Loading...
Findings - PZ - 2003 - A-3-03 & RZ-4-03 - A/Rz Frm Rut To Re/30.72 Acre/657 E Beacon Light Road ORIGINAL BEFORE THE EAGLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR AN ANNEXATION AND REZONE FROM RUT (RURAL URBAN TRANSITIONAL) TO R-E (RESIDENTIAL-ESTATES) FOR DOUGLAS CARNAHAN FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CASE NUMBER A-3-03 & RZ-4-03 ) ) ) ) The above-entitled annexation and rezone applications came before the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission for their recommendation on October 6, 2003, at which time public testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. 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: PROJECT SUMMARY: Douglas Carnahan, represented by David Bailey, P.E. with Bailey Engineering, is requesting a rezone upon annexation from RUT (Rural Urban Transitional - Ada County Designation) to R-E (Residential-Estates - up to one dwelling unit per two acres). The 30.72-acre development is located approximately If.¡ mile east of Eagle Road and south of Beacon Light Road, at 657 E. Beacon Light Road. A. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL: The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on August 7, 2003. B. 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 26, 2003. 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 20,2003. Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted on August 8, 2003, in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code. c. HISTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS: (none) D. COMPANION APPLICATIONS: PP-5-03 (Oakhaven Subdivision) Page 1 of 7 K:\Planning DepllEagle Applications\RZ&A\20031A-O3-03 & RZ-04-03 pz(doc E. COMPREHENSNE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS: COMPPLAN ZONING LAND USE DESIGNATION DESIGNATION Existing Residential Estates (up to RUT (Residential- Ada Wholesale Nursery one unit per two acres County designation) maximum) Proposed No Change R-E (Residential) Residential Subdivision North of site Residential Estates (up to RUT (Residential- Ada Sunnybrae Subdivision one unit per two acres County designation) maximum) South of site Residential Estates (up to A-R (Residential) Los Luceros Subdivision one unit per two acres maximum) East of site Residential Estates (up to A-R (Residential) Los Luceros Subdivision one unit per two acres maximum) West of site Residential Estates (up to R-E (Residential) Bighorn Subdivision one unit per two acres maximum) F. DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT: Not in the DDA, IDA or CEDA. G. TOTAL ACREAGE OF SITE: 30.72-acres H. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF mSTIFICATION FOR THE REZONE: See justification letter dated August 7, 2003, provided by the applicant's representative, attached to the staff report and included herein by reference. I. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF mSTIFICATION OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (if applicable): N/a J. AVAILABILITY AND ADEQUACY OF UTILITIES AND SERVICES: A preliminary approval letter (with conditions) from the Eagle Fire Department has been received. The Eagle Sewer District states the subject property is not annexed into the district and that it will be necessary for the development to employ on-site sewage disposal. The Central District Health Department has no objection to the proposal, but the City will require an approval letter the CDHD regarding septic systems, prior to the City signing the final plat. An approval letter from the water company having jurisdiction is required. K. PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUISITIONS MAP: No map currently exists. Page 2 on K:\Plaoning DepllEagle ApplicalionslRZ&A\20031A-O3-03 & RZ-O4-03 pz(doc L. NON-CONFORMING USES: A wholesale nursery/tree farm is in operation on the site that, pursuant to a rezone and annexation into the city limits, would constitute a non-conforming use since a nursery requires the approval of a conditional use permit in the R-E zoning district. M. 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 of Environmental Quality Eagle Fire Department Eagle Sewer District Idaho Power Joint School District No.2 N. LETTERS FROM THE PUBLIC: Letter date stamped by the City on September 30, 2003, from Joseph and Carol Meadows, 636 Los Luceros Circle, Eagle, ill 83616 STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITIllN THE STAFF REPORT: A. COMPREHENSNE PLAN PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL: . The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates this site as Residential Estates, suitable primarily for single-family residential development on acreages that may be in transition from agricultural to residential use or may combine small-scale agricultural uses with residential uses. Residential density of up to one dwelling unit per two gross acres may be considered by the City for this area. Chapter 8 Transportation 8.6 Implementation Strategies o. Encourage arterial and collector roadway design criteria consistent with the rural nature of planned and existing developments generally within the areas designated on the Land Use Map as Residential Rural (one dwelling unit per five acres maximum) and Residential Estates (one dwelling unit per two acres maximum). Such designs should include the following: 1. Vertical Curbs should not be permitted, except where may be required by ACHD. Where curbs are needed, flat or rolled curbs should be encouraged. 2. Sidewalks and/or pathways should meander and be separated from any roadway edge or curb to allow for added pedestrian safety. Topography, trees, ditches and/or similar features may limit the distance between sidewalks and/or pathways and the roadway edge. Easements may be needed if portions of the sidewalk and/or pathway is to be located outside of the right-of-way. Page 3 of 7 K:\Plaoning DeptlEagle Applications\RZ&A\20031A-O3-03 & RZ-04-O3 pzfdoc 3. Unless otherwise determined by ACHD to be necessary for public safety, roadways should be a maximum of two lanes with a center turn lane only at driveways and/or street intersections that are expected to generate a minimum of 1000 vehicle trips per day, or where determined to be necessary for safety by ACHD. Any portion of a center turn lane which is not used for such a driveway or intersection should be landscaped. Such landscaped medians would need to be maintained by the City and would require a license agreement with the highway district having jurisdiction. 4. The roadways should be constructed to provide a bike lane on both sides of the roadway. 5. A minimum building setback ordinance resulting in a setback of approximately 125-feet from the roadway centerline should be considered to be adopted by the City. B. ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL: . ECC Section 8-2-3 states that a Nursery requires a conditional use permit within the R-E zoning district. c. DISCUSSION: . A wholesale nursery/tree farm is currently in operation at the subject site that, pursuant to a rezone and annexation into the city limits, would constitute a non-conforming use since a nursery requires the approval of a conditional use permit in the R-E zoning district. For the Oakhaven Subdivision to be developed as proposed, it will be necessary for the nursery operators to vacate the property prior to the platting of the subdivision. It is staffs understanding that the applicant plans to remove all the nursery stock (other than that to be used for the development of the Oakhaven Subdivision) from the site during the fall months of 2003. Typically, when a site specific concern arises during the rezoning process (such as the nonconforming use as mentioned above) a development agreement pursuant to Eagle City Code Section 8-10-1 can be entered into between the City and an applicant to assure that appropriate conditions are placed on the rezone (which runs with the land) that help mitigate or eliminate the issues which may raise concern. In this instance, however, the only known concern (based on available information) regarding the rezone of the site to R-E is the nonconforming status of the parcel due to the existence of the wholesale nursery upon the site. Rather than initiating a development agreement for this single issue, staff recommends approval of the rezone upon annexation with the condition that the applicant discontinue the sale of nursery stock on the site, prior to the City approving the rezone ordinance. To assure the rezone of this site occurs in a timely fashion, the wholesale nursery operation should be removed from the site within 120-days from the rezone approval date (at which time the ordinance will be approved and the site will be designated as R-E). If the operation of the wholesale nursery is not discontinued within the 120-day timeframe, then the rezone approval should be considered void. Page 4 of 7 K:IPlanning DeptlEagle ApplicationsIRZ&A\20031A-O3-03 & RZ-O4-03 pzfdoc STAFF RECOMMENDED FINDINGS PROVIDED WITIllN THE STAFF REPORT: . With regard to Eagle City Code Section 8-7-5 "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 R-E (one unit per two-acres maximum) is equal to the one unit per two-acres maximum as 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, to serve single-family dwelling units on this property under the proposed zone. This information does not include the provision of individual septic systems; Central District Health Department approval of these systems will be required; c. The proposed R-E zone (one unit per two-acres maximum) is compatible with the RUT (Ada County designation) zone and existing residential lots to the north since the two areas are separated by a minor arterial (Beacon Light Road) and landscaping will be installed abutting the northern boundary of this site to buffer the proposed dwellings from said roadway; d. The proposed R-E zone (one unit per two-acres maximum) is compatible with the A-R zoning designation and existing residential lots to the south and east since those areas may develop further at one or fewer dwelling units per two acres per the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and since both areas allow for development transitioning from agricultural uses to residential uses; e. The proposed R-E zone (one unit per two-acres maximum) is compatible with R- E zoning designation (one unit per two-acres maximum) and land uses to the west; f. The land proposed for rezone is not located within a "Hazard Area" or "Special Area" as described within the Comprehensive Plan; g. No non-conforming uses are expected to be created with this rezone since the applicant is required to discontinue the sale of nursery stock on the site prior to the City approving the rezone ordinance, otherwise the rezone will be considered null and void. STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDED WITIllN THE STAFF REPORT: Based upon the information provided to staff to date, staff recommends approval of the requested rezone upon annexation with the condition as noted 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 October 6, 2003, 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 eight (8) individuals with concerns regarding the compatibility of 5-acre sized lots with 2-acre sized lots, the need to protect the property rights and quality of life of existing property owners, the effects of new septic systems on adjacent properties, the additional impacts on the congested roadways and overcrowded schools, the need to protect the "rural" character of the area that has been established, Page 5 of 7 K:\Planning DeptlEagle Applications\RZ&A \20031A-O3-03 & RZ-04-03 pzfdoc and the need to design irrigation ponds with measures that will not promote the breeding of mosquitoes and the spread of the West Nile virus. C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission by no one (other than the applicant/representative). D. Written testimony in opposition to this proposal was previously submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission, as noted under section "0" under the Findings of Fact written above. COMMISSION DECISION: The Commission voted 4 to 0 (Bandy absent) to recommend approval of the requested rezone upon annexation (A-3-03 & RZ-4-03) from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to R-E (Residential- Estates) for Douglas Carnahan with the following condition: The applicant shall discontinue the wholesale nursery operation existing on the site, prior to the City approving the rezone ordinance. To assure the rezone of this site occurs in a timely fashion, the wholesale nursery operation should be removed from the site within 120-days from the rezone approval date (at which time the ordinance will be approved and the site will be designated as R- E). If the operation of the wholesale nursery is not discontinued within the 120-day timeframe, then the rezone approval shall be considered void. The City recognizes that subsequent to the ceasing of commercial operations on the site. a share of the trees (those recognized as nursery stock and not established old growth trees) will remain on site past the 120-day time period due to harvesting schedules, and of which may be used off-site for commercial pwposes. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on August 7, 2003. 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 26, 2003. 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 20, 2003. Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted on August 8, 2003, in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code. 3. The Commission reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed annexation and rezone (A-3-03 & RZ-4-03) 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 annexation and rezone is in accordance with the City of Eagle Comprehensive Plan and established goals and objectives because: . With regard to Eagle City Code Section 8-7-5 "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 R-E (one unit per two-acres maximum) is equal to the one unit per two-acres maximum as 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 Page 6 on K:\Plaoning DeptlEagle ApplicationsIRZ&A\20031A-O3-03 & RZ-04-03 pzf.doc provided, to serve single-family dwelling units on this property under the proposed zone. This information does not include the provision of individual septic systems; Central District Health Department approval of these systems will be required; c. The proposed R-E zone (one unit per two-acres maximum) is compatible with the RUT (Ada County designation) zone and existing residential lots to the north since the two areas are separated by a minor arterial (Beacon Light Road) and landscaping will be installed abutting the northern boundary of this site to buffer the proposed dwellings from said roadway; d. The proposed R-E zone (one unit per two-acres maximum) is compatible with the A-R zoning designation and existing residential lots to the south and east since those areas may develop further at one or fewer dwelling units per two acres per the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and since both areas allow for development transitioning from agricultural uses to residential uses. Further, the proposed Oakhaven Subdivision has been designed to configure the lots in a ratio of approximately 1: 1 with the existing lots within Los Luceros Subdivision to mitigate (along with trees required to be planted along the eastern and southern boundary lines) lot-size compatibility concerns; e. The proposed R-E zone (one unit per two-acres maximum) is compatible with the R-E zoning designation (one unit per two-acres maximum) and land uses to the west; f. The land proposed for rezone is not located within a "Hazard Area" or "Special Area" as described within the Comprehensive Plan; g. No non-conforming uses are expected to be created with this rezone since the applicant is required to discontinue the sale of nursery stock on the site prior to the City approving the rezone ordinance, otherwise the rezone will be considered null and void. DATED this 20th day of October 2003. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF EAGLE Ada County, Idaho ----- 7:> ,¡/ð.-/ - Steve De ers, Chairman """""""" ", 1::: EAG ," ~.. o~ t. '#. Ii." ~ ....... ~ I#. , ~ ." .... ~ .: "",:<.. ~ o'R ii, F /'. .. ~ <IOi~.:<!- .~~.. ::0 8"'~ : . v .- 8, : :: .~:: :ir\ ,',~'O: ~ .." " .. ,">.. .. ~ .:--J'c . ,""",' ~ to. .. ' '?" .. ~ d"'), .~" ,") ...." I,I. "'A.,', , ~\'...." '"C¡.j ',' .." ""'" I",U"""" ATTEST: Page 7 on K:\Planning DeptlEagle Applications\RZ&A\20031A-O3-03 & RZ-04-03 pzfdoc