Findings - CC - 2001 - RZ-14-00 MOD - Change To Conditions In Da
ORIGINAL
BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR
A MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT FOR IFI PARTNERS II
)
)
)
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER RZ-14-00 MOD
The above-entitled development agreement modification came before the Eagle City Council for their
action on October 23,2001. The Council, having heard and taken oral and written testimony, and having
duly considered the matter, makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law;
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
IFI Partners IT, represented by John Evans, is requesting a change to the conditions within
the development agreement previously approved by the City for rezone application RZ-14-
00 (rezone from R-4 (Residential) to MU-DA (Mixed Use with a Development
Agreement)). The 2.97-acre site is located on the south side of Hill Road approximately
575-feet west of Highway 55.
B.
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL:
The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on July 12,2001.
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 August 18, 2001. Notice of this public hearing
was mailed to property owners within three-hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject property
in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City
Code on August 15, 2001. Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted on July 16,
2001 in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in
accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
ordinances on October 6, 2001. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property
owners within three-hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject property in accordance with the
requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on October 3,
2001.
D.
HISTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS:
On April 10, 2001, the Eagle City Council approved a rezone (RZ-14-00) with a
development agreement (including a concept plan) for this site.
E.
COMPANION APPLICATIONS: PP-9-01 (Great Sky Estates Subdivision No.7)
Page 1 of 11
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle ApplicalionslRZ&AI20011RZ-14-00 MOD cd.doc
F.
G.
H.
I.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS:
COMP PLAN ZONING LAND USE
DESIGNATION DESIGNA TlON
Existing Mixed Use R-4 (Residential)* Vacant
Proposed No Change MU-DA (Mixed Use with R esiden ti al/C 0 mmerc ial
Development Agreement)
North of site Residential Three (up to 3- R-3 (Residential) Gravel extraction site/
units per acre max.) Proposed Arbor Ridge
S ubdi vision
South of site Mixed Use R-4 (Residential) Residential
East of site Mixed Use R-4 (Residential) Proposed Commercial-
Residential Development
(Piccadilly Village)
West of site Residential Three (up to 3- R-3 (Residential) Residential
units per acre max.)
* The development agreement previously approved has not been recorded and an Ordinance to
zone the property to MU-DA has not been approved by the City Council to date.
DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT: Not in the DDA, TDA or CEDA.
TOTAL ACREAGE OF SITE: 2.97-acres
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REZONE:
See applicant's justification letter dated July 12,2001 (attached).
J.
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (if
applicable): See development agreement language with changes proposed by staff under Staff
Analysis Section C below.
K.
AVAILABILITY AND ADEQUACY OF UTILITIES AND SERVICES:
A preliminary review letter from the Eagle Fire Department has been received. The Eagle
Sewer District states that it will be necessary for the applicant to petition to annex the
subject property into the sewer district for sewage disposal prior to development of the
site, with an approval being anticipated. An approval letter from the water company
having jurisdiction is required.
L.
PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUISITIONS MAP: No map currently exists.
M.
NON-CONFORMING USES:
Based upon the information available, the proposed rezone will not create any
noncompliance issues with regard to provisions of the Eagle City Code, provided the
conditions within the development agreement are complied with.
Page 2 of 11
K:\P1mming Dept\Eagle ApplicationslRZ&A120011RZ-14-00 MOD ocf.doc
N.
AGENCY RESPONSES:
The following agencies have responded and their correspondence is attached. Comments
which appear to be of special concern are noted below:
Ada County Highway District
Central District Health Department
Eagle Fire Department
Eagle Sewer District
Independent School District of Boise City #1
New Union Ditch Company
O.
LETTERS FROM THE PUBLIC: None received to date
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
A.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN
REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL:
Chapter 5 - Economic Development
5.5
Implementation Strategies
f.
New commercial development outside of the Central Business District should
complement the Central Business District and Eagle's rural identity.
1.
Excessively large single entity businesses that would jeopardize the competitive
business environment should be discouraged.
Chapter 12 - Community Design
12.2
Goal
Strive to create an aesthetically pleasing community and protect the unique natural beauty
and small town character of the City.
12.3
Implementation Strategies
f.
Excessively large single entity businesses that would jeopardize the competitive
environment should be discouraged.
B.
ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
THIS PROPOSAL:
.
Section 8-1O-1(A): REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS (for development
agreements):
Purpose: Development agreements are a discretionary tool to be used by the Council as a
condition of rezoning. Development agreements allow a specific project with a specific
use to be developed on property in an area that is not appropriate for all uses allowed or
conditional in the requested zone.
Page 3 of 11
K:\Plwming Dept\Eagle ApplicationslRZ&A120011RZ-14-00 MOD ccf.doc
Section 9-3-6 (A): EASEMENTS
Unobstructed utility easements shall be provided along front lot lines, rear lot lines and
side lot lines when deemed necessary. Total easement width shall not be less than twelve
feet (12').
c.
DISCUSSION:
.
The previous application submitted by the applicant (RZ-14-00) included a concept plan
and development agreement with the parcel being developed with single-family residential
uses to the south, and commercial uses to the north. On April 10, 2001, the City Council
approved this application with specific conditions to be included within a development
agreement. The applicant is now requesting a modification to this application due to
changes in the vision of how the commercial portion of the site is to develop and be
controlled by separate ownership. The following conditions (italicized) were approved by
the City Council on April 10, 2001 and are included herein for reference.
2.1 The owner shall submit a Design Review application for the site (as required by the
Eagle City Code), and shall comply with all conditions required by Eagle as a part of
the Design Review.
2.2 The Concept Plan represents the Applicant's current conceptfor completion of the
project. As the Concept Plan evolves, the City understands and agrees that certain
changes in that concept may occur. Such changes, if proposed by the Applicant, shall
be reviewed by the City as "New Business" items and not as "Public Hearing" items
unless the City detennines that any such changes require additional public comment
due to potential impacts on surrounding property or the community or unless the
proposed use is a conditional use ( c) as established herein then a public hearing shall
be required. If the City detennines that a public hearing shall be held on any
proposed change in the Concept Plan, notice shall be provided as may be required by
the City.
2.3 The Property shall be pennitted to be developed with approximately 1.49*-acres
consisting of a maximum of six dwelling units and approximately 1.33 *-acres
consisting of a maximum of 1 0,500 gross square feet of commercial buildings. The
Owner acknowledges that the minimum City parking and landscaping requirements
may limit the square footage to less than 10,500 square feet.
2.4 The maximum size for any individualßr total combination of commercialþuilding( s)
shall be 10,500 square feet.
2.5 For the 1.33*-acres planned for commercial buildings noted in section 2.4 above, the
only allowed uses shall be as follows:
Pennitted (P) Uses:
-Horticulture (general)
-Horticulture (limited)
-Roadside stand (temporary structure)
-Home Occupation
Page 4 of 11
K:\Planning DeptlEagle ApplicationslRZ&A120011RZ-14-00 MOD ocf.doc
-Planned Unit Development
-Beaury/barbershop
-Bed and Breakfast faciliry
-Catering Service
-Childcare (family)
-Christmas Tree Sales
-Church
-Clinic
-Communications Facilities
-Office, Business and Professional
-Parking Lot, Parking Garage
-Personal Wireless Facilities (Height 35 feet or less)
-Professional activities
-Limited Retail Sales (up to 2,000 squarefeet)
Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit
-Childcare (Daycare Center)
-Childcare (Group)
-Flex Space
-Kennel
-Mortuary
-Nursery, Plant Materials
-Nursing / Convalescent Home
-Industry Research and Development
-Research Activities
-Public Service Facilities
-School, Public or Private
2.6 Only those uses as stated herein, with listed restrictions as mentioned within this
agreement, shall be allowed.
2.7 Except as provided for herein the development shall comply with the Eagle Ciry Code,
as it exists in final form at the time an application is made and the conditions within
this agreement shall be satisfied.
2.8 The applicant's properry shall become annexed into the Eagle Sewer District's
service boundaries and shall comply with all applicable Eagle Sewer District
regulations and conditions prior to approval of any final development plan for this
site.
2.9 The applicant shall extend an 8-inch sewer line to the properry to the west (known as
the Low properry) for future connection to that properry.
Page 5 of 11
K:\PlllDDillg DeptlEagle Applications\RZ&Al2oo11RZ-14-00 MOD ccf.doc
2.10 The applicant and the abutting parcel to the west shall resolve and provide
documentation concerning the disputed septic easement, prior to the issuance of
any building permits.
2.11 The residential portion of the development shall be limited to a maximum density of
six (6) dwelling units.
2.12 Although Eagle City Code Section 8-6-4 allows ten percent (10%) of a PUD to
include uses that the "Official Schedule of District Regulations" show as prohibited,
in no case shall any of those prohibited uses be permitted for this site.
(* With the submittal of the preliminary plat, these dimensions are more accurately
measured as 1.31-acres for the residential portion and 1.66-acres for the commercial
portion.)
.
With this application and development agreement, the applicant is requesting that: 1) the side
setbacks be allowed to be reduced to 5-feet (minimum is 7.5-feet); 2) the minimum lot sizes
for the commercial lots (23, 24, and 25, Block 11) and a residential lot (Lot 15, Block 11) be
allowed to be smaller than the required minimum lot size of 7,000-square feet; and, 3) the side
and rear setback lines for Lots 23, 24 and 25, Block 11, be reduced to zero (0) with all other
setbacks to be measured from the subdivision boundary lines. Eagle City Code section 8-2-1
provides that a development agreement may be allowed in lieu of a PUD when a property is
rezoned to Mixed Use, provided conditions of development are required which may normally
be required during the regular PUD process. This tool allows a development to overcome
certain obstacles or provide innovative solutions that the ordinance may not be flexible enough
to allow.
With regard to the side setbacks, the applicant desires to reduce the required minimum setback
(5-feet in lieu of 7.5-feet) in order to maintain a congruent pattern of house sizes in this
development compared to the subdivision (Great Sky Estates) to the south. Because the lot
widths proposed for this development are smaller than those for Great Sky Estates (70-feet
compared to an average of 80-feet), it may not be possible to construct houses similar in size
and thus symmetry is lost between the two residential subdivisions. Staff recommends that
the side setbacks be allowed to be reduced to 5-feet and should be stated as such on the final
plat.
The proposed reduction in the minimum lot sizes from 7,000-square feet for the commercial
lots are intended to allow the sale of the individual buildings that may be constructed on the
lots rather than one owner controlling the entire site. It may be considered that this situation is
merely for ownership purposes rather than as a planning issue because the net result is the
same. Whether the buildings are owned by one person on one lot or multiple people on
multiple lots, the outward appearance and function of the site will still be the same. It is
important to note that each owner and all development of the site is required to comply with
the development agreement for this site. Staff recommends that the minimum lot sizes for
Lots 23, 24 and 25, Block 11 be allowed to be reduced below 7,000-square feet, as depicted
on the preliminary plat and as stated within the development agreement for this site.
Finally, the request for zero side and rear lot setback widths for the common property lines
between Lots 23, 24 and 25, Block 11, is to accommodate buildings of approximately 2500-
square feet each to be sold off separately to individual owners. The end result remains the
same; that is, the development from the outside appearance functions as one cluster of
Page 6 of 11
K:\P1anning DeptlEagle ApplicationslRZ&Al2OO llRZ-l 4-00 MOD ocf.doc
buildings on one lot, while the buildings are actually built upon three lots and owned by more
than one individual. Staff recommends that the minimum side and rear setbacks be allowed to
be reduced to zero (0) for Lots 23, 24 and 25, Block 11, with all other setbacks to be measured
from the subdivision boundary lines.
.
The applicant desires to make the following additions (in bold type) to the development
agreement, with underlined text recommended to be added by staff and text shown with strike-
thru recommended to be deleted by staff.
2.13 The residential portion of the development, consisting of Lots 15-19, Block 11,
shall be allowed to have a minimum 5-foot side yard setback.
2.14 The commercial parcels noted on the plat as Lots 23, 24, and 25, Block 11, shall
be permitted to have the following minimum lot sizes (listed respectively) 4,114
- square feet, 4,568 - square feet, and 4,568 -square feet. The residential lot,
Lot 15, Block 11, is permitted to be a minimum of 6,807-square feet.
2.15 The commercial parcels noted on the plat as Lots 23, 24, and 25, Block 11, shall
be permitted to have zero (0) side setbacks along the common parcel lines
between said lots. Lots 23, 24 and 25, Block 11 shall be permitted to have zero
rear setbacks along the common parcel lines between said lots. All other
setbacks for these lots shall be measured from the subdivision boundary lines.
2.16 The entire propertv shall be developed and maintained per the conditions of this
Development Aereement reeardless of the number of owners of the
commercial property to the north. All lots and lot owner(s) as part of anv
future re-subdivision of the commercial property shall be subject to the
conditions within this Development Aereement.
2.17The applicant's property shall be annexed into the Eaele Water Company's
service boundaries and shall comply with all applicable Eaele Water Company
reeulations and conditions prior to approval of any final plat for this site.
STAFF RECOMMENDED FINDINGS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
.
With regard to Eagle City Code Section 8-7-S "Action by the Commission and
Council", and based upon the information provided to staff to date, staff believes
that the proposed rezone is in accordance with the City of Eagle Comprehensive
Plan and established goals and objectives because:
a. The requested zoning designation of MU-DA is in accordance with the Mixed
Use classification shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map;
b. The information provided from the agencies having jurisdiction over the public
facilities needed for this site indicate that public facilities exist, or are expected to
be provided as conditioned within the development agreement, to serve the single
family dwelling uses to the south and the commercial uses allowed on the north
section of this site as stated within the development agreement for this property.
c. The proposed MU-DA zone is compatible with the zoning designation and land
uses to the south since the proposed residential uses on this site are compatible
with the proposed residential uses to the south of this property;
Page 7 of 11
K:\P1mming DeptlEagle ApplicationslRZ&A\2001 IRZ-14-OO MOD ocf.doc
d. The proposed MU-DA zone is compatible with the zoning designation and land
uses to the north and west since this development is required to be separated from
the adjacent residential uses to the west with perimeter landscape buffers and is
separated to the north by Hill Road;
e. The proposed MU-DA zone is compatible with the zoning designation and land
uses to the east since the proposed residential uses combined with the proposed
commercial uses on this site are to be developed in a similar fashion as the
proposed development to the east;
f. The land proposed for rezone is not located within a "Hazard Area" or "Special
Area" as described within the Comprehensive Plan; and
g. No non-conforming uses are expected to be created with this rezone.
.
Eagle City Code section 8-2-1 provides that a development agreement may be allowed in lieu
of a PUD when a property is rezoned to Mixed Use, provided conditions of development are
required which may normally be required during the regular PUD process. This tool allows a
development to overcome certain obstacles or provide innovative solutions that the ordinance
may not be flexible enough to allow. In order to justify the conditions listed herein to be
placed within the development agreement, staff recommends that the facts submitted with the
application and presented to the Commission, establish that:
1. The development will be initiated within one year of the date of approval based upon the
testimony and documentation presented by the developer;
2. Each individual unit of the development, as well as the total development, will exist as an
independent unit capable of creating an environment of sustained desirability and stability
or that adequate assurance will be provided that such objective will be attained and the
uses will not be detrimental to present and potential surrounding uses, but will have a
beneficial effect which would not be achieved under standard district regulations because
of the conditions placed on this development;
3. The streets and thoroughfares to be constructed are suitable and adequate to carry
anticipated traffic, and the uses for the site will not generate traffic in such amounts as to
overload the street network outside the development upon written responses received from
the highway districts having jurisdiction;
4. The commercial development can be justified at this location because the site has
previously been approved to be zoned for the uses noted herein and will be guided through
completion with a development agreement outlining the conditions of proper and desired
development;
5. Any exception from standard district requirements is warranted by the design and other
amenities incorporated in the development agreement, in accordance with the adopted
policy of the Council because the site provides an opportunity for residents to patronize
local businesses in close proximity rather than travel farther distances to obtain similar
services;
6. The area surrounding said development can be planned and zoned in coordination and
substantial compatibility with this development since it is designed to incorporate
residential uses in addition to the commercial uses, and therefore transition into the
planned residential areas surrounding the development;
7. The development is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and
8. The existing and required utility services are adequate for this proposal as were either
previously installed and/or as noted by the agencies which will serve the development.
Page 8 of 11
K:\Planning DeptlEagle Applications\RZ&Al2oo1\RZ-14-00 MOD ocf.doc
STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
Based upon the information provided to staff to date, staff recommends approval of the requested
modification to the development agreement with the staff recommended changes as noted in the
staff report.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COMMISSION:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the Planning and Zoning Commission on
September 10, 2001, at which time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The
Commission made their recommendation at that time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission
by one (1) individual with concerns regarding the grade elevation of the adjacent development to the
east and matching grade of this development; realignment of the roadway to the west; and installation
of a streetscape to separate the street and backyards of the adjacent development to the east.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission by no
one (not including the applicant/representative).
COMMISSION DECISION:
The Commission voted 4 to 0 (Deckers absent) to recommend approval of RZ-14-00 MOD for a
modification to the development agreement for IFI Partners II with the modifications to be added
to the previously approved development agreement as shown within their Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law document dated October 1, 2001.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the City Council on October 23, 2001, at which
time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Council made their decision at that
time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one (other than the
applicant/representative).
COUNCIL DECISION:
The Council voted 3 to 0 (Guerber absent) to approve RZ-14-00 MOD for a modification to the
development agreement for IFI Partners II with the following Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended modifications to be added to the previously approved development agreement with
strike through text to be deleted by the Council and underlined text to be added by the Council.
1. The commercial parcels noted on the plat as Lots 23, 24, and 25, Block 11, shall be
permitted to have the following minimum lot sizes (listed respectively) 4,114 - square
feet, 4,568 - square feet, and 4,568 -square feet. The resiàeatiallot, Lot 15, Bloek 11, is
pørmitted to Be a miRiæHffi of 6,807 stlHare f.eet.
2. The commercial parcels noted on the plat as Lots 23, 24, and 25, Block 11, shall be
permitted to have zero (0) side setbacks along the common parcel lines between said lots.
Page 9 of 11
K:\Plmming Dept\Eagle Applications\RZ&Al2oo llRZ-l 4-00 MOD ccf.doc
Lots 23, 24 and 25, Block 11 shall be permitted to have zero rear setbacks along the
common parcel lines between said lots. All other setbacks for these lots shall be measured
from the subdivision boundary lines.
3. The entire property shall be developed and maintained per the conditions of this
Development Agreement regardless of the number of owners of the commercial property
to the north. All lots and lot owner(s) as part of any future re-subdivision of the
commercial property shall be subject to the conditions within this Development
Agreement.
4. The applicant's property shall be annexed into the Eagle Water Company's service
boundaries and shall comply with all applicable Eagle Water Company regulations and
conditions prior to approval of any final plat for this site.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on July 12,2001.
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 August 18, 2001. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners within
three-hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of Title 67,
Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on August 15, 2001. Requests for agencies' reviews
were transmitted on July 16, 2001 in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in accordance
for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City ordinances on October 6,
2001. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners within three-hundred feet (300-
feet) of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code
and Eagle City Code on October 3, 2001.
3. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed modification to the
rezone and development agreement (RZ-14-00 MOD) with regard to Eagle City Code Section 8-7-5
"Action by the Commission and Council", and based upon the information provided concludes that the
proposed development agreement modification is in accordance with the City of Eagle Comprehensive
Plan and established goals and objectives because:
a. The requested zoning designation of MU-DA is in accordance with the Mixed Use
classification shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map;
b. The information provided from the agencies having jurisdiction over the public
facilities needed for this site indicate that adequate public facilities exist, or are
expected to be provided (with stipulations in the development agreement), to serve
any and all uses allowed on this property under the proposed zone;
c. The proposed rezone is compatible with the current zoning and uses to the north,
south, east, and west since the development of this site will be limited to only those
uses outlined within the development agreement and since any commercial uses will
have adequate buffers as required with design review;
d. The land proposed for rezone is not located within a "Hazard Area" or "Special Area"
as described within the Comprehensive Plan;
e. No non-conforming uses are expected to be created with this rezone if the
Page 10 of 11
K:\P1mming Dept\Eagle Applications\RZ&Al2oo1\RZ-14-00 MOD ccf.doc
development agreement as proposed is required and subsequently complied with.
4. In accordance with Eagle City Code findings for a rezone with a development agreement [when
rezoning to MU (Mixed Use) and utilizing a development agreement in lieu of the PUD and/or
conditional use process], the Eagle City Council makes the following conclusions for RZ-14-00 MOD:
1. The development will be initiated within one year of the date of approval based upon the
testimony and documentation presented by the developer;
2. Each individual unit of the development, as well as the total development, will exist as an
independent unit capable of creating an environment of sustained desirability and stability or
that adequate assurance will be provided that such objective will be attained and the uses will
not be detrimental to present and potential surrounding uses, but will have a beneficial effect
which would not be achieved under standard district regulations because of the conditions
placed on this development;
3. The streets and thoroughfares to be constructed are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated
traffic, and the uses for the site will not generate traffic in such amounts as to overload the
street network outside the development upon written responses received from the highway
districts having jurisdiction;
4. The commercial development can be justified at this location because the site has previously
been approved to be zoned for the uses noted herein and will be guided through completion
with a development agreement outlining the conditions of proper and desired development;
5. Any exception from standard district requirements is warranted by the design and other
amenities incorporated in the development agreement, in accordance with the adopted policy
of the Council because the site provides an opportunity for residents to patronize local
businesses in close proximity rather than travel farther distances to obtain similar services;
6. The area surrounding said development can be planned and zoned in coordination and
substantial compatibility with this development since it is designed to incorporate residential
uses in addition to the commercial uses, and therefore transition into the planned residential
areas surrounding the development;
7. The development is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and
8. The existing and required utility services are adequate for this proposal as were either
previously installed and/or as noted by the agencies which will serve the development.
DATED this 13th day of November 2001.
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
Ada Co ty, Idaho
.."~
. ~>-:~<\
(j ...tOI~,.~~
~o ~ f
'*, ;e - d", *)"
EA4. ..,
,r,}»
Page 11 of"--.;.ø:'
Rick
ATTEST:
1 ~ (~--- ¥ 2ft(~-
haron 'Ie. Moore, Eagle City C rk
K:\P1mming Dept\Eagle ApplicationslRZ&AI20011RZ-14-00 MOD ccf.doc