Loading...
Minutes - 2008 - City Council - 12/09/2008 - Regular EAGLE CITY COUNCIL Minutes December 9, 2008 NO PlJBI..I~ BEARIN.-S WII..1.. BE BEARD PRIOR TO 7:38 P.M. REGULAR COUNCIL AGENDA: 4:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Bandy calls the meeting to order at 4:40 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: GUERBER, HUFFAKER, SHOUSHT ARIAN, SEMANKO. All present. A quorum is present. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: None 4. EXECUTIVE SESSION: A. Personnel Matters: Idaho Code 67-2345 (b) Mayor introduces the issue. We will not have an Executive Session as all issues have been resolved. 4. PUBLIC COMMENT: None Mayor: If Council would look at the agenda we could do all of the New Business except Item A. and all of Unfinished Business since we don't have the Executive Session and since we won't have the Public Hearings until 7:30 p.m. General discussion. Huffaker moves to amend the Agenda to handle Items #9C and #9Cl first and then proceed to Items #9B and #9D, the Consent Agenda, followed by all items under #7 and save for 7:30 Public Hearings #8A, 8B and 8C, followed by #9A. Seconded by Guerber. Discussion. 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. . 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 Against the City B. Minutes of October 14, 2008. C. Minutes of November 12, 2008. D. Minutes of November 18,2008. E. Minutes of November 25,2008. Huffaker moves to remove Item #5C Minutes of November 12,2008 from the Consent Agenda for a very minor change. Seconded by Semanko. ALL AYES: MOTION <:ARRI~~.................. Semanko moves to approve the Amended Consent Agenda. Seconded by Guerber. Guerber: AYE; Huffaker: AYE; Shoushtarian: AYE; Semanko: AYE: ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.............. Page I K:ICOUNCILIMINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-12-09-08min.doc 5C. Minutes of November 12,2008. Huffaker: On Page 6 at the bottom of the page where it is talking about the Veterans Day, it was my daughter that spoke not my wife, so if it could be changed to Ms. Huffaker spoke. Huffaker moves to approve Item #5c with the changes. Seconded by Semanko. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES................. 9C. Resolution 08-37: A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Eagle, Idaho, Authorizing The Issuance And Sale Of A Revenue Anticipation Note, Series 2008, In The Principal Amount Of $500,000 For The Purpose Of Providing Funds In Anticipation Of The Collection Of Taxes And The Receipt Of Other Revenues For The 2008-2009 Fiscal Year; Providing For The Form, Issuance, And Redemption Of The Note; Creating A Revenue Anticipation Note Redemption Fund And Providing For The Deposit Of Taxes And Revenues Into The Redemption Fund For The Payment Of The Principal Of And Interest On The Note; Providing For Related Terms And Covenants; And Providing An Effective Date. 9C.l. Approval of Zions Bank Corporate Trust as the Pavinl!: Al!:ent for the 2008 Tax Anticipation Note: . Mayor introduces the issue. City Attorney Bonney: Provides Council an overview of the State Statutes authorizing the TAN and discusses the terms of the Resolution and the financing and the Paying Agent. This requires a vote of the Council to approve the Resolution but does not require a vote of the citizens. General discussion. City Attorney: The action is to approve the Resolution 08-37. Semanko so moves to approve the Resolution. Seconded by Guerber. Guerber: AYE; Huffaker: AYE; Shoushtarian: AYE; Semanko: AYE: ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES........... ... Huffaker moves to approve Agenda Item # 9Cl. Seconded by Guerber. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.......................... Mayor: Discussion on what the Eagle businesses are doing to keep business in the City for Holiday shopping. General discussion.. 9D. First Addendum to Garden City Buildinl!: Inspection Al!:reement to Provide for Plumbinl!: Inspections: (MM) Mayor introduces the issue. Building Official Mongelli: Provides an overview of Garden City's request to have the City provide plumbing inspections. To do this we need to amend our Inspection Agreement. General discussion. Semanko moves to approve First Addendum to Garden City Building Inspection Agreement to Provide for Plumbing Inspections. Seconded by Guerber. Guerber: AYE; Huffaker: AYE; Shoushtarian: AYE; Semanko: AYE: ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.............. B. Memorandum ofUnderstandinl!:between the Urban Renewal Al!:encv and City of Eal!:le: Mayor introduces the issue. Page 2 KICOUNCIL\MlNUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-12-09-08min.doc Guerber moves to approve the Memorandum of Understanding between the Urban Renewal Agency and City of Eagle. Seconded by Huffaker. Guerber: AYE; Huffaker: AYE; Shoushtarian: AYE; Semanko: AYE: ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.............. 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: A. Re-appointment to Desi!!:n Review Board: They Mayor is requesting Council confirmation of the re-appointment of Mark Butler to the Design Review Board. Mr. Butler's term will expire in December 2011. This item was continuedfrom the November 18,2008 meeting. (PB) Mayor introduces the issue. General discussion on the re-appointment of Mark Butler to the Design Review Board. Guerber moves to continue the Re-appointment of Mark Butler to the Design Review Board to the December 16, 2008 City Council meeting. Seconded by Huffaker. General discussion. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.................. 10. REPORTS: Mayor and Council Report: Semanko: The Eagle Sewer district met Monday and they chugged out 48.35 M gallons to Boise in November. That is I .61M gallons for a daily average and that is the peak low for the year. Discussed the new lift station. The General Manager Lynn Moser reported that during November after 16 years of serving the Sewer District this was the first month that they did not sale any permits. Library Board met last night and there was a discussion on budget and the need for holdbacks and the reserve funds to get through to January. They also discussed the holdback of the funds for the engineer/architect for the remodeling. Guerber: Fire Department and a driver and two engineers that were certified. Eagle's Holiday Festival on Saturday and what I heard from the businesses that business was the best they have had any year. There was a big turn out for the tree lighting. Mayor: I hope everyone saw the report on the electric scooter. 1 won't take delivery of one until spnng. Reports on the Chamber of Commerce Lunch. I have had a number of meetings with boards and the Chamber. I met with Mike Moyle to discuss how the State is going to take care of issues and a number legislative concerns. Shoushtarian: I want to thank Mike coming to the Senior meeting and breaking the bad news to them that we have to postpone the construction of the parking lot. Mike is going to bring some gravel for the parking lot. Provides a report on the Special Olympics. Eagle is doing very well. One school has already prepared 39 beds. I was hoping that we could do some kind of a special event here in Eagle when they are here because Eagle is a host town and not every town is a host town. Huffaker: Reports on the Art's Commission meeting. They went through their budget and put on hold everything except for the employee's salary. Huffaker: I am the liaison with ACHD and it is interesting that what we are planning to do in the foothills depends on an agency that we have no control over. Page 3 KICOUNCILIMlNUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-12-09-08mindoc I attend the Downtown Feasibility meetings with the Chamber and what they are talking about is the same as what the Urban Renewal will be doing. Discusses the Downtown Visioning process. There is the meeting here at City Hall tomorrow night that the University of Idaho Students are presenting. We will eventually need to change our comp plan. I attended a government relations committee, this is also a Chamber of Commerce Committee, and they are putting their platform together to present to the Legislature. The big item is the Local Option Tax. Discussion on the Local Option Tax. Public Works Director Echeita: Reports on the work being done at City Hall. The seam along the North Side ofthe building stucco is being repaired and a problem with a leak at the corner of the building. They are planning on having both projects finished by the first of April. Zoning Administrator Vaughan: Kirk from the Fire Department had been exploring the idea of collecting development Impact fees and how they would do that at the time that a building permit was issued. We have ongoing issues with Arbor Ridge Subdivision. We still haven't accepted all of their common area improvements. They want to move forward for Phase IV. City Attorney's Report: Ms. Buxton will be at 6:15 p.m. City Clerk: No report. Mayor calls a recess at 6: 10 p.m. Mayor reconvenes at 6:50 p.m. B. Minutes of September 23. 2008. This item was continued from the November 18, 2008 meeting. (AS) Mayor introduces the issue. City Attorney Buxton: The one issue is what policy you want the City to have in regards to the minutes. You have to keep track of all of the actions by the governing board and who is present. One of the issues is how much detail you do above that. The Clerk usually summarizes what the action is. In some of these situations there is more discussion than at other times. In the September 23rd minutes one member had particular questions on the discussion on fiscal transparency. General discussion. Huffaker moves to continue this item to the December 16,2008 meeting. Seconded by Semanko. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.................... C. M3 Al!:reement supportinl!: the City's R&PP application to the BLM and all other costs incurred bv the City for administerinl!: their development al!:reement. This item was continuedfrom the November 12, 2008 special meeting. (SEB) Mayor introduces the issue. City Attorney Buxton: M3 wants to have two different agreements so this item needs to be continued. General discussion. Huffaker moves to continue Item #7C to the January 13, 2009 meeting. Seconded by Guerber. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES..................... D. Review updated lanl!:ual!:e of the Ada County Community Detoxification and Mental Health Crisis Center Joint Powers Al!:reement (JP A). (SEB) Mayor introduces the issue. Page 4 KICOUNCILIMINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-I2-09-08min.doc City Attorney Buxton provides Council an overview of the Joint Powers Agreement. This draft was approved by the City of Boise and Ada County and I have approved this as to form. The funding can only be appropriated annually by the City Council. It is up to you whether or not you want to do this. General discussion. Guerber moves to authorize the Mayor to sign the Ada County Community Detoxification and Mental Health Crisis Center Joint Powers Agreement. Seconded by Shoushtarian. Guerber: AYE; Huffaker: AYE; Shoushtarian: AYE; Semanko: AYE: ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES.............. Semanko: I want to make it very clear that while we are approving this we don't know what our budget is going to look like next year. We just held back $14,000.00 for studying an enlargement to the Library, we have other things that are being held back that are important to the community. We don't know if we are going to have these dollars. We are committing to having this part of the budget discussion in FY 2010. NO PtJBLI~ BEADINGS WILL BE BEADD PRIOR TO '7:30 P.M. 8. 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 a rezone from RUT (Rural Urban Transition- Ada County Designation) to MU-DA (Mixed Use with a development agreement) for a mixed use 46.0 acres of commercial uses. The 287.67-acre site is located at the Northeast corner of Beacon Light Road and State Highway 16. Testimony for this item will be limited to the terms of the Development Agreement only. (MJW) Mayor introduces the issue. Planner Williams: Provides Council an overview of the terms of the Development Agreement and the project. Joann Butler, representing the applicant, at the last meeting you closed the Public Hearing on the annexation and rezone and tonight we are discussing the Development Agreement. We will be happy to go through the Development Agreement one by one. I want to thank the Staff on getting the Development Agreement put together. Discusses the terms of the Development Agreement. General discussion. Ashley Ford, Principal Planner, discus~es traffic improvements. You have ACHD's staff report. We are participating in the North Ada County Foothill Plan. General discussion. Displays overheads and continued general discussion. Mayor opens the Public Hearing Kathy Pennisi, Representing North Ada County Foothill Association, I have a couple of issues in the Development. I would like to see something in the Development Agreement that talks about the Village Center according to your comp plan. There is always two issues, traffic and density. Discussion on the 21 acre public park. Phil Fry, 4122 Homer Road, distributes his written comments to the Council, and discusses the same. Basically I don't oppose this development. I just oppose the excess density and the mixed methods used to ignore some comp plan requirements. I have 8 exceptions to the code and the comp plan. Page 5 K:ICOUNCIL\MINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-I2-09-08min.doc Jay Friday, I live in Brookwood, We don't want building envelopes backing up to the canal. Discusses open spaces and floodplain. Is this consistent with anything out there? General discussion. Mary Taylor, 3410 Hartley, has this property already been annexed? We were understanding that before you annexed you had the approve the Development Agreement. Discussion on the roads that dead end in the area. What guarantee do we have that this is going to be developed? Phil Fry, 4122 Homer Road, discusses the water issues. Joan Langdon, 4690 Harley, discusses the property in the floodplain. The lots are so small, even with older people. I think they should put a retirement facility. Discussion on the traffic flow. I am in total agreement with what has been said before me. General discussion. Mary Taylor, discusses the swale area and the floodplain area. Discusses the entrance to the project. Joann Butler, we are here tonight only for the Development Agreement. We appreciate the comments of the neighbors. Discussion on transition and the floodplain. Discussion on the Restrictive Covenants. Further Council discussion. Ashley Ford, discusses the topographic map. General discussion. Mayor closes the Public Hearing General Council discussion. Semanko moves to approve the Annexation and Rezone subject to finalizing the Development Agreement instructing staff to work with the applicant addressing the concerns that have been expressed tonight. Seconded by Guerber. Discussion. THREE AYES: SHOUSHTARIAN: NAY; I BELIEVE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SHOULD BE AT THE SAME TIME: MOTION CARRIES............... Mayor calls a recess at 9:50 p.m. Mayor reconvenes at 10:00 p.m. B. CPA-05-08/A-3-03/RZ-08-08 - Comprehensive Plan Map & Text Amendment from Mixed Use and Professional Office to Commercial, Annexation and Rezone with Pre- annexation/Development Al!:reement - Eisenberl!: Company: Eisenberg Company, represented by Van Elg of The Land Group, Inc., is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendment to change the land use designation on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from +/- 31.4 acres Mixed Use and +/- 4.4 acres Professional Office to Commercial and amend the language in the Rim View Planning Area, an annexation and rezone with Pre- Annexation/Development Agreement for +/- 38.34 acres with a zoning designation ofC-3-DA (Highway Business District with a Development Agreement). The +/-38.34-acre site is located at the northeast corner of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard (US 20/26). Public testimony will be limited to the items noticed and published by the City. This item was continued from the November 12,20008 special meeting. (NBS) Mayor introduces the issue. Planner Baird-Spencer: Distributes a letter from ACHD dated December 9,2008. Displays overheads and provides an overview of the application for the Council. Craig Eisenberg, President of the Eisenberg Company, when we were before the Council we were requested to go back and meet with property owners to discuss their issues. We had a Page 6 K:ICOUNCILIMINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-12-09-08mindoc number of meetings. All that everyone wanted to talk about was to reduce the size of the project. Provides Council an overview of the application. We are down to 19 Yz coverage. General discussion. Don Forrest, Fred Meyer, discusses the roadway that will be used for truck access. This road was in place before. General discussion. Joann Butler, representing the applicant, discusses the Development Agreement and the meetings with neighbors to find common ground. The last meeting we had was very well attended. We sent radius notice out to 1,000 feet. General discussion. Don Forrest, further discussion on the project. General discussion. Joann Butler, discussion on the Development Agreement. General discussion. Van Elg, The Land Group, displays an overhead and discusses the lifestyle center. General discussion. Mayor opens the Public Hearing Lee Swider, 7176 N. Springcrest, Meridian, my testimony in opposition to this project are in the files. I wanted to address the meeting I attended. I wanted to know about size and was told that we would not talk about that. Discussion on the transition zone. My compromises were really not addressed in that meeting. Please don't do it. General discussion. Bob Banks, 1542 North Park Forest Way, I represent the Wilson family who own the Foxtail Golf Course. We are encouraged on the progress that has been made. We have continued to have neighborhood meetings. None of us are able to bring you a plan that everyone can agree on. We feel the City needs to provide some guidance as to what you want to see in this area. Fred Meyer is the appropriate tenant to be the anchor tenant. This needs to be developed as a gateway into the City of Eagle. Discussion on the interior frontage road. Larry Sandusky, 7602 Canton Drive, Meridian, Chinden is my primary conduit to get home. There are times of day that I can't leave home or get home. There is great disappointment that this has come up again. My concern is transportation. Hal Bunderson, I signed in support of this application. I think it is appropriate. I believe the application should be approved. Development is going to approved, not either or but how big should it be. Not long ago Walmart was being considered and this is substantially smaller. I trust you to make the decision on what this will look like. Marvin Quist, 1660 West Brandt Lane, this is immediately across Linder Road from this development. We are clearly impacted more than anyone. Discusses noise, traffic and lights. My family is impacted because we will loose some property with the expansion of Linder Road. My berm will have to be taken out. 21 trees and 19 shrubs will be taken out. I have appreciated the willingness of the developer to listen to our concerns. I believe that this proposal is as good an option that we are going to see. I want to state my approval ofthis application. LouAnn Quist, 1660 W. Brandt Lane, I live right across from this development. We knew that development would come and now ther;e is development across the street. I appreciate the developers concerns for our property. I very much approve of this development. Andrew Lawrence, 1685 West Brandt Lane, Meridian, this development about the Eisenberg Company and not Foxtail Golf Course and what they can get out of it. Since February we have been working to find common ground. Now we do not oppose this project. Foxtail must wait their turn and go through the process and not get a free ride. Lynne Trosper, 7110 Springcrest Place, I was at the general meeting held on November 5th. Page 7 K:ICOUNCIL\MINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-12-09-08min.doc During that meeting we went through the plan and discussed traffic issues. We took it upon ourselves to see if we could come upon common ground. What we agreed was that we couldn't agree on anything. It came down to discussion on the size of the project. Larry Swider, 7176 Springcrest Place, I went to the recent neighborhood meeting. We were unable to agree on any changes and the Developers were unwilling to discuss the size of this project. I feel the City is being held hostage by sewers and roads that you have no control over. Discussion on traffic congestion and development of the other properties in the area. Laura Broadbent, 913 River Heights Drive, we bought 5 acres in Eagle because the standards have been very high. We never thought we would have a big box in our back yard. The only people who are in favor of this are those who will benefit. One that was smaller than this was too big two years ago. We thought that Eagle would have a higher standard and not do it for the money. I think it is really a shame that comes down to financial. General discussion. Dan Rozsa, 593 West Gray Fox Court, I am in the Eagle Impact Area, I live just beyond the 1,000 foot limit. Everyone in the neighborhood feels there has been no compromise by the Eisenberg Company. We haven't been able to work anything out. It's a great comprehensive plan and you need to follow it. Discussion on transition. Ken Mallea, 2241 Almaden Drive, I amjust across Linder Road to the West of the site. I was in attendance at the meeting with Mr. Eisenberg. The most important issue to the neighbors is the overall size of the project and compromise ofthis has not happened. I encourage you to deny the application. Scott Trosper, 7110 N. Springcrest, we were directed to try and reach a compromise. The size of the project is the core issue, it overwhelms the area. Discussion on the comp plan. Discussion on the transition zone. I strongly urge the Council to table this issue and look at the whole area. Ben Kneadler, 3398 W. Fiona Drive, I have a letter that I will submit for the record. I have attended the meetings. I am a commercial realtor. Discussion on transition. This has the opportunity to serve Eagle as a gateway corner. I believe in this site and it is an appropriate location. Mimi Plum, 854 River Heights Drive, we are in the impact area. The City Council requested that the neighbors come up with a compromise plan. When we met with the Eisenberg Group and Fred Myers they did not want any discussion on the size of the project. Discussion on transition. I feel this project is far too large and urge City Council to deny this application. Josh Liddell 1485 Artesian Road, mostly I'm here tonight to provide some perspective of those that are in favor of this project. There are thousands to one in favor of this project. There is a huge need for this type of development. This is a great development and there is a huge need for this type of facility. I would ask that you don't let a few people out weigh the thousands of people who support this project. Mark Montier, 7175 N. Springcrest, this does affect us. This is my opinion and this is affecting us. Discussion on the traffic. I am against this. Judith Erdman, 7283 Winward Drive, it grieves me a great deal Mr. Semanko when you talked to Laura Broadbent, it is not our fault that we are only in the impact area. Distributes a Petition. Discusses hours of operation. Every time this comes before Council it seems to get bigger. I feel you will make a decision to support the people who live in the area. Everyone in favor of this development is only a matter of money. This is not a gateway and this is not the way the City should identify itself. We tried to comprise. Ryan Moore, 6673 N. Fox Run Avenue, almost everything has been said tonight. I'm here with Page 8 KICOUNCILIMINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-12-09-08min.doc the Foxtail Homeowners Association. There is going to be development. I think it is important that the Council looks at more than the 40 acre parcel. General Kathy Frigley, 1640 N. Linder, I am very offended that the people who come here tonight are only in support of this for financial gain. 1 support this project. What we want and what we need Eisenberg Company has been very good coming to us. Discusses the traffic issues. The traffic will be there regardless. We have live here 16 years and it is not easy for us. We felt the same way as these people when all of the big houses moved in. WE are so glad it is Fred Myers and not a Walmart. Nancy Merrill, 1246 S. Watermark Place, obviously I am still here, 1 did not go home, 1 do not work for Foxtail or the Wilsons. I live in the community and love this community. Discusses the development and the comp plan. It is hard to see progress that happens in your community. I am in support of this. You have an opportunity look at the bigger picture. Discusses the right-in and right-out on Chinden. Merlin Bogley, 7075 N. Linder, I believe I am the ancient one from that area. My greatest concern is that once the decision is made that all of the people in our area can remain friends and work together. I support your decision either way. Linda Waras 1685 W. Brandt Way, one ofthe things that bothered me is the residents that have 5-15 acres and they want to keep their pristine way. This is going to affect our property. Before these people moved into the area there was no one here to complain about it until they moved here and impacted the area. The message 1 am getting is it is okay but not in my backyard. Discussion on the meeting that the Eisenberg's held. I was initially against this development because of size but they have downsized. You are not going to make everyone happy. Linder Road is going to be closer to my home and impacts me more than those 1,000 feet away. I want to state that me and husband are not making any money off from this and 1 was offended. Jeff Fregley, 1640 N. Linder, 1 have history in the area and I love it. We don't have any plans to develop like it has been indicated tonight. I was at the general meeting and I think the Eisenberg's tried to bring up issues of concern. Most of the people were only concerned about the size and nobody wanted to listen to that. They tried but most people were not receptive. 1 am in support ofthis development. It is first class development and I think your Design Review will hold them to a high standard. Discussion on continuing the Council deliberations and the voting on the issue until next week. Mayor calls a recess at 12:45 a.m. Mayor reconvenes at 12:55 a.m. Mayor: I will look to Council as to how they want to move forward. General discussion. Joann Butler: It would be our preference to go forward tonight. We are prepared to summarize our rebuttal. We would appreciate to have that time next week when you are prepared to deliberate. Further discussion. Shoushtarian moves to continue with the rebuttal tonight. Seconded by Semanko. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES................... General discussion on when to have the deliberation, several people have left. Joann Butler: I would ask that you reconsider your motion. Page 9 K:ICOUNCIL\MINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-12-09-08mindoc Patrick Dobby, Dobby Engineering, discusses the traffic issues and the driveways. General discussion. Don Forrest, discusses the frontage road requested by Foxtail. I didn't hear anyone say that they wanted the development larger. Any frontage road would benefit the development of the golf course. We do not support this. Discusses the general meeting with the neighbors. Joann Butler, discusses the road system. We are asking you to look at our application and only our application. Foxtail has asked you to make certain motions and that is not appropriate. The right time to consider their application is when it is before you. Over half of the people who spoke tonight are in favor of this project. Discussion on the comp plan amendment request. Discussion on the previous planning. General discussion. Craig Eisenberg, I want to thank the Mayor and Council for listening to all of the testimony tonight. We did try to consider all of the issues that would come up. We met with as many residents as possible and some people will just never change their mind. The people who are 1,000 feet away or more just don't like the size of the project. We cut the project down to the minimum right from the start and maybe that was a mistake. Discusses the traffic and the sewer. General discussion. Guerber moves to continue CPA-05-08/A-3-03/RZ-08-08 - Comprehensive Plan Map & Text Amendment from Mixed Use and Professional Office to Commercial, Annexation and Rezone with Pre-annexation/Development Agreement to the next Council meeting on December 16,2008. Seconded by Huffaker. ALL AYES: MOTION ~~IG~................. C. ZOA-02-08 - Zoninl!: Ordinance Amendment: An Ordinance Of The City Of Eagle, Ada County Idaho Amending Certain Sections Of Eagle City Code Title 8 "Zoning", Chapter 2A "Design Review Overlay District"; Providing A Severability Clause; And Providing An Effective Date. This item was continuedfrom the November 18,2008 meeting. Staffis requesting this item be continued to the January 13, 2009 meeting. (JTL) Guerber moves to continue ZOA-02-08 - Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the January 13, 2009 City Council meeting. Seconded by Shoushtarian. ALL AYES: MOTION <:~~s............ 9. NEW BUSINESS: A. FP-04-06 - Lakemoor Subdivision - DMB Investments, LLC: DMB Investments, LLC, represented by Dan Torfin is requesting final plat approval for Lakemoor Subdivision No.3, a 52-lot (46-buildable, 6-common) residential subdivision. The 12.35-acre subdivision is located on the east side of S. Eagle Road approximately one-half mile south of Chinden Boulevard. (MJW) Mayor introduces the issue. Planner Williams: Provides Council an overview of the request for final plat approval. Dan Torfin, representing the applicant, displays overheads and provides Council an overview of the request for final plat approval. This is Phase III. We are in agreement to the conditions of approval as stated in the staff report. General discussion. Guerber move to approve FP-04-06 - Lakemoor Subdivision with the amendments as outlined by Staff. Seconded by Semanko. ALL AYES: MOTION C~ES................... B. Memorandum ofUnderstandinl!: between the Urban Renewal Al!:encv and City of Eal!:le: Page 10 K:ICOUNCILIMINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-12-09-08mindoc Moved to beginning of Agenda and approved by Council motion. C. Resolution 08-37: A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Eagle, Idaho, Authorizing The Issuance And Sale Of A Revenue Anticipation Note, Series 2008, In The Principal Amount Of $500,000 For The Purpose Of Providing Funds In Anticipation Of The Collection Of Taxes And The Receipt Of Other Revenues For The 2008-2009 Fiscal Year; Providing For The Form, Issuance, And Redemption Of The Note; Creating A Revenue Anticipation Note Redemption Fund And Providing For The Deposit Of Taxes And Revenues Into The Redemption Fund For The Payment Of The Principal Of And Interest On The Note; Providing For Related Terms And Covenants; And Providing An Effective Date. Moved to beginning of Agenda and approved by Council motion. C.!. Approval of Zions Bank Corporate Trust as the Pavinl!: Al!:enda for the 2008 Tax Anticipation Note: Moved to beginning of Agenda and approved by Council motion. D. First Addendum to Garden City Buildinl!: Inspection Al!:reement to Provide for Plumbinl!: Inspections: (MM) Moved to beginning of Agenda and approved by Council motion. 10. REPORTS: Moved to beginning of the Agenda I. Mayor and Council Report: 2. City Clerk/Treasurer Report: 3. Zoning Administrator Report: 4. Public Works Director Report: 5. City Attorney Report: II. ADJOURNMENT: Semanko moves to adjourn. Seconded by Guerber. ALL AYES: MOTION CARRIES....................... . Hearing no further business, the Council meeting adjourned at 1 :40 a.m. Respectfully submitted: lR (~. K.&~~ - SHARbN K. BERGMANN CITY CLERK/TREASURER PHILLIP J. BANDY MAYOR ",.......... "~,I ^'GL "" .' G ~l' l: '" ....' O~" ........ " ..... -.', $ ~ r O~^Tli ...... -:. ..F-.,"~ .-:. : ...... ~ ... .. u. 0 .. -: : -. ,. r- _ - · u ... 10.....0- : ~ ." h...V-::J:: ': . c..~r""~. = ~ ... ... / ~ ~"... '\ $ -:. .. NCORI'O~.. ~ .... " ........ ~ ," "" S1'A TE 0 ",.. '" I"~ """'11"" A TRANSCRIBABLE RECORD OF THIS MEETING IS A V AILABLE AT EAGLE CITY HALL Page 11 K:ICOUNCILIMlNUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaICC-12-09-08mindoc EAGLE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP A-16-07/RZ-23-07 - SB/CH Land Company (Flack/Carlock), LLC Testimony for this item Evill be limited to the terms of the Development Agreement only December 9, 2008 TESTIFY PRO/ CON or NAME ADDRESS YES/NO NEUTRAL t61,)` -i, I I Nur', C2 L1 + E P1✓e/"L (u,j,2 •-i II /— 79r IT / /6 / GrY\, EAGLE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP CPA-05-08/A-3-03/RZ-08-08 - Comprehensive Plan Map & Text Amendment from Mixed Use and Professional Office to Commercial, Annexation and Rezone with Pre- annexation/Development Agreement - Eisenberg Company Public testimony to the items noticed and published by the City December 9, 2008 NAME ADDRESS 11')1,13, n CtrQS `Du 2. d Pa_c fre S 1- Liu w. tzkc;) ,(3t.e_, URA -( S)k16" N Sp c e Ls --r \JIL BEt S11vGE N . S.P6C1 hlc Cit ST SH P N r`11 -S k 13 uo pAt Cf- f/ /7 U/r(' ✓ �� ((.._ 7 4 %iiJl�t�l,i/ I Y ►�ev, c 1'+�, 7/ 27.5s d Ey jet 1-J/T2-U 10 OCT 9427 .1X 5 90 A;i %�c�(- 6c14y %j (•(1.2/it..e%-fes;; TESTIFY YES/NO Y t1 ) f\ PRO/ CON or NEUTRAL 0 Pro Com 47' `f �� v EAGLE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP CPA-05-08/A-3-03/RZ-08-08 - Comprehensive Plan Map & Text Amendment from Mixed Use and Professional Office to Commercial, Annexation and Rezone with Pre-. annexation/Development Agreement - Eisenberg Company Public testimony to the items noticed and published by the City December 9, 2008 \ u J r M4 r �, �� 6-)ci� /‘ 6 o u' 8rg i � ��� c�wn Pr Co riff C--)1,0-- /G60 Cel Z rcivld Lune �ec Y fro taii)reoe-c 1(06— vi c v> lQui r -e CoCo2-o ca,r iZ, A v cc_. 1 r'1;k-rt Demon r,,c ,A' S U6-'4, ..( A) L y ( A) LyYI \arc: ,rpt{ ilei. '\A- Sri�,A 0esA Q l \1 a v- e.7 ,.__44tul.t'AD,r_ T-76 -Ir., 4---,1- / '(tiL2 -z—e dL (5 A CET r fre ~1)!.' 114/11 \ 'Z>7 4. ---5--.3 L 6r-c-kci ii,:k 0- ( 1(e m [\/LL ,.4- ,,)-- .1 L1( /q-(._ r,-, 4- r) (-=1 vv —(- c, Roa lc.,i; )2 7_5' 'R; n; Dr__ ','c (off C C g/9/ aoX1/-5"F C'071) �� ��.-C?' /<�,� /ti/. 547ticij cv64, 1�C S/ 600 eaek-. 4Azi A/o -1/ .1c" zAe r/4 A f j qrn /2-c9 -EJ c - 1c /1( 6/1 t -e. / 't)) Ear %y 355& S Prom, \tts 1:7/ 1.1 ail 7)8 607,-)ittcf,,i/ Prt /co „ 1\,14to,-trc-c_L Con 1-r b l )ry Ctfl Oovii w/v C�� Fyo December 9, 2008 Eagle City Council 660 E. Civic Lane P.O. Box 1520 Eagle, Idaho 83616 RE: CPA -05-08 Introduce self & give address (33 years; 5 acres) HANDOUT (they need to copy e page for the Council) -I1 grieves me that you made an issue of where my neighbor, Laurie,lives because it is not our fault if we have a Meridian or Eagle address; this issue is in our backyard -Every lime this comes before you the design gets bigger and bigger -The hours of operation are still all the hours the residents would be up /c31.?/0 I feel so small here tonight with all this power and money and notoriety presenting their case for developing the NE corner of Chinden and Linder Roads. Truly I feel like a David against Goliath, but I believe that you will make an unprecedented decision to support the majority of people that live in that area of impact. Please, please realize that for everyone in favor of this development it is only a matter of money because they do not live there, but for everyone else—those of us who have lived there for many, many years it is devastating to the very way of life that we have sacrificed to purchase, improve, and preserve in a rapidly changing environment. It is important that you realize that we are not trying to stop all development in this area just this huge retail complex which is NOT a gateway to Eagle. Is that really how Eagle defines itself? A gateway should be unique and something special that sets the City of Eagle apart from the other cities around her. What about a park, a fire station, an animal sanctuary...or at least more time to explore options for the City of Eagle. These all would make a greater statement for Eagle than another retail complex. I know this is a time we need to be more frugal, but then let's be giants in preserving and not abandoning beauty, nature, and art which we are losing rapidly. We who live there hope and pray that our way of life is not turned upside down. Just imagine how you would feel if someone wanted to place this development near your home -24/7 lights, more noise, more traffic, and development that is contrary to what is already established. Now the traffic is mainly East to West, but with this development that comer would become a magnet drawing people from North, South, East and West. No amount of restrictions regarding light, hours of operation, deliveries, etc., will alleviate the disruption of peace at home. This is the reason all of us live where we do— to find rest from commercialism. Think about it. Most big box development is surrounded by low cost, entry-level developments. This definitely will reduce our property values, for which we pay premium property taxes, and it will destroy our way of life. This property is all that I have for my children. I am not trying to hurt the Powells and others that are hoping to turn this land into a profit. The Powells will still gain significantly from the sale of that property for what it was designated for, and all the others can implement their plans anywhere else in this valley, like State and Linder. At the previous City Council meeting Kay (daughter of the Powells) had stated that she wanted to sell her parents property because she could not enjoy their property anymore, We do not want that same fate. We still live there. Compromise? We tried. You have heard from the others what happened there. I shop almost exclusively at the Fred Meyer just 4 miles away and they have just finished remodeling and adding on to the present structure. Besides, what would stop this development from expanding even more in the future? Look at their map. They could do this is the future (to the East.) Now, more than ever, because this whole beautiful valley is growing so quickly and what we loved about it is disappearing below pavement, parking spaces, and security lights, please think about "green space," visual breathing room—space as fundamental to life itself. Please do not jam a huge retail development into a corridor of people's homes where we find respite from the work we do to preserve our community. We are fellow citizens in this life, but right now you are in control of ours and our childrens' future. The developers will find another lot and still come out ahead. We stand much more to lose if they are given the vote. We look to you for help and beg you not to let us down. ayi -Alli>L1 (JuJ/) £ �c / PETITION December, 2008 We are NOT in favor of the proposed development described below: CPA-05-08/A-3-03/RZ-08-08 - Comprehensive Plan Map & Text Amendment from Mixed Use and Professional Office to Commercial, Annexation and Rezone with Pre-annexation/Development Agreement - Eisenberg Company: Eisenberg Company, represented by Van Elg of The Land Group, Inc. , is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendment to change the land use designation on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from +l- 31.4 acres Mixed Use and +l- 4.4 acres Professional Office to Commercial and amend the language in the Rim View Planning Area, an annexation and rezone with Pre- Annexation/Development Agreement for +/- 38.34 acres with a zoning designation of C -3 -DA (Highway Business District with a Development Agreement). The +/- 38.34 -acre site is located at the northeast comer of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard (US 20/26 Please sign name Print name Address IL/Y:1 (- ,Z/7); ///' J b,--1/ L ria /,' %'] 7)P GG , of %i/i! / ,)r; ✓�'• 755T6j) ,9i ke4 T 732..o N /~Jee;c{/a✓r lr.d 4,11. `r, ,c�� aart [r i ci A .' e Ici i a >' z 3LI 3 Do l yl(c --o n [ 104-e cv,)04soK( zgwQ s A/1r►6I 6L,, „,,, -) I �- z 2,1 z 6 ii.); Lk c I ? J2 -i 1_--r, 1,p1 ,'cf,,\cd.+ ()Ai ,o. tUILL ,'Onryr Avk_. H LI Vti r E666kc,Tb 12 k- ha ,7(. 13 /J,'(,((\/ Z`ij-5A. StilG'% 6-er ti Ec , ./.SJ,s((, /U „,t,c fv_1....- 2 Z C1 N tic 7 j( 1) E 0 0 KiNuko EN1 ZZ .k. i Sid C,A,f4--! n y K. (A6t.- , MI6, S-taci.i iKhudseil dsm___ ,2 -v), -7g -w, S(i( vb-t-Y. Id -;'(c((0 t',\\ ,---4 0 ,' c:.(-17 LI PETITION December, 2008 We are NOT in favor of the proposed development described below: CPA-05-08/A-3-03/RZ-08-08 - Comprehensive Plan Map & Text Amendment from Mixed Use and Professional Office to Commercial, Annexation and Rezone with Pre-annexation/Development Agreement - Eisenberg Company: Eisenberg Company, represented by Van EIg of The Land Group, Inc. , is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendment to change the land use designation on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from +1- 31.4 acres Mixed Use and +/- 4.4 acres Professional Office to Commercial and amend the language in the Rim View Planning Area, an annexation and rezone with Pre- Annexation/Development Agreement for +/- 38.34 acres with a zoning designation of C -3 -DA (Highway Business District with a Development Agreement). The +/- 38.34 -acre site is located at the northeast corner of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard (US 20/26 Please. sign name Print name Address f' /m /a J/v K Zy 7 L[). 5-53 ),/ (/t -,Y 1`//i`/ L i< 5 2 (" } , J A.1 rC_',i-st /- \J c T ory SP1 • \/U 011(k,W-- e 'e awl � s � c: r 62s-4. Dr s,EIP Z9A1I-Ct ( ro!iku I _aa-e,y mei )9'14'A .16-cj brAi/r/ 11/' 7 4 4 S 10141- Ve,)-1 A q(,- 56/fro- -Le' g)---45-7')Yia. it w#/..-71‘71(, )_/ JK 77-A1 >`.2)./ t [CO 9gr7D IA) '(-> Li ? Q(I / - ( Pr/ cl,k, \-9(1- PETITION December, 2008 We are NOT in favor of the proposed development described below: CPA-05-08/A-3-03/RZ-08-08 - Comprehensive Plan Map & Text Amendment from Mixed Use and Professional Office to Commercial, Annexation and Rezone with Pre-annexation/Development Agreement - Eisenberg Company: Eisenberg Company, represented by Van Elg of The Land Group, Inc. , is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendment to change the land use designation on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from +l- 31.4 acres Mixed Use and +l- 4.4 acres Professional Office to Commercial and amend the language in the Rim View Planning Area, an annexation and rezone with Pre- Annexation/Development Agreement for +/- 38.34 acres with a zoning designation of C -3 -DA (Highway Business District with a Development Agreement). The +1- 38.34 -acre site is located at the northeast corner of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard (US 20/26 Please sign name Print name Address �U, v o.Ny, oc V (1 N YY\ V LiN S oC S L( In S t� SIJ' Lre i) 4 ; -7i/7 / L/ tJ�tJ� V \4 `r al -kW 42 -PL'{ T ,,`-• jl t s (_;--". (4.4-n j Q V2 � 6111 S c'6 r 91'6, h /7( !'�/»2 J(17 >/ s } s sk6/,/ . SU r,r 114 Ae &7 �C/) (/c=4• C r et v/. C CO e eav &eek Lr. /Wet-ic'ra1Z I l LC �:✓v L- 6'L4 JY , 4'i dC' 1 CL 4 ✓ tel - 7 32`) ( ( ( re -li sed hAi/ )/G ISQ` rt« er J (1Crl1 tt �. /ik. PETITION December, 2008 We are NOT in favor of the proposed development described below: CPA-05-08/A-3-03/RZ-08-08 - Comprehensive Plan Map & Text Amendment from Mixed Use and Professional Office to Commercial, Annexation and Rezone with Pre-annexation/Development Agreement - Eisenberg Company: Eisenberg Company, represented by Van Elg of The Land Group, Inc. , is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendment to change the land use designation on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from +/- 31.4 acres Mixed Use and +/- 4.4 acres Professional Office to Commercial and amend the language in the Rim View Planning Area, an annexation and rezone with Pre- Annexation/Development Agreement for +/- 38.34 acres with a zoning designation of C -3 -DA (Highway Business District with a Development Agreement). The +1- 38.34 -acre site is located at the northeast corner of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard (US 20/26 Please sign name Print name Address C/U -a11-6 ,s7 -t --,d//-4/1,/2-4 heu M Ni? Li ILA) C ( cc '7'70 /2. C(6' G�Zeo17Vo ILLIIA 1)6' ( /50 eiC=r? 7 z, '266 &e? /1/ 11()fli1 / 7/."( te (1 ar bar, c‘ () Fi00 U )1 f�-� 14-3 /14ei, .c/ -/.A r vE Po wLz_L _ASPAT k Po t,v& LL 7cf 5 �'�APVu� D yiLfT/oi'A..) c'LE-ARvae Ali, /ltem7b4/1/ (7,e„„2,4„),-6. .,2/J 2 4 [/ ;-r/ 4 /(''J PETITION December, 2008 We are NOT in favor of the proposed development described below: CPA-05-08/A-3-03/RZ-08-08 - Comprehensive Plan Map & Text Amendment from Mixed Use and Professional Office to Commercial, Annexation and Rezone with Pre-annexation/Development Agreement - Eisenberg Company: Eisenberg Company, represented by Van EIg of The Land Group, Inc. , is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendment to change the land use designation on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from +1- 31.4 acres Mixed Use and +/- 4.4 acres Professional Office to Commercial and amend the language in the Rim View Planning Area, an annexation and rezone with Pre- Annexation/Development Agreement for +/- 38.34 acres with a zoning designation of C -3 -DA (Highway Business District with a Development Agreement). The +/- 38.34 -acre site is located at the northeast comer of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard (US 20/26 Please sign name Print name Address 1Z-- / ' l• Y ' r•. ,,1i-. ; (.%/l' 1 /d4../6 • dyteeta_ uti Ohr i 3J-) I'> � IA-gd 3 iv, /22/ j////17.4 c L( UCi" HE10 J 7? J � ))A ,. i.;'i,/ 7 r-/ )2,)6,/ c )/ c.n2 ,,-.C1,,.. i(r(• ., 5��17 .))c- �rr �t 7 6� 'L ,S C i I 1110-re2 tj // 9'l 7to` >r. //1fliUr1eve? ,01.- L',7y- ,r,t 061k -el (4-urlao t1">mv.•n PETITION December, 2008 We are NOT in favor of the proposed development described below: CPA-05-08/A-3-03/RZ-08-08 - Comprehensive Plan Map & Text Amendment from Mixed Use and Professional Office to Commercial, Annexation and Rezone with Pre-annexation/Development Agreement - Eisenberg Company: Eisenberg Company, represented by Van EIg of The Land Group, Inc. , is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendment to change the land use designation on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from +/- 31.4 acres Mixed Use and +/- 4.4 acres Professional Office to Commercial and amend the language in the Rim View Planning Area, an annexation and rezone with Pre- Annexation/Development Agreement for +/- 38.34 acres with a zoning designation of C -3 -DA (Highway Business District with a Development Agreement). The +/- 38.34 -acre site is located at the northeast comer of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard (US 20/26 Plgase sign name Print name Address '(7 •7;;, /2-- '? i ( % At. -14,(,? e V'Q S Lvvin rt,sper Lv ✓1 e JCrCav Te/C17(Y,geeej,i ? /l. e"I. 'IIit tJ `. rival r�5l 1'1 ,, /3 Y k5l J c x T N Double Eagle Ln Figure 7. East Segment — Access Management Plan L I I East Segment: Full access at 1/2 -mile or 1 -mile spacing as shown. Future High Volume Intersection Improvement near McDermott Rd (future SH 16) and at Linder Rd. T � --.= c crz z 0 = =J U 5120126 0 0. _1_ Ir 2 1- Z _ 1 --771I T411 � } I raw Ew IIIA'n'niZ a@l� 111 i 35 in% emnw. aim I/7744 flier, I 1 Irhd�!I��,I 0 N V 0 Comments to Flack/Carlock Development - A-16-07/RZ-23-07 SB/CH Land Co. for rezone RUT -> MU -DA of 46 A/287.7 A. by Phil Fry, 4122 Homer Rd., Eagle ID, 83616 on 9 December 2008 I don't oppose this development, I just oppose the excess density and the mixed methods used to ignore some Comp. Plan requirements. Basically, in this Terra View planning, I can find NO conformance with the density and zoning requirements in the Eagle Com Plan. And the planning is in violation of the Development Agreement requirement for Comp. Plan consistency and is mostly based on older PUD Code requirements. The Vision The Comp. Plan is the City of Eagle's agreement with the community for future planning and must be clear and readable. It has evolved through inconsistent changes to have many errors, unclear requirements and unclear interpretations. It also has major inconsistencies with the Eagle Code. And the Code update to match doesn't seem to be ongoing. These problems are shown in the volume of community comments on the Terra View development. Terra View has now evolved to be worse (more density, less density transition, and Tess recognition of community needs) following the 6 months of refined design. Lets talk about the Com. Plan vision. A resident of the village/community center could buy a coffee on the walk to drop off and pick up their child at Kindergarten, and do some laundry and pick up groceries for tonight's meal on the way home. Later the older children could walk home from school for a snack and then walk to athletics and classes. After work parents could walk to the gym and then come home were they all meet for dinner, or on special occasions walk to a nice restaurant. Eagle's vision is not supported by the Terra View design. Not for the village center in the Village Planning Area and not for the Community Center transect, in spite of the Development Agreement requirement for consistency. There are no schools, no village, no campus, little convenient walking access to retail commercial and too small a commercial area. Rather the retail is convenient for the automobile rather than being convenient to the housing areas for walking. Historically, Eagle's vision was not supported by the developer at the village location, so Eagle misapplied a Community Center transect from the Foothills Design Area, rather than move the village location or add the needed words to Village Planning Area. The transect does not fit well and carries with it inappropriate baggage. Then the Hartley Lane development also ignored the village but at least has been planning 2 units/ acre in the Village Planning Area. And now Terra View is not supporting that vision, and is using the outdated requirements in the PUD Code to build more homes and a lumped strip mall. I guess Eagle's vision of a walkable village is left to Mary Taylor to support by sacrificing her property some day. She will have to put in the 10 units / acre street grid, apartments and retail stores. But that is doomed to failure without convenient paths connecting to the distant homes in the 3 adjacent developments and from the economic competition of the Terra View commercial strip along Beacon Light Rd. The Problems And lets talk about the specific Terra View problems with the inconsistencies and mishmash of Eagle Planning documents. I spent the last week closely reading the density and zoning requirements in the Comp, Plan, the PUD Code, the Development Agreement Code, which requires conformance to the PUD Code, and the pending Development Agreement. I found many inconsistencies. Consider zoning. The Comp Plan shows this area as Residential Transition, a quite fuzzy zoning, as does the Terra View Development Agreement. The Eagle Code has never added this zoning, but the PUD Code requires using only zoning defined in the Code. And Terra View asks for a rezone from the Ada County RUT zoning at 1 u/5 acres. So how can the Development Agreement, which requires that the PUD Code be used to rezone here to a zone not in the Code? -- That is a Code violation. What is the correct underlying code zoning for this area which they want changed? I get confused trying to keep up here! Lets get some consistency. What is the allowed zoning in the development? The Residential Transition zoning outside the Mixed Use area requires compatibility with surrounding existing or pro op sad uses. The Village Center requirements for the Village Planning area is a max of 2 u/acre North of Beacon Light Rd. with feathering to the North and East. Now the existing zoning density on both borders is 1 u/ 5 acres without a zoning change, and 2 u/acre with a future zoning change. On the North border Terra View has an excessive 2.6 u/acre. On the East border is the Elderly housing which I measure as roughly 8 u /acre. The developer says this is far from any housing so they can ignore the compatibility requirement. But the use proposed by the allowed zoning should be honored here, and so their density is a Comp. Plan violation. Terra View gains higher density by using the PUD incentives for elderly housing. The Code allows 3 u/ acre for only the elderly housing and which must be less than 16 % of the PUD area = 46 acres. Terra View's development outside the Mixed Use zone is 3.2 u/acre and the total development is 3 u/acre (P&Z measure). This is not allowed and the Development Agreement is a Code violation. Further the elderly housing is actually about 8 u/acre and borders on present zoning area of 1 u/ 5 acres -- a Comp. Plan violation. I cannot see the density of the village center applying here without moving the Village Center to that area, which would also move in requirements for other requirements for commercial and zoning, which is not done. And the area is also in the Community Center transect which could allow the housing density but the rezone is not requested, nor are the other requirements honored. Terra View has 23% total open space. The PUD Code for elderly housing requires that if any lot is less than 1 acre the whole PUD needs 26% open space. This is another Code violation in the development agreement and the plan. I also don't identify the 5,000 SF clubhousefndoor recreation facility required in the elderly housing and which should identified as a requirement in the Development Agreement -- a Code violation. The Eagle Code for a PUD requires that less than 10% of gross land area (= 28.8 A) may be commercial, office, public and quasi -public. Here Mixed Use is about 60 acres counting roads and Terra View has a rezone request for 46 acres, so twice as much as allowed. And even if the 11 acres of residences is subtracted, the 35 acres is too much -- another Code violation. The PUD Code requires that commercial/ office uses are planned as groups with common parking. I thnk grouping should be in middle of the housing for convenient access, especially for retail commercial, and especially convenient for elderly housing, none of which is done here. The Comp. Plan borrows a Community Center transect from the N. Foothills Planning Area requirements which is well hidden on a map. This are not in the Eagle Code so can't be used for the used PUD and Dev. Agreement. And the transect should not carry all the associated requirements from that planning area. Such a transect is 100 to 150 acres in size with village characteristics including an identifiable community. It was carelessly applied here to a 560 acres area in both sides along 3/4 mile of Beacon Lt. Rd. This must mean we could allow 4 villages along Beacon Light Rd. This transect allows residential density of 8-10 u/A on 25% of area, which is 30 acres for the available 120 acres transect area in Terra View per the Comp. Plan. However only 46 acres of Terra View are being zoned as Mixed Use and are thus part of the transect, a much smaller area than the transect should have. And the 25% of their 46 acres exactly matches the 11 acres area of Terra View mixed use housing. However the 192 units on 11.1 acres is 17 u/acre, twice the allowed density -- and another Comp. Plan violation. Also the elderly housing is outside the transect area. Consider commercial parking, the Development Agreement does not want parking lots between roads and retail, but the plans show much parking separating the stores from the roads and the residents. This requires children to dodge traffic on the streets and parking lots when walking to stores. Actions I think you can see why I argue with the Terra View plans. If the developer would drop their density to 2 u / acre and make some attempt to a village environment I would withdraw. I agree the council should have leeway in adapting the Cities requirements for a better development. Also I admit I am not a planner and don't understand the Eagle Comp. Plan and Code as well as the P&Z planners, but I can read these requirements and I see many unresolved problems. I also think the elected council should make the decisions as to what exceptions are allowed, not P&Z , and from a presented list of these exceptions. And unless some other sections override the many obvious violations I think this development must be returned for re -planning. -- First, lets fix the Comp. Plan and City Code for consistency, to better conform to public agreements, and for clarity in interpretation. -- Second, the Council needs to review all Plan/Code exceptions with P&Z before approval, -- Third, Terra View needs re -planning for the acceptable Code/ Plan exceptions. -- Fourth, the proposed Development plan needs additional constraints to meet missing Code/ Comp Plan requirements. Cc /.2-9-0e"-- GG Gey E5e � Kee,ld yuf tMdy P6ttairz nn ERyte Participating Eagle businesses are extending their hours until 8:00 pm Wednesday, December 10th and 17th to help make your holiday shopping easy and fun! Nearly everything you need can be found in Eagle. • Unique Clothing & Gift Boutiques • Gourmet Food Shops, Wineries • Florists • Art Galleries • Day Spas and Salons • Restaurants and Coffee Bistros • Hardware Stores • Home Decor Shops Spending your holiday dollars here in Eagle makes a huge impact on our local economy. Eagle has a long list of quality businesses and services available to you, but they need your help. This year, stay, shop, and dine in Eagle! F NO TRAFFIC • SAVE GAS • PLENTY OF PARKING • WARM & FRIENDLY PEOPLE • RELAXED ATMOSPHERE BuyEagleFirst.org is a grass-roots, non-profit organization affiliated with The Landing Community Center. Our goals include promoting Eagle businesses, funding local non- profit and outreach groups and helping create a "Village Community" of friends, families and businesses. Here are just a few of our participating BuyEagleFirst.org businesses: AA Logos ActionCOACH 'AILANA Spa Art of Framing Gallerie Belle Ame.com The Athlete's Foot Beau Monde Boutique The Black Pearl Briano's Home Decor Casa Bella Interiors BEAGLE FIRSToRG BUY GIVE Gro_ •': CC Forte Custom Interiors CoCo Couture Boutique Evan's Building Center Flame Neapolitan Pizzaria Hope Blooms Flowers & Things Ina Jane's Cottage Mimi Marie Boutique Our Secret Cottage ReDesign Consignment Home Furnishings Reed Cycle & Ski Rembrandts Coffee House River Rock Ale House Ruby Lou Seasons Bistro/WineBar & Catering, Inc. Storage 55 The Stuffed Olive Tanglewood And More! BuyEagleFirst.org Mission Statement The mission of BuyEagleFirst.org is to showcase and support locally -owned businesses in Eagle; provide continuing opportunities for local entrepreneurs; and enhance the economic and social vitality, character and spirit of our community. ACHD coN rrec�� ,'n:C December 9, 2008 JoAnn C. Butler Spink Butler, LLP 251 E. Front Street #200 Boise. Idaho 83702 RE: ECPA-05-08/EA-03-08/ERZ-08-08 Dear Ms. Butler: Carol A. McKee, President Sherry R. Huber, 1r Vice President David Bivens, 2" Vice President John S. Franden, Commissioner Rebecca W. Amoid, Commissioner RECEIVED ; CITY OF EAGLE DECL;_�, 0 � 2008 File: Route ro• ACHD staff submitted a letter to the City of Eagle dated November 25, 2008. The letter expressed ACHD's staff support for a continued cooperative effort in reviewing the transportation system in the area of the Chinden and Linder intersection and specifically expressed ACHD's staff support for the ideas expressed in the letter from Pam Golden of ITD dated November 20, 2008. In response to this ACHD staff letter, Nichoel Baird Spencer of the City of Eagle requested a more specific letter from ACHD regarding access to the site. That letter from ACHD staff is dated December 5, 2008. As you have pointed out, some of the phrasing of what staff was attempting to express in response to this request from City staff is not completely accurate. Therefore, this letter shall clarify and replace the December 51h ACHD staff letter. If or when a specific development application is received from the City of Eagle, ACHD staff will review the application and information provided and make a recommendation to the ACHD Commission. To date, ACRD has made no final decisions in relation to the proposed development of your client's property. From the information available today, it is clear that access is a primary concern to everyone involved. ACHD policy restricts access to arterial roadways. The June 3, 2008 staff report issued for the Eisenberg property comprehensive plan amendment application discussed access onto Linder Road and recommended that when ACHD reviews and acts on a future development application for this site that the number of access points onto Linder Road be restricted to two driveways. One driveway at the north property line and one nearer the intersection of Linder and Chinden. The southern access point (closest to the intersection) would be recommend to be restricted to a right-in/right-out only driveway. Since issuing the staff report in June, your client has pursued access onto Chinden Road with the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). The amount and type of access onto Chinden Road granted by ITD will impact the access necessary on Linder Road. This development application has lead to several meetings with ACHD, ITD, City of Eagle, and City of Meridian staff members, as well as the development community. The future of the Chinden/Linder Road intersection and the potential for a roadway network in this area has been discussed at these meetings. Without a final decision from ITD in regard to access onto Chinden Road, ACHD staff will continue to recommend that the site be restricted to two access points onto Linder Road as identified in the original June 3`a staff report. ACHD staff would support a collector roadway along the north property line of the Eisenberg property. District policy supports a collector network near the half mile along arterial roadways. A collector in this Ada County Highway District • 3775 Adams Street • Garden Oty, ID • 83714 • PH (208) 387-6100 • FX 387-6393 • w w.achd.ada.id.us e specific area is also indicated in the District's DRAFT Transportation and Land Use Integration Plan (TLIP) currently underway. District staff would be remiss if this was not at least considered and this information provided to the ACHD Commission in the future. A collector in this area would allow for the creation of a frontage/backage road parallel to Chinden and set the groundwork for a roadway network in the area providing greater access and connectivity opportunities to all parcels. Clearly, the final decision on all of these issues including access to this particular site will be made by the ACHD Commission upon review and action on a future development application if or when one is received. 1 apologize for any confusion our December 5, 2008 staff letter may have caused. I hope this letter makes these issues clearer for you and your client. If you have any questions you may contact me at 387-6170. Sincerely, Gary Inselma Manager, Right -of -Way and Development Services Cc: City of Eagle Attachments: ACHD staff letter dated November 25, 2008 ACHD staff letter dated December 5, 2008 ITD staff letter dated November 20, 2008 November 25, 2008 To: Gene Shaffer, CSHQA ACHD, comms cI4; 5ovrieo Subject Wilson Properties Proposed Community Master Pian Carol A. McKee. President Slum R. Huber, 1" Vice President Dave Wens, 2 Vice President John 5. Fra den, Comabner Retexc W. Aniold, Consmaslaxx Sent Via -Email Thank you for meeting with ACHD and Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) staff to review the proposed Wilson Properties Community Master Plan. ACHD concurs with the letter written by Pam Golden of RD, dated November 20, 2008. Its always the District's goal to work together with lead agency staff, developers, and the public to address transportation need for area properties. The District encourages frontagelbackage roads adjacent to state highways, as they provide access to parcels with limited frontage and other properties in the vicinity of a state highway. ACHD looks forward to working with ITD, The City of Eagle, and the public as this effort moves forward. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (208) 387-6178. Sincerely, Mindy Wallace Planning Review Supervisor Right -of -Way 8 Development Services Ada County Highway District Ada County Highway Dist -:d • 3775 Adams Street • Garden City, ID • 83714 • PH 208.387-6100 • FX 345-7650 • www.actid.ada.idi s 411 it'd►. ACHD December 5. 2008 Card A. McKee, Ormdarit Sherry R. Huber, :=vice President Davo Bvens, r Yip Prde.it join S. rranden, C. Rebecca W. Amctd, CorralZones Sent Via -Email To: Nichoel Baird Spencer, City of Eagle Subject: ECPA-5-08, Eisenberg Comprehensive Plan Amendment Wth the proposed comprehensive plan amendment for the Eisenberg property before the Eagle City Council December 9, 2008. the District wanted to reiterate a few of the comments made in our staff report regarding access to Linder Road. On June 3, 2008 a staff report was issued for the Eisenberg property which discussed access onto Under Road. The staff reports states that the number of access points onto Linder Road will be restricted to two driveways, one at the north property line and one near the intersection of Linder and Chinden. The southern access point (closest to the intersection) will be restricted to a right-in/right-out only driveway. Since issuing the staff report in June the applicant has pursued access on to Chinden Road with the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). The amount and type of access an to Chinden Road granted by ITD will impact the access allowed on Linder Road. This development application has lead to several meetings with ACHD,ITD, City of Eagle, and City of Meridian staffs, as well as the development community, as the future of Chlnden/Linder Road intersection and the potential for a regional roadway network in this area has been discussed. Without a final decision from ITD in regard to access on to Chinden Road. the District recommends that the site be restricted to two access points on to Linder Road as identified In the staff report. ACHO would support collector roadway along the north property line of the Eisenberg property. This would aDow for the creation of a frontage/backage road to parallel Chinden and set the groundwork for a regional roadway network in the area. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (208) 387-6178. Sincerely, Mindy Wallace Planning Review Supervisor Right -of -Way & Development Services Ada County Highway District Ada County Ffghway District • 3775 Adams Strcct • Garden Gty, ID • 83714 • Fti 200-387-6100 • FX 345-700 • rv►vw.edidaiaJC.us KIANO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT P.O. Banc 8028 Bohm, ID 83707-2028 November 20, 2008 Ms. Wheel Baird Spencer, AICP City of Eagle Planning & Zoning Department P.O. Box 1520 Eagle, Idaho 83616 (208) 334-8300 ttdidaho.gov Re: CPA-05-08/A-3-03/RZ-08-08, Eisenberg and CPA for Wilson Properties (number unknown) Dear Ms. Baird Spencer. As you are aware, we have been working with representatives from Eisenberg and Wilson properties regarding access issues to US 20/26 (Chinden Boulevard). Recently, we received a copy of the October 2008 Traffic Impact Study for Wilson Properties. Figure 8 of that study presents a potential street network for the area north of Chlnden Boulevard between Under and Meridian Roads. We understand that representatives from Wilson Properties have been M discussion with other developers In the area about this plan. We are encouraged that Figure 8 depicts a shared right -in, right -out access at the Y. mile for the two properties. With any right -in right -out approach it Is important to have cross access between properties and a system of frontage or backage roads. Unfortunately these matters are beyond the power of the Department to require under its current regulatory scheme. We would support moving the proposed access on the Eisenberg property to the property line or as a joint use approach. Further, we are pleased to see a frontage mad system connecting Under Road to Fox Run (relocated), with potential for a backage system to connect through to Meridian Road. Both joint use approaches and frontage roads are encouraged In IDAPA 39.03.42, Rules Governing Highway Right -of Way Encroachments on Slate Rights -of -Way. We look forward to working further with the City of Eagle towards a workable solution for this area. Please call me at 334-83T7 If you have any questions. Sincerely, Pam Golden, P.E. District 3 Development & Access Management Engineer cc: Steven Parry (ITD-Legal) E.Don Copple (for Eisenberg Companies) Chris Beeson (for Wilson Properties) cc- f,1._?.. -or December 6, 2008 RE: Eagle Island Marketplace Mr. Mayor and Members of the Eagle City Council - My name is Ben Kneadler. I am a commercial real estate agent here in the Treasure Valley. My firm is involved in the current transaction between the Eisenberg Company and the Powell family. This relationship, however, does not in any way effect the validity of my testimony as I too am an Eagle resident and I live not too far from this property. I hope that you as a council would hear my words in their intended, honest, candor. I come to you tonight to speak from my personal experience as a homeowner that has gone through a process similar to this, a homeowner that was involved through my subdivision in the "Preserve Eagle" process two years ago involving comprehensive planning changes, and an attendee to all of the public meetings that have been hosted by both the Eisenbergs and the Wilsons. First, four years ago I was asked by my neighbors to be a voice during the process of a development that was immediately adjacent to my neighborhood. My subdivision had lots ranging from .5 to 2+ acres. A group of developers from outside of Idaho had placed under contract approximately 115 acres of property adjacent to our subdivision and had intentions of fully developing the site into various commercial uses. The commercial plan called for no zoning transition across the 115 acres. A development agreement was negotiated that included a CMU wall and some spacing from the property line to the first structure. Lighting was addressed, delivery hours, etc. similar to what is being addressed hear on the project before you. I attended the one public hearing that the developers hosted and was offered limited post -meeting correspondence. As the process continued, it was evident that the city involved was motivated to have the project move forward. As conversations with my neighbors took place throughout the process it was interesting to hear the feedback from the neighbors regarding the project. The people whose back fence would be the shopping center were generally opposed to the project and the other neighbors were 50/50 on how they felt. In all the emotion and discussion, one fact kept rising to the top of the discussion from all of the neighbors. We homeowners knew that we would have some sort of mixed-use project built on the other side of the fence. We all purchased property within 1/2 mile of one of the cities major NIS corridors that connected with I-84 one parcel away to the North. We chose to live there because our .8 of an acre gave us the country feel AND we had phenomenal access to the valley. And as a result, when I went to sell my home, the new buyers wanted exactly what all of us did. They wanted an accessible, country feel with proximity to services. It was foolish for me to think that I could live a rock's throw from a highway and Easterly gateway road and not expect larger scale development in my backyard. Similarly, as with the case before you this evening, living a half -mile off of Chinden along one of two community river crossings directly adjacent one of the fastest growing communities in the state is not living in the "country". I feel for the neighbors to the North of this project as I have been in their shoes. I understand the change that is before them. I also understand that there is opportunity for them to have their way of life preserved through the planning process of the 110+ acres bordering them and the proposed project, a luxury that my subdivision wasn't afforded. Secondly, speaking to transition, I was thrust into the zoning and comp plan battle of 2005 and 2006 that Eagle was going through in the western part of Eagle when I bought my lot to build the home I reside in today. The then proposed foothills developments and transitional planning were the major concerns of a large constituency of Eagle residents. Those voices were heard as new members of city government were elected to help "preserve Eagle". The process of transitional zoning again came to my back fence as the neighboring developers proposed a project that lacked, what I would call, transitional integrity. Let's face it, they wanted townhome/patiohome lots adjacent to 2 acre lots. As a compromise was reached between the city and the developers, I believe appropriate transition was achieved. Adjacent lots were at least 1 acre in size and then transitioned down to smaller lots to accommodate the developer's desired density and product type. The project before you provides appropriate and ample opportunity for the city to preserve that transition from the existing .8 acre lots in Sandy Springs through the 25+ acres of vacant ground to the North of the proposed project. I believe that the four parcel's owners have submitted letters to the city that speak to the effect that they know that they will need to appropriately plan their property to transition to their neighbors and even have preliminary conceptual drawings to support their belief. This point of knowing what would happen on the 110+ acres surrounding the proposed project was brought up numerous times at the open house meetings, especially at the November 5th meeting. I believe the neighbors would like to hear form the council regarding a concept of what the council would support, or require, develop on the transitional property. Thirdly, both personally and professionally, I have been involved in many public meetings regarding future developments of all sizes and types. I have seen shouting matches and blatant stubbornness, to cooperation and the incorporation of constituent ideas. It is my opinion that the Eisenberg Company and Fred Meyer have gone beyond what is required of them by code in listening to the neighbors and involving the community. I believe the neighbors have been heard and that the project has been modified appropriately to reflect concerns presented. There sometimes comes a point in the discussion process that all parties have to "agree to disagree" and that's why we have this process we are involved in currently. In conclusion, I don't envy the position that a city council member has when it comes to decisions that have tremendous passion involved on either side of an issue. I understand that you have to weigh personal opinions with feedback from those in attendance as well as what you believe is best for the masses not in attendance. At the same time, I believe you know that your decision comes down to what is best for Eagle. I encourage you to support this development as I believe that this project is truly first class and represents what Eagle is and aspires to be. From its elevations and landscaping to the developer's willingness to improve the road systems, I suggest this project is the best of its type in Eagle. This project will provide much needed jobs to our community in these tough economic times when others are laying off employees. I believe that the Eagle Island Marketplace not only preserves Eagle's way of life, it sets a standard for future projects within the city. Thank you for your listening ear, careful thought, and discernment. Kind regards, Ben Kneadler 3398 W. Fieno Dr. Eagle, ID 83616 EAGLE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SUBJECT: CU -04-08 — Retail and Wholesale area for Landscape Products for Idaho Concrete Company December 9, 2008 TESTIFY PRO/ CON or NAME ADDRESS YES/NO NEUTRAL /4,6 ,6 >/1 %1:�� Z� /C4_ ,� C /t/ ) 7c) EAGLE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SUBJECT: CU -04-08 — Retail and Wholesale area for Landscape Products for Idaho Concrete Company December 9, 2008