HomeMy WebLinkAboutBritton, Betty Lou AZ 02-025
October 14, 2002
AZ 02-025
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING October 17,2002
APPLICANT Betty Lou Britton ITEM NO. 5
REQUEST Public Hearing - Request for annexation and zoning of 6.24 acres from RUT to R-2
zones for Betty Lou Britton - 3680 West Ustick Road
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POliCE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
i
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:
<-fl-eCt)/n!7UYl ~
~JtVvcr-L -j() cj 6
{!.- n ~I'U:/
1-0
COMMENTS
See attached Staff Comments
No Comment
"Ok per Meridian Water Departmenf'
"No Commenf'
"No Comments at this time"
See -aHached COrYIroe.t"\.!S
"We have No Objections to this Proposal"
No Comment
Contacted:
DOle:~Phone: Q~g5S-92
"-'
I Ii
(1\\
senfed af public meeHngs shall become property of !he City of Meridian.
\
.J'-
.
.,~~,.\",
. ~ Ada County Highway District
David E. Wynkoop, President
Dave Bivens, 1st Vice President
Judy Peavey-Derr, 2nd Vice President
Susan S. Eastlake, Commissioner
Sherry R. Huber, Commissioner
318 East 37th Street
Garden City iD 83714-6499
Phone (208) 387 -Q1 00
F~(208)3a7-Q391
E-mail: tellus@ACHD.ada.id.us
October 8, 2002
RECEIVED
OCT 1 1 2002
To:
Betty Britton
3680 W. Ustick Road
Meridian, Idaho 83642
City of Meridian
City Clerk Office
Subject:
MAzt02-025
Rezone
3680 West Ustick Road
On October 8, 2002, the Ada County Highway District acted on your application for the above
referenced project. The attached staff level report lists site-specific requirements, conditions of
approval and street improvements, which are required.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact staff at 208-387-6171.
Sincerely
~~I'D::~
Right-of-way & Development Services
Planning Division
CC: Planning & Development Chron/project file
City of Meridian
Construction Services
Drainage
Utilities
.....;.;.-~..."
~ Ada County Highway District
Right-of-Way & Development Department
Planning Review Division
This application does not require Commission action and is approved at the staff level as of October 8, 2002
Tech Review for this item was held with the applicant on October 4, 2002. Please refer to Attachment for
appeal guidelines. Staff contact: Joyce Newton, 208-387-6171, jnewton@achd.ada.id.us
File Number(s):
MAZ02-025/Rezone
Site address:
3680 West Ustick Road
Owner:
Betty L. Britton
3680 W. Ustick Road
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Applicant:
Same
Representative:
Same
Application Information
The Ada County Highway District (ACHD) staff has received the above referenced application requesting
annexation and rezone approval to rezone the site from RUT to R-2 zoning. The site is located on the north
side of West Ustick Road approximately y.,.mile west of Ten Mile Road. This site is located directly across
from Dakota Ridge Subdivision NO.1.
Acreage:
Current Zoning:
Proposed Zoning:
Existing Use:
6.24
RUT (Rural Urban Transitional)
R-2 (Rural Low Density Residential)
Single-Family ResidentiaVAgricultural
Vicinity Map
MAZ.o2-ll25
3680 West Ustick Road
IIWl'Jr.L
i
~
r1r
W*E
- - -,- ----r-
~
''"'"
~I ~-
/ >
, .
'.
s
1
A. Findings of Fact
1. Trip Generation:
This rezone application is estimated to generate no additional vehicle trips per day, however the
residence will generate 10 vehicle trips per day based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers
Trip Generation Manual.
Future development is estimated to generate up to 110 additional vehicle trips per day. Trips will be
calculated at the time a development application is received by the District based on the Institute of
Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual.
2. Impact Fees:
The impact fee will be calculated at the time a development application is received by the District,
based on the impact fee ordinance in effect at this time.
3. Traffic Impact Study:
A traffic impact study was not required with the rezone application. A Transportation Impact Study
(TIS) may be required at the discretion of the Ada County Highway Districts Transportation
Department's Traffic Engineer when ACHD receives a development application.
4. Site Information:
There is an existing single-family residence located on a portion of the site the remainder of the site
is agricultural in nature.
5. Description of Adjacent Surrounding Area:
a. North: Agricultural with single-family residential
b. South: Dakota Ridge # 11 Englewood Creek EstateslWilkens Ranch
c. East: Agricultural with single-family residential
d. West: Agricultural with single-family residential
6.
Impacted Roadway(s)
West Ustick Road:
Frontage:
Functional Street Classification:
Traffic count:
Approximately 440-feet
Minor Arterial
East of Black Cat Road was 3,071 on 4/17/02
West of Ten Mile Road was 3,604 on 8/2101
Better than "C"
35-mph
North Tumberry Way (main entrance to Dakota Ridge #1 Sub.)
Level of Service:
Speed limit:
Nearest intersection:
7. Roadway Improvements Adjacent To and Near the Site
Ustick Road has 2-travellanes with no curb, gutter or sidewalk abutting the site. There is sidewalk
abutting Dakota Ridge and Wilkins Ranch and Englewood Creek Subdivisions.
2
..
8. Existing Right-of-Way
Ustick Road has 50-feet of existing right-of-way (25-feet from centerline).
9. Existing Access to the Site
There are two existing driveways into the site:
Driveway #1 is located approximately 143-feet west of the east property line and provides access the
residence. Driveway # 1 is currently offset approximately 54-feet from the intersection of Dakota
Ridge #1 (N. Turnberry Way).
Driveway # 2 is located approximately 172-feet west of Driveway # 1.
10. Site History/ Other Development in Area
District staff has not reviewed this site in the past. However staff has prepared staff reports for Dakota
Ridge, Wilkins Ranch, Englewood Creek and Utility Subdivisions. They are all located on Ustick Road
in .the same general location.
11. Five Year Work Program
This location is not programmed into the District's current Five-Year Work Program (FY 03-07) for
reconstruction or any roadway improvements.
B. Findings for Consideration:
This application is for a change of zoning. Listed below are some to the policies that
apply to the site. Upon the receipt of a development application the District may
require additional Findings of Consideration that may apply upon the District's review
of future development applications.
1. Right-of-Way
District policy requires 96-feet of right-of-way on arterial roadways (Figure 72-F1 B). This right-of-way
allows for the construction of a 5-lane roadway with curb, gutter, 5-foot concrete detached sidewalks
and bike lanes.
District policy 7204.4.1 and Figure 72-F1A requires 50-feet of right-of-way on local streets. This right-
of-way allows for the construction of a 2-lane roadway with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete
sidewalks
2. RoadwayOftSem
District policy 7204.11.6, requires local roadways to align or offset a minimum of 300-feet from an
arterial roadway (measured centerline to centerline).
3. Driveway Offsem/ Driveway widths/gravel
District policy 72-F5, requires driveways located on collector or arterial roadways with a speed limit of
35 to align or offset a minimum of 150-feet from any existing or proposed driveway.
District Policy 7207.9.3 restricts residential driveways to a maximum width of 20-feet.
Graveled driveways abutting public streets create maintenance problems due to gravel being tracked
onto the roadway. In accordance with District policy, 7207.9.1, the applicant should be required to
pave the driveway its full width and at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the
roadway and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge
3
4. Street Sections
District policy 7204.4.2 states, "developments with any buildable lot that is less that 1.5-acres in size
will typically provide streets having a minimum pavement width of 32-feet with curb, gutter and
sidewalks. The total street width shall be 36-feet from back-of-curb to back-of-curb. Variations of this
width may be allowed, depending on traffic volumes forecast to be generated by the development.
Concrete sidewalks shall be a minimum of 5-feet in width unless they are separated from the curb 5-
feet or more in which case the sidewalk shall be a minimum of 4-feet in width.
5. Stub Streets
District policy 7203.5.1 and 7205.5 requires stub streets to provide intra-neighborhood circulation and
to provide access to adjoining parcels. District policy also requires temporary turnarounds with a
temporary easement provided to the District at the end of stub streets that serve more than one lot, or
are greater than 150-feet in length with a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating that, "THIS
ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE"
6. Landscape Islands/Medians
District policy 7202.7 and 7207.5 requires any proposed landscape islands/medians within the public
right-of-way dedicated by this plat should be owned and maintained by a homeowners association.
Notes of this should be required on the final plat.
7. Turnarounds
District policy 7205.2.1 requires tumarounds to be constructed to provide a minimum turning radius of
45-feet. The applicant should also be required to provide a minimum of a 29-foot street section on
either side of any proposed center islands within the turnarounds. The medians should be
constructed a minimum of 4-feet wide to total a minimum of a 1oo-square foot area.
8. Sidewalk
District policy requires 5-foot wide (minimum) concrete sidewalk on all collector roadways and arterial
roadways (7204.6.5).
District policy 7203.6 requires the applicant of a proposed development to make improvements to
existing damaged sidewalk; curb and gutter construction or replacement; replacement of unused
driveways with standard curb, gutter and sidewalk; installation of pedestrian ramps; pavement
repairs; signs; traffic control devises; and other similar items in order to correct deficiencies or replace
deteriorated facilities.
c. NORTH MERIDIAN PLANNING AREA
In April of 2001, ACHD staff retained the services of WaShington Group International to conduct a six-
square mile traffic study of the northwestern Meridian area from Ustick Road to Chinden Boulevard,
and from Meridian Road to one-half mile west of Black Cat Road. The study revealed that the traffic
capacities of the surrounding roadways (Ustick Road, McMillan Road, Ten Mile Road, Linder Road)
with the proposed developments is expected to push the roadways to their 2020 planning thresholds
upon build-out of the projects.
After completion of the original study, and after meeting with representatives of the Meridian City
Council, Ada County Commissioners, ACHD Commissioners, and COMPASS, the study was
expanded to a 12-mile area from Eagle Road to McDermott Road and Ustick Road to Chinden
Boulevard. This has been deemed the "North Meridian Planning Area". The next phase of the study,
the economic phase, cannot be prepared until the traffic impact phase is complete, and will focus on
4
,.
the cost of the improvements deemed necessary by the study, including right-of-way costs. The
outcome of the economic study will provide the District with an estimate of the costs to improve the
roadways in the North Meridian Planning Area to handle the traffic generated by the proposed
developments in the area.
Staff anticipates that an extraordinary impact fee or Local Improvement District (LID) will be
implemented/established for the North Meridian Planning Area in order for the roadway system to be
adequately upgraded to handle the traffic generated by the development in this area. This current
application under review would also be subject to any extraordinary fees that the District may impose.
D. Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1. If the rezone is approved and the District receives a development proposal, the District intends to
provide site-specific requirements that apply upon District review of future development. The Findings
for Consideration cover a portion of the District policies that will pertain to any development proposal
for this site.
2. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval.
E. Standard Conditions of Approval
1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way.
2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be bome
by the developer.
3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the
construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file
number) for details.
4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by
the District. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file numbers) for details.
5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy
Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all
applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State
of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans.
6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or
other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes.
7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements
of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy.
8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with
Ordinance #195, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance.
5
,
9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The
applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant
shall be required to call DIGLlNE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking
ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in
the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction.
10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and
signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative
of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written
confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District.
11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this
application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other
regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises
the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a
waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the
time the change in use is sought.
F. Conclusions of Law
1. The proposed site plan is approved, if all of the Site Specific and Standard Conditions of Approval are
satisfied.
2. ACHD requirements are intended to assure that the proposed use/development will not place an
undue burden on the existing vehicular and pedestrian transportation system within the vicinity
impacted by the proposed development.
Attachments
1. Vicinity Map
2. Site Plan
3. Appeal Guidelines
6
Request for Reconsideration
Request for Appeal of Staff Decision
1. Appeal of Staff Decision: The Commission shall hear and decide appeals by an applicant of the
final decision made by the ROWDS Manager when it is alleged that the ROWDS Manager did not
properly apply this section 7101.6, did not consider all of the relevant facts presented, made an error
of fact or law, abused discretion or acted arbitrarily and capriciously in the interpretation or
enforcement of the ACHD Policy Manual.
a. Filing Fee: The Commission may, from time to time, set reasonable fees to be charged
the applicant for the processing of appeals, to cover administrative costs.
b. Initiation: An appeal is initiated by the filing of a written notice of appeal with the Secretary
of Highway Systems, which must be filed within ten (10) working days from the date of the
decision that is the subject of the appeal. The notice of appeal shall refer to the decision
being appealed, identify the appellant by name, address and telephone number and state
the grounds for the appeal. The grounds shall include a written summary of the provisions
of the policy relevant to the appeal and/or the facts and law relied upon and shall include a
written argument in support of the appeal. The Commission shall not consider a notice of
appeal that does not comply with the provisions of this subsection.
c. Time to Reply: The ROWDS Manager shall have ten (10) working days from the date of
the filing of the notice of appeal to reply to the notice of the appeal, and may during such
time meet with the appellant to discuss the matter, and may also consider and/or modify
the decision that is being appealed. A copy of the reply, and any modifications to the
decision being appealed will be provided to the appellant prior to the Commission hearing
on the appeal.
d. Notice of Hearing: Unless otherwise agreed to by the appellant, the hearing of the appeal
will be noticed and scheduled on the Commission agenda at a regular meeting to be held
within thirty (30) days following the delivery to the appellant of the ROWDS Manager's
reply to the notice of appeal. A copy of the decision being appealed, the notice of appeal
and the reply shall be delivered to the Commission at least one (1) week prior to the
hearing.
e. Action by Commission: Following the hearing, the Commission shall either affirm or
reverse, in whole or part, or otherwise modify, amend or supplement the decision being
appealed, as such action is adequately supported by the law and evidence presented at
the hearing.
Appeal Guidelines
7
;I;
'"
.(:)
Q~ -
0:: II CII
CII
::.::= u..
0.... e
~~ e
N
~:E ....
~~
~~
1.00 e
C")- e
> l>>
o
C!
~
u
i=
fJ)
::>
3:
e
$
e
e
C')
e
MAYOR
Robert D. Conie
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Tanuny deWeerd
Keith Bird
Cherie McCandless
William L.M. Nary
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208) 888-4433' FAX (208) 887-4813
City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888.4218
MEMORANDUM:
To:
Mayor, City Council and Planning & Zoning Commission
David McKinnon, Planner II }.JA c--d
Bruce Freckleton, Senior EngItr'ee';-i~g Tech ~
From:
Re:
Betty Lou Britton
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
(208) 288.2499 . Fax 288.2501
PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
(208) 898.5500' Fax 887-1297
PLANNING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT
(208) 884-5533 . FAX 888.6854
October 8, 2002
RECEIVED
OCT f 0 2002
C~ty Of Meridi
CIty Clerk om:
. Annexation and Zoning of 6.2 Acres of Land Located at 3680 W. Ustick Road
from RUT (Ada County) to R-2 (Rural Residential District), by Betty Lou
Britton (File No. AZ-02-025).
We have reviewed the above referenced submittals and otTer tbe foUowing comments, as
conditions of approval These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly
modified or deleted by motion of the Meridian City Council:
APPUCATION SUMMARY
The Applicant, Betty Lou Britton, has applied for Annexation, and R-2 zoning approval of a 6.2-
acre parcel oftand located at 3680 W. Ustick Road.
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.
The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area and essential City services are or
will be available to the subj ect property.
LOCATION
The property is located on the north side ofUstick Road, west ofTen Mile Road.
SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
North: Pasturelruralland, zoned RUT (Ada County).
South: Single family residential, zoned R-4
East: Single family residential, zoned R-2.
West: Single family residential, zoned RUT (Ada County).
ANNEXATION & ZONING ANALYSIS
According to Ordinance 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amend1nents, both
the P&Z Commission and Council are required "to review the particular facts and circumstances
AZ-02..o2S
BritOOn.AZ
Planning & Zoning CommissionlMayor & City Council
September 12, 2002
Page 2
of each proposed zoning amendment in lenns 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;
Staff finds thal the requested zoning designation, R-2, is not harmonious with and
in accordance with the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land
Use Map, which designates the land to be "Mixed Use - Waste Water Treatment
Plant" (MUWTP). The Comprehensive Plan states clearly that no additional
residential uses should be pennitted within the MUWTP land use designation (pg
98). MUWTP allows for low intensity industrial, retail uses and office uses.
Staff anticipates that the property will be redeveloped in the near future and
recommends a more appropriate zoning designation such as C-N (Neighborhood
Commercial Business District) or L-O (Limited Office) in order to accommodate
future uses.
The existing single family residential use would be allowed to remain as a legal
non-conforming use even if the property is rezoned to a zoning designation other
than residential. All future re-development of this property wi\l be required to
obtain a Conditional Use Permit prior to development, per the MCC and the
Meridian Comprehensive Plan's requirements.
B. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the
future;
Staff anticipates that if the property were to be zoned R-2, as requested by the
applicant, upon annexation, that the property would need to be rezoned again to
accommodate future development.
C. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be developed in the
fashion that would be aUowed under the new zoning -for example, a
residential area turning into a commercial area by means of conditional use
permits;
Staff has been informed by the applicant that she has no plans to develop the
subject property at this time, but has received an offer for the purchase of her
property.
D.
Has there been a change in the area or adjacent areas which may dictate that
the area should be rezoned. For example, have the streets been widened, new
railroad access been developed or planned or adjacent area being developed
in a fashion similar to the proposed rezone area;
AZ-02-025
BrittonAZ
Planning & Zoning CommissionlMayor & City Council
September 12, 2002
Page 3
Staff finds that the new Comprehensive Plan adopted in August, 2002 designates
the subject land as MUWTP, thereby dictating that he zoning be something other
than residential..
E. 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 the requested R-2 zoning will not change the existing character of
the area and will be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing
character of the general vicinity. The intended character of the vicinity is not
residential in use, but rather office and light commercial; therefore the R-2 zoning
designation may not be appropriate for this location.
F. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future
neighboring uses;
Staff finds that the proposed zoning will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing
or future neighboring uses, furthermore all future uses will be required to obtain a
Conditional Use Pennit prior to development.
G. 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 property to be annexed will be served adequately by all
essential public facilities and services.
H. 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.
L
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;
AZ-02-025
Britton.AZ
Planning & Zoning CommissionlMayor & City Council
September 12, 2002
Page 4
Staff finds that the proposed zoning/use will not increase traffic, noise or other
nuisances that would be detrimental to the general welfare of the surrounding
area.
J. 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 there will be no new proposed vehicular approaches to the
property.
K.. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic
feature of major importance; and
Staff fmds that no natural or scenic features of major importance will be lost or
damaged by approving the annexation and rezone.
L. 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.
ANEXATION AND ZONING COMMENTS
1. 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, when services are
available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as
landscape irrigation.
2. The development of this property shall be in compliance with all City Code in effect at the
time of development. A Conditional Use Permit is required for any future development of
this property.
3. All livestock currently being maintained on the property shall be allowed to continue on the
subject property until such time that the livestock use of the land ceases for a period of one
year, or if the land use changes from residential to a new commercial use.
4. The existing house has been connected to the sanitary sewer and water systems of the City of
Meridian recently. These emergency connections were made via a staff level approval,
wherein annexation is required.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the annexation; however staff believes that the requested R-2 zone
isnot appropriate for this location, due to the Comprehensive Plan's designation of the property
as MU-WTP.
AZ-Q2-02S
Britton.AZ
Planning & Zoning CommissionlMayor & City Council
September 12, 2002
Page 5
Staff anticipates that the land will be re-developed in the near future, and that the R-2 zone will
not accommodate the re-development, thus requiring another rezone in the future. Staff
recommends that the property be re-zoned to a C-N (Neighborhood Commercial Business
District) or L-O (Limited Office) zone in accordance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan.
AZ.()2-()25
_AZ
PUBLIC HEARING
SIGN-UP SHEET
DATE
October 17, 2002
PROJECT NUMBER
AZ 02-025
PROJECT NAME
Betty Lou Britton
NAME
FOR
AGAINST
v
"
. z
,_ 0 ~ 3
~J [i:l = '"
. ~": ~ Cia
* f>1 :::: !;1
f'll.-[:;
~J;i:\g ~
<>) P=\ u
I .
_ _~'1~.1!t~_
- -< - --
1--
~ll.~
I:::] ~
I '1l-bB IllS'1I' .~ ,-"
l'~~ ~<- ~
1:' ~.. '" /~e
. /
~.. .;;',., (e,;0[ii
. .:';0 \ \e :le~
.'\"~\~' .,
j II "'"'' if> \, r(l:\ ~'
U~ ~ ~
' " v
, \. ................
'"', -
,
'\
...
"
'" "I
~ . g
g~ ~ ~ i.
",,,, ~~ .
~m ~ s: ~~
411~ g~ >>~
!:~ ~ tl
>... .. ~I
~
!-.
1
!:
r
!
,.
I.
i
,.
,.
[
i-.
I
I
,,-
';-
f
I'
;,
i"
,
~.
r:
t. ,
i"
,.
~::
I.
,