Findings - PZ - 2002 - FPUD-7-01 & FP-20-01 - Fpud/Fp Countryside Estates 2/38-Lot/20.2 Acre
BEFORE THE EAGLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR
A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND FINAL PLAT
FOR COUNTRYSIDE ESTATES PUD SUBDIVISION
NO.2 FOR COUNTRYSIDE ESTATES LLC
)
)
)
)
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER FPUD-7-01 & FP-20-01
The above-entitled final development plan and final plat applications came before the Eagle Planning and
Zoning Commission for their recommendation on January 14, 2002. 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;
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. PROJECT SUMMARY:
Countryside Estates LLC, represented by Briggs Engineering, is requesting final development plan and
final plat approval for Countryside Estates Subdivision No.2, a 38-lot (30-buildable, 8 common)
residential subdivision. This 20.20-acre phase of Countryside Estates PUD Subdivision is located near
the northwest corner of Ballantyne Road and State Highway 44 (State Street).
B. illSTORY:
The City Council approved the PUD for Countryside Estates Subdivision on February 13,2001. The
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the annexation, rezone, conditional use permit,
preliminary plat and preliminary development plan are attached.
C. PRELIMINARY PUD/PLAT FINDINGS:
Council Findings and Conclusions dated February 13,2001, are incorporated herein by reference.
D. FINDINGS OF FACT REQUIRED BY EAGLE CITY CODE SECTION 8-6-6-3 B:
The Commission shall find that the facts submitted with the application and presented to them
establish that:
1. The proposed development can be initiated within one year of the date of approval;
2. Each individual unit of the development, as well as the total development, can 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
proposed 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;
3. The streets and thoroughfares proposed are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic,
and increased densities will not generate traffic in such amounts as to overload the street
network outside the PUD;
4. Any proposed commercial development can be justified at the locations proposed;
5. Any exception from standard district requirements is warranted by the design and other
amenities incorporated in the final development plan, in accordance with the PUD and the
adopted policy of the Council;
6. The area surrounding said development can be planned and zoned in coordination and
substantial compatibility with the proposed development;
Page 1 of 4
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2001\Countryside Estates No, 2 fpud pzf.doc
7. The PUD is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and
8. The existing and proposed utility services are adequate for the population densities and
nonresidential uses proposed.
E. FINDINGS OF FACT REQUIRED BY EAGLE CITY CODE SECTION 8-6-6-3 (C):
Upon granting or denying the application, the Council shall specify:
1. The ordinance and standards used in evaluating the application;
2. The reasons for approval or denial; and
3. The actions, if any, that the applicant could take to obtain a permit.
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITIDN THE STAFF REPORT:
The City Engineer and Planning staff have reviewed the fmal development plan and final plat. It
is staff's opinion that this final development plan can meet the Findings of Fact required in Eagle
City Code Section 8-6-6-3 B and C (as noted herein) with the conditions recommended herein and
that the final plat will be in substantial compliance with the preliminary plat with the conditions
herein.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
Staff recommends approval with the site specific conditions of approval and the standard
conditions of approval provided within the staff report.
REVIEW BY THE COMMISSION:
A review by the Planning and Zoning Commission was completed on January 14, 2002. The
Commission made their recommendation at that time. The minutes are incorporated herein by
reference.
COMMISSION DECISION:
The Commission voted 2 to 1 (Bloom against, Cadwell abstained, Franden absent) to recommend
approval of FPUD-7-01 & FP-20-01 for a final development plan and final plat approval for
Countryside Estates Subdivision No.2 with the following staff recommended site specific
conditions of approval.
SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Comply with all applicable conditions of CU-4-00/PPUD-3-00/PP-3-00.
2. Comply with the conditions ofDR-2-01.
3. The applicant shall submit payment to the City for all Engineering fees incurred for reviewing
this project, prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat.
4. Any pathway abutting a backyard shall be constructed prior to the issuance of a building
permit for the abutting lot. For phase No.2, the affected yards include Lots 23, 24, 26, 36 and
37, Block 3, and Lots 4-8 and 10-13, Block 9.
5. 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."
6. The applicant shall install a 4' x 4' plywood or other hard surface sign (mounted on two 4"x
4" posts with the bottom of the sign being a minimum of 3-feet above the ground) at the
northern entrance into the subdivision noticing the contractors to clean up daily, no loud
music, and no dogs off leash.
Page 2 of 4
K:\Planning Dept\Eagie Applications\SUBS\200I\Countryside Estates No.2 fpud pzf.doc
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on August 10, 2001.
B. In accordance with Eagle City Code Section 8-6-6-3 B the Commission finds that the facts submitted
with the application and presented to the Commission, with the conditions herein, establish that:
1. The proposed development can 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, can 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
proposed 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 proposed are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic,
and increased densities will not generate traffic in such amounts as to overload the street
network outside the PUD based upon written responses received from the highway districts
having jurisdiction;
4. No commercial development is proposed;
5. Any exception from standard district requirements is warranted by the design and other
amenities incorporated in the final development plan, in accordance with the PUD and the
adopted policy of the Council because the varied lot sizes and setbacks as specifically
approved by the City, will allow for a mix of housing types in accordance with the
Comprehensive Plan;
6. The area surrounding said development can be planned and zoned in coordination and
substantial compatibility with the proposed development since no intensive uses, that might
impact the planned residential areas surrounding the development, are proposed;
7. The PUD is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan because the zoning
designation ofR-2-DA-P is in accordance with the Residential One and Residential Two Land
Use designations on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map since the Land Use Map divides
the site into two different designations; and that with the use of a development agreement, the
overall density for the site will be limited to what would have been otherwise allowed within a
split zoning for the site (R-l and R-2 zones). Therefore, the City can be assured that any
development will be limited beyond what may have been allowed within a split zoning for the
site (R-l and R-2 zones); and
8. The existing and proposed utility services are adequate for the population densities as noted by
the agencies which will serve the development.
Page 3 of 4
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2001\Countryside Estates No.2 fpud pzf.doc
DATED this 28th day of January 2002.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
a C nty,
ATTEST:
1L~ r,A-û-- I~ 71J-~
'-""'"sharon K:-Moore, Eagle City Clerk
~....~
;;,"~ O~O~'-
.f'þ/-: .. ~-"
¡ ~'l <>-~ 0 r... ...0.. '\
"" . 0"" ..~ ~ ..
:; ~ ~ ~* ..
~ *J dPO- ! æ
n \.~~"O ~ L t:""'~\ .,.
\ ~),'"1),:;..J,~,1.n."".,',~,'1i~,,, ,:
.~'\:1'i~'",,-' ""...:~,...t.,/;:):t
~ö:\'z:.."'~"""-."""":",_.,'-'"-~z,,,,"',' "',':""~/h
,- -~""""~ 'co,
,,'ý'~-. ~;'f"'-;:"" ".:.
..... '<'/ O';~ ,"; ,.,¡;,V
~ "- Y,.,';r
1tq.y.1i"1<t~1
Page 4 of 4
K:\P1anning Dept\Eagle Applications\SUBS\2001\Countryside Estates No, 2 fpud pzf.doc