Staff ReportChanges to Agenda: Items #4F, G -Request for continuance on Chesterfield (RZ-11-004; PP-11-007) to the
October 6~ hearing.
Item #4A: Kingsbridge (RZ-11.003)
Application(s):
- Rezone of 38.31 acres of land from the R-2 zone to the R-4 zone.
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 38.31 acre(s), is currently zoned R-2, and is
located at east side of S. Eagle Road; midway between E. Victory Road and E. Amity Road.
Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: The subject property is surrounded on the north, east and south by larger county
residential properties zoned RUT. The property to the west includes lots platted with the first phase of the
Kingsbridge Subdivision, zoned R-2.
History: In 2010, the City Council approved a new preliminary plat (PP-10-007). The plat consists of 72 residential
lots and 7 common lots on 38.31 acres.
In 2011, the City Council approved phase 1 of the final plat (FP-11-004). The plat consists of 36 residential lots and 6
common lots.
In 2011, the City Council also approved the Kingsbridge development agreement modification (MDA-11-004) that
excluded this property from the original DA and required a new DA to govern the property. The new DA has not been
signed by the applicant.. Concurrently, the applicant applied for variance (VAR-11-001) to deviate from the R-2
dimensional standards. The City Council denied the variance request.
Summary of Request: The applicant is requesting to rezone 38.31 acres of land from the R-2 zoning district to the
R-4 zoning district. The proposal affects a total of 72 residential building lots. Initially, the applicant sought a blanket
variance to deviate from the R-2 dimensional standards. During the hearing, the Council deemed that a blanket
variance was not the appropriate mechanism for deviating from the R-2 dimensional standards and denied the
variance. In staffs analysis of the variance application, it was identified that rezoning the property to the R-4 zone
would allow less stringent dimensional standards (setbacks).
The applicant has provided a comparison of the two zoning districts. Rather than explaining the differences in text
form, staff has attached the comparison sheet as Exhibit A.3 in the staff report.
As indicated on this sheet, the applicant is not proposing to increase the number of buildable lots or the density
approved with the subdivision. The reason for the rezone is to reduce the setbacks to allow more flexibility in the
home styles proposed for the subdivision (Exhibit A.4). In general, staff recommends approval of the rezone as the
density and lot dimensions still consistent with the R-2 district the difference is the lesser interior lot setback in the R-
4district. City Council will be acting on the DA modification that ties the applicant to the number of buildable lots and
density approved with the platting of the property.
Comprehensive Plan DesignationlCompliance wlComp Plan? Low Density Residential -yes
Compliance with UDC? yes
Written Testimony: Verbal from the applicant in support of the Staffs recommended conditions of approval. Email
indicating the advisory committee for Kingsbridge No.1 has no opposition to the rezone provided the applicant
complies with the rezone exhibit attached in the staff report.
Staff Recommendation: Approval
Notes:
STAFF REPORT
Hearing Date:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
September 15, 2011
Planning & Zoning Commission
Bill Parsons, Associate City Planner
(208) 884-5533
E IDIAN~--
IDAHO
RZ-11-003 and MDA-11-006 - Kingsbridge
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, Boise Hunter Homes, has applied for rezone of 38.31 acres of land from the R-2 zoning
district to the R-4 zoning district.
A concurrent application for a development agreement modification has also been submitted to amend
the draft development agreement approved with a previous development agreement modification
(MDA-11-004).
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the proposed rezone and development agreement modification subject
to the conditions listed in Exhibit B, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in
Exhibit D.
3. PROPOSED MOTION
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City
Council of File Number RZ-11-003 and MDA-11-006 (optional) as presented in staff report for the
hearing date of September 15, 2011 with the following modifications: (Add any proposed
modifications.)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City
Council of File Number RZ-11-003 and MDA-11-006 (optional) as presented during the hearing on
September 15, 2011 for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial of the
annexation and you must state specific reason(s) for the denial of the plat.)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number RZ-11-003 and MDA-11-006 (optional) to the hearing date of
(insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s)
for continuance.)
4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
A. Site Address/Location:
The subject property is located on the east side of S. Eagle Road midway between E. Victory
Road and E. Amity Road in the northwest % of Section 28, Township 3 North, Range 1 East.
B. Applicant/Owner:
Boise Hunter Homes
Kingsbridge RZ-11-003 and MDA-11-006 - 1 -
1025 S. Bridgeway Place, Suite 290
Eagle, ID 83616
C. Applicant's Representative:
Matt Schultz, The Schultz Company (208) 880-1695
D. Applicant's Statement/Justification: Please see applicant's narrative for this information.
5. PROCESS FACTS
A. The subject application is for a rezone and a development agreement modifcation. A public
hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter,
consistent with Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 5.
B. Newspaper notifications published on: August 29 and September 12, 2011 (Commission);
C. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: August 18, 2011 (Commission);
D. Applicant posted notice on site by: September 2, 2011 (Commission);
6. LAND USE
A. Existing Land Use(s): The subject property is vacant and construction has commenced on the
first phase of the final plat.
B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: The subject property is
surrounded on the north, east and south by larger county residential properties zoned RUT. The
property to the west includes lots platted with the first phase of Kingsbridge Subdivision, zoned
R-2.
C. History of Previous Actions:
• In 2010, the City Council approved a new preliminary plat (PP-10-007). The plat consists of
72 residential lots and 7 common lots on 38.31 acres.
• In 2011, the City Council approved phase 1 of the final plat (FP-11-004). The plat consists of
36 residential lots and 6 common lots.
• In 2011, the City Council also approved the Kingsbridge development agreement
modification (MDA-11-004) that excluded this property from the original DA and required a
new DA to govern the property. The new DA has not been signed by the applicant.
• In 2011, the applicant applied for variance (VAR-11-001) to deviate from the R-2
dimensional standards. The City Council denied the variance request.
D. Utilities:
1. Public Works:
a. Location of water: E Kingsbridge Drive and S Merrivale Way.
b. Location of sewer: E Kingsbridge Drive and S Merrivale Way.
Issues or concerns: Secondary water connection will need to be established for fire flow
requirements. Proposed water design will only support homes up to 3600 SF.
E. Physical Features:
1. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: The McDonald Lateral is located along a portion of the north and
east boundary of the proposed plat. The Ten Mile Feeder Canal transverses along the
southern boundary. Both ditches are to remain open.
Kingsbridge RZ-11-003 and MDA-11-006 - 2 -
2. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards that exist on this property.
3. Flood Plain: This property does not lie within the floodplain.
7. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
This property is designated "Low Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use
Map. Low density residential areas are anticipated to contain up to three dwellings per acre (see Page
20 of the Comprehensive Plan.) With the subject rezone, the applicant is not proposing to increase the
density approved with the preliminary plat. The approved preliminary plat includes 72 single-family
lots on 38.31 acres for a gross density of 1.88 dwelling units/acre. The proposed density will remain
consistent with the current land use designation.
Further, the subject property is surrounded by large County parcels ranging from 3 acres in size to 5
acres in size. The larger lots approved with the plat along the perimeter are not proposed to change and
still provide a transition between this project and the adjacent county parcels as encouraged by the
Comprehensive Plan. Since the adjacent properties are developed with single family residential, the
approved lot count and density is not changing and the surrounding properties are developed as low
density and designated low density residential, staff finds the proposed rezone complies with the
Comprehensive Plan.
8. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
a. Schedule of Uses: Unified Development Code (UDC) 11-2A-21ists single-family detached
homes as permitted uses in the proposed R-4 zoning district.
b. Purpose Statement of Zone: R-4: The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a
range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Connection
to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential districts.
Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and
corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range.
c. General Standards: All of the proposed lots comply with the standard street frontage and lot
size requirements of the R-4 district. The number of lots and density approved with the
preliminary plat is not changing with the subject application.
9. ANALYSIS
Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation:
REZONE (RZ) Application: The applicant is requesting to rezone 38.31 acres of land from the
R-2 zoning district to the R-4 zoning district. The proposal affects a total of 72 residential
building lots. Initially, the applicant sought a blanket variance to deviate from the R-2
dimensional standards. During the hearing, the Council deemed that a blanket variance was not
the appropriate mechanism for deviating from the R-2 dimensional standards and denied the
variance. In staff's analysis of the variance application, it was identified that rezoning the
property to the R-4 zone would allow less stringent dimensional standards (setbacks).
The applicant has provided a comparison of the two zoning districts. Rather than explaining the
differences in text form, staff has attached the comparison sheet as Exhibit A.3. As indicated on
this sheet, the applicant is not proposing to increase the number of buildable lots or the density
approved with the subdivision. The reason for the rezone is to reduce the setbacks to allow more
flexibility in the home styles proposed for the subdivision (Exhibit A.4). In general, staff is
supportive of the rezone as the density and lot dimensions still comport to the R-4 district.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA) MODIFICATION: Concurrently, a development
agreement modification has been submitted. The applicant has already received Council approval
on a DA modification for the subject property (MDA-11-004). With that approval, the subject
Kingsbridge RZ-11-003 and MDA-11-006 - 3 -
property was excluded from the original Kingsbridge DA and subject to a new one. The new DA
has not been signed because the applicant has elected to move forward with a rezone application.
The applicant wishes to include additional provisions in the new DA before signing the
document. Further, staff believes other provisions should be modified and incorporated into the
DA to ensure this site develops consistent with the approved preliminary plat.
With the previous DA modification, the Council approved the following six (6) provisions:
NOTE: Staff has proposed a change to the approved provisions and has recommended new
provisions be added to the new DA. Staff s recommendations are in bold italicized format
below
1. Future homes constructed within the Kingsbridge Subdivision shall substantially comply
with the sample elevations attached as Exhibit A.4.
2. The Kingsbridge Subdivision shall contain the following amenities; 1) tot lot, 2) covered
picnic shelter, and the 1.58 acre neighborhood park. Further, the McDonald Lateral shall
remain un-tiled and the open lateral is to serve as an open space amenity for the
Kingsbridge Subdivision. The neighborhood park shall be installed with Kingsbridge
Subdivision No. 2 and the tot lot and picnic shelter shall be installed with Kingsbridge
Subdivision No. 3.
3. The applicant shall pipe the tail ditch from the Dartmoor irrigation pond through the site
and install a new head gate on the new inlet to control water flow into the pond.
In order to receive the first building permit, the applicant shall post a surety for said
improvement in the amount of one hundred and twenty-five percent (125%) of the
associated construction costs. A detailed bid document shall be reviewed by Planning
Department prior to the acceptance of the surety. Further, the construction drawings shall
be submitted to the Public Works Department for review. Evidence of acceptance of the
design by the irrigation district shall be included with the surety. The applicant shall
coordinate with the appropriate irrigation provider and adjacent Dartmoor homeowner's
to coordinate the construction activities. Staff recommends this provision be removed
from the new DA. Staff has received confirmation from both the Dartmoor HOA and
the Boise Project Board of Control that the improvements are approved by both
entities
4. The applicant shall comply with any applicable provisions of the settlement agreement
between the Dartmoor Homeowners Association as it relates to the Kingsbridge
Subdivision (PP-10-007) being developed by Boise Hunter Homes.
The 25-foot rear yard setback along the perimeter lots shall only apply to the four
perimeter lots that are not adjacent to a perimeter common lot. The subject lots are
located in the southeast corner of the subdivision (Phase 3).
6. The applicant shall construct 6-foot perimeter fencing along the eastern boundary of the
four (4) lots located in the southeast corner of the subdivision (Phase 3). The fencing
shall be installed with the construction of the homes.
7. The applicant shall comply with the requirements depicted on the Rezone Exhibit
attached as Exhibit A.2 which includes the following: 1) 72 buildable lots and square
footages of the lots, 2) the highlighted lots with the modified interior side yard setback
restriction and 3) the specific lots requiring the construction of single story homes.
8. Minimum square footages for future homes shall be as follows: 2,000 square feet for
single story homes and 2,400 square feet for two-story homes.
Kingsbridge RZ-11-003 and MDA-11-006 - 4 -
In summary, the applicant's proposal complies with the requested R-4 zoning district dimensional
standards and density requirements in accord with the UDC. Further, the approved density of 1.88
units to the acre is consistent with the low density residential land use designation in the Plan.
Therefore, staff recommends approval of the rezone and development agreement modification
subject to the above development agreement provisions and all applicable conditions approved
with PP-10-007 and FP-11-004.
10. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings
1. Vicinity Map
2. Rezone Exhibit
3. Comparison of the R-2 zone and R-4 zone
4. Approved Elevations
B. Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
2. Public Works Department
3. Fire Department
4. Police Department
5. Parks Department
6. Sanitary Service Company
7. Ada County Highway District
C. Legal description and Exhibit Map
D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
Kingsbridge RZ-11-003 and MDA-11-006 - 5 -
A. Drawings
1. Vicinity Map
.. ,. ~ ~ ~-~i1'I' ' '; ~ `` ~ Tf l 'fir I.7,~ f
"' E ~A~coN DR ,..r ~_~ . ,.
AVE ST R-4 n. `d ~ ~~~ ''s r? tl t ~~
• ` t i '~ a ~ Oyu
r
'~
Y
a
~~. ~.
,_ ,
t)r '' i i 'i ' f
r
F i ~ ', ~ ~ i ~o n~
~ R-4 ~ lei ~ ~ ~ ~~ ,rrit ~~I ~~~~~
J ~ 4 ~i~ ..t- ~ 2 1- ~ `gip ,
O
~ r-.- . ~w n C7 . ~T4 ^_ fi
~/1
E DEERHILL DR E SALCOMBE DR Z ~i ,~ _ ,'~ s~, , ~ `'
a o E KINGSBRIDGE DR ~" ~ ~'' ''~ f ~~ „~•
~ '~"'F "° '~'
°~ ~ E PLYMPTON DR ~ ~ ;..•~ <-~~ '-.~/ ``
Q ~,. ~x
~,' ~ .
E ZA~S~A DR !~' E ZALDIA ST E ZALDIA LN I~UT E ZALDI7A l~l ,'Z~'~.,LN
E TUSA ST F ` ~ ii ~* ~ ~ ~ " • ~
1 ti a ~' ~ a
n R 2 i~ r r w
E FRATELLO ST D E FRATELLO ST I~'0.'~~~ J ' " ~ ~ ~ rr4,' "'
E,XIl l171C f~
2. Rezone Exhibit
KINGSBRIDGE PHASE 2 & 3
72 LOTS ON 38.3 AC
- --- - - ,~ a .k ~. ~
4
22,416 $ s
20.622 e
19,46) 7
22.34! ~ e
19,32E 9
19,32! la
tf,728 11
20,266
-- -- I ~ ~--- ---
__
- " J
-- FUT URE PHASE 3
16
x17
16 -
27 -
2d
~ 29 30 13
12.325 14
12,J25 13
,2.326 12
12,326 it
12.326 10
,2,325 9
13,S7a
-- - -
. ,~OSe 12,34J 13,5a~ iSAOf
5
113' 9?
JS u
13,f80 33
I2,a08 32
13,671 ~ 31
~ 14,f15 2
12,325 3
12,323 4
12,325 5
12,325 6
12,325 7
12,325 e
13,639
20,Da2
-'
165' PHASE 2-UNDER CONSTRUCTION
_
~' 2a 7 te3 ~9 ~ ~~ 2 J 4 5 6
/ // ~ , ~ ~ 12.326 1Y,326 12,326 12,326 13,9J9
\V
-_
_~~
~ ,~
/ i~"
~ - 11
12,316 10
12,326 9
12,326 e
12,328 7
13,fH
27 ; 1
2$469 ~
~ FUTURE PHASE 3
2oa93
~
1 14,606 ~ 15510 14,126 13,966
29 15S
1&606 33 3g IJ
~ 46
_- - - iJ,005 13,239 12,357 12,327
146'
CJ
._~ ~
13,079 34
12,270 ~ 39
12,554 42
12,565 47
12,362
~
... ,.
r ~
~~ f~ ~
15.205 1x,901 16139 16.204 15.932
I
30,620
2
41,109
133'
(~
7
41,463
4
44,171
52 S
17,669
1BJ'
bi
14,9x1
50
12,293
4f
17,x02
'~• SINGLE-STORY HOME
15' SIDE SETBACK (WEST PL)
Exhibit A - 2 -
3. Comparison of the R-2 zone and R-4 zone
KINGSBRIDGE $UBDIVI8iON 2 8~ 3
T2 LOTS ON 38.3 ACRES
ZONE DIMENSIONAL STANDARD COMPARISON
PROPOSED
R-4 R-2 KING8BRIDGE
STANDARD TONE ZONE R-4 Zat~
DensHy 4/Acre 2/Acre 1.9/Acre
Lot Size 8,000 SF 12,000 SF 12,056 SF*
Frontage 60' 80' 80'*
Front Setback to Garage 20' 20' 20'
Front Setback to Llving/Side Garage 15' 20' 15'
Rear Setback 15' 15' 15'
Side Setback -Single Story 5' 7.5' S'
Side Setback -Two Stiory 5' 15' S'
Side Setback • Corner 15' 20' 15'
House Hsight 35' 35' 35'
Min. Living Area -Single Story 1,400 SF 1,500 8F 2,000 SF*
Min. Living Area -Two Story 1,400 SF 1,500 SF 2,400 SF*
*BY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Exhibit A - 3 -
4. Approved Elevations
~.. ..
Exhibit A - 4 -
~.
-~*~
.e .
- _ :~,.:r
Exhibit A
-5-
B. Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
1.1 Prior to the adoption of the rezone ordinance and City Engineer's signature on phase one of the
final plat, the new development agreement shall be signed by the applicant and approved by City
Council and include the provisions outlined in section 9 of the staff report.
1.2 The Applicant shall comply with all previous requirements of this site associated with PP-11-007,
FP-11-004 and new development agreement in effect for the development.
2. Public Works Department
2.1 The applicant shall comply with the conditions approved with the preliminary plat and final plat
(file #PP-10-007 and #FP-11-004).
3. Fire Department
3.1 The applicant shall comply with the conditions approved with the preliminary plat (file #PP-10-
007).
4. Parks Department
4.1 The applicant shall comply with any applicable conditions approved with the preliminary plat
(file #PP-10-007).
5. Police Department
5.1 The applicant shall comply with any applicable conditions approved with the preliminary plat
(file #PP-10-007).
6. Sanitary Service Company
6.1 The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to include a concrete pad at the end of the common
drive no more than 5 feet behind the sidewalk that is of sufficient area to accommodate the
receptacles of the residences that take access from the common driveway.
7. Ada County Highway District
7.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval
7.1.1 Construct Kingsbridge Drive as a residential collector with 36-foot street section, vertical curb,
gutter and 5-foot wide detached (or 7-foot wide attached) concrete sidewalk from its current
terminus to its intersection with Newbridge Avenue, as proposed. Parking and front-on housing
are prohibited on this segment of Kingsbridge Drive. Coordinate a signage program for NO
PARKING signs with District Traffic Services and Development Review staff.
7.1.2 Construct all internal local streets as 36-foot street sections with vertical curb, gutter and 5-foot
wide concrete sidewalks within 50 feet ofright-of--way, as proposed.
7.1.3 Construct two shared driveways on Kingsbridge Drive, as proposed. The shared driveways shall
be between Lots 32 and 33 and Lots 34 and 35. Pave the driveway its full width at least 30-feet in
to the site beyond the edge of pavement.
7.1.4 Construct a stub street to the north, Stockenham Avenue, located between Lot 31 and Lot 58
approximately 1,300 feet south of Victory Road and 2,425 feet east of Eagle Road (measured
centerline to centerline), as proposed. Provide a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the
roadway, and install a sign stating, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE."
7.1.5 Construct a stub street to the east, Kingsbridge Drive, located between Lot 26 and Lot 29
approximately 2,200 feet south of Victory Road and 2,650 feet east of Eagle Road (measured
Exhibit B - 1 -
centerline to centerline), as proposed. Provide a temporary turnaround at the terminus of the
roadway, and install a sign stating, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE."
7.1.6 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval.
7.2 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way.
7.2.2 Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACHD roadway or
right-of--way.
7.2.3 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be
borne by the developer.
7.2.4 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.
7.2.5 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Policy.
7.2.6 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing
by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for
details.
7.2.7 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.
7.2.8 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.
7.2.9 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.
7.2.10 Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction. The assessed
impact fee will be based on the impact fee ordinance that is in effect at that time.
7.2.11 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 DIGLINE (1-811-342-1585) at least two full business days
prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACRD Traffic
Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during
any phase of construction.
7.2.12 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.
7.2.13 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.
Exhibit B - 2 -
C. Legal Description and Exhibit Map
1~~
A rLU~aVINQ ~
~.
332 N. Broadmore Way
Nampa, iD d3ti87
Ph: (2N) 442•ti369 • Faxt (2~) 4ti64f944
~I pPROVAL
BY ---D -
Pro)ect: ct loos ~ ~ 6 20~
Date: Atrauat 15, 201 I AAERIDIAN PUBLIC
Page: 1 of 2 Wt~1K3 DEPT:
F.xhlblt "A"
REZONE PROPERTY BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION
This parcel to situated in a portion of Lot 1 I, Bieck 2 of Dartmoor SubcOviaion, Book 64, Page
6539, on Hlo in the Oftfco of the Recordex, Ads County. ~, located within a portion of the
S W l/4 of the NW i/4 and the S8 I/4 of the NW 1 /4 of Section 28, Town~sip 3 Norris, Mange 1
East of the Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, ldklw and b more pardCUlady
described as follows:
COMMENCMO ~ the west t/4 comer of mid Sxtton 2i, aid point mon-urrentad wtth a 5/8-
inch diameter iron rod and ref+~areod in Corner Perpotwuion an Fib ~ No.
109000661, on Lik in the Oftioe otthe Iteoordar, Ada County, Malw; Nronce aloe` dre south
boundary of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 2i,
A) 5.89.23'38"E.,1327.92 feet to the southwe~ oonuu of the SE i/4 of the NW ~, OF 3A1D
Section 28; thence along this aouth boundary of the aid SE i/4 of the NW 1/4,
l) 5.89°25' 12"B., 211.% foot to the southwt corner of Lot 16, Block 3 of
KingsbrM~ Subdivision Phase 1, Book %, Pagss 11933, on File in the Olllce of
the Iteoorda, Ada County. Wadw, and dre PO[NT OF BeGINN[NG; d-anoe
donF the a~sterly bow~dary of aid KinBsbridgo Subdivbion Phan 1 the
fotlowit~ course;
B) N.01'32'26"E., 321.71 feet (of t+ecord 321.72 feet); therwe,
i) N.27.56'29"W.,187.59 foot; thencx,
2) N.26°14'l2"W.,100.05 feet; thence,
3) N.40'04'S7"W., 253.58 feet; thence
4) N.03'21'35"W.,147.58 feet; thence,
5) N.07°24't0"E., 177.29 feet; thence,
t.:tPr«dda [~lletict toos~aarY.y~t.aaAL DE3cRtwrtoNSUtmne t~rapsrgr taoudsry Dssoriptien tutst i.ioc
Exhibit C - 1 -
Project: C11003
Date: August lS, 2011
Page: 2 of 2
6) S.89°30' 16"E., 56.39 feet to a point of curvature; thence along a curve to the
~4
7) having an arc length of 35.61 feet, a radius of 75.00 feat, through a cemnl angle
of 27.12' 11" and a bng chord which beam 3.75°54' 11 "E. 33.28 fret to a point of
non-tanga~cY: thence.
8) N.27°41'55"E., 50.00 feed; thence,
9) N.00°29'45"E.,195.83 feet to a poim on the north boundary of the said SS 1/4 of
the NW 1/4; thence leaving the easterly boun~ry of said Kingsbridge
Subdivision Phase 1 and abng said north boundary of the SE 1N of the NW t/4,
10) 5.89°30' 16"E.,1284.53 foot to be aortltaist corner of said SEl/4 of the NW 1/4;
thence along the east boutldsty of said 3EI /4 of the NW U4,
11) 3.00°29'34"W.,1325.46 feot to the southeaut corner of said SEl/4 of the NW1M;
d~eeeoe abng the south boundary of said 3E1/4 of the NElA4,
12) N.89°25' 12"W.,1116.18 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 31.31 sores, sere or las.
SUBJECT TO all 13aentenh, Rights, liishts-of--Way and all other Enarmbraaaa of record or
implied.
L:iProjeet FibsVC I I OOS~L DB8(:RIF710N91R~ tMop~rty BovndAry Dssatptbn Oi 131 I.doc
Exhibit C - 2 -
~~i1~QN[l~ 898YH3 ii1AL1[) ~ ~i ~
11[O1:QA1~8"J]f
.»...,,. il~'H ~/ONt109 xialY30Yd mow
1
~y T ~~~
~~ ~ ~ ~
N
a ~ sik~f~~ f
~~ ~~
~ ,,..- ~~
~~ ~ ~
E ^ ~w~ t
~ ~ ,
a ~
o ~ yy~
41 ~ [i
a ~ ~ ~
d ~
R S ~ ~ A ~~
:a ~ ~ rg ~ ati1 ~ ~~ F~~L.' g~
S : V
t ems,
8~~ °° ~ci.f~ae4 0 ~
~~, QkQ~ NRt N
~s
i _ _-' ~m w ~' g
' ~_..,,r,..._. ~ h ~ 8 ~ N
N
g~ ~~ s ~~ ~ ry~ ~
~Ry ~~ 7hg~ ~~
8{ N Z
` NN
O j
~; ~~ ~~
' A
a A
~ n ~~ a i
Exhibit C - 3 -
D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
1. Rezone Findings:
Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation
and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation
and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings:
a. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive
Plan;
The Applicant is proposing to rezone 38.31 acres of land from the R-2 zone to the R-4 zone.
Staff finds that the proposed zoning map amendment is consistent with the FLUM and
complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan.
b. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
Staff finds that the proposed map amendment to R-4 complies with the regulations and the
purpose statement of the R-4 zone. The subject application is not proposing an increase in lot
count (72) or density (1.88) approved with the Kingsbridge preliminary plat (PP-10-007).In
fact, the density, lot sizes and lot frontage requirements exceed the minimums required in the
R-4 zone.
c. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety,
and welfare;
Staff finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, or welfare. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council consider rely on any
oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this finding.
d. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services
by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not
limited to, school districts; and,
Staff finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon
the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site.
e. The rezone is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11-5B-3.E).
Staff finds rezoning this property is consistent with the future land use designated on the
FLUM and the objectives contained in the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, staff finds that the
rezoning of this property to R-4 district as proposed by the applicant is in the best interest of
the City; subject to the provisions of the development agreement.
Exhibit D - 1 -