Findings - CC - 2015 - RZ-06-14/PP-08-14 - Predico Ep Subd/4 Lot/10.68 Acre Site BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION )
FOR A REZONE WITH A DEVELOPMENT )
AGREEMENT IN LIEU OF A PUD,AND )
PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PREDICO EP )
SUBDIVISION FOR EAGLE MF PARTNERS,LLC)
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER RZ-06-14 AND PP-08-14
The above-entitled rezone with development agreement in lieu of a PUD and preliminary plat applications
came before the Eagle City Council for their action on March 10, 2015, at which time public testimony
was taken and the public hearing was closed. The City Council, having heard and taken oral and written
testimony, and having duly considered the matter, makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law;
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. PROJECT SUMMARY:
Eagle M.F. Partners, LLC, represented by Doug Russell with the Land Group,Inc., is requesting a
rezone with development agreement from A (Agricultural), A-R (Agricultural-Residential) and R-
2-DA-P (Residential with a Development Agreement — PUD) to MU-DA (Mixed Use with a
Development Agreement in lieu of a PUD, including a height exception) and preliminary plat
approval for Predico EP Subdivision, a 4-lot (3 commercial, 1 residential [88 units]) subdivision.
The 10.68-acre site is generally located on the northeast corner of West State Street and SH-44.
B. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL:
A Neighborhood Meeting was held at Eagle City Hall at 6:00 PM, Wednesday, October 22, 2014,
in compliance with the application submittal requirement of Eagle City Code. The applications for
this item were received by the City of Eagle on October 30, 2014.
C. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice of Public Hearing on the applications for the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission were
published in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle
City Code on December 15, 2014. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners
within three-hundred feet(300-feet)of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on December 15, 2014. Requests for
agencies' reviews were transmitted on November 5, 2014, in accordance with the requirements of
the Eagle City Code. The site was posted in accordance with Eagle City Code on December 24,
2014.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in
accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City Code on
February 23, 2015. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners within three-
hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of Title 67,
Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on February 20, 2015. The site was posted in
accordance with the Eagle City Code on February 27, 2015.
Page 1 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccfdoc
D. HISTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS:N/A
E. COMPANION APPLICATIONS: All applications are inclusive herein.
F. APPLICANT' STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION OF THE REZONE:
See justification letter dated October 30, 2014 (attached to the staff report), provided by the
applicant's representative.
G. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT:
The applicant is requesting a development agreement to meet the intent of the Eagle
Comprehensive Plan, specifically the Mixed Use development section, and to ensure that the
property is developed in a manner that protects the public interest and assures a development that
meets the vision for this area as anticipated by the City of Eagle.
H. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS:
COMP PLAN ZONING LAND USE
DESIGNATION DESIGNATION
Existing Mixed Use A(Agricultural), A-R Vacant parcels
(Agricultural-Residential)and
R-2-DA-P(Residential with a
development agreement—
PUD)
Proposed Mixed Use MU-DA(Mixed Use with a Commercial(retail)and
development agreement) multi-family residential
subdivision
North of site Residential Two and R-2-DA-P(Residential with a Countryside Estates
Residential Four development agreement— Subdivision and agriculture
PUD)and A(Agricultural)
South of site Business Park PS-DA (Public/Semipublic Eagle Sewer District
with a development headworks,ACHD Park
agreement) and Ride, and SH-44
East of site Residential Two A (Agricultural) Agriculture
West of site Residential Two R-2-DA-P(Residential with a Countryside Estates
development agreement— Subdivision
PUD)
DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT:
Not located within the DDA, TDA, CEDA, or DSDA.
J. SITE DATA:
Total Acreage of Site— 10.68-acres
Total Number of Lots-4
Page 2 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccfdoc
Residential— 1 (88-units, 7.85-acres)
Commercial—3 (2.83-acres)
Industrial—0
Common—0
Total Number of Units- 88
Single-family—0
Duplex—0
Multi-family—88
Total Acreage of Any Out-Parcels-0
Additional Site Data Proposed Required
Dwelling Units Per Gross Acre 11.2-dwelling units per acre 10-dwelling units per acre
(density calculation based (maximum)
upon the residential area
only: 88-units/7.85-acres =
11.2)
Minimum Lot Size 34,334-square feet 5,000-square feet
(minimum)
Minimum Lot Width 130-feet 50-feet
Minimum Street Frontage 262-feet 0-feet
Total Acreage of Common Area 2.93-acres* 1.33-acres(minimum)
Open Space
Percent of Site as Common Area 39.7%* 20%
Open Space Except that,according to ECC
Section 9-3-8(C)the City may
require additional public and/or
private park or open space facilities
in PUDs or in subdivisions with 50
or more lots.
* The residential area is proposed as a multi-family project to be owned and maintained by a single owner. The
required buffer areas, clubhouse/pool, and playground are not located within separate common lots,however,the area
associated with the aforementioned uses exceed the area that is typically required as open space pursuant to Eagle City
Code.
K. GENERAL SITE DESIGN FEATURES:
Landscape Screening:
The applicant is proposing two (2) landscape buffers to be located within the residential area(Lot
1, Block 1). A 50-foot wide landscape buffer is proposed to be located adjacent to West State
Street and a 75-foot wide landscape buffer is proposed to be located adjacent to SH-44.
Open Space:
A minimum of 18% open space is required pursuant to Eagle City Code Section 9-3-8. Although
the applicant is not proposing separate common lots for the required landscaped berms,
clubhouse/pool, and playground areas the area associated with these uses exceeds the area
typically required for open space.
Commercial Area:
Page 3 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccf.doc
The Concept Plan, date stamped by the City on December 11, 2014, shows a commercial area
containing three (3) retail buildings totaling 18,300-square feet of area. The retail buildings are
proposed to be located within separate lots. The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on
October 30, 2014, indicates a total of 77-parking spaces are being provided based on a parking
ratio of one(1)space per 250-square feet of floor area.
Storm Drainage and Flood Control:
Specific drainage system plans are to be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval
prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat. The plans are to show how swales, or drain piping,
will be developed in the drainage easements. Also, the CC&R's are to contain clauses to be
reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney, requiring that lots be so graded
that all runoff runs either over the curb, or to the drainage easement, and that no runoff shall cross
any lot line onto another lot except within a drainage easement.
Utility and Drainage Easements, and Underground Utilities:
Eagle City Code Section 9-3-6 requires utility easements to be not less than 12-feet wide. All
utilities including power are required to be placed underground.
Fire Hydrants and Water Mains:
The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, shows seven (7) fire hydrants
located within the subdivision. The hydrants should be installed and approved as required by the
Eagle Fire Department. The proposed development is located within the United Water of Idaho
water service area.
On-site Septic System(yes or no)—No
Preservation of Existing Natural Features:
Eagle City Code Section 9-3-8 (B) states that existing natural features which add value to
residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees,
watercourses, historic spots and similar irreplaceable assets) shall be preserved in the design of the
subdivision.
Preservation of Existing Historical Assets:
Staff is not aware of any existing historical assets on the site. If any historical artifacts are
discovered during excavation or development of the site, state law requires immediate notification
to the state.
L. STREET DESIGN:
Public Streets:No new public streets are proposed.
Drive Aisles:
The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, shows the commercial and
residential lots to be provided access by drive aisles connected to West State Street. The drive
aisles are shown to be 26-feet in width.
Blocks Less Than 500':None
Cul-de-sac Design:No cul-de-sacs are proposed.
Sidewalks:
The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, show attached sidewalks
located adjacent to the drive aisles and parking areas throughout the development.
Page 4 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc
Lighting:
Lighting for the proposed public streets is required. Location and lighting specifications
incorporating a "Dark Sky" style of lighting shall be provided to the City Zoning Administrator
prior to the submittal of the final plat. Any modifications made to the lighting shall be completed
before the final plat approval.
Street Names:
Street name approval by the Ada County Street Name Committee has not been received to date.
Approval from that committee is required prior to the City Clerk signing the final plat.
M. ON AND OFF-SITE PEDESTRIANBICYCLE CIRCULATION:
Pedestrian Walkways/Pathways: See comments under"Sidewalks"above.
Bike Paths:
Eagle City Code section 9-4-1-7 states that a bicycle pathway shall be provided in all subdivisions
as part of the public right-of-way or separate easement, as may be specified by the City Council.
N. PUBLIC USES PROPOSED:None proposed
O. PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUISITIONS MAP:No map currently exists
P. AVAILABILITY AND ADEQUACY OF UTILITIES AND SERVICES:
Q. SPECIAL ON-SITE FEATURES:
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern—None
Evidence of Erosion—No
Fish Habitat—No
Floodplain—No
Mature Trees — Yes — Black Locust trees located adjacent to the southern property line in
proximity to the Ballantyne Lane right-of-way to be vacated.
Riparian Vegetation—No
Steep Slopes—No
Stream/Creek—No
Unique Animal Life—Unknown
Unique Plant Life—Unknown
Unstable Soils—Unknown
Wildlife Habitat-Unknown
R. SUMMARY OF REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLAN:Not required
S. AGENCY RESPONSES:
The following agencies have responded and their correspondence is attached to the staff report.
Comments,which appear to be of special concern, are noted below:
City Engineer: All comments within the Engineer's letters dated, December 23, 2014, are of
special concern (attached to the staff report).
Ada County Highway District
Central District Health
COMPASS (Community Planning Association)
Eagle Fire Department
Idaho Transportation Department
Republic Services
Page 5 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccfdoc
Tesoro Logistics NW Pipeline
T. LETTERS FROM THE PUBLIC:
Email correspondence received from Cindy Bahora, dated December 28, 2014 (attached to the
staff report).
U. PROPOSED TIME SCHEDULE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE:
The applicant is proposing to develop the site in a single phase.
V. EAGLE CITY CODE FINDINGS FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
1. That the proposed PUD is in the public interest, advances the general welfare of the
community and neighborhood, and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the
community.
2. That the development be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious
and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity
and how such use will not change the essential character of the same area.
3. That the development will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighborhood
uses.
4. That the development does not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment, and/or
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare
by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
5. That the development will be served adequately by essential public facilities such as highways,
streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer, and
schools.
6. That the development will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for
public facilities and services.
7. That the development is provided with parks, ponds, open areas, areas of special interest,
floodplain preservation, and/or other special features which would not typically be provided in
a non-PUD proposal.
8. That the vehicular approaches to the property are designed to not create an interference with
traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares.
9. That the development will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic or
historic feature of major importance.
10. That the proposed development will be harmonious with and in accordance with the general
objectives or with any specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan.
11. That the proposed development will be harmonious with and in accordance with the general
objectives or with any specific objective of Eagle City Code Title 8.
12. That the benefits, combination of various land uses, and interrelationship with the surrounding
area for this proposed development justifies any proposed deviation from any standard district
regulations.
In case of large-scale PUDs (incorporating fifty(50) or more lots or dwelling units):
Page 6 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccfdoc
13. That public services shall be provided to the development including, but not limited to, fire
protection, police protection, central water, central sewer, road construction, parks and open
space, recreation, maintenance, schools and solid waste collection.
14. That an estimate of the public service costs to provide adequate service to the development has
been provided by the developer.
15. That an estimate of the tax revenue that will be generated from the development has been
provided by the developer.
16. That suggested public (or private) means of financing the services for the development if the
cost for the public services would not be offset by the tax revenue received from the
development has been provided by the developer.
For a request of up to 10%of the gross land area to be directed to uses other than residential
(i.e.; commercial, industrial,public and quasi public uses that are not allowed in the land use
district):
17. That the uses are appropriate with the residential uses.
18. That the uses will serve principally the residents of the PUD.
19. That the uses are planned to be an integral part of the PUD.
20. That the uses located and designed to provide direct access to a collector or arterial street.
21. That the proposed street connections will not create congestion or traffic hazards.
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS, WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN
REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL:
6.3 Land Use Designations
The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map (adopted February 7, 2011), designates this site as the
following:
Mixed Use
Suitable primarily for a variety of uses such as limited office, limited commercial, and residential
developments. Uses should complement uses within Downtown Eagle. Development within this
land use designation should be required to proceed through the PUD and/or Development
Agreement process, see specific planning area text for a complete description. An allowable
density of up to 10 units per 1 acre.
Scenic Corridor
An Overlay designation that is intended to provide significant setbacks from major corridors and
natural features through the city. These areas may require berming, enhanced landscaping,
detached meandering pathways and appropriate signage controls.
6.6 Land Use Implementation Strategies
T. Encourage development of high density residential units of up to 10 dwelling units per
acre in the vicinity of the existing intersections of State Highway 44 and Ballantyne Lane
and State Highway 44 and State Street if the intersections are eliminated and a new
intersection is constructed approximately 800—feet west of the existing State Highway
44/Ballantyne Lane intersection. If the relocation of the intersections occurs, then the
Page 7 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc
mixed use area shown along the north side of State Highway 44 from Van Engelen Estates
to the Mixed Use area's west boundary may be developed with uses which the City will
rezone and control through the use of Development Agreements. High density residential
units of up to 10 dwelling units per acre will be encouraged in this area. However, if the
existing intersection modifications outlined above are not completed, the Mixed Use area
referenced above shall be developed as residential with densities of up to a maximum of
two dwelling units per acre.
B. ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
THIS PROPOSAL:
• Eagle City Code, Section 8-1-2 defines Dwelling,Multi-Family as:
A dwelling consisting of three (3) or more dwelling units including townhouses and
condominiums with varying arrangements of entrances and party walls. Multi-family
housing may include public housing.
• Eagle City Code, Section 8-1-2 defines Easement as:
Authorization by a property owner for the use by another, and for a specified purpose, of
any designated part of his property.
• Eagle City Code, Section 8-2-1 Districts Established Purposes And Restrictions:
The following zoning districts are hereby established. For the interpretation of this title the
zoning districts have been formulated to realize the general purposes as set forth in this
title. In addition,the specific purpose of each zoning district shall be as follows:
MU MIXED USE DISTRICT: To provide for a variety and mixture of uses such as
limited office, limited commercial, and residential. This district is intended to ensure
compatibility of new development with existing and future development. It is also
intended to ensure assemblage of properties in a unified plan with coordinated and
harmonious development which shall promote outstanding design without unsightly and
unsafe strip commercial development. Uses should complement the uses allowed within
the CBD zoning district. All development requiring a conditional use permit in the
MU zoning district, as shown in section 8-2-3 of this chapter, shall occur under the
PUD and/or development agreement process in accordance with chapter 6 or 10 of
this title unless the proposed development does not meet the area requirements as set forth
in section 8-6-5-1 of this title. In that case a cooperative development, in conjunction with
adjacent parcels (to meet the minimum area requirements), shall be encouraged. Otherwise
a conditional use permit shall be required unless the proposed use is shown as a permitted
use in the MU zoning district within section 8-2-3 of this chapter. Residential densities
shall not exceed twenty (20) dwelling units per gross acre. When a property is being
proposed for rezone to the MU zoning district a development agreement may be utilized in
lieu of the PUD and/or conditional use process if approved by the city council provided
the development agreement includes conditions of development that are required during
the PUD and conditional use process.
• Eagle City Code, Section 8-2-3 Schedule of District Use Regulations:
Residential dwellings are allowed by Conditional Use within the MU (Mixed Use) zoning
designation.
Page 8 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc
• Eagle City Code, Section 8-2-4 Schedule of Building Height and Lot Area Regulations for the
MU(Mixed Use)zone:
Zoning Maximum Front Rear Interior Street Maximum Minimum Minimum
District Height Side Side Lot Lot Area Lot
Covered (Acres Or Sq. Width I*
Ft.)G And
H*
MU 35' 20' 20' 7.5' 20' 50% 5,000 50'
• Eagle City Code, Section 8-2A-7(J)Buffer Areas/Common Lots:
4. Major Roadways: New residential developments, including, but not limited to, subdivisions
and multi-family developments, shall be buffered from streets classified as collectors,
arterials, freeways, or expressways, to protect residential communities from noisy,
potentially dangerous, high speed roads. The "buffer area" shall be defined as a common
lot located between the residential lots within the subdivision and the right of way line of
the adjacent roadway. This buffer is required as part of the common area open space
owned and maintained by a homeowners' association. Any landscaping proposed to be
within the public right of way shall not be included as a part of the buffer area required
below. The height for berming/fencing, as noted below, shall be measured from the
elevation of the final grade of the adjacent roadway(measured at the centerline)to the top
of the proposed berming/fencing. The required buffer area width, plantings, and fencing
are as follows:
b. Any road designated as a minor arterial on the transportation and pathway network
plan in the Eagle comprehensive plan:
A minimum of fifty feet (50') wide buffer area (not including right of way) shall be
provided with the following plants per one hundred (100) linear feet of right of way:
five (5) shade trees, eight (8) evergreen trees, three (3) flowering/ornamental trees,
and twenty four(24) shrubs. Each required shade tree may be substituted with two (2)
flowering/ornamental trees, provided that not more than fifty percent (50%) of the
shade trees are substituted.
A minimum five foot (5') high, maximum eight foot (8') high, berm, decorative block
wall, cultured stone, decorative rock, or similarly designed concrete wall, or
combination thereof shall be provided within the buffer area. The maximum slope for
any berm shall be three feet(3')horizontal distance to one foot(1')vertical distance. If
a decorative block wall, cultured stone, decorative rock, or similarly designed concrete
wall is to be provided, in combination with the berm, a four foot (4') wide flat area
shall be provided for the placement of the decorative wall. Chainlink, cedar, and
similar high maintenance and/or unsightly fencing shall not be permitted.
c. Any road designated as a principal arterial on the transportation and pathway network
plan in the Eagle comprehensive plan:
Page 9 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc
A minimum of seventy five feet (75') wide buffer area (not including right of way)
shall be provided with the following plants per one hundred (100) linear feet of right
of way: six (6) shade trees, ten (10) evergreen trees, four (4) flowering/ornamental
trees, and twenty four (24) shrubs. Each required shade tree may be substituted with
two (2) flowering/ornamental trees, provided that not more than fifty percent(50%) of
the shade trees are substituted.
A minimum ten foot (10') high, maximum twelve foot (12') high, berm, decorative
block wall, cultured stone, decorative rock, or similarly designed concrete wall, or
combination thereof shall be provided within the buffer area. The maximum slope for
any berm shall be three feet(3')horizontal distance to one foot(1')vertical distance. If
a decorative block wall, cultured stone, decorative rock, or similarly designed concrete
wall is to be provided, in combination with the berm, a four foot (4') wide flat area
shall be provided for the placement of the decorative wall. Chainlink, cedar, and
similar high maintenance and/or unsightly fencing shall not be permitted.
• Eagle City Code, Section 8-3-3 Supplemental Yard and Height Regulations:
C. Yards In Multi-Family Dwellings: Multi-family dwellings shall be considered as one
building for the purpose of determining front, side and rear yard requirements. The entire
group as a unit shall require one front, one rear and two (2) side yards as specified for
dwellings in the appropriate district.
D. Side And Rear Yards For Nonresidential Uses Abutting Residential Districts:
Nonresidential buildings or uses shall not be located nor conducted closer than forty feet
(40') to any lot line of a residential district; except that the minimum yard requirements
may be reduced to fifty percent (50%) of the requirement if acceptable landscaping or
screening approved by the council is provided. Such screening shall be a masonry or solid
fence between four(4) and eight feet(8') in height, maintained in good condition and free
of all advertising or other signs. Landscaping provided in lieu of such wall or fence shall
consist of a strip of land not less than twenty feet(20') in width planted with an evergreen
hedge or dense planting of evergreen shrubs not less than four feet (4') in height at the
time of planting.
C. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
THIS PROPOSAL:
• Eagle City Code Section 9-3-7: Planting Strips and Reserve Strips:
Planting strips and reserve strips shall conform to the following standards:
A. Planting Strips/Buffer Areas: Planting strips/buffer areas shall be required to be placed
next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to
screen the view from residential properties and to provide noise mitigation for those
residents. Such planting strips/buffer areas shall be a minimum of twenty feet (20') wide
unless a greater width is required within section 8-2A-7 of this code. The landscape
strip/buffer area shall not be a part of the normal street right of way and shall comply with
all landscape/buffer area requirements within section 8-2A-7 of this code.
• Eagle City Code, Section 9-3-6: Easements:
A. Unobstructed utility easements shall be provided along front lot lines,rear lot lines and
side lot lines. Total easement width shall not be less than twelve feet(12'), except that
lesser easement widths,to coincide with respective setbacks, may be considered as part of
Page 10 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc
the planned unit development.
B. Unobstructed drainageway easements shall be provided in conjunction with the utility
easement along side lot lines or as required by the city council. Total easement width,
including the utility easement, shall not be less than twelve feet(12'), except that lesser
easement widths,to coincide with respective setbacks, may be considered as part of the
planned unit development.
• Eagle City Code, Section 9-3-8: Public Sites and Open Spaces:
D. Common Area Open Space: The minimum percentage of the gross area that must be set
aside for common area open space in new subdivisions shall be as follows:
Zoning District Open Space
MU(with residential uses) 18 percent
• Eagle City Code, Section 9-4-1-9: Water Supply and Sewer Systems:
C. Pressurized Irrigation Facilities:
1. All residential dwelling units shall be provided with a pressurized irrigation system to
be served with irrigation water unless a waiver, as outlined herein, is approved by the
city council.
2. The requirement for installation of a pressurized irrigation system may be waived by
the city council when the applicant has established that any of the following situations
exist(the sale or transfer of an existing water right shall not be grounds for requesting
a waiver pursuant to this provision):
a. Where a sufficient surface irrigation water right does not exist for the property. The
lack of surface irrigation water right shall be documented in writing by the
appropriate irrigation district or canal company and the department of water
resources and shall be submitted with the subdivision preliminary plat. In this case
a waiver shall only be granted for that portion of the subdivision that cannot be
served.
b. Where an existing surface water right cannot be delivered to the property by an
irrigation district or canal company due to current delivery capacity or scheduling.
In these situations the city council may still require the installation of the pressure
irrigation system, provided water rights can be made available to the property and
delivery system modifications can be made so irrigation water can be supplied
within two(2)years.
c. Where the applicant has provided for another means of delivery such as flood
irrigation, if approved by the city engineer. The applicant shall present the
proposed alternative delivery system to the city engineer at the time the waiver is
requested.
d. That due to the specific circumstances surrounding a new subdivision, the cost of
obtaining water rights, reestablishing water rights or developing the system would
impose an undue economic hardship on the developer. For purposes of this
section, an undue economic hardship shall consist of a showing that the cost per
lot to develop the pressurized irrigation system would be twenty five percent
Page 11 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc
(25%) higher than the cost per lot for providing a pressurized irrigation system to
subdivisions of similar size and density constructed in the city within the previous
two (2) years; or the cost per lot of the pressurized irrigation system would exceed
five percent(5%)of the expected per lot market value of the subdivision.
The developer shall bear the burden of providing documentation, acceptable to the
city engineer and city council, demonstrating and supporting the estimated costs
of construction of the pressurized irrigation system, and the cost per lot for
irrigation systems in those subdivisions built in the last two (2) years as noted
above, and the expected market value of the subdivision lots. For phased
developments, costs will be analyzed over all phases of the development rather
than the first phase only.
3. Should installation of a pressurized irrigation system be waived by the city engineer,
as outlined herein, compliance to Idaho Code 31-3805 is still required.
4. Requests for waivers shall be submitted to the city with the preliminary plat
application and shall be accompanied by an irrigation report,prepared by a licensed
Idaho registered professional engineer, stating the location and availability of surface
irrigation water and documenting the basis for the waiver request. If applicable,the
irrigation report shall be accompanied by a letter from the irrigation district or canal
company stating that water rights and/or a delivery system are not available to the
property.
D. DISCUSSION:
• The Eagle Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the property as Mixed Use and
Scenic Corridor. The Land Use Implementation Strategies within the Land Use chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan encourages development of high density residential units (up to 10
dwelling units per acre) to be located within the subject property. The applicant has submitted
a rezone and preliminary plat applications for Predico EP Subdivision, which consists of
10.68-acres. The applicant is proposing a four (4) lot (3-commercial, 1-residential [88 units])
subdivision. The applicant is proposing six (6) multi-family dwelling units which will contain
88-dwelling units and a club house. The proposed density of the development is 8.2-dwelling
units per acre (density calculation based upon the entire area of the 10.68-acre site: 88-
units/10.68-acres = 8.2).
Multi-family dwellings require a conditional use permit within the MU (Mixed Use) zoning
designation. Developments requiring a conditional use permit in the MU zoning district, as
shown in section 8-2-3 of this chapter, shall occur under the PUD and/or development
agreement process in accordance with chapter 6 or 10 of Eagle City Code. The applicant is
proposing a development agreement in lieu of a planned unit development (PUD) for this
development; therefore the findings and conditions usually found within a conditional use
permit will be placed within the rezone findings and associated development agreement.
• The applicant is requesting a height exception to allow the buildings to be a maximum of
38'7" in height to maintain a cohesive building to roof massing scale. The applicant has
indicated within the provided narrative, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014,that the
height exception will allow an "open" site plan with up to 50% of the site being committed to
landscaping. The narrative also indicates that Building A (shown on the building elevations,
date stamped by the City on December 11, 2014) has two (2)variations (Al and A2) in which
portions of the building have dropped the third floor to mitigate height concerns adjacent to
Countryside Estates. The proposed building height of the multi-family structures (as identified
Page 12 of 18
K\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccfdoc
on the Concept Plan) should not exceed 39-feet in height. Building `B" (as shown on the
Concept Plan) should be constructed utilizing building elevation Al.
• The applicant has requested a waiver from the requirement to provide pressurized irrigation.
The pressurized irrigation waiver request, date stamped by the City on December 12, 2014,
indicated that although the property has irrigation water rights (currently being utilized by
Countryside Estates Subdivision) there is no delivery point for irrigation water due to the
construction of the West State Street realignment. The applicant is currently working with the
Countryside Estates Subdivision homeowner's association and New Dry Creek in an effort to
provide irrigation to the site. However, if an agreement cannot be reached the applicant plans
to utilize potable water for irrigation needs if a waiver is approved.
• The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, shows three (3)
ingress/egress drive aisle access points to West State Street. The drive aisles are not located
within a common lot(s) and there is not a plat note identifying cross access between the
individual lots. The applicant should provide a revised preliminary plat with a new plat note
indicating that each lot owner and/or resident within the subdivision should have the perpetual
right of ingress and egress over the described common access drive aisles and that the
perpetual easement should run with the land.
• The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, identifies an existing 50-
foot wide right-of-way to be vacated. The applicant has submitted an application to ACHD
requesting a vacation of the abandoned portion of North Ballantyne Lane. Also, the applicant
has indicated within the provided narrative, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014,
that water service for domestic and fire protection will be provided by Untied Water via a
connection to the existing main located within the abandon ACHD right-of-way. The
preliminary plat does not show an easement associated with the United Water existing water
main. The applicant should provide documentation from ACRD indicating the portion of
existing right-of-way associated with North Ballantyne Lane shown on the preliminary plat to
be vacated as being vacated prior to submittal of a final plat application. The applicant should
provide a revised preliminary plat delineating a United Water service line easement within the
area identified on the preliminary plat as existing R/W (to be vacated) prior to submittal of a
final plat application.
• The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, does not delineate nor
reference the locations of public utility, drainage, or irrigation easements. Pursuant to Eagle
City Code Section 9-3-8, unobstructed utility and drainage easements a minimum of 12-feet in
width are to be provided located adjacent to front, rear, and side lot lines. The applicant is
proposing three (3) commercial lots and one (1) residential lot for multi-family dwelling units.
The preliminary plat conceptual improvement plan, date stamped by the City on October 30,
2014, shows the proposed utility lines located within the drive aisles and parking areas. The
applicant should provide a revised preliminary plat delineating a minimum 12-foot wide
public utility, drainage, and irrigation easement located adjacent to the subdivision perimeter
boundary. The preliminary plat should also delineate or note a public utility, drainage, and
irrigation easement located within the drive aisles and parking areas. The preliminary plat
should be provided prior to submittal of a final plat application.
• Republic Services (solid waste service provider) provided email correspondence that indicated
a concern with the proposed locations and sizes of trash enclosures. The applicant should work
with Republic Services in regard to locations and sizing of the trash enclosures. The applicant
should provide documentation from Republic Services approving the locations and sizing of
the trash enclosures prior to the issuance of a Zoning Certificate
Page 13 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc
STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
Based upon the information provided to date, staff recommends approval of the requested rezone with
development agreement in lieu of a PUD and preliminary plat with conditions of approval as provided
within the staff report.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COMMISSION:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the Planning and Zoning Commission on January
5, 2015, at which time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Commission made
their recommendation at that time.
B. Oral testimony in favor of the application was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission by
no one (not including the applicant/representative).
C. Oral testimony in opposition to the application was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission
by thirteen(13) individuals who expressed the following concerns:
• Whether or not the fire department has proper equipment to handle a fire within three (3) story
structures?
• Public safety concerns due to large complexes attract criminal activity such as vandalism, drug
activity, vehicle thefts, etc.
• Traffic impacts, safety concerns, and noise.
• Overcrowding of schools in the area.
• The proposed height of 38'7"for the multi-family buildings is too high.
• The proposed density is too high based on the area associated with the multi-family residential
units.
• The proposal does not meet Eagle's vision and there may be better uses for the site.
• When the property was considered during a previous comprehensive plan amendment in 2000
high density was never discussed.
• The proposed multi-family project is not compatible with the surrounding area.
• The property values of the surrounding area may diminish due to the proximity of the multi-family
residential units.
• The locations of two(2)of the proposed access points are located on a curve.
• The third story of the multi-family residential units should be removed to reduce the height of the
buildings.
• Since the units are proposed to be rented or leased the residents will not take pride in ownership.
• The development needs an area for children to play safely.
COMMISSION DELIBERATION:
Upon closing the public hearing,the Commission discussed during deliberation that:
• Although the comprehensive plan indicates high density residential is encouraged in this area the
plan does not address providing a transition to adjacent development.
• The school district needs to address growth issues.
• The proposed development is not compatible with adjacent development.
• The proposed access points located at the curve of West State Street are a concern.
• The applicant has not addressed child safety concerns due to the proximity of SH-44 and West
State Street.
• The developer needs to work with the surrounding neighbors to address their concerns.
Page 14 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc
• The applicant did not indicate why there is a need for multi-family development in this area.
• The proposed height of 38'7" is too high and is not compatible with the surrounding development.
• Based on the proposal the Commission is concerned with neighbor opposition to the proposal.
COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING THE REZONE WITH DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT IN LIEU OF A PUD:
The Commission voted 5 to 0 to recommend denial of RZ-06-14 for a rezone with development agreement
in lieu of a PUD for Eagle M.F. Partners, LLC, as provided within their findings of fact and conclusions of
law document, dated January 20, 2015.
COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT:
The Commission voted 5 to 0 to recommend denial of PP-08-14 for a preliminary plat for Predico EP
Subdivision for Eagle M. F. Partners, LLC, as provided within their findings of fact and conclusions of
law, dated January 20, 2015.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the City Council on March 10, 2015, at which
time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Council made their decision at that
time.
B. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one (other than the
applicant/representative).
C. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by 21 individuals who
expressed the following concerns:
• The proposed multi-family project is not compatible with the surrounding area and is not
consistent with the semi-rural lifestyle enjoyed by the citizens of Eagle.
• The proposal does not meet Eagle's vision and there may be better uses for the site. There is no
benefit to the community by allowing multi-family units at this location.
• The property values of the surrounding area may diminish due to the proximity of the multi-family
units.
• The proposed height of 38'7" for the multi-family buildings is too high; the buildings should not
exceed two-stories in height.
• This location is not appropriate for three-story structures since it is located on an entry corridor to
the community; the entry corridors are a showcase for Eagle, therefore, locating the project at this
location will disturb the rural atmosphere of the community.
• The proposed multi-family buildings are too bulky; the building design and proposed materials are
questionable and may devalue adjacent properties.
• Craftsman style architecture is not appropriate for three-story structures.
• The site plan doesn't show enough parking to ensure that sufficient parking will be provided.
• Due to the proximity to major roads the development needs an area for children to play safely; the
site needs to be fenced to provide safety for the children living within the development.
• There is not sufficient infrastructure to serve the proposed development(i.e. roads and schools).
• The proposed setbacks may not be in conformance with Eagle City Code.
• The elevations shown may not be the product that is built on the site.
Page 15 of 18
K.\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccfdoc
• Will the property be served by pressurized irrigation and if so does the developer have irrigation
rights and access to irrigation?
• Cost of potable water for irrigation.
• The proposed access driveway locations located at the curve on West State Street may be a hazard
to motorists traveling West State Street.
• One (1) of the driveway access points may cause traffic conflicts at the intersection of North
Ballantyne Lane and West State Street.
• The commercial area should not be utilized in the residential density calculation.
• When the property was considered during a previous comprehensive plan amendment in 2000
high density was never discussed; in 2000, during the original comprehensive plan map and text
amendment, apartments were not considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
• The proposed tot lots are not large enough.
• The adjacent corner of West State Street and SH-44 does not contain a sidewalk for crossing West
State Street or SH-44 to provide access to the greenbelt.
• The developer has not cooperated with the surrounding property owners.
• A work, live,play development would work well at this location.
• The Council should follow the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation.
COUNCIL DECISION REGARDING THE REZONE WITH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN
LIEU OF A PUD:
The Council voted 4 to 0 to deny RZ-06-14 for a rezone with a development agreement in lieu of a PUD
for Eagle M.F. Partners, LLC.*
COUNCIL DECISION REGARDING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT:
The Council voted 4 to 0 to deny PP-08-14 for a preliminary plat for Predico EP Subdivision for Eagle
M.F. Partners, LLC.*
* The Council discussed the following possible changes to the plan: limit buildings to two-stories in
height; reduce the density to not exceed 10-units per acre (density calculation to be based on the
residential area project site only); relocate the access points to the development away from the curve of
West State Street.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. A Neighborhood Meeting was held at Eagle City Hall at 6:00 PM, Wednesday, October 22, 2014, in
compliance with the application submittal requirement of Eagle City Code. The applications for this
item were received by the City of Eagle on October 30, 2014.
2. Notice of Public Hearing on the applications for the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission were
published in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
Code on December 15, 2014. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners within
three-hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of Title 67,
Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on December 15, 2014. Requests for agencies' reviews
were transmitted on November 5, 2014, in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
The site was posted in accordance with Eagle City Code on December 24,2014.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in accordance
with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City Code on February 23,
2015. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners within three-hundred feet (300-
feet) of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code
and Eagle City Code on February 20, 2015. The site was posted in accordance with the Eagle City
Code on February 27, 2015.
Page 16 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccfdoc
3. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed development agreement
(RZ-06-14) with regard to Eagle City Code Section 8-7-5 "Action by the Commission and Council",
and based upon the information provided concludes that the proposed rezone is not in accordance with
the City of Eagle Comprehensive Plan and established goals and objectives because:
a. The proposed MU-DA (Mixed Use with a Development Agreement) zoning district is not
compatible with the R-2-DA-P (Residential with a development agreement — PUD) and A
(Agricultural) zones and land uses to the north, west, and east since the proposed development
exceeds the density allowance identified in the Comprehensive Plan and since the designed layout
of the proposed multi-family portion of the site (including the proposed building heights) is too
intensive; and
4. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed development agreement
in lieu of a PUD, and based upon the information provided concludes that the proposed development is
not in accordance with the City of Eagle Comprehensive Plan and established goals and objectives
because:
a. Due to the bulk of the project and safety concerns for children living within the development and
the—possible burden to the schom the project is not in the public interest and will not
advance the general welfare of the community. • :, •- -:-: - - : -- _: • -. . -•-
._ • •• .._ . . . . . _ . . . ..- . . _ :: ._ • . .. -•- ; and
b. The proposed project will not be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing
character of the area since the proposed density is much higher than the adjacent developments
and the proposed height of the buildings will be approximately four feet (4') higher than what is
currently permitted within Eagle City Code and much higher than existing homes in the area. The
Comprehensive Plan identifies the site as being located within a Scenic Corridor which is an area
intended to provide significant setbacks from major corridors. The proposed height and size of the
buildings will negatively impact the corridor area in this location. The bulk/height of the project is
not appropriate at this location which is at the entry of the downtown core. The proposed location
is an "island" located within the Scenic Corridor and surrounded by SH-44, West State Street and
the ACHD Park and Ride causing a visual impact at this location due to the height and bulk of the
proposed buildings; and
c. The proposed project may be hazardous or disturbing to existing neighborhood uses due to the
proposed height of the multi-family buildings and the additional traffic created by the proposed
uses; and
d. The development will involve uses (commercial and multi-family residential) that will create
additional traffic conflicts in the area due to the striping of the turn-lane located at the intersection
of North Ballantyne Lane and West State Street; and
j. The proposed development is not in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan since the property is
located within an area identified as Scenic Corridor on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map,
which is an area intended to provide significant setbacks from major corridors and the proposed
height and size of the buildings will negatively impact the corridor area as stated in b. above; and
I. The benefits, combination of various land uses, and interrelationship with the surrounding area for
this proposed development does not justify any proposed deviation from any standard district
regulations because the proposed increased height of the multi-family residential buildings is not
justified since it will negatively impact the adjacent properties and will negatively impact the
Scenic Corridor area as stated in b. above. The height of the multi-family buildings would be
compatible at a height standard for two-story structures; and
Page 17 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc
5. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed preliminary plat(PP-08-
14) and based upon the information provided concludes that the proposed preliminary plat application
is not in accordance with the City of Eagle Title 9 (Subdivisions)because:
c. Will not be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in
appearance with the existing and intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will
change the essential character of the same area since the proposed bulk uses and density of the
development will not be compatible with the adjacent properties; and
e. Will net have vehicular approaches to the property that create interference with traffic on
surrounding public thoroughfares - •- . . _ ' -. .' -. . . : ::: , _. . --
Idaho Transportation Department and the Ada County Highway District. The proposed
development has a-sencer h two (2) of the proposed access points to be located at the inside
curve on West State Street. One(1) of the proposed access points may create traffic conflicts at the
intersection of West State Street and North Ballantyne Lane. The increased amount of traffic will
..-- . . -- .._ _. .._ .-; and
h. The health, safety and environmental problems that were brought to the Council's attention were
not adequately addressed by the applicant due to the proposed access points located at the curve of
West State Street, the safety of children residing within the development due to the proximity of
West State Street and SH-44, and the lack of a crosswalk at the intersection of West Sate Street
and SH-44.
DATED this 24th day of March, 2015
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
• da County, I ho
D Reynolds, a o#mes 01.-.........._f • Kr E •
OtS
ATTEST: � tr ,r, Q
alt -
•
,•, •'•. ...•', •':
-_ ....� Imo. •.....••' O'
.•'
Sharon K. Bergmann, Eagle Ci, Clerk
�'•#,,*.,•„ST'S; 0.
Regulatory Taking Notice: Applicant has the right, pursuant to section 67-8003, Idaho Code, to request a
regulatory taking analysis.
Reconsideration Notice: Applicant has the right, pursuant to Section 67-6535,Idaho Code,to request a
reconsideration within fourteen(14)days of the final written decision.
Page 18 of 18
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc