Loading...
Findings - PZ - 1992 - PP/Melvin's Eagle Point #6 - Pp/20 Lot/9.82 Acre CITY OF EAGLE IN THE MATTER OF ) AN APPLICATION FOR) M~LVIN'S EAGLE POINT) #6 A PRELIMINARY PLAT) BY ) MAX BOESIGER, INC. ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW On December 7, 1992, pursuant to public notice and hearing procedures set forth in Section 67-6509, Idaho State Code, Richard Boesiger, Inc., the applicant, came before the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission, for the City of Eagle, Idaho, requesting approval for a preliminary plat for phase #6, Melvin's Eagle Point. The subdivision includes 20 lot, 19 of which are single family dwelling lots and 1 common lot. The property included 9.82 acres, gross density 1.93 per acre. Based on testimony from the applicant and all interested parties, together with all documentary evidence submitted concerning the application, the Eagle City Planning and Zoning Commission finds the following: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. The records in this matter indicate all notices, publications have occurred as required by law. the records further reflect notice of the public hearing was sent to the appropriate public and private entities with responses to the proposal being received in the City Clerk's office from those entities; and 2. On December 7, 1992 public hearing proceedings were conducted by the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission. No oral testimony was received. A letter of inquiry was received by Pat and Bill Richards regarding the common area, asking if a park was to be designated at that location. 3. The standards used in evaluating the application are in the following sections of the Eagle City Code. TITLE 9-SUBDIVISIONS The standards used in evaluating the application are in the following sections of the Eagle City Code and Comprehensive Plan. With respect to the review of the preliminary plat: Title 9-Land Subdivisions: 9-1-3: 9-2-3: 9-2-4: 9-3-1: PURPOSE: The purpose of these regulations is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, and to provide for: A. The harmonious development of the City and its area of impact; B. The coordination of streets and roads within a subdivision with other existing or planned streets and roads; C. Adequate open space for travel, light air and recreation; D. Adequate transportation, water drainage and sanitary facilities; E. The avoidance of the scattered subdivision of land that would result in either of the following: 1. The lack of water supply sewer service, drainage, transportation or other public services; or 2. The unnecessary imposition of an excessive expenditure of public funds for the supply of such services; or F. The requirements as to the extend and the manner in which: 1. roads shall be created, improved and maintained; and 2. water and sewer and other utility mains, piping connection, or other facilities shall be installed G. The manner and form of making and filing of any plats; and H. The administration of defining the powers and authorities. these regulations by duties of approving Preliminary Plat Procedures Final Plat Procedures Design standards A. Street location and arrangements: When an official street plan or comprehensive development plan has been adopted, subdivision streets shall conform to such plans B. Minor Streets: Minor streets shall be so arranged as to discourage their use by through traffic C. Stub Streets: Where adjoining areas are not subdivided the arrangement of streets in the new subdivisions shall be such that said streets extend to the boundary line of the tract to make provisions for the future extension of said streets into adjacent areas, and shall have a cul-de-sac or temporary cul-de-sac. D. Relation to Topography: Streets shall be arranged in proper relation to topography so as to result in usable lots, E. Alleys:--- F. Frontage Roads:--- G. Cul-De-Sac Streets: shall not be more than 500 ft. in length and shall terminate with an adequate turnaround having a minimum radius of 50 ft for right of way H. Half Streets:--- I. Private Streets: shall be prohibited--- J. Driveways: Providing access to no more than 2 dwelling units shall be allowed. 9-3-7: Planting strips and reserve strips standards a. planting strips shall be required to be placed next to the incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen--shall be a minimum of 20 ft wide and not part of the normal street right of way or utility easement. 9-4-1: Required improvements, (the following are only a portion of the code) a. Street lights (City of Eagle standards) b. Sidewalks and pedestrian walkways c. Water supply and sewer systems d. Storm drains e. Fire hydrants f. Greenbelt areas (may be required) 9-4-1-9: 9-4-1-10: Water supply and sewer systems Storm drainage, Flood controls 9-4-1-12: Greenbelt Areas, landscaping screening 9-4-2-2: Guarantee of improvements a. Performance bond b. Cash deposit 9-5-4-4: Control during development, time limit 4. Eagle Planning and Zoning Commissioners recommendation, if approved by Council, is a proposal of a new road desiqn, eliminating lot 7 and designing the entrance through that lot rather than to the N as the design indicates. The cul de sae would have 2 turn around points, one to the N (lot 25) and the one indicated in the present design. The common lot would become, in part, lot 25. The Commissioners further challenged the easement proposed by Farms Union District of 15 feet. The Commissioners would like to see a pathway along the canal. The Commissioners believe the district may not have exclusive rights to the easement and a pathway can be established in the same easement. CONCLUSION The Commissioners recommended denial of the project, based on the concept/design and length of the cul de sac, and laek of completion of Eagle Water Co. Hydraulic analysis. And further concluded, if this application and project comes back to P&Z the attorney should review the rights of way (easement of 15 ft.) in order to establish a pathway along the canal. The Commission concludes that the preliminary development plan is not consistent with the intent and purpose of Title 9 of the Eagle City Code and that the proposed development does not advance the public welfare and that the proposed land use presented and their interrelationship with the land uses in the surrounding area do not justify deviation from standard land use in the surrounding area; There is inadequate evidence showing that this development use at the proposed location satisfies the general standards for approval of a subdivision set forth in said Sections of the Eagle City Code. Specifically, that the use will be not be harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, Title 9; that the development is premature due to the conditions not being satisfied to date, specifically questions remain regarding adequate service by essential public facilities and services. The application submitted for Melvin's Eagle Point #6 does not comply with the requirements set forth in the Eagle Comprehensive Plan; The granting of the application may violate the Idaho Code and may nullify the interests or purposes of the Eagle City Code and Eagle Comprehensive Plan, as conditions of approval cannot be satisfied at this time. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the foregoing FINDINGS OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the Council the application be denied. ADOPTED by the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Eagle, Idaho this ~ day of December, 1992. ò\~m ~ C"fIXI . LLOYD GERBER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION /~- / APPROVED: .. (, ,.",., ' ( "".. ", '. ,;'