Findings - DR - 2007 - DR-04-07 - Construct A Multi-Tenant Office Building In Winding Creek Subdivision
BEFORE THE EAGLE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR A )
DESIGN REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A MULTI-TENANT )
OFFICE BUILDING WITHIN WINDING CREEK )
SUBDIVISION FOR GALE POOLEY )
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER DR-04-07
The above-entitled design review application came before the Eagle Design Review Board for their action
on March 8, 2007. The Board continued the item to March 22, 2007, and to April 12, 2007. Due to a lack
of quorum on April 12,2007, this item was reviewed by the Board on April 26, 2007. The Design Review
Board having heard and taken oral 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:
Gale Pooley is requesting design review approval to construct a 1,872-square foot multi-
tenant office building. The O. I 8-acre site is located on the south side of Winding Creek Drive
approximately 430-feet west of Hill Road at 979 Winding Creek Drive.
B. APPLICA TION SUBMITTAL:
The City of Eagle received the application for this item on February 7, 2007.
C. NOTICE OF AGENCIES' REVIEW:
Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted on February 13, 2007, in accordance with the
requirements of the Eagle City Code.
D. HISTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS:
On March 16,2004, the Eagle City Council approved a design review application for the common
area landscaping within Winding Creek PUD (DR-08-04).
On June 22, 2004, the Eagle City Council approved a final development plan and final plat
application for Winding Creek PUD (FPUD-03-04 & FP-05-04).
E. COMPANION APPLICATIONS: DR-5-07 (design review master sign plan application)
Page 1 of7
K:\Planning DeptlEagle Applications\Dr\2007\DR_04_07 drfdoc
F. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS:
COMPPLAN ZONING LAND USE
DESIGNATION DESIGNATION
Existing Mixed Use MU-P (Mixed Use PUD) Vacant
Proposed No Change No Change Office
North ofsite Mixed Use MU-P (Mixed Use PUD) Residential
South of site Mixed Use MU-P (Mixed Use PUD) Proposed Office building
East of site Mixed Use MU-P (Mixed Use PUD) Proposed Office building
West of site Mixed Use MU-P (Mixed Use PUD) Office building
G. DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT: Not in the DDA, TDA, CEDA, or DSDA.
H. EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS: Street trees have been installed along East Winding Creek
Drive.
1. SITE DESIGN INFORMATION:
Site Data Proposed Required
Total Acreage of Site 7,979-square feet (0.18-acres) 7,000-square feet (0. I 6-acres )
(minimum)
Percentage of Site Devoted to 23% (approximately) 50% (maximum)
Building Coverage
Percentage of Site Devoted to 37% (approximately) 10% (minimum)
Landscaping
Number of Parking Spaces 7 -parking spaces 7-parking spaces (minimum)
Front Setback 35-feet (south) 10-feet (minimum per the PUD)
Rear Setback 10-feet (north) 10-feet (minimum per the PUD)
Side Setback I O-feet (west) 7.5-feet (minimum per the PUD)
Side Setback 19- feet (east) 7.5-feet (minimum per the PUD)
J. GENERAL SITE DESIGN FEATURES:
Number and Uses of Proposed Buildings: One multi-tenant office building.
Height and Number of Stories of Proposed Buildings: 25' 10"; one story.
Gross Floor Area of Proposed Buildings: 1,872-square feet.
Page 2 of7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\Dr\2007\DR-04-07 drfdoc
On and Off-Site Circulation:
A 3,091-square foot (approximately) paved parking lot provides parking for vehicles using this
site. One 24-foot wide shared driveway is proposed to be located at the northeast comer of this
site providing access to East Winding Creek Drive.
K. BUILDING DESIGN FEATURES:
Roof: 30 year Certain Teed Landmark Mountain Timber
Walls: Hardiplank lap siding (Boothbay Blue), Hardiplank staggered edge panel (cobble stone),
Rough River High Desert ledgestone
Windows/Doors: Vinyl windows (Country Lane Red), Metal doors with glass
Fascia/Trim: 6" raise band (Monterey Taupe)
L. LANDSCAPING DESIGN:
Retention of Existing Trees and Preservation Methods: There are street trees located along East
Winding Creek Drive.
Tree Replacement Calculations: N/A
Proposed Tree Mix (Species & Number): To be reviewed by the Design Review Board
Street Trees: The street trees along East Winding Creek were installed by the developer.
Maintenance Provisions and Proposed Irrigation Methods: Automatic irrigation required.
Transition Zones: N/A
Parking Lot Landscaping:
a. Perimeter Landscaping:
Continuous landscaping has not been proposed on the south, east, or west
property lines of the parking lot because this site will be integrated with the
properties to the south, east, and west providing cross access between parcels.
b. Interior Landscaping: 0% interior landscaping is required, 9% is proposed.
M. TRASH ENCLOSURES:
One 100-square foot trash enclosure is located along the east side of the site approximately 150-
feet southwest of the driveway on East Winding Creek Drive. The enclosure is constructed of
CMU walls with metal gates.
N. MECHANICAL UNITS:
The applicant is proposing to use ground mounted mechanical units. The ground mounted
mechanical units are proposed to be screened with landscaping.
O. OUTDOOR LIGHTING:
A site and parking lot light plan showing location, height, and wattage is required to be reviewed
and approved by the Design Review Board prior to issuance of any building permits.
P. SIGNAGE:
No signs are proposed with this application. A separate design review application is required for
the approval of any signs.
Page 3 of7
K\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\Dr\2007\DR-04-07 drfdoc
Q. PUBLIC SERVICES A V AILABLE:
A preliminary approval letter from Eagle Fire Department has been received by the City. A water
service approval has not been received to date. Approval of the water company having jurisdiction
will be required prior to issuance of a building permit.
R. PUBLIC USES PROPOSED: None
S. PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUISITIONS MAP: No map currently exists
T. SPECIAL ON-SITE FEATURES:
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern - none
Evidence of Erosion - no
Fish Habitat - no
Floodplain - no
Mature Trees - no
Riparian Vegetation - no
Steep Slopes - no
Stream/Creek - no
Unique Animal Life - no
Unique Plant Life - no
Unstable Soils - unknown
Wildlife Habitat - no
U. SUMMARY OF REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLAN (IF REQUIRED): Not
requ ired
V. AGENCY RESPONSES:
The following agencies have responded and their correspondence is incorporated herein by
reference. Comments, which appear to be of special concern, are noted below:
Ada County Highway District
Chevron Pipeline
Eagle Fire Department
W. LETTERS FROM THE PUBLIC:
Letter from Julie Lafferty, City Forester, dated February 23, 2007 (is incorporated herein by
reference and attached to the staff report).
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 Commercial.
Page 4 of7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\Dr\2007\DR-04-07 drf.doc
B. ZONING CODE PROVISIONS, WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING THIS
PROPOSAL:
. Eagle City Code Section 8-2A-6(A)(5)(b)
The location and design of transformers, pad-mount and roof-mounted mechanicals and
electrical equipment shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board. All roof-
mounted mechanicals shall be completely screened from view through the use of a parapet
wall when utilizing a flat roof design or shall be enclosed within the building when utilizing a
roof design other than a flat roof. Screened from view shall mean "not visible" at the same
level or elevation of the parapet wall (e.g. the perspective generally as shown on an elevation
plan).
. Eagle City Code Section 8-2A-6(B)(5)(c) states in part
All vents protruding through the roof, and similar features shall be painted so as to match the
color ofthe roof.
. Eagle City Code Section 8-2A-7(K)(3)
Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping: Perimeter landscaping requirements define parking areas
and prevent two (2) adjacent lots from becoming one large expanse of paving. This
requirement does not hinder the ability to provide vehicular access between lots.
a. Provide a minimum five foot (5') wide perimeter landscaped strip between the property
lines and the parking lot, and plant with a minimum of one shade tree and five (5) shrubs
per thirty five (35) linear feet of perimeter.
C. DISCUSSION:
. The applicant indicates within their justification letter date stamped by the City on February 7,
2007, that the building design reflects the Craftsman Bungalo Style of architecture. Horizontal
and shake siding with a stone wainscoting is proposed on the exterior of the building. A low
pitched roof with gables and four over one window are to be used. The applicant is proposing to
use square columns with a stone base with stucco between the stone wainscoting and the roof. Per
the Craftsman description within the EASD book, columns are typically tapered. Also, the
materials typically used in the craftsman style of architecture are wood or materials that
complement the rest of the materials used on the exterior of the building. The shape of the
columns and material used on the columns does not represent the craftsman style of architecture.
The applicant should be required to provide a revised building elevation showing the columns to
be tapered and constructed of materials that complement the materials used on the rest ofthe
building. The revised building elevation should be reviewed and approved by the Design Review
Board prior to the City issuing a zoning certificate for this site.
· The City Forester has provided comment regarding the plant material proposed along the southeast
and southwest comers of the building. The concern is the type of plant material proposed usually
prefers shade and where they are proposed will be in full sun. Staff defers comment regarding the
Foresters suggestions to the Design Review Board.
· The applicant has not proposed continuous landscaping along the southern, eastern, or western
perimeter ofthe parking lot because this site will be integrated with the surrounding parcels to
share common access drive aisles. Per Eagle City Code, a minimum five foot (5') wide perimeter
landscaped strip is required between the property lines and the parking lot and should be planted
with a minimum of one shade tree and five (5) shrubs per thirty five (35) linear feet of perimeter.
It is staff's opinion that because this site will be integrated with the surrounding properties,
providing cross access between parcels, the applicant should not be required to provide a perimeter
Page 5 of7
K:\Planning DeptlEagJe Applications\Dr\2007\DR-04-07 drfdoc
landscape strip on the south, east, or west property lines.
. Staff defers comment regarding building design and colors to the Design Review Board.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDED WITHIN THE REPORT:
Based upon the information provided to staff to date, staff recommends approval with the site
specific conditions of approval and the standard conditions of approval provided within the staff
report.
PUBLIC MEETING OF THE BOARD:
A. A meeting was held on the application before the Design Review Board on March 8, 2007. The
application was continued to March 22, 2007, and April 12, 2007. Due to a lack of quorum on April
12,2007, this item was reviewed by the Board on April 26, 2007, at which time the Board made their
decision.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the Design Review Board by no one.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the Design Review Board by no one (not
including the applicant/representative).
BOARD DECISION:
The Board voted 4 to 2 (Barnes and Wright against, Weber absent) to deny DR-04-07 for a design
review application to construct a multi-tenant office building for Gale Pooley. The application
was denied based on the applicant not complying with all the changes to the building requested by
the Design Review Board.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
I. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on February 7, 2007.
2. Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted on February 13, 2007, in accordance with the
requirements of the Eagle City Code.
3. The Board reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed design review application
(DR-04-07) with regard to the Eagle City Code Title 8, Chapter 2, Article A, DR Design Review
Overlay District, and based upon the information provided with the conditions required herein,
concludes that the proposed design review application is not in accordance with the Eagle City Code
and the Eagle Comprehensive Plan because the applicant has not complied with all the changes to the
building requested by the Design Review Board. The Board requested the applicant make the
following modifications to the building:
. Raise the stone wainscoting so the windows interrupt the sill of the wainscoting.
· Replace the round attic vents with a style more reflective of the Craftsman style architecture.
. Increase the overhangs on the building to four feet (4 ').
. Remove the incline of the roof gables.
. Taper the stone wainscoting on all elevations.
Page 6 of7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\Dr\2007IDR-04-07 drf,doc
DATED this 10th day of May 2007.
ATTEST:
1l(~9. --\2- ~~
./ Sharon~K. Bergmann, Eagle City C rk
...............,..
.,... ~ '* ~'"
.. I""..V ....... 0 '.
.. v . -. "
.! r.'r.... ~~ 1<-.. 'l ~
~ "'. "r' lr....e L ~
: C4 i ~ ,-...l ~\ p -:
: 0 a llo . "t: ~: - ::
i7'\\~ 'IlJ ~6:
.. u. " "'~. ~
" """ .. .., OT' b. -
" v.... \",C... ,(,," l
"'##. .....~~ ~ ......
"...... . os; "",
...........",'
Page 7 of7
K:l.Planning Dept\Eagle ApplicationslDr\2007\DR.04.07 drfdoc