-of-way, provide an essement for the sidewalk.
C6nstruct a 5-foot wide detached c~nczete sidewalk on Victory Road located 2-fe~ within the
n~v n'ght-of-way. Coordinate the location and elevation ofthe sidewalk with District staff. If
tl~ sidewalk meanders outside of the right-of-way, provide an easanent for the sidewalk.
C~)nstruct a center turn lane on Eagle Road for the Fast F.,uy Jet Drive intusection or road trust
the improventents, whicheve~ should occur fa'st. The turn ia~e shall be constructed to
p~. vide a miniw~_,m of 100-feet of storage with shadow tapers for both the zpproach and
d~parture directions. COOrdinate the design of the turn la.rte with District staff.
COns~uct a center turn lane on F_.agle Road or road trust for the improvements, whichever
s ,'..l~ould occur first for theiproposed shared driveway located on Eagle Road approximately 300-
fO'et south of the north property line. The turn lane shall be constructed to provide a minimum
og 100-feet of storage with shadow t&pers for both the approach and departure directions.
Coordinate the design ofthe turn lane with District staff.
C~nstmct a center turn lane on Eagle Road for the East Copper Point Way intersection or road
triist for the improvements, whichever should occur first. The turn lane shall be constructed to
p{ovide a rltinimtm~ of lO0-feet of stora~ with shadow tapers for both the approach and
departure directions. Coordinate the desi~ of the turn lane with District staff.
Sud~-~lael Farms.cram
Page 12
'02 12:43 888 6854 PAGE. 12
Sent By: ~er[Olan P&Z; 888 ~854; May-15.02 12:51PM; Page 13/17
I0.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Construc~ a shared-driveway on Eagle Road for Lot 3, Block 2 and Lot 4, Block 2, as proposed.
T~s proposed shared-driveway is located aa Eagle Road approximately 300-feet south of the
ngrth property line. This proposed driveway meets District policy and is approved with
application.
Fare the driveway on Eagle Road that serves Lot 3, Block 2 and Lot 4, Block 2 its full width of
30 to 35-feet and at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of Eagle goad and
itJstall pavement tapers with 1 S-foot radii abuttin~ the eximlng roadway edge.
~onstmct two main entrances to the subdivision, as proposed.. The proposed main entrance
1 ...Ocations meet current District policy and am approved with this application.
East Easy Jet Drive is proposed to be located on F.~e Road approximately 850-feet south
of the north propmy line and is proposed to align with Easy Jet Drive. East Easy Jet Drive
shall be designed wi~ 21-foot street sections on either side of a center median. The median
shall be constructed a minimum of 4-feet wide (maximum 12-feet wide) to total a minimum
of a 100-square foot area. The applicant will be required to dedicate 54-feet of right-of-way
Plus the additional width of the median.
South Bay Star Way. is proposed to be located on Viaory Road approximately 800-fbet east
of'F..agle Road. South Bay ~atr Way shall be designed with 21-foot street sections on either
side of a center median. The ~ shall be comamcted a minin~wn of 4=f~et wide
(maninmm 12-f~ wide) to total a miniature of a 100-SClUare foot area. The applicant will
be required to dedicate 54-feet of right-of-way plus the additional width of the median.
Construct Easy Jet Drive west of South Nephrite Way as a commercial / industrial roadway, as
groposed. The roadway shall be construct~ as a 40-foot street section with curb, gntter, 5-foot
Wide concrete sidewalk within 54-feet of right-of-way.
Designated Euy Jet Driv~ betwe~ South Nephrite Way and South Proud Way as a residential
~llector street with no from-on housing. This roadway shall be constm~l~l as 36-foot street
siddons with curb, guttsr and S-foot wide concrete sidewalks with access restrictions stated on
the final plat. Unless otherwise noted, parking shall be prohibited on these street segments.
(~oordinate the signage plan with District slaff.
-~¢onstmct a commercial:/industrial roadway that intersects East Copper Point Way
~proximately 1 SO-feet ~ast of South Cobblestone Way, as proposed. This commercial /
iadustrial roadway ~ DisUict policy and is approved with this application. The roadway
Shall be constructed as a. 40-foot street secgon with curb, gutter, 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk
x~ithin 54-feet of right-of-way.
Construct all public roads within the subdivision as 36-foot street sections with curb, gutter, and
S-foot wide concrete sidewalks within SO-feet of right-of-way, ns proposed.
Extend Hollandale Street, an existing stub street into the she at the east property line that is a
l~art of the Muir W~pdif4sit~-~s~roposed. Construct Hollandale Street as a stub street
S~thefland Fanns.~nm
Sen~ By: Mer[O[an P&Z; 888 6854; May-15-02 12:52PM; Page 14/17
17.
19.
20.
w~.,th temporary bollards. A li~n shall be placed on the bollards that states, "this road will
become an open connection when a public road to Overland Road is constructed."
Extend Knapp Drive, an existing stub street, into the site at the south property line, as proposed.
C0nslmct Knapp Drive as a stub street with temporary bollards. A sign shall b~ placed on the
b611ards that states, "this road will become an open connection when a public road to Overland
ROad is constructed."
Ci)nstruct five stub streets, as proposed.
0
The first stub street, South Pond Way, is proposed to stub to the south property line
approximately 1900-fi~ enst of Engle Road.
The second stub street, South Mueyah Way, is proposed to stub to the south property line
approximately 500-fzet east ofF. agio Road.
The third stub street, East Publisher Street, is proposed to stub to thc west property line
approximately 730-feet north of Victory Road.
The fourth stub street, North Knapp Avenue is proposed to stub to the north prope~ line
approximately 1,000-feet of the east prope~ line. This stub street is proposed to cross the
Ridenbaugh Canal.
The fifth stub street, East Copper Point Way is proposed to remain as a stub at the north
property line approximately 1,2$0-feet west of the east property tine.
P~vide a paved temporary turnaround at the end of South Mureyah Way' with a temporary
e~ement provided to th~ District and install a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating that,
"~HIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". Coordinate the sign plan for the
st'Ob street, and the design of the turnaround with District stafF,
S0bmit preliminary drawings for the cost of constructing the bridge From Sutherland Farms to
th~ North property line. The applicant shall road trust for one half of the total cost of the plans,
mitterial and labor to construct the bridge. The road trust or the construction of the bridge shall
b~ phased according to final platting and traffic warrants.
COnstruct North Knapp Avenue as 36.foot street sezfions with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide
concrete sidewalks. The applicant shall be designated this roadway as a residential collector
street with no front-on housin~ with access restrictions for the~e street segments stated on the
~al plat. Unless otheraise noted, parking shall be prohibited on these street sesm~ts.
Cbordinate the signage plan with .District staff.
Construct an alley located on South Nephrite Way north of East Rolfo Stre~ as proposed. The
alley shall lave a minimum of 16.feet of ril~-of-way and ~ be improved by paving the full
width and length of the right-of-way. Dedication of clear title to the fight-of-way, improvement
Sutherland Farms. cram
Page 14
MAY 15 02 12:44 888 6854 PAGE. 14
Sent By: ~er[O[an P&Z; 888 B854; May-15-02 12:52PM; Page 15/17
of the alley, and acceptance ofthe improvement by the District as meeting its construction
st~mdards are required for ail alleys contained in a proposed development.
21.
22.
C9~ nstmct ACHD approved turnarounds at the end ofEsst Shergar Court, Fast Monet Court,
F~.'~ st Spur Court, South Halo Place, East Ih'His Court, East Legal Place and the unnamed cul-de-
sac roadway that extends south from East Copper Point Way. Submit a design of the
turnaround for review and approval by District staff.
The residential turnnrounds shah be constructed to provide a minhnum turning radius of 45-feet
a~d the commercial turnaround~ shall be col',structed tO provide 8 minimum turning radius of 55-
feet. The applicant shallalso be required to provide a minimum ora 29-foot street section on
either side of any proposed center islands within the turnarounds. The medians shah be
cbnmvcted a minimum of 4-feet wide to total a minimum ora 100-square foot area. Dedicate
5h-feet of fi~t-of-way plus the additional width ofthe median.
Any proposed landscal~ islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat
shall be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Notes of this ehell be required on
the final plat.
25.
26.
27.
Replace any existing damaged curb, Burrer a~ sidewalk and any that may be damased during
tire construction ofthe proposed devdopment. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280
(,/vith file number) for details.
Any ex/sting irrigation facilities sl~l be relocated outside of the right-of=way.
Utility street cuts in pavm~tent less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing
by the District. Contact Constmctiot~ Services at 38?-6280 (with file numbers) for details.
All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be
I~orne by the developer.
28.
(~Jm* than the access POints specifically appwved with this application, direct lot or parcel
~ccess to Eagle Road and Victory Road is prohibited. Lot access restrictions, as requi~ed with
t~s application, shall be stated on the ~ plat.
Standard Requirements:
'1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall
~ made in wrkin~ to the ACHD Planning and Development Supervisor. Thc request shall
~eci~cn~ identify eacll requix_ement_to bc reconslder0d and include ~ written e:~planation of
~vhy such a x~quirement would result in a substantial hardshi~ or in~quity The written tee. ua_st
.~all be subnitted to the ~strict no later than 9'00 a m. on the day scheduled for ACHD
C~onnnission action, Those items shall be reschedul~d for discu~ion with the Commission on
he next available meet~ a~enda.
,~ ,. ~,.., ,;, ~. "~./~',T~ ~-',~.
~ , r.~'"
Sutheatand F~ms,cmm
Page 15
HAY 15 02 12:45 88@ -~ ....
6854
PAGE.
Sent By: Mer[oLan P&Z; 888 6854; May-15-02 12:52PM; Page 16/17
Requests submitted to the District after 9:00 a.m. on the day scheduled for Commission a~on
dO not provide sufficient~time for District staff to remove 1~ item from the consent agenda and
r~pon to the Commissioa regarding the reque,~ed modification, varianc~ or waiver. Those
items will be acted on by the Commission tlnless removed from the agenda by the Commission.
A~Commissioner, a member of ACHD staffer any other person objecting to any final action
taken by the Commission may request reconsideration of that action, provided the request is not
for.' a reconsideration of an action previously requested to be reconsidered, an action whose
p~sions have be~ partly and materially carried out, or an action that has crested a conuactual
r tion p with third patties.
.!
Only a commission mmltllr who voted with the prevailing side can move for
reconsideration, but the motion may be seconded by any Commissioner and is voted
on by all Commissioners present.
If a motion t° reconsider is made and socondexi it is subject to a motion to postpone
to a certain time.
The request must be in writing and delivered to the Secretary of the Highway District
no later than 3:00 p.m. on the day prior to the Commission's next scheduled regular
meeting following the meeting at which the action to be reconsidered was taken.
Upon receipt of the request, the Secretary shall cause the same to be plac~ on the
agenda for that next scheduled regular Commission meeting.
The requ for r~onsideration must be supported by written documentation setting
forth new fa~s and information not preseated at the earlier meeting, or a ctumged
situation that has developed ainc~ the taking of the earlier vote, or information
establishing an error of fact or law in the earlier action. The request may also be
supported by oral testimony at the meeting.
If a motion to reconsider passes, the effect is the original matter is in the exact
position it oc,~pied the moment before it was voted on originally, h will normally be
~ to ACI-ID staff for further review. The Commission may set the date of the
meeting at which the matter is to be returned. The Commission shall only take action
on the original matter at a ngeting where the agenda notice so provides.
At the meetiag where the original matter is again on the agenda for Co~mission
action, interested persons and ACHD staff may present such written and oral
testimony as the President of ~he Commission determines to be appropriate, and the
Commission may take any action the majority of the Commission deems advisable.
If a motion to reco~icler passes, the applic, am may be charged a reasonable fee, to
cover administrative cogs, as established by the Commission.
P(~ymem of applicable road i~p~,ac~t~fees are required prior to building construction in accordance
~ ' ~"~ "'~' '~':' ' ...... ' Highway ' 'Impact F dinance
w~th Ordinance #lgs, also .~i~al.~llt~'~.'.~-~ Dtsmct Roa~ ee Or
..... · ~ ,~ ~,~ Sathefland Fanm.cram
Pag~ 16
15 '02 12:45 888 6854 PAGE.
Sent By: Mer[Oian P&Z; §854; May-15-02 12:53P~; Page 17/17
Ail design and ~onstm~ion shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy
Ma,qua], ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Serves procedures and all
applicable AC.I-ID Ordinan~ unless specifically waived hereitt An engineer registered in the
State of Idaho shall prepare and certify ali improvement plans.
The applican'~ shn~ submit revised plans for staffapprova], prior to issuance of building permit
(~ other required permits), which incorporates any required design cha~ges.
(~onstruction, use and pr0pe~y development shall be in conformance with all applicable
r~luirements ofthe Ada:County Hishway District prior to District approval for occupancy.
18 is the responsibility ofthe applicant to verify all existin~ utilities ~th~n the right-of-way.
l~ utilities danced by the applicant shsll be repaired by the applicant at no cost to
ACHD. The applicant shall be required to call DI~ ({-800-342-1585) at least two full
b~s'mess d~ys prior to bs~king ~round within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact
ACHD Trn~c Operations 387=6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (sp~e or filled) are
c~mpromised durin~ any pha~e of construction.
No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing
~d signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized
~presentative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon th~ applica.ut to
Obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District.
Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject o£ this
application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or
qmher re6~atory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in
i~terest advises the Hishway District of'its intent to change the planned use of the subject
tiroperty unless a waiver/variance of said requimnems or other legal relief is 8ranted pursuant to
the law in effect at the time the chanse in use is sought.
Con.duS~on of Law:
1. ~CI-ID requirements are in~ended to assure that the proposed use/devdopment will not place an
dndue burden on the exis~ vgmio_,hw and pedestrian transportation system within the vicinity
'.~..~pacted by the proposed development.
,.
Should you have any questions or comments,'please contact the Plannin8 and Development
Division at 387-6170.
Subn~tt~d by'
Commission A~ion'
Plaunin~ and Development Staff'
May 8. 2002
Sutherland Fanns. mnm
Pa~e 17
MAY 15 '02 12:46 888 6854 PAGE. l?
PUBLIC HEARING
SIGN-UP SHEET
DATE
20-Jun-02
PROJECT NUMBER
PP 02-004
PROJECT NAME
Suthedand Farm
NAME
FOR
AGAINST
JUN 2 0 2002