Loading...
Minutes - 1986 - City Council - 09/23/1986 - SpecialPage 33 EAGLE CITYCODNCIL~ETING September 23, 1986 The City Council met in special session at the Eagle Primary School, on Tuesday September 23, 1986, at 7:30 p.m. In Mayor Carol Haley's absence., President of Council, MAILE presiding. Boll call showed the following members present: ~ATr,E~ GUERBER, MATLOCK. Councilman MINOW' absent. MATT.F. d~clared that it was the time and the place for the r~bli¢ hearing regarding the Treasure Valley Mobile Home Park Develorm~nt. Public hearinq ope_ned at 7:35 p.m. MAILE asked for those in favor of the development to qive testimony. David Nelson, Engineer for the p~oject from B&A Engineering, I~rry Sundell, Sundell Architects, Carlyle Briggs also an Engineer from B&A and W.J. Renauld, the developer~ gave testimony. MAILE asked for testimony from those opposed to t-he development to give testimony. Those who gave testimony are as follows: 1. Barbara Horn-charged that the project would deplete w~lls, that it was poor judgement to change the comprehensive plan, ~d ask council tD oppose t-he project. 2. Richard Meyer-opposed density 3. Kathleen Fields-does not feel council is listening to the protestors, objects to the project, naming water, pollution, traffic and Density problems. 4. Cindy Finch-charges her investment & life style threatened. Requests the project be on central water and sewer. Expressed concerns about traffic flow. 5. A1 Pardew-requests storm drain designs included in project. 6. Carol Jensen-protestswater problems, high density, believes should beon central systems. Claims the people are. not bein9 considered. 7. Ted Persons-protesting water tables, states that co ~.uncil cannot make a mistake on this project as it will effect lives and property. 8. C~raldine Herrold-concerned about traffic and access problems. MATLE closed the public hearing at 8:25 p.m. (TJERBER rc~uested Renauld to explain the density. Renauld claims density to be an averaoe of 4.1 per acre, and averages out at approximately 3.75 for entire p~k. GUERBER declared that he would like to conraent on the charges that co%~lcil had '~made up tkeir minds" and that they "didn't care". He stated that it would be irresponsbile to declare prior to t_he public hearing that council had made up t~eir ~'~' '~ _~z.~.d~ ...... stated that he was quoted in the paper t_hat he had no oppesition. .At the tima he was q~ted, the proposal was of ~nexation that he had no oppesi+ion to the ~nnexation of land, and that if there were to ever be. development that that land would have to be annexed to the city. There could be no dccisions on develop- merit of. the land until this public hearing and tha[~ co,~ncil ha~ the san~ concerns as the people. Page 34 City Council Meeting 9/23/86 page 2 MATT~ as~d~he question if ~his application was PUD or CU ? Briggs advised that it was the request of council to apply for PUD. That they applied for both PUD/CU and that it was the recomnendation of Planning and Zoning that CU applied. Renauld declared that this was not a subdivision, as it is single ownership. MATLOCK requested a discussion regarding w~ter. That the report submitted states that the wells would have to be drilled under the Glenns Ferry formation .which is 400 ft. under. He ask~ for clarification. Ur. Briggs proposes to drill the well 500 to 600 ft. When they have water strata below ~_00 ft then they would develop those water stratas and seal a~ound the casing at 400 ft. up. which should. protect the wells in the area. He stated that they will be nonitoring through the Watar Resources Board, which meets at the end of October or early November. That the State would also m~nitor neighboring wells and if they are e~fected that they %ould have to change sites or drill deeper. GUERBER askedabout the storm drain system. Renauld stated that the highway deparh,~nt would work that out with them but they will not cause that much run- off, that the lake will catch the run off and that the gravel area will aid in that area. GUERBER asked .who owns: the streets? Renauld. st~.t~d that all streets are private. MAILE asked about the requirements from the highway departments. The statement was made that the highway departments do have conditions and that they ~.~11 comply with those conditions made later in the project. MAILE also inquired about the fences in the project. The intent is to have a cedar and block fence, 6 ft. high, around the project. MAILE inquired about landscaping and was advised that there would be 115 acres of grass but that landscaping would be done in steps. That that portion would take 3-4 years. All streets and gutters will be done in one phase. MAILE brought up covenants, as yet they are not finalized and will not be until people occupy the park in order for them to have a part in those covenants. GUERBER ask about the fire depar~nent. It was declared that the land will be donated but that part of the project would be up to the ~ire department to obtain a crant. ~TLOCKa~=kedabout the fire hydrants and what the spacing would be. Renauld stated that they would be a spacing of 500 ft. and that pressure would be set by the fire chief. He said he would be using no sidewalks but would have standard roll curb and gutter. MATLOCK inquired about sewer and asked Re~aauld to review that now. He advised that the pro.rossi of the sewer department was acceptable. ~ATIDCK inquired about the wells as to the requiren~nts of health departments. Mr. Briggs advised him that they check the water level and the sanitary (purity) of the water at state level. The residents of the park would be charged for Utility and 5"aintenance in a package deal with the rent. ~ir. Briggs also declared that there would ~ criteria set up by the fire detent_ ~.~nt as to how much water would be needed to fight a fire and the developer must meet that need. GUERBER asked what the proposal was as to how many wells would be in o~eration. Renauld. answered that there ~uid De 2 wells, but may have to drill more initially. MATlOCKaskedCi~v Attorney, Pat Riceci his concept of Conditional Use ~Ir. Riceci claims that it is his belief that this project is a subdivision as this is a develolm~nt, but i~ you agree that this is a subdivision then there are a whole list of requirements to be met t_hat are very technical. If you disacree Page 35 City Council Meeting 9/23/86 Page 3 with the concept that this is a subdivision then you fall back on the PL~D/~3 as a PUD is a Conditional Use Permit because of the ~d.xed. use, it is a conditional use. Mr. Riceci cited Eagle City Code 8-7-3-2 general standards for Conditional Use Permit. ~e factors are whether or not Planning and Zoning and City Council should qrant a Conditional Use Permit. Then too, superimposed are the seperate PUD re~u. ire~ents in section ~-6. Mr. Riceci included that he bad bad questions on the subdivision since the first meeting on this project. GUERBER suggested that it must be decided on "what it is" in order to qo ahead with the requirements. _UATLOCK askedR~au~d if he was recording a plat, Mr. Renault answered "no". Eagle City Code, section 9-9-1-6 was read by MATLOCK in which he indicated that it stated that "selling" is a key point. That this development is under sinqle ownership. MATLOCK s%~ned up the points that the project is not beino sold as the definition of P[.~D provides and it is not being divided but it is being developed. MA/LE ask that council look at section 8-6-6 Procedure for approval of PUD. He cites that the code provides t_hat when a PUD also qualifies as a subdivision, the processinc of the conditional use uermit and subdivision application shall occur at the same ti~e. 'That first sentence denotes that you can have either/o.r! or combination beth Conditional ' Use~-S~]iVision as PUD. It is .~AILE'S opinion that it Can'qualify a~number of different ways and consider it as a conditional use. MATLOCK made a ~otion that council approval this PUD with a Conditional Use Permit subject to the followinc: 1. That the water system., be approved by Idaho Water Resourses Board. 2. That council has outside verification that the well penetrates the Glenns Ferry Formation. 3. That the well casino be sealed to at least 400 ft. or deeper if required. 4. That the water syst~n be dedicated to the city no longer than 8 years from now, if the city desires. 5. _"I~at a lot be dedicated to the Eagle Fire D~Bt. as outlined on the map submitted tonight. That the development be required to comply with all the requirements of A~a County Highway departments, the Sewer require~aents and State Depar~nent of Transportation. Motion seconded by GUERBER. Discussion took place by MAILE that under Eagle City Code,section 8-7-3-4, council could impose conditions, bonds and safeguards. MATLP. asks is assurance that the project will be aesthetically pleasing and would like tm hdd to tile condition that the project will be cor~pleted as submitted tonight. The reply was that the requirements of the highway department, sewer, etc. may have an effect of change on what is now subitted in easments. Things may have to be altered. That the assurance is in the fact that the land. is paid for &council has rights of conditions. MAILE addsdto the r~tion that what has been submitted tonight on the map be fulfilled and that if there are chan~es that they must come back in to council for approval. That he %Duld like that added to the list of conditions. MA_ILE cites Eagle City CDde, section 8-7-4-2 (D) conditions of a pennit. He highlights #4 of this section,that the development is maintained proparly, MAILE would like that amendment tm the motion. .Also that this water system be coordinated through the Page 36 Fmgle City Council Meeting 9/23/86 Page 4 Eagle Ranch Water CormDanv. Discussion resulted by MATLOCK and GUEFJ3ER that that would mske the burdel~ fa~l on the Eagle Ranch Water Co. and that tJ~e cor~pany not be able to handle ti%at burden, or want too. MA[[TOCK brought up timing on tJ%e completion of tJ~e project. Renault answered that it would ]De aDproximately May, 1987. MATIODC/{ ame. nded the motion to include comple~ion of project in one year. Briqgs suggested 'tJnat an occupancy certificate would provide i~e condition of completion in order to occupy tine park. MAILE moved that the conditions include lJ~e condition that in addition to the preposed conditions of MATIf)CK that be added the condition that an occnpa]ncy petT.]it be required. Motion seconded by MATLOCI<. Discussion resumed. Mi~ILE called for the question. ~qotion resulted as follows: .~IAILE, NAY. AYE: GUEPq3ER, ~19.Tf~C[<. Motion carried. RESULT OF T~ CONDITIONS lillE: 1. That the water system, be approved by Idaho Water Resources Board. 2. That council bas outside verification that the well penetrates t~through the Glenns Ferry Fom~ntion. 3. That the well casin~ be sealed to a~ least 400 ft. or deeper if required. 4. That the water system be dedicated to the city no longer titan 8 years from now, if the city desires. 5. That a lot be dedicated to the Eagle Fire D~'st. as outlined on the map submitted tonight. 6. ~Tat the development be required to comply with all the requirements of Ada County }]ighway departments, the sewer rexluirements and State Department of Transportation. 7. That completion be ~,wi~hin one year & an occupancy permit be required. ~qDAE~iY ~RTER/_AL/COLLEC~CR UPDATE,: ?ir. Ervin Olen requested approval of concept for final funct_iona] classification of the syster,, around and through %he City of Eagle. }~tion made by GUERBER to accept proposal as presented. ~fior, seconded by MA_,V_OCK. ALL' AYE: _~btion carried. EXECUT/VE SESSION DECLApdED BY M~.ILE AT 10:15 P.M. SU~/ECT: Potential acquisition of the water co_mpany. Water report given by Carlyle Briggs. Executive session closed at 10:35 p.m. GUERBER moved that the Centennial and BicentennJ~ be tabled until .+.he next regular council session. MATLOCK seconded the notion. ALL AYE: ~'otion carried. Eagle City Council adjourned at 10:40 p.m. ~JRespect fully zs~ tted: { THOMAS ~9%ILE, COUNCIL PRESIDENT"'