Loading...
Minutes - 1997 - Planning & Zoning - 10/06/1997 - Regular EAGLE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING MINUTES October 6, 1997 ORlGINAL The Planning and Zoning Commission met in regular session on October 6, 1997. Chairman Bradley presiding. 1. CALL TO ORDER: 2. ROLL CALL: The following members were present: BERT BRADLEY, DONALD BRINTON, FARRIN FARNWORTH, GENEVA TRENT. A quorum is present. 3. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL: A. Minutes of September IS, 1997 Moved by Brinton to not accept the minutes until the next session. Seconded by Farnworth. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES... 4. OLD BUSINESS: None 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Chairman Bradley announced it is the time and the place for the Public Hearing. A. RZ-8-97 - Rezone from A (Ae:ricultural) to R-2 and R-4 - Hormaechea LTD: Hormaechea L TO, represented by Scott Cook with Hubble Engineering, is requesting a rezone from A (Agricultural) to R-2 (Residential two units per acre maximum) and R-4 (Residential, four units per acre maximum). The 218.5-acre site is located at the northeast corner of Floating Feather Road and Eagle Road approximately one mile north of State Street. Bradley recuses himself due to a possible conflict of interest. He turns the item over to Commissioner Brinton Brinton introduces the item. Notes that he has received a letter from the applicant requesting the item be continued to the next scheduled meeting. Brinton calls for a show of hands of citizens who are not here to address this item. Brinton suggest the Commission go ahead and take public input regarding this item and then delay decision to the next meeting. Butler informs those attending that there is an information packet available regarding this item if anyone would like a copy of it. Gives a copy to the clerk to be included with the minutes of this meeting. Mike Hormaechea 5070 W. Hadlock Boise, Idaho. Comments that because of a discussion with Mark Butler last week, he understood this item would be continued tonight, so they are not as prepared as they would like to be to address this item. Hormaechea gives an overview of this project. Butler gives staff report based on the information received up to this point. Comments on the Pagelof9 F:\SHARED\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-IO-6-97 minutes. doc how this application relates to the Comprehensive Plan. Butler would recommend that if the Commission wishes to approve this zoning, that a development agreement should be attached to the land. Also states the Commission should look at how an application of this size would effect the infrastructure i.e. capacity of the school districts, the sewer district, and water supply of the city of Eagle. Tom Cornell, 470 E. Floating Feather Eagle, Idaho expresses his concern of the City approving a 400 unit subdivision without first resolving the sewer, water issues. Also, notes that his property is located at the edge of this property, and would suggest the developer place a security fence so his property would be protected. Mr. Cornell states that his property is located in a rural area, and owns animals, would like the fence to be erected to protect his property. He would like to see the density lower than what is asked for. Also expresses concern over the volume of traffic Farnworth asks for clarification as to whether or not both agenda items regarding Stonewater could be opened up for public comment at this time. McFadden notes that it would be acceptable to address both items at the same time. The Zoning Administrator agrees with Mr. McFadden that it would probably be a good thing if both items were heard at the same time. Farnworth strongly urges the Commission to open up both items and give the people who are present the opportunity to speak freely on these items. Commissioners agree that both items should be addressed at this time. B. Stonewater Planned Unit Development - CU-6-97/PPUD-1-97/PP-2-97- Hormaechea LTD: Hormaechea LTD, represented by Scott Cook with Hubble Engineering, is requesting a conditional use permit, PUD and preliminary plat approval for a 218.5-acre, 410-lot (401- buildable) residential subdivision. The site is located at the northeast comer of Floating Feather Road and Eagle Road approximately one mile north of State Street. Brinton opens the public hearing on Stonewater Planned Unit Development. Mr. Cornell declined to give further comment regarding the PUD. Because this item will be addressed again at the next regular meeting. Adrian Curnow, 597 E. Rooster Ct. Eagle, Idaho. Questions whether or not the second item will be tabled (Planned Unit Development). Brinton informs that it will be continued as well. Mr. Curnow defers his testimony until the next meeting. Mr. Hormaechea will wait to provide further comment regarding the Planned Unit Development at the next regular meeting. Butler gives further comment on the hillside currently located on the proposed site, and relays his desire that the developer incorporate the natural beauty of the site. Julie Campbell, 199 Rooster Dr. Eagle, Idaho comments on how this project will affect the children, and the educational system. The children should be taken into consideration when this project is considered. Questions how the sewer and water will be provided to the location. Concerned about decreased property values Laura McCarthy, 2379 N. Equestrian PI. Eagle, Idaho. Concerned about the mis-representation Page2of9 F:\SHARED\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN - ZON\MINUTES\ Temporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-l 0-6-97 minutes.doc by the developer that it will be 1.83 units per acre. It needs to be taken into consideration that 40% of the project is open area. 60% is where the houses will be, if the math is done correctly its 3.04 units per acre, which is allowed in the Comprehensive Plan. The information is presented to the public in a misleading manner. Comment on the letter submitted by the School District, feels the developer needs to finance the schools. The school district letter also states that the developer proposes using the Dry Creek Sewer System, which was paid for by the Meridian School District, the developer had been approached to help finance the sewer system and they refused to help finance. Any yet they want to uses the system, Ms. McCarthy feels this would be wrong, and would like further explanation regarding this issue. Cathy Hardy, 724 W. Rush Ct. Eagle, Idaho. Agrees with the comments given by the two women before her. Her biggest concern is the children and how education will be provided for them. Sally Bolthouse, 1643 Highgate Ct. Eagle, Idaho expresses her concern with the proposed density. Also expresses concerns with the schools. Gary Gear, 1675 E. Stonybrook Ct. Eagle, Idaho. Has concerns regarding the density. Perhaps larger lots would be more suitable. The traffic situation should be considered, also there no north south road on this plan. All of the traffic will be funneled onto Floating Feather. The impact on the education system, police, library services and fire protection. Would recommend the developer rethink this project. Monty Marcus 605 E. Rooster Ct. Eagle, Idaho. Questions whether or not the public input taken tonight will be taken into consideration by Commission when they take action. Brinton states that all comments are taken into consideration. Has two primary concerns- one being the density and the other is the building within the floodplain and the changing of the floodway. Marcus comments on the wildlife currently existing on his property, and that a north south road would not be acceptable to him. Wants the integrity ofthe rural area maintained. Feels the density is too high. Notes that it would be a mistake to allow building in the floodplain. Eagle being a progressive upscale community should not allow development in the floodplain. Marcus gives an explanation of the difference between a floodplain and floodway. Concerned with the disposal of storm water. Suggests the number of homes built in the floodplain be reduced if not eliminated, take into consideration the dike effect of the roads, would like the berms removed. Marcus suggests eliminating or greatly diminishing the number of homes within the floodplain, keeping all roads in the floodplain at the present elevation and decrease the dike-like affect. Another issue he would like addressed are the berms already existing along Dry Creek, would like them removed or at least no improvements made to them. Also comments on wells and the possible effect on existing wells by this application. Eleanor Chase, 70 W. Floating Feather Rd. Eagle, Idaho. Concerned about the flooding of her property. Does not want her property negatively affected by flooding because of this application. Questions whether or not the developer has a flood control in place which would eliminate the flood concern. Has concerns about the waste water, if the property is subdivided. Glida Bothwell, 642 Steeple View Dr. Eagle, Idaho. Main concern is the loss of productive farmland. Reads from an article regarding farmland being destroyed. Displays a map showing high development and prime farmland. Comments that she agrees with the previous comments given regarding the schools. Discusses a workshop regarding a sustainable community she Page 3 of9 F:\SHARED\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-IO-6-97 minutes. doc recently attended. Comments on traffic, police, fire protection, schools, and air quality. David Kent, 355 Rooster Dr. Eagle, Idaho. Shows the Commission the location of his property. It is the closest the proposed location. Expresses his concern that if this development is allowed the flood plain will be shifted towards his property. Would like Eagle to preserve its rural community feeling. Also concerned with the density of the project. Don Asbell, 1750 E. State St. Eagle, Idaho feels the project has a very California feel. The businessmen in town are tired of supporting projects like this. His sewer costs are substantially higher because he is a business owner. The density is too high. Concerned about where the impact fees will be used. The roads are currently not being maintained properly. The school issue also needs to be addressed. Jeffrey Rapp 152 S. Silverwood Way Eagle, Idaho. Comments on that the school issue definitely needs to be addressed. Also feels the lot size is too small. Adrian Curnow 597 Rooster Ct. Eagle, Idaho. Inquires the reason for Chairman Bradley recusing it. McFadden states it would be appropriate for Chairman Bradley to enter it in on the record. Bradley notes that he is on the Lexington Hills Homeowners Board, and they are somewhat opposed to the application. Feels it would be inappropriate to comment on this issue. Denise Kempson, 257 S. Silverwood Way Eagle, Idaho. Feels that it would be almost impossible to enforce the CCR's. Also fears a negative impact from the smaller lots. Lori Campbell, 1123 Pimlico Eagle, Idaho. Comments that she moved from California. Moved to Eagle to live in a safer community. The rural atmosphere will no longer exist in the area of this application. Reed Jarvis, 235 Rooster Eagle, Idaho. Points out the location of his property, the developers have approached him to purchase his property. The developers have been quite courteous. Explains the procedure he had to go through to erect a bridge across Dry Creek. Mr. Jarvis is extremely concerned with the location of the homes. Would like to see the lots larger, and make sure the floodwater is addressed properly. Commends the developer on his efforts. Farnworth moves to continue the public hearings for RZ-8-97 and CU-6-97, PPUD-I-97, PP-2-97 for the Stonewater Planned Unit Development to the October 20, 1997 meeting with all of the testimony which has been received to be entered into the record. Seconded by Trent. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES. Brinton calls a 5 minute recess. C. VAC-2-97 - Spvl!lass Sub. Final Plat -Vacation of Landscape Easements - Peter A. Wierenea: Peter A. Wierenga is requesting a vacation to the final plat of Spyglass Subdivision. The proposed vacation would allow the removal of the landscape and pathway easements along the west and north boundaries of the subdivision and along the property lines of 11 interior lots. The subdivision is located on the northwest corner of Locust Grove and Chinden Blvd. Bradley introduces the item. Page4or9 F:\SHARED\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-IO-6-97 minutes. doc Peter A. Wierenga, 10451 W. Garverdale Ct. Boise, Idaho. Gives an overview of the project and its history. Explains that the original concept of the subdivision regarding the equestrian/pedestrian paths running behind, or along many of the lots was a mistake. Many of the potential investors have expressed a great deal of dismay regarding the location of these paths, they do not want people wandering through their backyard. They are planning on putting a walking path along Chinden Blvd. General discussion between Commission and Mr. Wierenga regarding the height of the fence and the size of the ditch. Also comments on the fact that this will eliminate a great deal of the landscaping which was required via a condition of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The zoning in this area would allow the decrease in the landscaping. Mark Butler gives staff report. Butler gives background information regarding this item. Gives an overview of the original meeting regarding the final plat. Notes that he has not made a staff recommendation for this item. The decrease of landscaping would be allowed in the current zonmg. Chip Gallagher, 10320 W. Susan Ct. Boise, Idaho. Mr. Gallagher was part of the original design team of this subdivision, but has no financial interest to the subdivision. Comments on the flaw which is now obvious of placing the equestrian and pedestrian pathways along many of the lots. Gallagher supports this proposed change. Don Asbell, 1750 E. State St. Eagle, Idaho. Questions the cost of the lots in Spyglass. Wierenga provides the figures. Peter Wierenga, also comments on requiring trees via the CC&R's to replace some of the landscaping which will be eliminated through this vacation. Discussion between Commission and Mr. Wierenga regarding his changing the original intent of the subdivision. Bradley questions the City Attorney regarding whether or not Mr. Wierenga has the legal authority to make the proposed changes. McFadden notes that at this time, Mr. Wierenga owns enough lots, and has approval of the other homeowners to make these changes. Butler notes that Staff does have letters on file from the other homeowners of Spyglass approving of this change. Further discussion between Commission and Mr. Wierenga, regarding the original intent of the Subdivision and the proposed changes to it. Bradley questions whether or not the vacation of the Common Lot has been approved. Butler notes that it has with certain conditions. Further discussion between Butler and Commission to provide clarification of which pathways will be vacated. Bradley closes the public hearing portion. Brinton asks whether or not the CC&R's have been submitted with the requirement of trees. Brinton feels the Commission should require the CC&R's to be submitted. Bradley states he does not have a problem vacating this item. Trent agrees with Bradley's comments. Farnworth has a problem requiring the trees to be planted. Bradely states he would rather not address the requirements of trees, but leave that up to the developer to dictate in the CC&R's. Farnworth discusses the common lot. Farnworth moves to approve V AC-2-97 Spyglass Subdivision Final Plat - Vacation of Landscape Easements with the staff recommendations regarding the vacation. Seconded by Page 5 of9 F:\SHARED\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-IO-6-97 minutes. doc Trent. Discussion. Bradley would rather not dictate the type of fencing allowed in subdivision. Would like the fencing to be dictated by the CC&R's. Brinton notes the motion did not address trees. Farnworth calls for the question. Farnworth & Trent AYE. Bradley and Brinton NAY. MOTION FAILS for lack of majority. Discussion regarding the fencing, between Commission and Butler. Brinton moves to approve V AC-2-97 Spyglass Subdivision Final Plat Vacation of Landscape Easements with the four staff conditions of, 8 Yz x 11 copy of the plat showing with revision with the easements and related notes, the ordinance for vacation shall not be published until the requirements of the original vacation which has to do with the common lot be completed, and the fencing on the west and north side shall be a four foot three rail PVC fence, and that they have three trees in the front yard. Seconded by Farnworth. ALL AYE.. .MOTION CARRIES. D. CU-5-97 - Cellular Transmission Facilitv - Carl Stearns: Kim Garrick with AT&T Wireless Services, represented by Carl Steams with JUB Engineers, is requesting conditional use approval to construct and operate a cellular transmission facility with a 110' tower and a 336 sq. ft. equipment storage building. The 53-acre site is located approximately nO-feet east of Edgewood Lane and 800-feet north of State Street at 350 S. Edgewood Lane. Bradley introduces the item. Bradley recuses himself due to a possible conflict of interest, stating his brother works for AT&T. Turns the meeting over to Vice Chairman Brinton. Carl Stearns gives an overview of the application. Lists his background and experience. Steams gives a background of this application. Displays overhead to illustrate the locations in which cellular towers over 35 feet are and are not allowed. Displays charts displays a charts showing current coverage and possible coverage with the tower in proposed location. Notes that the Western PCS site will not provide adequate service for AT&T. Stems comments on certain points in the Staff reports. Discusses non-conforming uses section of the Eagle City Code. It is the applicants desire to provide adequate service for Eagle. Stems notes that if this site is denied they have no other alternatives. Reviews staff s site conditions in detail and notes his disagreement on numerous points. The Zoning Administrator conveys that the staff recommends denial, and if the Commission does wish to approve it then they should review the conditions within the staff report. Butler notes that our City Attorney has reviewed the staff report and stands behind the document. Larry Laraway, 8885 W. Highway 44 Star, Idaho. His family owns 16 lots behind the proposed property. The economic damage would be substantial. He would have a hard time selling the lots if a tower is approved. Frank Searle, 350 S. Edgewood Ln. Eagle, Idaho. The tower will be located on his property and he sees no problem with the installation of the site. Mr. Searle had no problems when his neighbor put in his lots, and sees no reason why his neighbor would have a problem with this tower. Feels the tower would not hurt anyone. Keith Bower, 233 S. Silverwood Way Eagle, Idaho. The tower would be visible outside his backdoor. Feels he would be financially damaged. Also feels the radio waves could possibly Page 6 of9 F:\SHARED\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN - ZON\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-l 0-6-97 minutes.doc harm those living near. Bower opposes this application and appreciates having a chance to comment. Steve Deckers, 2249 W. Dickey Circle Eagle, Idaho. The towers are ugly. Suggests AT&T co- locate with Western and then applying for a 35 foot tower. Jeffrey Rapp, 152 S. Silverwood Way Eagle, Idaho. The tower will be out his front door. Does not like the aesthetics of it. Feels co-location would be more preferable. Jeff Schrade, 1879 E. Laurelwood Way Eagle, Idaho. Notes that Edgewood estates requires underground phone and power lines, and now this application will undo all that the homeowners have worked towards. If the application goes through he will encourage the homeowners association to seek legal action either against the applicant or the Council. Feels that the tower will negatively impact his house and his ability to sell his property. Cleda Bower, 233 S. Silverwood Way Eagle, Idaho. Also likes the suggestion of co-locating and proposes a second tower. Citing ordinance 294 and questions the reason for this site. Collected signatures from homeowners who do not want the tower to be allowed. States that if AT&T could co-locate and install a smaller tower it would be preferable. Comments on other locations which the city recommended and might find more acceptable i.e. Ada County/Eagle Park, the Fire Department approved cite, Boise sewer ponds and future park, State park, Compo Plan Industrial, and the ACHD pond. Question whether or not these sites were truly looked at. Shari Wilson, 200 S. Silverwood Way Eagle, Idaho. President of Homeowners Association. Her house does face the tower. Relays that she has been contacted by numerous people concerned about the placement of this tower. Submits a list of people who have signed a petition against the tower. Sheryl Wool, 137 Silverwood Way Eagle, Idaho. Feels that it would be dangerous and unsightly. Opposes the proposed location of the tower. Ken Gee, 112 S. Blackwood Ave. Eagle, Idaho. Comments that the potential for the site to become overgrown with weeds should be considered. It isn't a buffer zone for a residential area at all, you shouldn't have the residential area stop and a weed patch begin. Jeff Schrade 1897 W. Laurelwood Way Eagle, ID. He lives in a residential area and feels the tower should be placed in a commercial area. Don Asbell, 1750 E. State St. Eagle, Idaho. Comments that the proposed site is commercially zoned. Notes that when the subdivisions were built the developer knew that the neighboring property would allow this type of structure. Feels there are trees that are higher than the proposed tower. Notes that there is a water transformer located nearby. States that there are certain things must be sacrificed. Believes that the major utilities should be located in the same area. Asbell notes that if it improves the service it would be worth it. Has no objection to the application. Butler notes the letters which have been submitted for Commission to review. Carl Stearns, rebuts some public comments given tonight. States that the 35 foot tower may not be the direction the City would like to move. The aesthetics are a problem, notes that many Page 7 of9 F:\SHARED\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-IO-6-97 minutes. doc people do not notice them. States that they have investigated numerous other acceptable locations taking into consideration the restrictions placed by the city ordinances and the geographic restrictions, and this site meets all of their needs. Also comments that the cellular lines cannot be placed underground. Discussion amongst Commission. Farnworth felt originally this would be the appropriate site for both towers to originally be located. Questions whether or not they would be providing service for the city of Eagle or for Garden City and the Boise foothills as well. Feels the tower may not be needed at this time, with two towers located on each side of Eagle at this time. Trent feels that many of the people commenting are relatively new to the community, and the people who have been long time residents are seeking a way to improve their lives. Perhaps the people need to be more tolerant. Brinton feels this is a difficult decision. There seems to be a lot of "not in my backyard syndrome". Has mixed feelings regarding the application. Brinton feels the Commission should address Staff s request that an independent consultant be brought in to review the site. Farnworth comments that he would like an independent consultant to provide information regarding what areas this proposed tower will serve, to confirm the necessity of the application.. Farnworth moves to continue CU-5-97 Cellular Transmission Facility until Staff and Commission receive a recommendation from an independent consultant which will study whether or not it is feasible for the applicant co-located upon the existing Western PCS tower. And the applicant shall be required to pay for the independent consultant per Eagle City Code 1-7-4A. Seconded by Trent. Discussion. McFadden also notes that this will be a continuation of the public hearing, since additional testimony will be taken at that time. Brinton notes that the public hearing has been closed. McFadden requests that Brinton reconsider and re-open the public hearing so that additional testimony may be taken at the next meeting, and also the applicant will then be allowed to rebut at that time. Brinton asks Farnworth to add that the public hearing be reopened at that time. Farnworth agrees as does Trent the second of the motion. Discussion. Farnworth comments that when they receive the independent consultant's report and this is the only location where this tower can be, then feels the Commission will need to approve the location. With all respect to the neighbors who have expressed their views, Farnworth hopes they feel that the Commission has done everything in their power to confirm this is the only solution. Brinton asks if a meeting date needs to be specified. Farnworth amends his motion to specify the item be continued to the November 3, 1997 meeting, agreed to by Trent the second. ALL AYE.. .MOTION CARRIES. E. ZOA-7-97 - Citv initiated zonin!! ordinance amendment: Ordinance Of The City Of Eagle, Ada County Idaho, Amending Eagle City Code, Title 8 "Zoning", Chapter 4, "Off-Street Parking And Loading", Sections 8-4-1: Interpretation Of Provisions, 8-4-2: Application Of Provisions, 8- 4-3: Design And Maintenance, 8-4-4: Additional Parking Regulations And Requirements, 8-4-4- 1: Location Of Parking Spaces, 8-4-4-2: Design And Maintenance, 8-4-4-3: Joint Parking Facilities, 8-4-4-4: Parking Disabled Vehicles, 8-4-5: Schedule For Parking Requirements, And 8-4-6: Additional Loading Space Regulations And Requirements. Brinton moves to continue this item to the next meeting due to the late hour. Seconded by Farnworth. ALL AYE.. . MOTION CARRIES... 6. NEW BUSINESS: None Page 8 of9 F:\SHARED\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-IO-6-97 minutes. doc 7. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: Butler gives a brief overview of the September 23rd Council meeting in which the Council approved that the Design Review Board will act as the Parks Committee. Council will act on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the October 14th meeting. The Zoning Ordinance will be addressed at the meeting of October 14th. And at the September 30th meeting the Chamber of Commerce billboard appeal was continued to the October 14th meeting. 8. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Brinton and Seconded by Trent to adjourn, ALL AYE.. ,MOTION CARRIES... RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED: :!!.""SIUIIAf..." ~~"""'f 0 F 1:: A ~'##. ~""~ .-tno« 4>~" ....",.... 'i4'.1- \.. Ii tl .& -. "'--41. to'. :: l8 ~.t' 0 1:<1. \ ,,- '\ :: "'~C "~~:. .. *.. .... ". ~.' . -'.- "..J.- .. '.. . ,. '" : ... 8.-0\ SF-A' .. ... .4 . 7 ". ~ .. ..... . J .. -- ~.('. .:...¡ L .~'" .. ~ e..,C't¡-. '~..": ~ ~:>". "'.~"On^ -¡...;.i..:. 0 i' "4""Á~."....i(". ...,"" -'l' ~-~ ~~', ~## 0" 1"Ot.,. ..,,' -#. r "" ""'Iun'" A TRANSCRIBABLE RECORD OF THIS MEETING IS AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. Page90f9 F:\SHARED\P&Z\MEETINGS\PLAN - ZON\MINUTES\ Temporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-I 0-6-97 minutes.doc