Minutes - 2002 - City Council - 09/30/2002 - Special oinGINAL
CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION/DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Special Meeting Minutes
September 30,2002
1. CALL TO ORDER: Meeting called to order at 6:05 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL: Council: Present: Merrill, Sedlacek, Guerber. Absent: Bastian
Design Review Board: Present: Murray, McCullough, Barnes, Christensen,
Paulson, Stanger, Floegel.
Planning & Zoning Compassion: Present: Nordstrom, Bloom, Cadwell, Crook.
Absent: Franden
Introductions are made.
3. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
A. Review of how a one story home is evaluated by the Building Official.
Mike Mongelli reviews the City's interpretation of a one story residential structure.
General discussion regarding the definition of living space, height of single and two story
homes.
B. Discussion on Arborists. (Design Review)
Murray states that the Board is quite pleased with the recent arborist reports submitted by
Linda Jarsky. The reports are very thorough. Discussion. Merrill is concerned with the
reports submitted by Ms. Jarsky, and explains her reasoning. She does not feel that the
mature trees should be removed, some existing trees have sentimental value. Barnes
states she likes receiving arborist reports from different individuals, as each bring
different backgrounds to their review of the site. Stanger notes that the arborist reports
are usually used as tools to aid in the decision being made by the Board. Merrill
comments on the liability issue the City made encounter if the arborist's report state a tree
should be removed and the City determines it should stay in and if falls injuring someone.
Discussion. Linda Jarsky states that she attempts to provide the Board with as much
information as she can so they can make an informed decision. She states there are many
ways to assign value. Discussion.
C. Discussion regarding landscape berms. (Planning &Zoning)
Cheryl Bloom lists a number of subdivisions which she has visited and feels that the site
specific conditions of approval have not been met. She states that the developer of
Oakley Estates has not done what he stated he would do when he addressed Council.
Bloom comments on The Colony, Spyglass,Big Horn, the Kings shopping center and
other subdivisions she feels are in need code enforcement regarding their landscaping
conditions. Bloom states that staff has not done follow up on the complaints that she and
others have filed on various sites. She feels there is no follow up and no enforcement for
these alleged violations. She inquires if there is a lack of procedure on staffs part or is it a
lack of desire for the City to expend additional funds for code enforcement? Bloom is
willing to go and bring some of theses things up to speed, and help with code
enforcement, by evaluating the sites and writing letters. Sedlacek explains some of the
challenges with code enforcement. Guerber comments on staff work load and budget
Page I
KACOUNCIL MINUTES\Tenpomy Minutes Work Area\CC-09-30-02sprondoc
constraints. There have been numerous discussions at the Council level regarding code
enforcement. Discussion. Merrill feels that if Bloom is willing to review the files for site
specific conditions of approval, visit the site, and write a letter for staff to review the City
should utilize her expertise. Vaughan addresses recent staff actions and staffs procedure
regarding code enforcement. He states that a code amendment instigating fines for non-
complying signs that will be going to Planning and Zoning in October for action.
Ransom Bailey, City Attorney, comments on the prudent way to seek compliance from
those violating conditions of approval. Discussion.
D. Discussion on how to improve the working relationship with Ada County
Development Services. (Planning & Zoning)
This item will be addressed later during the meeting.
*E. Report on the Visionary Committee. (WEV &JM)
This committee is comprised of members of Chamber of Commerce, City Staff, Design
Review Board, and local business that are attempting to address issues brought up
through the survey that the Chamber sent out. Vaughan relays the results of recent
meetings.
*F. Discussion regarding lot sizes vs. home sizes—specifically setbacks and
reduction of lot size in PUD's. (NM)
*G. Discussion regarding possibly requiring subdivisions over a certain number of
lots to apply for a PUD. (NM)
Mayor Yzaguirre introduces items F. &G. and gives the floor to Council member Merrill.
Merrill briefly touches on both topics. General discussion regarding density, lot size, and
the Comprehensive Plan. Guerber states that there have been proposed changes to the
Comprehensive Plan and amazingly everything they have planned on is right here (in the
Comprehensive Plan), and there has to be a very good reason for the City to revise it.
Crook states that he does not feel that the Plan needs to change to allow higher density so
lower income people would have a place to live in Eagle. Sedlacek comments that there
is mixed use zoning with 20 unites per acre, and some higher density of R-3 zoning
which provide different development options. Guerber states that there are people
starting to look at these higher density options, for apartments and other things to fill the
downtown core area. Development has been geared towards the larger lots and bigger
houses as the market has driven it there, but the market is shifting and other things are
being now being examined. The City has built this versatility into the Comprehensive
Plan.
General discussion.
Item 3D is now addressed.
Page 2
K:000NCILN INUT65\Temporary Minutes Work As a CC-09-30-02aprniadoc
Discussion on how to improve the working relationship with Ada County
Development Services. (Planning &Zoning)
Bloom comments on a recent Ada County transmittal at which neither the applicant or the
applicant's representative were present. The Commission felt that the application had
made no attempt to comply with Eagle's Comprehensive Plan, and they (the
Commission) were concerned that the application would be approved at the Ada County
level regardless of Eagle's action on the item. Discussion.
9. ADJOURNMENT:
Merrill moves to adjourn at 8:15 p.m.. Seconded by Sedlacek. ALL AYE: MOTION
CARRIES...
Hearing no further business, the Council meeting adjourned at 8:15 pm.
Respectfully submitted:
�0�, , ON EA C ,•��.
tea_V // .9€,4�- IO iyOR4>.
SHARO K. MOORE • _
CITY CLERK/TREASURER :* 3
t• a. SEALa •
"o
APPROVED: •'• `PT `• °�°o::•
, �. � ��
..:444/, _
RICK Y • ,
MAYOR
Page 3
KCCOUNCUM MUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\CC-09-30-02epntdoe