Minutes - 1996 - Planning & Zoning - 08/12/1996 - Special
-,
EAGLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING AUGUST 12, 1996
as called to order by Chainnan BRADLEY.
Present: BRINTON, MAYER, FARNWORTH, BRADLEY, absent: MAILE
Continuation of the Public Hearing on Application for Zoning Ordinance and Amendments to
Title 6, Title 7 and Title 8-2.
Meeting turned over to Don Brinton, Acting Chairman.
Continuation of Public Hearing on the Amendments to Title 6 Parks Committee, Title 7 Sign
Regulations, and Title 8-2-A Design Review Codes, and Design Review Manual.
Last meeting went through several pages up to the sign ordinance.
We will take additional testimony this evening that has not been given before.
Go through page by page looking at the changes as a commission and as the public to see if there
some changes that we need to make and what has been proposed and then we will continue on
with the ordinance page by page to see if there are any additional input or comments that they
would like.
Joan E. Lyons
351 Knobhill
Eagle, Idaho
We need to give a lot of thought on how stringent we are going to be to our community. We
have to keep our business. We can't make these ordinance so strict that we loose business. With
the bypass we will have to be really careful with our business. Has a concern on the ordinance
pertaining to bonds but would rather take that up at another time. Also she does not understand
the sign portion. Confusion on how the process will go.
Mark spoke as the Zoning Administrator: What the ordinance has done is it has taken some of
the items that typically would have to go through the Design Review Committee and brought
them down to staff level. Some of the items with certain criteria can be reviewed by Mark. This
is intended to save steps not add another step. Approval or denial with Mark. If Mark
recommends denial then it could be appealed.
Joe Schreiber
726 Nicklaus Lane
Eagle, Idaho
H:\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN - ZON\MlNUTES\1996\PZO81296,MIN 1
seen Mark Butler work whoever hired him made a wise choice.
a great preplanning and zoning meetings. I had a business there and
" time into it we wanted to find out what planning and zoning
ht u ssion and had questions answered as a citizen and made us
feel they were citizen friendly. We found out real soon that we did not have a plan.
On Joan's remarks, it will be a long time before we get a good feel of what the bypass is doing.
Keep things as stringent as planned to do with the idea of ease in where necessary.
(Marks report of August 9) P5 of7, first paragraph. Long discussion last week about masonry
fences. Don likes masonry walls because you really want to divide those areas.
P6 of 7, last paragraph, 5th line. Of should be or.
P7 of 7. Second to last line. Might want to change that because he understands that there will
be no pedestrian path on the bypass but there might be an overpass and maybe that could be
included in this area.
Also recommends that his report is still sent on to the council as a report and not part of the
Amendments to Title 8.
Recommends to the City Council that the committee be dissolved.
No further public testimony.
Proceed with the plan of going through the Ordinance.
The public hearing will stay open through the discussion of amendments.
Looking at the revised draft.
Section a-2a-1 Mark, Mayer, Farnworth - change to the size of the unit and the amount oflots to
one (duplex on one lot, townhouse on one lot) Susan- the following are specifically to one single
lot not included in subdivisions. If there is common area for the tenants that would be subject for
review Susan feels that it should not be more complicated than that. Farin agrees with adding on
Single lots cross out townhouses, not included in a subdivision.
Lengthy discussion on common areas, townhouses, single family and duplex.
Page 3 of35: No changes.
Page 2 of 35: Change the typo from last meeting.
H:\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN - ZON\MINUTES\1996\PZO81296.MIN 2
35: Under Design Guidelines Objectives and Considerations bold Section A. General
and Considerations.
Page 6 of 35: Minor change in the actual size of the letter "F", only change made.
Page 7 of 3 5: Section B near the bottom bold the area Downtown Development Area.
Page 8 of 35: Staff changes are on P2 of 7 of Staff s report, need to meet the requirement of the
City Code. Examples that we use mayor may not meet the other Section of the Code and we
want to make sure they meet the requirement in the design zoning districts appropriately.
Paragraph c-Page 8, you will notice the same thing applies. The design should accommodate the
ground floor uses as listed plus residential use. Add near the end - and including residential use.
Paragraph b-Page 8, ground floor (street level) of new building should accommodate......
Paragraph B-Page 8, add parking garage under uses on the ground floor.
Paragraph g-Page 8, corrected spelling of vertical.
Paragraph h-Page 8, Change city council to planning and zoning.
Page 9 of35: Staff recommends changes in Paragraph f. Add: unless the lot is approved for
Design Review for parking.
Page 10 of 35: Paragraph e: What we are saying is that there will be no access to parking from
State Street or Eagle Road.
Paragraph e: Strike this paragraph.
Paragraph b: Changes at bottom ofP3 of7, Staffs Report. Bold "special considerations".
Paragraph c: Correct spelling word.
Section C: Should be bolded to identify the transitional development area as we did the
downtown.
Page Ilof35: Staff changes to Paragraph's b, c and h. Talking about the same thing as in the
Downtown area clarification in the transitional area making sure those schedules meet the use.
Changes: Ground floor (street level) and upper floor to other floor options in Paragraph c. Add
parking garage. Strike the word plus and add the word and including residential use.
Page 12 of 35: Items on P4 and 5 of Staff s Report. Change: Preserve its natural resource, visual
features and recreational value.
Paragraph f: Should read 20 percent on the transitional zone.
Paragraph e: Strike the word "fence or", and leave it masonry wall with landscape treatment will
be required. Should read: When these facilities occur adjacent to existing residential
development s a continuous 6ft high masonry wall with land ment and/or a separate
landscape barrier will be required to mitigate sound and vis
H:\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN - ZON\MINUTES\1996\PZO81296,MIN 3
35: Changes made in the middle section which starts under the Code called "Urban
Streets" added verbiage in front of this "Unless prohibited by the Ada County
is pe streets, as shown on Exhibit A-2n.
. 1 ought back in the Public Gathering Places. Does it need to
be here? Mark Butler recommends that the Public Gathering Places remain in this area.
Change "Special Considerations" to "Planning Considerations".
Paragraph b, second paragraph: Change 15 feet to 10 feet (10'). Go back to Page 10 and make
the same changes.
Section D, bottom of Page 13: Bold "Community Entry Development Area".
Page 14 of35: Footprint size - 20%.
Page 15 of35: Section 6 -Special Considerations change to Planning Considerations.
Bronze Plaque: Strike and say "A permanent monument sign at the entrance of the City would be
encouraged" .
Page 7 of 7 of the Report, Paragraph b- Extension of 2nd Street: Strike the last paragraph of this
Section.
5 minute break called for.
Moved by MA YER seconded by BRADLEY to close the Public Hearing on the first part of the
Ordinance which is modification of Chapter 7 Title 6, Chapter 2 Title 7, Chapter 2a Title 8, up
through Section 7 to Sign Regulations, not including the Sign Regulations.
ALL AYE: MOTION CARRIED
Moved by MAYER and seconded by FARNWORTH to approve Pages 1 through 15 plus
Paragraph a of Page 16, Title 8-2-A7, up to Sign Regulations.
Move to send the Downtown Development Report to the Council accepted as a report, along with
the recommendation that the committee be disbanded with a thank you sent to each member of
the committee. Moved by FARNWORTH Seconded by MAYER.
Motion Withdrawn
Moved by FARNWORTH seconded by MAYER That we
Development Task Force so that the City Council can review
have not accepted or adopted the report, and with the reco
H:\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN - ZON\MINUTES\1996\PZO81296,MIN 4
, with a thank you letter of appreciation from the City.
: MOTION CARRIED
Page 17 of35: Lengthy discussion. Definition- Face of Building: Remove facade and add face
of the building.
Page 17 of 35: Definition-Grade: Clarify "of where the sign is placed".
Page 18 of35: Defmition-Grand Opening: After the heading "Grand Opening" add the word
"Sign" .
Definition-Identification Sign: Delete this definition.
Page 19 of 35: Capitalize "area and surface area of sign" in this definition and a referral back to
the Section that it is talking to.
Page 20 of 35: Section C should be bolded and then a and b portion should be bolded.
Facade should be changed to face of the building.
Section C - Paragraph 2: Change from three feet to eight square feet, with a minimum of7 ft 6 in
from sidewalk to bottom of sign.
Section C - Paragraph 3: Base monument to 10 feet from 6 feet. To come back to this.
Section C - Paragraph 4: Facade should be changed to face of the building. 15% of the area is
way to great for a sign. Mike Vance will do some sketches and general calculating to show what
could be allowed.
Page 21 of 35: Section C - Paragraph 5: Shall compliment the building - take out with.
Section D. Spell out areas. Paragraph need the examples shown in the booklet.
Change from wood to signage material. Recommendation that we stay with the wood look to get
away from the slick plastic that has been used. Also concerned about the size Mayer recommends
that the 8 ft limit would be good in this area.
Page 22 of35: Internally-illuminated signs: would like to see these areas separated out because
internally-illuminated signs are alright.
H:\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN - ZON\MINUTES\1996\PZO81296,MIN 5
Legal suggests we take the Petition as the short paragraph on
included into the record. The Petition is not dated. Petitions
y Laura Markham. Hard to say if the signatures on the Petition can be verified.
mebody from Design Review to answer questions in addition
Farrin: Legal impact of approving this with no interior lit signage.
Legal Counsel: Nonconforming sign issue. Eliminate the use of all internal illuminated signs
and then your nonconforming sign section of the Ordinance says everything must be in
conformance within a certain period of time. You need to make that something that is
reasonable. Needs to be in such a period of time that the cost can be absorbed, a general length
of time could be seven to ten years. Owners should be given enough time to remove signs.
Acting Chairman turns the meeting over to the Chairman.
Moved by BRINTON to continue the Public Hearing to 6:00 p.m. on August 19 , 1996, seconded
by FARNWORTH.
ALL AYE: MOTION CARRIED
Moved by Mayer and seconded by Brin~~ç.~tq,"~?J?urn.
Respectfully subm'. ,,"."'~"';-:;""
..'i-~:':..-\. ~';:';; /',\," ;,,' '?'.
:-:'0,.,..- .',"',)<',
.. ,.; eO;' ""I Y" ,1 "',¡', ';.
:: 'J Go ",<i.' '-' L.t'1, ';. :>,', ",
-- .... < ,', ", L
: OþO 'V'.,,/,-;
- to"" ..",..."" ü"","..
: .Jb,: ,', ;. ..
. 1'~. ~ A," ..,0 ::
: .~ C :~ i,; ~ <""'; .
~ ..,t~ Jo.:t;:¡...;.... ..,¡;. '.; ';') ::
. (:~O L',"~::
.. .~ ".. '"?Ò...,... ,.,-r<....,J" ,/).:
.##,V~ G~,¡~s¿"":"~::'\;~<.."" APPROVED:
---:!.'/'¡¡.Pf ':'. C:::;))
...........- ""'- ~~
Don Brinton
Acting Chairman
~a Markham
. Dr,Zo~L~1
C~C~
H:\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN - ZON\MINUTES\ 1996\PZO81296,MIN 6