Findings - CC - 1998 - RZ-7-98 - 95.2 Acre/1400 W.Floating Feather From Ar To R3
ORIGINAL
BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR
A REZONE FROM A-R (AGRICULTURAL-
RESIDENTIAL) TO R-3 (RESIDENTIAL) FOR
ROGER C. CRANDLEMIRE
)
)
)
)
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER RZ- 7 -98
The above-entitled comprehensive plan amendment application came before the Eagle City Council for
their action on August 21, 1999, at which time the public testimony was taken. The public hearing was
continued until August 28, 1999, and then to August 31, 1999, at which time the public hearing was
closed, however, written comments were accepted until 5:00 P.M., September 2, 1999. The Council
began deliberations on September 2, 1999, and continued deliberations until November 9, 1999, at which
time they made their final decision.
The Eagle 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.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Roger C. Crandlemire, represented by Roylance & Associates, is requesting approval of
a rezone from A-R (Agricultural-Residential - one dwelling unit per five acres
maximum) to R-3 (Residential - three dwelling units per one acre maximum). The 95.2-
acre site is located on the north side of Floating Feather Road approximately %-mile west
of Eagle Road at 1400 W. Floating Feather Road.
B.
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL:
The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on August 31, 1998.
C.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle Planning and Zoning
Commission was published in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho
Code and the Eagle City ordinances on September 30, 1998. Notice of this public
hearing was mailed to property owners within three-hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject
property in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and
Eagle City Code on October 3, 1998. Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted
on September 4, 1998 in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
D.
HISTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS: none
E.
COMPANION APPLICATIONS: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-2-98)
Page 1 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\RZ&A \1998\RZ- 7 -98 ccf.doc
F.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS:
COMP PLAN ZONING LAND USE
DESIGNATION DESIGNA TION
Existing Very Low Density A-R (Agricultural-Residential) Agriculture/ Existing
Residential (1 unit per residence
two acres maximum)
Proposed Medium Density R-3 (Residential) Residential Subdivision
Residential (4 units per
acre maximum)
North of site Very Low Density R1 & RT (Residential) Rural Residences
Residential (1 unit per
two acres maximum)
South of site Low Density Residential A (Agricultural), PS Agriculture/ Eagle
(2 units per acre (Public/Semi-Public), R-I Middle School/
maximum) & (Residential) Residences
Public/Semi- Public
East of site Very Low Density RT (Residential) & PS Agriculture
Residential (1 unit per (Public/Semi-Public)
two acres maximum) &
Public/Semi-Public
West of site Very Low Density RT, Rl, R8 (Residential) Residences
Residential (1 unit per
two acres maximum)
G.
DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT: Not in the DDA, TDA or CEDA.
H.
TOTAL ACREAGE OF SITE: 95.2-acres
I.
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REZONE:
See attached narrative date stamped August 31, 1998.
J.
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(if applicable): nJa
K.
AVAILABILITY AND ADEQUACY OF UTILITIES AND SERVICES:
Preliminary approval letters from Eagle Fire Department and United Water Idaho have
been provided to the City.
The letter received from the Eagle Sewer District states that a sewer line is existing near
the site, however, the District has not guaranteed service to this site to date.
L.
PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUISITIONS MAP: No map currently exists.
M.
NON-CONFORMING USES:
Based upon the information available, the proposed rezone is in conformance with
applicable provisions of the Eagle City Code.
Page 2 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\RZ&A\1998\RZ-7-98 ccf.doc
N.
AGENCY RESPONSES:
The following agencies have responded and their correspondence is attached. Comments
which appear to be of special concern are noted below:
Central District Health
Eagle Fire Department
Eagle Sewer District
United Water Company
O.
LETIERS FROM THE PUBLIC: See the 7-letters (attached) and other applicable letters in
packet for CP A-6-97
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITIDN THE STAFF REPORT:
A.
OCTOBER 14, 1997 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL
CONCERN REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL:
.
The 1997 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates this area as "Very Low Density
Residential (One or fewer dwelling units per two acres)."
.
SECTION: "PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACES"
Parks, recreation and open spaces deals with the places and facilities for the enjoyable
use of leisure time and provisions for attractive open spaces.
Open space is land which is not used for buildings or structures and offers opportunities
for parks, recreation, water amenities, greenbelt-river trails and pathways, tourism,
leisure pursuits and potential economic development. The policies and goals relating to
open space will greatly affect the character of Eagle's area of influence and future
developments.
.
SECTION: "TRANSPORTATION"
POLICIES AND GOALS
17. To require that new developments within the City or Impact Area provide a traffic impact
study to the City. These studies shall include, but not be limited to, potential impacts to
existing traffic patterns, suggested roadway widths, access to existing & proposed
roadways, signalization, location and need for intersections, turn lanes, and bus stops. In
addition the traffic impact study should address parking and pedestrian traffic.
Implementation of any traffic requirements by the City shall be dependent upon approval
from the Ada County Highway District (ACHD) and/or the Idaho Transportation
Department (ITD). No developments will be permitted to start until all approvals have
been obtained.
.
SECTION: "COMMUNITY DESIGN"
Community design is the organized fashion in which a community is developed in order
that a g:eneral mood or theme is established and maintained.
Page 3 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\RZ&A \1998\RZ- 7 -98 ccf.doc
Elements of the Eagle community design include: (a) a rural transitional community with
a shopping district functioning as the hub of the community; (b) the Boise River and its
floodplain establishing a natural open space area complete with wildlife, trees, and
recreation opportunities; (c) the rolling hills north of the river as an attractive terrace;
and, (d) a network of canals which crisscross the community.
Presently the dominant features within the Eagle Area, i.e., floodplain, canal system, etc.
are undeveloped and provide development potential. As Eagle grows, it will be a
challenge for the community to maintain its rural identity using these elements as the
basis for community design.
POLICIES AND GOALS
1. To establish and maintain a development pattern and desÜm criteria in keepill!! with the
rural transitional identity of Eagle.
.
SECTION: "LAND USE"
Land use designations as reflected on the Land Use Map shall be based on the existing
land use pattern, existing natural physical features such as the Boise River, Dry Creek
and the foothills, floodplain areas, capacity of existing community facilities, projected
population and economic growth, compatibility with other uses of the land, transportation
systems, and the needs oflocal citizens.
POLICIES AND GOALS
1. To preserve the rural transitional identity.
2. To preserve the natural features and resources of Eagle.
3. To establish land use patterns and zoning district's that do not exhaust available services
such as sewer, water, police, fire protection, recreational areas, highways and
transportation systems.
4. To promote compatibility between zoning districts.
5. To encourage pedestrian friendly development.
6. To encourage clustering and density transfer techniques to provide for recreational
opportunities and for the preservation and acquisition of open space as part of Planned
Unit Developments CPUD). Plats involving ten or more lots are encouraged to file such
requests as part of a (PUD).
Note: There is no language in the 1997 Comprehensive Plan that states that the City is intended to
develop into uniform concentric circles of decreasing density radiating out from the CBD.
B.
ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
THIS PROPOSAL: (None)
c.
DISCUSSION:
.
The 1997 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates this area as "Very Low Density
Residential (One or fewer dwelling units per two acres)."
The proposed R-3 zone (three units per acre) is not in compliance with the current
Page 4 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\RZ&A \ 1998\RZ- 7-98 ccf.doc
Comprehensive Plan, however, if the Comprehensive Plan is amended to allow Medium
Density Residential (four or fewer dwelling units per acre) for this area, then the requested R-
3 zoning designation would be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map.
Staff believes that if a rezone to R-3 is approved, then a development agreement should be
required to mitigate the concerns of surrounding properties and other concerns of the City.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDED WITIDN THE STAFF REPORT:
Based upon the information provided to staff to date, and if the requested Comprehensive Plan
amendment for this site is not approved, then staff recommends denial of the requested rezone. If
the Comprehensive Plan is amended to allow medium density residential for this area, then a
development agreement should be required with any rezone to mitigate the concerns of
surrounding properties and other concerns of the City.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COMMISSION:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the Planning and Zoning Commission on
November 9, 1998, at which time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The
Commission continued the item until deliberations were completed on CP A-2-98. On July 19, 1999,
after the Commission made their final recommendation on CP A-2-98, they made their
recommendation on RZ- 7-98 at that time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission
by thirty (30) individuals and is incorporated into these findings by reference. The concerns
addressed were generally as follows: The proposed change will have negative affects on traffic
congestion, density increases, air quality, water quality (potable and irrigation), school overcrowding;
and will advance out of control growth due to the lack of land and resources and infrastructure; will
increase the potential for gang activity; will have a negative impact on the rural atmosphere and
conditions in the resources; will disrupt existing lifestyles in the area near the proposal; the
infrastructure in the area is deficient and cannot support future growth! it is not prepared for this type
of project; this property should not be changed until the areas that are currently designated as higher
density residential are developed or some greater need arises for increased density in this area other
than the desire for increased profits for the developer;
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission by
one (1) individual (not including the applicant and their representatives) and is incorporated into these
findings by reference. The individual felt that property owners have the right to develop their land
and that if individuals do not want it developed and want to keep it open for their own enjoyment and
views then they should purchase it.
D. Written testimony in opposition to this proposal has been received by fifteen (15) individuals. The
letters are incorporated into these findings by reference.
COMMISSION DECISION:
The Commission voted 4 to 0 (Farnworth absent) to recommend denial of RZ- 7-98 for a rezone
from A-R (Agricultural-Residential - one dwelling unit per five acres maximum) to R-3
(Residential - three dwelling units per one acre maximum) for Roger C. Crandlemire.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the Eagle City Council on August 21, 1999, at
which time the public testimony was taken. The public hearing was continued until August 28, 1999,
and then to August 31, 1999, at which time the public hearing was closed, however, written
Page 5 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\RZ&A \1998\RZ- 7 -98 ccf.doc
comments were accepted until 5:00 P.M., September 2, 1999. The Council began deliberations on
September 2, 1999, and continued deliberations until November 9, 1999, at which time they made
their final decision.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by sixteen (16)
individuals who voiced concerns related to the negative impacts of increasing density, school
overcrowding, lack of necessary infrastructure, the future decreasing of property values, hindrance of
rural lifestyle, and property size incompatibility.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council by four (4) individuals
who generally felt that higher density should be on higher land and not within the floodplain, that
since other land within the City of Eagle was previously subdivided with high density then this land
should have the same rights, that people should be able to do whatever they want with their own land
and should be able to develop it to high density residential if they so choose regardless of location,
and that a higher density development such as the one proposed for this property will be an asset to
the community.
COUNCIL DECISION:
The Council voted 3 to 1 (Guerber against) to deny RZ- 7-98 for a rezone from A-R
(Agricultural-Residential - one dwelling unit per five acres maximum) to R-3 (Residential - three
dwelling units per one acre maximum) for Roger C. Crandlemire.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on August 31, 1998.
2. Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission was
published in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
ordinances on September 30, 1998. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners
within three-hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on October 3, 1998. Requests for agencies'
reviews were transmitted on September 4, 1998 in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle
City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in accordance
for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City ordinances on August 4,
1999. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners within three-hundred feet (300-
feet) of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code
and Eagle City Code on August 5, 1999.
3. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed rezone (RZ- 7-98) with
regard to Eagle City Code Section 8-7-5 "Action by the Commission and Council", and based upon
the information provided concludes that the proposed rezone is not in accordance with the City of
Eagle Comprehensive Plan and established goals and objectives because:
a. The requested zoning designation of R-3 (three dwelling units per gross acre maximum) is
greater than the one dwelling unit per two gross acres maximum shown on the Comprehensive
Plan Land Use Map;
b. The information provided (or lack thereof) from the agencies having jurisdiction over the public
facilities needed for this site do not indicate that adequate public facilities exist at this time to
serve any and all uses allowed on this property under the proposed zone;
c. The proposed R-3 zone (three dwelling units per gross acre maximum) is not compatible with the
Page 6 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\RZ&A\1998\RZ-7-98 ccf.doc
Rl and RT zoning designations and existing lots to the north, east, and west because lot sizes
permitted in an R-3 zone are significantly smaller than lots sizes in Rl and RT zones and because
the densities permitted in an R-3 zone are significantly higher than densities permitted in the Rl
and RT zones;
d. The proposed R-3 zone (three dwelling units per gross acre maximum) is not compatible with
future expected residential zoning and land use to the south since that area has a Comprehensive
Plan Land Use Map designation of Residential One (one dwelling unit per gross acre maximum)
and since the City Council determined that Floating Feather Road is the dividing line between
one dwelling unit per acre and higher residential densities to the south and acreage lot rural,
lower residential densities to the north.
DATED this 23rd day of November, 1999.
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
Ada Co , Idaho
." ,nul':!I:!~r
!>~ 0 ë:'I""" ~~.
..~~,..,1 r L.~./~ ;':.>..
-~"'~... .... _t~t'.af>...Jt"c..,..;~~
:'IJ,..,.~4II'" 'J..'\.",'
'" c..ì,," , ;,,> ",',> ',C.
:: ", ~170,"... "'.'" r"
"". r- 11>' <"'~» '" ';'
:: r..., c ..4'> ", ','
Z .J..,. ~ ."'>,, -- '~.~ ~.'~
:; /',,~. ;¡:; ;;:
\. ¿f;?~~:;>ï ~ ;~~i:/
'....t~IìH'U:',"'-
Page 7 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\RZ&A\1998\RZ- 7-98 ccf.doc