BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL

Transcription

1 BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR A REZONE WITH A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN LIEU OF A PUD, AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PREDICO EP SUBDIVISION FOR EAGLE MF PARTNERS, LLC) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CASE NUMBER RZ AND PP The above- entitled rezone with development agreement in lieu of a PUD and preliminary plat applications came before the Eagle City Council for their action on March 10, 2015, at which time public testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The City 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: Eagle M.F. Partners, LLC, represented by Doug Russell with the Land Group, Inc., is requesting a rezone with development agreement from A ( Agricultural), A-R ( Agricultural- Residential) and R- 2- DA- P ( Residential with a Development Agreement PUD) to MU-DA ( Mixed Use with a Development Agreement in lieu of a PUD, including a height exception) and preliminary plat approval for Predico EP Subdivision, a 4- lot ( 3 commercial, 1 residential [ 88 units]) subdivision. The acre site is generally located on the northeast corner of West State Street and SH-44. B. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL: A Neighborhood Meeting was held at Eagle City Hall at 6: 00 PM, Wednesday, October 22, 2014, in compliance with the application submittal requirement of Eagle City Code. The applications for this item were received by the City of Eagle on October 30, C. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Notice of Public Hearing on the applications for the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission were published in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City Code on December 15, 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 December 15, Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted on November 5, 2014, in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code. The site was posted in accordance with Eagle City Code on December 24, Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City Code on February 23, Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners within threehundred feet ( 300-feet) of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on February 20, The site was posted in accordance with the Eagle City Code on February 27, Page 1 of 18 K:\Planning Dept\ Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\Predico EP Sub ccfdoc

2 D. HISTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS: N/ A E. COMPANION APPLICATIONS: All applications are inclusive herein. F. APPLICANT' STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION OF THE REZONE: See justification letter dated October 30, 2014 ( attached to the staff report), provided by the applicant' s representative. G. APPLICANT' S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: The applicant is requesting a development agreement to meet the intent of the Eagle Comprehensive Plan, specifically the Mixed Use development section, and to ensure that the property is developed in a manner that protects the public interest and assures a development that meets the vision for this area as anticipated by the City of Eagle. H. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS: COMP PLAN ZONING LAND USE DESIGNATION DESIGNATION Existing Mixed Use A( Agricultural), A- R Vacant parcels Agricultural- Residential) and R-2- DA-P( Residential with a development agreement PUD) Proposed Mixed Use MU-DA( Mixed Use with a development agreement) Commercial( retail) and multi-family residential subdivision North of site Residential Two and R- 2- DA-P( Residential with a Countryside Estates Residential Four development agreement Subdivision and agriculture PUD) and A( Agricultural) South of site Business Park PS- DA (Public/ Semipublic Eagle Sewer District with a development headworks, ACHD Park agreement) and Ride, and SH- 44 East of site Residential Two A ( Agricultural) Agriculture West of site Residential Two R-2- DA-P( Residential with a Countryside Estates development agreement Subdivision PUD) DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT: Not located within the DDA, TDA, CEDA, or DSDA. J. SITE DATA: Total Acreage of Site acres Total Number of Lots- 4 Page 2 of 18 K:\Planning Dept\ Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\ Predico EP Sub ccfdoc

3 Total Number of Units- 88 Residential 1 ( 88- units, acres) Commercial 3 ( acres) Industrial 0 Common 0 Single- family 0 Duplex 0 Multi-family 88 Total Acreage of Any Out-Parcels- 0 Additional Site Data Proposed Required Dwelling Units Per Gross Acre dwelling units per acre 10- dwelling units per acre density calculation based maximum) upon the residential area only: 88-units/ acres = 11. 2) Minimum Lot Size 34, 334- square feet 5, 000- square feet minimum) Minimum Lot Width 130- feet 50- feet Minimum Street Frontage 262- feet 0- feet Total Acreage of Common Area acres* acres( minimum) Open Space Percent of Site as Common Area 39. 7%* 20% Open Space Except that, according to ECC Section ( 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. The residential area is proposed as a multi- family project to be owned and maintained by a single owner. The required buffer areas, clubhouse/ pool, and playground are not located within separate common lots, however, the area associated with the aforementioned uses exceed the area that is typically required as open space pursuant to Eagle City Code. K. GENERAL SITE DESIGN FEATURES: Landscape Screening: The applicant is proposing two ( 2) landscape buffers to be located within the residential area( Lot 1, Block 1). A 50- foot wide landscape buffer is proposed to be located adjacent to West State Street and a 75- foot wide landscape buffer is proposed to be located adjacent to SH-44. Open Space: A minimum of 18% open space is required pursuant to Eagle City Code Section Although the applicant is not proposing separate common lots for the required landscaped berms, clubhouse/ pool, and playground areas the area associated with these uses exceeds the area typically required for open space. Commercial Area: Page 3 of 18 K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\Predico EP Sub ccf.doc

4 The Concept Plan, date stamped by the City on December 11, 2014, shows a commercial area containing three ( 3) retail buildings totaling 18, 300- square feet of area. The retail buildings are proposed to be located within separate lots. The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, indicates a total of 77- parking spaces are being provided based on a parking ratio of one( 1) space per 250- square feet of floor area. Storm Drainage and Flood Control: 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 requires utility easements to be not less than 12- feet wide. All utilities including power are required to be placed underground. Fire Hydrants and Water Mains: The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, shows seven ( 7) fire hydrants located within the subdivision. The hydrants should be installed and approved as required by the Eagle Fire Department. The proposed development is located within the United Water of Idaho water service area. On- site Septic System( yes or no) No Preservation of Existing Natural Features: Eagle City Code Section ( 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 irreplaceable 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. If any historical artifacts are discovered during excavation or development of the site, state law requires immediate notification to the state. L. STREET DESIGN: Public Streets: No new public streets are proposed. Drive Aisles: The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, shows the commercial and residential lots to be provided access by drive aisles connected to West State Street. The drive aisles are shown to be 26- feet in width. Blocks Less Than 500': None Cul-de- sac Design: No cul- de- sacs are proposed. Sidewalks: The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, show attached sidewalks located adjacent to the drive aisles and parking areas throughout the development. Page 4 of 18 K:\ Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\ Predico EP Sub ccf doc

5 Lighting: Lighting for the proposed public streets is required. Location and lighting specifications incorporating a " Dark Sky" style of lighting shall be provided to the City Zoning Administrator prior to the submittal of the final plat. Any modifications made to the lighting shall be completed before the final plat approval. Street Names: Street name approval by the Ada County Street Name Committee has not been received to date. Approval from that committee is required prior to the City Clerk signing the final plat. M. ON AND OFF- SITE PEDESTRIANBICYCLE CIRCULATION: Pedestrian Walkways/ Pathways: See comments under" Sidewalks" above. Bike Paths: Eagle City Code section states that a bicycle pathway shall be provided in all subdivisions as part of the public right-of-way or separate easement, as may be specified by the City Council. N. PUBLIC USES PROPOSED: None proposed O. PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUISITIONS MAP: No map currently exists P. AVAILABILITY AND ADEQUACY OF UTILITIES AND SERVICES: Q. SPECIAL ON- SITE FEATURES: Areas of Critical Environmental Concern None Evidence of Erosion No Fish Habitat No Floodplain No Mature Trees Yes Black Locust trees located adjacent to the southern property line in proximity to the Ballantyne Lane right-of-way to be vacated. Riparian Vegetation No Steep Slopes No Stream/ Creek No Unique Animal Life Unknown Unique Plant Life Unknown Unstable Soils Unknown Wildlife Habitat- Unknown R. SUMMARY OF REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLAN: Not required S. AGENCY RESPONSES: The following agencies have responded and their correspondence is attached to the staff report. Comments, which appear to be of special concern, are noted below: City Engineer: All comments within the Engineer' s special concern ( attached to the staff report). letters dated, December 23, 2014, are of Ada County Highway District Central District Health COMPASS ( Community Planning Association) Eagle Fire Department Idaho Transportation Department Republic Services Page 5 of 18 K:\ Planning Dept\ Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\Predico EP Sub ccfdoc

6 Tesoro Logistics NW Pipeline T. LETTERS FROM THE PUBLIC: correspondence received from Cindy Bahora, dated December 28, 2014 ( attached to the staff report). U. PROPOSED TIME SCHEDULE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE: The applicant is proposing to develop the site in a single phase. V. 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. 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 harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives or with any specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan. 11. That the proposed development will be harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives or with any specific objective of Eagle City Code Title That the benefits, combination of various land uses, and interrelationship with the surrounding area for this proposed development justifies any proposed deviation from any standard district regulations. In case of large- scale PUDs ( incorporatingfifty( 50) or more lots or dwelling units): Page 6 of 18 K:\ Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\Predico EP Sub ccfdoc

7 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 i.e.; 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 an integral part of the PUD. 20. That the uses 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. STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT: A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS, WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL: 6. 3 Land Use Designations The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map ( adopted February following: 7, 2011), designates this site as the Mixed Use Suitable primarily for a variety of uses such as limited office, limited commercial, and residential developments. Uses should complement uses within Downtown Eagle. Development within this land use designation should be required to proceed through the PUD and/ or Development Agreement process, see specific planning area text for a complete description. An allowable density of up to 10 units per 1 acre. Scenic Corridor An Overlay designation that is intended to provide significant setbacks from major corridors and natural features through the city. These areas may require berming, enhanced landscaping, detached meandering pathways and appropriate signage controls Land Use Implementation Strategies T. Encourage development of high density residential units of up to 10 dwelling units per acre in the vicinity of the existing intersections of State Highway 44 and Ballantyne Lane and State Highway 44 and State Street if the intersections are eliminated and a new intersection is constructed approximately 800 feet west of the existing State Highway 44/ Ballantyne Lane intersection. If the relocation of the intersections occurs, then the Page 7 of 18 K:\ Planning Dept\ Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\ Predico EP Sub ccf doc

8 mixed use area shown along the north side of State Highway 44 from Van Engelen Estates to the Mixed Use area' s west boundary may be developed with uses which the City will rezone and control through the use of Development Agreements. High density residential units of up to 10 dwelling units per acre will be encouraged in this area. However, if the existing intersection modifications outlined above are not completed, the Mixed Use area referenced above shall be developed as residential with densities of up to a maximum of two dwelling units per acre. B. ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL: Eagle City Code, Section defines Dwelling, Multi-Family as: A dwelling consisting of three ( 3) or more dwelling units including townhouses and condominiums with varying arrangements of entrances and party walls. Multi-family housing may include public housing. Eagle City Code, Section defines Easement as: Authorization by a property owner for the use by another, and for a specified purpose, of any designated part of his property. Eagle City Code, Section Districts Established Purposes And Restrictions: The following zoning districts are hereby established. For the interpretation of this title the zoning districts have been formulated to realize the general purposes as set forth in this title. In addition, the specific purpose of each zoning district shall be as follows: MU MIXED USE DISTRICT: To provide for a variety and mixture of uses such as limited office, limited commercial, and residential. This district is intended to ensure compatibility of new development with existing and future development. It is also intended to ensure assemblage of properties in a unified plan with coordinated and harmonious development which shall promote outstanding design without unsightly and unsafe strip commercial development. Uses should complement the uses allowed within the CBD zoning district. All development requiring a conditional use permit in the MU zoning district, as shown in section of this chapter, shall occur under the PUD and/ or development agreement process in accordance with chapter 6 or 10 of this title unless the proposed development does not meet the area requirements as set forth in section of this title. In that case a cooperative development, in conjunction with adjacent parcels ( to meet the minimum area requirements), shall be encouraged. Otherwise a conditional use permit shall be required unless the proposed use is shown as a permitted use in the MU zoning district within section of this chapter. Residential densities shall not exceed twenty ( 20) dwelling units per gross acre. When a property is being proposed for rezone to the MU zoning district a development agreement may be utilized in lieu of the PUD and/ or conditional use process if approved by the city council provided the development agreement includes conditions of development that are required during the PUD and conditional use process. Eagle City Code, Section Schedule of District Use Regulations: Residential dwellings are allowed by Conditional Use within the MU (Mixed Use) zoning designation. Page 8 of 18 K:\ Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\ SUBS\2014\ Predico EP Sub ccf doc

9 Eagle City Code, Section Schedule of Building Height and Lot Area Regulations for the MU( Mixed Use) zone: Zoning Maximum Front Rear Interior Street Maximum Minimum Minimum District Height Side Side Lot Lot Area Lot Covered ( Acres Or Sq. Width I* Ft.) G And MU 35' 20' 20' 7. 5' 20' 50% 5, ' H* Eagle City Code, Section 8-2A- 7( J) Buffer Areas/ Common Lots: 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 a common lot located between the residential lots within the subdivision and the right of way line of the adjacent roadway. This buffer is required as part of the common area 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 berming/ fencing, as noted below, shall be measured from the elevation of the final grade of the adjacent roadway( measured at the centerline) to the top of the proposed berming/ fencing. The required buffer area width, plantings, and fencing are as follows: b. Any road designated as a minor arterial on the transportation and pathway network plan in the Eagle comprehensive plan: A minimum of fifty feet ( 50') 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: five ( 5) shade trees, eight ( 8) evergreen trees, three ( 3) flowering/ ornamental 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, berm, decorative block wall, cultured stone, decorative rock, or similarly designed concrete wall, or combination thereof shall be provided within the buffer area. The maximum slope for any berm shall be three feet( 3') horizontal distance to one foot( 1') vertical distance. If a decorative block wall, cultured stone, decorative rock, or similarly designed concrete wall is to be provided, in combination with the berm, a four foot ( 4') wide flat area shall be provided for the placement of the decorative wall. Chainlink, cedar, and similar high maintenance and/ or unsightly fencing shall not be permitted. c. Any road designated as a principal arterial on the transportation and pathway network plan in the Eagle comprehensive plan: Page 9 of 18 K:\ Planning Dept\ Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc

10 A minimum of seventy five feet ( 75') 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: six ( 6) shade trees, ten ( 10) evergreen trees, four ( 4) flowering/ornamental 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 ten foot ( 10') high, maximum twelve foot ( 12') high, berm, decorative block wall, cultured stone, decorative rock, or similarly designed concrete wall, or combination thereof shall be provided within the buffer area. The maximum slope for any berm shall be three feet( 3') horizontal distance to one foot( 1') vertical distance. If a decorative block wall, cultured stone, decorative rock, or similarly designed concrete wall is to be provided, in combination with the berm, a four foot ( 4') wide flat area shall be provided for the placement of the decorative wall. Chainlink, cedar, and similar high maintenance and/ or unsightly fencing shall not be permitted. Eagle City Code, Section Supplemental Yard and Height Regulations: C. Yards In Multi-Family Dwellings: Multi-family dwellings shall be considered as one building for the purpose of determining front, side and rear yard requirements. The entire group as a unit shall require one front, one rear and two ( 2) side yards as specified for dwellings in the appropriate district. D. Side And Rear Yards For Nonresidential Uses Abutting Residential Districts: Nonresidential buildings or uses shall not be located nor conducted closer than forty feet 40') to any lot line of a residential district; except that the minimum yard requirements may be reduced to fifty percent ( 50%) of the requirement if acceptable landscaping or screening approved by the council is provided. Such screening shall be a masonry or solid fence between four( 4) and eight feet( 8') in height, maintained in good condition and free of all advertising or other signs. Landscaping provided in lieu of such wall or fence shall consist of a strip of land not less than twenty feet( 20') in width planted with an evergreen hedge or dense planting of evergreen shrubs not less than four feet ( 4') in height at the time of planting. C. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL: Eagle City Code Section : Planting Strips and Reserve Strips: Planting strips and reserve strips shall conform to the following standards: A. Planting Strips/ Buffer Areas: Planting strips/ buffer areas shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from residential properties and to provide noise mitigation for those residents. Such planting strips/ buffer areas shall be a minimum of twenty feet ( 20') wide unless a greater width is required within section 8-2A- 7 of this code. The landscape strip/ buffer area shall not be a part of the normal street right of way and shall comply with all landscape/ buffer area requirements within section 8-2A- 7 of this code. Eagle City Code, Section : Easements: A. Unobstructed utility easements shall be provided along front lot lines, rear lot lines and side lot lines. Total easement width shall not be less than twelve feet( 12'), except that lesser easement widths, to coincide with respective setbacks, may be considered as part of Page 10 of 18 K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\ Predico EP Sub ccf doc

11 the planned unit development. B. Unobstructed drainageway easements shall be provided in conjunction with the utility easement along side lot lines or as required by the city council. Total easement width, including the utility easement, shall not be less than twelve feet( 12'), except that lesser easement widths, to coincide with respective setbacks, may be considered as part of the planned unit development. Eagle City Code, Section : Public Sites and Open Spaces: D. Common Area Open Space: The minimum percentage of the gross area that must be set aside for common area open space in new subdivisions shall be as follows: Zoning District MU( with residential uses) Open Space 18 percent Eagle City Code, Section : Water Supply and Sewer Systems: C. Pressurized Irrigation Facilities: 1. All residential dwelling units shall be provided with a pressurized irrigation system to be served with irrigation water unless a waiver, as outlined herein, is approved by the city council. 2. The requirement for installation of a pressurized irrigation system may be waived by the city council when the applicant has established that any of the following situations exist( the sale or transfer of an existing water right shall not be grounds for requesting a waiver pursuant to this provision): a. Where a sufficient surface irrigation water right does not exist for the property. The lack of surface irrigation water right shall be documented in writing by the appropriate irrigation district or canal company and the department of water resources and shall be submitted with the subdivision preliminary plat. In this case a waiver shall only be granted for that portion of the subdivision that cannot be served. b. Where an existing surface water right cannot be delivered to the property by an irrigation district or canal company due to current delivery capacity or scheduling. In these situations the city council may still require the installation of the pressure irrigation system, provided water rights can be made available to the property and delivery system modifications can be made so irrigation water can be supplied within two( 2) years. c. Where the applicant has provided for another means of delivery such as flood irrigation, if approved by the city engineer. The applicant shall present the proposed alternative delivery system to the city engineer at the time the waiver is requested. d. That due to the specific circumstances surrounding a new subdivision, the cost of obtaining water rights, reestablishing water rights or developing the system would impose an undue economic hardship on the developer. For purposes of this section, an undue economic hardship shall consist of a showing that the cost per lot to develop the pressurized irrigation system would be twenty five percent Page 11 of 18 K:\ Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\ SUBS\2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc

12 25%) higher than the cost per lot for providing a pressurized irrigation system to subdivisions of similar size and density constructed in the city within the previous two ( 2) years; or the cost per lot of the pressurized irrigation system would exceed five percent( 5%) of the expected per lot market value of the subdivision. The developer shall bear the burden of providing documentation, acceptable to the city engineer and city council, demonstrating and supporting the estimated costs of construction of the pressurized irrigation system, and the cost per lot for irrigation systems in those subdivisions built in the last two ( 2) years as noted above, and the expected market value of the subdivision lots. For phased developments, costs will be analyzed over all phases of the development rather than the first phase only. 3. Should installation of a pressurized irrigation system be waived by the city engineer, as outlined herein, compliance to Idaho Code is still required. 4. Requests for waivers shall be submitted to the city with the preliminary plat application and shall be accompanied by an irrigation report, prepared by a licensed Idaho registered professional engineer, stating the location and availability of surface irrigation water and documenting the basis for the waiver request. If applicable, the irrigation report shall be accompanied by a letter from the irrigation district or canal company stating that water rights and/or a delivery system are not available to the property. D. DISCUSSION: The Eagle Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the property as Mixed Use and Scenic Corridor. The Land Use Implementation Strategies within the Land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan encourages development of high density residential units ( up to 10 dwelling units per acre) to be located within the subject property. The applicant has submitted a rezone and preliminary plat applications for Predico EP Subdivision, which consists of acres. The applicant is proposing a four ( 4) lot ( 3- commercial, 1- residential [ 88 units]) subdivision. The applicant is proposing six ( 6) multi-family dwelling units which will contain 88- dwelling units and a club house. The proposed density of the development is dwelling units per acre ( density calculation based upon the entire area of the acre site: 88- units/ acres = 8.2). Multi- family dwellings require a conditional use permit within the MU ( Mixed Use) zoning designation. Developments requiring a conditional use permit in the MU zoning district, as shown in section of this chapter, shall occur under the PUD and/ or development agreement process in accordance with chapter 6 or 10 of Eagle City Code. The applicant is proposing a development agreement in lieu of a planned unit development ( PUD) for this development; therefore the findings and conditions usually found within a conditional use permit will be placed within the rezone findings and associated development agreement. The applicant is requesting a height exception to allow the buildings to be a maximum of 38' 7" in height to maintain a cohesive building to roof massing scale. The applicant has indicated within the provided narrative, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, that the height exception will allow an " open" site plan with up to 50% of the site being committed to landscaping. The narrative also indicates that Building A ( shown on the building elevations, date stamped by the City on December 11, 2014) has two ( 2) variations ( Al and A2) in which portions of the building have dropped the third floor to mitigate height concerns adjacent to Countryside Estates. The proposed building height of the multi-family structures ( as identified Page 12 of 18 K\ Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\ Predico EP Sub ccfdoc

13 on the Concept Plan) should not exceed 39- feet in height. Building `B" (as shown on the Concept Plan) should be constructed utilizing building elevation Al. The applicant has requested a waiver from the requirement to provide pressurized irrigation. The pressurized irrigation waiver request, date stamped by the City on December 12, 2014, indicated that although the property has irrigation water rights ( currently being utilized by Countryside Estates Subdivision) there is no delivery point for irrigation water due to the construction of the West State Street realignment. The applicant is currently working with the Countryside Estates Subdivision homeowner' s association and New Dry Creek in an effort to provide irrigation to the site. However, if an agreement cannot be reached the applicant plans to utilize potable water for irrigation needs if a waiver is approved. The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, shows three ( 3) ingress/ egress drive aisle access points to West State Street. The drive aisles are not located within a common lot( s) and there is not a plat note identifying cross access between the individual lots. The applicant should provide a revised preliminary plat with a new plat note indicating that each lot owner and/ or resident within the subdivision should have the perpetual right of ingress and egress over the described common access drive aisles and that the perpetual easement should run with the land. The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, identifies an existing 50- foot wide right-of-way to be vacated. The applicant has submitted an application to ACHD requesting a vacation of the abandoned portion of North Ballantyne Lane. Also, the applicant has indicated within the provided narrative, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, that water service for domestic and fire protection will be provided by Untied Water via a connection to the existing main located within the abandon ACHD right-of-way. The preliminary plat does not show an easement associated with the United Water existing water main. The applicant should provide documentation from ACRD indicating the portion of existing right-of-way associated with North Ballantyne Lane shown on the preliminary plat to be vacated as being vacated prior to submittal of a final plat application. The applicant should provide a revised preliminary plat delineating a United Water service line easement within the area identified on the preliminary plat as existing R/ W ( to be vacated) prior to submittal of a final plat application. The preliminary plat, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, does not delineate nor reference the locations of public utility, drainage, or irrigation easements. Pursuant to Eagle City Code Section , unobstructed utility and drainage easements a minimum of 12- feet in width are to be provided located adjacent to front, rear, and side lot lines. The applicant is proposing three ( 3) commercial lots and one ( 1) residential lot for multi- family dwelling units. The preliminary plat conceptual improvement plan, date stamped by the City on October 30, 2014, shows the proposed utility lines located within the drive aisles and parking areas. The applicant should provide a revised preliminary plat delineating a minimum 12- foot wide public utility, drainage, and irrigation easement located adjacent to the subdivision perimeter boundary. The preliminary plat should also delineate or note a public utility, drainage, and irrigation easement located within the drive aisles and parking areas. The preliminary plat should be provided prior to submittal of a final plat application. Republic Services ( solid waste service provider) provided correspondence that indicated a concern with the proposed locations and sizes of trash enclosures. The applicant should work with Republic Services in regard to locations and sizing of the trash enclosures. The applicant should provide documentation from Republic Services approving the locations and sizing of the trash enclosures prior to the issuance of a Zoning Certificate K:\ Planning Page 13 of 18 Dept\ Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc

14 STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT: Based upon the information provided to date, staff recommends approval of the requested rezone with development agreement in lieu of a PUD and preliminary plat with conditions of approval as 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 January 5, 2015, at which time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Commission made their recommendation at that time. B. Oral testimony in favor of the application was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission by no one ( not including the applicant/ representative). C. Oral testimony in opposition to the application was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission by thirteen( 13) individuals who expressed the following concerns: Whether or not the fire department has proper equipment to handle a fire within three ( 3) story structures? Public safety concerns due to large complexes attract criminal activity such as vandalism, drug activity, vehicle thefts, etc. Traffic impacts, safety concerns, and noise. Overcrowding of schools in the area. The proposed height of 38' 7" for the multi-family buildings is too high. The proposed density is too high based on the area associated with the multi-family residential units. The proposal does not meet Eagle' s vision and there may be better uses for the site. When the property was considered during a previous comprehensive plan amendment in 2000 high density was never discussed. The proposed multi-family project is not compatible with the surrounding area. The property values of the surrounding area may diminish due to the proximity of the multi-family residential units. The locations of two( 2) of the proposed access points are located on a curve. The third story of the multi-family residential units should be removed to reduce the height of the buildings. Since the units are proposed to be rented or leased the residents will not take pride in ownership. The development needs an area for children to play safely. COMMISSION DELIBERATION: Upon closing the public hearing, the Commission discussed during deliberation that: Although the comprehensive plan indicates high density residential is encouraged in this area the plan does not address providing a transition to adjacent development. The school district needs to address growth issues. The proposed development is not compatible with adjacent development. The proposed access points located at the curve of West State Street are a concern. The applicant has not addressed child safety concerns due to the proximity of SH-44 and West State Street. The developer needs to work with the surrounding neighbors to address their concerns. Page 14 of 18 K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\ Predico EP Sub ccf doc

15 The applicant did not indicate why there is a need for multi- family development in this area. The proposed height of 38' 7" is too high and is not compatible with the surrounding development. Based on the proposal the Commission is concerned with neighbor opposition to the proposal. COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING THE REZONE WITH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN LIEU OF A PUD: The Commission voted 5 to 0 to recommend denial of RZ for a rezone with development agreement in lieu of a PUD for Eagle M.F. Partners, LLC, as provided within their findings of fact and conclusions of law document, dated January 20, COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT: The Commission voted 5 to 0 to recommend denial of PP for a preliminary plat for Predico EP Subdivision for Eagle M. F. Partners, LLC, as provided within their findings of fact and conclusions of law, dated January 20, PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL: A. A public hearing on the application was held before the City Council on March 10, 2015, at which time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Council made their decision at that time. B. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one ( other than the applicant/ representative). C. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by 21 individuals who expressed the following concerns: The proposed multi- family project is not compatible with the surrounding area and is not consistent with the semi- rural lifestyle enjoyed by the citizens of Eagle. The proposal does not meet Eagle' s vision and there may be better uses for the site. There is no benefit to the community by allowing multi-family units at this location. The property values of the surrounding area may diminish due to the proximity of the multi- family units. The proposed height of 38' 7" for the multi-family buildings is too high; the buildings should not exceed two-stories in height. This location is not appropriate for three- story structures since it is located on an entry corridor to the community; the entry corridors are a showcase for Eagle, therefore, locating the project at this location will disturb the rural atmosphere of the community. The proposed multi- family buildings are too bulky; the building design and proposed materials are questionable and may devalue adjacent properties. Craftsman style architecture is not appropriate for three- story structures. The site plan doesn' t show enough parking to ensure that sufficient parking will be provided. Due to the proximity to major roads the development needs an area for children to play safely; the site needs to be fenced to provide safety for the children living within the development. There is not sufficient infrastructure to serve the proposed development( i.e. roads and schools). The proposed setbacks may not be in conformance with Eagle City Code. The elevations shown may not be the product that is built on the site. Page 15 of 18 K.\Planning Dept\ Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\Predico EP Sub ccfdoc

16 Will the property be served by pressurized irrigation and if so does the developer have irrigation rights and access to irrigation? Cost of potable water for irrigation. The proposed access driveway locations located at the curve on West State Street may be a hazard to motorists traveling West State Street. One ( 1) of the driveway access points may cause traffic conflicts at the intersection of North Ballantyne Lane and West State Street. The commercial area should not be utilized in the residential density calculation. When the property was considered during a previous comprehensive plan amendment in 2000 high density was never discussed; in 2000, during the original comprehensive plan map and text amendment, apartments were not considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The proposed tot lots are not large enough. The adjacent corner of West State Street and SH-44 does not contain a sidewalk for crossing West State Street or SH-44 to provide access to the greenbelt. The developer has not cooperated with the surrounding property owners. A work, live, play development would work well at this location. The Council should follow the Planning and Zoning Commission' s recommendation. COUNCIL DECISION REGARDING THE REZONE WITH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN LIEU OF A PUD: The Council voted 4 to 0 to deny RZ for a rezone with a development agreement in lieu of a PUD for Eagle M.F. Partners, LLC.* COUNCIL DECISION REGARDING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT: The Council voted 4 to 0 to deny PP for a preliminary plat for Predico EP Subdivision for Eagle M. F. Partners, LLC.* The Council discussed the following possible changes to the plan: limit buildings to two-stories in height; reduce the density to not exceed 10- units per acre ( density calculation to be based on the residential area project site only); relocate the access points to the development away from the curve of West State Street. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. A Neighborhood Meeting was held at Eagle City Hall at 6: 00 PM, Wednesday, October 22, 2014, in compliance with the application submittal requirement of Eagle City Code. The applications for this item were received by the City of Eagle on October 30, Notice of Public Hearing on the applications for the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission were published in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City Code on December 15, 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 December 15, Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted on November 5, 2014, in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code. The site was posted in accordance with Eagle City Code on December 24, Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City Code on February 23, 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 February 20, The site was posted in accordance with the Eagle City Code on February 27, Page 16 of 18 K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\ Predico EP Sub ccfdoc

17 3. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed development agreement RZ ) with regard to Eagle City Code Section " Action by the Commission and Council", and based upon the information provided concludes that the proposed rezone is not in accordance with the City of Eagle Comprehensive Plan and established goals and objectives because: a. The proposed MU-DA ( Mixed Use with a Development Agreement) zoning district is not compatible with the R- 2- DA- P ( Residential with a development agreement PUD) and A Agricultural) zones and land uses to the north, west, and east since the proposed development exceeds the density allowance identified in the Comprehensive Plan and since the designed layout of the proposed multi- family portion of the site ( including the proposed building heights) is too intensive; and 4. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed development agreement in lieu of a PUD, and based upon the information provided concludes that the proposed development is not in accordance with the City of Eagle Comprehensive Plan and established goals and objectives because: a. Due to the bulk of the project and safety concerns for children living within the development and the possible burden to the schom the project is not in the public interest and will not advance the general welfare of the community. :, - -:-: b. The proposed project will not be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing character of the area since the proposed density is much higher than the adjacent developments and the proposed height of the buildings will be approximately four feet ( 4') higher than what is currently permitted within Eagle City Code and much higher than existing homes in the area. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site as being located within a Scenic Corridor which is an area intended to provide significant setbacks from major corridors. The proposed height and size of the buildings will negatively impact the corridor area in this location. The bulk/ height of the project is not appropriate at this location which is at the entry of the downtown core. The proposed location is an " island" located within the Scenic Corridor and surrounded by SH- 44, West State Street and the ACHD Park and Ride causing a visual impact at this location due to the height and bulk of the proposed buildings; and c. The proposed project may be hazardous or disturbing to existing neighborhood uses due to the proposed height of the multi-family buildings and the additional traffic created by the proposed uses; and d. The development will involve uses ( commercial and multi-family residential) that will create additional traffic conflicts in the area due to the striping of the turn-lane located at the intersection of North Ballantyne Lane and West State Street; and j. The proposed development is not in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan since the property is located within an area identified as Scenic Corridor on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, which is an area intended to provide significant setbacks from major corridors and the proposed height and size of the buildings will negatively impact the corridor area as stated in b. above; and I. The benefits, combination of various land uses, and interrelationship with the surrounding area for this proposed development does not justify any proposed deviation from any standard district regulations because the proposed increased height of the multi-family residential buildings is not justified since it will negatively impact the adjacent properties and will negatively impact the Scenic Corridor area as stated in b. above. The height of the multi-family buildings would be compatible at a height standard for two- story structures; and and Page 17 of 18 K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\ SUBS\ 2014\Predico EP Sub ccf doc