Findings - CC - 1999 - PP-5-98 - Preplat For Clear Crk Crossing/54.8 Acre/72 Lots
OR I GINAL
BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION
FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CLEAR
CREEK CROSSING FOR A RESIDENTIAL
SUBDIVISION FOR JA YO CONSTRUCTION
)
)
)
)
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER PP-5-98
The above-entitled preliminary plat application came before the Eagle City Council for their action on
February 23, 1999. The public hearing was closed at that time. The Eagle Council, having heard and
taken oral and written testimony took action to deny the application at that time. On May 11, 1999, a
request for reconsideration, due to new information proposed to be entered into the public record, came
before the Eagle City Council. At that time the Eagle City Council took action to reconsider the Clear
Creek Subdivision application and they voted (3 to 1) to rescind their February 23, 1999, vote for denial.
The Council further directed staff to schedule a public hearing to review the modified plat presented by
the applicant, the March 22, 1999, letter from the City Engineer, and any further studies and/or
information relating to this item.
The above-entitled preliminary plat application again came before the Eagle City Council for their action
on August 10, 1999. The second public hearing was closed at that time. The Eagle City Council, having
heard and taken oral and written testimony took action at that time. The Eagle City Council having duly
considered the matter makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law;
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Jayo Construction, represented by Roylance & Associates, is requesting preliminary plat
approval for Clear Creek Crossing Subdivision, a 54.8-acre, 89-lot (reduced by the
applicant to 72-10ts after the 89 lot subdivision was denied by the Council) residential
subdivision generally located on the southwest comer of N. Eagle Road and Floating
Feather Road.
B.
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL:
The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on September 16, 1998.
The plat was modified by the applicant and submitted to the City on June 24, 1999, with
supporting documentation submitted (letter from Roylance & Associates dated July 9,
1999) on July 12, 1999.
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 October 14, 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 16, 1998. Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted
on September 18,1998 in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the first public hearing of the Eagle City
Council was published in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho
Page 1 of 26
\\EAGLENT I \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applieations\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing eef version3.doe
D.
E.
F.
Code and the Eagle City ordinances on January 20, 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 January 15, 1999.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the second public hearing of the Eagle
City Council was published in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho
Code and the Eagle City ordinances on July 21,1999. 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 July 26, 1999.
HISTORY OF PREVIOUS ACTIONS:
On July 14, 1998, the City Council denied a request for an extension of time for Wintry
River (Apreliminary plat previously submitted for this site).
COMPANION APPLICATIONS: None
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS:
CaMP PLAN ZONING LAND USE
DESIGNATION DESIGNATION
Existing Medium Density R-4 (Residential) Agriculture
Residential (4-units per
acre maximum)
Proposed No Change No Change Residences
North of site Low Density Residential RT (Residential) Agriculture and town
(2-units per acre houses
maximum) & Floodway
South of site Medium Density R-4 (Residential) Agriculture
Residential (4-units per R -10 (Residential)
acre maximum) and
Mixed Use
East of site Medium Density R-4 (Residential) Residences, Agriculture &
Residential (4-units per Church
acre maximum)
West of site Low Density Residential R-l (Residential) Residences
(2-units per acre
maximum) & Floodway
G.
DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT: Not in the DDA, TDA or CEDA.
H.
SITE DATA:
Page 2 of 26
\\EAGLENTI \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle AppJications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccfversion3.doc
Total Acreage of Site - 54.8
Total Number of Lots - 89 (reduced by the applicant to 72-lots after the 89 lot subdivision was
denied by the Council)
Residential- 89-lots (reduced by the applicant to 72-lots after the
89 lot subdivision was denied by the Council)
Commercial - 0
Industrial - 0
Common - 5.8-acres (approx) excluding floodway (not yet
shown with lot #'s on plat)
Total Number of Units - 89 (reduced by the applicant to 72-lots after the 89 lot subdivision was
denied by the Council)
Single-family - 89 (reduced by the applicant to 72-lots after the
89 lot subdivision was denied by the Council)
Duplex - 0
Multi-family - 0
Total Acreage of Any Out-Parcels - 5.4
ADDITIONAL SITE DATA PROPOSED REOUIRED
Dwelling Units Per Gross Acre l.62-units (reduced to 1.31- 4-units per acre maximum
units - appro x by applicant)
(2.06-units (reduced to 1.8-
units - approx by applicant)
per acre excluding floodwav)
Minimum Lot Size 10,300 SQ. ft. 8,000 SQ. ft.
Minimum Lot Width 80-feet 70-feet
Minimum Street Frontage 39-feet 35-feet
Total Acreage of Common Area 5.8-acres (approx) (excluding 5.48-acres minimum
floodwav)
Percent of Site as Common Area 10.6% (approx) (excluding 10% minimum
floodway) Except that, according to ECC
Section 9-3-8 (C) the City
may require additional public
and/or private park or open
space facilities in PUDs or in
subdivisions with 50 or more
lots.
1.
GENERAL SITE DESIGN FEATURES:
Greenbelt Areas and Landscape Screening:
Eagle City Code requires a 50-foot wide minimum buffer area (with landscaping and
berming) along Floating Feather Road (see Eagle City Code). The applicant is proposing
a 60- foot buffer area in this location.
Page 3 of 26
\\EAGLENTl\COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle AppJications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccf version3.doc
Also, a 10-foot wide landscaped pathway is proposed to be constructed within the
floodway along Dry Creek.
Open Space:
Will provide a total of 10.6% (excluding floodway) of common area. 10% minimum
required except that, according to ECC Section 9-3-8 (C) the City may require additional
public and/or private park or open space facilities in PUDs or in subdivisions with 50 or
more lots.
Storm Drainage and Flood Control:
Street drainage plans have been submitted by the applicant as required by the Subdivision
Ordinance. Specific drainage system plans are to be submitted to the City Engineer for
review and approval prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat. The plans are to
show how swales, or drain piping, will be developed in the drainage easements. Also,
the CC&R's are to contain clauses to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and
City Attorney, requiring that lots be so graded that all runoff runs either over the curb, or
to the drainage easement, and that no runoff shall cross any lot line onto another lot
except within a drainage easement.
Also, flooding issues are addressed elsewhere herein.
Utility and Drainage Easements, and Underground Utilities:
Eagle City Code section 9-3-6 requires utility easements to be not less than 12 feet wide.
Fire Hydrants and Water Mains:
Hydrants are to be located and installed as may be required by the Eagle Fire District.
On-site Septic System (yes or no) - no
Preservation of Existing Natural Features:
Dry Creek runs along the entire western portion of this site. The floodway section of that
area is proposed to be designated as common area and be preserved for wildlife habitat
and natural plant life. A 10-foot wide landscaped pathway is proposed to be constructed
within this area.
Also, the southeast portion of the subdivision consists of slopes of 10% or more and
development in that area is therefore additionally regulated under the provisions of Eagle
City Code Section 9-5-3.
Preservation of Existing Historical Assets:
Staff is not aware of any existing historical assets on the site which would be required to
be preserved. If during excavation or development of the site, any historical artifacts are
discovered, state law requires immediate notification to the state.
J.
STREET DESIGN:
Private or Public Streets: public
Applicant's Justification for Private Streets (if proposed): None proposed
Blocks Less Than 500': None
Page 4 of 26
\\EAGLENTI\COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccfversion3.doc
Cul-de-sac Design:
5-cul-de-sacs are proposed within this development. The design of the cul-de-sacs meet
the minimum requirements of Eagle City Code. Each cul-de-sac is proposed to have a
landscape circle in the center of the turn around area.
Sidewalks:
4-foot wide sidewalks are proposed within this development, however, the plat does not
show the location of the sidewalks. Sidewalks are required on both sides of the streets.
Curbs and Gutters:
Curbs and gutters which meet Ada County Highway District standards are proposed for
the interior streets.
Lighting:
Lighting for the proposed public streets is required. Location and lighting specifications
shall be provided to the City Zoning Administrator prior to the City Engineer signing the
final plat.
NOTE: The applicant is proposing decorative lighting.
Street Names:
Street names approved by the Ada County Street Name Committee are shown on the
attached correspondence from that committee.
K.
ON AND OFF-SITE PEDESTRIANIBICYCLE CIRCULATION:
Pedestrian Walkways: (See comments under sidewalks above.) Also, a 10-foot wide
landscaped pathway is proposed to be constructed within the floodway along Dry Creek,
and one 20-foot wide easement is proposed for a pathway connecting Remuda Way to
the Dry Creek Pathway. A school access pathway is also proposed.
Bike Paths:
Eagle City Code section 9-4-1-7 states that a bicycle pathway shall be provided in all
subdivisions as part of the public right-of-way or separate easement, as may be specified
by the City Council. The Council has typically allowed low intensity residential streets
within subdivisions to suffice for bikes.
L.
PUBLIC USES PROPOSED:
A 10-foot wide pathway is proposed to be constructed within the Dry Creek floodway
area. The path will extend along the entire western portion of the development and will
be open for public use.
M.
PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUISITIONS MAP: No map currently exists
N.
SPECIAL ON-SITE FEATURES:
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern - Dry Creek
Evidence of Erosion - no
Fish Habitat - unknown
Floodplain - 100-year
Mature Trees - Trees along Dry Creek
Riparian Vegetation - Along Dry Creek
Page 5 of 26
\\EAGLENTI \COMMON\Planning Dept\EagJe Applications\SUBS\ I 998\Clear Creek Crossing ccf version3.doc
Steep Slopes - There is a hillside area (slopes equal to or over 10%) within the southeast portion
of the proposed development.
Stream/Creek: Dry Creek is located on the western boundary of the site and Dry Creek Canal is
located near the southern boundary of the site
Unique Animal Life - unknown
Unique Plant Life - unknown
Unstable Soils - unknown
Wildlife Habitat - Yes
O.
SUMMARY OF REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLAN (IF REQUIRED):
See Biological Study & Evaluation prepared by Resource Systems Inc., dated September
14, 1998, the Hydrological Report on Dry Creek prepared by Kunz Engineering, dated
November 1997, and the July 8, 1999, letter from Kunz Engineering.
P.
AGENCY RESPONSES:
The following agencies responded:
City Engineer: Letter dated December 2, 1998.
Ada County Highway District
Central District Health
Division of Environmental Quality
Eagle Fire Department
Eagle Sewer District
Meridian School District
New Dry Creek Ditch Company MOU dated December 24,
Robertson & Tucker, chartered)
1998 (represented by Rosholt,
Also attached to the December 3, 1998, staff report is a November 2, 1998, letter from Kunz
Engineering, a November 23, 1998, letter from FEMA, and the APA "City of Eagle Build-Out
Scenario" regarding traffic generation
Q. LETTERS PETITIONS AND PICTURES FROM THE PUBLIC:
One dated February 19, 1999, and one dated July 13, 1999, from Frank W. Stoppello
and, at the public hearings of the Council the following was submitted:
1. A petition bearing 54 names of people opposed to the original development
(Wintry River Crossing);
Copies of 5 letters from February of 1998 expressing dissatisfaction with the
proposed development;
A variety of pictures taken of the property on which Clear Creek Crossing would
be built. They were reported to be from flooding in April 1986, from flooding in
1992, 1993 and 1996, and others from the last 15 years.
2.
3.
STAFF ANALYSIS WIDCH WAS PROVIDED WITIDN THE STAFF REPORT:
NOTE: This analysis was for the original plat submittal consisting of 89 lots. The plat which was revised
by the applicant (72 lot plat) and the additional design proposals presented by the applicant at the second
public hearing, addressed the concerns noted in the staff analysis.
A.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN
REGARDING THE ORIGINAL PLAT SUBMITTAL CONSISTING OF 89 LOTS:
Page 6 of 26
\\EAGLENTI \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccf version3.doc
COMMENTS ON SPECIFIC
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
POLICIES
AND
GOALS
FROM
THE
EAGLE
0 Hazard Areas
. #2: Whenever possible the existing natural floodplain of the Boise River and Dry Creek
should remain in a natural state as a greenbelt, wildlife habitat, agricultural, open space and
recreation-nature areas.
#3: Special drainage studies, for those areas within the 100 year floodplain, and any
other areas deemed necessary by the City, may be required before any development will be
approved...
.
Staff Comment: The proposal provides a common area for the floodway with no portion of any
lot encroaching into the floodway. The proposal also includes a regional public pathway within
this area. The applicant is proposing design solutions for location of streets and dwellings in the
fringe area of the floodplain. Design proposals include finish floor elevations for all homes to be
a minimum of I-foot above Base Flood Elevation (BFE) in accordance with the City's Title 10
"Flood Control" regulations and all streets to be a minimum of 6-inches above the BFE at
centerline and all manhole rings to be 6-inches above BFE - both proposals being over and
above the City's Title 10 "Flood Control" regulations.
NOTE: During the public hearings the applicant decided not to construct the streets as
proposed but to have the elevations of the streets be approximately 6 to 12" below BFE.
The applicant sees no need to transfer any density from the "Hazard Area" (100 year flood plain)
to the out-parcel to the east (approximately 3-acres in size) which is outside of the 100 year
floodplain.
The applicant states that the proposed density is near Y2 of what would be allowed per the R-4
zone and that their proposal to have such a lower density (than what is permitted) certainly meets
the intent of the clustering goals of the Comprehensive Plan, which is to have lower densities
than what would otherwise permitted per Eagle City Code.
0 Parks. Recreation. and Oven Spaces
. #3: To set aside for perpetual public enjoyment an adequate amount of open space such
as natural river frontage, greenbelt-river trail, creeks, drainage ways, buffers, floodplains,
wooded areas and viewpoints.
#4: Developers shall be encouraged to dedicate and develop areas for parks or tot lots
in new residential developments.
.
Staff Comment: The planning of this subdivision took into consideration the City's objective
for open space and trail systems, and the floodway common area, as well as 5.8-acres additional
open space (or 10.6 percent - over the 10% required per code) provides areas for recreation needs
of all residents.
0 Special Areas or Sites
. #4: To preserve existing trees and natural growth wherever practical and establish
appropriate landscaping as a part of new developments.
Staff Comment: The tree growth along Dry Creek will be protected through design measures to
be regulated by the City and the "Common Area" designation proposed by the applicant. The
Page 7 of 26
\\EAGLENTI \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccfversion3.doc
applicant states that specific attention will be given to the City's pathway plan and desire for a
regional public trail along Dry Creek and to ensure that existing habitat is not affected.
0 Transportation
. #5: To require that new developments provide for pedestrian, equestrian and bicycle
circulation in accordance with adopted local and regional pathway plans.
#18: To establish and require minimum setbacks between development and roadways
and to encourage installation of berms and landscaping for all developments to enhance
safety and to enrich the roadway and community appearance.
.
Staff Comment: The development provides an internal, off-street system pathways system and
proposes to implement the regional trail envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. Community
appearance and land-use buffering is proposed for aesthetics, noise abatement and safety, along
Floating Feather Road and will be in accordance with Eagle City Code regarding buffer
requirements.
0 Communitv Desifm
. #4: The jloodway shall be reserved as a natural state such as a greenbelt, wildlife
habitat, open space recreational area and for agricultural uses.
Staff Comment: The Dry Creek floodway will be preserved as an open-space corridor in a
common area with the regional trail. The design of the development "bridges" the close-in
residential community character within the subdivision to the one acre lots west of Dry Creek
(Downing Downs Subdivision) with the common area buffer (floodway) which averages over
200- feet in width.
0 Land Use
. Medium Density Residential
Suitable primarily for single family residential development within an urbanized setting.
Appropriate residential densities are 4 dwelling units or fewer per gross acre.
.
#3: To establish land use patterns and zoning district's that do not exhaust available
services...
#4: To promote compatibility between zoning districts.
#11: To identifY... the Dry Creekjloodplain ... as Special Areas...
.
.
Staff Comment: The Development proposes a density which provides medium density life-style
choices as outlined by the Comprehensive Plan. All with an overall density of less than 2.06-
units dwelling units per acre (excluding floodway) which is below the 4 or fewer units called out
by the Plan as well as below the 4 or fewer units permitted by the existing R-4 residential zoning
designation.
The Dry Creek floodway/floodplain has already been addressed above.
The Hillside area at the south east portion of the site needs to be addressed. The applicant is not
proposing to preserve and protect the hillside area but to remove the soil for fill material and to
re-slope the area at the property line with a gentle slope of approximately 3 horizontal to 1
vertical.
B.
ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
THE ORIGINAL PLAT SUBMITTAL CONSISTING OF 89 LOTS: (None)
Page 8 of 26
\\EAGLENTl \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\ I 998\Clear Creek Crossing ccf version3 .doc
c.
SUBDIVISION AND FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH OF SPECIAL
CONCERN REGARDING THE ORIGINAL PLAT SUBMITIAL CONSISTING OF 89 LOTS:
.
Eagle City Code Section 9-5-3 "Hillside Subdivisions"
.
Eagle City Code Title 10 "Flood Control"
.
On November 10, 1998, the City Council voted (3 to 2 with Sedlacek and Merrill against and
Mayor Yzaguirre breaking the tie vote for a decision in favor) to not apply Eagle City Code
Section 9-4-1-10 (H) to development proposed within the floodplain and to apply the City's
Title 10 instead (minutes of the November 10, 1998, meeting are provided with the details
regarding the decision).
Eagle City Code Title 9 "Subdivisions", Section 9-4-1-10 (H) states, "With the exception of
road crossings, approved drainage structures and recreation and open space uses which do
not involve the destruction of vegetal cove, development shall be prohibited within the 100-
vear floodplain for ma;or waterwavs. and the 50-vear floodplain for minor waterwavs ".
This section of code is also referenced to Title 1 0 with the following statement in the Code,
"See Title 1 0 of this Code, Flood Control ".
This code appears to have been adopted with the subdivision ordinance which was approved
by the City in 1983.
Eagle City Code Title 1 0 "Flood Control" provides development criteria for allowing
residential and non-residential development specifically within Section 1 0-1-8-5 of that title.
That title also addresses potential conflicts with other code sections as follows.
Section 10-1-3: INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF PROVISIONS:
A. Jurisdiction and Interpretation: This Title shall apply to all areas of special flood hazards
within the jurisdiction of the City. In the interpretation and application of this Chapter, all
provisions shall be:
1. Considered as minimum requirements;
2. Liberally construed in favor of the City; and,
3. Deemed neither to limit nor repeal any other powers granted under provisions of the Idaho
Code.
B. Conflicting Laws: This Title is not intended to repeal, abrogate or impair any existing
easements, covenants or deed restrictions. However, where this Chapter and other ordinance,
easement, covenant or deed restrictions conflict or overlap, whichever imposes the more
stringent restrictions shall prevail.
Title 10 appears to have been adopted by the City in 1982.
D.
DISCUSSION PROVIDED UNDER STAFF ANALYSIS WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT (This
discussion was regarding the original plat submittal consisting of 89 lots):
.
A review of the APA Build Out Scenario (attached) indicates that planning a roadway, to
connect Ranch Drive to State Street in the future, will help carry approximate 2000 trips per
day. This will alleviate some of the anticipated traffic congestion at Eagle Road and State
Street (unless the City desires Eagle Road in that area to be widened to five lanes) and will
Page 9 of 26
\\EAGLENTl\COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccf version3.doc
help the commercial area west of State Street.
Based upon this information, staff believes that the applicant should provide a revised plan
realigning East Whitewing Drive, the Ranch Drive stub, and the southerly stub of Remuda
Way to allow for a less restricted flow of traffic from Ranch Drive through this site to a
future connection to State Street. The north/south roads should also be realigned to restrict
cut-through traffic from Floating Feather Road. Also, all garages should be side entry
(unless a circular driveway is constructed) along East Whitewing Drive, the Ranch Drive
Stub, and the southerly stub of Remuda Way to help alleviate "backing out" conflicts for
residences along this planned roadway in the future. (Staff will present an overhead at the
public hearings to illustrate the general concept proposed.
.
Also, see staff comments provided above.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION WIDCH WAS PROVIDED WITIDN THE STAFF REPORT (This
recommendation was for the original plat submittal consisting of 89 lots):
If the City does not apply Eagle City Code Section 9-4-1-10 (H), and the FEMA floodplain issues
can be resolved (the Council held floodplain issues were not resolved), staff recommends
approval with the site specific conditions of approval and the standard conditions of approval
provided within the staff report.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COMMISSION (This hearing was on the original plat submittal
consisting of 89 lots):
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the Planning and Zoning Commission on
December 7, 1998, at which time testimony was taken. The public hearing was left open and the item
was continued to January 4, 1999. Additional testimony was taken, the public hearing was closed,
and the Commission made their recommendation at that time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to the application was presented by five (5) individuals to the
Commission. The concerns addressed were generally as follows: air quality, and traffic concerns on
Ranch Dr., that there is no computer model of the Dry Creek Drainage area, and the risk is not
known, that within the last 15 years this area has flooded twice, and the flooding has occurred very
swiftly, concern of the financial aspect of flooding and that the tax payers end up paying for clean up,
frustrated that a developer is even proposing to develop in the floodplain, regarding the road
proposed to the south, these proposed subdivisions should have more than one exit out, quotes FEMA
statistics regarding the chance of flooding in the 100 year floodplain, the tax payers will be the ones
to pay for the rebuilding, the negative impact of the development on the wildlife, the need for
additional access to the subdivision, concerned that the middle common area will not handle flood
waters, and that it's not a matter of if it will flood, but when it will flood.
C. Oral testimony in favor of the application was presented by one (1) individual to the Commission (not
including applicant and their representatives). The individual stated that Cobblestone Lane is a
private lane, it does not belong to ACHD or the City of Eagle, and that the residents of Cobblestone
were not notified of the meeting. Agrees with the developer that the roads within the proposed
subdivision should not be realigned to provide for the type of future connection between Ranch Drive
and Cobblestone Lane that would allow for a less restricted flow of traffic from N. Eagle Road to the
W. State Street without passing through the Eagle Road! State Street intersection.
D. All testimony presented at the public hearing is incorporated into these Findings of Fact by reference.
Page 10 of 26
\\EAGLENTl \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccfversion3.doc
COMMISSION DECISION:
The Commission voted 4 to 1 (Trent against) to recommend approval of the subdivision with the
site specific and standard conditions of approval within their findings and conclusions document
adopted for this application.
FIRST PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL (This hearing was on the original plat submittal
consisting of 89 lots):
A. The first public hearing on the application was held before the Eagle City Council on February 23,
1999, at which time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Council took action
to deny at that time (that decision was reversed after the second public hearing).
B. Oral testimony in opposition to the application was presented by four (4) individuals to the Council
(two additional individuals had signed up to speak against the proposal but had left by the time the
public hearing started). The concerns addressed were generally as follows: Negative impact on taxes
due to flood damage costs; Flood prone area that has repeatedly flooded in the last 20 years; Flood
insurance only paying for house repairs and not for damage on the other parts of property or streets;
Homes located in the 100 year floodplain have a 26% chance of being flooded over the life of a 30
year mortgage and the same home has a 1 % chance of a fire; Almost certain to see a 10 year flood
which has a 96% of being flooded in that 30 year mortgage; Almost all the houses are in the
floodplain; Too many homes in floodplain; Potential for flooding to the property and roads up and
down stream; Concern over having so much water in the streets and over the property; Concern
regarding safety of children playing in the backyard or elsewhere in the development being harmed
by water and currents; Pictures of flooding in April 1986, from 1992 and 1993 and possibly from
1996 and others from the last 15 years; Development endangering public safety and the properties
surrounding the development; Lack of preservation of natural elements; This area of the Dry Creek
drainage appears to have had a lot more water than any other property along Dry Creek over the
years; Flooding has crossed Floating Feather Road in this location; Erosion to hillsides; The policy of
no building in the floodway is a must; Need "no net loss" grading and finished floors higher above
the BFE; Densities are too high for public safety because any plan the City puts in place for handling
emergencies must give the capability to remove individuals and their pets safely from premises
during a flood event: Densities should be further away from the floodway; Emergency vehicle access
should be required near the south end to remove obstructions and to do necessary maintenance; Need
flood alert warning and management system; There are alternative commercial purposes that would
provide the owner with reasonable return such as driving ranges, ball parks, or a gravel pit;
Significant impact on and loss of wildlife; Comp plan says "To preserve and protect fish, wildlife and
agriculture interests, open space and recreation-nature areas, the floodplain of the Boise River and
Dry Creek area shall be encouraged in future development plans" and "Conserve and maintain all
desirable fish and wildlife species and habitats particularly along the Boise River and Dry Creek".
C. No one presented oral testimony in favor of the application to the Council other than the applicant
and their representatives.
D. All testimony presented at the public hearing is incorporated into these Findings of Fact by reference.
COUNCIL DECISION AFTER FIRST PUBLIC HEARING:
On February 23, 1999, the Council voted 2 to 1 (Guerber against denial and Bastian absent) to
deny the proposed Clear Creek Crossing subdivision preliminary plat. The Council held that, at a
minimum, a new proposal for a subdivision at this site is to incorporate designs that;
a. Allow for a "no-net loss grading design", as the Council has required on other similar
developments in the floodplain;
Page 11 of 26
\\EAGLENTI \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccf version3.doc
b. Mitigate the tendency for debris dams to form in Dry Creek especially at the New Dry Creek
Ditch flume;
c. Accommodate more flood water retention facilities such as ponds, etc, as other applicants
have proposed for other similar developments in the floodplain;
d. Assure that all roadways are constructed a minimum of 6" above BFE as opposed to
roadways that would be under water during the 100 year flood (and possibly lesser flood
events) as the Council has required on other similar developments in the floodplain;
e. Have a lesser number of homes in the floodplain (especially near the floodway line) and
cluster some of the homes outside of the 100-year floodplain (within the land shown as not a
part and possibly in the hillside area). The Council has required like designs on other similar
developments in the floodplain; and
f. Provide a roadway design to allow for an eventual connection from Ranch Drive through this
site to a future connection to State Street.
SECOND PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL (This hearing was on the plat revised by the
applicant consisting of 72 lots):
A. The second public hearing on the application was held before the Eagle City Council on August 10,
1999, at which time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Council took action
at that time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to the application was presented by two individuals. Their concerns
were generally that they were opposed to this floodplain development and were felt that the extension
of Ranch Drive would impact the Methodist Church property
C. No one presented oral testimony in favor of the application to the Council other than the applicant
and their representatives.
D. All testimony presented at the public hearing is incorporated into these Findings of Fact by reference
as well as the entire record of the City's previous files for Wintry River Subdivision, all of the
reconsideration documents, the revised Plat, the minutes of all the Brookwood Subdivision hearings
and deliberations and the final approval of the LOMR #2.
COUNCIL DECISION AFTER SECOND PUBLIC HEARING:
On August 10, 1999, the Council voted 3 to 1 (Sedlacek against) to approve the proposed Clear
Creek Crossing subdivision preliminary plat with the modifications proposed by the applicant and
with the conditions stated below:
SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Stub streets (as shown on the 72 lot platO shall be provided to the east and south for a future public
road connection between Ranch Drive and State Street.
2. All garages shall be side entry (unless a circular driveway is constructed) along East Whitewing
Drive, the Ranch Drive stub, and the southerly stub of Remuda Way to help alleviate "backing out"
conflicts for residences along the roadways planned for a future connection from Ranch Drive to
State Street.
3. Provide grading plans for review by the City Engineer and grading/landscape plans to be reviewed by
the City's Design Review Board for any development in the hillside area (land that slopes10% or
more) at the southeast portion of the site, prior to City approval of a final plat.
Page 12 of 26
\\EAGLENTI \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccfversion3.doc
4. Comply with all the requirements of the New Dry Creek Ditch Company. Provide an approval letter
from the Company prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat.
5. Provide documentation showing that the Clear Creek developers have entered into an agreement with
the Dry Creek Ditch Company to address the issues of maintenance and the building of the ditchlDry
Creek siphon tube.
6. Comply with all conditions noted within the City Engineer's letter, dated November 23, 1998, except
regarding the street connection referenced in Item #1. The street connection to Eagle Road would be
preferable to align with Ranch Drive (as proposed by the applicant) for a future vehicular connection
to State Street.
7. Provide an easement for the public pathway along Dry Creek and construct the pathway as a 10-foot
wide gravel path.
8. Construct the proposed pathway connection between Remuda Way and the Dry Creek pathway as a
gravel path.
9. Construct the proposed school access pathway as a 6-foot wide concrete path.
10. Provide a landscape plan for all common area for Design Review Board review and approval prior to
City approval of a final plat.
11. Any stub street which is expected to be extended in the future shall be provided with a sign generally
stating that, "This street is to be extended in the future".
12. Useable park amenities such as, picnic tables, gazebos, swing sets, basket ball courts, ball fields
and/or similar amenities shall be provided within the common area. Landscape plans showing
specific open space amenities proposed shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Eagle Design
Review Board prior to City approval of any final plat.
13. Provide a note on the plat showing the required residential dwelling setback "buffer area" along
Floating Feather Road.
14. The applicant's property shall become annexed into the Eagle Sewer District's service boundaries
and the applicant shall comply with all applicable Eagle Sewer District regulations and conditions
prior to City approval of a final plat.
15. Subdivision street lights shall be decorative lighting and not shoe box style lights.
16. All homes within the 100-year floodplain shall be elevated a minimum of 2-feet above BFE (base
food elevation).
17. No residential building lots shall be permitted to be within the flood way area.
18. Floodwav Setback. All buildings shall be set back a minimum of 50 feet from the floodway line
except that when the 100 year floodplain line is 50-feet or less from the floodway line the floodplain
line shall be the setback line.
19. Floodplain Grading. Grading plans shall show that grading shall be done in such a way that the
Page 13 of 26
\\EAGLENTI \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccf version3.doc
floodwater storage volume in the floodplain, as bounded by the existing surface topography and the
Base Flood Elevation surface, shall not be reduced from the current quantity. Depressions which will
be filled with ground water and sections of the floodplain which are restricted from floodwater
conveyance due to roads built above the Base Flood Elevation shall not be considered when
determining floodwater storage volumes.
20. Roadwavs and Manholes Within The Floodplain. Roadways and manholes within the floodplain
shall be a minimum of 0.5 feet above Base Flood Elevation at center line and manhole ring
respectively and all new roads built above the Base Flood Elevation shall not restrict conveyance of
floodwater into sections of the floodplain which may be cut off by the proposed road. Culverts or
bridges shall be provided under roads to allow floodwater conveyance for floodwater storage into
sections of the floodplain which may be cut off by a road.
21. The southerly stub street shall have a circular turn around with a minimum 50-foot radius.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
l.
The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Ada County Highway District and/or the
Idaho Transportation Department, including but not limited to approval of the drainage system,
curbs, gutters, streets and sidewalks.
2.
Correct street names, as approved by the Ada County Street Name Committee, shall be placed on
the plat prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat.
3.
Complete water and sewer system construction plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Engineer. Required improvements shall include, but not be limited to, extending all utilities to
the platted property. The developer may submit a letter in lieu of plans explaining why plans
may not be necessary.
4.
Idaho Department of Health & Welfare approval of the sewer and water facilities is required
prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat (I.c. Title 50, Chapter 13 and I.C. 39-118).
5.
Written approval of all well water for any shared or commercial well shall be obtained from the
Idaho Department of Water Resources prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat.
6.
Unless septic tanks are permitted, wet line sewers will be required and the applicant will be
required to furnish the City Engineer with a letter from the sewer entity serving the property,
accepting the project for service, prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat.
7.
All homes being constructed with individual septic systems shall have the septic systems placed
on the street side of the home.
8.
Per Idaho Code, Section 31-3805, concerning irrigation rights, transfer and disclosure, the water
rights appurtenant to the lands in said subdivision which are within the irrigation entity will be
transferred from said lands by the owner thereof; or the subdivider shall provide for underground
tile or other like satisfactory underground conduit to permit the delivery of water to those
landowners within the subdivision who are also within the irrigation entity.
See Eagle City Code Section 9-4-1-9(C) which provides overriding and additional specific
criteria for pressurized irrigation facilities.
Plans showing the delivery system must be approved by a registered professional engineer and
Page 14 of 26
\\EAGLENTl\COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccf version3.doc
9.
10.
shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat.
The applicant shall submit a letter from the appropriate drainage entity approving the drainage
system and/or accepting said drainage; or submit a letter from a registered professional engineer
certifying that all drainage shall be retained on-site prior to the City Engineer signing the final
plat. A copy of the construction drawing(s) shall be submitted with the letter.
Drainage system plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to
the City Engineer signing the final plat. The plans shall show how swales, or drain piping, will
be developed in the drainage easements. The approved drainage system shall be constructed, or a
performance bond shall be submitted to the City Clerk, prior to the City Engineer signing the
final plat. The CC&R's shall contain clauses to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer
and City Attorney, prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat, requiring that lots be so
graded that all runoff runs either over the curb, or to the drainage easement, and that no runoff
shall cross any lot line onto another lot except within a drainage easement.
11.
No ditch, pipe or other structure or canal, for irrigation water or irrigation waste water owned by
an organized irrigation district, canal company, ditch association, or other irrigation entity, shall
be obstructed, routed, covered or changed in any way unless such obstruction, rerouting, covering
or changing has first been approved in writing by the entity. A Registered Engineer shall certify
that any ditch rerouting, piping, covering or otherwise changing the existing irrigation or waste
ditch (1) has been made in such a manner that the flow of water will not be impeded or increased
beyond carrying capacity of the downstream ditch; (2) will not otherwise injure any person or
persons using or interested in such ditch or their property; and (3) satisfied the Idaho Standards
for Public Works Construction. A copy of such written approval and certification shall be filed
with the construction drawing and submitted to the City Engineer prior to the City Engineer
signing the final plat.
12.
Street light plans shall be submitted and approved as to the location, height and wattage to the
City Engineer prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat. All construction shall comply with
the City's specifications and standards.
The applicant shall delineate on the face of the final plat an easement, acceptable to the City
Engineer, for the purpose of installing and maintaining street light fixtures, conduit and wiring
lying outside any dedicated public right-of-way, prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat.
The applicant shall pay applicable street light inspection fees on the proposed subdivision prior to
signing of the final plat by the Eagle City Engineer.
13.
The applicant shall provide utility easements as required by the public utility providing service,
and as may be required by the Eagle City Code, prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat.
14.
An approval letter from the Eagle Fire Department shall be submitted to the City prior to the City
Engineer signing the final plat The letter shall include the following comments and minimum
requirements, and any other items of concern as may be determined by the Eagle Fire Department
officials:
a. The applicant has made arrangements to comply with all requirements of the Fire
Department.
The proposed fire hydrant locations shall be reviewed and be approved in writing by the
Eagle Fire Department prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat..
Minimum flow per hydrant shall be 1,000 gallons per minute for one and two family
dwellings, 1,500 gallons per minute for dwellings having a fire area in excess of 3,600
b.
c.
Page 15 of 26
\\EAGLENTI \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\ I 998\Clear Creek Crossing ccf version3 .doc
15.
16.
d.
square feet, and 1,500 gallons per minute for non-residential uses (ie; Commercial,
Industrial, Schools, etc.). Flow rates shall inspected in accordance with all agencies
having jurisdiction, and shall be verified in writing by the Eagle Fire Department prior to
issuance of any building permits.
The proposed fire protection system shall be reviewed and approved by the Eagle Fire
Department prior to issuance of a building permit.
Covenants, homeowner's association by-laws or other similar deed restrictions, acceptable to the
Eagle City Attorney which provide for the use, control and mutual maintenance of all common
areas, storage facilities, recreational facilities, street lights or open spaces shall be reviewed and
approved by the Eagle City Attorney prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat.
A restrictive covenant must be recorded and a note on the face of the final plat is required,
providing for mutual maintenance and access easements.
Appropriate papers describing decision-making procedures relating to the maintenance of
structures, grounds and parking areas shall be reviewed and approved by the Eagle City Attorney
prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat.
Should the homeowner's association be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the
storm drainage facilities, the covenants and restrictions, homeowner's association by-laws or
other similar deed restrictions acceptable to the Eagle City Attorney shall be reviewed and
approved by the Eagle City Attorney prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat.
17.
The applicant shall submit an application for Design Review, and shall obtain approval for all
required landscaping, common area and subdivision signage prior to the City Engineer signing
the final plat.
18.
Any recreation area, greenbelt area or pathway area along the Boise River, Dry Creek or any
other area designated by the City Council or Eagle City Pathway/Greenbelt Committee for a path
or walkway shall be approved in writing by the Eagle City Pathway/Greenbelt Committee prior to
approval of the fmal plat by the City Council.
19.
Conservation, recreation and river access easements (if applicable) shall be approved by the
Eagle City Pathway/Greenbelt Committee and shall be shown on the final plat prior to approval
of the final plat by the City Council.
20.
The applicant shall place a note on the face of the plat which states: "Minimum building setback
lines shall be in accordance with the applicable zoning and subdivision regulations at the time of
issuance of the building permit or as specifically approved and/or required".
21.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of the Eagle City Code, pertaining to floodplain
and river protection regulations (if applicable) prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat.
22.
The development shall comply with the Boise River Plan (if applicable) in effect at the time of
City Council consideration of the final plat.
23.
The applicant shall obtain written approval of the development relative to the effects of the Boise
River Flood Plain (if applicable) from the Corps. of Engineers prior to approval of the final plat
by the City Engineer.
24.
The applicant shall obtain approval of the development relative to its effects on wetlands or other
Page 16 of 26
\\EAGLENTl\COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccf version3.doc
25.
26.
27.
28.
natural waterways (if applicable) from the Corps. of Engineers and the Idaho Department of
Water Resources and/or any other agency having jurisdiction prior to the City Engineer signing
the final plat.
Basements in homes in the flood plain are prohibited.
The Americans with Disabilities Act, Uniform Building Code, Eagle City Code, Eagle
Comprehensive Plan, and all applicable County, State and Federal Codes and Regulations shall
be complied with. All design and construction shall be in accordance with all applicable City of
Eagle Codes unless specifically approved by the Commission and/or Council.
No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing
and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized
representative of the City of Eagle. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written
confIrmation of any change from the City of Eagle.
No public board, agency, commission, official or other authority shall proceed with the
construction of or authorize the construction of any of the public improvements required by the
Eagle City Code Title 9 "Land Subdivisions" until the final plat has received the approval of the
City Council (ECC 9-6-5 (A) (2)).
After Council approval of the final plat, the applicant may construct any approved improvements
before the City Engineer signs the final plat. The applicant shall provide a financial guarantee of
performance in the amount of 150% of the total estimated cost for completing any required
improvements (see resolution 98-3) prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat. The
financial guarantee shall be a Letter of Credit, Certificate of Deposit, cash deposit or certified
check.
29.
In accordance with Eagle City Code, failure to obtain a recorded final plat for the subdivision
within one year following City Council approval shall cause this approval to be null and void,
unless a time extension is granted by the City Council.
30.
Prior to submitting the final plat for recording, the following must provide endorsements or
certifications: Owners or dedicators, Registered Land Surveyor, County Engineer, Central
District Health Department, Ada County Treasurer, Ada County Highway District
Commissioners, City Engineer, and City Clerk.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on September 16, 1998. The plat was
modified by the applicant and submitted to the City on June 24, 1999, with supporting documentation
submitted (letter from Roylance & Associates dated July 9,1999) on July 12, 1999.
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 October 14, 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 16, 1998. Requests for agencies' reviews
were transmitted on September 18, 1998 in accordance with the requirements ofthe Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the first public hearing of the Eagle City Council was
published in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
Page 17 of 26
\\EAGLENTl \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccfversion3.doc
ordinances on January 20, 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 January 15, 1999.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the second public hearing of the Eagle City Council
was published in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
ordinances on July 21, 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 July 26, 1999.
3. In accordance with Eagle City Code 9-2-3 (D)(3)(a) the Eagle City Council makes the following
conclusions for the preliminary plat application PP-5-98 Clear Creek Crossing subdivision:
>- The proposed residential use (1.8-units per acre (approx) excluding floodway) is in accordance
with the residential land use designation of this area shown within the Comprehensive Plan Land
Use Map (four or fewer units per acre excluding floodway) and the subdivision will be
harmonious with and in accordance with other general and specific objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan and Eagle City Code Title 9 as follows:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS OF CONCERN
Note: Non-italicized text is from the Comprehensive Plan and italicized text it the
Council's conclusion.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF PLAN
.
To ensure that adequate public facilities and services are provided to the people at reasonable
cost.
See letters for said public service providers. Also, roadways in the 100 year floodplain
will be required to be constructed such that roadway surface will be 6" above BFE
thereby allowing adequate emergency services access to residents within this
development in case of a 100 year flood.
.
To ensure that the development of land is commensurate with the physical characteristics of
the land.
The development is commensurate with the physical characteristics of the land because,
although a number of homes are proposed to be placed in areas that have been prone to
flooding, compensating measures to minimize flood damage have been proposed as
required herein.
.
To protect life and property in areas subject to natural hazards and disasters.
Adequate measures, as proposed by the applicant and as required herein, are planned
with the subdivision (see site specific requirements).
HAZARD AREAS POLICIES AND GOALS
1. To protect the health and safety of Eagle residents while offering varied open space uses.
The design solutions proposed by the applicant and required herein, for location of
streets and dwellings in the fringe area of the floodplain, adequately protect the health
and safety of Eagle residents. (See discussion under "PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF
PLAN" above).
Page 18 of 26
\\EAGLENTI \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1 998\Clear Creek Crossing ccf version3.doc
2. Whenever possible the existing natural floodplain of the Boise River and Dry Creek should
remain in a natural state as a greenbelt, wildlife habitat, agricultural, open space and
recreation-nature areas.
The applicant has proposed to preserve the entire floodway area, for open space with a
greenbelt pathway. Also, the subdivision was planned with 5.8-acres of open space
(excluding floodway). The pathway area in the floodway can be included in the open
space area per Eagle City Code. That area will bring the open space area to
approximately 13% which is 3% over the 10% minimum for a non "Large Scale"
subdivision (defined as a subdivision with 50 or more lots).
In accordance with Eagle City Code (ECC) Section 9-3-8 (C) the City may require
additional public and/or private park or open space facilities in PUDs or in Large Scale
subdivisions (with 50 or more lots) to assure that the open space is an acceptable size
based on suitability regarding the proposed development. The Council concludes that
the open space proposed is suitable as long as amenities are provided as required within
the site specific requirements herein.
3. Special drainage studies, for those areas within the 100 year floodplain, and any other areas
deemed necessary by the City, may be required before any development will be approved.
This is to facilitate the orderly development and the preservation of downstream or downflow
properties.
The studies, and testimony presented at the first public hearing, provided the City
Council with evidence that orderly development and the preservation of downstream or
downjlow properties could not occur with the first proposal. Due to the design solutions
proposed by the applicant, as a part of information submitted for the second public
hearing of the Council, and the conditions of approval stated herein, the Council
concludes that orderly development and the preservation of downstream or downflow
properties is anticipated.
PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACES POLICIES AND GOALS
3. To set aside for perpetual public enjoyment an adequate amount of open space such as natural
river frontage, greenbelt-river trail, creeks, drainage ways, buffers, floodplains, wooded areas and
viewpoints.
See item #2 under "HAZARD AREAS POLICIES AND GOALS" above.
5. When deemed necessary the City shall require density transfers where urban development
parcels lie partly in areas that are unsuitable for development such as hazard areas, steep slopes,
unstable soils or where it is desirable that there be provisions made for open space that is adjacent
to urban development
In accordance with this section of the Comprehensive Plan, since the majority of this site
is in the 100-year floodplain, the City Council only allowed a maximum density of 1.8-
units per acre (approx) excluding floodway) even though the residential land use
designation of this area shown within the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map is for four
or fewer units per acre (excludingfloodway) and the zoning designation of R-4 allows a
maximum of 4 dwelling units per acre.
7. Open space should be utilized: (a) to protect the finite resource base of Eagles environment
- air, water, soil, surface waters, forested areas, plant and wildlife habitats, agricultural areas, and
aquifer recharge and water shed areas; (b) to protect against hazards that are inherent to
floodplains, steep slopes, areas of geological instability, airport approach and takeoff areas and to
Page 19 of 26
\\EAGLENTl\COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccfversion3.doc
preserve the natural lay of the land; (c) to protect such unique environmental areas as historical,
geological, and archaeological sites and monuments, and important views, vistas and panoramas;
and (d) to provide an open space setting for active and passive recreation.
See item #2 under "HAZARD AREAS POLICIES AND GOALS" above.
SPECIAL AREAS OR SITES
"Special Areas or Sites" are defined as areas, sites or structures of historical, archaeological,
architectural, ecological, or scenic significance. Special areas or sites within the Impact Area
should be analyzed according to their defined function. Whenever possible, these sites should be
preserved and conserved as open spaces or for educational and cultural centers. Development of
Special Areas or Sites should take place in a manner that reflects harmony with their natural
environment and recognized qualities which render them distinctly unique.
NOTE: The Plan states that, "The Dry Creek Floodplain is designated as a Special Area due to
its ecological and scenic significance. This area comprises the length of the Dry Creek Floodplain
through the Impact Area."
SPECIAL AREAS OR SITES POLICIES AND GOALS
1. To promote the conservation and efficient management of all Special Areas and Sites in
addition to open space natural resources within the Impact Area.
7. To conserve and maintain all desirable fish and wildlife species and habitats particularly
along the Boise River and Dry Creek. Developmental and governmental programs which
provide for fish and wildlife conservation shall be encouraged. When additional public access to
designated special areas is required, such access shall cause minimum disturbance to the present
land use.
See item #2 under "HAZARD AREAS POLICIES AND GOALS" above.
See item #5 under "PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACES POLICIES AND
GOALS NATURAL RESOURCES"
TRANSPORTATION
The City's existing network of roadways represents only a portion of the system needed to serve
future growth and development. As the City continues to experience growth, population will
increase as the number of vehicles using the transportation system will increase. In addition to
adding new streets and roadways, modifications to the existing routes will be necessary in order
to create a fully integrated, modem, efficient transportation system that will effectively serve the
residents of the City, the business community and the traveling public.
To meet the goal of creating a fully integrated, modern, efficient transportation system
that will effectively serve the residents of the City, the business community and the
traveling public, the proposed plan will allow for a future public roadway connection
from Ranch Drive through the subdivision to a future connection to State Street.
HOUSING POLICIES AND GOALS
Page 20 of 26
\\EAGLENTI \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccfversion3.doc
1. A wide diversity of housing types and choice between ownership and rental dwelling units
shall be encouraged for all income groups in a variety of locations suitable for residential
development.
Although the subdivision generally provides only one housing type, the out-parcel, which
is outside of the floodplain, may be appropriate for higher density development in the
future.
LAND USE LAND USE CATEGORIES
SPECIAL AREAS
Areas identified on the Land Use Plan to have special significance to the City and which warrant
analysis and consideration related to conservation and preservation. Such special areas may be
designated because of their recognized historic, environmental, scenic, or architectural
significance.
SPECIAL AREAS POLICIES AND GOALS
11.
To identify the foothills, the Dry Creek Floodplain and the Boise River Floodplain as
Special Areas due to its environmental and scenic significance.
To create special development and design review standards for properties characterized by
a Special Area designation. Special Areas shall be given consideration for a Planned Unit
Development (PUD) zoning classification.
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 (PUD). Plats involving ten or more lots are encouraged to file such requests
as part of a (PUD). When a PUD includes more than one land use and/or zoning
designation the boundary line between the designations may be moved within the PUD if
approved by the City Council and if the total number of acres in each land use, or zoning
designation remains substantially the same within the PUD.
12.
22.
See item #2 under "HAZARD AREAS POLICIES AND GOALS" and item #5 under
"PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACES POLICIES AND GOALS NATURAL
RESOURCES" both above.
TITLE 9 PROVISIONS OF CONCERN
Note: Non-italicized text is from the Eagle City Code and italicized text it the Council's
conclusion.
9-1-3: PURPOSE:
The purpose of these regulations is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, and
to provide for:
A. The harmonious development of the City and its area of impact;
B. The coordination of streets and roads within a subdivision with other existing or planned
streets and roads;
C. Adequate open space for travel, light, air and recreation;
D. Adequate transportation, water drainage and sanitary facilities;
As specifically noted under "COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS OF CONCERN"
above, and as further noted below, the proposed development, with the conditions
stipulated herein provides for "A. " The harmonious development of the City; "B." The
Page 21 of 26
\\EAGLENTl \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccfversion3.doc
coordination of streets and roads within the subdivision with other existing or planned
streets and roads (specifically the future public road connection between Eagle Road and
State Street at Ranch Drive); "c." Adequate open space; and "D." Adequate
transportation and water drainage facilities.
9-3-8: PUBLIC SITES AND OPEN SPACES:
Public sites and open spaces shall conform to the following standards:
C. Special Development: In the case of planned unit developments and large-scale developments,
the City Council may require sufficient public and/or private park or open space facilities of
acceptable size, location and site characteristics that may be suitable for the proposed
development.
See item #2 under "HAZARD AREAS POLICIES AND GOALS" above
9-4-1-10: STORM DRAINAGE, FLOOD CONTROLS:
H. With the exception of road crossings, approved drainage structures and recreation and
open space uses which do not involve the destruction of vegetal cove, development shall be
prohibited within the 100-year floodplain for major waterways, and the 50-year floodplain for
minor waterways.
See "STAFF ANALYSIS WHICH WAS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT" Item "C"
"SUBDIVISION AND FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF
SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL" above.
9-5-3-1: HILLSIDE SUBDIVISIONS "PRESERVATION OF NATURAL FEATURES":
In order to preserve, retain, enhance and promote the existing and future appearance, natural
topographic features, qualities and resources of hillsides, special consideration shall be given to
the following:
A. Skyline and ridge tops;
B. Rollin1!: IITassv land forms. includin1!: knolls. rid1!:es and meadows;
C. Tree and shrub masses, grass, wild flowers and top soil;
D. Rock outcroppings;
E. Stream beds, draws and drainage swales, especially where tree and plant formations occur; and
F. Characteristic vistas and scenic panoramas.
The applicant, as required in the conditions herein, will submit grading/landscape plans
for the hillside area.
9-5-5: LARGE-SCALE DEVELOPMENT SUBDIVISIONS, REQUIRED IN FORMATION:
Due to the impact that a large-scale development would have on public utilities and services, the
developer shall submit the following information along with the preliminary plat:
A. Identification of all public services that would be provided to the development including, but
not limited to, fire protection, police protection, central water, central sewer, road construction,
parks and open space, recreation, maintenance, schools and solid waste collection;
B. Estimate of the public service costs to provide adequate service to the development;
C. Estimate of the tax revenue that will be generated from the development; and
D. Suggested public means of financing the services for the development if the cost for the public
services would not be offset by tax revenue received from the development.
Eagle City Code defines a "Large-Scale" development as any development with 50 or
more lots. This subdivision was proposed with 89 lots (reduced by the applicant to 72-
Page 22 of 26
\\EAGLENTI \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle AppJications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccfversion3.doc
lots after the 89 lot subdivision was denied by the Council). The information required
within Items "A, B, C, and D" has been submitted to the City..
9-5- 7: SUBDIVISION WITHIN A FLOODPLAIN:
In addition to the provisions of this Title, any subdivision within the designated floodplain of the
City shall comply with all applicable provisions of the floodplain regulations of the City as now
in effect or as may hereafter be amended.
TITLE 1 0 FLOOD CONTROL
1 0-1-1: FINDINGS OF FACT AND PURPOSE:
A. Findings of Fact:
1. The flood hazard areas of the City are subject to periodic inundation which results in
loss of life and property, health and safety hazards, disruption of commerce and
governmental services, extraordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief,
and impairment of the tax base, all of which adversely affect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
2. These flood losses are caused by natural forces and by the cumulative effect of
structures located in areas of special flood hazards which increase flood heights and
velocities, and when such structures are inadequately anchored, can damage property in
other areas. Uses that are inadequately floodproofed, elevated or otherwise protected
from flood damage also contribute to the flood loss.
B. It is the purpose of this Title to promote the public health, safety and general
welfare, and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific
areas by provisions designed;
1. To protect human life and health;
2. To minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects;
3. To minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding and
generally undertaken at the expense of the general public;
4. To minimize prolonged business interruptions;
5. To minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains,
electric, telephone and sewer lines, streets and bridges located in areas of special flood
hazard; and
6. To help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of
areas of special flood hazard so as to minimize future flood blight areas; and
7. To ensure that potential buyers are notified that property is in an area of special flood
hazard; and
8. To ensure that those who occupy the areas of special flood hazard assume
responsibility for their actions.
10-1-8-4: FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION PROVISIONS "SUBDIVISIONS":
A. All subdivision proposals shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood
damage;
B. All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer,
gas, electrical and water systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage;
C. All subdivision proposals shall have adequate drainage provided to reduce
exposure to flood damage;
(Any development proposed will be required to comply with Title 10. In addition,
see discussion under "COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ISSUES OF CONCERN -
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF PLAN" above
Page 23 of 26
\\EAGLENTI \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccfversion3.doc
9-5-8: SUBDIVISION WITHIN AN AREA OF CRITICAL CONCERN:
A. Designation of Areas of Critical Concern: Hazardous or unique areas may be
designated as an area of critical concern by the City Councilor by the State of Idaho.
Special consideration shall be given to anv proposed development within an area of
critical concern to assure that the development is necessarv and desirable and in the
public interest in view of the existing unique conditions. Hazardous or unique areas that
may be designated as areas of critical concern are as follows:
1. Earthquake location;
2. Unstable soils;
3. Unique animal life;
4. Unique plant life;
5. Scenic areas;
6. Historical significance;
7. Floodplain;
8. Center City;
9. Areas within the area of City impact but outside City boundaries; and
10. Other areas of critical concern.
The Council gave special consideration to this proposed development, which is
within an area of critical concern, to assure that the development is necessary
and desirable and in the public interest in view of the existing unique conditions
and found that the development needed to incorporate design elements as
proposed by the applicant at the second public hearing and as required in the
conditions herein.
B. Environmental Assessment Plan: The developer shall prepare and submit an
environmental assessment along with the preliminary plat application for any
development that is proposed within an area of critical concern.
The content of the environmental assessment shall be prepared by an interdisciplinary
team of professionals that shall provide answers to the following questions:
1. What changes will occur to the area of environmental concern as a result of the
proposed development?
2. What corrective action or alternative development plans could occur so as not to
significantly change the area of environmental concern?
3. What changes in the area of environmental concern are unavoidable?
4. What beneficial or detrimental affect would the development have on the environment
including, but not limited to, animal life, plant life, social concerns, economic, noise,
visual, available farm land and other?
C. The following areas are specifically identified as areas of critical concern:
2. Dry Creek Floodplain: The Dry Creek Floodplain is designated as an area of critical
concern due to its ecological and scenic significance. This area comprises the "Dry Creek
Floodplain" as defined on the Land Use Designation Map of the Comprehensive Plan
adopted by the City of Eagle on May 11, 1993, including that portion in the City of Eagle
impact area.
A Biological Study & Evaluation prepared by Resource Systems Inc., dated
September 14, 1998, and a Hydrological Report on Dry Creek prepared by Kunz
Engineering, dated November 1997 was submitted to the City. After review of
the said documents and the new information and proposals presented at the
second public hearing, and after hearing public testimony at both public
Page 24 of 26
\\EAGLENTl\COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccfversion3.doc
hearings, the Council concludes that the answers to the questions to be
addressed per Eagle City Code 9-5-8-B (1) (2) (3) & (4) areas follows:
1. The changes that would occur to the area of environmental concern as a
result of the proposed development (second Clear Creek Crossing proposal)
were acceptable based upon the conclusions herein and if the development
met the conditions of approval stipulated herein;
2. Corrective action proposed by the applicant for the second Clear Creek
Crossing proposal, and as conditioned herein, were sufficient to limit the
change in the area of environmental concern due to the fact that the
corrective actions meet the requirements of the revised Title 10 "Flood
Control" of Eagle City Code;
3. That the change in the area of environmental concern that is unavoidable, is
the general change from pasture land to residential urbanized development,
and the second Clear Creek Crossing proposal, with the conditions
stipulated herein, incorporated design elements to mitigate concerns (i.e.:
density lower than allowed by the zoning and Comprehensive Plan
designations andflood mitigation measures) .
4. That detrimental affects of the proposed development on the environment
including, but not limited to, animal life, social concerns, economic concerns
and visual concerns do not outweigh the beneficial effects of the second
Clear Creek Crossing proposal because the design elements conditioned
herein will mitigate concerns and because dwelling units close to the
downtown (approximately Y2 mile) will contribute to a viable commercial
center and pedestrian friendly environment.
CONTINUATION OF CONCLUSION OF LAW #3 "In accordance with Eagle City Code 9-2-3
(D)(3)(a) the Eagle City Council makes the following conclusions for the preliminary plat
application (PP-5-98) for Clear Creek Crossing Subdivision"
~ The subdivision will be served adequately by essential public facilities such as highways,
streets, police and fire protection, schools, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and
sewer, or the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use will
be able to provide adequately for any such services as noted in the documentation provided
from said agencies.
~ That there are no known capital improvement programs for which this development would
prevent continuity;
~ The information required per Eagle City Code Section 9-5-5 "A, B, C, and D" has been
submitted to the City and, based upon that information, there is adequate public financial
capability to support the proposed development;
Page 25 of 26
\\EAGLENTl \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccf version3.doc
> That the many health, safety and environmental problems that were brought to the
Commission and Council's attention were adequately addressed with the second Clear Creek
Crossing subdivision proposal at the second public hearing of the Council and as specifically
conditioned herein.
DATED this /:2
day of~, 199!:J.
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
Ada Co , Ida 0
,
Rick
" ~f'UP~~,
ATTEST: ~ Of ;"'I\C~#~
~ ;-:..;:.- ...,." "',
AI ~.... "l" """ <"'.ò ',,:,
"1/ <:.i ~ 1<"~ ~ ."
r t.Æ..A II - ~ ~~ $ r;' 'í3 0 '~41' '>~'~ .~.
-, ,....J ~.1~ v. ~ .1> tic ..', ,.,
SharoIT Moore, Eagle CIty Clerk ;; ~:: .-0""" '; -;.~' ?
~ )::(~: ~ .cc....,- ,,- .;; , ~
\~~?~~~:~~¡~t~j:/
:t~.-w'~...'"",,<;\,~,,~
.....~ "- ..;';;: --:","¡.'"
~.z.~~...~.~~..,
Page 26 of 26
\\EAGLENTI \COMMON\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\1998\Clear Creek Crossing ccf version3,doc