The URL can be used to link to this page

Minutes - 2008 - City Council - 09/23/2008 - Regular EAGLE CITY COUNCIL Minutes September 23, 2008 PRE-COUNCIL AGENDA: 6:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. 1. Ada County Sheriffs Office Monthly Report. Chief Hippie distributes the monthly report and discusses the same. General discussion. 2. Dan Savino will present a report on the Eagle Rib Cook Off event held at Guerber Park earlier this month. Dan Savino and John George discuss the Eagle Rib Cook Off. Attendance was 15,000 people. There were 23 teams competing for the cash and prizes. Discussion on the activities. Discussion on next year's event. General discussion. Savino requests $10,000.00 from the City for a future event. 3. Mayor and Council's Report: Moved to end of agenda 4. City Clerk/Treasurer Report: Moved to end of agenda 5. Zoning Administrator's Report: Moved to end of agenda 6. Public Works Director Report: Moved to end of agenda 7. City Attorney Report: Moved to end of agenda 8. City Engineer Report: Moved to end of agenda REGULAR COUNCIL AGENDA: 7:30 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Bandy calls the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: GUERBER, HUFFAKER, SHOUSHTARIAN, SEMANKO. All present. A quorum is present. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Troop 321 leads the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. PUBLIC COMMENT: Steve Purvis, 3939 Brookside Lane. I'm curious if there is going to be any public comment on Unfinished Business Item #C. General discussion. Nancy Merrill, 1246 S. Watermark Place, reports on the Velodrome being short offunds to hydro-seed and if this was done this would provide a place for events like the Rib Cook Off. Discusses the BLM Park. Huffaker: I'mjust wondering how many people are here tonight for the BLM park. (Several raised their hand) Possibly there could be one or two who could be a spokesperson for their group. General discussion. Huffaker moves to make Item #6C. Consideration ofM3's proposal to support BLM and R&PP Applications Item#6B and Item #6B will be Item #6C. Seconded by Semanko. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.................. 5. CONSENT AGENDA: . Consent Agenda items are considered to be routine and are acted on with one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless the Mayor, a Councilmember, member of City Staff, or a citizen requests an item to be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Items removed from the Consent Agenda will be placed on the Regular Agenda in a sequence determined by the City Council. Page I K\COUNCILIMlNUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\CC-09-23-08min.doc . Any item on the Consent Agenda which contains written Conditions of Approval from the City of Eagle City Staff, Planning & Zoning Commission, or Design Review Board shall be adopted as part of the City Council's Consent Agenda approval motion unless specifically stated otherwise. A. Claims Al!:ainst the City. B. Cooperative Al!:reement between Valley Rel!:ional Transit and city of Eal!:le for Annual Dues and Service Contribution: C. Findinl!:s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for CU-ll-06 MOD - Outdoor Plavl!:round Area for Land of Nod Learninl!: Center - Genesis One LLC: Genesis One LLC, represented by Travis Burrows of Dave Evans Construction, is requesting a modification to a conditional use permit to allow a fenced-in outdoor playground area for Land of Nod Learning Center. The 0.33-acre site is located on the south side of East Iron Eagle Drive, approximately Y4 mile west of Edgewood Lane at 1167 East Iron Eagle Drive (Lot 9, Block I, Merrill Subdivision No.5). (WEV) D. Alcohol license application: La Tapatia Mexican Restaurant Eagle LLC. is requesting a beer and wine license to be used at 1225 E. Winding Creek Dr. #130 Eagle, Idaho. All required documentation and fees have been submitted. This license will be valid from date of approval through April 20, 2009. (SKB) E. Minutes of September 16, 2008. F. Joint Powers Al!:reement between the Ada County Sheriff's Office, the Ada County Prosecutinl!: Attornev's Office. and the City of Eal!:le relatinl!: to Law Enforcement Services and Prosecution services for Fiscal Year 2008-2009. G. Beer and Wine License for Beckv LOl!:ue dba: Flame Neapolitan Pizzeria. H. Beer and Wine License for Olel!: Mironov dba: Russian Bear. Guerber moves to add to the Consent Agenda for approval Item #G. a Beer and Wine License for Becky Logue dba: Flame Neapolitan Pizzeria and Item #H. a Beer and Wine License for Oleg Mironov dba: Russian Bear. Seconded by Semanko. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES............... Shoushtarian moves to remove Item #5E from the Consent Agenda and place it on the Agenda under New Business #8E. Seconded by Semanko. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.......... Huffaker moves to remove Items #5B and #5F from the Consent Agenda. Seconded by Semanko. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES............... Guerber moves to approve the Amended Consent Agenda Items #A, C, D, G and H. Seconded by Huffaker. Guerber: AYE; Huffaker: AYE; Shoushtarian: AYE; Semanko: AYE: ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.............. B. Cooperative Al!:reement between Valley Rel!:ional Transit and city of Eal!:le for Annual Dues and Service Contribution. Huffaker: I'm curious what the amount was that we paid last year and also where does this fit into our Budget? General discussion. City Clerk Bergmann: The dues are in General Administration under Professional Dues and the Express Bus is I think under the PZ Department. I'm not sure what the amount is in the current budget. General discussion. Page 2 K\COUNCILIMINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\CC-09-2J-08min.doc Guerber moves to approve Item #5B. Cooperative Agreement between Valley Regional Transit and city of Eagle for Annual Dues and Service Contribution. Seconded by Huffaker. Guerber: AYE; Huffaker: AYE; Shoushtarian: AYE; Semanko: AYE: ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.............. Semanko: How difficult would it be to post this agreement on the web site after is fully executed and signed by the Mayor? General discussion. Council concurs to place this agreement on the web site. F. Joint Powers Al!:reement between the Ada County Sheriff's Office, the Ada County Prosecutinl!: Attornev's Office. and the City of Eal!:le relatinl!: to Law Enforcement Services and Prosecution services for Fiscal Year 2008-2009. Huffaker, my questions are the same type. I know that the Sheriffs Department is already in our budget but I'm wondering about the Prosecuting Services and where is it in our budget. I would also like this posted on the web site. General discussion. City Clerk Bergmann: These items are both under Contracts in the General Administration Budget. The Prosecuting Attorney's Office provides a letter each year at the time of the budget process as to the cost of these services. Discussion on how these costs are offset with the fines and fees collected from Ada County. Huffaker move to approve Joint Powers Agreement between the Ada County Sheriff's Office, the Ada County Prosecuting Attorney's Office, and the City of Eagle relating to Law Enforcement Services and Prosecution services for Fiscal Year 2008-2009. Seconded by Shoushtarian. Guerber: AYE; Huffaker: AYE; Shoushtarian: AYE; Semanko: AYE: ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.............. Semanko: Why are these two contracts not bid out? City Attorney Buxton: These are professional services and professional services are exempt from the Bid Laws. 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: A. A-02-08/RZ-06-08 - Annexation and Rezone from RUT to A-R - John VOl!:t: John Vogt is requesting approval of an annexation and rezone from RUT (Rural - Urban Transition - Ada County designation) to A-R (Agricultural-Residential). The 39-acre site is located on the northeast corner of West Beacon Light Road and North Park Lane at 3632 West Beacon Light Road. This item was continuedfrom the September 9, 2008 meeting. The public hearing has been closed (WEV) Mayor introduces the issue. Planner Williams: Provides the Council an overview and history of the application. Semanko moves to approve A-02-08/RZ-06-08 - Annexation and Rezone from RUT to A-R _ John Vogt given the understanding that we have been given tonight on the legal description ofthe property. Seconded by Shoushtarian. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES................ B(C). Consideration ofM3's proposal to support BLM and R&PP Apolications. (PJB) Mayor introduces the issue. Page 3 K\COUNCILIMlNUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\CC-09-23-08mindoc Planner Baird Spencer: Distributes information to the Council and provides Council an overview and history of the application. General discussion. It was envisioned through M3' s Development Agreement that they participate in this park and the application Rosemary Thomas, BLM in Boise, I am the Field Manager for BLM for this area. We have been working with the City of Eagle to recognize this application and work to have it perfected. Previously we were not in a hurry to complete the application but now planning and development has begun in the area. The responsibility is on the City but they have the option on how they complete the application. One option is to do it through the government, this would take some time. Discussion on what needs to be done on the application. General discussion. We would like to be involved with the development of the application and we will make staff available. Huffaker: discussion on the estimate for the planning and designing, which is between $400,000 and $600,000. I would like M3 to address this cost and if it could be less and the fact that M3 would front these costs to be reimbursed with impact fees. I would also like to know what type of controls the City would have over this process and what type of an agreement would be entered into. Discussion on what this area is going to be called. Bill Brownley, M3, displays overheads. I would like to add one statement about our intention. Our intention is to move this forward. Our desire is not to turn this into an Albertson or Ann Morrison Park. Discusses the area that was to be improved. The purpose is to go through a planning process that we would fund at the City's direction. Discussion on some of the proposed amenities. This needs to be a natural open space conception. Discusses the estimate of the cost of the design. Our intention is to be the facilitator in the process. Estimate of cost is $426,750.00. Discussion on the tenus of their Development Agreement and the process to be completed. General discussion. Nancy Merrill, 11249 Watermark Place, former Mayor, provides some history on the application. General discussion. Kathy Pennisi, I am here representing NACF A and I did submit a letter to you on September 19, 2008. Discussion on the amenities in the park and the price of the development. It seems like we are rushing this process. It seems like BLM will front the costs. Discussion on the maintenance of the park. Discussion on the vision and what the Council does not want to see in the Park. General discussion. C.J. Thompson, discusses the Idaho Conversation League involvement in this process. Discussion on M3 being involved in the process. Bill Brownley discusses the suggestion of a Steering Committee. General discussion. Steve Purvis, 3939 Brookside Lane, I'm very pleased that we are having this discussion. Discussion on whether or not a development agreement trumps state code. General discussion. General discussion. City Attorney Buxton: I have 14 pages of notes and I expect to bring an agreement to you at the October 14th City Council meeting. Mayor calls a recess at 9:50 p.m. Mayor reconvenes at 10:05 p.m. C(B). Resolution No. 08-19: A ResQlution Of The City Of Eagle, Idaho, Amending Allied Waste Services Fee Schedule Pursuant To The Solid Waste Contract Recycling Collection Page 4 K\COUNCILIMINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\CC-09-23-08min.doc Services As Stated In Section 4.2 A. "Customer Rates - Establishment" And Providing For Effective Date. This item was continuedfrom the September 16,2008 meeting. Mayor introduces the issue. Rachele Klein, Allied Waste, we have been here several times asking for a fuel recovery fee. We know exactly how much fuel we burn in the City of Eagle. The residents in Eagle burned 62% of the fuel and this has been very consistent over the last several months. This would be $.48 cents per household per month. We have 262 businesses that we service in the City of Eagle. General discussion. Council concurs that the Contract Amendment for Allied Waste will be on the Joint Meeting Agenda for September 29, 2008 for approval. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. A-16-07/RZ-23-07 - SB/CH Land Company (Flack/Carlock). LLC: SB/CH Land Company (Flack/Carlock), LLC, represented by Ashley Ford with WRG Design, Inc., is requesting an annexation and rezone from RUT (Rural Urban Transition-Ada County Designation) to MU-DA (Mixed Use with a development agreement) with a Pre-Annexation and Development Agreement for a Mixed Use Development including +/- 235.57 acres of residential use (single-family and multi-family units) and +/- 52.1 acres of commercial uses. The 287.67- acre site is located at the Northeast corner of Beacon Light Road and State Highway 16. This item was continuedfrom the August 26, 2008 meeting. The applicant is requesting this item be continued to the October 14,2008 meeting. (WEV) Mayor introduces the issue. The applicant is requesting this item be continued to the October 14, 2008 meeting. Guerber moves to continue A-16-07/RZ-23-07 - SB/CH Land Company (Flack/Carlock), LLC to the October 14,2008 City Council meeting. Seconded by Huffaker. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES............ B. RZ-08-03 MOD - Eal!:le Island Crossinl!:, LLC: Eagle Island Crossing, LLC, represented by Kammie Oates with Horrocks Engineers, is requesting a modification to the rezone development agreement (instrument No.1 05007541) to add "restaurant with drive thru" (specifically one of the following: coffee, yogurt/ice cream, or sandwich shop) as a "P" permitted use within Arts West Subdivision (aka Symphony Subdivision), a 21-lot (l7-commercial, 1- access and 3-common) mixed use subdivision. The 16.05-acre site is generally located 1,320 feet east ofN. Park Lane on the north side of State Highway 44 at 3300 & 3450 W. State Street and 3415 W. Flint Drive. (WEV) Mayor introduces the issue. Geoffrey Wardle, we are in agreement with the Staff Report and the conditions in the Staff Report. Displays overheads and provides Council an overview of the application. General discussion. Tommy Alcrest, discusses the location of the drive-thru. General discussion. Planner Williams, displays overheads and provides Council an overview of the application. General discussion. Mayor opens the Public Hearing Page 5 KICOUNCIL\MINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-09-23-08min.doc Joel Barker, 972 Cove Colony Way, I am the Treasurer of the Colony Homeowner's Association and I am representing the 72 homeowners. Displays overheads and provides the Council some history of the area and the Colony. Discusses the Colony's opposition to the application. Geoffrey Wardle, discusses the traffic issues. Traffic on this site was addressed by ITD and ACHD when this development was approved. This applicant has been required to fund traffic lights to the tune of about $500,000. Discusses the traffic generated by different types of restaurants. Mayor closes the Public Hearing General Council discussion. Semanko moves to table this application and instruct staff to summarize the issues that have been raised here and ask that ACHD and ITD provide comments and this is tabled until such time that we received these comments. Seconded by Guerber. Discussion. Shoushtarian moves to deny this application because of the drive-thru. Seconded by Huffaker. Discussion. Shoushtarian withdraws his motion and Huffaker withdraws his second. Geoffrey Wardle, Ijust want to make a statement that our application is not incomplete. We have satisfied all of your applications requirements. Testimony from your staff is that each of these agencies were provided the information and they either responded or elected to not respond. As an applicant we a right to due process. General discussion. Semanko amends his motion to reopen the public hearing and allow the submittal of additional information and to ask Arts West for their comments. Second concurs. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES....................... Discussion on when the application is tabled to. Mike Brokaw, I will certainly take this information back tomorrow morning and we will get this information back to you as soon as possible. Council concurs to bring this application before Council on October 28, 2008. C. RZ-24-06 MOD2 - Ea!!:le Gatewav Development. LLC: Eagle Gateway Development, LLC, is requesting a modification to the rezone development agreement associated with the Eagle Gateway South Subdivision. The 56.86-acre site is generally located is located on the southeast corner of State Highway 44 and E. Riverside Drive at 1650 E. Riverside Drive. Staff is requesting this item be continued to the October 7, 2008 special meeting. (WEV) Mayor introduces the issue. Staff is requesting this item be continued to the October 7, 2008 special meeting. Guerber moves to continue RZ-24-06 MOD2 - Eagle Gateway Development. LLC to the October 7, 2008 City Council meeting. Seconded by Shoushtarian. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES........ ... 8. NEW BUSINESS: A. 20080019 S-CU-MSP - Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use Permit and Master Site Plan For A Residential Subdivision and Church Facility - The Hei!!:hts Church, Inc.: The Heights Church, Inc., represented by Ryan Mackowiak with CSHQA, is requesting preliminary plat approval for Heights Subdivision and approval for a conditional use permit and master site plan for a church. The 20.91-acre site is generally located on the northwest corner of Eagle Road and Beacon Light Road. This site is located in the Eagle Area of Impact. (WEV) Page 6 K:ICOUNCILIMINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-09-23-08min.doc Mayor introduces the issue. Nathan Coombs, CSHQA, presenting the applicant, provides Council an overview of the application. We recognize the Staffs Condition of Approval and accept those with a couple of suggestions. Discussion on Item #3 for the 35' wide landscape buffer between Eagle Road and the two residential lots. Discussion on Item #4, the recommendation for at 10' wide 6' high landscaper buffer between lot I and lot 2. General discussion. Planner Williams, provides Council an overview of the application. General discussion. Discussion on annexation into the City of Eagle. Guerber moves to approve the 20080019 S-CU-MSP - Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use Permit and Master Site Plan For A Residential Subdivision and Church Facility with Site Specific Conditions of Approval as proposed by staff. Seconded by Huffaker. Discussion. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.................. B. Ordinance No. 611: An Ordinance Of The City Of Eagle, Ada County, Idaho, Amending Eagle City Code Title I "Administrative," Chapter 9 "Municipal Elections"; Providing A Severability Clause; And Providing An Effective Date. (SKB) Mayor introduces the issue. Huffaker moves, pursuant to Idaho Code, Section 50-902, that the rule requiring Ordinances to be read on three different days with one reading to be in full be dispensed with, and that Ordinance #611 be considered after being read once by title only. Huffaker reads Ordinance #611 by title only. Seconded by Shoushtarian. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES. ... ....... ...... Huffaker moves that Ordinance #611 be adopted. Seconded by Shoushtarian. Discussion. Guerber: AYE; Huffaker: AYE; Shoushtarian: AYE; Semanko: AYE: ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.................................n Council concurs to have draft ordinances, resolutions and proclamations that are on a Council Agenda be posted on the web site. C. Discussion on fiscal transparency. (NS) Mayor introduces the issue. Guerber: I have a question about this. How did the proposed resolution that has not yet been presented to Council for discussion end up in Mr. Pooley's hands for his review and his comments to appear in the newspaper when we haven't even had a discussion. Semanko: I forwarded my proposed Resolution bye-mail to the City Staff and City Council group this week prior to the deadline I was given by staff asking that it be included on the agenda. That is the only people I have sent this to. Shoushtarian: I can talk about that. I did pass it on and I think anything just like that, any ordinance or resolution, should be on the web site, everybody should have an advantage to see it. This is my philosophy. I think we should have an open account. I think that if it is Executive Session or it is attorney privilege then we cannot pass it on. Everything else is public record. Huffaker: Can I address this. I think there is a difference, this was a discussion item and is a working draft and this may go through lots of revisions and I think we need to differentiate between a resolution that we are going to vote on versus something that we are trying to work through first and make comments on before we are going to vote on it. I would suggest to Council Member Shoushtarian, I agree that we want to be transparent, that we want to share this Page 7 KICOUNCILIMlNUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-09-23-08min.doc with the public, but I didn't think this particular document was ready to do that with yet because we haven't even had a chance to look at it ourselves first to decide what its final form it is going to be before we voted on it and then at that time we share it with the public, they have a chance to come in and comment on it if they want to and it is totally open. I think if we start doing it the other way around we are going to end up with stuff that is going to get out that has all kinds of thing in it that are not yet prepared for the public and because there might be things in it that are total irrelevant. We need to make the distinction between the two. I think that this was a little early to be circulating. Shoushtarian: this is where I am a little bit different. I believe that most of the document we have are public record. I talked to Susan about this and your e-mail is also a public record unless it is something that we have been told is attorney privilege. I think that this is something that as a government we should do and our residents should be exposed to the infonnation. General discussion. Semanko: I think this a fascinating discussion but we lose sight of the actual issue which is does the City of eagle want to be in the business of increasing of transparency in regards to its budget and its expenditures and its revenues and I have offered this resolution. Just to be clear for the record I did request that the resolution be included on the agenda and I did request that it be posted to the web site but I did not get enough support to do that without making a motion to do it. I do hope that folks will provide input on this draft. I received a draft ordinance from Mr. Pooley. That draft ordinance struck me as not having the right tone, maybe containing a number of things that weren't helpful and weren't appropriate. I got a reaction from staff with regard to the tone and the content, and got a reaction from the City Attorney that perhaps an ordinance was not the necessary or best form. I sat down and drafted the resolution and if anybody is looking for a template that I might have borrowed from, I looked at a Resolution in Hamilton County, Ohio and there is also a web site, fiscalaccountability.org, that has model legislation and has examples of what local governments have done. Mayor: There seems to be one or two individuals that are clamoring for this information, one of whom is Gale Pooley, another is John Grasser and John Wall. My concern is that we are jumping through a lot of hoops and spending a significant amount of money to satisfY the desires of two individuals who are not citizens of the City of Eagle. I completely agree with the transparency issue. But I am concerned about what is going on here with Mr. Pooley, Mr. Wall, Mr. Grasser, Mr. Charney and Mr. Deaton. They seem to have a little knot of individuals that are trying to wag the dog here. I am very supportive of transparency. Shoushtarian: I look at it a little bit different. I look at it like we are a team. Once you put things out then we say you have it. I have never met Mr. Pooley, and I wouldn't even recognize him. I sent him the ordinance to get his input because he initially sent all of us a copy. I wanted to see what his ideas are. I am confident that we do a good job. We are the first city to put these out. Everything is public and we are doing everything right. Semanko: First of all this transparency issue was something that I have been familiar with long before I got on the Council, it has to do with efforts by Americans for Tax Reform. I started in June 2006 a local group in the Boise area where we come together and we talk about issue and one of the issues is this transparency issue. When I received the ordinance from Mr. Pooley, the draft, I was not comfortable with that but I felt like lets circulate it and see what response we get and it was mostly negative. I inquired from Americans for Tax Reform about that time, are there are any models of actual ordinances that have been adopted by cities or counties and the response I got back from Washington DC was we will find something and send to you and I never received anything. When I got the notice about this web site, fiscalaccountability.org, I pulled it up and Page 8 KICOUNCILIMINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-09-23-08min.doc there on that web site there is a link and there is the resolution from Hamilton County, Ohio. My goal is for the resolution to provide the transparency on the budget, spending and fiscal side but not to put an overburden on the staff. So if there are things in my draft that, (a) don't exist or would be excess burdensome to post then lets identifY what they are. If we don't have the software to do this or the staff capacity to do this or more time is needed then lets identify that. I did put November 15t in here to have this done, if we can only post certain things by November 151 I'm amenable to say that these certain things are posted by November 151 or whatever date is reasonable and if there are other things that take longer then we can say that in here. My goal is to get the dialog and the discussion going with a resolution that is a little more productive than that draft ordinance was and to avoid any tone or acquisition that we are posting things on the web site to expose or root out some kind of corruption or some of things that were flavored in that draft ordinance. The idea is simply as stated in the draft, we want to increase transparency, we want to fully utilize the technology improvements that are out there, we think that making these things available will reduce the time and cost to respond to public records request and also recognize the substantial steps that we have already taken, which we took another step tonight by agreeing to post a couple of contracts that were approved. Here is how we are going to instate it and here is the timeline. Further discussion on the language in the proposed Resolution. Semanko: I just want to make clear for the record, while Mr. Pooley and others in the community may like the idea of transparency, 1 did not run this draft by any of them, I did not ask for their approval ahead of time. I got an e-mail from Mr. Pooley discussing several items on the transparency resolution. Discussion on Mr. Pooley's e-mail. This is the only response I have received from what was forwarded to Mr. Pooley, the only comments I have received from anybody outside the City Council circle. City Clerk Bergmann: Tracy, Devri and I have been working on this for some time. We have several options. We have some concerns, one is how much information our web site will store, and we are talking to Leonard about some different options. So if you will give us a little bit of time so we can pull this together for you we should have some pretty good information for you to consider. Just so you know, staff has no objection to this, we just want to be able provide you all of the information and some different options that we have. General discussion. Ideally, what you have proposed in your resolution, we would post the Detail Ledger, which gives you absolutely everything, it gives you revenues and all of the expenditures, provides you vendors names, invoice, account numbers and etc. I will distribute a copy of the Detail Ledger to you. General discussion. Discussion on posting the contracts and what has already been posted on the web site. D. Discussion on Community Detox and Mental Health Crisis Center. (PJB) Mayor introduces the issue. We received an e-mail from Theresa McLeod from Mayor Bieter's Office and this is something that started back in November of 2006. Mayor provides some history of this to the City Council. We have had no additional information until we received the e-mail from Theresa McLeod this month. Discussion on the new information presented. Although the City Council did vote to support in concept the annual contributions to the center, I don't agree with her contention that the City has confirmed our willingness to provide the annual operations support. City Council certainly didn't, I didn't as Mayor, the former Mayor may have but not with the concurrence of the Council. Mayor Bieter would like to meet. I would like to have them come and discuss this. We did not include this in our budget this year. Just looking for Council's guidance on how to respond to this e-mail from Ms. McLeod. General discussion. Council concurs that they would like to be briefed on this issue. Page 9 K:ICOUNCILIMINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-09-23-08mindoc 5E. Minutes of September 16,2008 Shoushtarian: I pulled that one for a couple of items. Under Item #8A. The Resolution No. 08- 251, page 5, it was saying that Shoushtarian move to go with the previous resolution except for the 50% waiver. What I was whole time saying was 50% waiver plus in lieu of parking should be fair market value. So those are the two things and I want to make a correction on that. Then on Item #9A. New Business, I made a call to ITD and I didn't get it back until after the Council meeting regarding the signalized light that was to be moved from # 1 0 to #4, I voted YEA because I did not get the response from ITD on time and I want to change my motion from YEA to NAY. General discussion. City Attorney Fitzer: You have already deliberated and voted at the meeting. While you have not approved the minutes involved the vote has become a finite decision, you cannot change your decision after the fact. General discussion. Council discusses access to the by-pass and the proposed meeting with ITD that Senator McGee is willing to broker. Semanko: Did we not all get the draft letter that Susan sent out? The upshot of that letter is that Senator McGee who is the Chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee in Idaho has agreed, at the request of not just the City, to broker a meeting with ITD to do exactly what you have suggested AI, except not just in front of the City Council but to have ITD with all of the proponents and with all of those seeking the by-pass, and if Senator McGee is successful in brokering that meeting we will have this dialog. I think this going to happen, we are going to have this discussion with ITD if he actually sends the letter that has been drafted for his consideration. Are you saying that he should not send that letter to ITD, that we shouldn't have a meeting with them? Shoushtarian: I don't think first of all that it is his business to be involved in this and I am going to send him a letter maybe. This is our City that has to get involved and I have not been involved with the rest of the Council on this issue. I have not been updated. We have never been talked about this in the past nine months. Behind the scene lots of things happening. General discussion. Huffaker: I can see where Council Member Shoushtarian feels like he was excluded and did not have as much information available to him but I want to refute completely the idea that you were purposely excluded. The reason I became involved was just because I happened to be on the committees that were talking about this. I think that this has been discussed but not formally shared with you. I don't think you were ever purposely excluded, that did not happen. Further general discussion. Semanko: I need to respond to the thing about Senator McGee, Senator McGee is the Chairman of the Transportation Committee in the Senate, the Transportation Committee has jurisdiction over ITD and so when a group of citizens who are concerned about the future of Highway 44, which is under ITD' s jurisdiction, approach the Senator with an idea for a request for support or to broker a meeting it is Senator's McGee's business. I guess I disagree, and also, I don't think the City has to be the lead or the authorizing entity on everything that happens in the community. If Ada County Paramedics, the Fire Department, Eagle River Development folks, the folks that are tenants there, the Emergency Room Hospital all want to take a lead and invite the City to be part of that discussion and part of that process, I think that is a good thing. I think brokering a meeting with ITD and all of those parties is a good thing if Senator McGee can get that Page 10 K:ICOUNCIL\MINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-09-23-08mindoc accomplished where we haven't been able to. Is it the perception in the letter that we are supportive of the by-pass or the request by Senator McGee to have a meeting brokered that is offensive to you? Shoushtarian: the first part not the second. I'm not on that position. I think that is a business community oriented and I do not think that is necessarily a benefit to our community. I would rather that they come if we can get together with them. General discussion. Semanko moves to approve the Minutes of September 16,2008. Seconded by Guerber. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES........................... PRE-COUNCIL REPORTS: NO REPORTS GIVEN Mayor and Council's Report: City Clerk/Treasurer Report: Zoning Administrator's Report: Public Works Director Report: City Attorney Report: City Engineer Report: 9. ADJOURNMENT: Semanko moves to adjourn. Seconded by Guerber. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES................. . Hearing no further business, the Council meeting adjourned at 2:00 a.m. Respectfully submitted: 1l~8 -~I~~ - SHARON K. BERGMANN CITY CLERK/TREASURER P ILLIP J. BANDY MAYOR ,........., ". -'. ......' f.,AGLl; "'" " 0<< ....... *# .:-' ~ t.e ......~ .. L .. oRA T Ii' . M ~ ~~..o ....,.... .. ~. ~~ .:. : CJ: 0 ~ _~ : . ~.- : : u ,. \;~: 0 : :.. .. ~ c.,~~ $: ~: . ~ .. /";J to"'.. ~ ~ ..."'COR pot.....<::) ..~ ....... X ~ .... 1 TC 0 ..,.... P ,\ ,r, ,1,' A TRANSCRIBABLE RECORD OF THIS MEETING IS AVAILABLE AT EAGLE CITY HALL Page II KICOUNCIL\MlNUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-09-23-08min.doc Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 10 Attachment A Eagle Equestrian Park Questionnaire Eagle Equestrian Park Questionnaire by Philip Fry, 10 May 2006 Personal: Rest Rooms: at arena/trailhead only, several distributed, distributed portajohns; arena dressing areas. Picnic/Party areas: Informal, covered; one large area, distributed small areas, at lookouts; scheduling. Parking: at arena/trailhead only, several distributed at each area entry, large trailer pull through parking. Environmental Issues Wildlife preservation: sacrifice, support, attempted improvement; maintain wildlife corridor. Aquifer Impacts: use aquifer to support facilities, reduce facilities to moderate water usage, minimum aquifer water usage; pipe in surface water; require water injection to replace aquifer usage. Landscaping: maintain municipal style parks, reduce aquifer usage with xeriscape/natural plantings, aquifer preservation with minimal lawns and landscaping. ACCESS Road access via: E -W ends, N over foothills from Homer Rd., S over foothills from Big Gulch M3 developments. Trail access via: E -W ends only, E -W ends, N over foothills from Homer Rd., S over foothills from Big Gulch M3 developments; from Linder Rd., from Park Ln., from Meridian Rd. line, from Skyline Dr., from Ballantine Rd, from Eagle Rd. M3 proposes an E -W road through the Equestrian Park from Willow Creek Rd (Eagle Rd.) through to an extension of Hartley Rd.(W of Linder Rd.) to act as a through traffic corridor, access M3 developments on the N. of the Park, and to access the Park. This E -W road should be: not through, local residential type, 2 lane collector type, 4 lane arterial type; max. 20 mph, max. 35 mph, max. 45 mph; not crossed by trails, use lights at trail crossing, use stop signs at trail crossings, use yield signs at trail crossings. M3 proposes N -S roads for easier access between Eagle, the M3 developments and the Park. One road proposes extending Hartley Road into the Park at Little Gulch and over the foothills into the Big Gulch M3 developments. This road is: not needed, poorly placed, too expensive, too steep and windy, allows excessive traffic in the Park, desirable; also needs a trail; local residential type, 2 lane collector type; max. 20 mph, max. 35 mph, max. 45 mph. M3 proposes another N -S road to extend Linder Rd. from Homer Rd over the foothills to the Park in Little Gulch and continue over the foothills into the Big Gulch M3 developments. This road is: not needed, poorly placed, too expensive, too steep and windy, allows excessive traffic in the Park, desirable; also needs a trail; local residential type, 2 lane collector type; max. 20 mph, max. 35 mph, max. 45 mph; better replaced by Park Ln. access, better replaced by extending at the Meridian Rd. line, better replaced by Ballantine Rd access. Other Comments: Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 11 Attachment B Results for Eagle Equestrian Park Questionnaire This is the total counts for all options with the o=# counting the circled option and / # the crossed off option. Counts positioned over the option headers count the number of questionnaires who rejected to whole area (i.e. arenas, pens, stables and services). The I indicates the number of questionnaires responding to the following area of options. Results for Eagle Equestrian Park Questionnaire by Philip Fry, of10 May 2006, 28 July count =. 47 Please circle all personally desirable/wanted items(o=#), leave neutrai items unmarked, and cross -off all personally undesirable/unwanted items(i. _ 32 o=1/6 0=7/1 o=25/1 GENERAL: The Eagle Equestrian Park is: not desirable, desirable, very desirable. 131 0=12/0 2412 o=1411 0=117 Costs: mostly self supporting; no increased taxes, worth small tax increase, worth large tax increase. Z47 0=10 asZ PERSONAL: Your Loc. is near: N. Eagle, N. foothills, Eagle, Star, Meridian, Boise, other areas; Q1 Q 0-10 0 . Your family owns horses: none, one, two, 3 or more; lease. .Z Q-12 0=21 Family members ride: monthly, bi-weekly, weekly, several times/week. o=27 0=36 QZ Q Q o Style: pleasure,trail, English, teams, events, racing, endurance, other. 0=0/2 0=11cl& 0=13 0=12 Might Ride at Eq. Park: monthly, bi-weekly, weekly, several times/week. /44 o=15/0 0=37/1 0=22/2 o=24/2 o=18/6 0=1/29 0=0/29 Tralls:Use shared by: similar riding styles, all horsemen, hikers, joggers,bicycles, ATVs, autos/trucks 145 o=3/6 0=38/0 0=33/1 0=17/0 Trail types: mostly straight, meandering & scenic, much long distance; scenic stops & lookouts; 0-214 o=27/1 0=21/1 0/14 o=11/8 o=22/7 mostly flat, some hills, lots of hills; some hwy. crossings, no hwy. crossings, protected hwy. crossings. 137 o=0/,1811 0=24/4 0=9/3 Arenas: Provided by: Eagle Park , nearby neighborhood commercial facility; 0=16/2 0=14/1 0=1/6 Located near: Eagle Rd end, Emmett hwy. end, middle of park. 128 gALT o=15/0 0=12/0 o=13/0 o=9/1, o=12/1 o=513_ 0=5/3 o=6/1 Open arena(s) with: pleasure, English, rider training, teams, events, roping, cutting, other. 0=2/0 0=9/0 0=9/0 0=6/2 Watered and worked: monthly, weekly, daily, before each use. o=8/0 0=11/0 o=6/3 0=2/6 0=0/8 Group 2 hr. costs:Free, $20, $50, $100, $200. 125 0=118 0=15/0 0=11/0 0=14/0 0=7/0 o=8/0 0=5/1 0=5/2 0=5/2 Covered arena with:pleasure, English, rider training, teams, events, roping, cutting, other. o=1/0 o=5/0 0=10/0 0=5/0 Watered and worked: monthly, weekly, daily, before each use. 0=5/1 0=9/0 o=713 o=3/4 0=3/7 Group 2 hr. costs: Free, $20, $50, $100, $200. E18 0=0/9 g=2/6 0=5/30=1012 o=0/4 0=2/2 Pens : few individual, many individual, mix of shared and individual, large shared, cattle(roping, cutting). 128 o=14/1 0=8/4 0=3/3 Services: Provided by: Eagle Park, nearby neighborhood stable facility, concession; 0=11/2 o=2/9 o=2/9 o=3/8 self washing facilities, trainer, exerciser, groomer. Z17 o=0/14 o=6/1 o=8/1 o=7/1, 0=3/2 Stables: Support stays: day, overnight w. caretaker, events w. caretaker, monthly b'rding w caretaker; o=10/1 o=1/3 o=2/3 o=2/3 user cleans & feeds, cleaning services, feeding services, grooming services, o=1/6 0=1/6 exercising services, training services. X37 o=27/1 0=10/6 0=9/6 0=5/7. Rest Rooms:at arena/trailhead only, several distributed, distributed portajohns; arena dressing area. 137 0=0/3 0=21/0 0=7/2 0=7/2 o=9/5 0=3 0=4/6 Picnic/Party areas: Informal, covered; one large area, distributed small areas, at lookouts; scheduling. 137 o=19/1 o13=/0 0=12/5 0=21/2 Parking: at arena/ trailhead only, several distributed at each area entry, large trailer pull thru parking. 137 0=0/10 0=14/1 0=12/3 0=34/0, Wildlife preservation: sacrifice, support, attempted improvement; maintain wildlife corridor. 137 0=8/9 0=10/1 Aquifer Impacts: use aquifer to support facilities, reduce facilities to moderate water usage, 0=13/1 o=2/3 0=9/g min.aquifer water usage; pipe in surface water; require water injection to replace aquifer usage. 140 0=0/12 o=20/3 Landscaping: maintain municipal style parks, reduce aquifer usage with xeriscape/natural plantings, 0=21/5 aquifer preservation with minimal lawns and landscaping. 125 0=17/0 0=2 o=10/1 Road access via: E-W ends, N over foothills from Homer Rd., S over foothills from Big Gulch M3 devel.. 134 o=7/3 0=13/2 0=8/3 0=12/0 Trail access via: E-W ends only, E-W ends, N over foothills from Homer Rd., S over foothills from Big o=8/3 o=1/4 0=2/2 0=1 a Gulch M3 developments, from Linder Rd., from Park Ln., from Meridian Rd. line, from Skyline Dr., 0=4/2 0=12/2 from Ballantine Rd, from Eagle Rd. Park road from Willow Creek Rd to Hartley Rd 131 0=13/1 0=812 o=6/3 o=2/8 0=10/3 not through, local residential type, 2 lane collector type, 4 lane arterial type; max. 20 mph, o=6/8 0=1/8 0=8/3 0=4/4 max. 35 mph, max. 45 mph; not crossed by trails, use lights at trail crossing, o=9/4 0=4/5 use stop signs at trail crossings, use yield signs at trail crossings. Park crossing road from Hartley Road: 126 0=11/3 0=5/2 0=1a 0=2/1 0=7/1 not needed, poorly placed, too expensive, too steep and windy, allows excessive traffic in Park, o=1 /g 0=8/0 o=2/1 0=2/2 0=5/1 desirable; also needs a trail; local residential type, 2 lane collector type; max. 20 mph, o=3/3 0=012 max. 35 mph, max. 45 mph. Park crossing road from Linder Rd. 133 0=12/1 0=7/0 0=4/0 0=3/0 0=8/1 not needed, poorly placed, too expensive, too steep and windy, allows excessive traffic in Park, 0=1/2 o-6ro 0=2/1 o=1/2 p=5/0, 0=3/3, desirable; also needs a trail; local residential type, 2 lane collector type; max.20 mph, max.35 mph, 0=013 0=0/2 0=1/1 max. 45 mph; better replaced by Park Ln. access, better replaced by extending at Meridian Rd. 9=6/1 line, better replaced by Ballantine Rd access. Comment summary: Need no road in park=2, Keep access simple =2, Access only via HW 16 =1, 123 Have no arenas and no services =10, keep park natural = 7, keep reasonable and inexpensive = 5 Spend money on trails not facilities =1, Need conservation easements =1, keep trails wild/natural= 2 Use $10 yearly parking for use =1, Use yearly fee, refundable=1, I appreciate horse and hiker trails=1. Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 12 Attachment C Eagle Area Results for Eagle Equestrian Park Questionnaire This is the total counts for all options except most of the park road options. The o=# counting the circled option and / # the crossed off option. Counts positioned over the option headers count the number of questionnaires who rejected to whole area (i.e. arenas, pens, stables and services). The I indicates the number of questionnaires responding to the following area of options. Eagle Area Results. for Eagle Equestrian Park Questionnaire by Philip Fry, of10 May 2006, 28 July count .= 28 Please circle all personally desirable/wanted items(o=#), leave neutral items unmarked, and cross -off all personally undesirable/unwanted items(L. p=1/6 o=3/2 0=13/0 GENERAL: The Eagle Equestrian Park is: not desirable, desirable, very desirable. 119 0=911 0=4/2 0=8/1 9=0/7 Costs: mostly self supporting; no increased taxes, worth small tax increase, worth large tax increase. 127 0=10 0=12 =1? 9 o Q PERSONAL: Your Loc. is near: N. Eagle, N. foothills, Eagle, Star, Meridian, Boise, other areas; Qi QZ 0=14 Your family owns horses: none, one, two, 3 or more; lease. Q 0=12 Family members ride: monthly, bi-weekly, weekly, several times/week. 0=16 0=23 4gma 0=0 g_r4 Style: pleasure,trail, English, teams, events, racing, endurance, other. 0=0/1 c o 0=10 Might Ride at Eq. Park: monthly, bi-weekly, weekly, several times/week. 227 o=9/0, 0=20/1 0=14/2 0=14/2 o=12/6 o=1/18 o=0/20 Trails:Use shared by: similar riding styles, all horsemen, hikers, joggers,bicycles, ATVs, autos/trucks 127 o=0/5 0=20/0 p=14/1 o=9/0 Trail types: mostly straight, meandering & scenic, much long distance; scenic stops & lookouts; 0=1/2 0=13/1 0=12/1 0=2/11 0=18/8 o=8/ mostly flat, some hills, Tots of hills; some hwy. crossings, no hwy. crossings, protected hwy. crossings. 121 0=019 0=8/4 0=612 Arenas: Provided by: Eagle Park , nearby neighborhood commercial facility; 0=9/1 o=4/0 0=0/5 Located near: Eagle Rd end, Emmett hwy. end, middle of park. Z16 0=5/0 o=5/0 o=5/0 9=4/1 0=5/1 o=1/3 o=1/3 o=1/1 Open arena(s) with: pleasure, English, rider training, teams, events, roping, cutting, other. o=2/0 o=2/0 0=5/0 o=3/1 Watered and worked: monthly, weekly, daily, before each use. 0=3/0 0=4/0 g=2/2 o=2/5 o=0/6 Group 2 hr. costs:Free, $20, $50, $100, $200. 113 0=1/7 o=3 Q 0=4/0 0=4/0 0=4/0 Covered arena with:pleasure, English, rider training, teams, 0=110 o=210 Watered and worked: monthly, weekly, o=3/1 o=3/0 o=3/2 0=2/3 0=4/Q 0=1/2 0=1 f2 0=112 events, roping, cutting, other. 0=3/0 0=2/0 daily, before each use. 0=1 /5 Group 2 hr. costs: Free, $20, $50, $100, $200. 110 0_ /$ o=2/3 o=1/1, o=3/2 0=0/2 0=2/3 Pens : few individual, many individual, mix of shared and individual, Targe shared, cattle(roping, cutting). 114 o=0/7 0=6/1 0=6/3 0=3/4 Services: Provided by: Eagle Park, nearby neighborhood stable facility, concession; o=4f2 0=1/5 0=1/5 0=2/1 self washing facilities, trainer, exerciser, groomer. 116 0=0/12 o=2/0 0=3/1 0=2/1 0=2/1 Stables: Support stays: day, 0=3/1 user cleans & feeds, 0=1/2 exercising services, overnight w. caretaker, events w. caretaker, monthly b'rding w caretaker; 0=112 0=1/2 0=1 /2 cleaning services, feeding services, grooming services, 0=1/2 training services. 112 0=18/0 0=4/5 0=416 4=116 Rest Rooms:at arena/trailhead only, several distributed, distributed portajohn; arena dressing area. 119 0=112 0=15/0 o=412 0=2/1 o=4/3 o=013 0=1/5 Picnic/Party areas: Informal, covered; one large area, distributed small areas, at lookouts; scheduling. 120 0=16/1 o=514 0=13/1 Parking: at arenaltrailhead only, several distributed at each area entry, Targe trailer pull thru parking. 121 0=0/9 o=711 0=10/3 0=21/0 Wildlife preservation: sacrifice, support, attempted improvement; maintain wildlife corridor. 121 0=1/7 0=911 Aquifer Impacts: use aquifer to support facilities, reduce facilities to moderate water usage, ogyi o=312 0=7/1 min.aquifer water usage; pipe in surface water; require water injection to replace aquifer usage. 123 0=0/9 o=13/3 Landscaping: maintain municipal style parks, reduce aquifer usage with xeriscapelnatural plantings, o=13/3 aquifer preservation with minimal lawns and landscaping. 114 0=9/0 0=2/4 0=6/1 Road access via: E -W ends, N over foothills from Homer Rd., S over foothills from Big Gulch M3 devel.. 119 o=5/2 o=8/1 0=4/1 0=7/0 Trail access via: E -W ends only, E -W ends, N over foothills from Homer Rd., S over foothills from Big 0=4/4 o=0/3 0=0/1 0=1/1 Gulch M3 developments, from Linder Rd., from Park Ln., from Meridian Rd. line, from Skyline Dr., o=2/1 o=7/1 from Ballantine Rd, from Eagle Rd. Park road from Willow Creek Rd to Hartley Rd 115 0=10/1 not through, local residential type, 2 lane collector type, 4 lane arterial type; max. 20 mph, 0=3/3 max. 35 mph, max. 45 mph; not crossed by trails, use lights at trail crossing, use stop signs at trail crossings, use yield signs at trail crossings. Road crossing Park from Hartley Road: E11 o=5/2 not needed, poorly placed, too expensive, too steep and windy, allows excessive traffic in Park, 0=4/1 desirable; also needs a trail; local residential type, 2 lane collector type; max. 20 mph, max. 35 mph, max. 45 mph. Road crossing Park from Linder Rd. X11 0=4 not needed, poorly placed, too expensive, too steep and windy, allows excessive traffic in Park, desirable; also needs a trail; local residential type, 2 lane collector type; max.20 mph, max.35 mph, max. 45 mph; better replaced by Park Ln. access, better replaced by extending at Meridian Rd. line, better replaced by Ballantine Rd access. Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 13 Attachment D Horseman Results for Eagle Equestrian Park Questionnaire This is the total counts for many selected options for the "3 or more" horse owners. with the o=# counting the circled option and / # the crossed off option. Counts positioned over the option headers count the number of questionnaires who rejected to whole area (i.e. arenas, pens, stables and services). The 1 indicates the number of questionnaires responding to the following area of options. Horseman Results for Eagle Equestrian Park Questionnaire by Philip Fry, of10 May 2006, 28 July count =47'0/5 Please circle all personally desirable/wanted items(o=#), leave neutral items unmarked, and cross -off all personally undesirable/unwanted items(Le. o=0/4 0=2/1 0=13/1 GENERAL: The Eagle Equestrian Park is: not desirable, desirable, very desirable. 114 o=4/0 0=3/0 0=3/0 0=1/4 Costs: mostly self supporting; no increased taxes, worth small tax increase, worth Targe tax increase. 123 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q PERSONAL: Your Loc. is near: N. Eagle, N. foothills, Eagle, Star, Meridian, Boise, other areas; Q Q 4 o=23 Your family owns horses: none, one, two, 3 or more; lease. Q _11 Family members ride: monthly, bi-weekly, weekly, several times/week. 0=15 0=22 Q Q2 I Q Style: pleasure,trail, English, teams, events, racing, endurance, other. Q Q _Z Might Ride at Eq. Park: monthly, bi-weekly, weekly, several times/week. 120 0=7/0 0=18/1 0=9/1 0=9/1 0=6/5 o=1112 0=0/13 Trails:Use shared by: similar riding styles, all horsemen, hikers, joggers,bicycles, ATVs, autos/trucks 123 0=2/2 0=1910 0=10/1 0=810 Trail types: mostly straight, meandering & scenic, much long distance; scenic stops & lookouts; 0=1/1 0=13/0 o=10/0 o=3/5 o=7/4 Q J'C/ mostly flat, some hills, lots of hills; some hwy. crossings, no hwy. crossings, protected hwy. crossings. 118 0=0/4 o=10// 0=3/2 Arenas: Provided by: Eagle Park , nearby neighborhood commercial facility; 0=9/1 g=7/0 0=1 /Z Located near: Eagle Rd end, Emmett hwy. end, middle of park. 118 QED& Open arena(s) with: pleasure, English, rider training, teams, events, roping, cutting, other. Watered and worked: monthly, weekly, daily, before each use. o=5/0 o=7/0 0=3/1 0=1/3 0=0/3 Group 2 hr. costs:Free, $20, $50, $100, $200. 115 y ��,� �', 4_ 4= 4= Covered arena with:pleasure, English, rider training, teams, events, roping, cutting, other. Qs Qs Watered and worked: monthly, weekly, daily, before each use. Q Q Group 2 hr. costs: Free, $20, $50, $100, $200. 110 o=0/6 0=0/1 0=2/2 p=7/0 Pens : few individual, many individual, mix of shared and individual, large shared, cattle(roping, cutting). 115 0=0/4 0=7/1 0=4/4 0=3/2 Services: Provided by: Eagle Park, nearby neighborhood stable facility, concession; Q3 -S2/11 0=2/5 0 self washing facilities, trainer, exerciser, groomer. 115 o=0/5 1)=4/1 o=6/1 0=2/1 Stables: Support stays: day, overnight w. caretaker, events w. caretaker, monthly b'rding w caretaker; user cleans & feeds, cleaning services, feeding services, grooming services, exercising services, training services. Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 14 Appendix E The 47 Returned Questionnaires of 28 July 2006 (only included with the copy for the Eagle City Planners). November 27, 2006 Plan M3 Open Space Cluster • 41,... 1. ',d- d• iV +L HorsebackBiding . • 11 1 • Trail Layout Single direction loops or multiple loops are suitable for horse trails. Provide routes with a variety of scenery and terrain. Wet areas and steep slopes pose extreme difficulties to trail maintenance and should be avoided. Keep water and motorized road crossings to a minimum. Open parade areas may be offered for riders to practice their skills. • Trail Length Horseback riders travel at average speeds ranging from 4 to 8 miles per hour. Many day - use trails are designed to cover 5 to 25 miles. • Clearing Width Light use: 8 feet (one-way traffic) Heavy use: 12 feet (two-way traffic) • Clearing Height lO to 12 feet • Tread Width Light use: 2 to 4 feet (one-way traffic) Heavy use: 5 to 6 feet (two-way traffic) • Trail Surface Natural trail surfaces should be favored. A corduroy base covered with soil or woodchips is recommended for areas with erodible or poorly drained soils. Avoid using asphalt or concrete as both may injure horses' hooves. • Turning Radius Turning radius is not critical on horseback riding trails. But, avoid sharp -angled turns or turns on steep slopes. • Percent Grade Erosion problems often will develop on grades exceeding 10 percent. Switchbacks and waterbars may be necessary to traverse steep slopes. Offer resting grades (4 percent or less) of at least 500 feet in length at regular intervals. Desired: 0 to 10% Maximum: 10% (sustained) 20% (shorter than 50 yards) 4i . May 2008 Draft Plan EAGLE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP RZ-08-03 MOD - EaE1e Island Crossinu. LLC September 23, 2008, 7:30 P.M. NAME loDD Lure ACL 131)\12-VaL A0171}1S- .g; Ii4j41[1)/h/ti& lik1114/ 6CT'AA'-<- r'� lea 015 c n A / an(/c ADDRESS/ TELEPHONE/E-MAIL 677 q73 CJ COVE COLO WRY Q39 -gzSS Y s-- 36 3 L 972 aoVE C co,-ty vvpcy e (c) C( 136/o1 6v{' C. -.7.1=1t=3F_ ov , -CfcI(t.r RD 87 -13/ ,U. Cove e.oCeuk I 0 TESTIFY YES/NO? PRO/CON 2 T Lo &I Com Yes co kJ No Fro P/Z1) pA) U NAME EAGLE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGNUP RZ-24-06 MOD2 - Eagle Gateway Development. LLC September 23, 2008, 7:30 P.M. ADDRESS/ TESTIFY TELEPHONE/E-MAIL YES/NO? PRO/CON 1\9/e‘1 i EAGLE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP A-16-07/RZ-23-07 - SB/CH Land Company (Flack/Carlockl. LLC Septem r-2-3;2008, 7:30 P.M. ADDRESS/ TESTIFY TELEPHONE/E-MAIL YES/NO? PRO/CON EiLibdIAJWISr); Modification to Rezone Development Agreement HORROCKS N Arts, \]\Je.r ! J��J�IJJJJII IIORROCKS N 1 Eagle OJ ry Code: Title , Chapter P] irill��,C� Ufllt U��I��U;Jtll�Tlr • Section 8-6-4: USES PERMITTED: • All uses that may be allowed within the land use district are permitted within a PUD. Also, up to ten percent (10%) of the gross land area may be directed to other commercial, office, public and quasi -public uses that are not allowed within the land use district; provided, that there is a favorable finding by the council ! [ORROCKS M f IORROCKS 2 Proposed addition to Condit on of Development 21 • The restaurant with drive-thru (limited to one of the following: coffee, yogurt/ice cream, or deli sandwich shop), shown on the Eagle Island Crossing Site Plan (Exhibit "D") as Building "L", which is a prohibited use within said section of Eagle City Code and on the entire property as noted above, shall be permitted with this development agreement. 11ORROCKS N E. -;rte plan shov'iiri j Building '1_." with c] i\Je- thr! 1 Building L = 2,760 sq. ft. 3 Proposed New Condition of Development for inclusion in the development agreement: ■ 2.14 Any building with a proposed drive-thru shall be designed in such a way as to compliment the entirety of the development and shall provide a minimum eighteen -eight inch (18") grade separated berm with landscaping adjacent to the drive thru-lanes to reduce the impact of the vehicles utilizing the drive-thru lanes (i.e. vehicle headlights and vehicle queuing). The combined height of berm and landscaping shall equal a minimum of forty-eight inches (48"). Design styles exceeding the standard utilitarian look of a building with a drive-thru shall be required. PLANTfE.:MEDULF 71 LEGEND Cy* C X3A TREF 'LANftNG FIOR ROCKS N (I ) (.) PE (I)PC _ (2) RN (2) RN -. II)PC (2)P / 414, 4 SI %II 1I1411R'AY44 meal l inu 1 11111 11 11111Bibail III1 I I I I L•••.11 1 ` N'� 5 Looking north from Pad "L" 6 7 8 1 10 Eagles Family Fun Filled Eagle Rib Cook -Off & SpudFest (Year One Overview) • Collected 6,000 lbs of food for the Idaho Food Bank. • 15,000 + Attendees. • Major local Idaho Sponsorships with Pepsi (Nagel Beverage), J.R. Simplot Company & Hayden Beverage. • Kansas City Barbeque Society sanctioned event conducted by professional staff with 23 teams competing for cash and prizes, with several out-of-state competitors participating. • Relaxed family atmosphere with kid's zone, live entertainment, hot air balloon launch, clowns, face painting and a variety of food and vendors. • Many local businesses selling food and other services. •. Embraced and supported by many Eagle businesses and residents who made this event a success. • Mayor Bandy and Governor Otter's endorsements. • Overwhelming positive input and success. Planned Improvements for 2009 1. Name of Event: Eagle BBQ Cook -Off and SpudFest. 2. Location: Guerber Park, Eagle Island State Park or Veladrome Cycle Park. 3. More activities: 15 to 20 hot air balloon launch with charity involved breakfast. 4. Fireworks: If possible with permits, etc, etc. 5. Additional live music groups. 6. Additional 15 + cookers/food vendors . 7. "Bike Rally" if held at Veladrome. 8. Spudbar and "all you can eat" spud eating competition. 9. Sack races for kids. 10. Amateur backyard BBQ contest. 11. People's choice sampling contest With costs and additions spiraling upward, we ask the City of Eagle to Sponsor and endorse this Eagle City success story that easily could reach 30,000 + attendees in 2009. City of Eagle Sponsorship: $10,000 in cash and/or services ADA COUNTY GARY RAN[Y, SII[RIUT City of Eagle Police Monthly Report August 2008 Group A NIBRS Crime Person Crime* Property Crime* Society Crime* Total Felony Misdemeanor 4 of Reported Crimes 80 60 40 2007 90 263 70 423 VTD 2008 79 232 43 354 Clearance Rate 2008 67.1% 20.3% 95.3% 39.8% 167 152 24.3% 256 202 51.5% June 2008 July August 13 10 12 35 44 37 3 12 2 City of Eagle Population COMPASS 2007: 20,951 COMPASS 2008: 21,090 % Change 0.7% 51 66 51 Group A NIBRS Crime Rate YTD (per 1,000) 19 33 21 2007: 20.2 32 33 30 2008: 15.4 INN mu, 20 0 tl• itiil _ mu l♦ III No Br Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep [li Person Property Society Oct Nov Dec 2007 Monthly Average % Change -23.9% 2007 Clearance Rates Person: 70.3% Property: 25.2% Society: 92.0% Total: 44.5% Felony: 31.8% Misdemeanor: 53.0% Police :Activity Calls For Service+ Total Response Time Code 31 Response Time Officer-Initiatedt Proactive+ Reports (DR's) Arrests§ Citations 1600 4 of Incidents YTD 2008 2007 2008 June July August 3,197 2,691 341 370 364 6:36 6:49 6:59 7:00 6:56 3:09 3:02 2:40 3:24 2:52 4,356 5,387 652 686 608 1,667 2,417 249 270 325 1200iv Nil 800 400 1,183 1,178 144 171 388 350 32 61 1,275 1,280 183 196 130 45 148 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Calls For Service Provided By ACSO/CAU/Ih Officer -Initiated Proactive — 2007 Monthly Average August 2008 Top Calls For Service Burglary Alarm Auto Accident Non -injury Suspicious Vehicle Vandalism Report Data obamed from New World, CAD, Legacy Ati400, ISTARS, and IIT WebCart databases Data dunned 9/9/08 Page 1 ort Property Crime Vehicle Burglary Residential Burglary Commercial Burglary Construction Burglary Vandalism Other** Total Construction Site Check" Property/Security Check 1 TD 2008 2007 2008 August E 30 38 41 6 •c 29 23 2 v 20 7 9 5 t 10 6 0 v • 10 81 60 7 cc 98 93 17 3 0 u 263 232 37 690 734 44 783 1,295 206 • � G 400 300 200 100 0 c.0>, c — oo a > u ro ai t9 Q ep 7 v u 0 W LL 2 a a en o z o Burglaries & Vandalisms -U—Construction Site/Property/Security Checks # of Checks Traffic 1.TD 2008 2007 2008 June July August Crashes Property Damage 91 94 9 12 14 0000-0600 hrs 1 Personal Injury 52 61 9 5 4 0600-0900 hrs 0 Fatal 1 0 0 0 0 0900-1200 hrs 4 Total 144 155 18 17 18 1200-1500 hrs 3 Alcohol -Related Crashes 10 ♦ 2 0 ♦ 1500-1800 hrs 5 1800-2100 hrs 2 3,192 3,774 433 453 405 2100-2400 hrs 3 39 46 2 10 5 59 45 8 5 5 August 2008 808 641 83 107 77 ('rashes by Day of Week August 2008 Crashes by Time of Day Traffic Stops DUI Arrests DWI' Citations Moving Citations # of Crashes 25 20 15 10 5 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec tti Property Damage Personal Injury Fatal 2007 Monthly Average April - June 2008 Top Crash Intersections Eagle Rd & Chinden Blvd State St & Park Ln State St & Highway 55 Chinden Blvd & Locust Grove Rd Eagle Rd & Highway 44 State St & Horseshoe Bend Rd Highway 44 & Riverside Dr Highway 55 & Hill Rd Pro.dod By ACS WCAL,th �♦ Contributing circumstances for August 2008 crashes are currently unavailable. Sunday 0 Monday 3 Tuesday 2 Wednesday 4 "l'hursday 2 Friday 4 Saturday 3 August 2008 Top Crash Contributing Circumstances Currently Unavailable Data oburned from New World, CAD. Legacy AS400, ISTARS, and ITD WebCats databases Data quened 4.9,05 rage 2 oft 'Cue it up at the Eagle Rib Cook -Off & Spudfest Tie on your bib and let the barbecue sauce flow this Labor Day weekend. (Burp.) BY JEANNE HUFF jhufftrpidahostatesman.com Call it the Treasure Valley barbe- :ue throwdown. The Eagle Rib Cook -Off & Spud - e7` is turning on the heat Labor Day Neekend at Guerber Park in Eagle. This is a Kansas City Barbecue So- :iety-sanctioned event, a big deal be- ause the KCBS is one of the top Jogs in the country. "The largest or- ;anization of barbecue enthusiasts in he world," according to the Web >ite. The group also sponsors one of he most challenging competitions, Ind with more than 300 annual :mokin' events to narrow down the )est of the best, it's nigh on impossi- .)le to make it to the big show "The American Royal is the one averybody's trying to get to," said :ompetitor and vendor Andrew Pe- rehn. "I've never won enough to get :o ttrat, but maybe, if I win this year, ['ll get an invitation there." Petrehn, who owns and cooks for Eagle Rib Shack in Eagle and An- drew's Rib Shack in Meridian, said an invitation would make his mom, who lives in Overland Park, Kan., a Kansas City suburb, very happy. The rest of us will be happy, no matter what. Because for three whole days, cookers from Idaho, Montana, Washington, Oregon, Wyoming, Utah and beyond will be smokin'. The air will be thick with wafting, mouth-watering, smoky breezes, redolent with zingy spices; the sharp, tang of Memphis -style barbecue, smoky dry Texas rub, the sweet -with - a -kick punch of Kansas City style. "It's a very big deal," Petrehn said. "There are a lot of Idahoans who have never been exposed to authen- tic barbecue. To be exposed to differ- ent smokers, different spices, differ- ent flavors — that's the joy of playing around with barbecue." ocal caterer Kanak Attack is an - FIRE UP THE GRILL! • If you want to be a part of the cook -off, you can enter in one of sev- eral categories. Only the profession- al category is sanctioned. You can enter online. Deadline: Tuesday, Aug.12. Entry fees: > Professional: $200 per team > Spudmaster: free > Amateur/backyard: $125 per team Not a contender but still want to play? "We need judges," Savino said. All judges will take a short KCBS judge's course. Event organizers also are looking for volunteer help. For information or to sign up, call 860- 1820. Idaho Stat®i l(n file The Eagle Rib Cook -Off & S udfest is sanctioned bythe Kansas CityBarbecue Society.There are still o -ee it foie d ` Call. g P P gs jd b'� 860-1820 if you're interested. other competitor. "We're pretty excit- ed about it," Martin Oshiro, sous chef, said. "We'll probably be cooking our Kalua pig." Petrehn was mum on giving away his secrets: "I'm pretty sealed lips on that one," he said. "But I'll tell you this — what we serve at the restaurant is what I compete with." To win "you've got to have it just perfect," Petrehn said. He should know. Petrehn, who does his barbecue Kansas City -style, won first place, grand champion, for the 2003 Thrill of the Grill barbecue contest in Boise. 'And I've been try- ing to get back there ever since," he said, laughing. "I took second place in ribs for two years — that just drove me crazy" Good barbecue can, indeed, drive you insane. Presidents have been known to take sudden detours to get their fix. Petrehn said he remembers when President Clinton sneaked down to Arthur Bryant's barbecue joint in Kansas City in his motorcade on the way to the airport and "picked up the big platter." President Jimmy Carter, another president who loved his 'cue, would regularly fly Air Force One in to pick up some of Bryant's legendary ribs. Petrehn has similar lofty goals for barbecue in Idaho. "Hopefully, we can get (future) presidents to stop in our restaurants." Eagle cook -off competitors, judged "in the blind," will barbecue up four types of meat: pork, chicken, baby - back or spare pork ribs and beef brisket. As a nod to our fair state, all professional competitors also must submit a potato dish. The stakes are high — The Eagle Fat Hog Grand Champion gets $2,000, The Eagle Spudmaster Champion gets $1,000, the four Class Champions get $250. Plus, there are nine other winners per class (type of meat). But the real winners are the rest of us. We get to pig out for three whole days on some of the finest barbecue west of the Mississippi. Jeanne Huff: 377-6483 LARRY CROWE/ The Associated Press Barbecued pork spareribs is one of the four categories in an official barbecue competition. The other categories are pork, chicken and beef brisket. EAGLE RIB COOK -OFF & SPUDFEST Noon -10 p.m. Saturday, Aug. 30;11 a.m.-10 p.m. Sunday, Aug. 31; 11 a.m.-6 p.m. Monday, Sept.1; Guer- ber Park, 2200 E. Hill Road, Eagle. Tickets $2; free for12 and under. Free admission with nonperishable food item for the Idaho Foodbank. Food tickets: $1 each. Prices on food items, including barbecue from vendors and some willing competi- tors, vary. Page 2 .Page 3 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 IDAHO Y K riJ J- 1 n 1 1.s lJ 1\ L 0 1 /-- A ir , ", ELL.' V li '--,t_. -,.. \ aye Steffler 465-8123 community@idahopress.com Eagle 's Wednesday, August 20, 2008 ry or the ho _. Volunteers . ileedded You can lend a hand to help with this event. Volun- teers get a free BBQ meal and can enjoy the festivities; call 860-1820. • not your typical ild consider a fam- of them adopted) uliar. But being dif- ies isn't something ants Tim and Shelly. elves as a very nor - :r. 1 obvious questions Minn! nnnnla cnnh ♦ Event: Rib Cook -Off & Spudfest brinjs the World Series of barbecue to Idaho By Dan Lea dlea @idahoprpss. co rn EAGLE — Smokinnn'! As summer winds down, things heat up when pit mas- ters kick it up a notch at the first-ever Eagle Rib Cook -Off & Spudfest Labor Day weekend. Billed as "Three days to pig out on taters, BBQ ribs, chicken, brisket and pork," the Aug. 30 - Sept. 1 event is finger -licking, fall -off -the -bone fun. This is Idaho's first sanc- tioned BBQ Cook -Off of 2008 with rib cookers from several states vy- ing for nearly $10,000 in cash and prizes. "This is a big thing," enthused Dano Savino, vice presi- dent of sales and marketing for Northwest Events Unlimited, or- ganizers of the event. Sanctioned by the Kansas City Barbecue Society, the nation's largest orga- nization of barbecue enthusiasts, it's one of 300 cook -offs KCBS has sanctioned in 2008. "We've done events here, but nothing of this magnitude. It's 14 acres of fun for the entire family. "We're going to have cookers from Idaho, Montana, Washing- ton, Utah, Wyoming and beyond competing," Savino said. For many Idahoans the Cook - Off is a rare opportunity to tie on a bib and sample the wide variety of BBQ popularized by different regions of the country. They'll get to try sweet and sassy Kansas City style ribs, dry rub Texas bar- becue and tangy Memphis -style meat from vendors like Andrews Rib Shack, Applebee's, Texas Roadhouse and Idaho BBQ Co. Professional cooks challenge for The Eagle Fat Hog Grand Championship prize of $2,000. Four Class Championships earn $250 each with nine additional J Fall Festival A & E Editor: Christin Runkle 465-8119 play@idahopress.com _.1 v if Da \ To go Rat: Eagle Rib Cook -Off & Spudfest When: Aug. 30 -Sept. 1; Noon -10 p.m. Saturday, Aug. 30; 11 a.m.-10 p.m. Sun- day, Aug. 31; 11 a.m.-6 p.m. Monday, Sept. 1 Where: Guerber Park, 2200 E. Hill Road, Eagle Admission: $2/adult, free with the donation of a non-perishable food item to benefit the Idaho Foodbank; kids 12 and under free; (food tickets are $1 each and vary in price from vendors and some competitors). Attractions: Professional Rib Cook -Off & Spudfest, food, Beer & Wine Garden, Pepsi Kids' Zone, prize drawings, retail displays, classic cars and bikes and fire- works winners in each class (various types of meat). Cook -off competitors will barbecue four types of meat to be judged: Baby -back or spare pork ribs, beef brisket, chicken and pork. As a tip of the cap to Idaho and event sponsor, J.R. Simplot Co., each professional cooker is also required to prepare a side dish using potatoes for a shot at the $1,000 Eagle Spudmaster Championship. If the mouthwatering bar- becue wasn't reason enough to attend, the Cook -Off features a host of activities designed to entertain the entire family from the safe and friendly Pepsi Kids' Zone to the Hayden Beverage Beer & Wine Garden. "We've got something to see and something to do for everybody," Savino said. Other attractions include classic cars and bikes, kids' movies, charity booths, backyard barbe- cues, retailers and a fireworks show "that will blow you away." There's loads of giveaways, radio station remote broadcasts and recreational vehicles on display. Adults are admitted free with the donation of a nonperishable food itcm that will go to replen- ish the Idaho Foodbank. Children 12 and under are admitted free. Forget the napkins. Come get sauced on some of the best bar- becue you'll ever taste this Labor Day weekend in Eagle. 400000101111111. 20 SCENE • FRIDAY, JULY 4, 2008-THU N' . FOOD / \ /7/RSDAY, JULY10, 2008 Barbecue in Eagle and the return of a Boise icon You can enter an August tir.ti,t to see how your barbecue skills stand up in the heat of competition. BYER NRVAN THROWDIG DOWN THE HOT MflT • The World Series ofbarbe- cue is coming to Eagle at the end ofAugustThe Ewe Rib . Cook -Off & Spud Fest is sanc- tioned by the Kansas City Bar- becue Society andapanel of �y . will deter- mine the winners of close to $10,000 in cash and prizes. The three-dayeventat Gue rberPark(2200 E.Hill Rd, Eagle) ens.., the com- mon man "to pig out on taters, barbecue ribs, chime, brisket and pork." There alsowillbe continuous live music, aQbeer � garden, a. a y � aIdds zone, classic car and bilce shows, movies, charity booths, ven dors, displays, retailers and Admission is free to the public, and interested barbe- cue experts can eaterin sever- al everal categories for avariety of fees. Forinforn, call 8604820 orvisitwww. IdahoRibs.com. Eagle City Hall 660 E. Civic Ln./P.O. Box 1520 Eagle, Idaho 83616 (208) 939-6813 (ext.201) fax (208) 939-6827 A memo from the Sr. Deputy City Clerk/Treasurer. To: Mayor & Council CC: From: Tracy E. Osborn, CMC Date: September 22, 2008 Re: Addition to Consent Agenda I respectfully request the addition of the approval of a Beer and Wine license to the consent agenda. Beer & Wine License: Becky Logue dba: Flame Neapolitan Pizzeria LLC. is requesting a beer and wine license to be used for on premises consumption only at 228 E. Plaza Ste. F in the Eagle Plaza Shopping Center. All required documentation and fees has been submitted. This license would be valid from date of issuance through April 30, 2009. CITY OF EAGLE Application for Beer, Wine, and/or Liquor licen.e P.O. Box 1520/ 310 E. State St. Eagle, ID 83616 RECEIVED & FILED CITY OF EAGLE Rift. dI Rni'S. 4n• 2 9 20153 Please provide the City of Eagle with the following documents/items: 1. Copy of current year State of Idaho beer, wine and/or liquor license. 2. Copy of current year Ada County beer, wine and/or liquor license. 3. Copy of your premise diagram/floor plan approved by the State of Idaho showing areas in which alcohol will be served. 4. Copy of any lease agreement if premises to be used are not owned by the applicant(s), partners or members. 5. Articles of incorporation and bylaws. 6. Appropriate fees. Check type of license(s) being applied for: BEER WINE LIQUOR ON Premises Ii OFF Premises ON/OFF Premises Name of applicant(s): Include partnership or association members, board members or stocyh olders: Fin me ti c p),+ca,(-. P.2 � , �� - x,6,1 LOaa 1 1 Address of applicant(s), partners or association members and contact phone number(s): , C, bSr r u ca mr, 1-1-3 R - (CC -n- -FciL 1171 Physical address of license location: PIct 'ZC1 S .A; F Cac.t e =r7) (r 1 Co Detailed description of premises for which the license is to be issued: / 0 S J -Pf In , a 2,a rccf'rabint i CC�cc'o P/a 5/r��z�;., ce•111...0-7 Age of Applicant: ?) Citizenship: 1i S Applicant(s), partners or associations members length of residence in the State of Idaho: List any convictions of any laws of the State of Idaho, United States, or licensing city within three (3) years immediately preceding the date of filing the application, regulating governing or prohibiting the sale of alcoholic beverages. Within said time has the applicant(s) partners or members suffered the forfeiture of a bond for failure to appear in answer to charges of any such violation? List any convictions of any felony, or withheld judgment granted following adjudication of guilty of a felony, or fines paid or sentence completed thereof, within five (5) years from the date of this application: List any conviction of any crime or misdemeanor opposed to decency or morality: Pale 1 of 2 K `Clerks\Forms,applications`AIcohol permit appl.doc CITY OF EAGLE Application for Beer, Wine, and/or Liquor license P.O. Box 1520/ 310 E. State St. Eagle, ID 83616 Zoning of premises for which license is to be used: State of Idaho) ss: County of Ada) being first duly sworn, deposes and says that FEE. SHE. THEY is/are the owner(s) of the busing making the above and foregoing application, and makes the statements therein contained for the purpose of securing a license to sell BEER - WINE - AND/OR ALCOHOL within the corporate limits of the City of Eagle, and that HE. SHE, THEY have read the above foregoing application, knows the contents and the facts therein stated are true, and HE. SHE, THEY have read and is familiar with the ordinances of the City of Eagle related to the sale of beer, wine, and/or alcohol within the City of Eagle. Signature of applicant SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this �`3. -- day of , 20(3(6' NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Idaho Notary Signature. Y�- Residing. Expiration date. 1- \L -1-k9 ANNUAL LICENSE FEES: BEER: To be consumed OFF the premises only: $50.00 BEER: To be consumed ON the premises only: $200.00 BEER: To be consumed ON/OFF the premises: $250.00 WINE: To be consumed OFF the premises only: $125.00 WINE: To be consumed ON the premises only: $200.00 WINE: To be consumed ON/OFF the premises: $325.00 LIQUOR: To be consumed ON the premises only: $562.50 TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY OFFICIAL: Date received: q- 7,•Z -05 Fees Collected: "ZC.QC-,-� 6-� Page2of2 K \Clerks\FormslapplicationsWcohol permit appl doc (Q OO °t Premise Number: 1A-7520 Idaho tate Police Retail Alcohol Beverage License This is to certify, that Flame Neapolitan Pizzeria LLC doing business as: Flame Neapolitan Pizzeria is licensed to sell alcoholic beverages as stated below at: j..;;;;;,, „NO reek, '44:1 , • It ,T3, • Cycle Tracking Number. 37458 License Year: 2009 License Number: 7520 228 E Plaza Ste F, Eagle, Ada County Acceptance of a license by a retailer shall constitute knowledge of and agreement to operate by and in 00, f - iryr�. •*.s • I 40, elk accordance to the Alcohol Beverage Code, Title 23. Only the licensee herein specified shall use this license. Liquor Beer On -premise consumption Kegs to go Restaurant Wine by the bottle Wine by the glass No Yes $50.00 Yes $0.00 No Yes $0.00 Yes $100.00 Yes $100.00 TOTAL FEE: $250.00 • Director of Idaho State Police *a) Signature of Licensee,CO�D>icer`T LC Member or Partner 9rA FLAME NEAPOLITAN PIZZERIA LLC FLAME NEAPOLITAN PIZZERIA 574 E OBSERVATION DR MERIDIAN, ID 83642 Mailing Address License Valid: 09/03/2008 -04/30/2009 Expires: 04/30/2009 '^W • is (9' ABC FORM NO: ABC 02 03AV1dS10 A1S11Of1OIdSNO0 38 Ism 3SN3O11 SIH. (This license must be conspicuously displayed.) May 1, 2008 — April 30, 2009 ADA COUNTY LICENSE May 1, 2008 — April 30, 2009 STATE OF IDAHO 2009 NO.13783 Year THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT FLAME NEAPOLITAN PIZZERIA LLC FLAME NEAPOLITAN PIZZERIA is granted a / to conduct a / or for a ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE License (Type) at 228 E Plaza Ste F in Eagle 83616 ,State of Idaho (Street Address) (City or Town) and has complied with the laws of the State of Idaho and/or regulations and ordinances of Ada County. BEER Bottled\Canned 75.00 WINE By The Drink 100.00 TOTAL 175.00 . David Navarro, Clerk/Auditor/Recorder Signature of Licensee or Officer of Corporation Approved by the Board of County Commissioners this 15 day of September 2008 Chairman cc ?,23'cr Eagle City Hall 660 C. Civic Ln./P.O. Box 1520 Eagle, Idaho 83616 (208) 939-6813 (ext.201) fax (208) 939-6827 A memo from the Sr. Deputy City Clerk/Treasurer To: Mayor & Council CC: From: Tracy E. Osborn, CMC Date: September 22, 2008 Re: ANOTHE Addition to Consent Agenda I respectfully request the addition of the approval of a Beer and Wine license to the consent agenda. Beer & Wine License: Oleg Mironov dba: Cafe Russian Bear is requesting a beer and wine license to be used for on premises consumption only at 600 S. Rivershore Ln. #160 in Channel Center . All required documentation and fees has been submitted. This license would be valid from date of issuance through April 30, 2009. CITY OF EAGLE Application for Beer, Wine, and/or Liquor license P.O. Box 1520/ 310 E. State St. Eagle, ID 83616 RECEIVED & FILED CITY OF EAGLE SEP Z 3 JJOB Ro... c to: Please provide the City of Eagle with the following documents/items: 1. Copy of current year State of Idaho beer, wine and/or liquor license. 2. Copy of current year Ada County beer, wine and/or liquor license. 3. Copy of your premise diagram/floor plan approved by the State of Idaho showing areas in which alcohol will be served. 4. Copy of any lease agreement if premises to be used are not owned by the applicant(s), partners or members. 5. Articles of incorporation and bylaws. 6. Appropriate fees. ON Premises OFF Premises ON/OFF Premises Check type of license(s) being applied for: BEER WINE LIQUOR, Name of applicant(s): Include partnership or association members, board members or stockholders: (24 e 6 /27/le CA/0 V PR&& / eNIT ,cu.,2oVe-7 vice - PRes,J eNr Address of applicant(s), partners or association members and contact phone number(s): 74/1/9 ,Du,vCa,v /cz,ve x or s'e To 837/2/ / (a 0S) 4 o 9 - 9 / 04/ Physical addres f license location: 60i2 S , /6'es»p,Pe Z24/67 .4f /60 ea -2T-o 6736/.6 (a oK}5V/'/77 Detailed description of premises for which the licos (—OZ 00 ace fax/o/oea to be issued: Ga /4/ oie/r eo ea'74 4 /3t h4 /-?a,r.�e gAo, Age of Applicant: 25 Citizenship: Applicant(s), partners or associations members length of resift ce in the State of Idaho: CCI el rl7/,e°o4/01) ^ /4' eats . S Ve-r e S'ez-4 t'e-r5 — 67-e List any convictions of any laws of the State of Idaho, United States, or licensing city within three (3) years immediately preceding the date of filing the application, regulating governing or prohibiting the sale of alcoholic beverages. Within said time has the applicant(s) partners or members suffered the forfeiture of a bond for failure to appear in answer to charges of any such violation? N/4 List any convictions of any felony, or withheld judgment granted following adjudication of guilty of a felony, or fines paid or sentence completed the eof, within five (5) years from the date of this application: N/A List any conviction of any crim pr misdemeanor opposed to decency or morality: /4 Page 1 of 2 K \Clerks\Forms\applications\Alcohol permit appl doc CITY OF EAGLE Application for Beer, Wine, and/or Liquor license P.O. Box 1520/ 310 E. State St. Eagle, ID 83616 Zoning of premises for which license is to be used: e -f State of Idaho) ss: County of Ada) 9/ `/ /744c/vCbeing first duly sworn, deposes and says that HE, SHE, THEY is/are the owner(s)A f the business making the above and foregoing application, and makes the statements therein contained for the purpose of securing a license to sell BEER - WINE - AND/OR ALCOHOL within the corporate limits of the City of Eagle, and that HE, SHE, THEY have read the above foregoing application, knows the contents and the facts therein stated are true, and HE, SHE, THEY have read and is familiar with the ordinances of the City of Eagle related to the sale of beer, wine, and/or alcohol within the City of Eagle. Signature of applicant SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this day of 3/igg NOTARY PUBLIC • and for ./: to of Idaho ' 1 Notary Signatur • • .44t d'. Residing: ✓ Expiration d • te: / - ac3/do ANNUAL LICENSE FEES: BEER: To be consumed OFF the premises only: $50.00 BEER: To be consumed ON the premises only: $200.00 BEER: To be consumed ON/OFF the premises: $250.00 WINE: To be consumed OFF the premises only: $125.00 WINE: To be consumed ON the premises only: $200.00 WINE: To be consumed ON/OFF the premises: $325.00 LIQUOR: To be consumed ON the premises only: $562.50 TO BE COMPLET Date received: , 20 . OFFICIAL: Fee's 1tollected: ? 4'...&‘-/ Page 2 of 2 K:\Clerks\FormslapplicationslAlcohol permit appl.doc If (0``' mit Nw, Premise Number: 1A-7543 Idaho tate Police Retail Alcohol Beverage License This is to cert, that Russian Bear LLC doing business as: Cafe Russian Bear Cycle Tracking Number. 37702 License Year: 2009 License Number: 7543 is licensed to sell alcoholic beverages as stated below at: 600 S Rivershore Ln #160, Eagle, Ada County Acceptance of a license by a retailer shall constitute knowledge of and agreement to operate by and in accordance to the Alcohol Beverage Code, Title 23. Only the licensee herein specified shall use this license. Liquor Beer On -premise consumption Kegs to go Restaurant Wine by the bottle Wine by the glass No Yes $50.00 Yes $0.00 No Yes $0.00 Yes $100.00 Yes $100.00 TOTAL FEE: $250.00 Director of Idaho State Police • Signature of Licensee, Corporate Officer, LLC Member or Partner RUSSIAN BEAR LLC CAFE RUSSIAN BEAR 7449 DUNCAN LN BOISE, ID 83714 Mailing Address License Valid: 09/10/2008 - 04/30/2009 Expires: 04/3012009 •wNd NN•. :r 1 ) 449 ARC FORM NO: ARC 0• I HIS LILtNSt MUS I bt eUNSFIC:000SLY UISI'LAYtU (This license must be conspicuously displayed.) May 1, 2008 — April 30, 2009 ADA COUNTY LICENSE May 1, 2008 — April 30, 2009 STATE OF IDAHO 2009 Year RUSSIAN BEAR LLC CATE RUSSIAN BEAR is .. THIS: IS. TO.CERTIF THAT is granted a / to conduct a / or fora ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE License (Type) • at 600 S Rivershore Ln #160 in Eagle 83616 (Street Address) (City or Town) and has complied with the laws `otithe State'of;Idahopand/or regulations and ordinances of Ada County. NO.13788 ,State of Idaho BEER Draught\Bottled\Canned 100.00 WINE By The Drink • 100.00j TOTAL • 200.00! i . i . David Navarro, Clerk/Auditor/Recorder. Signature of Licensee or Officer of Corporation Approved by the Board of County Commissioners this 23 day of September 2008 Chairman C City of Eagle/BLM Regional Park Timeline: March 8, 2006 City Council adopted Res. 06-12 authorizing the acquisition of the 1,922 acres under the Recreation and Public Purposes Act (R&PP). (See Attached) May 30, 2006 City submits the R&PP application to the BLM for 1,922 acres August 6, 2006 City received a Questionnaire from Philip Fry Concerning the potential of an equestrian park in Eagle with 47 respondents. (See attached) September 2006 City Council adopts process for planning for the R&PP property. October 4, 2006 & November 1, 2006 City held public meetings including the following groups: City of Eagle Parks & Pathways Committee California/Oregon Trail Group Southwest Idaho Trail & Distance Riders, Inc. Land Trust of the Treasure Valley Southwest Idaho Mountain Biking Association Bob Firman- local cross country interests November 27, 2006 As a result of the first two meetings the City presented a draft plan for the property. (See attached) December 2006 City Council broadened the staff direction to include a Foothills sub -area within the City's comprehensive plan. The purpose from the council was not to change the direction of the planning for the R&PP application but to provide perspective and context for the plan. Spring 2007 The City established a subcommittee to work on Open space as part of the Foothills Sub -area plan shifting the focus to the entire 49,000 acre oppose to the 2,000 R&PP application area. The following polices came from the comprehensive plan concerning recreation and open space: The park is delineated separately on the future land use map as City/BLM Regional Park. Pg. 59 of the current plan (Res 08-20) (Allow for) the transfer/trade of public lands for a better open space network Providing and preserving of a regional recreation system. Goals (pg. 62) A-2.Establish a significant regional open space network in order to formalize the existing recreational uses and environmentally sensitive areas, and connections between them through creative design, voluntary dedications, incentives and governmental acquisition or exchange. Pg. 64 3. Use a regional open space overlay to establish areas that clustering and conservation development should be used opposed to large lot development in order to provide habitat and a regional open space network connecting the EagIeBLM land to points in and outside of the area.... 4. A.2.: Fragmentation open space area should be minimized so that resources areas area able to be managed as viewed as a integrated network. This can be accomplished through various engineering and design tools, i.e. super pads, hillside grading and others. (this clearly states that there was going to be some alterations to the land . 6. Work with the BLM to leverage the exchange of discontiguous tracts of public land for equal or larger tracts of contiguous ownership within the regional open space overlay the will build onto the existing public ownership. Pg. 104 : Definition of open space is as follows: Open space is land which offers opportunities for parks, recreation, water amenities, greenbelts, river trails, pathways, tourism, leisure activities, view points and wildlife habitat. Pg105 : Explore public/private or intergovernmental agreements to set aside and protect open space Spring 2008 M3 request status of the application since adoption of the Foothills Plan in March of 2008. City met with M3, BLM & mayor to discuss the status of the application and how to move forward. It is agreed that the plan had been preliminarily reviewed by the public and received comment and should now be presented formally to the City's parks and pathway committee. M3 took the original plan and added an amphitheater and riding arena at the direction of staff based upon requests from various user groups. May 21, 2008 Staff presented to the parks and pathways committee providing copies of the updated plan. The Committee request 30 days to review the plan, no comments were received from the Committee. (See attached) August 2008 M3's request to move forward the plan. Basic Assumptions of the Plan: 1) Within the 7 &1/2 mile area there will be road crossings. Locations are identified in the Comprehensive plan and being further researched by ACRD. 2) Road crossing will allow for wildlife and recreational crossings based upon the presence of wildlife and the identified users. 3) Trailhead, parking and basic services (restrooms, etc.) will be provided at key roadway crossings. 4) Connectivity will be required from private lands into the park area as private lands are developed. 5) Park will be for multiple "non -motorized" users (Hikers, biker, equestrian, & runners). 6) Areas will be identified for protection of sensitive species R&PP Applications and Resolution 05/J0/2006 15:58 FAX 208 331 1202 MOORE SMITH BUXTON TURCI( Form 2740-1 (July 1997) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT APPLICATION FOR LAND FOR. RECREATION OR PUBLIC PURPOSES (Act of June 14, 1926, as amended; 43 U.S.C, 869; 8694) la. Applicant's name b. Address (include 240 code) P..O. Box 1520 City of Eagle, Idaho Eagle, Idaho 83616 2.. Give legal description of lands applied for (include metes and bounds description, f necessary) SUBDIVISION SECTION iOWNSIIIP please see attached County of Ada State of Idaho 3a. This application ie for ® Lease a Purchase al lease, indicate year b. Proposed use is EI Public Recreation 0 Other Public Purposes 4. Describe the proposed ase of the land_ The description must specifically identify an established or definitely proposed project. Attach a detailed plan and schedule for development, a management plan which includes a description of how any revenues will be used, and any known environmental or cultural concerns specific to the land. Date • WJ uuzi vvo • FORM APPROVED OMB No. 1034-0012 Expires: June 30, 2000 Serial Number (BLM use only) Home phone (include area code) NA Business phone (include area code) (208)939-68)3 RANGE MERIDIAN Containing (acres) 1922 The proposed useof the land is to provide biking, equestrian, and other non—motorized recreational opportunitie's to the publ The proposed trail system would connect to'the City of Eagle's pathways and parks system and other public trail systems. The proposes to co'n•struct parking, trailhead and public visitation The City also proposes to construct an equestrian center to pr equestrian facilities for equestrian—related events.and activi 5. If applicant is State or Political subdivision thereof, cite your statutory or other authority to hold land for these purposes. hiking ic. trail, City • facilities. ovide ties. .Sections 50-301 and 50-303, Idaho Code 6. Attach a copy of your authority for filing this application and to perform all acts incident thereto. 7. If land described in this application has not been classified for recreation and/or Public purposes pursuant to the Recreation and Public urposea Act, consider this application as a petition for such classification. ' (Continued on reverse) 05/30/2006 15:59 FAX 208 331 1202 MOORE SMITH BUXTON TURCK - .0 j 003/006 8. Are all activities. facilities, services, financial aid, or other benefits as a result of your proposed development provided without regard to race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or age? l Yes U No Wino," the situation or activity and your plansfor achieving compliance.) 9. Are all activities, facilities, and services constructed or provided as a result of your proposed development accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities? 13 Yes No (If "no," describe the situation or activity and the reasons for nonaccessibility). Applicant's Signature I Date Tide 18 U.S.C. Section 1001 and Title 43 U.S.C. Section 1212, make it a crime for any person knowingly and wilfully to make to any department or agency of the United States any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representation as to any matter within its jurisdiction. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1. Type or print plainly in ink. 2. Submit application and related plans to the BLM District or Resource Area Office in which the land is located. 3. Study controlling regulations in 43 CFR 2740 (Sales) and 43 CFR 2912 (Leases). 4. If applicant is non-govemmenml association or corporation, attach a copy of your charter, articles of incorporation or other creating authority. If this information has bon previously filed with any BLM office, refer to previous filing by date, place, and case serial number. 5. If applicant is non-governmental association or corporation, attach a copy of your authority to operate in the State where the lands applied for are located If previously filed with any BLM office, refer to previous filing by date, place, and case serial number. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS (Items not listed are se(' -explanatory) Item 2.. If land is surveyed. give complete legal description. If land is unsurveyed, description should be by metes and bounds connected, if feasible, by course and distance with a corner of public land survey. If possible. approximate legal subdivisions of unsurveyed lands should be stated. Acreage applied for must not exceed that specified by regulations. 3a. Generally, title to lands will not be granted upon initial approval of an application. In order to assure proper development or use plans. the general practice will be to issue a lease or lease with option to purchase after development is essentially completed In any case, term of lease may not exceed 20 years for non-profit organizations or 25 years for governmental agencies, instrumentalities or political subdivisions. 4. Leases and patents under this act are conditioned upon continuing public enjoyment of the purposes for which the' land is Gla:.:ified. The plan of development. use, and maintenance must show, at a minimum: a. A need for proposed development by citing population trends, shortage of facilities in area, etc. • b. That the land will benefit an existing or definitely proposed public project authorized by proper authority. c. 'type and general location of all proposed improvements. including public access (roads, trails, etc.). This showing may take the form of inventory lists, maps, plats, drawings, or Item blueprints in any combination available and necessary to describe the finished project. Site designs should be provided for intensive use sites and general information about improvements existing or planned on lands within the overall project. d. An estimate of the construction costs, how the ptoposed project will be financed, including a list of financial sources, and an estimated timetable for actual constriction of all improvements and facilities. e. A plan of management to include operating rules. proposed source and disposition of revenues arising from the proposed operation, personnel requirements, etc. f. A specific maintenance plan to include, for example, sewage and garbage disposal, road maintenance, upkeep and repair of grounds and physical factiities. eta g. Applications for solid waste disposal sites must comply with guidelines established by the Environmental Protection Agency (40 CFR 258) and must include a detailed physical description of the site including a map, description of ground water situation. soil characteristics and management plan. 6. This may consist of a copy of a delegation of authority, resolution or other evidence of authority from the governing board of the applicant's organization, copy of the by-laws of the organization, or the like. tt U.G. GovERNMENT PRIMING OFFICE 1897--676.295 MOORS SMITH BUXTON TURCR BLM Parcels for the City of Eagle PARCEL LEGALI LEGAL2 LEGAL3 S0221233800 W2NW4 SE4NW4 NW4SW4 SEC 21 5N 1E S0220438500 S0323449000 S0326142300 S0327449200 S0334212400 S0324336000 S0219314800 S0325212400 S0230110100 LOT 1 E2SE4 SE4SE4 NE4 E2NW4 SW4NW4 SE4SW4 NE4SE4 N2NW4 NW4SW4 S2SW4 LOTS 3 & 4 E2SW4 NE4NE4 W2NE4 NE4 E2NW4 SEC 20 5N 1E SEC 23 5N 1W NW4SW4 N2SE4 S2SE4 SEC 35 5N 1W S2SE4 SEC 195NIE NW4 NW4SE4 LOTS 1 & 2 SEC265N 1W SEC 27 5N 1W SEC 245N11A1 SEC 30 5N 1E TOTAL ACRES SECTION 160.000 5N 1E21 117.810 5N 1 E20 40.000 5N1W23 400.000 5N1W26 160.000 5N1W27 80.000 5N1W34 200.000 5N1W24 141.690 5641E19 320.000 5N1W25 302.850 5N1 E30 7922 SUBNM 5N 1 E 21 5N 1E 20 5N1W23 5N1W26 5N1W27 5N 1W 34 5N 1W 24 5N 1E 19 5N1W25 5N 1E 30 BUXTON TURCK S0323 L 42)13 re 00 S0324336009 S0325212400Is023011010C S0326142300 •. Ir. SCI327449200 S0334211440d FI I 1 I fl 1-1 S0221233E100 I .- .-• 0220438590 r\N atittedfi III 110 rairauniumant 1101 VIA% r HMV 1 J . ---r LM Parc-4Is Request for the City of Eagle A5/30/200:61 15::- 5i-9'' FA% ' :2 O.s 33.1 ,1202 MOORE'1 SitfITH BUXTON TUR - . 1009, /9962 iy.ci i3 1 3 RESOLUTION NO. 06- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EAGLE, ADA COUN"T"Y, IDAHO, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION WITH THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT FOR THE ACQUISITION OF PUBLIC LANDS UNDER THE RECREATION AND PUBLIC PURPOSES ACT; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE SAME; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Recreation and Public Purposes Act, 68 Stat. 173, 43 U.S.C. 869 et seq., is administered by the Bureau of Land Management ("BLM") and authorizes the sale or lease of public lands to local governments for recreational or public purposes; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized and empowered to exercise all powers and perform all functions of local self-government in accordance with the law, including acquiring real property, and to execute all necessary contracts pursuant to Idaho Code § 50-301; and WHEREAS, the City desires to make application for acquisition of public lands for recreation or public purposes as more specifically described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and fully incorporated herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGLE, Ada County, Idaho, as follows: Section 1: That the City of Eagle, Ada County, Idaho (the "City") hereby authorizes the filing of the Application For Land for Recreation or Public Purposes, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A," and authorizes the Mayor to execute the document on behalf of the City. Section 2: This Resolution shall take effect and be in force immediately upon its passage and approval. DATED this day of March, 2006. CITY OF EAGLE Ada County, Idaho By ATTEST: Sharon K. Bergmann, City Clerk [SEAL] RESOLUTION NO. 06 - Mayor Nancy C. Merrill NOCkPE •j.ti ,DA! ; , . 6 (1,/S? User Survey tx2..a7At.74'20:st,:y:ttt RECEIVED & FILED CITY OF EAGLE AUG 0 7 2006 File: Route to: Repor ©n a Questionnaire foT the Eagle Equestrian Park Philip Fry 6 August 2006 �V\/C C Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 1 1. Executive Summary Philip Fry prepared this report privately to help the City of Eagle define the capabilities supported by their proposed equestrian park. Philip is a private citizen with no ties to the City of Eagle nor to any developer including M3 Corporation. His land on Homer Rd. borders the proposed Park on the South and he has used Little Gulch for recreation and relaxation for 67 years. Philip prepared an "Eagle Equestrian Park Questionnaire" on 10 May which was passed to many horse groups and at many N. Foothills meetings, mostly a general mix of the valley horse owners. He has collected the 47 responses as of 28 July to prepare this report. These were 20% of the total 230 distributed questionnaires. All but one responder owned horses and 51% owned 3 or more. The responses were a good mix of the potential Park users with 26% from Eagle, 21% from N. Eagle, 26% from the N. foothills, 17%from Boise: 2% from Star, 9% from Meridian, and 15% from other areas. In all 57% were from the Eagle area, represented by the first three areas. The responses show a strong support for the proposed Equestrian Park, particularly for natural long distance trails, and for meandering and scenic trails. But the strongest response, including every Eagle area responder, was to maintain a wildlife corridor through the Park. The strongest responses were: • 81% rated the park as very desirable, • 84% wanting to share riding trails with all horsemen, • 84% wanting meandering & scenic trails, • 73% wanting a lot of long distance trails, • 70% of owners of 3 or more horses wanted a mix of pens at the arena, • 80% of the 20 responses from the Eagle area wanted parking at the arena/ trailhead only, • 100% of the Eagle area responders wanted to maintain wildlife corridor, and • 92% of all responses wanted to maintain wildlife corridor. The Park design must consider that these are the most used and desirable capabilities and that these responders are the primary users for the Park. The Park design can then provide as many more additional capabilities as can be afforded to support less popular capabilities. Philip Fry's interpretation of the responses suggest the Park needs the following capabilities, as explained in the section 5 Interpretation. The Park costs must be mostly self supporting or perhaps with a small tax increase. However the responses to arena cost options were unreasonably low. The responses for trail capabilities suggest that a small road or greenbelt type trail in the bottom of the gulch could carry the bicycles, as well as those hikers and joggers who don't meander, and that the motor vehicle access should be restricted to maintenance. Equestrian trails would then be meandering through and over the hills with some scenic stops as riders do now. Trail access roads should be from the Parks East and West ends and over the hills from Big Gulch. Trail crossings must also be protected at Willow Creek Rd. and the desired road from Big Gulch. The responses on an arena suggest building an arena with parking near highway 16 and a parking area for trails at Willow Creek Rd. which would separate trail and arena users and still allow shared access. And all parking should support pull-through parking for large trailers, both considering the responses and seeing the current parking in Little Gulch off Willow Creek Road on most days. Initially no services except self washing areas should be provided. A mix of individual and group pens should be provided with the arena in spite of the strong objections. An open arena should be a little less expensive to develop but would require more working and be less usable in midday during the hot summer months, winter, and spring while a covered arena would be much more expensive to develop, require a little less working and be usable year around. The stronger responses for the open arena makes it a little more desirable than the closed arena but the choice is not clear. The open arena could provide the less expensive option wanted by the 18 responders. All riding uses of the arena were wanted, especially pleasure and English. Philip thinks the Park design should consider a simple watering system and drag which riders could use themselves for less expense. The cost to operate a stable and the lack of interest should make it initially undesirable for the Park. Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 2 Rest rooms should be near the arena or trailhead, matched the parking responses. Informal picnic/ party areas were wanted but with less agreement on details including scheduling. The responses on aquifer impacts were not strong and thus inconclusive. The strongest were only 35% wanting to minimize aquifer usage and 33% of Eagle area responders opposing use of the aquifer to support park facilities. However landscaping options were much stronger wanting reduced aquifer usage using xeriscaped and natural plantings and minimum lawn and landscaping Copies of this report are provided to: City of Eagle councilors, Mayor, and Planners, Ada County Development Services for the comprehensive plan, M3 Corporation, and the North Ada County Foothills Association. They may use these responses and conclusions without restriction. Philip Fry can be contacted at 4122 Homer Rd. Eagle ID, 83616, phone 939-9267 and E-MAIL "idphil@earthlink.net". 2. Background M3 Corporation presented their preliminary plans for village and housing developments in the Foothills north of Eagle around the Big Gulch area in a meeting on 17 April, 2006. M3 also announced that Eagle had plans for an Equestrian Park using BLM lands in the Little Gulch Area. Both Eagle City and M3 planned that the developments and the Equestrian Park would be annexed into the City of Eagle. The Eagle City Council approved pursuit of the Equestrian Park in March 2006, about the time the M3 letter to local Iandowners was sent out. In response Philip Fry first wrote a paper titled "Foothills Development Issues" dated 17 April, 2006 where he outline issues he recognized as a longtime landowner bordering the planned Equestrian Park. This paper also identified contacts for many of the valley horse groups. This was provided to the Eagle City Council, city planners and M3. Then starting on 10 May Philip Fry distributed the "Eagle Equestrian Park Questionnaire" to encourage others in the valley, mainly horse groups, to define their desires for the Park. Only the most impacted, dedicated and outspoken people will usually attend the planning meetings on the Eagle Park. This questionnaire attempts to get a larger audience involved in the Park's design and, in particular, the many horse owners in the valley. The questionnaire was distributed to various riding clubs and riding groups and at many meetings on the N. Foothills planning. 3. Analysis Approach About 230 questionnaires were distributed, either directly or by recipients who distributed copies. As of 28 July, 47 were returned, about 20%. Philip made the questionnaire somewhat time consuming, and to require mailing which eliminates many casual respondents. He totaled responses and made separate counts for three groups, for all options in all forms (47), for most options in forms from the Eagle Area (N. Eagle, N. Foothills and Eagle: 57%) and many selected options of the forms from owners of "3 or more" horses (51%). The Eagle area was selected as representing the tax payers and those most impacted by the Park. The "3 or more" horsemen were selected to perhaps represent more experience with problems and as probable frequent users of the Park. Attachment A below has the questionnaire, Attachment B summarizes all 47 responses, Attachment C summarizes most responses for the Eagle area, Attachment D summarizes many selected responses for owners of "3 or more" horses, and Appendix E delivers the 47 filled out questionnaires to allow further analysis and is only included in the report sent to Eagle City Planning. An amazing variety in marking the Questionnaires required Philip to make some decisions on how best to present the desires of the respondents. Where possible, he marked the returned questionnaires in pencil with what he thought was the respondents intentions to aid his counting. However different interpretations of the markings in the several tabulations caused some slight inconsistency in the reported results, which is not worth the energy to resolve. Another problem was his use of negative statements several times (as "not needed") where he interpreted circled statements as agreement and and crossed out as disagreement, as for all options. He suspects some crossed out negative statements meant agreement. Another problem in interpreting the results was the many areas of the questionnaire left blank, some described as neutral, some described as rejecting the general area Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 3 with no detailed markups, and most, he assumed, indicating no opinion. In tabulating results Philip calculated percentages from only the total entries in an area, ignoring general mark outs or blank areas. He also added counts for comments which rejected general areas, even though this option was not on the original form and therefore is probably underrepresented. 4. Summaries of Responses by Questionnaire Area 4.1. Summary of the General Area Respondents marked only 32 of 47 forms (66%) on desirability and 31 on costs. They marked 25 (81%) as "very desirable", 7 (23%) as "desirable" and 1 as "not desirable" with 6 (19%) rejecting the latter. Responses from the Eagle Area (57% of total) and "3 or more" horse owners (49% of total) were similar, with Eagle area responses proportionally a little Less. On costs, 12 (39%) favored "mostly self supporting", 14 (45%) favored "worth a small tax increase", 5 (16%) favored no increased taxes (4 = 21% of the Iatter were from the Eagle area). Proportionally more respondents from the Eagle area (47%)favored "mostly self supporting". Only 1 response favored a large tax increase while 6 (19%) rejected it. Also 37% of Eagle area respondents and 28% of the "3 or more" horse owners rejected a large tax increase. 4.2. Summary of the Personal Area All 47 respondents entered their location, and 45 entered horse ownership, riding frequency and style, and possible use of the equestrian park. Location entries were: N. Eagle: 21%, N. foothills: 26%, Eagle: 26%, Star: 2%, Meridian: 9%, Boise: 17%, other areas: 15%. Of the Eagle area responders (57%), 10 also marked N. Eagle and 12 also marked N. Foothills. Horse ownership entries were: none: one: 20%, two: 22%, 3 or more: 51%; lease: 2%, with Eagle area responses about the same. Responses for family members riding frequency were: monthly: 9%, biweekly: 16%, weekly: 27%, and several times/week: 47%. Eagle area riders and "3 or more" horse owners responses were similar except 35% of the latter ride weekly. Horse riding styles were: pleasure: 60%,trail: 80%, English: 16%, teams: 11%, events: 7%, racing: 0%, endurance: 13%, other: 11%. Comments on the "other" option show some inconsistency in results and included drill team, western„ and dressage. Both pleasure and trail were marked by 24 (51%) of the responders. Eagle area responders are about the same except only 7% ride English. The owners of "3 or more" horses had similar results except somewhat proportionally higher counts for pleasure and trail. Responses for "might ride at equestrian park" were: monthly: 24%, biweekly: 13%, weekly: 29%, several times/ week: 27%. Responses for Eagle area riders were similar except that only 15% would ride monthly and 37% would ride several times /week. Results for the "3 or more" horse owners were also similar except twice as many (26%) would ride biweekly and more (35%) weekly. 4.3. Summary for Trails wanted The circled of the 44 responses for sharing trail use were: similar riding styles: 34%, all horsemen: 84% with 1 objection, hikers: 50% with 2 objections, joggers: 55% with 2 objections, and bicycles: 41% with 13% objecting. However responses for ATVs had only 1 circled with 66%objecting, and autos/trucks had none circled with 66%objecting. The 27 Eagle area responders and the 20 responses for "3 or more" horse owners were similar except the latter had only 30% who wanted bicycles and 25% who rejected them. The circled of the 45 responses for Trail Types were: mostly straight 7% (13% rejected), meandering & scenic: 84%, much long distance: 73%; scenic stops & lookouts: 38%; mostly flat: 4% (9% objected), some hills: 61%, and lots of hills: 47%. The 18 Eagle area responders were similar except fewer (52%) wanted much long distance. The 23 responses for "3 or more" horse owners were much the same except only 43% circled much long distance. The circled responses for highway crossings of trails were: some highway crossings: 11% with Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 4 31% objecting, no highway crossings: 24%with 18% crossed off (meaning unclear?), and protected highway crossings: 49% with 16% objecting. The 23 responses for "3 or more" horse owners were similar. The 18 Eagle area responders were also similar for "some highway crossings" but many more both wanted (66%) and crossed off (30%) "no highway crossings" and less (30%) wanted "protected highway crossing" while more (26%) objected . 4.4. Summary for Arenas Responses showed 14, 9 from the Eagle area, totally rejecting any arenas with quite avid marks and comments. The circled of the 37 general Arena responses were 65% wanting an arena in the Eagle Park (8% opposed) and 24% wanting an arena in a nearby neighborhood commercial facility (8% opposed). Of the responders 43%wanted the arena at the Eagle Rd. end (5% rejected), 38% at the Emmett hwy. end, and only 3% at the middle of park(16% objected). Responses from owners with "3 or more" horses were similar as were Eagle area responses except with more (24%) objection to the middle of the park. 4.5. Summary for Open Arena There were 28 responses on open arenas and Zall from the Eagle area, further rejecting any open arena. The circled of the 28 responses for arena uses were: pleasure: 54%, English: 43%, rider training: 46%, teams: 32%, events: 43%, roping: 18%(3 objected), cutting: 19% (3 objected), and other: 21%. Note that the roping and cutting users were probably not well represented in the questionnaire distribution. The 16 Eagle area responses were somewhat less. The circled of the 28 responses for arena "water and worked" were: monthly: 7%, weekly: 32%,daily: 32%, and before each use: 21% (2 objected). The 16 Eagle area responses were similar. The circled of the 28 responses for arena costs were: Free: 29%, 520: 39%, $50: 21% (11% rejected), $100: 7% (21% rejected), $200: 0% (29% rejected). The 16 Eagle area responses were similar. Note that similar commercial open arena costs are typically $100 in the valley now. 4.6. Summary for Covered Arena There were 25 responses on covered arenas and 8 which further reject any covered arena, 7 from the Eagle area. The circled of the 25 responses for covered arena uses were similar to the open arena as follows: pleasure: 60%, English: 44%, rider training: 56%, teams: 28%, events: 32%, roping: 20%(1 objected), cutting: 20%(2 objected), and other: 24%(1 objected). Note that the roping and cutting users were probably not well represented in the questionnaire distribution. The 13 Eagle area responses were about half for all uses. A third (5) of the owners of 3 or more horses objected to the covered arena. The circled of the 28 responses for arena "water and worked" were: monthly: 4%, weekly: 20%, daily: 40%, and before each use: 20%. The 13 Eagle area responses were similarly smaller. The circled of the 28 responses for arena costs were: Free: 20%, $20: 36%, $50: 28% (12% rejected), 5100: 12% (16% rejected), $200: 12% (28% rejected). The 13 Eagle area responses were roughly similar. 4.7. Summary for Arena Pens Arena pens had only 18 responses and 9 which rejected any pens, as did 8 from the Eagle area and 6 owners of "3 or more" horses . Note that more responders objected than selected any one option and as many Eagle area responders objected as responded to the pen options. The circled of the 18 responses for pens were: few individual: 6% (33% objected), many individual: 28% (17% objected), mix of shared and individual: 56%,(11% objected), large shared: 0% (22% objected), and cattle: 11% (11% objected). The 10 Eagle area responders wanted more of a few individual pens and cattle pens while only half as many wanted the many individual pens, and the mix of pens. The 10 responses from owners with "3 or more" horses were similar to the totals except 70% liked a mix of pens, and 40% objected to a large shared pen. 4.8. Summary for Arena Services Arena services had 28 responses and 7 which rejected all services, all from the Eagle area, as Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 5 did 4 owners of "3 or more" horses . The circled of the 28 responses for arena service providers were: Eagle Park: 50%, nearby neighborhood stable facility: 29% (14%objected), and concession: 11% (11%objected). The 14 Eagle area responders wanted an Eagle Park provider less (42%)and a neighboring facility or concession twice as much (42% or 21%) but with twice the objections to both (21% and 28%). The 15 responders with "3 or more" horses were similar except twice as many objected to a neighboring stable and more than twice as many both wanted and objected to a concession provider. The circled of the 28 responses for arena services were: self washing facilities: 39% (7% objected), trainer: 7% (32%objected), exerciser: 7% (32%objected), and groomer: 11% (29%objected). The 14 Eagle area responses were similar except fewer wanted washing facilities and all options had many more objections. Responders with "3 or more" horses objected much more to self washing facilities and wanted trainers somewhat more proportionally, while also having many more objecting. 4.9. Summary for Arena Stables Arena stables had only 17 responses and 14 responses which rejected any stables, 12 from the Eagle area and 5 from "3 or more" horse owners. Nearly as many responses objected as responded to all options and twice as many objected as responded to any one option. Eagle area responses had even stronger objections. The circled of the 17 responses for stable stays were: day: 33%, overnight with. caretaker: 47%, events with caretaker: 41%, monthly boarding with caretaker: 18% (12% objected). Proportionally about half as many of the 14 Eagle area responders and owners of "3 or more" horses both wanted and objected to the stable stays. The circled of the 17 responses for stables services were: user cleans & feeds: 59%, cleaning services: 6% (18% rejected), feeding services: 12% (18% rejected), grooming services: 12% (18% rejected), exercising services: 6% (33% rejected), and training services: 6% (33% rejected). Proportionally about half as many of the 14 Eagle area responders wanted and objected to the stable services. 4.10. Summary for Park Rest Rooms The circled of the 37 responses for rest room options were: at arena/ trailhead only: 73%, several distributed: 27% (16% objected), distributed portajohns: 24%(16% objected), and arena dressing area: 14% (19% objected). The 14 Eagle area responders wanted the arena/ trailhead option more and all other options somewhat less and with stronger objections. 4.11. Summary for Park Picnic/Party areas Picnic/ party options had 37 responses and 3 who totally rejected any picnic/ party facilities including 2 from the Eagle area. The circled of the 37 responses for picnic/ party options were: informal: 57%, covered: 18%; one large area: 18%, distributed small areas: 24%(14% objected), at lookouts: 8%(11% objected), and scheduling: 11%(16% objected). The 19 responses from the Eagle area were somewhat stronger in wants, and similar in objections except for a much stronger opposition to scheduling (26%). 4.12. Summary for Parking The circled of the 37 responses for parking options were: at arena/ trailhead only: 51%, several distributed at each area entry: 32%(14% objected), and large trailer pull thru parking: 57%. Fully 80% of the 20 responses from the Eagle area wanted the first option and they were somewhat similarly stronger on the other options and objections. 4.13. Summary for Wildlife Preservation The circled of the 37 responses for wildlife preservation options were: sacrifice: 0% (27% objected), support: 38%, attempted improvement: 32% (8% objected); maintain wildlife corridor: 92%. The Eagle area responders had stronger responses and less objections except 43% objected to sacrifice and 100% wanting to maintain a wildlife corridor. Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 6 4.14. Summary for Aquifer Impacts The circled of the 37 responses for aquifer options were: use aquifer to support facilities: 22%(24% objected), reduce facilities to moderate water usage: 27%, minimum aquifer water usage: 35%, pipe in surface water: 5%(8% objected), and require water injection to replace aquifer usage: 24%. The 21 responses from the Eagle area showed stronger worries about the aquifer with only 1 wanting to use the aquifer and 33°l, opposed. The remaining Eagle area responses were similar but proportionately somewhat larger, as were the objections. 4.15. Summary for Landscaping The circled of the 40 responses for Landscaping options were: maintain municipal style parks: 30%, reduce aquifer usage with xeriscape/natural plantings: 50010, and aquifer preservation with minimal lawns and landscaping: 53%(13% objected). The 23 responses from the Eagle area have a little larger wants and similar objections. 4.16. Summary for General Road access The circled of the 25 responses for general road access options were: E -W ends: 68%, N over foothills from Homer Rd.: 8%(20% objected), S over foothills from Big Gulch M3 development: 40%. The 14 responses from the Eagle area are similar with both slightly larger wants and objections. 4.17. Summary for General Trail access The circled of the 34 responses for general trail access were: E -W ends only: 21%(9% objected), E -W ends: 38%, N over foothills from Homer Rd.: 24%(9% objected), S over foothills from Big Gulch M3 developments: 35%, from Linder Rd.: 24%(901° objected), from Park Ln.: 3%(12% objected), from Meridian Rd. line: 6%(6% objected), from Skyline Dr.: 3%, from Ballantine Rd.: 12%( 6% objected), and from Eagle Rd.: 35%. The 19 responses from the Eagle area are similar with slightly larger wants and similar objections. 4.18. Summary for a Park Road Connecting Willow Creek Rd to Hartley Rd. The circled of the 31 responses for park road options were: not through: 42%, local residential type: 26%, 2 lane collector type: 1970(10% objected), 4 lane arterial type: 6%(26% objected); max. 20 mph: 32%(10% objected), max. 35 mph: 19%(29% objected), max. 45 mph: 3%(26% objected), not crossed by trails: 26%(10% objected), use lights at trail crossing: 13%(13% objected), use stop signs at trail crossings: 29%(13% objected), and use yield signs at trail crossings: 13%(16% objected). The 15 Eagle area responses were similar but a little larger. 4.19. Summary for a Road Crossing the Park from Hartley Road and M3 developments The circled of the 26 responses for this crossing road were: not needed: 42%(13% objected), poorly placed: 19%(% objected), too expensive: 4%, too steep and windy: 8%, allows excessive traffic in Park: 27%(% objected), desirable: 4%; also needs a trail: 31%, local residential type: 8%, 2 lane collector type: 8%(8% objected); max. 20 mph: 24%, max. 35 mph: 12%(12% objected), and max. 45 mph: 0O1o(8% objected). The 11 Eagle area responses were similar but slightly larger. 4.20. Summary for a Road Crossing the Park from Linder Rd. The circled of the 33 responses for this crossing road were: not needed: 36%, poorly placed: 21010, too expensive: 12%, too steep and windy: 6%, allows excessive traffic in Park: 21%, desirable: only 1 (2 objected); also needs a trail: 18%; local residential type: 2, two lane collector type: 1; max. 20 mph: 157, max. 35 mph: 9%(9% objected), max. 45 mph: none (9% objected); better replaced by Park Ln. access: none (2 objected), better replaced by extending at Meridian Rd. line: 1 (1 objected), and better replaced by Ballantine Rd access: 18%. The 11 Eagle area responses were similar. Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 4.21. Comment Summary Responders made 23 comments, some of which Philip Fry turned into option marks, if not already made, for inclusion in the counts, and others which are summarized below. • Have no arenas and no services: 9, • Keep park natural: 7, • Keep park reasonable and inexpensive: 5 • Need no road in park: 2, • Keep access simple: 2, • Access only via highway 16: 1, • Spend money on trails not facilities: 1, • Need conservation easements: 1, • Use $10 yearly parking for use: 1, • Use yearly fee, refundable: 1, • I appreciate parks horse and hiker trails: 1. 5. Interpretation The responses have few (19 of 47) who filled all areas of the questionnaire including some who crossed off whole areas (i.e. arenas). Most seemed to respond only to areas they knew or cared about. Many (14 of 47) responders seemed to be very positive, mostly circling options they wanted, leaving whole sections unmarked and not crossing off options except for a few they found very undesirable (riding with ATV's seemed to cause the most objections). All these factors reduced the percentages in the responses and makes a 20% response in a questionnaire option more significant. The highest positive responses were: • 81% rated the park as very desirable, • 84% wanting meandering & scenic trails, • 73% wanting much long distance trails, • 84% wanting to share riding trails with all horsemen, • 70% of owners of 3 or more horses wanted a mix of pens at the arena, • 80% of the 20 responses from the Eagle area wanted parking at the arena/ trailhead only, and • 92% wanted to maintain wildlife corridor as did 100% of the Eagle area responders. The most negative response was that 66% objected to riding with ATVs and autos/trucks. These responses show a strong support for the proposed Equestrian Park, particularly for long distance trails and meandering and scenic trails. The strongest response, including every Eagle area responder, was to maintain a wildlife corridor through the Park. Park design must consider that the most used/popular capabilities will initially support the Park. The design can then support as many additional capabilities as can be afforded or easily added later as money is available. Horse ownership shows that more that 49% (23) of the responders have 3 or more horses and 82% (19) of them ride weekly or more, which sound like the major users of the Park if they find it convenient. And 70% of these responded that they might ride in the park weekly or more, compared to 53% of all responders. Most responders rode pleasure (60%) and trail (80%) style, and the owners of 3 or more horses had a 96% response for trail riding. Perhaps the other riding styles, all around 10-15%, could be supported with little added expense, and the questionnaire responses show 83% do not object to riding with all other horsemen. Responses on Park costs had 45% agreeing with a small tax increase and 39% wanting "mostly self supporting." The Eagle area responses had 47% wanting "mostly self supporting". About 16% of responders, all from the Eagle area,wanted no tax increase and rejected a large tax increase. These responses show that the Park usage costs should be mostly self supporting, although responses for arena costs show unrealistic expectations. Eagle area taxes must pay for the park and they were somewhat more opposed to more taxes. Trail capabilities were supported by many strong responses with most desiring much the same trails they now enjoy. Responses for sharing trails show that most, 84%,will share trails with all Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 8 other horsemen and about 50% will share with hikers and joggers. However many riders, especially owners of 3 or more horses, have apparently had bad experiences with bicycles and objected, although the general responses were generally positive. Most everyone objected to sharing with ATVs, autos and trucks. Nearly half wanted protected highway crossings for trails and nearly a quarter wanted no highway crossings. The no highway crossings option had much stronger responses from the Eagle area (66%). On a road through the Park 29% wanted stop signs at trail crossings,twice as many as wanted yield signs or lights. The wanted trail types were hills (60%), lots of hills (47%) and scenic stops and lookouts (39%). The responses for trails accessing the park were scattered with the strongest being 38% wanting the East and West ends of the park and 35% wanting access from the M3 developments in Big Gulch. The road responses also had 42% objecting to a through vehicle road in the park. These responses for trail capabilities suggest that a small road or greenbelt type trail in the bottom of the gulch could carry the bicycles, as well as those hikers and joggers who don't meander, and that the motor vehicle access should be restricted to maintenance. Equestrian trails would then be meandering through and over the hills with some scenic stops, just as riders do now. Trail access should be from the Park East and West ends and from Big Gulch. Trail crossings must also be protected at Willow Creek Rd. and the desired road from Big Gulch. Responses on arena options were somewhat less and somewhat polarized. There seem to be two groups. Some seem to oppose an arena which would interfere with their natural trail rides, and many seem to want an arena as less expensive area for training and group activities. Many responders (24 = 65%) wanted Eagle Park to provide arenas and arena services. However 13 responders wanted no arenas, 7 wanted no services and 10 were indifferent with no responses on arenas. The arena services were half as popular with Eagle area responders and "3 or more" horse owners. Responses were evenly divided between arena locations at either end. Only one person wanting an arena in the middle of the Park. More than half want parking at the arena or trail head, and large trailer pull-though parking, and 32% want parking at each Park entry. These responses suggest building an arena with parking near highway 16 and a parking area for trails at Willow Creek Rd. which would separate the two groups. And all parking should support large trailer pull though parking, both considering the responses and viewing the current Little Gulch parking off Willow Creek Road on most days. The most popular service was a self washing area (39%) with little support for any other services. An arena needs pens but as many responders objected to pens as wanted the largest pen option of a mix of shared and individual pens. An open arena should be a little less expensive to develop but would require more working and be less usable in midday during the hot summer months, winter, and spring. The stronger responses for the open arena makes it a little more desirable than the closed arena but the choice is not dear. The 7 objectors to the open arena, all from the Eagle area and including 6 who own 3 or more horses, were significant - about half of the maximum responders to any one arena option. Half the responders want to use the arenas for pleasure and English. And all riding uses seemed popular including 5 who wanted cutting and roping and who were probably greatly underrepresented in the questionnaire distribution. Eagle area responders wanted somewhat less use. Very few of the responders had an idea of the expense and work to make a good arena with 33% thinking weekly working was adequate and 39% thinking a $20 fee for 2 hr. usage was reasonable, unless they assumed usage would be shared. A rough calculation of costs for one resident worker with 50% rider usage all day would require $100 per hour fee with no facility upkeep expenses considered. And 21% of responders objected to the reasonable $100 fee. However the open arena could provide the less expensive option wanted by the 18 responders. The Park design should consider a simple watering system and drag which riders could use themselves to work the arena to reduce usage costs by less need for maintenance people. Certainly the arena size should match the Idaho Equestrian center to provide an alternative for practices. A covered arena would be much more expensive to develop, require a little less working and be usable year around. The responses do not make a clear need for the covered arena. Again the 8 objectors to the closed arena were significant - more than half of the maximum responders to any one arena Report on a Questionnaire for the Eagle Equestrian Park 8/6/06 by Philip Fry 9 option, and 5 who own 3 or more horses. The responses for uses of the covered arena are similar to the open arena. About half the responders want to use the arenas for pleasure and English riding. And all riding uses seemed popular including 5 who wanted cutting and roping. Eagle area responders had somewhat less use. Again, very few of the responders had an idea of the expense and work to make a good arena with 20% thinking weekly working was adequate and 36% thinking a S20 fee for 2 hr. usage was reasonable, unless they expected shared use. Even 16% of responders objected to the marginal S100 fee. As said above, the Park design should consider a simple watering system and drag which arena users could use themselves, for reduced usage costs. The stables also had many more objectors than responses to any one option. The total responses were also smaller, a little more than half of other arena options. However 6 - 8 people would like to use stables and their services. The responses show 47% would want occasional overnight stable stays, and almost 60% wanted user cleaning and feeding if used. A third of responders objected to exercise and training services. The cost to operate a stable and the lack of interest should make it initially undesirable for Eagle. The many responses were strongly in favor of rest rooms near the arena or trailhead and Eagle area responders were even stronger. This location matched the parking responses. More than half the responders also wanted informal picnic/party areas but with less agreement on details. Scheduling for picnic areas was divided with more objectors that wanters. The responses on aquifer impacts were not strong and so inconclusive. The largest responses had only 35% wanting to minimize aquifer usage and 33% of Eagle area responders opposing use of the aquifer to support park facilities. Responses to landscaping options were much stronger with 50%wanting reduced aquifer usage with xeriscape/natural plantings and 50% wanting minimum lawn and landscaping. Fewer people responded to road access options, 25 - 30, than for many other questionnaire areas. Most (68% )wanted access roads only from the E -W ends and 40% wanted an access road from the Big Gulch developments. The strongest responses were a 42% objection to a road through the Park at the bottom of Little Gulch, 42% not wanting a crossing road from Hartley Rd., and 36% not wanting a crossing road from Linder Rd. The wanted road type in the Park was local residential with a 20 MPH speed limit. The 2 lane collector option and higher speed limits were somewhat less wanted and had many objections. Responders wanted stop signs at trail crossings and almost as many wanting no trail crossings. 6. Postscript Philip and the 47 people who returned the questionnaires hope the City of Eagle finds this effort useful. Philip also apologizes for any errors which were inadvertent. The possible inclusion of any additional returned questionnaires will be discussed with the City of Eagle Planners. cc 7--•23-° OREGON TRAIL & GOODALE'S CUTOFF SIGNAGE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE ENTRY-MONUMENTAT1ON EXAMPLE Regional Conceptua 6' COMPACTED 1 NATIVE SOIL MULTI -USE TRAIL G\2007\07142\LAO\OR SODMITTAL\_07142-ORLondacape•DIdg1L1-6.12.06.dwg plotted by totem on Thu, Jun. 12 2006 at 01.57 PM PLANT SCHEDULE KEY I BOTANICAL NAME ORNAMENTAL FLOWERING TREES I COMMON NAME 1 SIZE 1 NOTES PC Pm,caWYw SIMS FormIw —---Dnelne ver-------- -1 rcx...BA9 I UEUIyUUS SHAUt 1 HttS I AP�/1i/ Ma—iN Kn Nig Li -re -N116, 14.06 ---...--I E.r B6s...—I SHRU /PERENNIALSIORNAMENTAL GRA 'SES 11 RF CalarnoproTth. .0ALlur.lc,r1 Moos expo tanpocta. PN 80004 HE 14461aicaii'Was 0.04o --- 4 9E Pomba 6819141664 LEGEND .. I LAWN(SOO; Foenters-- R..a Or.,. -._)6T.._ -Ni lJWI011.n-Y.UP - SYN-fEDeao D.m 690449RK4.4A Dart Gald.e ArerN.. PO1T (A 0140 CROOK N ITE TRW 151 ABOVE RE SR INC) O R: I -Y .1501E me s0 vE ROOT caw (Sx01A4 AT SOL LK IARC Sm DS91E 10 9I1 05 NO ROOT RS9.0) TO BC AT SOL 1NE ROOT PROBE 93 01_ PREVAIUNC 6100 DIRECTION .RETOIE C00,54Y4EO STAVDES MO RIME 10 INTERNA TOW 500TY OF AROMA0010 SWARDS TORUN: LT MMED REES (A5 DTR.AD EY DE LAYDSCIPC 490811(0) 9141 EC 90110100001513400 UlEm m1/mot PON =NAM APA (4PP. 2'4' Dell 1211 1144)10 Root. 6664st *0011 IFy est roots said G po.TAr.4 al or Aptly mow rode 14NL NOTES: 2 ;x ROOTBALL DIAMETE • 5.-0' DIAMETER TREE IRO ROY FAOUO TO IR51 WAREN (N) 8644001 OI01 45 44901E BURLAP & Irx( TRW MP OF EAU AMR 5041010 SEC NOM 2 BARR NAI LATER - 3' RUM PPM 4410 511 PLANING IOL SEE 00044(400136 FI 4444401044 NFONA0I CONO404 FFRIUDR ;MUM 917 0y01 104111E 1AOSRREED 944$0 0. E' 1Y O'OAR SrAFJ1 (2 PW REE) QO N01 POEIRAIP ROOT 041 SEC NOTE 1. THE STRONG OF TREES IS TO eE 186E CONTRACTORS OPTION: HOWEVER THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPOHSRE TO INSURE THAT ALL TREES ARE PLANTED STRAIGHT AND THAT THEY RETAIN 610146HIT FOR ALR1mUM OF I YEAR. REAAOVAL OF Bl1110 A. TWINE FROM TOP OF ROOM4LMAY BE POSTPONED FOR 90 DAYS ATCONTTACTORS OPTION. S. N THE EVENT OF A OUESTON OR LACK OF CLARITY ON THE DAWTWS. INE CONTRACTOR IS TO NOTIFY THE LANOSU➢E ARCHTECT BEFORE PROCEEDING. LA 00011 PE CONTRACTOR IS TO NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHR IECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANT MATER.. WRAP AROIRO THE TREE TRUNKS AND STARES USING EITHER TIE STANDARD OR FIGURE EIGHT TYING 1401400. SECURE TIE TIES TO THE STAKES MIN GALVANTED NAILS TO PREVENT SLIPPAGE. a N THE EVENT HARDPAN SOILS PREVENT TREE FUMING AS DETAILED. NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCWIECT .A EI ATELY. 4. 5. °DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING NOT TO SCALE 41 (1) AP- V (5) PF 2' earth berm�`, (5) AR (1)AP– wri"-- 1.41 (5) PF 1.5' earth berm (6) AR (5) PF F (6) RN(5) HE (1) PC (7) KF • (3) –2' earth berm L — (5) KF (19) RN �I (13) HE (5) Pte- �f (8) AR 4r�6W �1eo0;aooa'ao ,; Ove„ ' > Mill l 1.5' earth berm 40' SITE TRIANGLE BARK NAI LATER - 3.0f901 OKR DOW BEA OD Mor COWR CROATS OF PLUM SOL P1.114I111 MZ SEC 9'CC11EAION5 540 4000014 44440704504 SPLIT 4L R001 GCVO ROOTS NM 3 COUAL SFACE0 IKRIXA1 IIS NOTES: 1. SET GROUND COVERS N STAGGERED ROWS AS SPECIFIED. 2. SETPERENNALS N STAGGERED ROWS AS SPEC0IED. ®PERENNIAL & GROUNDCOVER PLANTINGNOT TO SCALE 1. (3) PC (2) PF cbi 1 (7) H (4) PE (1) PC (2) RN (2) RN (1) PC (2) PE l. \\Cg - SHRUB PLANTING NOT TO SCALE PREUMINARY N OT OR CORSTR !POTION CoP/dgl4 © 2005 O.Ng ry ro be m;vWrsxl N ,outTAM 1 C. Own LA c aup.. REVEICTE No 1 02. I 04,4460.4 \\ /I r THE LAND GROUP 9.4148 ! Ery.ry WN 452 009151x1e Dive. 980.700 Eagle. Idaho 5361E Pan. (208) 939-4041 Fax 1208)939-4445 .1194IR10y1DUP1Tc.wm (1111.10911 Strte LANDSCAPE PLAN L1.1 OM. IIID IIA PPR 642. 1'1144'-0' REV MTE SY ocsournort REVISIONS PE3 141_1.1111C\ =Th D 1111-111 r.L • •••-'' A SCALE worm. NA I1IHIIIUIIIIIIIIIW C2 • ; ..• • v • • - J - WARNING 9 1 2 HORROCKS ENGINEERS IF THIS BAR DOES NOT MEASURE 2' 'THEN DRAINING IS NOT TO SCALE ONE WEST Mi P.O. BOX 37) AMERICAN FORK UT 84On 1634100 K — 0 EXHIBIT "D" EAGLE ISLAND CROSSING SITE PLAN • z P Cc DEMME DAM mama KIM 08/30/07 0703402 DRAM EWE SWIM 14011 OW30107 1 w 1 PLO= DAM mum low ICDH MOM?