Findings - PZ - 2000 - A-3-00/RZ-2-00/CU-4-00/PPUD-3-00/PP-3-00 - Annex/Rz From Rt And Ar To R1p And R2p/Cu/Ppud/Pp/62.73 Acres/112 Lot
ORIGINAL
BEFORE THE EAGLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR
A REZONE UPON ANNEXATION (WITH
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT), CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND
PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR COUNTRYSIDE
EST A TES PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
(CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT)
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER A -3-00IRZ-2-00/CU-4-00IPPUD-3-00IPP-3-00
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
The above-entitled rezone upon annexation, conditional use permit, planned unit development
preliminary development plan, and preliminary plat applications came before the Eagle Planning
and Zoning Commission for their recommendation on July 24, 2000.
The Commission, having heard and taken oral and written testimony, and having duly considered
the matter, makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law;
c.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Capital Development and Tom Ricks, represented by Becky Bowcutt and Richard
Cook with Briggs Engineering, are requesting an annexation and rezone from RT
(Rural Transition) and A-R (Agricultural-Residential) to R-1-P and R-2-P
(Residential one unit per acre maximum and two units per acre maximum -
PUD), conditional use, planned unit development preliminary development plan,
and preliminary plat approvals for Countryside Estates Planned Community. The
development consists of a 62.73-acre, 112-10t (96-buildable) residential
subdivision. The site is located near the northwest corner of Ballantyne Lane and
State Street.
B.
APPLICATION SUBMIIT AL:
The applications for this item was received by the City of Eagle on April 13,
2000.
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 May 19, 2000. 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 May 19, 2000. Requests for agencies'
reviews were transmitted on April 14, 2000 in accordance with the requirements
Page 1 of 19
KIPIanoing DeptlEagle ApplicationslSUBSl2000\C0untryside Estates 2nd pzf.doc.doc
-~~-~..----_.__.
of the Eagle City Code.
D.
mSTORY OF PREVIOUS ACTIONS:
On August 24, 1999, the City Council denied a 174-lot preliminary plat for this
site.
E.
COMPANION APPLICATIONS: None
F.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS:
COMPPLAN ZONING LAND USE
DESIGNA TION DESIGNA TION
Existing Residential One and A-R (Agricultural- Agricultural land
Residential Two (I & 2- Residential) & RT (Rural
units per acre max.) Transitional)
Proposed No Change R-1-P & R-2-P Countryside Estates
(Residential PUD) PUD housing
development
North of site Residential One (I -unit RT (Rural Transitional) Residences &
per acre max.) Agricultural land
South of site Residential Two (2-units A-R (Agricultural- State Highway 44 &
per acre max.) and Residential) & RT (Rural Agricultural land
Mixed Use Transitional)
East of site Residential One and A-R (Agricultural - Residences and
Residential Two (1 & 2- Residential) & A Agricultural land
units per acre max.) (Agricultural)
West of site Residential One (I -unit R-1 (Residential) & RT Residences and
per acre max.) (Rural Transitional) Agricultural land
G.
DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT: Not in the DDA, TDA or CEDA.
H.
SITE DATA:
Total Acreage of Site - 62.73
Total Number of Lots - 112
Residential - 96
Commercial - 0
Industrial - 0
Common - 16
Total Number of Units - 96
Page 2 of 19
K:\PJaoning DeptlEagle ApplicationslSUBSl2000\C0untryside Estates 2nd pzf.doc.doc
Single-family - 96
Duplex - 0
~ulti-farrrily -0
Total Acreage of Any Out-Parcels - 0
Additional Proposed Required
Site Data
Dwelling 1.53-units per 1.42-units per acre (approx. - maximum for a standard non-
Units Per acre PUD subdivision based on 36-acres of the site being zoned
Gross Acre R-l and 26.5-acres being zoned R-2)
Except that the City Council may permit an increased
density of up to 15% of the allowable number of dwelling
units provided that the requirements within ECC Section 8-
6-5-4 are fulfilled.
~inimum Lot 11,874 sq. f1. 17,000 sq. f1. (minimum in an R-2 zone)
Size Except that a decrease of minimum lot size in a subdivision
may be allowed if there is an offsetting increase of the same
percentage in open space and a planned unit development is
applied for and approved) - per ECC Section 8-2-4 (G).
~inimum Lot 86-feet 75-feet (minimum in an R-2 zone)
Width
Minimum 40-feet 35-feet (minimum in all zones)" ..
Street Total Acreage of Common Lots"
Frontage 6.77-acres ..
10.17 -acres (minimum)
6.27-acres for 10% minimum plus 3.9-acres for lots smaller
than the minimum (17,000 sq. f1.) - per ECC Section 8-2-4
(G)
In addition, 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.
Percent of 10.7% 15.9% (minimum - see above)
Site as In addition, according to ECC Section 9-3-8 (C) the City
Common may require additional public and/or private park or open
Area space facilities in PUDs or in subdivisions with 50 or more
lots.
Page 3 of 19
K\P1anning DeptlEagle ApplicationslSUBSI2OOO1Countryside Estates 2nd pzf.doc.doc
0 Special Setbacks proposed for one acre lots within the development:
Front
Rear
Interior Side
Street Side
30-feet
30-feet
I5-feet
30-feet
0 Special Setbacks proposed for all remaining lots within the development:
Front
Rear
Interior Side
Street Side
20-feet
20-feet
7.5-feet
20-feet
I.
GENERAL SITE DESIGN PEA TURES:
Open Space, Greenbelt Areas and Landscape Screening:
Will provide a total of 10.7% of common area. (15.9% required - see site data
above)
The pathway plan designates the Chevron pipeline as a public pathway. The
proposed site plan provides for a street (with separated sidewalk and 5-foot wide
landscape strip) and pathway in alignment with the Chevron pipeline. Three
micro-paths connect State Street, Ballantyne Lane and the linear open space for
convenient pedestrian and bicycle access.
A 30-foot landscape lot has been provided along the future State Street
realignment which oscillates to provide a meandering fence line. A combination
of benning, landscaping and fencing will be installed to provide an aesthetically
pleasing appearance from State Street and adequate buffering for future residents
of the development. The ordinance specifies a 35-foot separation between
residences and collector roadways. The 30-foot buffer area (combined with a 5-
foot wide maintenance easement along the rear portion of the lots abutting the
buffer area) with the installation of required benning, fencing, and landscaping
will provide adequate buffering for these residences from State Street.
A 25-foot landscape lot is proposed along Ballantyne Lane. Ballantyne Lane is
designated as collector roadway which requires a 35-foot separation between
abutting homes and the roadway. The 25-foot buffer area (combined with a 10-
foot wide easement along the rear portion of the lots abutting the buffer area) with
the installation of required benning, fencing, and landscaping will provide
adequate buffering for these residence from Ballantyne Lane.
Storm Drainage and Flood Control:
Page 4 of19
KIPlanning DeptlEagle Applications\SUBSI2000\C0untryside Estates 2nd pzf.doc.doc
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.
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 required by the Eagle Fire District.
On-site Septic System (yes or no) - No
Preservation of Existing Natural Features:
There are numerous existing trees located on this site. Eagle City Code Section 9-
3-8 (B) states that existing natural features which add value to residential
development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees,
watercourses, historic spots and similar ilTeplaceable assets) shall be preserved in
the design of the subdivision.
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': No
Cul-de-Sac Design, Sidewalks and Curbs and Gutters:
See ACHD staff report and site specific recommendations herein.
Tree lined streets, with a five foot wide planter strip between the sidewalk and
curb are proposed within this site
Lighting:
Page 5 of 19
K:\Planning DeptlEagle AppücationslSUBSI2000\Countryside Estates 2nd pzf.doc.doc
. un_. n_._~--__.--._-_._._.._--_...-... ..--
O.
P.
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.
Street Names:
Street names approved by the Ada County Street Names Committee are shown on
the attached correspondence from that committee.
K.
ON AND OFF-SITE PEDESTRIANIBICYCLE CIRCULA nON:
See "Open Space, Greenbelt Areas and Landscape Screening" under "I" above.
L.
PUBUC USES PROPOSED:
The proposed site plan provides for a public pedestrian connection (via a
combination of the sidewalks along the interior streets and separate pathways)
between Ballantyne Lane and the western portion of this site in alignment with the
Chevron pipeline. Three micro-paths connect State Street, Ballantyne Lane and
the linear open space for convenient pedestrian and bicycle access.
M.
PUBUC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUISITIONS MAP: No map currently exists
N.
SPECIAL ON-SITE FEATURES:
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern - none
Evidence of Erosion - no
Fish Habitat - no
Floodplain - no
Mature Trees - yes
Riparian Vegetation - no
Steep Slopes - no
Stream/Creek: no
Unique Animal Life - no
Unique Plant Life - no
Unstable Soils - unknown
Wildlife Habitat - no
SUMMAR Y OF REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLAN (IF
REQUIRED): Not required
AGENCY RESPONSES:
The following agencies have responded and their correspondence is attached.
Comments which appear to be of special concern are noted below:
City Engineer: All comments within the engineer's letter dated May 3,2000 are of special
concern (see attached).
Ada County Highway District
Page 6 of 19
K:\Plarullng DeptlEagle ApplicationslSUBSI2000ICountryside Estates 2nd pzf.doc.doc
- .- ------- .--- -------- ---
Central District Health
Drainage District #2 - Ringert Clark
Eagle Fire Department
Eagle Sewer District
Meridian School District
Q.
LETIERS FROM THE PUBLIC: None received to date.
R.
PROPOSED TIME SCHEDULE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE:
The applicant states that, "Countryside Estates is proposed to develop in three (3)
phases of 32:t lots, with an estimated final build-out in 3 years. Phase 1
construction is anticipated to begin in the fall of 2000 with lots available in spring
of 2001.
Phase 1 will be adjacent to Ballantyne Lane.
S. EAGLE CITY CODE FINDINGS FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
1. That the proposed PUD is in the public interest, advances the general welfare of the
community and neighborhood, and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the
community.
2. That the development be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be
harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the
general vicinity and how such use will not change the essential character of the same area.
3. That the development will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future
neighborhood uses.
4. That the development does not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment,
and/or conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the
general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or
odors.
5. That the development will be served adequately by essential public facilities such as
highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water
and sewer, and schools.
6. That the development will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for
public facilities and services.
7. That the development is provided with parks, ponds, open areas, areas of special interest,
floodplain preservation, and/or other special features which would not typically be
provided in a non-PUD proposal.
Page 7 of 19
K:\P1anning DeptlEagle ApplicationslSUBSI2000ICountryside Estates 2nd pz(doc.doc
--- ---------- -----
8. That the vehicular approaches to the property are designed to not create an interference
with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares.
9. That the development will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural,
scenic or historic feature of major importance.
10. That the proposed development will be hannonious with and in accordance with the
general objectives or with any specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan.
11. That the proposed development will be hannonious with and in accordance with the
general objectives or with any specific objective of Eagle City Code Title 8.
12. That the benefits, combination of various land uses, and inteITelationship with the
suITouncling area for this proposed development justifies any proposed deviation from any
standard district regulations.
In cased of large - scale PUDs (incorporating fifty (50) or more lots or dwelling units):
13. That public services shall 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.
14. That an estimate of the public service costs to provide adequate service to the
development has been provided by the developer.
15. That an estimate of the tax revenue that will be generated from the development has been
provided by the developer.
16. That suggested public (or private) means of financing the services for the development if
the cost for the public services would not be offset by the tax revenue received from the
development has been provided by the developer.
For a request of up to 10% of the gross land area to be directed to uses other than
residential (ie; commercial, industrial, public and quasi public uses that are not allowed
in the land use district):
17. That the uses are appropriate with the residential uses.
18. That the uses will serve principally the residents of the PUD.
19. That the uses are planned to be a integral part of the PUD
20. That the uses are located and designed to provide direct access to a collector or arterial
street.
21. That the proposed street connections will not create congestion or traffic hazards.
In cases where an increase in residential density of up to 15% of the allowable number of
dwelling units is requested:
Page 8 of 19
K:\P1anning Dep<1Eag1e Applicmions\SUBSI2000lCountryside Estates 2nd pzf.doc.doc
22. LANDSCAPING - For up to 5%
That the quality of the designs for landscaping, streetscape, open spaces and plazas, use
of existing landscape, pedestrian way treatment, and recreational areas, incorporated into
this development, exceed that of a non PUD development.
23. SITING - For up to 5%
That the quality of the designs for visual focal points, use of existing features such as
topography, view, sun orientation, prevalent wind direction, pedestrian/vehicular
circulation pattern, physical environment, variation in building setbacks, and building
grouping (such as clustering), incorporated into this development, exceed that of a non
PUD development.
DESIGN FEATURES - For up to 5%
That the quality of the designs for street sections, architectural styles, harmonious use of
materials, parking areas broken by landscaping features, and varied use of housing types,
incorporated into the development, exceed that of a non PUD development.
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN
REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL:
. Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces:
PARKS - Section 9.4.2 "Objectives"
c. To provide a system of neighborhood parks where safe and convenient access
is available to residents.
d. To dedicate and develop areas for parks in new residential developments.
PATHWAYS AND GRENBELTS - Section 9.5.2 "Objectives"
b. To provide a network of central and neighborhood paths where residents are
able to safely access and utilize pathways for alternative foTITIS of
transportation.
e. All development should provide developed pathways for connection to
Eagle's public pathway system and/or adjoining development's public
pathway system.
OPEN SPACE - Section 9.6.2 "Objectives"
b. To provide an open space setting for active and passive recreation for all age
groups throughout the community.
Section 9.6.3 "Policies"
b. To encourage cluster development to retain open space.
.
Transportation
Section 8.6 "Implementation Strategies"
e. Encourage new development to provide for pedestrian, equestrian, and bicycle
circulation in accordance with the City of Eagle TransportationlPathway
Page 9 of 19
~,. .
K:\Planning DeptlEagle Applications\sUBSI2OOO1Countryside Estates 2nd pzf.doc.do<:
Network Maps #1 and #2, adopted local and regional pathway plans, as may be
needed for intra-neighborhood connectivity and to ensure that bike and
pedestrian traffic is not unnecessarily pushed out onto arterials and collectors.
1. Encourage street lighting to increase roadway and neighborhood safety while
preserving a rural environment free of any unnecessary lighting.
p. Encourage sidewalks that are separated from the curb on all streets, except for
areas where Eagle City Code requires sidewalks to abut the curb and where existing
buildings, inordinate environmental impacts, or other impacts make setting the
sidewalk back infeasible. Meandering sidewalks should be required where space
pennits. A planter strip of sufficient width for street trees between the sidewalk
and roadway should be required to provide a canopy effect over the roadways. The
type of street trees used should be those which have root systems that have proven
to not cause sidewalk or curb damage when in close proximity to such
improvements.
q. Design and/or align roads to preserve existing trees wherever possible; safety shall
not be compromised.
.
Housing
Section 10.2 "Goal"
Encourage a variety of housing so that all residents can choose sound,
affordable homes that meet individual needs.
.
Land Use
Section 6.7 "Implementation Strategies"
p. Encourage a verity of housing through such mechanisms as PUD's in
subdivisions including large lot subdivisions.
Comments: The proposed development provides for a variety of lot sizes and homes
which translates to a mixed housing product. This provides for different home values for
varying income groups who desire a planned development within close proximity to the
city center. A community has been designed to reflect walking paths, a linear park and
common area landscaping. The plan creates an environment which reflects a
neighborhood feel. By offsetting the sidewalks five feet from the roadway, a landscape
strip will run parallel with the roadway. By planting trees in the corridor a tree canopy
will emit a warmth and neighborhood atmosphere.
The proposed development utilizes transitional lot sizing to ensure compatibility with
adjoining residential development. Consideration has been given to the large estate lots
along the west boundary in Redwood Creek Subdivision. The lot sizes in Countryside
Estates on the west boundary adjoining Redwood Creek are one (1) acre in size to provide
for lot compatibility. One acre lots are proposed on both sides of the local street near the
northwest portion of the site. Smaller lots are proposed within the interior of the site and
along the perimeter next to realigned State Street and Ballantyne Lane
Page 10 of 19
K:\P1anning DeptlEagle Applications\sUBSI2OOOICountryside Estates 2nd pzf.doc.doc
------ Un_-- ----------------_.--.----~.--
Parking facilities are proposed within the cul-de-sacs to alleviate on-street parking
problems and pedestrian/bicycle and vehicle conflicts where street frontages are reduced.
Landscaping will consist of a variety of native trees, shrubs, and flowers. Decorative
vinyl fencing is being considered for the perimeter of the site. The project is expanding
the City's pathway system along the Chevron pipeline as specified in the Comprehensive
Plan. Three micro paths connect State Street, Ballantyne Lane and the linear open space
for convenient pedestrian and bicycle access.
B. ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WillCR ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN
REGARDING TillS PROPOSAL:
- -- - -- --- ---.- ---------
.
ECC 8-6-5-4: INCREASED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY: To provide for an incentive for
quality PUD, the Council may authorize an increased residential density of up to fifteen
percent (15%) of the allowable number of dwelling units. Character, identity and
architectural and siting variation incorporated in a development shall be considered cause
for density increases, provided these factors make up a substantial contribution to the
objectives of the PUD, which are as follows:
A. Landscaping (a maximum increase of five percent [5%]), streetscape, open spaces
and plazas, use of existing landscaping, pedestrianway treatment and recreational
areas;
B. Siting (a maximum increase of five percent [5%]), visual focal points, use of
existing physical features such as topography, view, sun and wind orientation,
circulation pattern, physical environment, variation in building setbacks and building
grouping (such as clustering); and
C. Design features (a maximum increase of five percent [5%]), street sections,
architectural styles, harmonious use of materials, parking areas broken by
landscaping features and varied use of housing types.
. ECC Section 8-2-4 (G): A decrease of minimum lot size in a subdivision may be allowed
if there is an offsetting increase of the same percentage in open space and a planned unit
development is applied for and approved.
.
ECC Section 8-7-3-3 CONDITIONAL USES "PUBUC SITES AND OPEN SPACES"
Public sites and open spaces shall confonn to the following:
B. Natural Features: Existing natural features which add value to residential
development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees, water
courses, historic spots and similar iITeplaceable assets) shall be preserved in the
design of the development.
C. Special Developments: In the case of planned unit developments and large-scale
developments, the Council may require sufficient park or open space facilities of
acceptable size, location and site characteristics that may be suitable for the proposed
development.
.
ECC Section 8-7-3-5: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
Page 11 of 19
K:\P1anning DeptlEagle ApplicationslSUBSI2OOO1Countryside Estates 2nd pzf.doc.doc
-------- --------.-- -- -._--------- -------.
D. Conditions Of Pennit: Upon the granting of a conditional use pennit, conditions
may be attached to said pennit including, but not limited to, those:
1. Minimizing adverse impact on other development;
2. Controlling the sequence and timing of development;
3. Controlling the duration of development;
4. Assuring that development is maintained properly;
5. Designating the exact location and nature of development;
6. Requiring the provision for on-site or off-site public facilities or services; and
7. Requiring more restrictive standards than those generally required in this Title.
.
ECC Section 8-6-1: PURPOSE "PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS":
It shall be the policy to guide a major development of land and construction by
encouraging planned unit development (PUD) to achieve the following:
A. A maximum choice of living environments by allowing a variety of housing and
building types and pennitting an increased density per acre and a reduction in lot
dimensions, yards, building setbacks and area requirements;
B. A more useful pattern of open space and recreation areas and, if pennitted as part
of the project, more convenience in the location of accessory commercial uses,
industrial uses and services;
C. A development pattern which preserves and utilizes natural topography and
geologic features, scenic vistas, trees and other vegetation and prevents the disruption
of natural drainage patterns;
D. A more efficient use of land than is generally achieved through conventional
development resulting in substantial savings through shorter utilities and streets; and
E. A development pattern in harmony with land use density, transportation and
community facilities objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
.
ECC Section 8-6-5-2: COMMON OPEN SPACE:
A. Required Common Open Space: A minimum of ten percent (10%) of the gross
land area developed in any residential PUD project shall be reserved for common
open space and recreational facilities for the residents or users of the area being
developed.
D. Clustering: Every property developed under the PUD approach should be designed
to abut upon common open space or similar areas. A clustering of dwellings is
encouraged.
.
ECC Section 8-2A-7 (1)(4)
Major Roadways: New residential developments, including, but not limited to,
subdivisions and multi-family developments, shall be buffered from streets classified
as collectors, arterials, freeways, or expressways, to protect residential communities
from noisy, potentially dangerous, high-speed roads. The buffer area shall be defined
as the distance from the outside wall of the lowest story of any single-family attached
or detached dwelling and the right-of-way line of the roadway. The lowest story must
be screened from the view of any street classified as a collector, arterial, freeway, or
expressway. This buffer is required either on individual lots or as an easement, or as
Page 12 of 19
K:\Planning DeptlEagle ApplicationslSUBS\2000\C0untryside Estates 200 pzf.doc.doc
part of the common open space owned and maintained by a homeowners' association.
Any landscaping proposed to be within the public right of way shall not be included
as a part of the buffer area required below. The height for benning/fencing, as noted
below, shall be measured from the elevation of the final grade of the adjacent
roadway (measured at the center line) to the top of the proposed benning/fencing. The
required buffer area width, plantings, and fencing are as follows:
a. Any road designated as an urban or rural collector on the AP A Functional Street
Classification Map:
A minimum of thirty five feet (35') wide buffer area (not including right of way)
shall be provided with the following plants per one hundred (100) linear feet of
right of way: four (4) shade trees, five (5) evergreen trees, and twenty four (24)
shrubs. Each required shade tree may be substituted with two (2)
flowering/ornamental trees, provided that not more than fifty percent (50%) of the
shade trees are substituted.
A minimum five foot (5') high, maximum eight foot (8') high, benn, panelized
vinyl fence, decorative block wall, or cultured stone, decorative rock, or similarly
designed concrete wall, or combination thereof shall be provided within the buffer
area. The maximum slope for any benn shall be three feet (3') horizontal distance
to one foot (1 ') vertical distance. If a panelized vinyl fence, decorative block wall,
or cultured stone, decorative rock, or similarly designed concrete wall is to be
provided, in combination with the benn, a four foot (4') wide flat area at the top of
the benn shall be provided for the placement of the fence or decorative block wall.
Panelized vinyl fencing shall be no higher than four feet (4'). Chainlink, cedar,
and similar high maintenance and/or unsightly fencing shall not be pennitted.
The five foot (5') minimum height requirement for the benning/fencing shall be
pennitted to be decreased one foot (1 ') for every thirteen feet (13') of additional
buffer area added to the thirty five foot (35') wide buffer noted above.
C. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH OF SPECIAL CONCERN
REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL:
. ECC Section 9-3-8 (B) Natural Features: Existing natural features which add value to
residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as
trees, watercourses, historic spots and similar ilTeplaceable assets) shall be preserved
in the design of the subdivision.
. ECC Section 9-5-4-3 (C) Storage Areas: Storage areas shall be provided for the
anticipated needs of boats, campers and trailers. For typical residential development,
one adequate space shall be provided for every two (2) living units. This may be
reduced by the City Council if there is a showing that the needs of a particular
development are less.
. ECC Section 9-5-4-3 (E) Maintenance Building: A maintenance building shall be
provided of such size and in such location as is suitable for the service needs that are
Page 13 of 19
K:\Planning DeptlEagle ApplicationslSUBS\2000lCountryside Estates 2nd pz[doc.doc
necessary for the repair and maintenance of all common areas.
D. DISCUSSION:
. The Comprehensive Plan's land use map designations set the maximum density limit at
89-units (1.42-units per acre approx.) for a standard non-PUD subdivision for this site
(based on 36-acres of the site being zoned R-l and 26.5-acres being zoned R-2). The
applicant is proposing 96-units which is 7-units (7.8%) more than 89-units.
Eagle City Code Section 8-6-5-4 allows the City Council to permit increased density of
up to 15% of the allowable number of dwelling units provided that additional character,
identity, and architectural and siting variation is incorporated within the development.
The factors which are to be considered (per ECC Section 8-6-5-4) for adding substantial
contribution to the development are as follows:
A. Landscaping (a maximum increase of five percent [5%]), streetscape, open
spaces and plazas, use of existing landscaping, pedestrianway treatment and
recreational areas;
B. Siting (a maximum increase of five percent [5%]), visual focal points, use of
existing physical features such as topography, view, sun and wind orientation,
circulation pattern, physical environment, variation in building setbacks and
building grouping (such as clustering); and
C. Design features (a maximum increase of five percent [5%]), street sections,
architectural styles, harmonious use of materials, parking areas broken by
landscaping features and varied use of housing types.
. If the City approves a rezone to R-2-DA-P with development agreement limiting overall
density to 1.53-units per acre (96-10ts on 62.7-acres) for this site, then the minimum lot
size (per ECC Section 8-2-4, R-2 zone) would be 17,000 square feet. However, ECC
Section 8-2-4 (G) generally states that a decrease in minimum lot size in a PUD
subdivision may be allowed if there is an offsetting increase of the same percentage in
open space. Minimum open space required per ECC Section 9-3-8 (D) and Section 8-6-
5-2 is 10%.
The applicant is proposing to decrease the minimum lot size of 60-10ts (smallest lot being
11, 874 sq. ft.) by a total of 191,930 square feet (4.4-acres) of decreased lot size. If a
minimum of 6.27-acres of open space is required for the site (10% of 62.7-acres) and the
applicant is proposing 6.77-acres of open space, then an additional 3.9-acres of open
space is required (total open space equaling 10. 17-acres). This is calculated as follows
(numbers represent open space in acres):
Minimum 10% open space required: 6.27
Open space proposed: 6.77
Amount proposed greater than 10%: 6.77 - 6.27 = 0.5
Open space required for offsetting decreased lot size: 4.4
Total open space required: (4.4 - 0.5 = 3.9) 3.9 + 6.27 = 10.17
Page 14 of 19
K:\Planning DeptlEagle ApplicationslSUBSI2000lCountryside Estates 2nd pzf.doc-doc
.
Eagle City Code Section 8-6-6-3, requires all final development plans to be reviewed by
the Planning and Zoning Commission as well as the City Council. This is partly to allow
for additional City review for flexibility needed for long range and large PUDs.
.
ECC Section 8-7-3-3 (B) states that existing natural features which add value to
residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees,
water courses, historic spots and similar iITeplaceable assets) shall be preserved in the
design of the development.
There are three groves of existing trees located near the northeast, southwest, and
southeast comers of this site. Several other trees are located in various areas on this site,
specifically along the western property line. Staff recommends that all healthy trees (as
determined by a certified arborist) be preserved as proposed. The trees shall be protected
with construction fencing extending beyond the drip line of the tree during construction
of the subdivision.
.
Regarding Eagle City Code findings for a rezone, conditional use permit, planned unit
development preliminary development plan, preliminary plat - As a part of the application
submittal for this project, and in accordance with application submittal requirement #14,
the applicant has provided a ten page document, dated April 13, 2000. The document
outlines how the applicant intends to guarantee that this project will meet the Eagle City
Code required findings for a rezone, conditional use permit, planned unit development
preliminary development plan, and preliminary plat.
.
ECC Section 8-6-1 (A) states in part that a reduction in building setbacks may be
permitted within a PUD.
The applicant is proposing the following setbacks: 30' -front, 30' -rear, 15' -side, and 30'-
street side for all one acre lots within this development. Staff recommends approval of
the setbacks proposed for the one acre lots since they are consistent with the minimum
setbacks required by ECC for one acre lots.
The applicant is proposing the following setbacks for the remaining lots within the
development: 20' -front, 20' -rear, 7.5' -side, and 20' -street side. These setbacks are the
same as required by ECC for 8,000 square foot lots in an R-4 zone. ECC setbacks for an
R-3 zone with lots ranging in size from 10,000 square feet to 16,000 square feet (similar
to this proposal) are: 30' -front, 25' -rear, 7.5' -side, 20' -street side.
.
ECC Section 9-5-4-3 (C) requires that storage areas be provided for the anticipated needs of
boats, campers, and trailers. Staff is not aware of any provision for the storage of such
accessories within this development. The applicant should provide a revised preliminary plat
showing an area specifically designated for the storage of boats, campers, and trailers or
provide justification as to the proposed alternate method of storage for such items (ie. -
CC&R's prohibiting storage of such items within the development). If an on-site storage area
Page 15 of 19
K:\P1aoning DepllEag1e Applications\SUBSI2000\Counuyside Estates 2nd pzidoc.doc
-------.~.- ----~~_.-
is required, then the applicant should be required to obtain design review approval and should
construct the storage area prior to City Clerk signing the final plat for phase one.
.
ECC Section 9-5-4-3 (E) requires that a maintenance building be provided of such size and in
such location as is suitable for the service needs that are necessary for the repair and
maintenance of all common areas. Staff is not aware of any provision for any such
maintenance building within this development. The applicant should provide documentation
showing the proposed location and design of a maintenance building or provide justification
on how the maintenance of the common areas will be handled without the need of a
maintenance building. If an on-site maintenance building is required, then the applicant
should be required to obtain design review approval of the design and location and should
construct the maintenance building prior to the City Clerk signing the final plat for phase one.
.
As noted in previous responses to the City, Chevron pipeline representatives have stated that
trees will not be allowed within the pipeline's easement area. Staff is concerned how the
applicant will install the proposed separated sidewalk and street trees along the section of W.
South Fork Drive that abuts the Chevron pipeline easement. The applicant should be required
to provide documentation from Chevron Pipeline indicating their position on these proposed
improvements within their easement. If these improvements cannot be placed within the
easement area, then a modification to this application will need to be applied for and approved
by the City prior to the City accepting a final plat application.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the annexation and rezone for the entire site to R-2-DA-P
(with a development agreement limiting the overall density to 1.53 units per acre). If the
City Council approves the rezone with development agreement, then staff recommends
approval of the conditional use permit, preliminary development plan, and preliminary
plat with the site specific conditions of approval and the standard conditions of approval
provided below:
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COMMISSION:
A. A public hearing on the applications was held before the Planning and Zoning Commission
on July 24, 2000, at which time testimony was taken. The Commission continued this matter
until August 14,2000, in order to receive additional testimony, closed the public hearing and
made their recommendation at that time. Commissioner Nordstrom recused himself based
upon a potential conflict of interest.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning
Commission by eleven individuals on July 24, 2000 and seven on August 14, 2000. The
concerns addressed were generally related to traffic concerns, housing density on Ballantyne
Road, the ability of schools to serve the property, and whether PUD requirements are met.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning
Commission by one individual who was in favor of the project.
Page 16 of 19
K\PIanning DeptlEagle ApplicationslSUBSI2000lCountryside Estates 2nd pzf.doc.doc
-..----n---- ..-- --- -.
D. The Commission received eleven letters, all in opposition to the project and these letters were
entered into the record
COMMISSION DECISION:
The Commission voted 4 to 0 (Nordstrom abstaining) to recommend that RZ-2-00,
PPUD-3-00 and PP-3-00 be denied for the following reasons:
A.) The Commission does not agree with the rezone of the northern portion of the
property to the equivalent R-2 density, and are not aware of any recent zoning change
that exceeds the maximum shown on the Comprehensive Plan land use map, and do
not want to establish such precedent.
B.) The Commission does not feel the P.u.D. density increase in lot size/set back bonuses
being requested by the applicant meet the criteria specified in Eagle City Code 8-6-5-
4. The Commission do not feel that what the applicant is offering in terms of layout,
landscaping and open space is significantly beyond that which may be offered in a
non-PUD development.
c.) The Commission does not feel that the development transitions well to the property to
the east.
D.) The Commission does not accept the re-routing of Ballantyne/State Street intersection
as a justification for a PUD density increase bonus. The City has already
compromised by awarding the landowner with a mixed-use designation for the land to
the south of the re-routed Ballantyne in exchange for moving the intersection.
Items that the Commission would recommend to the applicant that would help gain
approval of this development are:
1.) The northern portion of the property should be developed to a density not to exceed
the maximum allowed in a non-PUD R-l designation.
2.) The southern portion of the property should be developed to a density not to exceed
the maximum density allowed in a non-PUD R-2 zone designation.
3.) The boundary describing the northern and southern portion of this property shall
reflect the transition of land uses shown on the current Comprehensive Plan land use
map.
4.) From a minimum lot size perspective the boundary defining the northern versus the
southern portion of the property could be blurred in a PUD application as long as the
maximum density in recommendations 1 and 2 are not exceeded for each portion of
property.
Page 17 of 19
K:\P1anning DepllEagle AppLicationslSUBSI2000ICountryside Estates 2nd pzf.doc.doc
5.) Provide a greater percentage of open space.
6.) Incorporate traffic calming features in the connection to Redwood Creek.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on April 13, 2000.
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 May 19,2000. 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 May 19, 2000.
Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted on April 14, 2000 in accordance with the
requirements of the Eagle City Code.
3. In accordance with Eagle City Code findings for a rezone with development agreement,
conditional use permit, preliminary development plan and preliminary plat the Eagle
Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following conclusions for RZ-2-00/CU-4-
00/PPUD-3-00/PP-3-00 (COUNTRYSIDE ESTAlES PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT):
The proposed rezone, preliminary development plan, conditional use and preliminary
plan;
A. Is not in the public interest, and do not advance the general welfare of the community
and neighborhood, and will be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community
since the development on the northern side is too dense and that the property does not
transition well with the property to the east
B. Is not harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives and specific
objective of the Comprehensive Plan and this title (Eagle City Code Title 8) in
particular because the development is not in conformance with the comprehensive
plan provisions related to density and lot size and does not provide sufficient
improvements in terms of layout, landscaping and open space to justify increased
densities through a PUD.
C. Is not designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and
appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general
vicinity and that such use would change the essential character of the same area since
the development will not meet the City's zoning requirements;
D. Will be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighborhood uses since the area
is primarily sUITounded by residential and agricultural property zoned at an R-l or AR
designation;
E. The development does not meet the provisions of a PUD, namely that the
development does not provide sufficient amenities to justify the increased density;
and
F. The development does not minimize the adverse impact on other nearby development.
Page 18 of 19
K:\P1anning DeptlEagle Applicatioru;\sUBSI2000lCountryside Estates 2nd pzf.do<.doc
DATED this 28th day of August, 2000.
L
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
Ada County, Idaho
~¡þ
J~hn :anden, Chainnan
~
ATTEST:
1L r.+ . - \'- ~ð-ð H'
./Sharon 'Moore, Eagle City CI rk
Sr~ 1)¿u-~$
U lee- OrA< ¿~--vu
..........~
~ of !ilO
t~ ,.rF'.~' (~ ..
..tlt <:>O"~ '" .
I " "',:.~ -..» Q... ~
, :¡ f..Jc <r" ~
, 1cr. .-.- ** =
5 t<"' ......",,", ~,T -.. !
t\ «',{" """,:,;'~ v:,ï ,;",~' ..
~ .,',:"~,",, -', ". ,""d' " . ..
't- ~'~';"':~'~T",»';<:)¡.i
~' ',"',"L' '-.. '>,'.'
~~~~2~.{~:~'~~'>;'~
K:\P1anning DeptlEagle AppticationsISUBS\2000lCounttyside Estates 2nd pzf.doc,doc
Page 19 of 19