Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo from PlanningProject: Castle Rock (AZ-07_016, PP_07_020, PUD-07-001) Location, size of property and existing zoning: The site is located on the west side of S. Eagle between Amity &Lake Hazel. The property consists of 224.29 acres and is currently zoned County. g Road, RR in Ada Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: North: Recently approved Whitebark Subdivision, zoned R-4 residences and agriculture, zoned RUT (Ada Coun large rural parcels, zoned RR Ada Coun) East: Eagle Road and Single-family home on gal (Ada Coun ( Court South: Single-family homes on large rural parcels, zoned RR ty); West: Single-family homes on large rural parcels, zoned RR and R(Ada C Comprehensive Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (104 +/_ acres) and Medium Density l ty) Residential (120 +/- acres) Applications: • AZ of 224.29 acres from RR in Ada County to R-2 (45 acres) and R-8 (179 acres) • PP consisting of 794 single-family residential building lots and 99 common/other lots on 182.0 acres in the proposed R-2 and R-8 zoning districts 8 • PUD for deviations from the R-8 district requirements pertaining to lot size, street frontage, and building setbacks, to provide an opportunity for exemplary site development This project was originally heard by the Commission on 1216107. At that meeting, the Commissi recommended denial of the project to City Council primarily because the density didn't meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, and the Commission wanted larger lots on the perimeter. °n Prior to the Council meeting, revisions were made to the plans to reflect some of the Commis' concerns as follows: number of building lots was decreased from 847 to 789; open space was decrease from 41.6 acres to 38.84 acres; and the overall density of the plat was reducedfrom 4 ing per acre to 4.33 dwelling units per acre [The density of the platted area designated or to d residential uses was originally 4.48 dwelling units per acre; the revi f 6S dwelling units dwelling units per acre. The density of the area designated for mediumf w density splat depicted a density of 3. S originally 4.71 d u. per acre; the revised plat depicted a density of 4.39 d u. er acre . density residential uses was hearing m issio .the City Council reviewed the revised plans and voted t Per the to the Commission. � At the Council project back Since the Council meeting, the applicant has revised the plans again. Revisions made to the Council meeting are as follows: the number of building lots has increasedfro 789 decrease from the original plan of 53 lots); open space increased from 38.84 the plat since decrease from the original plan o f to 794 (a within the development in the medium4rlensi) designated area to the a acres to gal to acres (a adjacent to Blackrock Subdivision in the low d the C'ty park was relocated from a central location plat area increased from 4.33 dwelling units per acre e 'gu dwelling west boundary of the plat ensity designated area; and the overall density of the original density of 0.7 dwelling units/acre)[The density of theplatted area desigacre nate (a decrease in the residential uses was 3. S d. u. per acre; the revised plat depicts a density of 2.98 d u density of the area designated for medium density residential uses was 4.3 g dfor low density Plat depicts a density of 5.08 d u. p Per acre. The per acre . 9 d u• per acre; the revised this project (applicant to explain changes)., The applicant has also revised the design guidelines for The Council remanded this project back to the Commission and asked or the specifically consider/review the following items: 1 Plat, 2) Consider the traffic impact of this development on E f Commission to Make anew recommendation based on the revised interchange, specifically the Eagle/Tof'h s intersection • 3 ownership of the coved areas, and/or ct o has the ri h Eagle Road between the site and the 4) Reconsideration of the revised densities in gel )Consider not only the maintenance but the g t to do (or not do) what within the coved areas' approved South Meridian Area Plan; and S) Consider requiring S. Carlisle Wa anon to the Comprehensive Plan and the recently boundary across the Ten Mile Creek for istterconnectivity upon future de across the creek. y to stub to the east development of theProperty Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: The entrance into this site is from E. Taco currently intersects Eagle Road. Note: The Fire Department and Police Department minimum of two points of access be re uired or anme Drive, which (this includes the Blaclo ock lots), 4 f YPortion of the project, which serves more thanrequestrng that a 50 homes Landscaping: 1 • Width of street buffer(s): 25 feet adjacent to S. Eagle Road; 20 feet adjacent to E. Taconi Drive s 2• Width of buffer(s) between land uses: NA 3. Percentage of site as open space: 21.7% (39.86 acres) —Includes an 8 acre park Proposed dedicated to the City, p p d to be Proposed DA requirements: See staff report, pages 11 &12. History of Previous Actions: • An annexation and zoning submitted to the City in 006 for subjec59) t Preliminary plat (PP-06-059) application was Blackrock Castlegreens Subdivision. The annexation request by the was for 224.26 acree developer s to be zothe ne of 2, R-4, and R-8 with no reductions to dimensional standards. The preliminaryzoned R- building lots and 31 common/other lots with a gross density of 3.61 dwelling units per acre net density of 4.64 dwelling units per acre. This application was plat was for 644 Primary reasons for denial were the lack of designnes i and a denied Proposed the City Council. development and lack of transportation infrastruurre in this area of the City tructures within the • This property was previously platted in Ada County as Blackrock Subdivision No. 1. The access roaockd Subdivision No. 1 plat contains 44 residential lots and various streets, including access road from Eagle Road, E. Taconic Street. The subject application is a re -subdivision tof Lots 16 & 24, Block 1 and Lot 10, Block 3, of Blackrock Subdivision No. 1. Although a re included Subdivision No. 1 is included in the annexation area, only the lots mentioned a of are included in the subject preliminary plat. above Elevations: Yes. The applicant has included a Product Exhibit that depicts the location housing types proposed within the development along with common areas and cove a °f the different is proposing to construct custom homes on the 7 lots in the R-2 zone that are include Plat that border Blackrock Subdivision on the north. The applicant is Proposing real. The applicant single-family detached dwelling units within this development to Promote d m the Castle Rock P p g four different types of types. p to diversity and choice m housing Letters of testimony have been received from the applicant, Larry Wickham Jerry Smith, Russell Fulcher, and Martin Fabricius. Staff has also received re ACHD. ,Debbie Wickham, wised comments from Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the subject applications with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. Notes: Project: Castle Rock Location: west side of S. Eagle Road, between Amity & Lake Hazel. Applications: annexation, preliminary plat and planned unit development Highlights of Proposed Development: AZ of 224.29 acres to R-2 (45 acres) and R-8 (179 acres). PP consisting of 794 single-family residential building lots and 99 common/other lots on 182.08 acres in the proposed R-2 and R-8 zoning districts. PUD for deviations from the R-8 district requirements pertaining to lot size, street frontage, and building setbacks. The gross residential density is 4.38 dwelling units per acre (overall). Reductions to the minimum dimensional standards proposed in the R-8 zone: Castle Rock Dimensional Standards Street setback* Legend Cottage Village UDC Living 10 10 10 15 Alley setback* Garage 11 20 20 N/A 20 Living N/A N/A 10 12 ide seacGarage Stbk N/A N/A 20 12 Rear setback 5 12 5 12 5 5 Minimum lot size (square footage) 4,200 3,800 N/A 12 Minimum living area (square footage) 1,400 1,000 3,100 4,000/5 Minimum lot frontage (measured at 50 900 NA garage front setback line) 46 40 NA Minimum lot frontage (measured at the 30 30 street) 40 40 *Measured from back of walk ** Measured from edge of allev navemP„t Proposed site amenities are as follows: 1) The applicant is providing 39.86 acres of usable open space, which equals approximately 21.7% of the total development area. A minimum of 10% open space is required; every additional 5% of open space that is provided on the site counts toward the number of required amenities. In this case, 11.7% open space is provided above the required amount, which counts as 2 amenities. 2) Various pathways and micro -paths are proposed within the common areas, some of which connect to the multi -use pathway along the Ten Mile Creek and others run along the Beasley Lateral. 3) A neighborhood park is proposed on Lot 1, Block 17 that is proposed to contain a gazebo, tot lot, and basketball court. 4) A gazebo is proposed within the common area on Lot 27, Block 3. 5) A pocket park is proposed on Lot 18, Block 38 that is proposed to contain a tot lot. 6) A pocket park is proposed on Lot 27, Block 43 that is proposed to contain a tot lot and pond. 7) Picnic tables are proposed throughout the common areas. Furthermore, the applicant is proposing an 8.8 acre park that is intended to be dedicated to the City as part of this development. ACHD has submitted conditions of approval for this project that are included in E include the following: 1) A signal will be required at the Taconic/Eagle intersection Exhibit B that 4/15/2008 tion when signal warrants are met based on signal analysis submitted to the District for each final plat after the final platting of the 4001h lot. 2) The Amity/Eagle intersection will need to be fully improved as identified in the District's Capital Improvement Plan prior to the final platting of the 1271h lot. The Council remanded this project back to the Commission and asked for the Commission to specifically consider/review the following items: 1) Make a new recommendation based on the revised plat; 2) Consider the traffic impact of this development on Eagle Road between the site and the interchange, specifically the EagleNictory intersection; 3) Consider not only the maintenance but the ownership of the coved areas, and/or who has the right to do (or not do) what within the coved areas; 4) Reconsideration of the revised densities in relation to the Comprehensive Plan and the recently approved South Meridian Area Plan; and 5) Consider requiring S. Carlisle Way to stub to the east boundary across the Ten Mile Creek for interconnectivity upon future development of the property across the creek. Elevations: Yes. The applicant has included a Product Exhibit that depicts the location of the different housing types proposed within the development along with common areas and cove areas. The applicant is proposing to construct custom homes on the 7 lots in the R-2 zone that are included in the Castle Rock plat that border Blackrock Subdivision on the north. The applicant is proposing four different types of single-family detached dwelling units within this development to promote diversity and choice in housing types. Other: The DA includes the following: • The only allowed uses on this property are as follows: single-family detached homes and allowed accessory uses in the R-2 and R-8 zoning districts. • A 10-foot wide multi -use pathway shall be constructed on this site on the south side of the Ten Mile Creek • The applicant shall construct a minimum 8.8 acre neighborhood park on this site and dedicate said park to the City. The neighborhood park shall be constructed and accepted by the City prior to the 400th building permit being issued for this development. • Construction materials used on the wall surfaces of all structures shall incorporate a minimum of 3 different types of materials. Materials may include the following: vertical and horizontal siding, board and batten, shingle, shake, hardboard, scallops, stucco, brick, or stone (per the Castle Rock Design Guidelines). Balustrades shall not be considered an acceptable material as they are an architectural feature, not a wall surface material. • All structures shall substantially comply with the building elevations submitted with this application The Parks Department has submitted analysis of the proposed park site as follows: The new park location is along the bench between Castle Rock Subdivision and Black Rock Subdivision. While the new site is not as centrally located within the project, it is more central to the overall square mile and provides some unique opportunities based on topography not found at other Meridian parks. The new location has fewer building lots adjacent to it and provides better visibility and landmark quality. Commission Recommendation: approval at their March 6, 2008public hearing. Summary of 3/8/2008 Commission Public Hearing: 4/15/2008 i. In favor: Gerry Armstrong, Providence Development Group ii. In opposition: Martin Fabricius, Carol Jarvis, Ray Eggleston, Justin Thiel, Don Cantrell, Tim Foster, Tom Sylvester, and Tim Taylor. (The following people signed up in opposition of the project but did not offer testimony: Pat Fabricius, Dan Lisberry and another person whose name is illegible.) iii. Commenting: None iv. Written testimony: Russ Fulcher, Larry Wickham, and Debbie Wickham, Jerry Smith, and Martin Fabricius (all in opposition). Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. The Commission discussed each of the outstanding issues from the Council meeting on January 22"d; ii. Landscaping and maintenance responsibilities of the coved/public use areas on individual homeowners' lots; iii. The depth and flow of the lateral and pond adjacent to the tot lot in relation to children's' safety; iv. The Use and Benefit Agreement for the Village units allowing property owners to use the adjacent side yards for a larger yard area; v. The extension of S. Carlisle Way to the east, stubbing at the canal. Key Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: i. Added a condition of approval for the applicant to provide a 42-foot wide easement for the extension of S. Carlisle Way to the east property boundary for access to the Fulcher property; i. Added a condition of approval for the applicant to work with staff to relocate the tot lot depicted on Lot 27, Block 43 away from the lateral and pond; ii. Added a condition of approval for the applicant to install fencing along the south property boundary adjacent to the Don Cantrell property (parcel #R1835500100); Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. Council should determine if an easement for the future extension of S. Carlisle Way is appropriate or if Carlisle should be extended as a public street to the east Property boundary with development of the subdivision. ii. The applicant has not yet contacted staff for the relocation of the tot lot depicted on Lot 27, Block 43, away from the lateral and pond. Written Testimony since Staff Report: i• Sherrie Ewing sent an e-mail expressing concerns about the inability of the road system to handle the anticipated traffic from the development. ii. The Parks and Recreation Department noting the decision of the Parks and Recreation Commission. Notes: 4/15/2008