Findings - PZ - 2002 - CPA-05-02 - Request Expansion To Impact Boundary To Include 14 Acres At 767 N Linder Rd
OR\G\NAL
BEFORE THE EAGLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR A )
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT)
TO ESTABLISH A LAND USE DESIGNATION)
OF RESIDENTIAL TWO UPON THE WESTERLY)
EXPANSION OF THE CITY'S AREA OF IMPACT)
BOUNDARY FOR BRIAR CREEK LLC )
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER CPA-O5-02
The above-entitled comprehensive plan amendment application came before the Eagle Planning and
Zoning Commission for their recommendation on November 18, 2002. The Commission continued the
public hearing to December 2, 2002, and made their decision at that time; to be forwarded to the Council
in combination with the additional comprehensive plan amendment applications currently under review
with the City. The Eagle Planning and Zoning 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:
Briar Creek LLC, represented by Land Consultants, Inc., are requesting a westerly
expansion to the City's Impact Area Boundary to include the 14-acre site is located
approximately 1200-feet north of State Highway 44 at 767 N. Linder Road. The applicant
is also requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to include the site into the City's
Land Use Map as Residential Two (up to two dwelling units per acre).
B.
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL:
The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on September 9, 2002.
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 15, 22, and 29, 2002. 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 31,2002. Requests for agencies' reviews were
transmitted on September 19, 2002, in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City
Code.
D.
HISTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS: None
E.
COMPANION APPLICATIONS: None
Page 1 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\CPA\2002\CPA-S-O2 pzf.doc
F.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS:
COMP PLAN ZONING LAND USE
DESIGN A TION DESIGNA TION
Existing Not within the City of RR (Rural Residential - Ada Single-family residence
Eagle Area of Impact County designation)
Proposed Residential Two No change at this time Residential Subdivision
North of site Not within the City of RR (Rural Residential - Ada Residences/Pasture
Eagle Area of Impact County designation)
South of site Not within the City of RR (Rural Residential - Ada Residences/Pasture
Eagle Area of Impact County designation)
East of site Residential One (up to RUT (Rural Urban transitional- Proposed Sedona Creek
one dwelling unit per Ada County designation) Subdivision
acre maximum)
West of site Not within the City of RR (Rural Residential - Ada Residences/Pasture
Eagle Area of Impact County designation)
G.
DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT: Not in the DDA, IDA or CEDA.
H.
TOTAL ACREAGE OF SITE: 14 - acres
1.
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REZONE:
No rezone proposed.
J.
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT:
Not applicable
K.
A V AILABILITY AND ADEQUACY OF UTILITIES AND SERVICES:
The City has received a letter from the Eagle Fire Department stating the District has no
opposition to the project. The Eagle Sewer District states that the property will need to be
annexed into the District's service area and approval of construction drawings prior to any
connection to sewer service.
L.
PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUISITIONS MAP:
No map currently exists.
M.
AGENCY RESPONSES:
The following agencies have responded and their correspondence is attached. Comments
which appear to be of special concern are noted below:
Department of Environmental Quality
Eagle Fire Department
Eagle Sewer District
N.
LETTERS FROM THE PUBLIC: None received to date.
Page 2 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\CP A\2002\CP A-S-O2 pzf.doc
O.
APPLICANT REQUEST FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT:
See the attached letter dated September 7, 2002, submitted by the applicant addressing
justification for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
A.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS
REGARDING TillS PROPOSAL:
WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN
. The subject site is not located within the City's Area of Impact and has no Comprehensive
Plan Land Use Map designation.
Chapter 1 - Overview
1.3 The City of Eagle Vision Statement
In 1999, City of Eagle citizens envision their future town as a well-planned
community that encourages diversified living and housing opportunities,
economic vitality that offers jobs for residents, and places for people to recreate
and enjoy Eagle's natural beauty.
b. known as a highly livable town that successfully balances many of the rural
elements of its heritage with growth;
h. a unique community that maintains its rural residential feel in the midst of the
Treasure Valley.
Chapter 6 - Land Use
6.1
Background and Existing Conditions
Managing growth and channeling it into orderly community development is the
key element of land use planning. Unplanned growth results in undesirable land
use patterns. Areas within the City and within the Impact Area are given land use
designations which are depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map,
hereinafter referred to as the "Land Use Map".
The Land Use Map is an integral part of the Comprehensive Plan. It serves as a
planning policy document and planning tool that will assist the City in sustaining
responsible growth and development to ensure that evolving land use patterns
remain consistent with goals, objectives and strategies of the Plan.
Land use designations as reflected on the Land Use Map are based on the existing
land use pattern, existing natural physical features such as the Boise River, Dry
Creek and the foothills, floodplain areas, capacity of existing community facilities,
projected population and economic growth, compatibility with other uses of the
land, transportation systems, and the needs of local citizens.
6.5
Goal
To preserve the rural transitional identity.
Page 3 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\CP A\2002\CP A-S-O2 pzf.doc
6.7
Implementation Strategies
b. Establish land use patterns and zoning districts that do not exhaust available
services such as sewer, water, police, fire, recreational areas, highways and
transportation systems.
f.
Higher density residential development should be located closest to the
Central Business District (CBD) as shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land
Use Map.
Residential subdivisions outside the City limits but within the Impact Area
should comply with the Land Use Map.
h.
Chapter 12 - Community Design
12.3
Implementation Strategies
q.
Maintain the rural residential character and open space environment in
and around the City.
Chapter 13 - Implementation
13.7
Implementation Strategies
c. Any person applying for a Comprehensive Plan amendment shall submit a
justification letter for the amendment which shall include the following:
1. A specific description of the change being requested.
2. Specific information on any property involved.
3. A description of the condition or situation which warrants a change being
made in the Plan.
4. A description of the public benefit(s) that would occur from such a change in
the Plan and an explanation of why the public would need any such benefit(s).
5. An explanation of why no other solutions to the condition or situation which
warrants a change in the Plan are possible or reasonable under the current
policies of the Plan.
6. A proposed development plan for any land involved if a specific development
is planned at the time the request for the amendment is being made.
7. An analysis showing the estimated impact on infrastructure expected to occur
by any proposed change.
8. Any other data and information required by the City for their evaluation of the
request.
Page 4 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\CP A\2002\CP A-S-O2 pzf.doc
B.
c.
ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
THIS PROPOSAL:
.
ECC Section 8-8-2 (A) ANNEXATION TO OCCUR ONLY IN AREA OF CITY IMPACT:
Annexation by the city shall be limited to those lands lying within the area of city impact
and being contiguous to the boundaries of the city.
DISCUSSION:
.
The subject property is currently zoned RR (Residential-up to one dwelling unit per lO-acres,
Ada County designation) with no Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation since it is
located west of the City's Area of Impact. Until negotiations occur between the City and Ada
County and an agreement is made, the parcel will not be included within the Area of Impact
boundary. However, it is important to consider requests submitted to the City to review
properties outside of the City's Area of Impact in order to establish land use patterns that are
compatible with existing uses, as well as to encourage uses that will adequately serve the
region as the area grows and changes in character.
The applicant's justification letter states that the "City has already determined many months
ago that the Impact Area should, at a minimum, be extended west to the Lanewood
alignment." And further, upon the annexation of property to the east, the subject parcel is
available for annexation since it is included within the proposed area of adjustment. Whether
or not the City has officially determined that the area between Linder Road and the Lanewood
alignment is appropriate for an Area of Impact Boundary adjustment is still left to be
answered, yet it may be a fair statement that an Area of Impact Boundary adjustment to the
west will likely occur. Until such time as this adjustment occurs, the property will remain out
of the jurisdiction of the City's purview since Eagle City Code does not allow annexation to
occur outside of the City's Area of Impact. However, this does not preclude further discussion
of the area and the types of land designations that would be most appropriate for the site.
.
.
On April 10, 2001, the Eagle City Council voted to recommend denial of Sedona Creek, a
residential subdivision located east of this subject site. The Sedona Creek property is located
within the City of Eagle Area of Impact with a City of Eagle 2000 Comprehensive Plan land
use designation of Residential One; Sedona Creek is being constructed with a density of
approximately 1.48 units per acre. The Council determined that the residential density
allowed by the County and proposed within Sedona Creek Subdivision was incompatible with
surrounding properties and existing residential developments in the vicinity of Linder Road/
State Highway 44.
Recently, the City Council amended the Comprehensive Plan to designate the property on the
northeast corner of State Highway 44 and Linder Road (CPA-02-0l) as Commercial (from
Residential One) based on the determination that "The noise and pollution created by the high
volume of traffic at the intersection of State Highway 44 and Linder Road creates a situation
suitable for commercial uses that provide economic benefits to the community as well as to
residents in the area who desire commercial amenities within close proximity." The Council
further concluded that properties on all sides of the intersection (SH 44 and Linder Road) have
the potential for commercial uses, provided a traffic study is conducted and subsequently
reviewed and approved by the City.
It may be considered that the subject site, as well as properties in the near vicinity, are
increasingly evolving from a rural focus to that of a mixed-use character. With the extension
of central sewer and water, combined with the construction of Sedona Creek and the Council's
determination that a commercial designation is more appropriate than residential at the
Page S of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\CP A\2002\CP A-S-O2 pzf.doc
.
intersection of SH 44 and Linder Road, higher density development in the area may be
considered an appropriate alternative to the one-unit per acre plan in place at this time. In
addition, with the recent completion of the Camille Beckman manufacturing facility as well as
the remodel of the existing Shady Acres convenience store (both located within one-mile of
this site), employment opportunities and retail services may contribute to supporting a higher
density development in the area.
With no current agreements in place with the County for the subject parcel, the City would not
have the ability to make recommendations regarding any proposed development of the parcel.
However, based on the Council's action with the aforementioned Comprehensive Plan
Amendment (northeast corner of SH 44 and Linder Road) and recent and existing
development in the area, it is conceivable that if this subject property were to be located within
the City's Area of Impact, the Council might determine that a Residential Two designation is
more appropriate than a Residential One designation for the subject site. Upon such
determination, it would be important to designate compatible land uses on the surrounding
properties adjacent to this site to create a guide to reach a desired character for the area. For
this to occur, the City of Eagle and Ada County would need to negotiate an impact boundary
adjustment as well as label each property in the area with a land use designation. If approved
by the City, this application may be considered as a starting point to providing an overall plan
that may evolve through discussions between the City, County and the public.
If the Area of Impact is adjusted to the west, it is possible that this subject site will remain
outside of the City limits, thereby any development would be under the jurisdiction of the
County, with the City acting as a recommending body only. With this in mind, the City may
want to consider the following condition:
1. The property shall not be developed with a residential use with a density greater than one
unit per five-acres until such time as the property is included within the City of Eagle Area
of Impact boundary.
STAFF RECOMMENDA nON PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
In staff's opinion, an approval of a Residential Two designation for the subject site is appropriate
since the subject site and surrounding properties may increasingly shift from a rural focus to that of
a higher density area supported by central water and sewer services, employment opportunities and
potential office / retail uses. Upon successful negotiations between the City of Eagle and Ada
County to adjust the City of Eagle Area of Impact boundary west of Linder Road, the City may
want to consider the staff recommended condition provided within the staff report.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COMMISSION:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the Planning and Zoning Commission on
November 18, 2002, and continued to December 2, 2002, 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 no one.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission by one
(1) individual (other than the applicant) who felt that a land use designation of Residential Two (rather
than Residential One) for the site is more compatible with the continuing development in the area, and
the addition of schools change the character of the existing neighborhoods and rural nature of the area.
Page 6 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\CP A \2002\CP A-S-O2 pzf.doc
D. Written testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission by
the Eagle Fire District which felt that the approval of the site as a subdivision would serve as an
excellent site for a fire station to provide emergency services to the area.
COMMISSION DECISION:
The Commission voted 4 to 0 (Cadwell absent) to recommend denial of CPA-5-02 for a
comprehensive plan designation of Residential Two, upon the westerly expansion to the City's
Impact Area Boundary, for Briar Creek LLc.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on September 9, 2002.
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 15, 22, and 29, 2002. 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 31, 2002. Requests
for agencies' reviews were transmitted on September 19,2002, in accordance with the requirements of
the Eagle City Code.
3. The Commission reviewed the particular facts and circumstances and based upon the information
provided concludes that the proposed comprehensive plan amendment (CPA-5-02) is not in
accordance with the City of Eagle Comprehensive Plan and established goals and objectives because:
The Commission believes that it is premature to designate the density and appropriate land use for the
subject property without fIfst evaluating the larger area surrounding the site. A boundary line
adjustment and expanded Area of Impact must coincide with a study by the City for the proper land
use planning for the entire region west of the City rather than reviewing individual parcels on a case-
by-case basis.
In addition, the Commission stated that should the City Council determine that the inclusion of the
parcel into the City's Area of Impact is appropriate, the parcel should have a land use designation that
provides for a density of no greater than one-unit to the acre.
DATED this 6th day of January 2003.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
Ada County, Idaho
ATTEST:
.,.........,~
.' "'«
,'~ Of BAOÞ."",
l ~~........~~ ,
/ Dr' d~ORAl';.. \
iii . O.V v'..
: Iv ~*:
: : _.- ~ :
: .. , 1;:::.:
: '..... ~Ej\ '~:o :
: ..1-. J <) Ol- :
-.C'. <¡' .~ ."1..: -.
~ Ú' ..O!>.POR \.~ 5~ .....':
-" » -..~,....,.. <'" ~ ...."
#', -1 ì ¡; 0 ,('"<', .' ~.."
"'I 4 . "~~
"'UI..II"
~.~ ,&ao~
Cheryl Bloom, Vice Chairman
~ WikL- 'i.. ~
Šharon Ì<. Moore, Eagle City CI rk
Page 7 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\CP A\2002\CP A-S-O2 pzf.doc