Findings - CC - 2006 - A-3-05/RZ-5-05 - Annex/Rezone From Rut To R2/14.6 Acre/1835 Park Ln/Post Mediation
BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
ORIGINAL
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION
FOR ANNEXATION AND REZONE FROM
RUT (RURAL URBAN TRANSITION) TO
R-2 (RESIDENTIAL) FOR CHAD MOFFAT
POST-MEDIATION FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER A-3-05 & RZ-5-05
The above-entitled annexation and rezone from RUT to R-2 came before the Eag]e City Council for their
post-mediation action, pursuant to Idaho Code 67-6510, on February 28,2006. The Council, having heard
and taken ora] and written testimony, and having duly considered the matter, makes the following Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law;
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. PROJECT SUMMARY:
Chad Moffat, represented by Eric Cronin, P. E. with The Land Group, LLC is requesting
an annexation and rezone from RUT (Rura] Urban Transition) to R-2 (Residential up to 2
units per acre). The 14.6-acre is located on the west side of Park Lane approximately one-
half mile north of F]oating Feather Road at 1835 Park Lane.
A. APPLICA TION SUBMITTAL:
The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on March 24, 2005. A post
mediation submittal was received by the City on February 1, 2006.
B. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice of the post-mediation Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council
was published in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the
Eag]e City ordinances on February 10, 2006. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to
property owners within three-hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject property in accordance
with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on
February 6, 2006. The property was posted on and requests for agencies' reviews were
transmitted on February 7, 2006, in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City
Code.
C. HISTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS:
On March 24, 2005, Chad Moffat, represented by The Land Group LLC, requested an
annexation and rezone from RUT (Rura] Urban Transition) to R-2 (Residential - up to 2
units per acre). The 14.6-acre site is located on the west side of Park Lane approximately
one-half mile north of F]oating Feather Road.
On September 13, 2005, the City Council voted 4 to 0 to deny the above mentioned
annexation and rezone application, based upon the finding that the proposed zoning
designation was not shown to be compatible with the surrounding uses.
On October 6,2005, the applicant's attorney, Joanne Butler, requested mediation under
Idaho Code Section 67-6510. The Council addressed this request on October ]8, 2005,
and agreed to mediation and assigned Council President Bastian as the Council
representative.
Page 1 of7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\RZ&A\2005\A-03-05 & RZ-05-05 ccf moffat post mediation.doc
On December 15, 2005, a mediation meeting was held between the City and the applicant.
On February 1, 2006, after participating in mediation, pursuant to Idaho Code 67 -65] 0,
the applicant submitted a modified preliminary plat for consideration by the City Council.
D. COMPANION APPLICATIONS: PP-06-05 (Moffat Subdivision)
E. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS:
COMP PLAN ZONING LAND USE
DESIGNATION DESIGNA TlON
Existing Residentia] Two RUT (Residentia] - Ada Vacant
County designation)
Proposed No Change R-2 (Residentia]) Residential Subdivision
North of site Residential Two RUT (Residential - Ada Residence/Pasture
County designation)
South of site Residentia] Two RUT (Residentia] - Ada Residence/Pasture
County designation)
East of site Residentia] Two RUT (Residential - Ada Pasture
County designation)
West of site Residentia] Two RUT (Residential- Ada Pasture
County designation)
F. DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT: Not in the DDA, TDA or CEDA.
G. TOTAL ACREAGE OF SITE: 14.65-acres
H. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REZONE:
The justification letter dated March 24, 2005 , June 13, 2005, and February 1, 2006
provided by the applicant's representative is attached to the staff report and is incorporated
herein by reference.
1. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (if
applicable): N/A
J. A V AILABILITY AND ADEQUACY OF UTILITIES AND SERVICES:
Letters from the Eagle Fire Department and Idaho Power state they have no objection to
the proposed rezone and annexation. The letter from the Eagle Sewer District states that
the District currently does not have a central sewer system in the area. However, the
property is in the district's centra] sewer master plan for the western region. No comments
from Unite Water Company have been received to date.
K. PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUISITIONS MAP: No map currently exists.
Page 2 of7
K:\Planning DeptlEagle Applications\RZ&A\2005\A-03-05 & RZ-05-05 ccf moffat post mediation.doc
L. NON-CONFORMING USES: None are apparent on the site.
M. AGENCY RESPONSES:
The following agencies have responded and their correspondence is attached to the staff
report and is incorporated herein by reference. Comments which appear to be of special
concern are noted below:
Ada County Highway District
Centra] District Health
Chevron Texaco
Division of Environmenta] Quality
Eagle Fire Department
Eag]e Sewer District
Idaho Power Company
Meridian Joint Schoo] District No.2
Ringert Clark (Drainage District No.2)
N. LETTERS FROM THE PUBLIC: No Letters were received for the post-mediation submittal and
hearing.
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN
REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL:
. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates this site as Residential Two, suitable
primarily for single-family residential development within areas that are rural in character.
Residentia] density of up to two dwelling unit per acre may be considered by the City for this
area.
Chapter 4 Schools, Public Services and Utilities
4.1 Background
Public utilities, facilities, and services are necessary for the overall welfare of the
public and are generally available to Eag]e residents. The City and special
districts provide the basic services of water, sewer, school, police, fire and library
to residents. With Eagle's growing population come the need for increased public
services and the necessity to improve existing service delivery systems.
Policies concerning the manner in which public utilities and services are expanded
play an important role in the location and intensity of future housing, commercial
and industria] development. Since the City of Eag]e depends on outside
providers, it must be involved in any plans that will affect the community.
4.3 Goal
c. Maintain a sense of persona] safety and security for all residents.
d. Strive to prevent and extinguish fires and aid in other emergencies dealing
with the protection of life or property.
4.4 Objectives
d. To encourage a high standard of fire protection and emergency services
Chapter 8 Transportation
Page 3 of7
K:\Planning DeptlEagle Applications\RZ&A\2005\A-03-05 & RZ-05-05 ccf moffat post mediation.doc
8.3.0 City of Eagle Functional Pathway Classifications
An effective pathway system should include a combination of Paths and Lanes.
The City of Eagle Transportation/Pathway Network Maps # 1 and #2 illustrates the
various classifications and locations which are included in the pathway system
and described as follows:
8.3.1 Paths
Location:
Paths could be located on corridors separated from roadways such as utility
easements, irrigation canals, or adjacent to rivers or creeks. Paths could also be
located along roadway right-of-ways and would usually be separated from vehicle
travel lanes and the paved section of the roadway by a median or sidewalk.
8.6 Imp]ementation Strategies
r. Encourage planning of local roadway systems which will provide for intra-
neighborhood connectivity. The connection roadways should be designed to
not become collectors and to discourage traffic from cutting through
neighborhoods to go from a collector or arterial to another collector or arterial.
Such intra-neighborhood connectivity is for emergency and delivery vehicles
and for local intra-neighborhood access.
o. Encourage arterial and collector roadway design criteria consistent with the rural
nature of planned and existing developments generally within the areas designated
on the Land Use Map as Residential Rura] (one dwelling unit per five acres
maximum) and Residentia] Estates (one dwelling unit per two acres maximum).
Such designs should include the following:
1. Vertical Curbs should not be permitted, except where may be required by
ACHD. Where curbs are needed, flat or rolled curbs should be encouraged.
2. Sidewalks and/or pathways should meander and be separated from any
roadway edge or curb to a1]ow for added pedestrian safety. Topography, trees,
ditches and/or similar features may limit the distance between sidewalks
and/or pathways and the roadway edge. Easements may be needed if portions
of the sidewalk and/or pathway are to be located outside ofthe right-of-way.
3. Unless otherwise determined by ACHD to be necessary for public safety,
roadways should be a maximum of two lanes with a center turn lane only at
driveways and/or street intersections that are expected to generate a minimum
of 1000 vehicle trips per day, or where determined to be necessary for safety
by ACHD. Any portion of a center turn lane which is not used for such a
driveway or intersection should be landscaped. Such landscaped medians
would need to be maintained by the City and would require a license
agreement with the highway district having jurisdiction.
4. The roadways should be constructed to provide a bike lane on both sides of
the roadway.
5. A minimum building setback ordinance resulting in a setback of
approximately 125-feet from the roadway centerline should be considered to
be adopted by the City.
. SOARING 2025 WESTERN AREA PLAN PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL
CONCERN REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL:
Page 4 of7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\RZ&A \2005\A-03.05 & RZ.05-05 ccf moffat post mediation.doc
Chapter 5
5.3
Transportation
Imp]ementation Strategies
i. New developments shall be required to stub access to adjacent underdeveloped
parcels, where appropriate.
j. All new developments shall be reviewed for appropriate opportunities to
connect to local roads and collectors in adjacent developments.
B. ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
THIS PROPOSAL: (None)
C. DISCUSSION:
. The Eag]e Fire Department's letter of Apri] 25, 2005, states that the Department recommends
approval of the annexation and rezone.
. With regard to Eagle City Code Section 8-7-5 "Action by the Commission and Council", and
based upon the information provided to staff to date, staff believes that the proposed rezone is
in accordance with the City of Eag]e Comprehensive Plan and established goals and objectives
because:
a. The requested zoning designations R-2 is equal to or less than the Residential Two
shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map;
b. The information provided from the agencies having jurisdiction over the public
facilities needed for this site indicate that adequate public facilities exist, or are
expected to be provided, to serve any and all uses allowed on this property under the
proposed zone;
c. The proposed R-2 zone (two units per acre maximum) is compatible with the RUT
zone (Rural Urban Transition - Ada County designation) land use to the east;
d. The proposed R-2 zone (two units per acre maximum) is compatible with the RUT
zone (Rura] Urban Transition - Ada County designation) land use to the west;
e. The proposed R-2 zone (two units per acre maximum) is compatible with the RUT
zone (Rural Urban Transition - Ada County designation) land use to the north;
f. The proposed R-2 zone (two units per acre maximum) is compatible with the RUT
zone (Rura] Urban Transition - Ada County designation) land use to the south;
g. The land proposed for rezone is not located within a "Hazard Area" or "Specia] Area"
as described within the Comprehensive Plan; and
h. No non-conforming uses are expected to be created with this rezone.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
The applicant does not propose any changes to the requested annexation and rezone applications.
The associated preliminary plat has been revised, is included herein, and is the subject of a
mediation process; therefore, no staff recommendation will be made.
Note: The property shall become annexed into the Eag]e Sewer District's boundaries prior to the
City adopting the annexation and rezone ordinance for the site.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COMMISSION:
The Commission's recommendation is contained in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law
Page 5 of7
K:\Planning DeptlEagle Applications\RZ&A \2005\A-03-05 & RZ-05.05 ccf moffat post mediation.doc
dated July IS, 2005. This application was reviewed by the Council after partIcipating in
mediation, pursuant to Idaho Code 67-6510, this application was not reheard by the Commission.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL:
A. A post-mediation public hearing on the application was held before the City Council on February 2S,
2006, at which time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Council made their
decision at that time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by five (5) individuals
who expressed concerns about the compatibility of this development with the surrounding area and
lifestyles; the lack of buffer or transition to other developments; the impact this development will have
on the public roads and schools; and the effects of development upon the sewer and water systems. *
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council by twelve (12) individual
(not including the applicant/representative) who felt this development would compliment the
surrounding area by providing a quality development with smaller lots. *
D. No written testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council.
COUNCIL DECISION:
The Commission voted 4 to 0 (Bandy absent) to recommend approval of A-3-05 and RZ-5-05 for a
rezone upon annexation from RUT (Rural Urban Transition - Ada County designation) to R-2
(Residential - up to two units per acre) for Chad Moffat.
Note: The property shall become annexed into the Eagle Sewer District's boundaries prior to the City
adopting the annexation and rezone ordinance for the site.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on March 24, 2005. A post-mediation
submittal was received by the City of Eagle on February 1,2006
2. Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission was
published in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
ordinances on April IS, 2005. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners within
three-hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of Title 67,
Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on April 12,2005. Requests for agencies' reviews were
transmitted on March 25, 2005, in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in accordance
for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City ordinances on August 29,
2005. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners within three-hundred feet (300-
feet) of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code
and Eagle City Code on August 24, 2005.
Notice of the post-mediation Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was
published in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
ordinances on February 10, 2006. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners within
three-hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of Title 67,
Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on February 6, 2006. The property was posted on and
requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted on February 7, 2006, in accordance with the
requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Page 6 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\RZ&A\2005\A-03-05 & RZ.05.05 ccf moffat post mediation.doc
3. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed rezone (RZ-05-05) with
regard to Eagle City Code Section 8-7 -5 "Action by the Commission and Council", and based upon the
information provided concludes that the proposed rezone is in accordance with the City of Eagle
Comprehensive Plan and established goals and objectives because:
a. The requested zoning designation of R-2- (Residential at 1.64 dwelling units per
acre) is consistent with the Residential Two designation as shown on the
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map;
b. The information provided from the agencies having jurisdiction over the public
facilities needed for this site indicate that adequate public facilities exist, or are
expected to be provided, to serve commercial uses on this property under the
proposed zone;
c. The proposed R-2- (Residential at 1.64 dwelling units per acre) is compatible with
the R-E (Residential Estates) zone to the south since those areas have similar lot
alignment to the lots in the Loch Lomond development;
d. The proposed R-2- (Residential at 1.64 dwelling units per acre) is compatible
with RUT (Rural Urban Transition) zone to the north, south and west since that
area has the same comprehensive Plan designation as this site; Residential Two
(up to two units per acre).
e. The land proposed for rezone is not located within a "Hazard Area" or "Special
Area" as described within the Comprehensive Plan.
f. No non-conforming uses are expected to be created with this rezone, and
DATED this 14th day of March 2006.
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
Ada County, Idaho
ATTEST:
Mc~o__k~
Sharon k. Bergmann, Eagle City C erk
"~I .........
"~I ....
...... "'l 0 F c-1 """
..~ ..'\ ........ 0" """
.. v..... .. ...~ ".
f '/ o,"'POR.<1;"~' ~
: Ie; i' :
i * f -.- * :
,v,.C\SEAL,f j
'\ <P", ~<t~OI"1,,9" '~f/
..... "f ~ ........ toy
., 'Ii OF \";
..............
Page 7 of7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\RZ&A\2005\A-03-05 & RZ-05-05 ccf moffat post mediation.doc