Findings - CC - 2017 - AA-02-17/DR-52-16 - Multi-Tenant Building 3 With Drive ThroughBEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR
AN APPEAL OF THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DECISION REGARDING DR -52-16 FOR A MULTI -
TENANT RETAIL/RESTAURANT BUILDING 3 WITH
DRIVE-THROUGH FOR HAWKINS COMPANIES
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER AA-02-17/DR-52-16
The above -entitled appeal came before the Eagle City Council for their action on January 24, 2017. 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. SUBJECT/GROUNDS FOR APPEAL:
The City of Eagle, represented by William E. Vaughan, AICP, Zoning Administrator, is appealing the
Design Review Board's decision on the above referenced matter in accordance with Eagle City Code
(ECC) Section 8-2A-14. Specifically, pursuant to ECC Section 8 -2A -14(3)(a), there is an inconsistency
with the required findings specified within subsection 8 -2A -13(B); and pursuant to ECC Section 8 -2A -
14(3)(b), there is an inconsistency with the purpose and objectives of this article; and pursuant to ECC
Section 8 -2A -14(3)(c), there is a lack of nexus between the requirements of the development agreement
and the proposal.
B. PROJECT SUMMARY:
Hawkins Companies, represented by Christian Samples, is requesting design review approval to
construct a 10,620 -square foot multi -tenant retail/restaurant building with drive-through. The 0.98 -acre
site is located on the east side of South Eagle Road approximately 800 -feet south of East Colchester
Drive within Lakemoor Commercial Subdivision (Lot 1, Block 10).
C. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DECISION — FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
The Board voted 5 to 0 (Schaffer and Koci abstained) to approve DR -52-16 for a design review
application for a multi -tenant retail/restaurant building with drive-through for Hawkins Companies
with the site specific conditions of approval and standard conditions of approval provided within their
findings of fact and conclusions of law document, dated January 12, 2017 (attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference).
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
A. ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
THIS APPEAL:
• Eagle City Code Section 8-2A-14: APPEALS:
A. Administrative decisions may be appealed to the design review board and design review board
decisions may be appealed to the city council. An appeal fee, as may be adopted by resolution of the
city council, shall be required for any appeal. Appeals shall comply with the following:
1. Any such appeal shall be submitted within ten (10) calendar days after the written decision by
filing with the administrator a notice of appeal specifying the grounds for the appeal. The
administrator shall transmit to the appellate body, either the design review board or the city council,
Page 1 of 9
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\APPEALS \2017\AA-02-17 Appeal of DR -52-16 Multi -ten bldg 3 in Lakemoor ccf.docx
all documents constituting the record upon which the appeal is based. An appeal stays all proceedings
in furtherance of the action taken.
2. Within seven (7) calendar days after receipt of an appeal, the zoning administrator shall fix a date
for the application to be heard and shall notify the appealing party and applicant, if not the appealing
party, with no further notification being required.
3. The grounds for the appeal may address, but is not limited to, the following:
a. Inconsistency with the required findings specified within subsection 8 -2A -13(B) of this article;
b. Inconsistency with the purpose and objectives of this article;
c. Lack of nexus between the requirement and the proposal;
d. Discriminatory action;
e. Unwarranted prevention of an allowed land use;
f. Undue interference with the design integrity of the proposal;
g. Prohibition or unwarranted restriction of building type or material;
h. Violation of law.
4. The appellate body, either the design review board or the city council, shall either approve, approve
with supplementary conditions, or deny the design review application as presented and shall adopt
findings as required within subsection 8 -2A -13(B) of this article. Within seven (7) calendar days after
a written decision has been rendered, the zoning administrator shall provide the applicant with written
notice of the action on the request. (Ord. 756, 8-23-2016)
• Eagle City Code Section 8 -2A -13(B):
B. Action And Required Findings: Following a complete review of the design review application, the
zoning administrator or design review board, whichever is applicable, shall approve the application as
presented, approve the application with supplementary conditions, continue the application for further
review, or deny the application.
1. City Findings: The city shall make findings which address the following:
a. The ordinance and standards used in evaluating the application;
b. The reasons for the approval or denial;
c. The actions, if any, that the applicant could take to obtain approval.
2. General Standards For Design Review: The zoning administrator or design review board, whichever
is applicable, shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed design review in
terms of the following standards and shall find adequate evidence showing that such design review at
the proposed location:
a. Will function in conformance with the applicable strategies of the Eagle comprehensive plan and is
in accordance with the regulations of this code;
b. Is of a scale, intensity, and character that is in harmony with existing conforming and planned
development in the vicinity of the site;
c. Is designed with adequate off street parking facilities in such a way as to not interfere with
ingress/egress to the site and will serve the intended use so as to not cause conflict with adjacent uses
as anticipated within the zoning district;
d. Will not interfere with the visual character, quality, or appearance of the surrounding area and city,
Page 2 of 9
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\ APPEALS\2017\AA-02-17 Appeal of DR -52-16 Multi -ten bldg 3 in Lakemoor ccLdocx
and where possible, enhance the continuity of thematically common architectural features;
e. Will have facades, features, and other physical improvements that are designed as a whole, when
viewed alone as well as in relationship to surrounding buildings and settings;
f. Will not obstruct views and vistas as they pertain to the urban environment and in relation to artistic
considerations;
g. Will provide safe and convenient access to the property for both vehicles and pedestrians through
patterned traffic circulation and connectivity to abutting development;
h. Is in the interest of public health, safety, and general welfare promoting a pedestrian friendly and
walkable environment in balance with protecting a viable commercial center in the area; and
i. Will have signs, if proposed, that are harmonious with the architectural design of the building and
adjacent buildings, and will not cover or detract from desirable architectural features.
• All City Code Sections identified within the Design Review Board's findings of fact and conclusions
of law document, dated January 12, 2017, are incorporated herein by reference.
B. DISCUSSION:
• Pursuant to Eagle City Code Section 8 -2A -13(B)(2), the City (in this case, the Design Review Board)
is required to review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed design review in terms of
the standards enumerated in 8 -2A -13(B)(2) and find adequate evidence that each standard has been
satisfied. With regard to these enumerated standards, the Board determined the following:
A. Will function in conformance with the applicable strategies of the Eagle Comprehensive Plan and is in
accordance with the regulations of this code since there are no inconsistencies with the comprehensive
plan and the multi -tenant retail/restaurant building is permitted with the approval of a design review
application within the development agreement provisions and MU -DA (Mixed Use with a development
agreement) zoning district;
B. Is not of a scale, intensity, and character that is in harmony with existing conforming and planned
development in the vicinity of the site. Similar architectural elements are utilized on both the T -Sheets
building and the multi -tenant retail/restaurant building, however, there is a significant variance and
sense of style between both buildings that do not transition and tie the buildings together;
C. Is designed with adequate off street parking facilities in such a way as to not interfere with
ingress/egress to the site and will serve the intended use so as to not cause conflict with adjacent uses
as anticipated within the zoning district since 56 parking spaces are provided for this site;
D. Will interfere with the visual character, quality, or appearance of the surrounding area and city, and
where possible, enhance the continuity of thematically common architectural features and while the
proposed building has similar materials as the nearby T -Sheets building, a significant contrast in the
theme of architecture exists among the planned buildings. Although both buildings were approved
under the same written design guidelines approved through a development agreement, the "sense of
style" proposed within the exhibits approved through the most recent development agreement
modification (RZ-05-02 MODS, approved by City Council October 25, 2016) is a contrast from the
previous exhibits approved (RZ-05-02 MOD2) from which the T -Sheets building design was derived;
E. Will not have facades, features, and other physical improvements that are designed as a whole, when
viewed alone as well as in relationship to surrounding buildings and settings in that the building has
some similar elements as the nearby T -Sheets building, however, there is concern with the transition
between the two buildings and how they will complement each other. The two buildings are not
harmonious with each other due to the contrast in design and style and both buildings will be very
prominent within the development due to their locations and size. The multi -tenant retail/restaurant
building has a "Modern Farmhouse" theme, whereas the T -Sheets building was approved through the
"sense of style" (term used in the commercial design guidelines within the development agreement
Page 3 of 9
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\ APPEALS\2017\AA-02-17 Appeal of DR -52-I6 Multi -ten bldg 3 in Lakemoor ccLdocx
approved by City Council on October 25, 2016) that will promote traditional, contemporary, and
transitional styles significantly different from the "Modern Farmhouse" style;
F. Will not obstruct views and vistas as they pertain to the urban environment and in relation to artistic
considerations since the proposed building is in conformance with the required setbacks and height
restrictions noted within the development agreement;
G. Will provide safe and convenient access to the property for both vehicles and pedestrians through
patterned traffic circulation and connectivity to abutting development;
H. Is in the interest of public health, safety, and general welfare promoting a pedestrian friendly and
walkable environment in balance with protecting a viable commercial center in the area; and
I. No signs are proposed. However, any proposed signs will be required to be harmonious with the
architectural design of the building and adjacent buildings, and shall not cover or detract from desirable
architectural features.
• GROUNDS FOR APPEAL — ECC 8 -2A -14(3)(a) — "Inconsistency with the required findings specified
within subsection 8 -2A -13(B) of this article":
As identified above, the Design Review Board approved the application, however, they did not find
adequate evidence indicating that Standards B, D, and E have been satisfied. The City's approval of the
application cannot be substantiated until adequate evidence has been presented and accepted for all
standards (A -I), therefore, this application is being appealed to the City Council. The Council will have
the opportunity to review all of the information in the record and make its own findings and conclusions
with regard to the aforementioned standards.
If the Council makes the same findings and conclusions as the Board, then the application should be
denied. The Council may also request the applicant provide revised plans to address the deficiencies
identified in Standards B, D, and E for evaluation by the Council. Once, and if the Council finds
adequate evidence that all standards (A -I) have been satisfied, then the application may be approved.
Additionally, the Design Review Board reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of the proposed
design review application (DR -52-16) with regard to the commercial guidelines set forth in the
Development Agreement and has concluded the following:
A. The architectural theme for this building is "Modern Farmhouse."
B. The proposed design review complies with the commercial design guidelines (see Exhibit "A") set
forth in the Development Agreement based on: height of the building, screening of roof mounted
mechanicals, exterior building finishes to include: brick veneer, fiber cement lap siding, fiber
cement board and batten siding, decorative metal barn doors, and standing seam metal roof on the
peaked roof elements, pedestrian connectivity, materials and colors for the parapet/window
treatments/entryway elements, green screens, building lighting, and site lighting.
C. The development currently has three (3) buildings proposed which include: the T -Sheets building
(currently under construction), a multi -tenant retail/restaurant building, and a multi -tenant
retail/restaurant building with a drive-through. The T -Sheets building was approved based on the
same written commercial design guidelines, but different design exhibits (see Exhibit "B"). The T -
Sheets building has positive architectural elements including: mansard roof, window treatments,
entryway elements, architectural elements through articulated wall sections, concrete sills at
various heights providing differentiation in wall massing and horizontal banding, and extended
tower elements to improve the visual quality. Similar elements including: architectural elements
through articulate wall sections, material variations to provide differentiation in wall massing,
window treatments, and entryway elements are being carried over into the multi -tenant
retail/restaurant building, however. it has not been demonstrated by the applicant how the styles.
design, and similar materials and elements between the three buildings will work together and how
Page 4 of 9
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\APPEALS \2017\AA-02-17 Appeal of DR -52-16 Multi -ten bldg 3 in Lakemoor ccf.docx
they will transition throughout the site to guarantee the entire mixed use development has a
cohesive architectural theme.
D. The commercial design guidelines refer to a "Sense of Style" stating the architectural treatment of
the buildings will be eclectic in character, and, to diminish fatigue and to create a rich and visually
stimulating environment, the Center will promote the co -existence of traditional, contemporary,
and transitional styles in a harmonic composition. There is concern with the architectural style
transition between the T -Sheets building and the two multi -tenant retail/restaurant buildings due to
significant contrast in the theme of architecture among the three (3) buildings. The multi -tenant
retail/restaurant buildings contain a "Modern Farmhouse" theme and are designed as two
rectangular buildings with design elements to make the buildings appear as multiple different
buildings. The two multi -tenant retail/restaurant buildings have exterior building finishes of brick
veneer, fiber cement lap siding, fiber cement board and batten siding, decorative metal barn doors,
and standing seam metal roofs on the peaked roof elements and are connected through the creation
of a "Barn Frame" outdoor pedestrian gathering place built from rough sawn wood timbers in a
natural color. The T -Sheets building does not have a theme per se, but fits within the combination
of traditional, contemporary, and transitional styles. The Board determined that additional
modifications should be imnlemented in the architecture of the nronosed buildings to better create
a more cohesive theme with the previously annroved T -Sheets building, however. the Board felt
that due to the previous City Council arnroval of the amended development agreement (and
associated approved desin n g uidelines) that they may not possess the autonomy to require such
changes.
E. The multi -tenant retail/restaurant buildings will be as prominent as the T -Sheets building along
Eagle Road, will be one of the first buildings in view when entering the City of Eagle, and will set
the theme for the entire development, therefore. significant consideration should be given to the
architectural compatibility between the T -Sheets building and two multi -tenant retail/restaurant
buildings.
The Design Review Board concluded that there is not sufficient architectural compatibility between
the multi -tenant retail/restaurant building proposed with this application and the T -Sheets building
previously approved (see underline text above). The application (DR -52-16) should not be
approved until and unless the City determines that the provisions of the development agreement
previously approved for the property, up to and including the commercial design guidelines, have
been affirmed and satisfied.
The Council will have the opportunity to review all of the information in the record and make its
own conclusions with regard to compliance with the development agreement.
If the Council makes the same conclusions as the Board, then the application should be denied. The
Council may also request the applicant provide revised plans to address the architectural
compatibility between the multi -tenant retail/restaurant building and the T -sheets building for
evaluation by the Council. Once, and if the Council concludes that architectural compatibility has
been achieved between the multi -tenant retail/restaurant building and the T -sheets building, then
the application may be approved.
• GROUNDS FOR APPEAL — ECC 8 -2A -14(3)(b) — "Inconsistency with the purpose and objectives of
this article":
Eagle City Code Section 8 -2A -2(A)(2), states that the purpose of this article is to encourage the
development of private property in harmony with the desired character of the city and in conformance
with the guidelines herein (within Article A — Design Review Overlay District) provided with due
regard to the public and private interest involved. The Design Review Board concluded that the
proposed multi -tenant retail/restaurant building and the nearby T -Sheets building have such differing
design themes and styles such that they are not harmonious with each other. Prior to the application
Page 5 of 9
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\ APPEALS\20I7\AA-02-17 Appeal of DR -52-16 Multi -ten bldg 3 in Lakemoor ccf.docx
submittal and throughout the application review process, staff has met with the applicant to express
concerns with the proposed styles and to clarify the need for the applicant to address how these
buildings are going to be designed to be architecturally compatible with each other and with the other
proposed buildings within the development. Staff believes that the proposed design results in
inconsistencies with the purpose and objectives of the design review article, specifically that the
building is not harmonious with the desired character of the city and both building themes and styles
do not create the feel of one cohesive and harmonious commercial development, as a whole.
• GROUNDS FOR APPEAL — ECC 8 -2A -14(3)(c) — "Lack of nexus between the requirement and the
proposal":
The development agreement for the Property contains commercial design guidelines. The purpose of
the design guidelines is to establish an architectural theme for the development to assure compliance
with the City's design review requirements, Article A — Design Review Overlay District. The
commercial design guidelines are a requirement of the development agreement and, if the proposed
buildings are not concluded (by the City) to be in conformance with said guidelines, then a lack of
nexus between the requirement (the design guidelines) and the proposal (DR -52-16) exists.
The Council will have the opportunity to review all of the information in the record and make its own
conclusions with regard to the nexus between the requirement (the design guidelines) and the proposal
(DR -52-16).
If the Council cannot conclude that there is a nexus between the requirement and the proposal, then the
application should be denied. The Council may request the applicant provide revised plans to address
the architectural compatibility between the multi -tenant retail/restaurant building and the T -sheets
building for evaluation by the Council. Once, and if the Council concludes that architectural
compatibility has been achieved between the multi -tenant retail/restaurant building and the T -sheets
building, then the Council can conclude that a nexus between the requirement and the proposal has
been achieved and the application may be approved.
• Staff will be available to provide additional information or answer questions during the City Council
review of the appeal.
PUBLIC MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL:
A. A meeting to consider the application was held before the City Council on January 24, 2017, at which
time their decision was made.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one (not including the
applicant/representative).
COUNCIL DECISION:
Upon review of the facts established with AA -02-17, along with the information provided to the Council
during their meeting for this item, the Council voted 4 to 0 to approve DR -52-16 for a design review
application for a multi -tenant retail/restaurant building with drive-through for Hawkins Companies with
the site specific conditions of approval and standard conditions of approval provided within the Design
Review Board's findings of fact and conclusions of law document, dated January 12, 2017.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed design review application
(DR -52-16) with regard to the Eagle City Code Title 8, Chapter 2, Article A, DR Design Review
Overlay District, and based upon the information provided, with the conditions required within the
Design Review Board's findings of fact and conclusions of law document, dated January 12, 2017,
concludes that the proposed design review application is in accordance with the Eagle City Code and
Page 6 of 9
K:'Planning Dept'Eagle Applications \APPEALS12017 AA -02-17 Appeal of DR -52-16 Multi -ten bldg 3 in Lakemoor ccf.docx
the Eagle Comprehensive Plan, and the commercial design guidelines established within the
development agreement for the property.
2. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of the proposed design review in terms of
Eagle City Code 8-2A-13, "General Standards for Design Review" and has concluded that the proposed
design review:
A. Will function in conformance with the applicable strategies of the Eagle Comprehensive Plan and
is in accordance with the regulations of this code since there are no inconsistencies with the
comprehensive plan and the multi -tenant retail/restaurant building is permitted with the approval
of a design review application within the development agreement provisions and MU -DA (Mixed
Use with a development agreement) zoning district;
B. Is of a scale, intensity, and character that is in harmony with existing conforming and planned
development in the vicinity of the site since the building is designed with an architectural style to
complement the other planned commercial buildings in the general vicinity and provide
aesthetically pleasing architecture to enhance the character of the area;
C. Is designed with adequate off street parking facilities in such a way as to not interfere with
ingress/egress to the site and will serve the intended use so as to not cause conflict with adjacent
uses as anticipated within the zoning district since 61 parking spaces are provided for this site;
D. Will not interfere with the visual character, quality, or appearance of the surrounding area and city,
and where possible, enhance the continuity of thematically common architectural features since the
proposed building has architectural elements that will complement the nearby T -Sheets building
and other planned buildings within the Lakemoor commercial subdivision;
E. Will have facades, features, and other physical improvements that are designed as a whole, when
viewed alone as well as in relationship to surrounding buildings and settings since the proposed
building incorporates architectural elements utilized on other buildings within the area and is in
conformance with the commercial guidelines set forth in the development agreement;
F. Will not obstruct views and vistas as they pertain to the urban environment and in relation to artistic
considerations since the proposed building is in conformance with the required setbacks and height
restrictions noted within the development agreement;
G. Will provide safe and convenient access to the property for both vehicles and pedestrians through
patterned traffic circulation and connectivity to abutting development;
H. Is in the interest of public health, safety, and general welfare promoting a pedestrian friendly and
walkable environment in balance with protecting a viable commercial center in the area; and
I. No signs are proposed. However, any proposed signs will be required to be harmonious with the
architectural design of the building and adjacent buildings, and shall not cover or detract from
desirable architectural features.
3. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of the proposed design review application
(DR -52-16) with regard to the commercial design guidelines set forth in the Development Agreement
and has concluded the following:
A. The architectural theme for this building is "Modern Farmhouse."
B. The proposed design review complies with the commercial design guidelines set forth in the
Development Agreement based upon the height of the building, screening of roof mounted
mechanicals, exterior building finishes to include brick veneer, fiber cement lap siding, fiber
cement board and batten siding, decorative metal barn doors, and standing seam metal roof on the
peaked roof elements, pedestrian connectivity, materials and colors for the parapet/window
treatments/entryway elements, green screens, building lighting, and site lighting.
Page 7 of 9
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\APPEALS \20171AA-02-17 Appeal of DR -52-16 Multi -ten bldg 3 in Lakemoor ccf.docx
C. The development currently has three (3) buildings proposed which include the T -Sheets building
(currently under construction), a multi -tenant retail/restaurant building, and a multi -tenant
retail/restaurant building with a drive-through. The T -Sheets building has positive architectural
elements including a mansard roof, window treatments, entryway elements, architectural elements
through articulated wall sections, concrete sills at various heights providing differentiation in wall
massing and horizontal banding, and extended tower elements to improve the visual quality. Similar
elements which include architectural elements through articulate wall sections, material variations
to provide differentiation in wall massing, window treatments, and entryway elements are being
carried over into the multi -tenant retail/restaurant building. It has been demonstrated by the
applicant how the styles, design, and similar materials and elements between the three buildings
(and other future buildings within the Lakemoor commercial subdivision) will work together and
will be used on other buildings within the commercial development to provide an appropriate
architectural theme and transition throughout the commercial development.
D. The commercial design guidelines refer to a "Sense of Style" stating the architectural treatment of
the buildings will be eclectic in character, and, to diminish fatigue and to create a rich and visually
stimulating environment, the Center will promote the co -existence of traditional, contemporary,
and transitional styles in a harmonic composition. The multi -tenant retail/restaurant building has
been designed with a "Modern Farmhouse" theme and is designed as a rectangular building with
design elements to make the building appear as multiple different buildings. The multi -tenant
retail/restaurant building has exterior building finishes of brick veneer, fiber cement lap siding,
fiber cement board and batten siding, decorative metal barn doors, and standing seam metal roofs
on the peaked roof elements and is connected to another multi -tenant building through the creation
of a "Barn Frame" outdoor pedestrian gathering place built from rough sawn wood timbers in a
natural color. The nearby T -Sheets building fits within the combination of traditional,
contemporary, and transitional styles. The Council determined that the applicant has appropriately
demonstrated that the theme of the proposed multi -tenant restaurant/retail building will be
harmonious with the theme of the T -Sheets building and other building proposed within the
Lakemoor commercial subdivision.
E. The proposed multi -tenant retail/restaurant building will be as prominent as the T -Sheets building
along Eagle Road, will be one of the first buildings in view when entering the City of Eagle, and
will set the theme for the entire development, therefore, significant consideration has been given to
the design and appropriate architectural compatibility between the T -Sheets building and the multi -
tenant retail/restaurant building.
4. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed Appeal application (AA -
02 -17) with regard to the Eagle City Code Section 8 -2A -14(3)(a), and based upon the information
provided, concludes the required findings specified within subsection 8 -2A -13(B) have been satisfied,
as identified in Conclusions of Law Section 2 above;
5. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed Appeal application (AA -
02 -17) with regard to the Eagle City Code Section 8 -2A -14(3)(b), and based upon the information
provided, concludes there are no inconsistencies with the purpose and objectives of this article as
identified in Conclusions of Law Section 1 above;
6. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed Appeal application (AA -
02 -17) with regard to the Eagle City Code Section 8 -2A -14(3)(c), and based upon the information
provided, concludes there is a nexus between the requirements of the development agreement and the
proposal as identified in Conclusion of Law Section 3 above.
Page 8 of 9
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle ApplicationsAPPEALS \2017\AA-02-17 Appeal of DR -52-16 Multi -ten bldg 3 in Lakemoor ccf.docx
DATED this 25th day of April 2017.
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
Ada County, Idaho
Stan Ridgeway, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sharon K. Bergmann, Eagle Ci Clerk
••c).1• Q0RA j6%
•0 F• t -
v op.
s
• S ENL��O c
� .
4ttiap
. J.�
>. •.••• P .•
4 of � •••*
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 9 of 9
K.\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\APPEALS \201MA-02-17 Appeal of DR -52-16 Multi -ten bldg 3 in Lakemoor ccfdocx