20040706Merrill Direct.pdf

Direct Testimony of Nancy C. Merrill on Behalf of the City of Eaele. Case No. IPC-O4-
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
COMPLAINT VS. CITY OF EAGLE
IDAHO , RESPONDENT
) CASE NO. IPC-04-
Direct Testimony of
Mayor Nancy C. Merrill
On behalf of
The City of Eagle
July 2, 2004
eEl
' "
r;:1J ' I
V"IL_EO t..,
,~,
2DUli JUl - 2 PM 3: 37
i1) i;i, lii;; If"
UT ILl T iES o'~'i;fISSION
Direct Testimony of Nancy Co Merrill on Behalf of the City of Eaele. Case No. IPC-O4-
Would you please state your name and address?
Nancy C. Merrill, Mayor, City of Eagle. The address is City Hall, 310 E. State Street, Eagle
Idaho 83616.
Does your testimony include any attachments?
Yes. Exhibits 119 through 127 are included at the end of my testimony.
What is the purpose of making your appearance at this hearing?
As the Mayor of the City of Eagle, I am testifying to explain the impact on Idaho Power
Company s (the Company, IPC) proposed 138 kV power line through the City of Eagle, the
City's denial of their request (Exhibit 119) and the efforts the City has made over the years to
establish and maintain a viable residential and business community with the changing
expectations of the citizens of Eagle. I will also testify that IPC failed to provide the City with
viable alternatives regarding the concerns raised about the adverse impact of the high
transmission lines.
How is your testimony organized?
I provide a brief description of my own participation in Eagle City government, describe
changes made to Eagle s Ordinances and Policies to meet the considerable growth and
development Eagle has experienced while maintaining its rural residential feel, and the analysis
undertaken by the City in denying IPC's request for the high transmission lines.
Can you describe your business prior to your work in Eagle City government?
In 1988 I first became involved with the City of Eagle as a citizen, business and property
owner that had recently been annexed into the Eagle City limits. Our family business consisted
of an egg farm consisting of approximately 500 000 chickens. I also had my own business
teaching art classes, selling retail art supplies, and traveling with a local designer around the
Pacific Northwest painting murals and faux finishes in homes and commercial businesses.
Q. What was Eagle like at that time?
Direct Testimony of Nancy C. Merrill on Behalf of the City of Eaele. Case No. IPC-O4-
Eagle had a population of approximately 3 000 but had been discovered and began to grow.
When and how did you get involved in Eagle City government?
I was appointed to the Planning and Zoning Commission in 1993 and served on the Downtown
Task Force as well as the Design Review Committee. I was appointed to the City Council in
1994, and was elected to that position in 1995. Also, in 1995 while serving on the City Council
was given the job of the City Council's liaison to the Design Review Commission. I was Council
President for four years before being appointed to the office of Mayor in December 2002 and
elected to that position in 2003.
What was Eagle s vision for its future development?
In 1994, Mayor Steve Guerber (he is presently a member of the Eagle City Council)
appointed me as the City Council's liaison to the Design Review Committee. It was during my
tenure with this committee that it became evident that Eagle should focus on becoming a full-
service community, different from other cities close to Boise. We needed to create a commercial
area that could support and balance residential taxes, provide jobs in town instead of just being a
bedroom community to larger business hubs like Boise, Meridian, and Garden City.
How did Eagle change its regulatory scheme to meet its vision?
Eagle began the process by creating fairly strict Design Criteria that included detached sidewalks
with planting strips for tree lined streets; trees were required to be of a three inch caliper to
provide for a city that did not look like it was entirely new. We created a tree ordinance that
makes it difficult to remove old growth trees and established a tree fund to replace these trees if
they were removed or damaged.
We removed signs from poles and required them to be replaced with non-illuminated monument
signs. We required lights to be shielded and directed downward to prohibit light pollution at
night.
Direct Testimony of Nancy C. Merrill on Behalf of the City of Eaele. Case No. IPC-O4-
We created scenic corridors along Eagle Road and State Street, as well as additional landscape
requirements at key entrances into our city. Those entrances are the comer of Eagle Road and the
Bypass, State 44 and Edgewood, State 44 and Highway 55 , State 44 and
Old Hill Road, State 44 and Ballantyne, and Eagle Road and Chinden.
We have required developers at these sites to provide additional street comer landscaping along
our scenic corridors as identified in our Comprehensive Plan. Exhibit 106, p. 48 and Land Use
Planning Map indicating the scenic corridors. This provides a beautiful entrance into our city.
We have also gone to great lengths to ensure that development has adhered to Eagle s unique
rural/urban feel. Examples of the City's high standards for design criteria are contained in the
numerous development agreements. See, Exhibits 120 & 121.
We adopted a height limit of 35 feet to protect our view corridor of the mountains. See, Exhibit
101. We have allowed additional height in only three locations of the city: one was an
uninhabited tower, a small part of an architectural feature of the Two River Club House. Exhibit
122, pp. 5 & 7. The other was a 5 foot addition for the Hilton Hotel that backs up to the Boise
River. Exhibit 123, pp. 1 , 5-7. This addition was allowed because of gradient changes in the road
that placed the Hotel well below the regular grade for a building. The same is true for the Con
Agra building that is also placed along the Boise River and was allowed an additional 5 feet to
conceal the mechanicals on the roof. This building is in a setting that does not block the view
corridor of the mountains. Exhibit 124, pp. 5-6. St. Alphonsus Medical Office Building recently
requested additional height at the new Eagle River site, but was limited to the 35 foot standard.
See, Exhibit 107, Eagle River Design Review Guidelines p. 2.
When did the City first become aware that pole heights would adversely impact its vision?
I was serving on the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission that two new issues arose. One was
Direct Testimony of Nancy C. Merrill on Behalf of the City of Eaele. Case No. IPC-O4-
a cell tower that requested to be located at the back of the Container and Packaging building
located along State Street and backing up to the Rocky Mountain Business Park. The second issue
was the CUP request from Idaho Power to allow for additional pole height along State Street from
Edgewood to the existing substation across from City Hall. The cell tower was denied because of
the requested height and because it was also too prominent an intrusion into the view corridor.
contrast, in 1995, the Idaho Power poles were allowed, but the discussions were long and lengthy,
and because promises were made that these would be the only completing circuit that Eagle
would ever need. The CUP also conditioned the sub-station such that if upgrades were ever
requested, the sub-station would be removed from the City center. See, Exhibit 100.
In the mid 1990's the Planning and Zoning Commission was fairly new and the members and had
never dealt with a public utility. The desire of the Commission was not to have ugly poles along
State Street. I believe that if we had had any idea that this was only the beginning of many tall
poles being requested within the city limits, we would have recommended denial of the 1995
Conditional Use Permit. See, Exhibit 101.
A cell tower was later permitted at the Republic Storage Site along Highway 55; however it was
limited to a 135 foot height and also allowed co-locations for additional services on the same
pole. See, Exhibit 125, pp. 1
In Eagle we strategically place cell towers away from residences and provide for a fall zone as
well as limiting their height and prohibiting them along our scenic corridor. See, Exhibit 101.
Explain the history ofIPC's Conditional Use Permit Application?
A. IPC received a CUP from the City in 1995 for the upgrade of the public utility substation
primarily to update the transmission power lines from 69kV to l38kV. See, Exhibit 100. In its
Direct Testimony of Nancy C. Merrill on Behalf of the City of Eaele. Case No. IPC-E-O4-
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the City placed conditions on the CUP which required
future upgrades to be made at a different location, outside of the City. When IPC came to the
City for a new CUP the Council was gravely concerned about how this application would impact
property values, how it would fit into Eagle s rural/urban setting, affect our tax base, revenues
job opportunities and inhibit future development. Numerous public hearings were held before
both the Planning and Zoning Comission and the City Council. See, Exhibit 126, pp. 3-, Exhibit
127, pp. 1-4. The public repeatedly objected to the proposed pole heights and the impact they
would have on Eagle s skyline, the view corridor, and the rural feel of the City.
As elected officials, we were frustrated with the lack of options presented by IPC and felt
powerless to address the concerns of our citizenry. The City was unfamiliar with available
alternatives or any options it might have to alleviate these concerns. As a result, the City hired
Black and Veatch to evaluate the costs and feasibility of constructing an underground 138kV line.
What Black and Veatch did not disclose to Eagle was the fact that they had done significant work
for IPC in the past. We are concerned that this influenced the work they did for us. Nevertheless
the Black and Veatch report is a narrow evaluation of overhead lines vs. underground lines. The
study contained no examination of modern technologies and how they might be used to reach a
viable solution or any alternative routes suggested by the City Council. Instead the Black and
Veatch study only examined IPC' s suggested alternatives. It did not address innovations or
alternative technology. See Teinert's Direct Testimony. This may be due in part to the City'
unfamiliarity with the intricacies of public utilities and utility planning. We were relying on IPC
to identify different options for us to consider. They did not give us information on alternative
technologies.
Explain Eagle s goal in having such development standards?
The City of Eagle has established high design criteria for both the residential and
Direct Testimony of Nancy C. Merrill on Behalf of the City of Eaele. Case No. IPC-O4-
commercial developers. This has been a good partnership and has given the citizens high property
values while keeping the property tax base one of the very lowest of all the cities in Idaho.
Large overhead power lines through the scenic corridors of our City will absolutely destroy
everything we have tried so hard to create since we were incorporated in 1972. We recently
received the Pat Summerall Champions of Industry Award for one of the Best Small Managed
Cities in America. See, Exhibit 104. Much of this was based on our planning and design criteria
efforts. We also just received from the Association of Idaho Cities two awards for being a
Community of Promise. See, Exhibit 105. The Eagle Architecture and Design Book was created
for the purpos~ of ensuring that developments follow these guidelines.
Our future could very well be defined by this very important decision. With three state highways
intersecting our community - all with utility easements - we will be forever impacted if the PUC
allows for this to happen. There just simply must be a better way.
As President elect of the Association of Idaho Cities (AIC) what concerns do you have for
the cities of Idaho?
I plan to educate growing cities like Eagle about the dangers of how public utilities can affect
property values, result in adverse health perceptions, has impacts on years of careful planning and
zoning, and stunt future development. Clearly, utility corridors need to be planned well in
advance. Since the cities are given little or no help in this area I would like to see the AIC take a
more active role in helping to address this problem. I am also the legislative chair for the AIC and
will encourage a review of relevant statutes addressing large utility poles in the territorial limits of
Idaho Cities.
Does this conclude your direct testimony?
Yes.
Case No. IPC-04-
Exhibit 119
May 11 , 2004
Eagle Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Case No. CU-
Denying IPC's Conditional Use Permit Application
for a Height Exception to Construct Utility Poles 70-85 feet
.... '/' , .., ,
0 RIG
BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
IN TIlE MA TIER OF AN APPLICATION FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A
138kV SUB. TRANSMISSION LINE AND A HEIGHT
EXCEPTION REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT UTILITY
POLES IN EXCESS OF 3S.FEET FOR IDAHO POWER
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LA W
CASE NUMBER CU.
The above-entitled conditional use pennit application came before the Eagle City Council for their action
on October 14, 2003, at which time the public hearing was closed and the item was then continued toOctober 28, 2003. At that time, the Council remanded this item to staff with direction to schedule a new
public hearing to consider additional routing options. A second public hearing was h~ld March 23, 2004,at which time the public hearing was closed and the Council made their decision at that time.
The EagleCity 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:
PROJECT SUM:MARY:
Idaho Power, represented by Layne Dodson, is requesting conditional use approval to
construct a 138kV sub-transmission line, and a height exception request to construct utility
poles with heights ranging from approximately 70 to 85-fee1, (35 to 50-feet higher then therequired maximum of 35-feet).
The first proposal for routing the new sub-transmission line would connect with the
existing 138kV power line near the intersection of Edgewood and State Street. The newline would proceed west along State Highway 44 to Ballantyne Road, where the line
would be constructed along the same route as the existing power lines that parallel the
highway, to the new Star, Idaho, substation site.
The second proposal for routing the new sub-transmission line would travel within the
existing right-of-way from the Eagle Substation (located on the south side of State Street
approximately 300-feet east of 2nd Street) north to the alleyway north of State Street and
then west through the alley to a point approximately 300-feet west of Park Road (Jackson
Square). The line would then extend south and connect to State Street and continue west
along State Street to Ballantyne Road and follow along the same route as the existing
power lines that parallel the highway, to the new Star, Idaho, substation site.
APPLICATION SUB:MlTI' AL:
The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on September 9, 2002.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle Planning and ZoningCommission was published in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho
Code and the Eagle City ordinances on October 8, 2002, October 29, 2002, and again on
June 24, 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 ofTitle 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on October 2, 2002, October 23,
EXHIBIT 119
CASE NO. IPC-O4-Page 1 of 13
K:\PIazmiag DqIt'&gJe ~.Q9.02 cd.4b:
U, U.LI ,",UU'! U~;""U 1"ftA ~uo ~,JO ,JO~4 J:;AGLt; P. N . Z. .-+ CITY ATTY 141 003" ': -;' ,
2002, and again on 1une 18, 2003. Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted on
September 17, 2002, in accordanCe with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in
accordance for requirementB of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle Cityordinances on September 9, 2003 and March 2, 2004. Notice of this public hearing wasmailed to property owners within three-hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject property inaccordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle CityCode on September 2, 2003, and March 3, 2004.
HISTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS:
On January 23, 1996, the Eagle City Council approved a conditional use permit for
capacity upgrades to the Eagle Substation located at 315 E. State Street
On February 20,2001, the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission recommend denial of
CU-23-O0 for a conditional use permit by Idaho Power Company for a height exception
request and the reconsttuction, upgrade, and fe-routing at an existing 69k V power line to
accommodate a 138kV sub-transmission line and placement of existing distribution lines
underground, generally extending from the Eagle Substation on State Street west toBallantyne Road. The item was not heard by the City Council as the applicant withdrew
the application following the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing.
COMPANION APPLICATIONS: None
Page 2 of 13
X:\P1tamiD; Dept\Bag1e App~.\CtJ\2OO2'(:U-w.a!
II Voll ~UU~ U~: ~U t"AA ~U~ ~J~ J~54, .t:AGLE P. N . Z .-+ CITY ATTY 141 004
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS:
Existing
Proposed
North of site
South of site
East of site
West of site
COMP PLAN
DESIGNATION
Business Park Central
Business District
Connnerciall Mixed Use
Public/Semi-Public
Residential One (1- unit
per acre max.
Residential Two (2-units
per acre max.
Residential Four (4-units
per acre max.
No Change
Commercial' Central
Business District
Residential One (I -unit
per acre max.
Residential Two (2-units
per acre max.) Residential
Four (4-units per acre
max.Residential Two
(2-units per acre max.
Mixed Use
Commercial Central
Business District
Public/Semi-Public
Mixed Use Residential
Four (4-units per acre
max.Residential Two
(2-units per acre max.
ZONING
DESIGNATION
A (Agriculture)
(Agricultural-Residential)
BP (Business Park)
(Highway Business District)
CBD (Central Business
District) MU (Mixed Use)
l (Residential) R-
(Residential) R-4
(Residential)
No Change
A (Agriculture)
(Agricultural-Residential)
CBD (Central Business
District) l (Residential)'
2 (Residential) R-4
(Residential)
A (Agriculture)
(Agricultural.Residential)
C-l (Neighborhood Business
District) CBD (Central
Business District) IPS
(public/Semi-Public)
(Residential)
(Residential) R-4
(Residential)
Business Park Mixed BP (Business Park)
Use Residential Four (4.. (General Business District)
units per acre max.MU (Mixed Use) R-4
(Residential)
MIXed Use PubliclSemi-
Pnblic Residential One
(1- unit per acre max.
Residential Two (2-units
per acre max.
Residential Four (4-units
per acre max.
A (Agriculture)
(Agricultural-Residential)
MU (Mjxed Use) IR-
(Residential) R-
(Residential) R-4
(Residential)
Page 3 of 13IC:~ D&Ipt\BIIsIB App&;aIjo~'C\t~~ cddoc
LAND USE
Businesses
Residencesff ransmission
Power Line
Transmission Power Line
Businesses
R esi den ceslTran smi ssian
Power Line
Businesses
Residenceslfran 8 mi s s ion
Power Line
Businesses
Re s idenceslf ran s mi ss ion
Power Line
Businesses
Residenceslf ransmissi on
Power Line
II V~I ~VV~ U~; ~U ~AA ~UO ~JO JO~~, .. .bA\:(Lb 1". N . Z .~ (;lT~ ATr~IgJ UUo
DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT:
The existing and proposed lines are located within the DDA (Downtown DevelopmentArea), CEDA (Community Entry Development Area), and the IDA (TransitionalDevelopment Area) as wen as the City s designated Entry Corridor.
EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
The existing power line is within easements and or public rights-of-way that extend
through both residential and coIDII1ercial areas of the City.
SITE DESIGN INFORMATION: N/a
GENERAL SITE DESIGN FEATURES:
Number and Uses of Proposed Buildings: No buildings are proposed.
Height and Number of Stories of Proposed Buildings:
No buildings are proposed, however., the height of the sub-transmission line poles are
proposed to be 70 to 8S-feet (maximum) through the comdor.
Gross Floor Area of Proposed Buildings: N/a
On and Off-Site Circulation:
Other than the existing Eagle Substation, which has a maintenance access~ the power line
easement abuts public rights-of-way and no othe(public access is proposed.
PUBUC SERVICES AVAILABLE:
Central District Health Department and Eagle Fire Department have provided preliminary
approval letters. Letters from water and Sewer entities, as well as other affected utilities.
are required prior to the issuance of any permits.
PUBLIC USES PROPOSED: None
PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUlSmONS MAP: No map cunentlyexists
SPECIAL ON-SITE FEATURES:
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern - A portion of this site is designated a Special Area and
a Hazard Area in the Comprehensive Plan
Evidence of Erosion - unknown
Fish Habitat - unknown
Floodplain - yes
Mature Trees - yes
Riparian Vegetation. unknown
Steep Slopes - unknown
Stream/Creek - yes
Unique Animal Life - unknown
Unique Plant Life - unknown
Unstable Soils - unknown
Wildlife Habitat - unknown
Page 4 of 13
K!\P1annIq ~Ic AI"PIieIIio~~
V, V~I ~UU~ VV. ~V rftA ~UO ~~O ~OO~; ".bAbLb 1"'.1'1. L.. .-+ CITY ATTY 19) 006
SUMMARY OF REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS:MBNT PLAN (IF REQUIRED):An Environmental Assessment Plan has been prepared and submitted to the City Engineer
for review. The Environmental Assessment Plan is incorporated herein by reference.
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:
Ada County Highway District
Central Disttict Health
Depamnent of Environmental Quality
Eagle Fire Department
Eagle Sewer District
LETI'ERS FROM TIlE PUBLIC:
LetteJ:' from Thomas Dater, 999 Main Street, Boise, ID 83702 date stamped by the City onOctober 8, 2002.
Lettet from Givens-Pursley LLP 277 N. 6rb. Street, Suite 200 Boise, ID 83701 date
stamped by the City on October 11, 2002.
Letter from Capital Development, Inc., 6200 N. Meeker Place, Boise, II) 83713 date
stamped by the City on October 30. 2002.
All letters are incorporated herein by reference.
EAGLE CITY CODE 8-2 GENERAL STANDARDS POR CONDITIONAL USES:
The Commission/Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed
Conditional Use in terms of the following standards and shall fmd adequate evidence showing that
such use at the proposed location:
Will, in fac~ constitute a conditional use as established in Section 8-3 of this title (Eagle
City Code Title 8) for the zoning district involved;
Will be harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives or with any
specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan and/or this title (Eagle City Code Title 8);
Will be designed, constructed, opewed and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate
in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general yicinity and that such
use will not change the essential character of the same area;
Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighborhood uses;
Will be served adequately by essential public facilities such as highways, streets, police
and :fire protection, drainage strnctllfeS, refuse disposal. water and sewer and schools; or
that the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use shall be
able to provide adequately any such services.
Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and
sC!rvices and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community;
Page 5 of 13
, K!\PtannIng ~~ A~'tCU\2002\cu.()9.02 a:f:doc!
V I / v~/ ~UU~ u~; ~U ~ftA ~uo ~JO JO~~hAuLh Y. N . 'L. ~ CITY ATl'Y ~OO7. .
Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials~ equipment and conditions of
operation that will be detrimental to any persons~ propel1;y or the general welfare by reasonof excessive production of traffi~ noise, smoke,. fumes, glare or odors;
Will have vehicular approaches to the property which are designed as not to create an
interference with traffic on suaoundjng public thoroughfares; and
Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of
major unponance.
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS WInCH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERNREGARDING THIS PROPOSAL:
Chapter 4 Schools, Public Services and Utilities
Other Services and Utilities
Electricity
Appropriate placement of electric utility facilities on public rights..of-way
encouraged. Public streets and road rights-of-way typically serve as conidors forelectric facilities. Transmission lines are usually located on easements that IPC
(Idaho Power Company) acquires from private property owners. The joint use of
utility corridors is also encouraged, provided that such joint use is consistent with
limitations as may be prescribed by applicable law and prudent utility practice for
existing and proposed utility facilities.
Additions and imp(ovements to electric utility facilities that enhance the capacity
and reliability of regional resourcest particularly when multi-jurisdictional benefits
within the region can be achieved, should be accommodated.
implementAtion Stmtegies
Recognize the need for electric utility facilities that are sufficient to
support economic development.
Encourage Idaho Power to make additions to and improvements of
electric utility facilities that provide adequate capacity for projected
growth.
Chapter 7 Natural Resources and Hazard Areas
Hazard Areas
. The Dry Creek floodplain has a potential for flash flooding. ..
Page 6 of 13
lC:\PbmaiDi Dapt\Bq1ll App~..cwow1CU~ cctdoe
V, V~I ~VV~ v~; ~U rftA ~UO ~JO JO~~bA~Lt; 1"'. N . Z; .~ CITY ATIY 141 008
Chapter 11
11.2
Special .Areas and Sites'
Recognized Special Areas and Sites
The Dry Creek Floodplain is designated as a special awa due to its ecological and
scenic significance. This area comprises the length of the Dry Creek Floodplainthrough the Impact Area.
The State StreetlEagle Road Corridor is designated as a Special area due to itshistorical, architectural and scenic significance.
Chapter 12 Community Design
12.3 En1ry Conidors
Enrryway corridors are arterial roadways that introduce both visitors and residents
to Eagle. City enbyways include State Highways 44 (State Street and Alternate
Route) and 5S (Eagle Road). These entrances with their landscaping (or lack
thereof), commercial signage and building character provide the fust, and
oftentimes the most lasting impressions of the entire community. The City of
Eagle has the responsibility to guide development and redevelopment that occurs
along these entryway conidors.
Design review procedures should guide furore development and redevelopment of
existing uses. Depending on land uses and bulldings, more extensive landscaping
and fewer points of access may be required. The design review process will
afford the opportunity to address the special features of each property and facility
in a manner that will best address the overall intent of enhancing Eagle
entryways. Bagle s entrance conidors may take on the look of berms built
adjacent to the Banbury and Lexmgton Hills Subdivisions.
ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
THIS PROPOSAL:
Section 2A-(A)(7)(a)
Additional Height Restrictions: All spires, poles, antennas, steeples, towers, and any other
such structures shall be llinited to a maximum of thirty-five feet (35'). Additional height
may be permitted if a conditional use permit is approved by the City Council.
Section 2A-(J)(2)(c) & (3)
c. To conceal outdoor storage areas, trash receptacles. exposed equipment associated with
any commercial or industrial activity, and off-street loading when adjacent to or in view
frorn a residential activity or public street right of way, a five foot (5') wide by six foot (6.
high landscaped buffer is required.
3. Materials:
a. All buffer areas shall be comprised of, but not limited to, a mix of eve.cg(een and
deciduous trees, shn1bs.and groundcover in which evergreen plant materials comprise a'
minimum of sixty percent (60%) of the total plant material used.
b. Height requirements shall be accomplished with plant material with a fence or
decorative wall.
Page 7 of 13
K:\PIIaIIIIDg Dc~ A,1If'I~II#CtNOO2\CU.og..02 c;f.doG
v. , v~, _VV~ vo. ~~ rAA _UO O~O ~OU~J:.i\.b'LJ:. r. 1~ L. -+ t;lTY ATl'LgJ UOY
c. The required buffer IU'ea shall result in an effective haIrier within three (3) years and be
maintained such that sixty percent (60%) or more of the vertical swface is closed andprevents the passage of vision through it.
d. Chamlink fencing, with slats or otherwise, is prohibited for screening.
Section 8.5 (D): Conditions Of Permit
Upon the granting of a conditional use permit, conditions may be attached to said permitincluding, but not limited to, those:
1. Minimizing adverse impact on other development~
2. Cannalling the sequence and timing of development;
3. Controlling the dmanon of development;
4. Assuring that development is maintained properly;
5. Designating the exact location and nature of development;
6. Requiring the provision for on-site or off-site public facilities or services; and
7. Requiring more restrictive standards than those generally required in this Title.
DISCUSSION:
In Febrwuy of 2001, the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial of a
conditional use permit application proposed by Idaho Power to install a 138kV line that would
travel, in part, from the Eagle Sub-station through the downtown area along State Street and
on to State Highway 44 near Ballantyne Road. Idaho Power withdrew the application prior to
a public hearing before the City Council.
Subsequently, in March of 2002, Idaho Power held an informational open hOllse to inform and
gamer comment from the public concerning the ronting of a proposed 138-kV sub~
transmission line. 35% of the questionnaires returned to Idaho Power suggested that the best
route would be to utilize a state highway corridor. Through the responses received at the open
house~ as well as from nominations from the Eagle City Council and Star City Council, a
group of volunteers was assembled to form a Community Advisory Committee (CAC).Through both. subj ective and objective approaches, the CAC determined that the most
appropriate routing of a new 138-kV sub-ttansmission line (out of a total of ten options) would
extend from. the existing 138-kV sub-transmission line near the intersection of Edgewood
Lane and State Highway 44 and travel east along the bypass route to connect to the existing
line near the intersection of Ballantyne Road and State Street The factors involved (as well as
the methods used) in determining the route are detailed within the July 2002, Routing Study
entitled "Eagle-Star 138-kV Sub-Transmission Project , attached to this report in booklet
form.
It should be noted that it has not yet been determined which side of the bypass the line will
traverse; this item is left to be deterrnmed from comments received at the public hearings
well as the determination of the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission and the Eagle City
Council.
With regard to placing the sub-transmission Iine(s) underground, the CAC felt that while thisscenario would be most favorable, the committee did not feel "empowered to make a
recommendation to IPC that might obligate the citizens of Eagle to higher power rates , due tothe costs of installation. and maintenance of, an underground line- Staff will defer discussionregarding this matte( to the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission and the Eagle City
Council.
Page 8 of 13K:~ Dcpt\Eq1s App~~-0-42 cd.doc
II V~I ~VV~ V~. ~~ rftA ~VO ~~O ~OOq ~ (;lTY ATl', .., '.b.& \j L.t; 1'..N. L.. .~UIU
It is staff s understanding that the existing Eagle Substation (located on the south side of State
Street approximately 350-feet east of 2tJ4 Street) will not require modifications and/or upgrades
to accommodate the extension of the 138-kV line. The Eagle Substation (located within the
downtown Central Business District) was previously detennined by the City Council as being
located in an area that is not suitable as a long-term site (as noted within the meeting minutes
for the original conditional use pennit) and that future changeslupgrades may require moving
the substation out of the downtown. With the extension of the existing sub-transmission line,
which may also eventually become an alternative power source to the Eagle Substation, it
would appear that Idaho Power' s long~term facility planning efforts include keeping the
substation in its cunent location.
If the City Council determines that the substation I118.y remain in its current location, then staff
recommends that the existing chain link fence with slats surrounding the facility be removed
since it does not comply with ECe minimum screening requirements. A new screening
method such as a minimum 8-foot high decorative block (split face eMU) wall and additional
landscaping should be installed around the perimeter of the substation. Design Review Board
review and approval of the screen wall and landscaping should be required prior to the
issuance of any zoning pennits.
The new power line may travel through an area designated as a "Hazard Area , specifically the
Dry Creek fioodplainlfloodway. This portion of the floodway is located on State Highway 44
in approximate alignment with Riverview Street to the north. Eagle City Code Section 10-1-
(A) requires that any development that could possibly increase or alter the flood hazard shall
obtain a development permit prior to any construction occurring within the special flood
hazard area. A flood plain development pennit may be issued if documentation prepared by a
registered professional engineer is submitted with an application to the City and approved by
the City EngineeJ:' and the Building OfficiallFloodplain Administrator. The applicant should
be required to obtain a floodplain development permit if any new poles are to be placed within
a floodplainlt1oodway, prior to the City issuance of a Zoning Certificate.
STAFF RECOMMENDA TION PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
If the City Council approves the transmission line facility as proposed by Idaho Power, then based
upon the information provided to staff to date. staff recommends the site specific conditions of
approval and the standard conditions of approval as outlined within the staff report
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COMMISSION:
A. A public hearing on the appfication was held before the P1aJ1T11ng and Zoning Commj~sion On October
28, 2002. and continued to November 13, 2002, at which time testimony was taken and the public
hearing was continued to a date uncertain. The public hearing was noticed for a meeting held on July
15, 2003, at which time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed for oral testimony.
The Comrn1~sion continued the public hearing for written testimony to August 11, 2003, at which time
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 PI;mning and Zoning Commission
by thirty-one (31) individuals with concerns regarding the rural feel that residents have moved to the
City to enjoy would be lost if overhead lines were constructed; the utility poles would detract from the
scenic views of the City; willingness (and also lack thereot) of citizens to pay for the cost of under
grounding the sub-transmission line; the need for Idaho Power to take resident s concerns under
consideration when designing utility lines; the resultant decrease in property values from overhead
Page 9 of 13
1C!\PIamiiar DBpt\&p AppJiI:a~~.Q2 CXItdDa
U7/U1/2UU4 Ug: 21 FAX [phone] EAGLE P. N . Z .-+ CITY A'ITY 141 all
lines; the risks of electricity on health and effects of emissions from the power lines; actual costs forboth underground and overhead construction; and the need for the City leaders to act as stewards tomaintain the reputation the City has acquired as an upscale community. (NOTE: While fifty..two (52)individuals signed the public hearing sign-in sheet, not all chose to provide testimony.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal Was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission by two(2) individuals (not including the applicant/representative) who felt that the proposed route andoverhead construction Was the most cost effective and least intrusive (to residential uses) means to
construct the sub-transmission line.
D. Written testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the Planning and ZoningCommission by one (1) individual with concerns regarding the lack of communication between Idaho
Power and the Public Utilities Commission to consider power line routing and construction optionsand that this individual has had contact with a staff member at the PUC who is willing to meet with
interested property owners to examine the issue.
E. A report prepared by the consulting firm Black & Veatch, contracted by the City to peIform a study
regarding the feasibility of under-grounding the line, and routini alternatives, was submitted to thePlanning and Zoning Commission for their consideration and is incorporated herein by reference.
COMMISSION DECISION:
The Commission voted 4 to 1 (Deckers against) to recommend denial of the conditional use permit
(CU.9-O2) to construct an overhead 138 tV sub-transmission line and a height exception for utility
poles for Idaho Power Company. The underground installation of the sub-transmission line fromthe Eagle substation to the western boundary of the Eagle City limits may be taken underconsideration as an alternative method, as noted within their Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law document, dated September 2, 2003.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 14, 2003:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the City Council on October 14, 2003, at which
time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The item was continued to October 28,
2003, for a decision to be detennined at that date.
B. Orat testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by six (6) individuals
who felt that the State Highway 44 bypass is a prominent entry corridor into the City and that because
taIl landscaping is not permitted within easements for power lines, there will never be any type
camouflage to soften the visual impact of the lines; the new line should be CODstmCted along theexisting right-ai-way (State Street), the City should maintain the design standards and character it has
established and pursue underground construction of the lines, with either franchise fees, surcharges, or
a local improvement district to pay for the cost; the decrease in property values caused by the location
of the poles and line; the need for Idaho Power to show the entire power planning area rather than this
small area in order to see the "big picture"; the importance of following the standards outlined in Eagle
City Code regarding tower height as well as heeding the goals and objectives of the comprehensiveplan; the Public Utilities Commission should be requested to require under grounding of all power
lines; and there is a need to review other routs and design schemes for the poles and line.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one (not including the
applicantlrepresen tati ve).
Page 10 of 13
K:\I"1ann1lla ~\EU AppliRlkJlI5'CtJ'\2OO1'C.09.Q2 asf.doc
~. , ~"" -"'VOS VQ. -.&. J:~to. ~VQ D'tJQ 'tJQ",*.E:.iib~ r.!'j. L.. .4 t:lT): ATl'~Ul~
COUNCIL DECISION:
The Council voted 3 to 1 (Sedlacek absent) to remand this conditional use permit application to
staff to notice for a new public bearing to review alternate routes, pole structure designs. and thepossibility of constructing the line underground.
A public hearing was scheduled for March 23, 2004, to consider the following described route toconstruct a 138kV sub-transmission line with poles ranging in height from approximately 70 to 90-
feet, (35 to 55-feet higher then the required maximum of 3S-feet):
The proposed routing of the sub-transmission line will travel within existing right-of-way from the
Eagle Substation (located on the south side of State Street approximately 300-feet east of 2ndStreet) north to the alleyway north of State Street and then west through the alley to a pointapproximately 300-feet west of Park Road (Jackson Square). The line will extend south andconnect to State Street and continue west along State Stteet to Ballantyne Road, where the line will
follow along the same route as the existing power lines that parallel the highway, to the new Star,Idaho, substation site.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL ON MARCH 23, 2004:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the City Council on March 23, 2004, at which
time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Council made their decision at thattime.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by thirteen (13)individuals who felt the city should require that the lines be constructed underground; the attractivecharacter and appearance of the city would be mauedt along with a decrease in property values by the
construction of large power poles; the City of Eagle should not bear the burden to provide power
service to the city of Star; and the City should require Idaho Power to adhere to ordinances requiring
developers to install utilities underground.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one (not including the
applicant/representative).
D. Oral testimony neither in opposition to nor in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council
by three (3) individuals with questions reganUng the replacement and height of the poles, theavailability of existing and future right-of-way for the lines; and .consideration was given (during theCommunity Advisory Committee meetings) to route the line along the bypass to lessen the impact on
residential uses.
E. Written testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by six (6)individuals who felt the city should represent the needs of the residents before the desires ofcommercial developers, under grounding of the lines can be paid for through franchise fees; the needto protect views near the Eagle Island State Park; the line should travel through less developed areasrather than established neighborhoods; the decrease in property values due to the construction of power
poles and lines; and the issue of "stray voltage" and its impacts on health.
F. A petition in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council signed by one hundred
ftfty-four (154) individuals.
Page 11 of 13
JC:\PIInDiae
~~
AppJaDoas\CtJ\2OO'llaJ-aJ.aA cd.doG
II V~I ~UU~ U~; ~~ rftA ~VO ~JO JO~~bl\\1iLb f' l~ . Z. .-+ CiTY ATl'Y III 013
COUNCIL DECISION:
The Council voted 4 to 0 to deny the conditional use permit of the conditional use permit (CU-
02) to constroct an overhead 138-kV sub-transmission line and a height exception for utility poles
for Idaho Power Company.
CONCLUSIONS OF LA W:
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 8, 2002, October 29, 20027 and again on June 247 2003. Notice of this publichearing 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
2, 2002, October 23, 2002, and again on June 18, 2003. Requests for agencies' reviews were
transmitted on September 17, 2002. in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in accordance
for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City ontinances on September 9
2003 and March 2, 2004. 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 September 2, 2003, and Match 3, 2004.
3. The City Council has reviewed the particular facts 3IId circunlstances of this proposed conditional use and
has made the following conclusion:
The proposed conditional use for the construction of an overhead sub-transmission line and height
exception for utility poles to exceed the maximum of 35...feet is !!Q! in accordance with the general
objectives of the Comprehensive Plan nor Eagle City Code Title 8. While statements within the
Comprehensive Plan encourage Idaho Power to improve electric utility facilities to provide adequate
capacity and service fo( growth.. the design and construction of an overhead sub-transmission line
conflicts with the City's goal to "protect important views, vistas, and panoramas of the community'
natural setting and environment" (Chapter 9, Section 9.2 f). The overhead line also conflicts with
the city s goal to "Strive to create an aesthetically pleasing community and protect the unique natutal
beauty and smal1 town character of the CitY' (Chapter 12, Section 12.
The requirement for those who develop properties within the City to place utilities serving said
development underground should be applied equally to Idaho Power setVice projects. Pursuant to the
approval of a conditional use permit, it must be found that the proposed use will be designed
consttUcted, operated and maintained to be hannonious and appropriate in appearance with the
existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential
character of the same area. Further, the proposed use is to not result in the destruction, loss or damage
of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. The installation of new poles will alter the
natural setting of the area since power poles are not typical features expected to be found in a nawraJ
environs. The historical character and appeal of the downtown will be further dirn;nished since the
power poles are not proposed to be designed with features that are harmonious with the existing styles
of the downtown .area (as shown within the City.' s adopted Eagle Architecture and Site Design book),
nor do they contribute to a pleasing environment for both residents and visitors alike. Moreover, the
extension of existing poles will contribute to the obstruction of scenic views of both the tree canopy
along the Boise Rivet as well as the foothills north of the City, depending upon the viewing vantage
Page 12 of 13
~\PlmmIDi Dept\E8aJc AppIieIdioIl&'CU':WOZ(;U~ cef.d04:
V, V~I ~VV~ VV. ~~ r4A ~VO ~~O ~O~~J:!.J\.bL~ t'. 1'1 . L.. .-+ t;lTY AT1'~ Ul'l~. ..: ......
point. The Council emphasized that to vary from the community's vision of the intended character of
the City, consisting of both present and future development and to change the practices and objectives
to achieve this goal, in order to accommodate the overhead power line. would be debimental to
persons, property and the general welfare of the City of Eagle.
DATED this 11 th day of May 2004.
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
County. Idaho
,,'It ,'IA'.'..f.~
#.~
.d 0 .c~,.. ~#
" ""~ ~ .
........ v
~ ,~ (;~ .. .. ~ $ ..
~:r OR-1)o
.. ":: ... ,. ~ ,,' -.- : * ..- . .
, 1'"'".
~:
~ ~:r
;, :., jj, ~"..
\, foP':). fl
.:)
;1 "...-t.~."S $
'#:". ~
\RA.'
",,~
'" "1 :t'
~...... ~
'ft
""1. 'l1 OF 1.~
,~~~
."'f"lIu'."~
AITE
'--"'
)) Q .f ~
~ ~_
J3.( ~.e..!Sharon . Bergm$lnn, Eagle City Cle k
Page 13 of 13
K:\I'1aIInII18 Dq)1~ AppIR~U..Q9..()2 ~.doG
Case No. IPC-04-
Exhibit 119
May 11,2004
Eagle Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Case No. CU-
Denying IPC's Conditional Use Permit Application
for a Height Exception to Construct Utility Poles 70-85 feet
.... ', .;; .., ,
ORIGINA
BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MA TIER OF AN APPLICATION FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A
138kV SUB-TRANSMISSION LINE AND A HEIGHT
EXCEPTION REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT UTILITY
POLES IN EXCESS OF 3S-FEET FOR IDAHO POWER
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER CU-
The above-entitled conditional use pennit application came before the Eagle City Council for their action
on October 14, 2003, at which time the public hearing was closed and the item was then continued to
October 28, 2003. At that time, the Council remanded this item to staff with direction to schedule a new
public hearing to consider additional routing options. A second public hearing was h~ld March 23, 2004,
at which time the public hearing was closed and the Council made their decision at that time. The EagleCity 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:
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Idaho Power, represented by Layne Dodson, is requesting conditional use approval to
construct a 138kV sub-transmission line, and a height exception request to construct utility
poles with heights ranging from approximately 70 to 85-feet, (35 to 50-feet higher then therequired maximum of 35-feet).
The fIrst proposal for routing the new sub-transmission line would connect with the
existing 138kV power line near the intersection of Edgewood and State Street. The newline would proceed west along State Highway 44 to Ballantyne Road, where the linewould be constructed along the same route as the existing power lines that parallel the
highway, to the new Star, Idaho, substation site.
The second proposal for routing the new sub-transmission line would travel within the
existing right-of-way from the Eagle Substation (located on the south side of State Street
approximately 3oo-feet east of 2nd Street) north to the alleyway north of State Street and
then west through the alley to a point approximately 3oo-feet west of Park Road (Jackson
Square). The line would then extend south and connect to State Street and continue west
along State Street to Ballantyne Road and follow along the same route as the existing
power lines that parallel the highway, to the new Star, Idaho, substation site.
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL:
The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on September 9, 2002.
NOTICE OF PUBUC 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 8,2002, October 29, 2002, and again on
June 24, 2003. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners within three-
hundred feet (3oo-feet) of the subject property in accordance with the requirementS of
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on October 2, 2002, October 23,
EXHIBIT 119
CASE NO. IPC-O4-Page 1 of 13
K:\ft8zmiaa J)ept\EIaIe AppIicadoatCU\2.()9.02 ccf.doc
2002, and again on June 18, 2003. Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted on
September 17, 2002, in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in
accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
ordinances on September 9, 2003 and March 2, 2004. 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 September 2, 2003, and March 3, 2004.
mSTORY OF ~v ANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS:
On January 23, 1996, the Eagle City Council approved a conditional use permit for
capacity upgrades to the Eagle Substation located at 315 E. State Street.
On February 20, 2001, the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission recommend denial of
CU-23-OO for a conditional use permit by Idaho Power Company for a height exception
request and the reconstruction, upgrade, and fe-routing of an existing 69kV power line to
accommodate a 138kV sub-transmission line and placement of existing distribution lines
underground, generally extending from the Eagle Substation on State Street west to
Ballantyne Road. The item was not heard by the City Council as the applicant withdrew
the application following the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing.
COMPANION APPLICATIONS: None
Page 2 of 13I(.~ n-.t\a...a. .A._..L...u"'I I\~' _Nt ....I"~
, ,, ,, .
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS:
COMP PLAN ZONING LAND USE
DESIGNATION DESIGNATION
Existing Business Park Central A (Agriculture) Businesses
Business District (Agricultural-Residential) Res i den cestr ran s mis s i
Commercial/ Mixed Use BP (Business Park) / C-Power Line
Public/Semi-Public /(Highway Business District)
Residential One (1- unit / CBD (Central Business
per acre max.District) / MU (Mixed Use)
Residential Two (2-units l (Residential) R-
per acre max.
) /
(Residential) / R -4
Residential Four (4-units (Residential)
per acre max.
Propos~No Change No Change Transmission Power Line
North of site Commercial/ Central A (Agriculture) Businesses /
Business District (Agricultural-Residential) /Res i dencesIT rans mis s ion
Residential One (I-unit CBD (Central Business Power Line
per acre max.District) R -1 (Residential)
Residential Two (2-units 2 (Residential) / R-4
per acre max.) Residential (Residential)
Four (4-units per acre
max.Residential Two
(2-units per acre max.
Mixed Use
South of site Commercial/ Central A (Agriculture) Businesses
Business District (Agricultural-Residential) ResidenceslTransmissi on
Public/Semi-Public l (Neighborhood Business Power Line
Mixed Use Residential District) / !2BD (Central
Four (4-units per acre Business District)
max.Residential Two (public/Semi-Public)
(2-units per acre max.(Residential) / R - 2
(Residential) R -4
(Residential)
East of site Business Park / Mixed BP (Business Park) Businesses
Use / Residential Four (4-(General Business District) Res i den cesff ran smiss i on
units per acre max.MU (Mixed Use) /R-4 Power Line
(Residential)
West of site Mixed Use / Public/Semi-A (Agriculture) Businesses
Public / Residential One (Agricultural-Residential) R esi den cesff ransmiss i on
(1- unit per acre max.MU (Mixed Use)/R-Power Line
Residential Two (2-units (Residential) R-
per acre max.(Residential) / R-4
Residential Four (4-units (Residential)
per acre max.
Page 3 of 13
K:\PIaDaiaa Dept\BqIe
~~
ccUoc
. ,. '. ,
DESIGN REVIEW OVERLA Y DISTRICf:
The existing and proposed lines are located within the DDA (Downtown DevelopmentArea), CEDA (Community Entry Development Area), and the TDA (TransitionalDevelopment Area) as well as the City's designated Entry Corridor.
EXISTING SITE CHARACfERISTICS:
The existing power line is within easements and or public rights-of-way that extend
through both residential and commercial areas of the City.
SITE DESIGN INFORMATION: N/a
GENERAL SITE DESIGN FEATURES:
Number and Uses of Proposed Buildings: No buildings are proposed.
Height and Number of Stories of Proposed Buildings:
No buildings are proposed, however, the height of the sub-transmission line poles are
proposed to be 70 to 85-feet (maximum) through the corridor.
Gross Floor Area of Proposed Buildings: N/a
On and Off-Site Circulation:
Other than the existing Eagle Substation, which has a maintenance access, the power line
easement abuts public rights-of-way and no other public access is proposed.
PUBLIC SERVICES A V AILABLE:
Central District Health Department and Eagle Fire Department have provided preliminary
approval letters. Letters from water and sewer entities, as well as other affected utilities
are required prior to the issuance of any permits.
PUBliC USES PROPOSED: None
PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUISmONS MAP: No map currently exists
SPECIAL ON-SITE FEATURES:
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern - A portion of this site is designated a Special Area and
a Hazard Area in the Comprehensive Plan
Evidence of Erosion - unknown
Fish Habitat - unknown
Floodplain-yes
Mature Trees - yes
Riparian Vegetation - unknown
Steep Slopes - unknown
Stream/Creek - yes
Unique Animal Life - unknown
Unique Plant Life - unknown
Unstable Soils - unknown
Wildlife Habitat - unknown
Page 4 of 13
K:\PI8Im/Di Dcpt\EIaIe ~.()9.0Z cctdoc
. ", , "
SUMMARY OF REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLAN (IF REQUIRED):
An Environmental Assessment Plan has been prepared and submitted to the City Engineer
for review. The Environmental Assessment Plan is incorporated herein by reference.
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:
Ada County ffighway District
Central District Health
Department of Environmental Quality
Eagle Fire Department
Eagle Sewer District
LETTERS FROM THE PUBLIC:'
Letter from Thomas Dater, 999 Main Street, Boise, ID 83702 date stamped by the City on
~rober 8, 2002.
Letter from Givens-Pursley LLP 277 N. 6th Street, Suite 200 Boise, ID 83701 datestamped by the City on ~tober 11, 2002.
Letter from Capital Development, Inc., 6200 N. Meeker Place, Boise, ill 83713 date
stamped by the City on October 30, 2002.
All letters are incorporated herein by reference.
EAGLE CITY CODE 8-2 GENERAL STANDARDS FOR CONDmONAL USES:
The Commission/Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed
Conditional Use in terms of the following standards and shall fmd adequate evidence showing that
such use at the proposed location:
Will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as established in Section 8-3 of this title (Eagle
City Code Title 8) for the zoning district involved;
Will be harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives or with any
specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan and/or this title (Eagle City Code Title 8);
Will be design~ constrocted, operated and maintained ro be harmonious and appropriate
in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such
use Will. not change the essential character of the same area;
Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighborhood uses;
Will be served adequately by essential public facilities such as highways, streets, polic~and ftre protection, drainage stnlctures, refuse disposal, water and sewer and schools; or
that the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use shall be
able to provide adequately any such services.
Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community;
Page 5 of 13
1C:\PIaaoiDa Dept\BIaIe ~.(II).02 cctdoc
. ". ,. .
Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and 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;
Will have vehicular approaches to the property which are designed as not to create an
interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares; and
Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of
major importance.
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS WInCH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN
REGARDING TInS PROPOSAL:
Chapter 4 Schools, Public Services and Utilities
Other Services and Utilities
Electricity
Appropriate placement of electric utility facilities on public rights-of-way is
encouraged. Public streets and road rights-of-way typically serve as corridors for
electric facilities. Transmission lines are usually located on easements that IPC
(Idaho Power Company) acquires from private property owners. The joint use of
utility corridors is also encouraged, provided that such joint use is consistent with
limitations as may be prescribed by applicable law and prudent utility practice for
existing and proposed utility facilities.
Additions and improvements to electric utility facilities that enhance the capacity
and reliability of regional resources, particularly when multi-jurisdictional benefits
within the region can be achieved, should be accommodated.
Implementation Strategies
Recognize the need for electric utility facilities that are sufficient to
support economic development
Encourage Idaho Power to make additions to and improvements of
electric utility facilities that provide adequate capacity for projected
growth.
Chapter 7 Natural Resources and Hazard Areas
Hazard Areas
The Dry Creek floodplain has a potential for flash flooding...
Page 6 of 13
1C:\P1maiDa Dept\BIsIe ~-09-01 cctdoc ,
, ,
Chapter 12
, ,
Chapter 11 Special Areas and Sites
11.2 Recognized Special Areas and Sites
The Dry Creek Floodplain is designated as a special area due to its ecological and
scenic significance. This area comprises the length of the Dry Creek Floodplain
through the Impact Area.
The State StreetJEagle Road Corridor is designated as a Special area due to its
historical, architectural and scenic significance.
Community Design
12.Entry Corridors
Entryway conidors are arterial roadways that introduce both visitors and residents
to Eagle. City entryways include State Highways 44 (State Street and Alternate
Route) and 55 (Eagle Road). These entrances with their landscaping (or lack
thereof), commercial signage and building character provide the first, and
oftentimes the most lasting impressions of the entire community. The City of
Eagle has the responsibility to guide development and redevelopment that occurs
along these entryway corridors.
Design review procedures should guide future development and redevelopment of
existing uses. Depending on land uses and buildings, more extensive landscaping
and fewer point$ of access may be required. The design review process will
afford the opportunity to address the special features of each property and facility
in a manner that will best address the overall intent of enhancing Eagle
entryways. Eagle s entrance corridors may take on the look of berms built
adjacent to the Banbury and Lexington Hills Subdivisions.
ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS WInCH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
TInS PROPOSAL:
Section 8-2A-6 (A)(7)(a)
Additional Height Restrictions: All spires, poles, antennas, steeples, towers, and any other
such structures shall be limited to a maximum of thirty-five feet (35'). Additional height
may be permitted if a conditional use permit is approved by the City Council.
Section 8-2A-7 (J)(2)(c) & (3)
c. To conceal outdoor storage areas, trash receptacles, exposed equipment associated with
any commercial or industrial activity, and off-street loading when adjacent to or in view
from a residential activity or public street right of way, a five foot (5') wide by six foot (6'
high landscaped buffer is required.
3. Materials:
a. All buffer areas shall be comprised of, but not limited to, a mix of evergreen and
deciduous trees, shmbs, and groundcover in which evergreen plant materials comprise a
minimum of sixty percent (60%) of the total plant material used.
b. Height requirements shall be accomplished with plant material with a fence or
decorative wall.
Page 7 of 13
K:\PI8mIiJs Dept\E8ak ~.()9.()1 cx:tdoc:
. ', .. , "
c. The required buffer area shall result in an effective barrier within three (3) years and be
maintained such that sixty percent (60%) or more of the vertical surface is closed and
prevents the passage of vision through it
d. Chainlink fencing, with slats or otherwise, is prohibited for screening.
Section 8-5 (D): Conditions QfPermit
Upon the granting of a conditional use permit, conditions may be attached to said pennitincluding, but not limited to, those:
1. Minimizing adverse impact on other development;
2. Controlling the sequence and timing of development;
3. Controlling the duration of development;
4. Assuring that development is maintained properly;
5. Designating the exact location and nature of development;
6. Requiring the provision for on-site or off-site public facilities or services; and
7. Requiring more restrictive standards than those generally required in this Title.
DISCUSSION:
In February of 200 1, the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial of a
conditional use permit application proposed by Idaho Power to install a 138kV line that would
travel, in part, from the Eagle Sub-station through the downtown area along State Street and
on to State Highway 44 near Ballantyne Road. Idaho Power withdrew the application prior to
a public hearing before the City Council.
Subsequently, in March of 2002, Idaho Power held an informational open house to inform andgamer comment from the public concerning the routing of a proposed 138-kV sub-
transmission line. 35% of the questionnaires returned to Idaho Power suggested that the best
route would be to utilize a state highway conidor. Through the responses received at the open
house, as well as from nominations from the Eagle City Council and Star City Council, a
group of volunteers was assembled to form a Community Advisory Committee (CAC).Through both' subjective and objective approaches, the CAC determined that the most
appropriate routing of a new 138-kV sub-transmission line (out of a total often options) wouldextend from the existing 138-kV sub-transmission line near the intersection of Edgewood
Lane and State Highway 44 and travel east along the bypass route to connect to the existing
line near the intersection of Ballantyne Road and State Street. The factors involved (as well
the methods used) in determining the route are detailed within the July 2002, Routing Study
entitled "Eagle-Star 138-kV Sub-Transmission Project", attached to this report in bookletform.
It should be noted that it has not yet been detennined which side of the bypass the line will
traverse; this item is left to be determined from comments received at the public hearings as
well as the determination of the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission and the Eagle City
Council.
With regard to placing the sub-transmission line(s) underground, the CAC felt that while this
scenario would be most favorable, the committee did not feel "empowered to make a
recommendation to IPC that might obligate the citizens of Eagle to higher power rates , due tothe costs of installation, and maintenance of, an underground line. Staff will defer discussion
regarding this matter to the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission and the Eagle CityCouncil.
Page 8 of 13
K:\PI8aaiua Dcpt\f.8ale ~.02 cctdoc
. "
It is staff's understanding that the existing Eagle Substation (located on the south side of State
Street approximately 350-foot east of 2nd Street) will not require modifications and/or upgrades
to accommodate the extension of the 138-kV line. The Eagle Substation (located within the
downtown Central Business District) was previously determined by the City Council as being
located in an area that is not suitable as a long-term site (as noted within the meeting minutes
for the original conditional use pennit) and that future changes/upgrades may require movingthe substation out of the downtown. With the extension of the existing sub-transmission line,
which may also eventually become an alternative power source to the Eagle Substation, itwould appear that Idaho Power s long-term facility planning efforts include keeping the
substation in its current location.
If the City Council determines that the substation may remain in its current location, then staff
recommends that the existing chain link fence with slats surrounding the facility be removed
since it does not comply with BCC minimum screening requirements. A new screeningmethod such as a minimum 8-foot high decorative block (split face eMU) wall and additional
landscaping should be installed around the perimeter of the substation. Design Review Boardreview and approval of the screen wall and landscaping should be required prior to the
issuance of any zoning permits.
The new power line may travel through an area designated as a ('Hazard Area , specifically theDry Creek floodplainlfloodway. This portion of the floodway is located on State Highway
in approximate alignment with Riverview Street to the north. Eagle City Code Section 10-
(A) requires that any development that could possibly increase or alter the flood hazard shall
obtain a development permit prior to any construction occuning within the special flood
hazard area. A flood plain development permit may be issued if documentation prepared by aregistered professional engineer is submitted with an application to the City and approved by
the City Engineer and the Building OfficiallFloodplain Administrator. The applicant shouldbe required to obtain a floodplain development permit if any new poles are to be placed within
a floodplainlfloodway, prior to the City issuance of a Zoning Certificate.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
If the City Council approves the transmission line facility as proposed by Idaho Power, then basedupon the information provided to staff to date, staff recommends the site specific conditions of
approval and the standard conditions of approval as outlined within the staff report.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COMMISSION:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the Planning and Zoning Commi~sion on October28, 2002, and continued to November 13, 2002, at which time testimony was taken and the public
hearing was continued to a date uncertain. The public hearing was noticed for a meeting held on July
15, 2003, at which time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed for oral testimony.The Commission continued the public hearing for written testimony to August 11, 2003, at which time
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 Commissionby thirty-one (31) individuals with concerns regarding the mral feel that residents have moved to the
City to enjoy would be lost if overhead lines were constmcted; the utility poles would detract from the
scenic views of the City; willingness (and also lack thereof) of citizens to pay for the cost of under
grounding the sub-transmission line; the need for Idaho Power to take resident's concerns underconsideration when designing utility lines; the resultant decrease in property values from overhead
Page 9 of 13
K:'IPIaauiDc Dept\Baale AppIicIdoaa'CU\.()9..()1 ccUIoc
, .. ,
lines; the risks of electricity on health and effects of emissions from the power lines; actual costs for
both underground and overhead construction; and the need for the City leaders to act as stewards tomaintain the reputation the City has acquired as an upscale community. (NOTE: While fifty-two (52)individuals signed the public hearing sign-in sheet, not all chose to provide testimony.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission by two
(2) individuals (not including the applicant/representative) who felt that the proposed route andoverhead construction was the most cost effective and least intrusive (to residential uses) means to
construct the sub-transmission line.
D. Written testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the Planning and ZoningCommission by one (1) individual with concerns regarding the lack of communication between Idaho
Power and the Public Utilities Commission to consider power line routing and construction options,and that this individual has had contact with a staff member at the PUC who is willing to meet with
interested property owners to examine the issue.
E. A report prepared by the consulting fJIm Black & Veatch, contracted by the City to perform a study
regarding the feasibility of under-grounding the line, and routing alternatives, was submitted to the
Planning and Zoning Commission for their consideration and is incorporated herein by reference.
COMMISSION DECISION:
The Commission voted 4 to 1 (Deckers against) to recommend denial of the conditional use permit
(CU-9-O2) to construct an overhead 138 kV sub-transmission line and a height exception for utility
poles for Idaho Power Company. The underground installation of the sub-transmission line fromthe Eagle substation to the western boundary of the Eagle City limits may be taken underconsideration as an alternative method, as noted within their Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law document, dated September 2, 2003.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 14, 2003:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the City Council on October 14, 2003, at which
time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The item was continued to October 28,
2003, for a decision to be determined at that date.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by six (6) individuals
who felt that the State Highway 44 bypass is a prominent entry conidor into the City and that because
tall landscaping is not permitted within easements for power lines, there will never be any type
camouflage to soften the visual impact of the lines; the new line should be constmcted along theexisting right-of-way (State Street), the City should maintain the design standards and character it has
established and pursue underground construction of the lines, with either franchise fees, surcharges, or
a local improvement district to pay for the cost; the decrease in property values caused by the location
of the poles and line; the need for Idaho Power to show the entire power planning area rather than this
small area in order to see the "big picture ; the importance of following the standards outlined in Eagle
City Code regarding tower height as well as heeding the goals and objectives of the comprehensiveplan; the Public Utilities Commission should be requested to require under grounding of all power
. lines; and there is a need to review other routs and design schemes for the poles and line.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one (not including the
applicant/representative).
Page 10 of 13
K:\PImaIaa ~-OIJ-02 ccldoc
.. , ..
COUNCIL DECISION:
The Council voted 3 to 1 (Sedlacek absent) to remand this conditional use permit application tostaff to notice for a new public hearing to review alternate routes, pole structure designs, and the
possibility of constructing the line underground.
A public hearing was scheduled for March 23, 2004, to consider the following described route to
construct a 138kV sub-transmission line with poles ranging in height from approximately 70 to 90-
feet, (35 to 55-feet higher then the required maximum of 35-feet):
The proposed routing of the sub-transmission line will travel within existing right-of-way from the
Eagle Substation (located on the south side of State Street approximately 300-feet east of 2ndStreet) north to the alleyway north of State Street and then west through the alley to a point
approximately 3OG-feet west of Park Road (Jackson Square). The line will extend south andconnect to State Street and continue west along State Street to Ballantyne Road, where the line willfollow along the same route as the existing power lines that parallel the highway, to the new Star,
Idaho, substation site.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL ON MARCH 23, 2004:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the City Council on March 23, 2004, at whichtime testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Council made their decision at that
time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by thirteen (13)individuals who felt the city should require that the lines be constructed underground; the attractivecharacter and appearance of the city would be marred, along with a decrease in property values by the
construction of large power poles; the City of Eagle should not bear the burden to provide power
service to the city of Star; and the City should require Idaho Power to adhere to ordinances requiringdevelopers to install utilities underground.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one (not including the
applicant/representative).
D. Oral testimony neither in opposition to nor in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council
by three (3) individuals with questions regarding the replacement and height of the poles, theavailability of existing and future right-of-way for the lines; and consideration was given (during the
Community Advisory Committee meetings) to route the line along the bypass to lessen the impact on
residential uses.
E. Written testimony in opposition to this proposal w~ presented to the City Council by six (6)individuals who felt the city should represent the needs of the residents before the desires ofcommercial developers, under grounding of the lines can be paid for through franchise fees; the need
to protect views near the Eagle Island State Park; the line should travel through less developed areasrather than established neighborhoods; the decrease in property values due to the construction of power
poles and lines; and the issue of "stray voltage" and its impacts on he8Ith.
F. A petition in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council signed by one hundred
fifty~four (154) individuals.
Page 11 of 13
K:\PIaaias Dept\BaaIe AppIicadoIll'O.J\'ZOO1'a-09.02 c:c:f.doc
, ,..., .
COUNCIL DECISION:
The Council voted 4 to 0 to deny the conditional use permit of the conditional use permit (CU-
02) to construct an overhead 138-kV sub-transmission line and a height exception for utility poles
for Idaho Power Company.
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 waspublished in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
ordinances on October 8, 2002, October 29, 2002, and again on June 24, 2003. Notice of this publichearing was mailed to property owners, within three-hundred feet (3oo-feet) of the subject property inaccordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on October2, 2002, October 23, 2002, and again on June 18, 2003. Requests for agencies' reviews weretransmitted on September 17, 2002, in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in accordancefor requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City ordinances on September 9,
2003 and March 2, 2004. 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 September 2, 2003, and March 3, 2004.
3. The City Council has reviewed the particular facts md circumstances of this proposed conditional use andhas made the following conclusion:
The proposed conditional use for the construction of an overhead sub-transmission line and heightexception for utility poles to exceed the maximum of 35-foot is not in accordance with the general
objectives of the Comprehensive Plan nor Eagle City Code Title 8. While statements within theComprehensive Plan encourage Idaho Power to improve electric utility facilities to provide adequatecapacity and service for growth, the design and construction of an overhead sub-transmission lineconflicts with the City's goal to "protect important views, vistas, and panoramas of the community'
natural setting and environment" (Chapter 9, Section 9.2 0. The overhead line also conflicts withthe city's goal to "Strive to create an aesthetically pleasing community and protect the unique natural
beauty and small town character of the City" (Chapter 12, Section 12.
The requirement for those who develop properties within the City to place utilities serving saiddevelopment underground should be applied equally to Idaho Power service projects. Pursuant to the
approval of a conditional use pennit, it must be found that the proposed use will be designed,constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with theexisting or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essentialcharacter of the same area. Further, the proposed use is to not result in the destructiont loss or damageof a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. The installation of new poles will alter thenatural setting of the area since power poles are not typical features expected to be found in a natural
environs. The historical character and appeal of the downtown will be further diminished since thepower poles are not proposed to be designed with features that are harmonious with the existing stylesof the downtown ,area (as shown within the City's adopted Eagle Architecture and Site Design book),
nor do they contribute to a pleasing environment for both residents and visitors alike. Moreover, theextension of existing poles will contribute to the obsttuction of scenic views of both the tree canopyalong the Boise River as well as the foothills no~ of the City, depending upon the viewing vantage
Page 12 of 13
1C:\PIIaaiat Dcpt\BqIe AppIicadoasv:tJ\2OO2'CU-09-02 cct:doc
..... .
point. The Council emphasized that to vary from the community's vision of the intended character of
the City, consisting of both present and future development, and to change the practices and objectives
to achieve this goal, in order to accommodate the overhead power line, would be detrimental to
persons, property and the general welfare of the City of Eagle.
DATED this 11 th day of May 2004.
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
A~~ County, Idaho G-
-----=~_
J~.( ..J
Sharon . Bergmann, Eagle City Cle
Page 13 of 13
K:\PIamUoa DeptI&aIc AppIicadoIll'CU\2OO2'CU-og.()2 cd.doc
"'U""'"
.." 0 F Bc1 '~~~
~ ","\......_--
0; ~':t
(? .. -. ~
ill!
$ ..""
~ 0 -1 )- -
~ .' , ~.p ~ .:*. .....- :*=': ~~ ';::. - .','-' ~
01 .
-:. ~ '"'- "
~ cP
').. .~;...~~
o ~
-r' " ()RA.- .
--'1 ~
"" ...- ~ ~##,
7'/3 0 F \'9 "tt,........",'
Case No. IPC- E-04-
Exhibit 120
Development Agreement
between Albertson s and City of Eagle
August 26, 1997
Recording Requested By and
When Recorded Return to:
Mark Butler - Planning and Zoning Administrator
CITY OF EAGLE
O. Box 477
Eagle, Idaho 83616
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY
#1101; Eagle - Gas
(#182; Eagle, ID)
9/10/97
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This Development Agreement, made and entered into this day of .Al fAll
,+
, 1997
by and between the City of Eagle, a municipal corporation in the State of Id~e ), by
and through its Mayor, and Albertson , Inc. ("Property Owner
WHEREAS, the Property Owner is owner of record of certain real estate located at 434
S. Eagle Road, Eagle, Idaho ("Property"), which is more particularly described on Schedule "
attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference, and which is the subject of an
application for rezone in Eagle, identified as Rezone Application No. RZ-96; and
WHEREAS, the Property includes properties within an area currently zoned A
(Agricultural); and
WHEREAS, the Property Owner desires to develop a parking lot and fuel island with
canopy on the Property; and
WHEREAS , the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council of Eagle have
determined that the scope of any commercial project upon the Property must be limited to prevent
undue damage and to otherwise be in harmony with existing development; and
WHEREAS, the intent of this Development Agreement is to protect the rights of Property
Owner s use and enjoyment of the Property for the purpose of developing a parking lot and fuelisland with canopy while at the same time ensuring the Property is developed in a manner
consistent with Eagle s Design Review Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Property Owner has agreed to the use restrictions and other limitations
set forth herein upon the use and development of the Property and has requested a C- 2 (General
Business District) zoning designation for the Property; and
EXHIBIT 120
CASE NO. IPC-04-
G: \CLlENT\OOO13\227\DEVAG/'.T.
WHEREAS, the owner of the Property has previously provided Eagle with an affidavitagreeing to submit the Property to a development agreement pursuant to Eagle City Code Section10-1(C)(1); and
WHEREFORE, Property Owner and the City of Eagle desire to resolve the issues andconcerns that have arisen and for and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained hereinit is agreed as follows:
ARTICLE I
LEGAL AUTHORITY
Eagle will adopt an ordinance amending the Eagle Zoning Ordinance to rezone the
Property that is the subject of the application to the requested C-2 (General Business District)zoning designation, after recordation of, and subject to the provisions of this DevelopmentAgreement. The ordinance will become effective after its passage, approval, and publication andthe execution and recordation of this Development Agreement.
ARTICLE n
CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPMENT
The two existing Scots pine trees located on the Property shall not be removed andshall be protected and maintained to allow continued undisturbed growth until such time as theright-of-way for the realigned east/west roadway (Plaza Street) is dedicated to the Ada CountyHighway District. The realigned roadway, as approved by the City of Eagle Planning and ZoningCommission and City Council on June 30, 1997, shall be located so as to permit the preservationof the four trees north of the Albertson s supermarket site which lies immediately to the north
- '
of the Property (Two Catalpas, one Oak, and one Maple), and the real property devoted theretoshall be sufficient to accommodate any Plaza Street construction activity ( or any otherconstruction activity) so as to avoid its occurring within the drip line of any of the four trees.
The Property Owner shall agree to standard terms and conditions of annexationinto the Eagle Sewer District, and any other terms or conditions of the Eagle Sewer DistrictBoard (i.e., currently only one building is permitted until the remainder of the site is annexed intothe Sewer District boundaries - per Eagle Sewer District).
The Property Owner shall submit a Design Review application for the site (asrequired by the Eagle City Code), and shall comply with all conditions required by Eagle as part of the Design Review prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
The Property Owner understands that Eagle is in the process of revising itsComprehensive Plan and is aware that this site (and general area) is intended to be within Central Business District shown within the new Comprehensive Plan, and agrees to permit Eagleto rezone this Property to CBD (Central Business District) along with the proposedComprehensive plan amendments.
G:\QIENT\OOOI3\227\DEVAGHT.
The Property Owner also understands that the proposed use (fuel island with canopy) iscurrently a permitted use in the applicable zoning district (C-2) in the CB area, but may be aprohibited use within the CBD zoning district in the future. If the use becomes prohibited, theuse would be permitted to continue under the regulations within Eagle City Code governingnonconforming uses as long as a Design Review application was received by Eagle, prior toadoption of any new applicable CBD regulations.
The development shall comply with the Zoning Code, as it exists in fmal form atthe time an application for construction and/or improvement, or change in use is made.
The Property Owner agrees to apply for Council approval of a lot split for thisparcel to become a legal parcel of record prior to Eagle publishing the ordinance for the rezone.
The development on the Property is subject to the following further conditions:
(a)The kiosk building to be located on the site shall not exceed 400 square feet
of floor area.
(b) The merchandizing, display, sale or storage of retail goods (other thanfuels) shall not be permitted outside of the said kiosk building on the Property.
(c) Only the following categories of products may be sold from thedevelopment on the Property:
(1) Gasoline, diesel oil, automotive products (such as oil, windshieldwiper fluid, air fresheners, additives);
(2)
containers;
(3)
apples);
(4)
(5)
(6)
and
(7)
Beverages in packages not larger than six-packs or two liter
Immediately consumable products (such as doughnuts, muffins
Candy and snacks;
Tobacco products;
Checkout stand items (such as newspapers, lottery tickets, aspirins);
Charitable fundraising products.
G: \CLlENT\OOO13\227\DEVAGHT. 04
ARTICLE III
AFFIDAVIT OF PROPERTY OWNERS
An affidavit of all owners of the Property agreeing to submit the Property to this
Development Agreement and to the provisions set forth in Idaho Code Section 67-6511A andEagle City Code Section 8-10-1 shall be provided and is incorporated herein by reference.
ARTICLE IV
DEFAULT
In the event the Property Owner fails to comply with the commitments set forthherein, within thirty (30) days of written notice of such failure from Eagle, Eagle shall have theright, without prejudice to any other rights or remedies, to cure such default enjoin suchviolation and otherwise enforce the requirements contained in this Development Agreement
to terminate the Development Agreement following the process established in Eagle City Code
Section 8-10-
If required to proceed in a court of law or equity to enforce any provision of thisDevelopment Agreement Eagle shall be entitled to recover all direct out-of-pocket costs so
incurred to cure or enjoin such default and to enforce the commitments contained in this
Development Agreement, including attorneys' fees ,and court costs.
ARTICLE V
UNENFORCEABLE PROVISIONS
If any term, provision, commitment or restriction of this Development Agreement
or the application thereof to any party or circumstances shall, to any extent, be held invalid or
unenforceable, the remainder of this instrument shall terminate and the zoning of the Propertyshall revert to A (Agricultural).
ARTICLE VI
ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFER
After its execution, the Development Agreement shall be recorded in the office of
the County Recorder at the expense of the Property 'Owner. Each commitment and restrictionon the development shall be a burden on the Property, shall be appurtenant to and for the benefit
of the Property, adjacent property, and other property near the Property and shall run with the
land. This Development Agreement shall be binding on the Property Owner and owners, and
their respective heirs, administrators, executors, agents, legal representatives, successors, andassigns; provided, however, that if all or any portion of the development is sold, the sellers shall
thereupon be released and discharged from any and all obligations in connection with theProperty sold arising under this Agreement. The new owner of the Property or any portion
thereof (including, without limitation, any owner who acquires its interest by foreclosure, trusteesale or otherwise) shall be liable for all commitments and other obligations arising under this
Development Agreement with respect to the Property or portion thereof.
G: \CLlENT\OOO13\227\DEVAGHT ,
ARTICLE VII
GENERAL MATTERS
Amendments. Any alteration or change to this Development Agreement shall be
made only after complying with the notice and hearing provisions of Idaho Code Section67-6509, as required by Eagle City Code Section 8-10-
Paragraph Headings. This Development Agreement shall be construed accordingto its fair meaning and as if prepared by both parties hereto. Titles and captions are forconvenience only and shall not constitute a portion of this Development Agreement. As used inthis Development Agreement, masculine, feminine or neutral gender and the singular or pluralnumber shall each be deemed to include the others wherever and whenever the context sodictates.
Choice of Law. This Development Agreement shall be construed in accordancewith the laws of the State of Idaho in effect at the time of the execution of this DevelopmentAgreement. Any action brought in connection with this Development Agreement shall be brought
in a court of competent jurisdiction located in Ada County, Idaho.
Notices. Any notice which a party may desire to give to another party must be
in writing and may be given by personal delivery, by mailing the same by registered or certified
mail, return receipt requested postage prepaid, or by Federal Express or other reputable overnight
delivery service, to the party to whom the notice is directed at the address of such party set forth
below:
Eagle:Mark Butler
Planning and Zoning Administrator
City of Eagle
310 E. State Street
Eagle, ID 83616
Property Owner:Albertson , Inc.
250 Parkcenter Blvd.
O. Box 20
Boise, ID 83726
Attention: Legal Department
Or such other address and to such other persons as the parties may hereafter designate.Any such notice shall be deemed given upon receipt if by personal delivery, forty-eight (48)hours after deposit in the United States mail, if sent by mail pursuant to the foregoing, ortwenty-four (24) hours after timely deposit with a reputable overnight delivery service.
Effective Date. This Development Agreement shall be effective after delivery to
each of the parties hereto of a fully executed original of this Development Agreement.
G: \CL I ENT\OOO13\227\DEVAGMT.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Development Agreement.
DATED this -+Lo- day of , 1997.
CITY OF EAGLE a municipal corporation
organized and existing under the laws of
the State of Idaho
By:
ATTEST:
..,/:'. ..
lQ -(9_/ /L
ity erk
----" ," "
i~'jL~~~:~\~
~~~~" ,,'
DATED this day of tf1P-1997.
ALBERTSON'S, INC.
a Delaware corporation
C:J By:
~ ~
..L
Name: olJe;~ T K. 611IJKS
Its: G-lUJufJ ~ fJ.J!..EA L EsTtrrE
G: \Q IENT\OOO13\227\OEVAGHT.
STATE OF IDAHO
) ss.County of Ada
On this day 0 f 1997, before me ~ r a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Rick Yzagu e, known or identifiedto me to be the Mayor of the City of Eagle, the municipality that executed the within instrument
or the person who executed the instrument on behalf of said municipality, and acknowledged to
me that such municipality executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the
day and year in this certificate fIrst above written.
Pu c for Idaho
Residing at J1u17Q
/~
'r2.#tJ;1My commission expires
STATE OF IDAHO
) ss.
County of Ada
On this day of ~LL 1997, before me ~EP 11/1(./ EO '1!J. .I11f!.-Do!04-t-/)a Notary Public in and for said tate, personally appeared f!L;13C:~ T Ie, 8/1AJ/(s
known or identified to me to be the G/louP V. A. 12.E:I+L es TITTe of Albertson s, Inc., theowner of the Property referenced herein and the person whose name is subscribed to the
foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the
day and year in this certificate fIrst above written.
,...
",1.I"u""'~..-G M
).. ~ ~ p '
"'1 ,lIT
~\. ..."...
C'/)
./ ~ ." ~.... './; ~
... "I
~, -' ...~ ~ ..
-...\OT
p ""'
. 0;
:: ",\' '" '- ~
.. '-.I ,
...."" '' ,-~ "....... ..... _. :.' ;;
.Lef!-~
~ *~.. /)!;!., .. ~- .: '* g
ary Public for Idaho
,p . '. ,. ,,:: , /) ::.. ..() "'
ResIdIng at
;;:
?l:. ~\) 0
)~~.
My commission expires '4
- /
/Iff 1.'~',rrut.lt"
G: \CLI ENT\OOO13\227\DEVAGKT . 04
('"
SCHEDULE "
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE REZONED .J(J
September 10, 1997
A parcel of land in the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 16
Township 4 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho; more
particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the Northwest comer of said Section 16; thence South 89052'48" East
413.00 feet along the northerly line of said Section 16; thence South 00055'4T' West
150.00 feet and parallel"with the westerly line of said Section 16; North 89O52'4~~ West
413.00 feet to a point on the westerly line of said Section 16; thence North 00055'47"
East 150.00 feet along said westerly line to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Said parcel contains 61 944 square feet more or less.
AFFIDAVIT OF LEGAL INTEREST
STATE OF IDAHO
) SSe
County of Ada
/(.EA L
A!..o t!3E12- T K. AA~k5 , the B-/(i)ulJ V. fJ. EST~of Albertson s, Inc., 250 Parkcenter
Boulevard, Boise, Idaho 83706 , being fIrst duly sworn upon oath, depose and say:
1. That I am the (;/lj)l.lP v,A, ~EAL ESTIt-:lib.for Albertson , Inc., and that I make this
affidavit for and on behalf of Albertson
2. That Albertson , Inc. is the owner of the Property described on the attached, and
t\lbertson , Inc. agrees to submit the Property to this Development Agreement and
to the provisions set forth in Idaho Code Section 67 -6511A and Eagle City Code
Section 8-10-
3. That Albertson , Inc. agrees to indemnify, defend and hold the City of Eagle and its
employees harmless from any claim or liability resulting from any dispute as to the
statements contained herein or as to the ownership of the property which is the subjectof the application.
D A TED this day of M"J1~1997.
IZo 18 EA ie. t3 If tJ!!( 6IUJlt
/!.
V, fJ. f( E4bAlbertson, Inc. e;-rA7G
SUBSCRIBED AriD SWORN to before me the day and year fIrst above written,
~~
pI. 'alIU,,~#,
. ;
~ ~ M. Me
-\.'\.~ ....... /)
"~T .
. -
oij *
'1. .
' '. ., ~
""C
1h
-. ~
1\ ei ~... -- .
: ~
. ~ 0 ,J~ t.
'" -:... ~ . .
~ rJ ,.. 0
\.
'It \.
..
..L
'-"'-"
~ ..., i
-'~'
! CJ ~
rY ~~r State of Idaho
..
.,\..) ~-J...
'"
-:. Cc. B L \. "
::
ResIdIn at Idaho
.. ~.::
~ (f)'A I:!II;;
,.
f.)
,~
mmi sion Ex ires' c2.
/ - .,~ -(' ~ ~
1J'\)o..I!'I. 'r~
""
'Or
; '~"\ ..
IS
\~) \ ....~"
#~t ",'6"IUIU""".
(seal)
THIS AFFIDAVIT OF LEGAL INTEREST shall be attached to and be an integral part of that
certain Development Agreement executed by and between Albertson , Inc. and the City of
Eagle, dated , 1997.
Case No. IPC-04-
Exhibit 121
Development Agreement
between Eagle Gravel and City of Eagle
October 28, 1998
Recording Requested By and
When Recorded Return to:r RE EIVED & FILED
CITY OF EAGLE
Mark Butler - Planning and Zoning Administrator
City of Eagle
O. Box 477
Eagle, Idaho 83616
NOV 1 9 1998
File:
Route to:
F or Recording Purposes Do
Not Write Above This Line
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This Development Agreement, made and entered into thisc::o?~ay of ~ 1998by and between the City of Eagle, a municipal corporation in the State of Idaho ("Eagle ), by andthrough its Mayor, and Eagle Gravel, Inc. (property Owner).
WHEREAS, the Applicant is the owner of record of certain real estate located at the
northeast comer of Eagle Road and State Highway 44, Eagle, Idaho
, ("
Property"), as specificallydefined in the attached legal description (Exhibit A) which is the subject of an application for
rezone, identified as Rezone Application No. RZ-98; and
WHEREAS, the proposed development includes properties within an area currently
zoned A (agricultural); and
WHEREAS, the Applicant desires a CBD (Central Business District) zoning
classification to develop a commercial use on the above-described property, which is hereinreferred to as the "Property"; and
. .
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council of Eagle have
determined that the scope of any commercial proj ect upon the Property must be limited to prevent
undue damage to, and to otherwise be in hannony with, the existing community; and
WHEREAS , the intent of this Development Agreement is to protect the rights ofApplicant's use and enjoyment of the Property while at the same time limiting any adverse impacts
of the development upon neighboring properties and the existing community and ensuring theProperty is developed in a marmer consistent with Eagle s Comprehensive Plan and City Code; and
Page 1 of 7
H:\P&Z\Eagle Applications\RZ&A\1998\RZ-98 da cc.doc
EXHIBIT 121
CASE NO. IPC-O4-
WHEREAS, the Applicant has agreed to the use restrictions and other limitations set forth
herein upon the use and development of the Property and has consented to a CBD (CentralBusiness District) zoning designation for the Property with the requirements set forth in thisDevelopment Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the owner of the Property has previously provided Eagle with an affidavitagreeing to submit the Property to a development agreement pursuant to Eagle City Code Section
10-1(C)(1); and
WHEREFORE, Applicant and the City of Eagle desire to resolve the issues and concerns
that have arisen and for and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, it isagreed as follows:
AR TI CLE
LEGAL AUTHORITY
1 Eagle will adopt an ordinance amending the Eagle Zoning Ordinance to rezone the property
that is the subject of the application to a CBD (Central Business District) zoning designation
after recordation of, and subject to the provisions of this Development Agreement. Theordinance will become effective after its passage, approval, and publication and the execution
and recordation of this Development Agreement.
ARTICLE II
CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPMENT
1 The owner shall submit a Design Review application for the site (as required by the Eagle
City Code), and shall comply with all conditions required by the City as a part of the Design
Review prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
2 The development shall comply with the Zoning Code, as it exists in final-form at the time anapplication is made and the conditions within this agreement shall be satisfied.
2.3 All development within area of the Property which is within the 100 year floodplain shall have
finished floor level of all buildings which are at least two (2) feet above the Federal Emergency
Management Association Base Flood Elevation (BFE).
2.4 City approvals shall be subject to the revised study for the Boise River floodplain currently
underway by FEMA. (This section applies to applications submitted after the study is
complete. )
5 Provide an on-site tree Hned landscaped strip to be an average of 35-feet in width along State
Page 2 of 7
H:\P&Z\Eagle Applications\RZ&A\1998\RZ-98 da cc.doc
Highway 44 and a minimum 28 000-square foot on-site landscaped area (with trees and other
improvements such as shrubs, flowers, drinking water fountain, benches etc. as may be
recommended by the Design Review Board and approved by the City Council) with parking
to be permitted generally as shown on the colored rendering submitted to the Commission on
August 3, 1998) at the comer of State Highway 44 and Eagle Road. Buildings within the
000-square foot on-site landscaped area shall be prohibited. Landscaping/intersection
entry enhancement plan shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board with final approval to
be by the City Council.
6 Construct a 10-foot wide bicycle/pedestrian pathway (within the 35-foot wide landscape strip
noted above) along State Highway 44 from Eagle Road to the east-most end of the property.
7 A public easement for the greenbelt pathway along State Highway 44 shall be provided. Thespecific location and design of the pathway shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council
and Design Review Board.
8 Provide a license agreement, approved by ITD and/or ACHD, allowing the right-of-way
between this site and the edge of pavement along State Highway 44 and Eagle Road to be
landscaped and landscape said area.
9 The proposed access point at the south end of Second Street shall be designed to make itclear to motorists that they are entering a commercial development and that the road has
ended. This can be accomplished with features such as entry landscaping and a landscaped
center island between the inbound and outbound lanes.
10 Provide the City with a letter of approval from Albertson s Corporation regarding the
second access point through the Albertson s parcel. If a letter cannot be obtained City
Council may consider waiving this requirement if requested by the Applicant.
AR TI CLE III
AFFIDAVIT OF PROPERTY OWNERS
1 An affidavit of all owners of the Property agreeing to submit the Property to this
Development Agreement and to the provisions set forth in Idaho Code Section 67-6511A andEagle City Code Section 8-10-1 shall be provided and is incorporated herein by reference.
ARTICLE IV
DEF AUL T
1 In the event the Applicant fails to comply with the commitments set forth herein, within
Page 3 of 7
H:\P&Z\Eagle Applications\RZ&A \ 1998\RZ-98 da cc.doc
thirty (30) days of written notice of such failure from Eagle, Eagle shall have the right
without prejudice to any other rights or remedies, to cure such default or enjoin such
violation and otherwise enforce the requirements contained in this Development Agreement
or to terminate the Development Agreement following the process established in Eagle City
Code Section 8-10-
2 If required to proceed in a court of law or equity to enforce any provision of this
Development Agreement, Eagle shall be entitled to recover all direct out-of-pocket costs soincurred to cure or enjoin such default and to enforce the commitments contained in this
Development Agreement, including attorneys' fees and court costs.
ARTICLE V
UNENFORCEABLE PROVISIONS
1 If any term, provision, commitment, or restriction of this Development Agreement or the
application thereof to any party or circumstances shall, to any extent, be held invalid or
unenforceable, the remainder of this instrument shall terminate and the zoning of the property
shall revert to R -4 as set forth in the above Article.
ARTICLE VI
ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFER
1 After its execution, the Development Agreement shall be recorded in the office of the County
Recorder at the expense of the Applicant. Each commitment and restriction on the
commerciaVoffice development shall be a burden on the Property, shall be appurtenant to and
for the benefit of the Property, adjacent property, and other residential property near the
Property and shall run with the land. This Development Agreement shall be binding on the
Applicant and owners, and their respective heirs, administrators, executors, agents, legalrepresentatives, successors, and assigns; provided, however, that if all or any portion of the
development is sold, the sellers shall thereupon be released and discharged from any and all
obligations in connection with the property sold arising under this Agreement. The newowner of the Property or any portion thereof (including, without limitation, any owner whoacquires its interest by foreclosure, trustee s sale or otherwise) shall be liable for all
commitments and other obligations arising under this Agreement with respect to the Property
or portion thereof.
ARTICLE VII
GENERAL MA TIERS
Page 4 of 7
H:\P&Z\Eagle Applicati~ns\RZ&A \ 1998\RZ-98 da cc.doc
Amendments.Any alteration or change to this Development Agreement shall be made only
after complying with the notice and hearing provisions of Idaho Code Section 67-6509, asrequired by Eagle City Code Section 8-10-
Paragraph Headings. This Development Agreement shall be construed according to its fair
meaning and as if prepared by both parties hereto. Titles and captions are for convenience
only and shall not constitute a portion of this Development Agreement. As used in thisDevelopment Agreement, masculine, feminine or neutral gender and the singular or plural
number shall each be deemed to include the others wherever and whenever the context so
dictates.
7.3 Choice of Law. This Development Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the
laws of the State of Idaho in effect at the time of the execution of this Development
Agreement. Any action brought in connection with this Development Agreement shall be
brought in a court of competent jurisdiction located in Ada County, Idaho.
7.4 Notices.Any notice which a party may desire to give to another party must be in writing and
may be given by personal delivery, by mailing the same by registered or certified mail, returnreceipt requested postage prepaid, or by Federal Express or other reputable overnight delivery
service, to the party to whom the notice is directed at the address of such party set forth
below;
Eagle:Mark Butler
Planning and Zoning Administrator
City of Eagle
3 10 E. State St.
Eagle, Idaho 83616
Owner:Eagle Gravel, Inc.
Dan Hardee
6477 Fairview Avenue
Boise, Idaho 83704
Or such other address and to such other persons as the parties may hereafter designate. Anysuch notice shall be deemed given upon receipt if by personal delivery, forty-eight (48) hours
after deposit in the United States mail, if sent by mail pursuant to the foregoing, or twenty-
four (24) hours after timely deposit with a reputable overnight delivery service.
5 Effective Date.This Development Agreement shall be effective after delivery to each of the
parties hereto of a fully executed original of this Development Agreement.
Page 5 of 7
H:\P&Z\Eagle Applications\RZ&A \ 1998\RZ-98 da cc.doc
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Development Agreement.
DATED thi day of 1998.
CITY OF EAGLE, a municipal corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the State of
Idaho
By:
ATTEST:
~6+u- Shar Smith, City CIer
DATED this ~YOf 1998.
STATE OF IDAHO
: ss.
County of Ada)
On thi~./J..day of , 1998, before the undersigned notary public in and
for the said state, personally appeared RICK YZAGUIRRE, known or identified to me to be the
Mayor of the City of Eagle and the person who executed the foregoing instrument on behalf of
said City and acknowledged to me that said City executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal the day and year first
above written.lL~
Notary ublic for Idaho I n
Residing at: J)JI. J::cY
My Commission Expires: 4 -/ t;-o~
Page 6 of 7
H:\P&Z\Eagle Applications\RZ&A \1 998\RZ-98 da cc.doc
STATE OF IDAHO
: ss.
County of Ada)
On this d!. t, of
-.!
1997 before the undersigned notary public in andfor the said state, personal! y appeared ~known or identified to me to be theowners of the property referenced herein. an the persons who executed the foregoing
instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF have hereunto set my hand and seal the day and year first
above written.cX~Notary Public D Idaho
Residing at: .J-
My Commission Expires:
Page 7 of 7
H:\P&Z\Eagle Applications\RZ&A\1998\RZ-98 da cc.doc
Case No. IPC- E-04-
Exhibit 122
April 11 2000
Eagle Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Case No. CU-
Granting height exception for Two Rivers Tower and Chimney
II V~I ~VV~ ~~. ~~ rftA ~UO ~~O ~OO~~i\.~L~ r. 1'1 . L. ~UU~\,;lTY A'lTY
OR GINAl
BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A 48...FOOT )IDGH ARCIDTECTURAL TOWER FOR DENNISM. BAKER & ASSOCIATES
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER CU-
The above-entitled conditional use application came before the Eagle City Council for their action on
March 14 2000. The Eagle City Council having heard and taken oral and written testimony~' and havingduly considered the matter, makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law;
FINDINGS OF FACT:
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Dennis M. Baker & Associates, represented by Dan Torfin, is requesting conditional use
approval for a 48-foot high tower which acts as an architectural feature for the
Community Center within Two Rivers Subdivision NoT 1 (fonnally Quarter Circle
Ranch). The site is located on the west side of Eagle Road approximatcly %-milc southof State Highway 44 at 1.501 S. Eagle Road.
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL:
The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on December 16, 1999.
The letter addressing skateboard areas provided by the applicant on April 61 2000~ is
incorporated into these fmdings by reference.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARJNG:
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle PlaIllling and Zoning
Commission was published in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65
Idaho Code and the Eagle City ordinances on January 21, 2000. 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 January 21, 2000. Requests for agencies ' reviews were
transmitted on December 171 1999 in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City
Code.
HISTORY OF RELEV ANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS: None
CO~ ANION APPLICATIONS: DR-50-
Page 1 of 12 EXHIBIT 122\\BAGLENT I \COMMO'N\Plannmg Dept\Ellgle Appll~p\CIJ\I~" eet.doc
CASE NO. IPC-O4-
V I V~I ~VV~ ~~. ~~ rAA .VO O~O ~OU~I:.A~L.Q r. 1'1 . L.. .-+ \d..L.l /\..L.L.l UU,J
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS:
CaMP PLAN ZONING LAND USE
DESIGNATION DESIGNATION
Existing Residential Two (2-units P (Residential PUD)Agri cuI turalland
per acre max.
Proposed No Change No Change Residences
North of site Residential Two (2-units A (Agricultural)Agricultural land
per acre max.
South of site Residential Two (2-lU1its A (Agricultural)~ R-Residences, commercial
per acre maA.(Residential), and C-business, and vacant land
(Commercial)
East of site Residential Two (2-units P (Residential)Residences and vacant
per acre max.land
West of site Residential Two (2-units A (Agricultural) and A-Residences and
per acre max.(Agri au) tural-Residen tial). Agricultural land
DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRlCT: Not in the DDA, IDA or CEDA.
EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
There is an existing residence on the site that is proposed to be removed. Approximately
27 -coniferous trees are located on the west side of the proposed parking lot. The trees
ate proposed to be retained.
Page 2 of 12
\\6AGL~J\COMMON\PlaMing Dcpl\&Slc ApplicaLiobS\ClJ\l ,~\CU-8-99 I!ct:.doc
V, I V~I _VV~ ~~. -~ r4A ~UO ~~O ~O~~.r..1\.~L.r.. r. 1'1 L. -+ '.; IT:k: ATl":k:igJ UU4
SITE DESIGN INFORMATION:
Site Data Proposed Required
Total Acreage of Site 47.92-acres N/A
Percentage of Site Devoted to Less than 1 40% (maximum)
Building Coverage
Percentage of Site Devoted to 40%10% (minimum)
Landscaping
Number of Parking Spaces 33-parking spaces 33-parking spaces
(per conditions of Design Review)
Front Setback 310- feet 30~feet (minimum)
Rear Setback 220-feet 25-feet (minimum)
Side Setback 40.feet 7.5- feet (minimum)
Side Setback lBO-feet feet (minimum)
GENERAL SITE DESIGN FEATURES:
Number and Uses of Proposed Buildings:
One community center building is proposed to be used for homeowners activities.
Height and Number of Stories of Proposed Buildings:
Community center building .... 31-feet high with a 48-foot high architectural tower) single
story with 2Dd floor balcony on the east side of the building.
Gross Floor Area of Proposed Builclings:
Entire Commmrity center building - 3 O24-square feet
Architectural tower portion only - approximately ISO-square feet (5% of the size of the
entire building).
On and Off.Site Circulation:
A 9850-square foot (approx.) paved parking lot provides parking for vehicles using this
site. One 50-foot wide driveway separated by a to-foot wide landscape island is
proposed to be located on the north side of this site approximately 200-feet east of the
Tu intersection providing access to West Island Woods Drive.
PUBLIC SERVICES AVAILABLE:
Preliminary approval letters were received from public service providers at the time
Quarter Circle Ranch Planned Unit Development was reviewed by the City.
PUBLIC USES PROPOSED:
The clubhouse is to be used by members of the homeowners association for gatherings
and meetings. The applicant is proposing a swimming pool, basketba1l/sports court
Page 3 of 12
\\BAGLENTI\COMMON\PIlWlin(l DeptlEagla Applications\CU\19!19\CU-8-99 lilir.do~
v I , V~' _VV~ ~~. ~~ rAA ~VO V~O ~O~q ~l\bL.t; 1".1'1. L. IgJ 005-+ CITY ATl'Y
tennis court and a tot lot. The proposed hours of operation are 10:00 AM to 8:00 PM.
PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON F1ITURE ACQUISITIONS MAP: No map cUtTently exists
SPECIAL ON .SITE FEATURES;
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern - none
Evidence of Erosion - no
Fish Habitat - no
Floodplain - yes (500~year)
Mature Trees - yes
Riparian Vegetation - no
Steep Slopes - no
Stream/Creek: no
Unique AI1imal Life - unknown
Unique Plant Life - unknown
Unstable Soils - unknown
Wildlife Habitat - unlmo'Wn
SUMMARY OF REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLAN (IF REQUIRED):Not required
AGENCY RESPONSES:
The following agencies have responded and their correspondence 1S attached.Comments. which appear to be of special concern~ are noted below:
Eagle Fire Department
Eagle Sewer District
LETrERS FROM THE PUBLIC: None received to date.
EAGLE CITY CODE 8-2 GENERAL STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USES:
The Commission/Council shall review the particular facts and ci1:"cUI:nstancI!:S of each proposedConditional Use in tenns of the following standards and shall find adequate evidence showingthat such use at the proposed location:
Will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as established in Section 8-3 of this title
(Eagle City Code Title 8) for the zoning district involved;
Will be hannonious with and in accordance with the general objectives or with any
specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan and/or this title (Eagle City Code Title 8);
Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and
appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity
and that such use wjll not change the essential character of the same area;
Win not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighborhood uses;
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; or
that the persons Or agencies responsible fOT the establishment of the proposed use shall
Page 4 of 12
\\BAGLBNT1\COMMOWhlllllins Dept\Eqle Appli!!llliolUl\CU\1999\CU.99 cd.doc
V, / v~/ _VV~ ~~.,~ rdA .vo ~~O ~o~~~l\.bL~ r. 1'1 . L. OUtS-+ (.;lTY ATl'Y
be able to provide adequately any such services.
Wilt not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and
services and will not be detrilnental to the economic welfare of the community;
Win not involve uses~ activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions ofoperation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by
reason of excessive production of traffic~ noise smoket furnes~ glare or odors;
Will have vehicular approaches to the property which are designed as not to create an
interference with traffic,on sU1i"ounding public thoroughfares; and
Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural~ scenic or historic feature
of major importance.
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS~ WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN
REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL: (None)
ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS, WInCH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
TInS PROPOSAL:
Section 8-2A-6 (A)(7)(a)
Additional Height Restrictions: AU spires, poles, antennaS1 steeples1 towers. and any
other such structures shall be limited to a maximum of thirty five feet (351). Additional
height may be pennitted if a conditional use permit is approved by the City Council.
DISCUSSION:
Per ECC, the maximum height allowed for spires, poles, antennas, steeples~ towers, etc. is
35-feet unless a conditional use permit is approved by the City Council. The architectural
tower proposed with the Two Rivers community center is 48-feet high (13-feet higher than
the maximum allowed by code).
Staff believes that the tower provides an interesting architectural height element to the
community center building without overwhelming the sU1Tounding landscape. The
footprint" size of the community center is 3,024 square feet. The "footprinf' size of the
tower is approximately 150..square feet, which is only 5% of the entire size of the building.
Other than containing a portion of the stairway that will provide access to the balcony on the
east side of the building, the tower is not intended for occupancy.
Staff has reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed conditional use and,
in tenns of Eagle City Code Section 8-3-2 "A thru I" (required fmdings for approval of
conditional use), has made the following conclusions:
The proposed conditional use:
Will~ in fact, constitute a conditional use as established in Section 8-3 of Eagle
City Code Title 8 as referenced "as otherwise provided within this Code" since
Eagle City Code Section 8-2A-6 (A)(7)(a) states in part that additional tower
height above 3S-feet may be pennitted if a conditional use pewit is approved by
Page 5 of 12
\\aJ\.GL~NTI ~MMON\Phwnlll.8 Dept~1e Applll!lIdont.ClI\ 1999\CU-8.99 ccf.doc
~. , ~-, -~~-.; .&.-.;....'" ...~ .vv OOJU OJUOJ~J:.J\.~.LJ:. !~. L.. .IgJ UU7-+- \,;1"1"): A'1Tr
the City Council;
Will be hannonious with and in accordance with the genetal objectives or withany specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan and/or this title (Eagle CityCode Title 8) since there are no inconsistencies with the Conlprehensive Planand since the development will be required to meet conditions of a design reviewapplication;
Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be hannonious andappropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the generalvicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area
since the development will be required to meet the City' $ design reviewrequirements;
Win not be hazardous Or disturbing to existing or future neighborhood uses since
the area surrounding the proposed tower is heavily landscaped and since no
others Structures above 35~feet are proposed in this vicinity;
Will be served adequately by essential public facilities such as highways, streetspolice and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer
and schools; or that the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of
the proposed use shall be able to provide adequately any such services as noted
is responses received by agencies providing the public services;
Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public
facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the
community;
Will not involve uses) activities, processes, rnatedals, equipment and 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;
Will have vehicular approaches to the property which are designed as not to
create an interference with 1raffic on surrounding public thoroughfares as are to
be approved by the highway district having jurisdiction; and
Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic
feature of maj or importance since the City has already approved preliminazy
development plan/preliminary plat/conditional use permit applications for the
site (Quarter Circle Ranch PUD) and has determined that, other than the existing
trees, no natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance is existing on the
site.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDED WITBIN THE STAFF REPORT:
Based upon the information provided to staff to date~ staff recommends approval with the site
specific conditions of approval and the standard conditions of approval provided within the staff
report.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COMl\1ISSION:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the Planning and Zoning Commission on
Page 6 of 12
\\EJ\.Ol.P'N't1 \COMMOJl/\l'I"llIil)& DC9~Etlale ApplieILtiolls\CU\ 199~CO-~ eer.t:b:
~., ~...., -~v-z ...-z. --z ""0.4 ""VV Oo,JV 'l,)O"-l't r.~~L..J::. r. l~ . L... .\.,;In:: AT11:IgJ UU~
February 7, 2000, at which time testimo-ny was taken and the public hearing was closed. TheCommission 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 tbis proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission byno one (not including the applicant). The applicant testified that the tower is for architectural
purposes only, it is not the: intention of the applicant to use the tower for storage space, office spaceor other human habitation uses other than periodic maintenance.
COM1VlISSION DECISION:
The Commission voted 5 to 0 to recommend approval for the conditional use pennit for a 48-foot high architectural tower for the community center at Two Rivers Subdivision No- 1 forDennis M. Baker & Associates with the site specific and standard conditions of approval within
the Commission s Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law document dated February 28~ 2000.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL:
A- A public hearing on the application was held before the Eagle City Council on March 14, 2000~ atwhich time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Council made theirdecision at that time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City COlIDCil by no one.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one (not including
the applicant and their representative).
COUNCIL DECISION:
The CouncH voted 3-1 (Sedlacek absent) to approve CU-99 for the conditional use pennit for a
48-foot high architectural tower and a 42-foot high (maximum) chimney for the community
center at Two Rivers Subdivision No.1 for Dennis M. Baker & Associates with the following
conditions.
SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Comply with the conditions ofDR-SO-99 and RZ-l 0-98/CU-98/PPUD.98/PP-98.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Ada County Highway District and/or the
Idaho Transportation Department, including but not limited to approval of the dminage system,
curbs, gutters, streets and sidewalks. A letter of app(ovaI from the highway district having
jurisdiction shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of any building pennits or Certificate
of Occupancy, whichever occurs first.
Idaho Department of Health & Welfare approval of the sewer and water facilities is required
prior issuance of any building permits or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs first.
All penn its from Central District Health, Eagle Sewer District & Eagle Fi(e District~ shall be
secured prior to issuance of building permit or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurS first.
Page 7 of 12
\~GU!IIrfI\COMMON\JrllWftlll& Ccpt\~Je A.~ICAElolla\CU\19!'J9\CU-~~ cct:doo
II V~I ~VV~ ~~; ~~ rftA .VO ~~O ~O~~.l:!ii\\jLt; r.!~.-+ ~lTr AT!'r ~UU~
Written approval of aU well water for any shared Or commercial well shall be obtained from theIdaho Department of Water Resources shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of any
building permits or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs first.
Unless septic tanks ate permitted! wet line sewers win be required and the applicant will berequired to furnish the City Engineer with a letter from the sewer entity serving the property,
accepting the project for service1 prior to issuance of any building penults or Certificate of
QccupancY1 whichever occurs first.
The applicant shall submit a lette( from the appropriate drainage entity approving the drainage
system and/or accepting said drainage; or submit a 1etter from a registered professional engineer
certifying that all drainage shall be retained on-site prior to issuance of any building permits or
Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs first. A copy of the construction drawing(s) shall be
submitted with the letter.
The applicant shall submit plans and calculations prepared by a registered professional engineer
to handle the satisfactory disposal of all stann drainage on the applicant's site. Drainage system
plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of any
building penmts or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs first.
The plans shall show how swales, or drain piping, will be developed in the drainage easements.
The approved drainage system shall be constructed, or a perfonnance bond shaH be submitted to
the City Clerk prior to issuance of any building permits or Certificate of OccupancY1 whichever
occurs first. The lot shall be so graded that all runoff runs either over the curb, or to the
drainage easement! and no runoff shall cross any lot line onto another lot except within a
drainage easement.
All design and calculations shall meet the requirements of Ada County Highway District.
Construction of the stonn drain disposal system shall be complete before an occupancy permit is
issued.
No ditch1 pipe or other structure or canal, for irrigation water or irrigation waste water owned
an organized irrigation district canal company;. ditch association, or other irrigation entity, shallbe obstructed! routed, covered or changed in any way unless such obstruction, rerouting,
covering or changing has first been approved in writing by the entity. A Registered Engineer
shall certify that any ditch rerouting, piping, covering or otherwise changing the existing
irrigation or waste ditch (1) has been made in such a manner that the flow of water wilt not be
impeded or increased beyond carrying capacity of the downstream ditch; (2) will not otherwise
injure any person or persons using 01' interested in such ditch or their property; and (3) satisfied
the Idaho Standards for Public Works Cons1ruction. A copy of such written approval and
certification shall be filed with the construction drawing and submitted to the City prior to
issuance of any building permits or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs first.
Street light plans shall be submitted and approved as to the location, height and wattage to the
City Engineer (if applicable) prior to issuance of any bui1ding permits or Certificate of
Occupancy, whichever occurs first- All construction shaH comply with the City's specificationsand standards.
The applicant shall provide a recorded easement, acceptable to the City Engineer ~ for the purpose
of installing and maintaining street light fixtures, conduit and wiring tying outside any dedicated
public right-of-way, prior to issuance of any building permits or Certificate of Occupancy,
whichever occurs rust.
. Page 8 of 12
\\EAGL5NTI \COMMON\Phmninll: Dept\Eqle Applications\CU\ I 999\CU.9S) c;Gf.doc
I I U.L "V U '! .L '! ; ~ '! 1"i\A z: U 0 ~ oJ 0 oJ 0 0 'l
15.
bAGLt: Y. N . Z.I4J 010-+ CITY ATrY
10.
The applicant shaH pay applicable street light inspection fees prior to Certificate of Occupancy.
Parking lot light plan shall b~ submitted and approved as to the location, height and wattage bythe City Engineer. All construction shan comply with the City's specifications and standards.
Lighting is required in the parking area and shall be properly illuminated to avoid accidents.Any lights used to illuminate the parking lot shall be so arranged as to reflect the light away from
the adjoining property.
11.The parking area shall be paved and shall be maintained in good condition without holes and free
of all dust, trash, weeds and other debris.
12.One set of building plans, for any non single. family residential use, shall be submitted to the
Eagle Fire Department for approval. An approva1letter from the Eagle Fire Department shall be
submitted to the City prior to issuance of any building pennits or Certificate of Occupancy,
whichever occurs first. 1ne letter shall include the fonowing comments and minimumrequirements, and any other items of concern as may be determined by the Eagle Fire
Department officials:a. "The applicant has made arrangements to comply with all requirements of the Fire
Department. "
The fire hydrant locations shaH be reviewed and be approved in writing by the Eagle Fire
Department prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat..
Minimum flow per hydrant shall be 1,000 gallons per minute for one and two family
dwellings, 1 ~500 gal1ons per minute for dwellings having a fire area in excess of 3,600
square fee~ and 1,500 gallons per minute for non-residential uses (ie; Commercial,
Industrial, Schools, etc.). Flow rates shall inspected in accordance with all agencies
having jurisdiction, and shall be verified in writing by the Eagle Fire Department prior to
issuance of any building pennits or certificate of Occupancy! whichever occurs first.
The proposed fire protection system shall be reviewed and approved by the Eagle Fire
Department prior to issuance of a building pennit or Certificate of Occupancy,
whichever OCCurs first.
13-Any recreation area, greenbelt area or pathway area along the Boise River, Dry Creek or any
other area designated by the City Councilor Eagle City Pathway/Greenbelt Committee for a path
or walkway shall be approved in writing by the Eagle City Pathway/Greenbelt Committee prior
to issuance of a building pcnnit or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever Deems first.
14.Conservation, recreation and river access easements (if applioable) shall be approved by the
Eagle City Pathway/Greenbelt Committee and shan be shown on the fmal plat prior to issuance
of a building pennit or Certificate of Occupancy! whichever occurs first.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of the Eagle City Code, pertaining to floodplain
and river protection regulations (if applicable) prior to issuance of a building pennit or
Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs first.
16.The applicant shall obtain written approval of the development relative to the effects of the Boise
River Flood Plain (if applicable) from the COIl'S. of Engineers prior to issuance of a building
permit or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs fIrst.
17.The applicant shall obtain approval of the development relative to its effects on wetlands or other
natural watenvaY$ (if applicable) from the Corps. of Engineers and the Idaho Department of
Page 9 of 12
\\'S..-\GI~1\COMMON\l'l.llllfting Dq'II~l!le Applil!lltiom\CU\i 999\CU.s.99 ccf.doc:
V, I V~I ,vv~ ~~; ~~ r4A ~UO ~JO JOO~
21.
22.
23.
24.
~A~Lh 1'. N . 'L. -+ CITY ATTY ~Oll
Water Resources and/or any other agency having jurisdiction prior to issuance of a buildingpermit or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs first.
18.Basements in the flood plain are prohibited.
The Americans with Disabilities Act, Uniform Building Code) Eagle City Code, and allapplicable County, State and Federal Codes and Regulations shall be complied with. AU designand construction shall be in accordance with all applicable City of Eagle Codes unless
specifically approved by the Commission and/or Council.
19.
20.New plans which incorporate any required changes shall be submitted for staff approvaJ. Staff
may elect to take those plans to the Design Review Board and/or the Planning and Zoning
Commission for review and approval.
Any changes to the plans and specifications upon which this approval is based, other than thoserequired by the above conditions, will require submittal of an application for modification andapproval of that application prior to commencing any change.
Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of thisapplication, shall require the applicant to comply with all roles, regulations, ordinances, plans, orother regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors ininterest advises the City of Eagle of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property
unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law
in effect at the time the change in use is sought.
No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing
and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorizedrepresentative of the City of Eagle. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written
confinnation of any change from the City of EagJe.
Approval of any Design Review shall expire without notice to the applicant on the date of
expiration of the Design Review, as stipulated in Eagle City Code (one year from the Planning
and Zoning Commission approval date).
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on December 16, 1999.
The 1etter addressing skateboaxd areas pJ;ovided by the applicant on April 6, 2000, is incorporated
into these findings by reference.
2. Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission was
pub)jshed in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
ordinances on January 21,2000. 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 January 21, 2000- Requests for agencies' re~ews
were transmitted on December 17, 1999 in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was publish~d in accordance
for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City ordinances on February 28
2000. Nonce 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
Page 10 of 12
\\fiAOLENTl\COMMON\Planning Dapt\&SlCJ AppIiCltious\CU\I!ilWlCU-Sl9 ~t~
V' , V-Lf "VV":lt .I.":It. ""':It J:'dA _UO VoJO oJO"-,,*~i\uL~ r. 1'1 . L. I4J 012-+ (';IT:k: A'lT:k:
and Eagle City Code on February 28, 2000-
3 - The Council has reviewed the particular facts and circwnstanccs of this proposed conditional use and,
in tenns of Eagle City Code Section 8-7-3-2 "A tbru I" (required fIDdings for approval of aconditional use), has made the following conclusion.
The proposed conditional use;
Will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as established in Section 8-3 of EagleCity Code Title 8 as referenced "as othexwise provided within this Code" sinceEagle City Code Section 8-2A-6 (A)(7)(a) statf;S in part that additional towerheight above 35.feet may be pennitted if a conditional use pennit is approved by
the City Colman;
Will be hannonious with and in accordance with the general objectives or withany specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan and/or this title (Eagle CityCode Title 8) since there are no inconsistencies with the Comprehensive Plan
and since the development will be required to meet conditions
of a design reviewapplication;
Win be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be hannonious and
appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the generalvicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area
since the tower is proposed to be setback from Eagle Road approximately 835-feet, since the tower is proposed to be constructed out of materials that arecompatible with the building materials proposed for the Two Rivers Subdivision
Community Center which are consistent with residentia1 building materials used
in the general area, and since the development win be required to meet theCity's design review requirements;
Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighborhood uses since
the tower is not intended for human occupancy, since the area smrounding the
proposed tower is heavily landscaped, since the building materials proposed forthe tower are compatible with surrounding residences, and since no other stand-alone s1ructures above 35-feet are proposed in this vicinity;
Will be s~ed adequately by essential public facilities such as highways, streetspolice and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer
and schools; or that the persons or agencies responsible for the estabJisIunent ofthe proposed use shall be able to provide adequately any such services as noted
is responses received by agencies providing the public services;
Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for publicfacilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the
conununity;
Wilt not involve uses, activities, processes, materia18 equipment and conditionsof operation that win be detrimental to any persons, property or the general
welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glareor odors;
Win have vehicuhu; approaches to the property which are designed as not to
Page 11 of
'\EAGLBNTI\COtvf.MONU'loumil\l: Dap~le AppIiCAl;()IIJ\CU\. 999\CU-s.99 ""f.doc;
v, V~I _VV~ ~~.,~ rdA ~vo ~~O ~o~~J:!.l\.\jLJ:!j r. 1'1 . L. -+ C1TY AT!'Y 19) 013
create an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares as are to
be approved by the highway district having jurisdiction; and
Will not result in the destruction loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic
feature of major importance since the City has already approved preliminarydevelopment plan/preliminary plat/conditional use permit applications for the:site (Quarter Circle Ranch PUD) and has detennined that, other than the existingtrees, no natura), scenic or historic feature of major importance is existing on the
site
DATED this 11 th day of April, 2000.
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
Ada County Idaho
, ~
TrEST: :
~~ : .. .
~,t.I."J
, ' ," .
-'!tSi .r'
. ,', ,
.t!i.~-" I""
~..
..s~ '
~ '... .. ' " '' '
I ~
" """" ., "".' ,
1,: "
. ." ..
. ,;w
' .. .
\l..l:
(..j ~/ ,\~? .
r1.., '
' ~~,j
-1;haron~re, Eagle City Cle
, r : . 0..- . 4' '
1: :~'
. ~
f1 ~~;r
~~
e, " 0' I
/,' ~ ,,, , '..- ,
t. t'I, ,
,'";) '
t. II: ' :
' ,
I" :
'! ' .: " , ", ,
I ~
b- Ii".,",
~..:_
c.i'
:' ., ,,' ,~ ~:;:::::.. .~\ ,
'\:- 'l,Q" '
" '
: t ' .
" '';;~
:i::::
~ ~:;: .~~; .? ~:
Page 12 of 12
\\eAGLEI'lTI\COMMONIPlannil'l.t Depl\Ea&:I~ Applieatiom\CO\ 1 m\CU-" ecf.
Case No. IPC-04-
Exhibit 123
March 12, 2002
Eagle Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Case No. CU-II-
Approving height exception for Hilton Hotel
~ ., ~~, -............ ........ -v .....VQ C1~Q ~QU'!. .~ ..bl\~L.ti r. 1'1 . l.. -+ CITY ATIY ~O25
BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
A 45-FOOT HIGH HOTEL BUILDING
WITH A 48-FOOT mCR CHIMNEY
FOR EAGLE RIVER HOSPITALITY LLC
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER CU.l1.01
The above-entitled conditional Use application came before the Eagle City Council for their action onFebruary 26, 2002. The Eagle City Council having heard and taken oral and written testimony. and havingduly considered the matter, makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law;
FINDINGS OF FACT:
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Eagle River Hospitality LLC, represented by Bill Clark with Clark Development, is
requesting conditional use approval for a 45-foot high hotel building. The heightexception (the portion of the building above 35-feet) is for the purpose of screening
mechanical units and includes the installation of a 48-foot high chimney. The site is
generally located on the southeast corner of Eagle Road and State Highway 44. (Lot 6,
Block 4 of Mixed Use Subdivision #2).
APPUCA TION SUBMITr AL:
The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on December 4. 2001.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle Planning and ZoningCommission was published in accordance for requirements of Title 67 ~ Chapter 65, IdahoCode and the Eagle City ordinances on January 12~ 2002. Notice of this public hearingwas 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 January 9, 2002. Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted on November, 200 1. in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code-
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in
accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
ordinances on February 9~ 2002. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to propertyowners 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 6.2002.
mSTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS:
On January 25, 2000. the Eagle City Council approved a rezone (RZ-2-98) with adevelopment agreement (including a concept plan) for this site.
On April 24. 2001, the Eagle City Council approved a preliminary plat (PP-14--00) for this
EXHIBIT 123
Page 1 of 11 CASE NO. IPC-O4-
K:\Planning Dcpt\Eagle Applications\CU\200 1 \CU-ll..o 1 ccf.doc
~ .. --. - ~ ~ A ~ -.. ..V ... .~~ ...V ~ OoJV oJ VV'i:.t:..t1~L.t:. r. l~ . L.. .-+ (;lT~ AIT~~O26
site.
On May 8. 2001 , the Eagle City Council approved a final plat (FP-13-01) for this site.
On November 7, 2001, the Eagle City Council approved a combined preliminary plat and
final plat (PPIFP-OI-Ol) for this site.
COMPANION APPLICATIONS: Hilton Hotel Design Review Application (DR-82-01)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS:
COMP PLAN ZONING LAND USEDESIGNA nON DESIGNA TION
Existing Commercial DA (Highway Business Vacant
District with Development
Agreement)
Proposed No Change No Change Hilton Garden Inn Hotel
North of site Conunerdal DA (Highway Business Riverside Drive/Vacant
District with Development
Agreement)
South of site Nonh Channel of the P (Residential)North Channel of the BoiseBoise RiverlResidential RiverlIsland WoodsTwoSubdivision
East of site Mixed Use MU-DA (Mixed Use with Vacant
Development Agreement)
West of site Commercial A (Agricultural) & C-Eagle Road/Channel
(Neighborhood Business Center Commercial
District)Subdivision
DESIGN REVIEW OVERLA Y DISTRICT: Not in the DDA, TDA or CEDA.
EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
This site is located within the Eagle River commercial development (Mixed Use
Subdivision No.2). Constroction of streets, sidewalks and landscaping for the entirecommercial subdivision are neaxJy complete.
Page 2 of 11
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\CU\2001\CU.11-Ol ccf.doc
V'I VLI ~VV~ L~; ~O rftA ~UO ~~O ~O~~t;A~LJ:!; 1". N . Z. .-+ CiTY ATIY ~O27. "
SITE DESIGN INFORMATION:
Site Data Proposed Req uired
Total Acreage of Site 96-acres (128,938-square feet)O2-acres (1,300-square feet)
(minimum)
Percentage of Site Devoted to 21%92% (maximum)Building Coverage
Percentage of Site Devoted to 48% (approximately)10% (minimum)Landscaping
Number of Pa~king Spaces 12 I-parking spaces (Hotel site,1I8-parking spaces (minimum)
Lot 6, Block 4)
117 -parking spaces (2 Pad sites,
Lots 5 & 7, Block 4 minus the 12
non-exclusive sportsman access
parking spaces)
238- Total Parking Spaces (Lots 5,
, & 7. Block 4 minus the 12 non-
exclusive sportsman aCCess
parking spaces)
Front Setback 127 -feet (north)feet
Rear Setback 50-feet (south)feet
Side Setback 14-feet (west)fect
Side Setback II-feet (east)feet
GI;!NERAL SITE DESIGN FEATURES:
Number and Uses of Proposed Buildings:
There is to be one building to include a hotelt restaurant, and conference rooms.
Height and Number of Stories of Proposed Buildings:
The building is to be three stories with a height of 45-fee~ 2-inches to the peak of the roofcovering the mechanical units. A chimney WIll extend to 48-feet.
Gross Floor Area of Proposed Buildings: 69,900-square feet
On and Off-Site Circulation:
A 40.328...squate foot (approximately) paved parking lot provides parking for vehicles
using this site. One 35-foot wide driveway is proposed to be located on the north side of
this site approximately 335-feet east of Eagle Road providing access to Riverside Drive.
Page 3 of 11
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\CU\200 1 \CU.II-O 1 ccf.doc
V, / v~/ ~VV~ ~~. ~ I rftA ~uo ~~O JO~~bA~Lt; 1"'. N . Z; .~ CiTY ATfY ~O28
PUBLIC SER. VICES A V AILABLE:
Preliminary approval letters from Central District Health Department, Eagle FireDepartment, and Eagle Sewer District have been received by the City. A water serviceapproval has not been received to date. Approval of the water company havingjurisdiction will be required prior to issuance of a building pennit.
PUBLIC USES PROPOSED; None
PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUISITIONS MAP: No map currently exists
SPECIAL ON--SITE PEA TURES:
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern -Yes - Boise River Floodplain
Evidence of Erosion - no
Fish Habitat - no
Floodplain - Yes - Entire site is located within the lOa-year floodplain
Mature Trees - no
Riparian Vegetation - Yes
Steep Slopes... no
StreamlCreek- Yes - North Channel of the Boise River
Unique Animal Life - unknown
Unique Plant Life - unknown
Unstable Soils - unknown
Wildlife Habitat - unknown
SUMMARY OF REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLAN (IF REQUIRED):
An environmental assessment plan was provided to and reviewed by the City Engineer
with the preliminary plat of Eagle River Development (PP-14-00). A copy of theenvironmental assessment plan is on file with the City Engineer.
AGENCY RESPONSES;
The following agencies have responded and their correspondence is attached.
Ada County Highway District
Central District Health Department
Department of En vironmental Quality
Eagle Fire Department
Eagle Sewer District
United Water
LEITERS FROM TIIE PUBLIC: None received to date.
EAGLE CITY CODE 8-2 GENERAL STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USES:
The Commission/Council shan review the panicular facts and circumstances of each proposedConditional Use in terms of the following standards and shall rmd adequate evidence showing that
such use at the proposed location:
Wills in fact.. constitute a conditional use as established in Section 8-3 of this title (Eagle
Page 4 of 11
K~\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\CU\2001\CU-1 J-Ol eel.doc
V, I V~I ~VV~ ~~. ~ rdA ~uo ~~O ~o~~.l:!;i\.bLJ::!.; 1". 1~ . L. I(g U~y-+ L;lT): ATl'
.. n' ,
City Code Title 8) for the zoning district involved;
Will be harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives or with anyspecific objective of the Comprehensive Plan and/or this title (Eagle City Code Title 8);
" c.Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate
in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such
use will not change the essential character of the same area;
Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighborhood uses;
Will be served adequately by essential public facilities such as highways. streets, policeand fire protection~ drainage stIuctures, refuse dispos~ water and sewer and schools; Orthat the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use shall be
able to provide adequately any such services.
Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities andservices and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community;
Win not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions ofoperation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason
of excessive production of traffic7 noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors;
Will have vehicular approaches to the property which are designed as not to create aninterference with traffic on suITounding public thoroughfares; and
Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature ofmajor importance.
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITIDN THE STAFF REPORT:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS, WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERNREGARDING THIS PROPOSAL:
Chapter 11 - Special Areas and Sites
11.2 Recognized Special areas and Sites
Boise River Floodplain
The Boise River Floodplain is designated as a special area due to its ecologicaland scenic significance. The area comprises the two channels of the Boise River
and intervening and immediately adjacent areas as generally depicted on the
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map.
ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS, WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
THIS PROPOSAL:
Section 8-2A-6 (A)(7)(a)
Additional Height Restrictions: All spires. poles, antennas. steeples, towers, and any other
Page 5 of 11
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\CU\200 1 \CU-I1-0 I ccf.doc
~ ., ~.., _v........ .&........ I ,L.a.a, "'"VV O..,Q "'O;,)'t J::.i\.~LJ::. r. 1'1 . L. -t \;lT~ A'lT~IgJ uau
such structures shall be limited to a maximum of thirty-five feet (35'). Additional heightmay be permitted if a conditional use permit is approved by the City Council.
DEVELOPIvIBNT AGREEMENT PROVISIONS WIllCR ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERNREGARDING THIS PROPOSAL:
ARTICLE ill - CONDITIONS ON DEVELOPMENT
Section 3.2 (STATES IN PART)~
A portion of the C3 Zone landt as snownon Exhibit A (hereinafter referred to as tLHotel Siteis cunently intended to be used for hotel (as defined by the Eagle Zoning Code) includingrestaurant(s), meeting and/or convention rooms. and similar full service hotel uses, and for two
(2) free standing, restaurant uses. . .. The hotel approved for the Hotel Site is approved for upto 200 rooms in size and 35.feet in height unless a variance is approv~or unlessEagle City Code is amended to allow additional height
DISCUS SION:
The development agreement for Eagle: River Development allows for the hotel to beconstructed as a pennitted use within the development and therefore would requite only adesign review application. Because the applicant has proposed for the hotel roof enclosing themechanical units and a chimney to be in excess of that which is allowed by Eagle City Code
(peak of roof is to be 45-feet, 2-inches high; chimney is to be 48-feet high, 13-feet higher thanthe 35-foot maximum), a conditional use application is required to request the exception to the
height restriction.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDED WITIDN THE STAFF REPORT:
If the City approves the requested height exception then staff recommends the site specificconditions of approval and the standard conditions of approval provided within the staff report.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COMMISSION:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the Planning and Zoning Comnrission on January
, 2002, at which time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Commissionmade their recommendation at that time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commissionby nO one.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission by one
(1) individual who felt that the hotel was designed well and the reason for the 35-foot height restrictionas shown in Eagle City Code was to accommodate the fife department's equipment.
COMMISSION DECISION:
The Commission voted 5 to 0 to recommend approval for the conditional use permit for a 45-foothigh building and 48.foot high chimney for Eagle River Hospitality LLC with the site specific:conditions of approval and standard conditions of approval shown within their Findings of Fact
and Conclusions of Law document, dated Febrnary 4, 2002.
Page 6 of 11
K:\Planning Dept\EagIe Applioations\CU\2001\CU-11-Ol eef.doc
-.-. -.-- -~~ --.., -...,...,..~...""~.... ....,."....., V.L.L.L l1..L.L.L ~VoJ.1.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the City Council on February 26, 2002, at which
time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Council made their decision at thattime.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one (not including the
applicant/~epresentative ).
V-'
COUNCIL DECISION:
The Council voted 4 to 0 to approve CU...II-Ol for the conditional use pennit for a 45-foot highbuilding and 48-foot high chimney for Eagle River Hospitality LLC~ with the following Planning
and Zoning Conunission recommended site specific conditions of approval and standardconditions of approval.
SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Comply with the conditions ofDR-82-01.. PP-14-00, FP-13-O1, PPIFP-
2. Comply with any applicable conditions of RZ-98 and the development agreement for Eagle RiverDevelopment.
3. A building permit for this proposal shall be obtained within one year, otherwise the conditional useapproval for a height exception shall be considered null and void.
ST ANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Ada County Highway District and/or the
Idaho Transportation Departmen4 including but not limited to approval of the drainage system,curbs. gutters, streets and sidewalks. A letter of approval from the highway district havingjurisdiction shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of any building permits.
Idaho Department of Health & Welfare approval of the sewer and water facilities is required prior
issuance of any building pennits.
All permits from CentJ;al District H~lth, Eagle Sewer District & Eagle Fire District shall besecured prior to issuance of building permit.
Written approval of all well water for any shared Or commel:"cial well shall be obtained from the
Idaho Department of Water Resources shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of any
building pennies.
Unless septic tanks are permitted.' wet line sewers will be required and the applicant will be
required to furnish the City Engineer with a letter from the sewer entity serving the property~accepting the project for servicet prior to issuance of any building pennits.
The applicant shall submit a letter f'tom the appropriate drainage entity approving the drainagesystem and/or accepting said drainage; or submit a letter from a registered professional engineer
Page 7 of IIK:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applic~tions\CU\2001\CU-l1-01 ccf.doc
V'I V4( aoVV"* 4,,*. "" n.A ,,"VQ ~"'Q ..,QUlt .a::.i\\:d...a::. r.!~. L.. -+ \.r 111: in 11:IgJ u.,~, "-
certifying that all drainage shall be retained on-site prior to issuance of any building permits Or
Certificate of Occupancy. whichever occurs first. A copy of the constnlction drawing(s) shall besubmitted with the letter.
The applicant shall submit plans and calculations prepared by a registered professional engineer
, handle the satisfactory disposal of all stonn drainage on the applicant s site. Drainage system plansshall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of any building
permi ts.
The plans shall show how swales. or drain piping, will be developed in the drainage easements.
The approved 'drainage system shall be constmcted, or a pelfonnance bond' shall be submitted to
the City Clerk. prior to issuance of any building pennits. The lot shall be so graded that all runoff
runs either over the curb, or to the drainage easement, and no ronoff shall cross any lot line onto
another lot except within a drainage easement.
All design and calculations shall meet the requirements of Ada County Highway District.Construction of the stann drain disposal system shall be complete before an occupancy permit is
issued.
No ditch, pipe or other structure or canal, for irrigation water or irrigation waste water owned by
an organized irrigation district, canal company, ditch association, or other irrigation entity, shall be
obstructed, routed, covered or changed in any way unless such obstnlction. rerouting, covering or
changing has first been approved in writing by the entity. A Registered Engineer shall certify that
any ditch rerouting,piping. covering or otherwise changing tbe existing irrigation or waste ditch(1) has been made in such a manner that the flow of water will not be impeded or increased
beyond canying capacity of the downstream ditch: (2) win not otheIWise injure any person or
persons using o( interested in such ditch or their property; and (3) satisfied the Idaho Standards for
Public Works Construction. A copy of such written approval and certification shall be filed with
the construction drawing and submitted to the City prior to issuance of any building pennits.
Street light plans shall be submitted and approved as to the location, height and wattage to the City
Engineer (if applicable) prior to issuance of any building penmts or Certificate of Occupancy,
whichever occurs rll'st. AU construction shall comply with the City s specifications and standards.
The applicant shall provide a recorded easement, acceptable to the City Engineer, for the purpose
of installing and maintaining street light fixtures, conduit and wiring lying outside any dedicated
public right-of-way, prior to issuance of any building permits.
The applicant shall pay applicable street light inspection fees prior to Certificate of Occupancy.
10.Parking lot light plan shall be submitted and approved as to the location, height and wattage by the
City Engineer. All constmction shall comply with the City's specifications and standards.
Lighting is required in the parking area and shall be properly illuminated to avoid accidents. Any
lights used to illuminate the parking lot shall be so aITanged as to reflect the light away from theadjoining property.
11.The parking area. shall be paved and shall be maintained in good condition without holes and free
of all dust trash, weeds and other debris.
Page g of 11
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\CU\200 1 \CU-II-o 1 ccf.doc
V, V~I ~VV~ ~~. -, rdA ~UO ~~O ~O~~
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
r.1\bLr. r. 1'1 . L.. .-+ \';.1J.~ 1\.1.11:IgJ U,J,J
12.One set of building plans, for any non single-family residential use, shall be submitted to the EagleFire Department for approvaL An approval letter from the Eagle Fire Department shall be
submitted to the City prior to issuance of any building permits or Cel1ificate of Occupancy,
whichever occurs first. The letter shall include the following comments and minimumrequirements, and any other items of concern as may be detennined by the Eagle Fire Department
officials:a. "The applicant has made arrangements to comply with all requirements of tbe FireDepartment. tI
The fire hydrant locations shall be reviewed and be approved in writing by the Eagle FireDepartlIIent prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat.
Minimum flow per hydrant shall" be 1 000 gallons per minute torQue and two family
dwellings. 1 500 gallons per minute for dwellings having a fire area in excess of 3 600square feet, and 1,500 gallons per minute for non-residential uses (Le.Commercial,Industrial, Schools, etc.). Flow rates shall inspected in accordance with all agencieshaving jurisdiction, and shall be verified in writing by the Eagle Fire Department prior to
issuance of any building pennies or certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs first.
The proposed fire protection system shall be reviewed and approved by the Eagle Fire
Department prior (0 issuance of a building permit
13.Any recreation area., greenbelt area or pathway area along the Boise River, Dry Creek 01' any other
area designated by the City Councilor Eagle City Pathway/Greenbelt Comminee for a path
walkway shall be approved in writing by the Eagle City Pathway/Greenbelt Committee prior to
issuance of a building permit
14-Conservation, recreation and river access easements (if applicable) shall be approved by the Eagle
City Pathway/Greenbelt Committee and shall be shown On the tIDal plat prior to issuance of abuilding pcnnit.
15.The applicant shall comply with the provisions of the Eagle City Code, pertaining to floodplain
and river protection regulations (if applicable) prior to issuance of a building pennit.
The applicant shall obtain written approval of the development relative to the effects of the Boise
River Flood Plain (if applicable) from the Corps of Engineers prior to issuance of t, building
permi t.
The applicant shall obtain approval of the development relative to its effects on wetlands or other
natural waterways (if applicable) from the Corps of Engineers and the Idaho Department of Water
Resources andlor any other agency having jurisdiction prior to issuance of a building permit.
Basements in the flood plain are prohibited.
The Americans with Disabilities Act. Uniform Building Code. Eagle City Code~ and all applicableCounty, State and Federal Codes and Regulations shall be complied with. All design and
construction shall be in accordance with aU applicable City of Eagle Codes unless specificallyapproved by the Commission and/or Council.
New plans, which incorporate any required changes, shall be submitted for staff approval. Staffmay elect to take those plans to the Design Review Board and/or the Planning and ZoningConunission for review and approval.
Page 9 of 11
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle ~plications\CU\200 1 \CU-II-O 1 ccf.doc
~ .. ~-, -~~6 -~. -v 6'~ .."" "'UV UVU"I1.~n.~~ 1' . L..\;.1.11. J1.1.11.V.J'i, '
21.Any changes to the plans and specifications upon which this approval is based, other than those
required by the above conditions, will require submittal of an application for modification andapproval of that application prior to commencing any change. Any change by the applicant in theplanned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the appli~nt tocomply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions inforce at the time the applicant or its Successors in interest submits application to the City of Eagle
for a change to the planned use of the subject property.
22.Approval of any Design Review shall expire without notice to the applicant on the date ofexpiration of the Design Review. as stipulated in Eagle City Code (one year from the City Council
approval date).
'. . ", ,
23.The City s actions on the application does not grant the applicant any appropriation of water Or
interference with existing water rights- The applicant indemnifies and holds the City harmless for
any and all water rights, claims in any way associated with this application.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on December 4.2001.
2. Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission waspublished in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
ordinances on January 12, 2002. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners withinthree-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 January 9, 2002. Requests for agencies' reviewswere transmitted on November 4, 2001, in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in accordance
for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City ordinances on February 9,2002. 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 February 6, 2002.
3. The Council reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed conditional use permit
application (CD-il-Ol) with regard to Eagle City Code Section 8..5 "Action by the Commission andCouncil", and based upon the infonnation provided concludes that the proposed conditional use permit
is in accordance with the Eagle City Code because:
Will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as established in Section 8-3 of Eagle CityCode Title 8 as referenced &Cas otherwise provided within this Code" since Eagle CityCode Section 8-2A-6 (A)(7)(a) states in part that additional building height above 45-feet
may be permitted if a conditional use permit is approved by the City Council;
Will be harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives or with any
specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan and/or this title (Eagle City Code Title 8)
since there are no inconsistencies with the Comprehensive Plan and since the development
will be required to meet conditions of a design review application;
Will be designed. constructed, opetated and nialntamed to be hannonious and appropriate
in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such
Page 10 of
K:\PI~.Iming Dept\Eagle Applications\~U\2001\CU-ll"()1 ccf.doc
..._.6~"""" 6 ,.'.c.I.-r '" .L .L.L 11..L.L.L II!:! v '" OJ
use will not change the essential character of the same area since the hotel building will be
required to comply with the conditions of the final plat for Mixed Use Subdivision No.with conditions of design review t and the design guidelines as stated within thedevelopment agreement previously approved for the Eagle River Development;
Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighborhood uses since the
majority of the area suITounding the proposed hotel is planned for commercial uses andwil1 be required to install buffers between this site and any residential uses in the vicinity;
Will be served adequately by essential public facilities such as highways, streets, policeand fire -protection, drainage.. Structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer and schools; orthat the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use shall be
able to provide adequately any such services as noted is responses received by agenciesproviding the public services;
Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities andservices and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community;
Will not involve uses, activities, processes. materials. equipment and 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;
Will have vehicular approaches to the property which are designed so as not to create an
interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares as the major roadways intothe site have been approved by ACHD and ITD and have been constructed to designstandards; and
Will not result in the destmction, loss or' damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature ofmajor importance since none are apparent on the site.
DATED this 12th day of March 2002.
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
Ada Cou , Idaho
ATTEST:
' -
..l.Q (t+QI
\(.
Sharo K. Moore, Eagle City erk
Page 11 of 11
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\CU\2001\CU-l1-01 ccf.doc
Case No. IPC- E-04-
Exhibit 124
September 12, 2000
Eagle Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Case No. CU-
Approval of height exception to screen mechanicals on ConAgra building
U, I U~I ~UUq ~q: ~D ~AA ~U~ ~J~ J~D4 bA~Lb 1:'. N . Z; .-+ (,;1'1')::' A'IT)::,IgJ U 14
BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR TWO 41.5- )FOOT WGH ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING
ENTRY FEATURES FOR DENNIS M. BAKER & ASSOCIATES
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER CU-
The above-entitled conditional use application came before the Eagle City Council on Jll)Y 11 2000. TheEagle 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:
PROJECT SUl\1MA.R Y:
Dennis M. Baker & Associates, represented by Dan Torfin, is requesting conditional use
approval for two 41.foot high building entry featu(es which are proposed for the
screening of the roof-top mechanical units. The site is located on the west side of South
Rivershore Lane within Channel Center Subdivision at 599 South Rivershore Lane.
APPUCA TION SUBMITTAL:
The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on April 13, 2000.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle Plannmg and Zoning
Commission was published in accordance for requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho
Code and the Eagle City ordinances On April 27, 2000. 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 April 28, 2000. Requests for agencies' reviews were transmitted on April 14
2000, in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in
accordance for requirements of Title 67 Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
ordinances on June 24, 2000. 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 t Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on June 23, 2000.
InSTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS:
On June S. 2000, the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission .approved this application
with site specific and standard conditions of approval.
COMPANION APPUCA TIONS: DR-20-
Page 1 of 11 EXHIBIT 124
K:\Pbmnmg ~\eo.l11e A1'II'1ic8Iiolls'CtJ\1OOOlCU-O~ I:\;(doG CASE NO. IPC- E-O4-
II V~I ~VV~ ~~. ~O r~A ~VO ~~O ~O~~.t!;i\.~Lt.i l' l~ . Z. .~U15~ CITl ATTl
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONJNG MAP DESIGNA TrONS:
COMP PLAN ZONING LAND USEDESIGNA TION DESIGNATION
Existing Conunercial Cft 1 (Neighborhood Business Vacant
District)
Proposed , No Change No Change Two Office Buildings
North of site Commercial l (Neighborhood Business Montessori School
District)
South of site Commercial C-l (Neighborhood Business Vacant
Pistrict)
East of site Commercial C-l (Neighborhood Business Two Retail Buildings
District)
West of site Boise River! Residential A (Agricultural)Boise Riverl AgriculturalTwo
DESIGN REVIEW OVERLA Y DISTRICT: Not in the DDA, TDA or CEDA-
EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
This site is within Channel Center Commercial Subdivision. There are several
existing trees located on the site. All of the trees are proposed to be retained,
however, four of the existing trees are proposed to be relocated within the site.
Page 2 of 11
K:\PlDwI!ng Dept\&gle A.pplblkll\l~.O~ ~dQe
v. , V~, _VV~ ~~. ~~ r4A ~VO V~O ~OO~.tH\~Lb 1".1'1. L.. .(.;lTY ATTY Ig) 016
SITE DESIGN INFORMATION:
Site Data Proposed Requked
ToW Acreage of Site 07-acres (220 911-square feet)OOO-square feet (minitnllII1)
Percentage of Site Devoted to 13% (approx.50% (maximum)
Building Coverage
Percentage of Site Devoted to 31 % (approx.10% (minimum)
Landscaping
Number of Parldng Spaces 206-parking spaces 184-parking spaces
Front Setback I7D-feet (approx.) Bldg. 1 I5-feet (minimum)
60-feet (approx.) Bldg. 2 (per Plat Condition)
Rear Setback 51-feet (approx.) both Bldg.50-feet (minimum) (per Plat
Condition - setback from
ordinary high waterline)
Side Setback 340-feet (approx.) Bldg. feet (minimum)
(measured to the north)
Side Setback 120-feet (approx.) Bldg. 2 feet (minimum)
(measured to the south)
GENERAL SITE DESIGN PEA rURES:
Number and Uses of Proposed Buildings: Two buildings, Office.
Height and Number of Stories of Proposed Builclings: Parapet height: 32-feet, Accent Element
Peak: 41-feet, 6-inches; two stories.
Gross Floor Area of Proposed Buildings; 29,80Q-square feet
On and Off-Site Circulation:
A 38.700-square foot (approx.) paved parking lot provides parking for vehicles using this
site. Access to the site is provided by three driveways located on the north side of South
Rivershore Lane.
PUBLIC SERVICES A AILABLE: None
PUBUC USES PROPOSED:
A la-foot wide pedestrian easement and pathway provides pedestrian access to the Boise
River through this site.
PUBLIC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUISITIONS MAP: No map culTently exists
Page 3 of 11
~:\P1ao.rI1ng Dept\EagJ.: ApplU:utiollS\ClJ\2000\CU-o3-00 OI:r.40e
V' v...., _VVOS ..LOS."V .I.'n.A, ~VQ O~Q ~QU't J::.i1~LJ::. r. l~ . "- .-+ \";J."1"1: A'J.TX LgJU17
SPECIAL ON-SITE FEATURES:
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern - An environmental assessment plan was previously
completed for the entire subdivision site.
Evidence of Erosion - no
Fish Habitat - no
Floodplain - no
Mature Trees - yes
Riparian Vegetation. unknown
Steep Slopes - no
Stream/Creek - yes - Boise River
Unique Animal Life - no
Unique Plant Life - no
Unstable Soils - unknown
WiJdlife Habitat - no
SUMl\1ARy OF REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLAN (IF REQUIRED):
Not required. This plan was provided as a part of the Channel Center Subdivision application.
AGENCY RESPONSES:
The following agencies have responded and their correspondence is attached. Coxnments.which appear to be of special concern, are noted below:
Central District Health Department
Eagle Fire Department
Eagle Sewer District
LETIERS FROM THE PUBLIC: None received to date.
EAGLE CITY CODE 8y 7 -2 GENERAL STANDARDS FOR CONDmONAL USES:
The Commission/Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposedCondjtional Use in terms of the following standards and shall find adequate evidence showing that
such use at the proposed location:
WHIt in faC4 constitute a conditional use as established in Section 8-3 of this title (Eagle
City Code Title 8) for the zoning district involved;
Will be harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives or with any
specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan and/or this title (Eagle City Code Title 8);
Will be designedt constmctedt operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate
in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such
use will not change the essential character of the same area;
Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighborhood uses;
Page 4 of 11
K:\PJAInnina Dc:p!'&8k; AppliGlItiol15'CU\2OOOII;tJ.O3..oo ccldol!
V I f V~f ~VV~ ~~. -~ rnA .VO ~~O ~O~~~abL.ti r. 1'1 . L. IgJ UHS-+ CiTY ATl'Y
Will be served adequately by essential public facilities such as highways, streets. police
and fue protection, drainage stroctures, refuse disposat water and sewer and schools; or
that the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use shall be
able to ptovide adequately any such services.
Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community;
Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and 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;
Will have vehicular approaches to the property which are designed as not to create an
interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares; and
Will not result in the destruction, loss Or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of
major importance.
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS, WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN
REGARDING TInS PROPOSAL: (None)
ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS, WInCH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
TIllS PROPOSAL:
Section 8-2A-6 (A)(7)(a)
Additional Height Restrictions: All spires, poles, anteunas, steeples, towers, and any other
such st:oIctures shall be limited to a maximum of thirty five feet (35'). Additional height
may be permitted if a conditional use permit is approved by the City Council.
DISCUSSION:
Per ECC, the maximum height allowed for spires. poles, antennas, steeples7 towers, etc. is 35-
feet unless a conditional use permit is approved by the City Council. The architectural accent
element peaks used to screen the roof-top mechanical units for the two, two-story office
buildings proposed within Channel Center Subdivision are proposed to be 41.feet high (6.
feet higher than the maximum allowed by code).
STAFF RECOMMENDA TION PROVIDED WITmN TIlE STAFF REPORT:
Based upon the information provided to staff to date, staff recommends approval with the site
sp~ific conditions of approval and the standard conditions of approval 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 May 15,
2000, at which time testhnony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Commission made
their recommendation at that time.
Page 5 of 11
K:~llliIlB 'Oepl~1t: AppIIClllbns,\0J\2000\CU.03.00 C;C;(doli
II U~I ~UU~ ~~; ~~ rdA ~UO ~~O ~O~~bl\\jLb 1'.1'1. L. -+ (,;1'1'):: AT!')::LgJ UIY
B. Oral testjmony 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 no
one (not including the applkant).
CO:M:MISSIQN DECISION:
The Commission voted 4 to 0 (Bloom Absent) to recommend approval of the conditional' usepermit fot' two 41.foot high architectural building entry features for the screening of 1:'oof~top
mechanical units for two proposed office buildings within Channel Center CommercialSubdivision for Dennis M. Baker & Associates with the site specific and standard conditions ofapproval shown within their Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law document dated June 5,
2000.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the City Cpuncil on July 11, 2000, at which time
testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Council made their decision at that time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one (not including the
applicant).
COUNCIL DECISION:
The Council voted unanimously to approve CU-00 the conditional use permit for two 41.foot
high architectural building entry features for the screening of roof-top mechanical units for two
proposed office buildings within Channel Center Couu.ne(dal Subdivision for Dennis M. Baker &
Associates with the following site specific and standard conditions of approval.
SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Comply with the conditions ofDR...20~OO.
2. The architecture of the two buildings with the 41.5~foot high building entry features shall be
generally as shown on Exhibit A" which incorporated into these findings by reference.
3. The portion of the buildings which are approved to exceed 35-feet in height (bunding entry
features only) shall be a maximum of 41.5-feet high.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Ada County Highway District and/or the
Idaho Transportation Departmen4 including but not limited to approval of the drainage system1
curbs, gutters, streets and sidewalks. A letter of approval from the highway district having
jurisdiction shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of any building permits or Certificate of
Occupancy whichever occurs f1fst.
Idaho DepartInent of Health & Welfare approval of the sewer and water facilities is required prior
Page 6 of 11
K:\1'ImuiiDg Dapt\BDg18 Applil:ati0us\CU\2000\CtI-03-00 ~1kJ~
v. , v...., _VVOZ .&.":I:..oJ ""l1A ~VQ O~Q ~Q""t:r:.i\.~Lr:. r. 1'1 . LA -+ \;J."1"): ATl'IgJ UZU
issuance of any building permits or Cenificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs ftrst.
An petmits from Central District Health~ Eagle Sewer Dis1rict & Eagle Fire District, shall be
secured prior to issuance of building pennit Of Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs fi:rst.
Written approval of all well water for any shared or commercial well shall be obtained from the
Idaho Department of Water Resources shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of any
building pennits or Certificate of Oc,cupancy whichever occurs fIrst.
Unless septic tanks are permitted, wet line sewerS will be required and the applicant will be
required to furnish the City Engineer with a letter from the sewer entity serving the property.
accepting the project for service, prior to issuance of any building permits or Certificate of
Occupancy! whichever occurs first
The applicant shall submit a letter from the appropriate drainage entity approving the drainage
system and/or accepting said drainage; or submit a letter from a registered professional engineer
certifying that all drainage shall be retained on-site prior to issuance of any building pennits
Certificate of OccupancYt whichever occurs flISt. A copy of the constnlction drawing(s) shall be
submitted with tbe letter.
The applicant shall submit plans and calculations prepared by a registered professional engineer to
handle the satisfactory disposal of all storm drainage on the applicant's site. Drainage system plans
shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of any building
permits or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs first
The plans shall show how swales, or drain piping, will be developed in tbe drainage easements.
The approved drainage system shall be constructed) or a performance bond shall be submitted to
the City Clerk, prior to issuance of any building pennits or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever
occurs fIrst The lot shall be so graded that all runoff rens either over the curb. or to the drainage
easemen~ and no ronoff shall cross any lot line onto another lot except within a drainage
easement.
All design and calculations shall meet the requirements of Ada County Highway District.
Construction of the storm drain disposal system shall be complete before an occupancy permit is
issued.
No ditch, pipe or other structure or canalt for irrigation water 01" irrigation waste water owned by
an organized inigation district, canal company, ditch association, or othet irrigation entity, shall be
obstructed, routed, covered or changed in any way unless such obstruction, rerouting, covering or
changing has first been approved in writing by the entity. A Registered Engineer shall certify that
any ditch rerouting, piping1 covering or otherwise changing the existing irrigation or waste ditch
(1) has been made in such a manner that the flow of water will not be iro.peded or increased
b~yond carrying capacity of the downstream ditch; (2) will not otherwise injure any person or
persons using or interested in such ditch or their property; and (3) satisfied the Idaho Standards for
Public Works Construction. A copy of such written approval and certification shall be filed with
the construction drawing and submitted to the City prior to issuance of any building permits or
Certificate of Occupancy. whichever occurs fIrst.
Street light plans shall be submitted and approved as to the location, height and wattage to the City
Engineer (if applicable) prior to issuance of any building pennits or Certificate of OccllpancY1
Page 7 of 11
K;\J'I/\iIJ1iDj Depl'1SAale Appl.l.t::!l11lons'tCU\2000\CU.O3.00 ~~4OC
"'. , "'.&0' _vv"Z .L"Z. 6oV .L'l'14 ,,"VQ O~Q ~QU,*r.i\\U,.r. r. 1'1 . LA .-+ '-'11 I lUll Ifg U~l.
whichever occurs first. All construction shall comply with the' City s specifications and standards.
The applicant shall provide a recorded easement, acceptable to the City Engineer, for the purpose
of installing and maintaining street light fixtures, conduit and wiring lying outside any dedicated
public right-of-way, prior to issuance of any building permits or Certificate of Occupancy,
whichever occurs fl1sc.
The applicant shall pay applicable street light inspection fees prior to Certificate of Occupancy.
10.Parking lot light plan shall be submitted and approved as to the location, height and wattage by the
City Engineer. All construction shall comply with the City's specifications and standards.
Lighting is required in the parking area and shall be properly illUDlinated to avoid accidents. Any
lights used to illuminate the parking lot shall be so arranged as to reflect the light away from the
adjoining property.
11.The parking area shall be paved and shall be maintained in good condition without holes and free
of all dust, trash, weeds and other debris.
12.One set of building plans, for any non single-family residential use, shall be submitted to the Eagle
Fire Depanment for approval. An approval letter from the Eagle Fire Department shall be
submitted to the City prior to issuance of any building permits or Certificate of Occupancy,
whichever occurs IIrSt. The letter shall include the following comments and minim
requirements, and any other items of concern as may be determined by the Eagle Fire Department
officials:a. "The applicant has made auangements to comply with all requirements of the Fire
Department"
The fire hydrant locations shall be reviewed and be approved in writing by the Eagle Fire
Department prior to the City Engineer signing the final plat..
Minimum flow per hydrant shall be 1,000 gallons per minute for one and two family
dwellings. 1,500 gallons per minute for dwellings having a tHe area in excess of 3,600
square feet, and 1.500 gallons per minute for non-residential uses (ie; CommercialJ
Indusnial, Schools, etc.). Flow rates shall inspected in accordance with all agencies
having jurisdiction, ,and shall be verified in writing by the Eagle Fire Department prio~ to
issuance of any building permits or certificate of OccupancYt whichever occurs first.
The proposed fIre protection system shalt be reviewed and approved by the Eagle Fire
Department prior to issuance of a building permit or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever
occurs first.
13.Any recreation areat greenbelt area or pathway area along the Boise River, Dry Creek or any other
at'ea designated by the City Council or Eagle City Pathway/Greenbelt Committee for a path
walkway shall be approved in writing by the Eagle City Pathway/Greenbelt Committee prior to
issuance of a building permit or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs fJIst.
14.Conservation, recreation and river access easements (if applicable) shall be approved by the Eagle
City Pathway/Greenbelt Committee and shall be shown on the fmal plat prior to issuance of a
building pennit or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs eRst.
15.The applicant shall comply with the provisions of the Eagle City Cadet pertaining to floodplain
and river ps:otection regulations (if applicable) prior to issuance of a building permit or Certificate
Page 8 of 11
lC\PIIw1IDg J)ept\&gJ& ApplAlion&~,03.00 ~f.~OI;
V' f VLf _VV~ ~~..V rnA 'VO ~~O ~O~~
20.
21-
22.
r.4uLr. r. 1'1 . ~u~~~ t;lT~ A"lT~
of OccupancY7 whichever occurs fll'st.
16.The applicant shall obtain written approval of the development relative to the effects of the BoiseRiver Flood Plain (if RJ?plicable) from the Coxps. of Engineers prior to issuance of a. buildingpermit 01' Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs ftrst
17.The applicant shall obtain approval of the development relative to its effects on wetlands or other
natural waterways (if applicable) from the Corps. of Engineers and the Idaho Department of Water
Resources andlot" any other agency having jurisdiction prior to issuance of a building pennit orCertificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs first.
18.Basements in the flood plain are prohibited.
19.The Americans with Disabilities Act, Uniform Building Code, Eagle City Code, and all applicable
County, State and Federal Codes and Regulations shall be complied with. All design and
construction shall be in accordance with aU applicable City of Eagle Codes unless specificaUyapproved by the Commission and/or Council.
New plans which incorporate any required changes shall be submitted for staff approval- Staffmay elect to take those plans to the Design Review Board and/or the Planning and Zoning
Commission for review and approval.
Any changes to the plans and specifications upon which this approval is based. other than thoserequired by the above conditions. will require submittal of an application for modification andapproval of that application prior to commencing any change. Any change by the applicant in the
planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to
comply with all roles, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions inforce at the time the applicant or its successors in interest submits application to the City of Eagle
for a change to the planned use of the subject property.
Approval of any Design Review shall expire without notice to the: applicant on the date expiration of the Design Review, as stipulated in Eagle City Code (one year from the City Council
approval date).
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The application for this item was received by the:: City of Eagle on April 13, 2000.
2. Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle PlaIming and ZoIring Comrni~sion was
published in accordance for requirements of Title 67. Chapter 65. Idaho Code and the Eagle City
ordinances on April 27, 2000. 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 April 28, 2000. Requests for agencies' reviews were
transmitted on April 14, 2000, in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
3. Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in accordance
for requirements of Title 67. Chapter 657 Idaho Code and the Eagle City ordinances on June 24, 2000.
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 June 23, 2000.
Page 9 of 11
K:\f'llIIDiDg Dept\ElIgle AppbtioD5\Cll\2OOOlCU.O3-OQ cd.doc
V, V~/ ~VV~ ~~. ~O rftA ~UO ~~O ~OO~~A\:iLb 1". N . l.. .~O23-+ c..; 1 TY" A'1TY"
4. The City Council has reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed conditional use
and, in tenns of Eagle City Code Section 8-2 "A thru r' (required findings for approval of aconditional use), has made the following conclusions:
The proposed conditional use;A. Will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as established in Section 8-3 of EagleCity Code Title 8 as referenced "as otherwise provided within this Code" since
Eagle City Code Section 8-2A-6 (A)(7)(a) states in part that additional building
height above 35-feet may be pennitted if a conditional use pennit is approved by
the City Council;
Will be harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives or with
any specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan and/or this title (Eagle City
Code Title 8) since there are no inconsistencies with the Comprehensive Plan and
since the development will be required to meet conditions of a design review
application;
Will be designed, constmcted! operated and maintained to be hatmonious and
appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general
vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area
since the architectural building features are proposed to be setback from Eagle
Road approximately SOD-feet, since the buildings are proposed to be constructed
out of materials that are compatible with the residential and commercial building
matedals used in the general area and are consistent with turn of the century
architecture, and since the development will be required to meet the City's design
review reqnirements~
Will not be hazardous Or disturbing to existing or future neighborhood uses since
the area suITounding the proposed tower is heavily landscaped, since the building
materials proposed for the entry features are compatible with sun-ounding building
architecture;
Will be served adequately by essential public facilities such as highways. streets,
police and f:ire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water. and sewer
and schools; or that the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of
the proposed use shall be able to provide adequately any such services as noted is
responses received by agencies providing the public services;
Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public
facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the
community;
Will not involve uses, activities. processes, materials, equipment and 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;
Will have vehicular approaches to the property which are designed as not to create
an interference with traffic on sunounding public thoroughfares as are to be
approved by the highway district having jurisdiction; and
Page 10 of 11
K:\I'1mmiD8 Depl\BDBII! App&atjallll\CU\2~03-00 cd.doc
v., V~f _VV~ ~~. ~U rAA ~VO ~~O ~O~~J:!ii\\jL.tj t' .1'1 . Z. -+ (';lTY' ATfY 141 024
Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a naru.ra1~ scenic or historic
feature of major importance since, other than existing trees which will be
preserved, none are apparent at this site.
DATED this 12th day of September, 2000.
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGLEAda ty, dIDO
~~~I!t~~ATTEST: .~~1 0 ~ Eli
J'
"'" &."""'"
:t.. .. "
...";:'" .
" 0
",..
..,.. f;1 t~ '
..;
(.~.J"- \L- --O-r~.--(j is ~..1l 0 1l"'7'
S harOI Moore, Eagle City CI rk g
:; ~
\) 4'%'
.&- \
* it. -1r~ ~
:~
Of Q "'
. '~ ~....;.. "
:" ~'I r .(I ,~"
'~ ... '.-~',(..
)~A,tt.
':-'
J"uu' .. ' , ..
~ ~ ,'"", ,,;' ",
f:: '
::'
~r"
~.., -
S)"
~~')" '_..' "~,,. "'j,..::-:,,,..,... ~
i~1i;""
'.,J
:-:' /";~":-,'
'., V~'
,. "')" '. ~'
~if:,::":'.:,
~,~,
"ID"..:""
Page 11 of 11K:!~ Dept\8qlll App1ilOJrtjO1III\CW000'ICU.()).OO CC;(!b;
Case No. IPC- E-04-
Exhibit 125
August 28, 2001
Eagle Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Case No. CU-I0-96 MOD
Approving height exception to cell tower
and requiring co-location of facilities to avoid numerous towers
v~~-~ ~ -~~ ~c: ~~ rKUM: ~ 11 X Ur c~u~c I D: 212J8+838+BB27 PAGE 15/26
ORIGINAL
BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLJCA nON FOR
A CONDmONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
13S-FOOT IDGH PERSONAL WIRELESS
FACD...ITY FOR CRICKET COMMUNICA nONS
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LA
CASE NUMBER CU-l()"% MOD
The above..entitled conditional use application came before the Eagle City Council for their action on
August 14~ 2001. The Eagle City Council having beard and W::en oral and written testimony, and having
duly considered the mttter7 makes the following Findings of Fact and Conel nsions of Law;
FINDINGS OF FACT:
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Cricket CommnnicatiOOSt represented by Kirk Johnson with Pacific Telecom Services..
LLC, is requesting a modification to the existing conditional use permit to increase the
height of the existing 120-foot high monopole to 13S-feet to accommodate the co-location
of another cellular service provider. The existing pole is located at the Republic Mini-
Storage facility at 8785 Horseshoe Bend Road approximately ~~-mile noIth of State Street.
APPUCA TION SUB:MITT AL:
The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on May 3. 2001.
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 677 Chapter 65
,.
Idaho
Code and the Eagle City ordinances on June 16, 2001. Notice of this public hearing was
mailed to property owners within three-hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject property in
accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 657 Idaho Code and Eagle City
Code on June 13.2001. Requests for agencies' ~ews were transmitted on May 4, 2001
in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in
accordance for requirements of Title 677 Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City
ordinances on July 28~ 2001. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property ownerswithin ~hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject property in accordance with the
requirements ofTitIe 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on July 25
,.
2001.
IllSTORY OF RELEV ANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS:
On March 25t 1997, the Eagle City Council voted to approve a conditional use permit for
this site (CU-Io-96) for a 12Q.foot tall personal wireless facility.
CO:MP ANION APPUCA TIONS: DR.-30-O 1
EXHIBIT 125
CASE NO. IPC-O4-
Page 1 of 12\'lEACi~l COMM~ A~. )0.9& MOD
~ u~-~ L -~~ Lb: ~~ ~~UM: ~ 1 ~Y U~ ~AGLE I D: 21218+838+8827 PAGE 18/28
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING :MAP DESIGNA nONS:
COMP PLAN ZONING LAND USE
DESIGNATION DESIGNA nON
Existing Business Parle BP (Business Park)Cellular Tower
Proposed No Change No Change No Change
North of site Business Park RT (ResidentiaI- Ada Residence
County designation)
Sooth of site Commercial 3 (Highway Business Eagle Towne & Coantry
District)Centre Shopping Center
East of site Business Park BP (Business Park)Republic Mini Storage
West () f site Residenfial Three (up to 3-R -4 (Residential)State Inghway 55 &. Greatunits per acre max.)Sky Estates Subdivision
DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICf: Not in the DDA" 'IDA or CEDA.
II.EXISTING STIE CHARAc.rERISTICS:
A 120-foot high cellular tower cmrently exists within the Republic Mini-Storage site.
SITE DESIGN :INFORMATION:
SITE DA T PROPOSED REQUIRED
Total Acreage of Site 02 -acres N/A
Percenttge of Site Devoted to Building Less than 50%50% maximumCoverage
Percentage of Site Devoted to N/A N/ALandscaping
Number of Parking Spaces N/A N/A
Front Setback 600-feet (apptox)2O-feet minimum
Rear Setback 600-feet (approx)13.5-feet
Side Setback 32Q...feet (approx)13.feet
Street Side Setback 320-feet (approx)20-feet minimum
GENER AL SITE D &SIGN FBA TURES:
Nwnber and Uses of Proposed Buildings: N/A
Page 2 of 12
K.. o\PbaD ilia; ~OO'\ \Ct1- IM6 MOD a:f..doc
~U~-~! -~~ !~: ~b ~~UM: ~ 1 ~Y U~ ~AGLE I D: 208+838+8827 PAGE 17/26
Height and Number of Stories of Proposed Buildings:
The tower is to be a maximum of 135.feet (currenIly 120-feet).
Gross Floor Area of Proposed Building&: tOO-square feet (concrete pad).
On and Off-Site Circulation: The site is accessed through the Republic Mini-Stomge
facility from Horseshoe Bend Road.
PUBUC SERVICES A AILABLE:
No water or sewer 5t~ces are required for this particular use.
PUBUC USES PROPOSElY. None
PUBUC USES SHOWN ON FUTURE ACQUIsITIONS MAP: No map currently ~xim;
SPECfAL ON-SITE FEATURES:
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern - none
Evidence of Erosion - no
FISh Habitat .
FloodpbUn . no
Mature Trees -
Riparian Vegera.tion - no
Steep Slopes - no
Stream/Creek: no
Unique Anim~l Life-unknown
Unique Plant Life - unknown
UnstabJe ScriIs - unknown
Wildlife Habitat... unknown
SU1vfM:ARY OF REVIEw OF ENVlRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLAN OF REQUIRED):Not required
AGENCY, RESPONSES:
The f~Uowing 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
Eagle Fjre Department
Eagle Sewer District
LE'ITERS FROM THE PUBUC: None received to date.
EAGLE CITY CODE 8-7-3-2 GENERAL STANDARDS FOR CONDmONAL USES:
The CoromissionlCooncil shall review the particu.1ar facts and circumstances of each proposedConditiOnal Use in terms of the following standards and shall find adequate evidence showing that
such use at the proposed location:
Page 3 of 12X:~DqIt~ ~N:U.t~96 MODa:Uhc:
~UL-~ I-~q Ie: ~B FROM: CITY OF EAGLE I D: 208+838+6827 PAGE 18/26
Wilt in fact, constitnte a conditional use as established in Section 8-3 of this title (Eagle
City Code Title 8) for the zoning diStrict involved;
Will be harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives or with any
specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan and/or this title (Eagle City Code Title 8);
Will be designed, constnlcted, operated and waiDtah1ed to be harmonious and appropriate
in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that mchuse will not change the essential chatactec of the same area;
Will not be hazatdous or distUIbing to exisdng or future neighboIbood uses;
Will be served adequately by essential public facilities such as highways~ streets. police
and fire protection, chaioage stmctnres, refuse disposa4 water and sewer and schools; or
that the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the propQSed use shall be
able to provide adequa.tely any such services.
Will not cre3te excessive addidonal requirements at public cost for public facilities andservices and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the conununity;
Will not involve uses" activities, processes" xnaterials~ equipment and Conditions of
operation that will bt detrimental to any persons" property or the general welfare by reason
of excessjve production of tIaffic, noise~ smoke, fum.es" glare or odors;
Will have vehicular approacbes to the property which are designed as not to create aninterference with tmffic on surrounding public thoroughfares; and
Will not result in the destruction~ loss OJ; damage of a natUtalt scenic or historic feature of
major rmpottance.
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
COMPlmHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS, WInCH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERNREGARDING TBIS PROPOSAL: (None)
ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS) WH1CH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDlNG
THIS PROPOS~
ECC Section 8-5 (S) (1) (a) In part states that wireless facilities are necessary in order to:
1) Facilitate the provision of wireless telecommunication services to the residents andbusinesses of the City;
(2) :Minimize adveJ:$e visual effects of spires" poles,. antennas~ steeples.. towers, and other suchstructures through careful design and sitting standards;
(3) Avoid potential damage to adjacent properties from spire~ pole~ antenn~ steeple, tower" andother such sttnctures' failnret through structutal standards and setback requirements; and
(4) Maxirniu the use of existing and approved towers and buildings to accommodate new
Page 4 of 12rc:!~q; ~'ClI\2tX)~'Ctt- JD-96 MOO
~ u~-~ 1-~~ Ib: ~~ ~~UM: ~ 1 IV U~ ~AGLE I D: 21218+838+6827 PAGE 18/26
wireless telecomU)lJnication antennas in order to reduce the number of towers needed to
serve the community.
ECC 8-3-5 ($) (3) (a.) states in pan that a proposal for a new commercial wirelesstelecommunication service tower in excess of thirty five feet (35') in height shall not be
approved unless the City Council fmds that the telecommunications equipment planned
for the proposed tower cannot be accommodated on an existing or approved tower or
building.
. BeC 8-5 (S) (4) (a)
All pel'Sonal wireless facilities shall be required to obtain design review approval prior tocons1xucdon. '
' '
DISCUSSION:
With regard to the functional relationship of the stnLCture and the sjtc in relation to its$UIToundings~ concem.s arise as to whether it is appropriate to raise an existing 120-foot high
pole to 135.f~ thus making what some consider an deyesore" more conspicuous. However.if wireless facilities were not allowed to ro-Iocate on an existing pole (which is required by
Eagle City Code). multiple poles would be erected to service the communication needs of the
community-Thus, one taller pole may be considered less invasive than multiple
poles scatteredacross the landscape.
There is no impact to on.site traffic conditions or to contiguous streets as the site rarely needs
to be accessed and is served by an existing driveway from the Republic ~toJ.'age-Adjoining properties to the east and west are over 600-feet from this site~ whiI~ the property tothe north is mxa1 in nata re and the property to the sontb is a. proposed comm~iaJ shoppingcenter (Eagle Towne & Conntry Centre). The impact on adjoining properties may beconsidered miD.imaI because there are no dense ~idcntial uses in the immediate area and the
industriaJIconunerciaI uses SUITounding the site are more use-intensive than a personal wirelessfacility-
Staff has reviewed the particular facts and circumstmces of this proposed conditional use and, in
tenns of Eagle City Code Section 8-2 '~A thru r~ (required fmdings for approval of aconditional use). has made the following conclusions:
The proposed conditional use;
Will., in fact, constitute a conditional use as established in Section 8-3 of EagleCity Code TItle 8 as conditioned heIein;
Will be harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives or with
any specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan andfor this title (Eagle CityCode Title 8) since there are no inconsistencies with the Comprehensive Plan and
since the tower will be required to meet conditions of a design review application;
Will be designed~ constnlcted" operated and maintained to be hannonious and
appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the generalvicinity and that sneb use will not change the essential chatacter of the same area$mce this use will Dot only be required to meet the City's design review
Page 5 of 12JC!~- ~....'Ct1\2OO I\CU- 10.915 ~1Joc
VU~-~ ~ -~~ 10: ~ r~UM: ~ 1 ~Y U~ ~A~L~I D: 208+838+8827 PAGE 20/26
X'eqWrements;o but is also utilizing an existing pole rather than constructing a new
structure;
Will not be hazardol1s or disturbing to existing or future neighborhood uses since
no known complaints or safety issues have been received from the existing uses
sUlrOlJ1lding the tower and little change will be made to the tower that would
warrant any subsequent concerns reganiing these issues;
Will be served adequately by essential public facilities such as highway~ streets,
police and fire protection,. drainage structnres~ refuse disposal, water and sewer
and schools; or that the pexsoDs or agencies responsible for the establishment ofthe proposed use shall be able to provide adequately any such services as noted in
responses received by agencies providing the public seJ:Vices or as conditioned
herein;
Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public
facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the
co:mmunity since the structUre will be attached to an existing tower and will not
require any additional services;
Will not involve activities, proces~ materials, equipment and conditions of
operation that will be detrimenW to any pefSOns, property or the general welfare
by reason of excessive production of traffic~ noise, smoke, glare Or odors;
Will have access on an existing vehicular approach to the property which is
designed so as to not create an interference with traffic on surrounding public
thorooghfares as required by the Ada County Highway District; and
Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural. scenic or historicfeature of major importance since none are app3rent on this site.
STAn RECOl\fMENDA nON PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT;
Based upon the information provided to stldf to date., staff recommends approval with the sitespecific conditions of approval and the standard conditions of approval provided within the staff
report.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COMM1SSION;
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the Planning and Zoning Commission on July 2
2001, at which time testimony was taIcen and the public hearing was closed. The Commission madetheir reconttnendation at that tllne.
B. Oral tesrbnony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commi~~ionby no on~
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the Planning and ZoJring Commission by noone (Dot including the applicant).
Page 6 of 12
J::'t'JIaj)jqg ~J'O1- JO-M MOD cd'.dcw;
- -- -. ~~ .~ - ~, r~~~. ~ ~ ~ a vr ~M~~~1 U : :.i:: IU t:!I "'I" =t ..:I =t "'I" t::It:::J ~ (t"Au.c ~l/~t::i
COM:MJSSION DECISION:
The Commi~sion voted 5 to 0 to recommp-od approval for a conditional use permit for a 135..fOO1
high personal wireless facility for Cricket Communications with the site specific conditions
approval and standard conditions of approval shown within their Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law document dated July 167 2001.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE COUNCIL:
A. A public he3Iing on the application was held before the City Council on August 14~ 2001~ at which
time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Council made their decision at that
time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the City Council by no one.
C. Oral testimony in favor of dtis proposal was presented to the City Council by no one (not including the
applicants) .
COUNCIL DECISION:
The Council voted 4 to a to approve CU-IO-96 MOD for a conditional use permit for a 13S-foot
high personal wifeless facility for Cricket Communications with the following Planning & Zoning
ommission recommended site specific conditions of approval and standard conditions
approval
SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Comply with the site specific conditions of
approval and standard conditions of approval of DR-30-01.
Comply with all applicable site specific conditions of app:o'Val and standard conditions of approvalofCU-lO-96.
The tower shall be a maximum of 13S-feet high.
A zoninglbuilding permit is requked prior to the construction and insrallation of the improvements
to tb~ personal wirele$$ facility.
The appIiC3Dt shall provide letter from a qualified engineer stating the existing tower isstructurally capable of accommodating the proposed height extension to the tower.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
The applicant shall comply with aU requirements of the Ada County Highway Dismc( and/or theIdaho Transportation Departmen(. inc:ludmg but not limited to approval of the drainage syst~cw:bs, gutters, streets and sidewalks. A letter of approval from the highway district havingjurisdiction shall besnbmitted to the City prior to issuance of any building perroits.
Idaho Department of Health & Welfare approval of the sewer and water facilities is required prior
issuance of any building permits.
Page 7 of \~~"TJ'COM~ DeIpt\l!ag): ~1\CU-1~ MOOcct..doc
v u~ - ~ & - ~~ c : ~O r ~U" : ~ 1 ~ X ur CH~LC 1 U : :.l1Ot::J+~ ~~ +ct::J:.l-PAGE 22/2t:i
AJI permits from Central District Health, Eagle Sewer District & Eagle Fire District shall besecured pri oX" to issuance of building permit.
Written approval of all well water for any shared or commercial well shall be obtained from the
Icbho Department of Wat:er Resoun;es shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of anybuildin g permits.
Unless septic tanks are permi~ wet line sewers will be required and the applicant will bereqn.ired to fum.isb the aty Engineer with a letter from the sewer entity serving the property,accepting the projeCt for senrice~ prior to issuance of any building permits..
The applicant shaIl submit- a .letter frOIn the appropriate dtainage entity approving the dninagesystem and/or accepting said drainage; oX" submit Ct letter from a registered professional engineer
certifying that all drainage shall be retained on-site prior to issuance of any building pennits orCertificate of Occupancy. whichever occurs first A copy of the construction drawing(s) shall besubmitted with the letter.
The apPlicant shall submit plans and calculations prepared by a registeted professional engineer to
handle the satisfactory disposal of an storm ~Tn~ge on the applicant's site. Drainage system plansshall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of any buildIDg
pennits.
The plans sball show how swales, or drain piping, will be developed in the drainage easementS.The approved drainage systetn slWl be constructed, or a performance bond shall be submitted tothe City Qed, prior to issuance of any building permits. The lot shall be so graded that all runoffruns either over the cnrb, or (0 the dramage ea5emen4 and no runoff shall cross any lot line ontoanother lot except witlrin a drdinage ease(Qent.
All design and calcu1atioos shall meet the requirements of Ada County Highway District-ConStlUcdon of the stotm drain disposal system shall be complete before an occupancy permit is
issued.
No ditch,. pipe or other structure or canal, for inigatiOD water or irrigation waste water owned byan organized itrigation district, canal company, ditch association.. or other inigation entity, shall beobstru.cted,. routed, covered or changed in any way nnless such obstructioI4 rerouting~ covering or
clw1gjng has fim been approved in writing by the entity. A Registered Engineer shaIl certify thatany ditch rerouting, piping, covering or otherwise changing the existing inigation or waste ditch(I) has been made in such a manner that the flow of water will not be impeded or increasedbeyond carrying capacity of the downstream ditch; (2) will not otherwise injure any peISOO. orpersons using or interested in such ditch or their property; and (3) satisfied the Idaho Standards for
Pablic Worb Construction. A copy of such written approval and certification shall be filed withthe constrnction thawing and submitted to the City prior to issuance of any building permits.
Street light plans shall be submitted and approved as to the location. height and wattage to the CityEngineer (if applicable) prior to issuance of any building penuits or Certificate of Occupancy..whichever occurs firsL All construction shaU comply with the City's specifications and standards.
The applicant shall provide a recorded easement acceptable to the City Eugineer~ for the purposeof installing and maintaining street light fIXtUreS, conduit and wiring lyjng outside any dedicated
public right-of-way, prior to issuance of any building permits.
Page 8 of 12
~~
~'CU\'Wo \CtJ.11).M )COO Gd.JIQc
- ~- ~ & ~~ 4 ~ . ~~ r ~un . ~ ~ ~ s ur CM~~C
14.
15.
16.
17.
1 U: :'::::1Ot::S.,.~~~.,.t:it::S~.t-'AGE ~~/2D
The applicant shall pay applicable street light inspection fees prior to Certificate of Occupancy.
10.Parking lot light plan shall be submitted and approved as to the location, height and wattage by the
City Engineer. All consttnction shall comply with the City s specifications and standards.
lighting is required in the parking area and shall be properly illuminated to avoid accidenES. Anylights used to illuminate the parking lot shall be so arnmged as to reflect the light away from the
adjoining property-
II.The parking area. shall be paved and shall be maintained in good condition without holes and free
of all dnst, trasb~ weeds and other debris- .
12-One set of building
p~
for any non singje.family residential U5ejo shall be sllbmitted to the Eagle
Fire Department for approval An approval letter from the Eagle Fire Department shall be
submitted to the City prior to issuance of any boiJeJ;ng permits or Certificate of Occupancy.whichever occurs first The letter shall include the following comments and minimum
requirements, and any other items of concern as may be detennined by the Eagle FIre Departmentofficials: a.. "The applicant bas XIlBde arrangements to comply with all requiremen~ of the rueDepartment. ..
The fire hydrant locations shall be reviewed and be approved in writing by the Eagle Fire
Department prior to the Oty Engineer signing the final plar.
Minimum. flow per hydnnt shall be 1 ~OOO gallons per minute for one and two familydwellin~ I~OO gallons per minute for dwellings having a fire area in excess Of 3~600square feet, and 1,500 gallons per minute for non-residential uses (Le.; Commercial,Industrial, Schools, etc.). Flow rates shall inspected in accordance with all agencieshaving jnrisdiction~ and shall be verified in writing by the Eagle Fire Department prior toissuanceof any building permits or certificate of Occupancy,. whichever occurs firstThe proposed fIre protection system shall be reviewed and approved by the Eagle FireDepattment prior to issuance of a building permit
13.Any recreation area, greenbelt area or pathway area. along the Boise Rivet'
,.
Dry Creek Or any other
area designated by the City Council or Eagle City Pathway/Greenbelt Committee for a path walkway shall be approved in writing by the Eagle City Pathway/Greenbelt Committee prior toissuance of a building permit.
Cooserv atio~ xecreation and river access easements (if applicable) sha1l be approved by the EagleCity Pathway/Greenbelt Committee and shall be shown on the final plat prior to issuance of abuilding permit.
The applicant shall cOInply with the provisions of the: Eagle City Code, pertaining to floodplainand river protection regulations (if applicable) prior to issuance of a building permit.
The appJicant shaJI obtain written approval of the development relative to the effects of the BoiseRivet' Flood PlaiJ1 (if applicable) from the Corps. of Engineets prior to issuance
of a buildingpermi L
The applicant shall obtain approval of the development relative to its effects on wetlands or other
natural waterways (If applicable) from the Corps. of Engineers and the Idaho Depattment of Water
Page 9 of 12
rL Dc;pt \Et# l'CU- MOD
~ ~- - A -~ A ~ . ~~ r ~UM . ~ ~ ~ x ur OHU~O
21.
22.
23.
1 U : :.! 10 t:S 't-::t ~::t 't-I:H::S :.! -,.t-' AG J:;:.!,q/2t:i
Resources and/or any other agency having jurisdiction prior to issuance of a buildiDg permit.
1&.Basements in the flood plain are prohibited.
The Americans with Disabilities Act, Uniform Bnilding Code. Eagle City Code~ and. all applicableCounty, State and Federal Codes and Regulations shall be complied with. All design and
construction shall be in accordance with all applicable City of Eagle Codes unless specificallyapproved hy the Commission andlor Council.
19.
20.New pIan~ which incorporate any required chang~ shall be submitted for staff approval. Staffmay elect to take those plans to the Design Review Board and/or the P1anning and Zoningornmh,:sion for review and approval. .
- -
Any changes to the plans and specifications upon which this approval is based, other than thoserequired by the above conditi~ will require snbmitW of an application for modiIJCation andapproval of that a.pplication prior to commencing any change. Any change by the applicant in theplanned use of the property which is the subject of this application? shall x-equlre the applicant
comply with all mlest regulations, ordinances.. planst or other regulatory and legal restrictions info~ce at. the time the applicant or itS SUCCessOIS in inte~t submits application to the City of Eagle
fot a change to the planned use of the subject property.
Approval of 31Jy Design Review shall expire without 1)otice to. the applicant on the date ofexpimtion of the Design Review, as stipulated in Eagle City Code (one year from the City Council
approval date).
The Citi s actions on the application does not grant the applicant any appropriation of water or
interference with existing water rights. The applicant indemnifies and holds the City hannless for
any and all water rightst claitns in any way associated with this application.
CONCLUSIONS OF LA W:
1. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on May 3 2001.
2. Notice of Public Hearing on the 3.pplication for the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission waspublished in accordance for reqoirements of Title 61? Chapter 659 Idaho. Code and the Eagle CityordIDances on June 161' 2001. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners withinthree-hundred feet (300-feet) of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of Title 67
Chapter 657 Idaho Code and Eagle City Code on June 13, 2001- Requests for agencies' reviews weretransmitted On May 4" 2001 in accordance with the requirements of the Eagle City Code.
Notice of Public Hearing on the application for the Eagle City Council was published in accordance
for requirements of Title 67) Chapter 65, Idaho Code and the Eagle City ordinances on July 28,2001.Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property oWners within three-hundred feet (300-feet) of the
subject property in accoIdance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter
6S~ Idaho Code and EagleCity Code on July 25.. 2001.
3 . 1l1e City Council has reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed conditional use
an~ in terms of Eagle City Code Section 8-3-2
t.t.
tbru r' (required findings for approval of aconditional use)1' has made the following conclusions:
Page 10 of 12
~~
~'OrI2OO1 \CU.II).~ MOD a:t..doc
~ ~~ - ~ ~ - ~~ ~ C : ~~ r ~un : ~ ~ L. ur CM~~C 1 U : :.! 10 t::S T::I ;.:s::l T b t::S:.! ('l"'Au.b :.!~/ ~t:I
The proposed conditional use;
Will, in f~ constitute a conditional use as established in Section 8-2...3 of Eagle
City Code Title 8 as conditioned herein;
Will be harmonious with and in accordance with tbe general objectives or with
any specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan and/or this title (Eagle CityCode Title 8) since there are no inconsistencies with the Comptehensive Plan and
since the tower will be required to meet conditions of a design review application;
Will be designed, consttucted. operated and maintained to be hannonious and
. appropriateiu a~ce with the existing or intended charaCter of the generalvicinity and that such use will not change the essential charade( of the same areasince this \l3e will not only be required to meet the City's desjgn review
:requiremenn;, but is also utilizing an existing pole rather than constructing a Dewstructure;
Will Dot be ~dous or disttubing to existing 01' future neighborhood uses sinceno known complaints or safety issues have been received from the existing uses
SUII'OUDdin g the tower and little change will be made to the tower that wouldwanant any subsequent concerns regarding these issues;
Will be se.xved adequately by essential public facilities such as highways
~ streets,police and fire protection, dminage structures" refuse disposa4 water and sewerand schools; or that the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment ofthe proposed USe shall be able to provide adequately any such services as noted in
responses received by agencies providing the public services or as conditionedherein;
WiD not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for publicfacilities and service$ and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of thecommunity since the structure will be attached to an existing tower and will nOt
requite any additional services;
Will not involve ~ activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions ofoperation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfareby reason of excessive production of traffic" noise, smoke, fumesJ glare or odors;
Will have access on an existing vehicular approach to the property which isdesigned so as to not create an mterference with traffIC on SUIrOIIIlding publicthoroughfares as required by the Ada County Highway District; and
Will not result in the destmction. loss or damage of a naturaL scenic or historicfeature of major importance since none ate apparent on this site.
Page 11 of 12
l:.:\PI.I=Kc DqIt~ ~ ~I'CtJ.tO-96 MOD td.doc
~ u~ - ~ ~ - ~~ 0: 1 ~ r KU~ : ~ 1 ~ Y Ur cAuLc 1 U: ;'!"'t:::S+~~~+t::it:::S;'!1 t"Auc ;.!t::i/ ~t:i
DATED this 28th day of August 2001.
CITY COUNCn..
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
Ada Co ~.. Idaho
~..
AITEST: .
. ,~;
2!~~~
/:O~YOt.c,.;\
Page 12 of 12
~1J'\mmirc ~ ~l..cu-lo.!I6)dOt) ~doc
Case No. IPC- E-04-
Exhibit 126
October 14, 2003
Eagle City Council Minutes
IPC Height Exception Application for 138 kV lines Public Hearing
ORIGINAL
EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
Minutes
October 14, 2003
CALL TO ORDER: Meeting called to order at 5:03 p.rn.
ROLL CALL:Present: BASTIAN, GUERBER, NORDSTROM. Absent:
SEDLACEK. A quorum is present.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
PUBLIC COMMENT:
A. Joe Rausch would like to discuss the V-Haul business.
Mayor introduces the item.
Joe Rausch, states that he was notified by the city, that the location of the V-Haul business is a
noD-t':onforming use. He would like to openly discuss the Council's desire regarding this issue.
The V-Haul business is currently in the same location as the mini-storage facility. Discussion as
to what is needed in order to bring the V-Haul business into conformance. Vaughan states that a
conditional use permit would need to be obtained in order for both the mini-storage and the
trailer rental use to co-exist. Also discusses the need to modify the code to add the definition
a trailer rental business. Mayor would like to expedite this issue as far as staff working with Mr.
Rausch in order to find a reasonable solution to this issue. Council feels that a definition
trailer rental business, would be an appropriate addition to current code. And as the U-Haul is
basically a complimentary use to the mini-storage at this location the City should find a way to
accommodate them.
B. Lawrence Bosio would like to air a complaint before the City Council.
Mayor introduces the issue.
Mr. Bosio expresses his gratitude to the Ada County Sheriffs Office as they have been very
responsive to his concerns. Mr. Bosio has concerns with the noise levels of air conditioners and
swimming pool motors that are located near neighboring property owners, and that run
throughout the night. He would like to see a building code established to address these noise
issues. Mr. Bosio is also concerned about the parties continuing at residential areas after the bars
have closed, and on street parking problems this situation causes. Discussion.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Consent Agenda items are considered to be routine and are acted on with one
motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless the Mayor, a
Councilmember, member of City Staff, or a citizen requests an item to be removed
from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Items removed from the Consent Agenda
will be placed on the Regular Agenda in a sequence determined by the Rules of
Order.
Any item on the Consent Agenda which contains written Conditions of Approval
from the City of Eagle City Staff, Planning & Zoning Commission, or Design
Review Board shall be adopted as part of the City Council's Consent Agenda
approval motion unless specifically stated otherwise.
All design review applications will be appealed by the Zoning Administrator to the
City Council for their review and approval.
A. Claims Against the City.
B. Minutes of September 9, 2003.
EXHIBIT 126
CASE NO. IPC-O4-
Paac 1K:\COUNcn.\MINU1'ES\T~ Mioutel wort AreaICC-10-14-03nio.lIoc
C. Minutes of September 23t 2003.
D. Re-aooointment to the Plannine and Zonine Commission:The Mayor is
requesting Council confumation of the fe-appointment of Mathew Glavach to
the Planning and Zoning Conumssion. Mr. Glavach recently fulfilled the
remainder of a vacated term. His re-appointment would be for a three year term.
(NM)
E. Re-aooointment to Co~ssion:The Mayor is requesting
Council confmnation of the re-appointment of Linda Goldman to the Cultural
Arts Commission. Ms. Goldman recently fulfilled the remainder of a vacated
term. Her re-appointment would be for a three year term. (NM)
F. DR..43-98 MOD3 - Modification to the Master SieD Plan for Eaele PavilionSho in Center - Pete Lo 8: Pete Loyat represented by Chuck Buckner with
Idaho Electric Signs Inc., is requesting design review approval to modify the
master sign plan for the Eagle Pavilion Shopping Center. The site is located on
the northeast comer of South Eagle Road and State Highway 44 at 480 South
Eagle Road. (WEV)
G. DR-35-03 - Buildin Wall Si n for Carats Fine Diamonds and Gold - obn
Grene:John Grene, represented by Chuck Buckner with Idaho Electric Signs
Inc., is requesting design review approval to construct a building wall sign for
Carats Fine Diamonds and Gold. The site is located within the Eagle Pavilion
Shopping Center at 400 South Eagle Road. (WEV)
H. DR-42-03 - Ent" Stmctut!..!!!!!Jdonumen* Shro for Henry s Subdivision -Hen '5 North 40 LLC: Henry s North 40 LLC, represented by Peter Harris
and Kristen Van Engelen, is requesting design review approval to construct an
entry structure and monument sign for Henry s Subdivision. The site is located
on the west side of Meridian Road approximately 1,320-feet south of Beacon
Light Road.
I. DR-43-03. Modification to the Existinl! BuUdin!! Elevations for the EaRle
Manor A artment BoUdin - 1m Tomlinson: Jim Tomlinson, represented by
Ray Crowder with Crowder Associates Architects, is requesting design review
approval to modify the existing building elevations of the Eagle Manor
Apartment Building. The modifications include the installation of dormers, and
installing a higher roof over the two stair towers. The site is located on the
northeast comer of Cedar Ridge Road and 2nd Street at 276 Cedar Ridge Road.
(WEV)
J. DR-4S-03 - Buildin WaD Si For Curves for Women - Cind Reriford:
Cindy Heriford with Curves for Woment represented by Tony Meade with Idaho
Electric Signs IDc., is requesting design review approval to construct an
internally illuminated building wall sign for Curves for Women. The site is
located on the south side of State Street within Bosanka Village at 393 West
State Street. (WEV)
K. DR-46-03. BuDdin Wall Si for the UPS Store - W &H Limited Liabilit
Co.W & H Limited Liability Company, represented by Bruce Williams with
Young Electric Sign Company, is requesting design review approval to construct
an internally illuminated building wall sign for The UPS Store. The site is
located within the Eagle Pavilion Shopping Center at 372 South Eagle Road.
(WEV)
L. Final Plat Extension of Time for Yorkshire Acres ubdivision - Robert
DeShazo:Robert DeShazo Jr ./Berkshire West, represented by Douglas W.
Paae 2K:'COUNCIL'HINUTES\T~r8IY MiDut.es Work AraV;:;C. JO- )~3min.doc
Landwer, is requesting a second one-year extension of time for the final plat for
Yorkshire Acres Subdivision. The 4.64-acre, I5-lot (13-buildable,2-common)
residential subdivision is located on the south side of East Floating Feather
Road, approximately 900-feet west of Horseshoe Bend Road. (WEV)
M. Review and action on bid for iDcreasine the size of two lawn drains and
addin two additional lawn drains at Merrill Park.(SKM)
Buxton states that items 8B, 8C, and 9B will need to be continued to the next meeting as there
are legal issues which need to be addressed prior to Council taking action on them.
Bastian moves to continue items 8B, 8C and 9B to the next regular Council meeting.
Seconded by Guerber. ALL A YE...MOTION CARRIES.
Discussion regarding time frame at which this item will be acted on.
Bastian moves to approve the Consent Agenda, except for the Claims Against the City
which will be moved to the end of the agenda. Seconded by Guerber. Discussion. Bastian
amends his motion to remove item J for discussion. Second concurs. BASTIAN
YEjGUERBER AYE; NORDSTROM AYE. ALL A YE...MOTION CARRIES.
Claims Against the City will be moved to item lOB.
J. DR-4S-03 - BuUdin Wall Si For Curves for Women - Cind Beriford: Cindy Heriford
with Curves for Women, represented by Tony Meade with Idaho Electric Signs Inc., is
requesting design review approval to construct an internally illuminated building wall sign for
Curves for Women. The site is located on the south side of State Street within Bosanka Village
at 393 West State Street. (WEV)
Tony Meade, with Idaho Electric Signs, states that there is a site specific condition disallowing
the use of the trademark that he believes is a violation of federal law. He would like the
trademark symbol to remain. Bastian states he was in attendance at the Design Review meeting
and feels that the Design Review Board was merely trying to eliminate clutter with the signage,
but as the trademark has been allowed previously he has no issue with allowing it to remain.
Bastian moves to approve DR.4S-03 Building Wall Sign For Curves for Women
presented, striking site specific condition #4 in that the 3" ~ trademark may be included
with the sign. Seconded by Nordstrom. ALL A YE...MOTION CARRIES.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. CU-09-02 - Public Service Facilitv! Heieht Exce1!!!!!!!.B.eQuest::138k V SuI!:
Transmission line - Idaho Power:Idaho Power, represented by Layne Dodson, is req~esting
conditional use approval to construct a 138kV sub-transmission line and a height exception
request to construct utility poles with heights ranging from approximately 70 to 85-feet (35 to 50-
feet higher then the required maximum of 35-feet). The specific routing of the new sub-
transmission line will connect with the existing 138kV power line near the intersection of
Edgewood and State Street. The new line will proceed west along State Highway 44 to
Ballantyne Road, where the line will be constructed along the same route as the existing power
lines that parallel the highway, to the new Star, Idaho, substation site. It should be noted that it
has not yet been detennined which side of the bypass the line will traverse; this item is left to be
determined from comments received at the public hearings as well as the determination of the
Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission and the Eagle City Council. (WEV)
Mayor introduces the item.
Bastian clarifies a comment he made earlier today and would like to assure everyone that he has
Paac 31C:'COUNCIL'MINUTES\TCIqIOnII'y MiDuta Wort AJa\CC .10-14-03m.doc:
an open mind and will consider all testimony in a balanced and fair manner.
Nordstrom also states that he made comment at a Chamber of Commerce meeting, but that he
feels he can make a fair and just decision based on infonnation which has been submitted and
that which will be received tonight.
Layne Dodson, representative for Idaho Power 10790 Franklin Road. Mr. Dodson presents the
application. Dodson gives a history of the application with the City, the public input which was
sought and received and the findings thereof. Review of costs for installation for overhead lines
versus underground lines. Discussion regarding location and costs.
Jeff Lowe, City Planner, presents the staff report and reviews comment which the outside
consultant provided regarding this application. Discussion.
Mayor opens the public hearing.
Mayor swears in Mr. Ricks.
Steven Ricks 1560 N. Crestmont Dr. Ste. B Meridian, Idaho. Represents the property owners
immediately north of bypass between the Eagle Forum and Rocky Mountain Fitness Center, an
approximately 25 acre parcel. I have three points I wish to make to the Mayor and Council
concerning our objection to the location of the transmission line along the Bypass east of Eagle
Road, which is the area we are concerned with. The first point is that from the east, that is
becoming the entry corridor to the City of Eagle. I think it is fair to state that the City of Eagle
has essentially shifted its center of gravity slightly to the south from what existed 30 or 40 years
ago when our family bought some property out here. It use to be down State Street it's now
shifted so the primary entrance from a visual point of view is along the Bypass and then north on
Eagle Road, those two entrances to the City. If the construction of the 138 KV line is located on
either of those entrance corridors the visualization of those lines, from my observation, will never
be camouflaged. There is no right for the property owners along the Eagle Bypass east of Eagle
Road to plant trees close to the lines that would grow up and somewhat shield the visual effects
of those 90' poles. For the main reason is that they are in the right of way which the adjacent
property owners would have no access to or control over. Once installed there would never be
any type of camouflage or landscaping that would soften the visual impact of those features on
the landscape. The second point I would like to make is the property we own north of the Bypass
has been zoned by this Council, previous administrations as a CBD zone, which means Central
Business District. Which essentially means the City of Eagle would desire that, that area be
developed into a retail center eventually. In our discussions with prospective purchases,
builders, developers and urn potential retailers, I can say this based on those discussions, that a
90' tall power lines adjacent to that property would be a very serious disincentive for those kinds
of businesses to locate at that location. It simply isn t in harmony with what they view t6 be the
type of property where they would, high class stores, would want to construct. The third point I
would like to make which has essentially, this is the fourth, I think third or fourth hearing I have
attended on this issue. It has essentially been ignored at the beginning right at the out set the
bodies who are hearing this testimony, and the presenters from Idaho Power, Mr. Dodson, who is
always gracious in his presentations, have initially discarded the possibility of constructing these
lines and power poles in the existing right of way. This decision, as I have observed it, was made
initially based on the 14 member citizens advisory committee at a recommendation that the lines
should not be located near residential areas. But I would raise the point that the existing right of
ways which jogs up an alley and then over to the west and then down Kingsford and then out
State Street, has been with us for decades. And has been accommodated, visually by the
residents of Eagle for decades. Additionally the landscaping adjacent to this right of way
corridor which presently exists had matured and very frankly as you walk around the city of
Peae ..K:\COUNCIL~T erqxnry Mi8u8eI Wort Area'CC.l ()'l4-03mbuloc
Eagle you don t even know there is a transmission line above you because of the trees and the
vegetation canopy which is provided by that. That will never happen on the Bypass, there will
never be in our lifetimes, if ever trees do grow up to shield the visual obstruction from the
ground. And so these folks which are adjacent to the corridor now, the existing corridor, have
been accustom to those power lines being there for years and to go up another 30 or 40' is going
to be no different because you can t see the existing lines anyway because of the trees. Unless
you re back up Eagle Road and are looking down on the City. The last point I would make is
that because the difference in $2,300,000 per mile vs. $300,000 per mile it would seem to me a
lot less money could be spent in locating the new lines along the existing route now and perhaps
bringing, for a little cash, to the adjacent property owners for the perceived loss of value to the
property if the lines go up another 60'. That to me would be a whole lot cheaper than having
$2,000,000 a mile to go underground. H I were an adjacent property owner who had mature
landscaping and all they were going to ,do was put the pole up another 30' or 40' and I've gotten
use to the poles already there, and the lines, that are already there I would be happy to put a check
in my pocket for the bother of having some additional poles put there. Rather than being taxed
the 2 million dollars a mile to put it underground.
Bill Clark, 479 Main St Boise, Idaho here tonight representing Eagle River. We have been
fonowing this proposal since we first read about it in the newspaper about a year ago. We were
not part of the advisory team, nor were we aware of the study going on. And we since began to
follow this very closely. I think all of you on the Council have followed or have been part of the
development and planning for Eagle River, as well as creating the vision for what Eagle is as a
community in its physical and social character. And of course one of the things that stands out is
the very high standards the City has established and continues to pursue as far as the asthetics
development. And Eagle River was held to very high standards and we have been happy to do so
and be part of a community that has those kinds of standards. We have spent several million
dollars on landscaping in Eagle River and along the alternate route underneath where these
power lines might go on the south side. We also paid Idaho Power to underground lines, much
smaller lines, distribution lines along Eagle Road. At the time we did that we still weren
informed of the fact that within a few months a proposal would be coming along to putting giant
lines along our north side. The opinion we have, is that the conununity in order to maintain the
kind of standards and character that unintelligible they absolutely be pursing the underground
option. And my recommendation to you after having been through these hearings and so on is, I
think has been part of the discussion tonight too, is that there be a serious evaluation of what the
options are for financing this. What part Idaho Power can pay in it, if not entirely perhaps there
is a cost sharing approach, perhaps there is something with franchise fees, perhaps there
something with a surcharge, perhaps there is something with a community wide local
improvement district. But we estimate that for Eagle River alone the combination of the lowered
land values and property values, that is, that which would be built on that land that would be
impacted would be on the order of 20 million dollars. You take the annual tax revenues to all
jurisdictions from that and that's on the order of $400, 000 a year in reduced tax revenues, if our
estimate is correct. And that's just the Eagle River project, we are a mile of frontage the most
single, the single most impacted property owner, I believe, by this proposal. In any event, I think
that you ll see an effect on other property values as well and so I hope that draws your attention
even more to the negative effects just from a financial perspective let alone the aesthetics.
Everything that Eagle has done to establish itself as a distinctive community of extraordinary
quality, I think would be diminished by... unintelligible.
NORDSTROM: ...as far as people you have visited to maybe come up with what you think is the
most appropriate way to anticipate the extraordinary costs that we mayor may not be able to sell
the PUC on?
P&jIeS
K:\COUNCIL\MJN1JI'ES\TcqJODr)' MDda Won: Area'CC-!~ !+(I3_doc:
CLARK: Councilman Nordstrom, I, first of all I don t have a very strong knowledge of the
procedures and standards of the Public Utilities Commission. I do know in the conversations we
have had with Idaho Power and others that, in other states and jurisdictions there are
requirements, and I don t know the method of payment, I believe I have heard, but I can t say for
certain that in some instances it is required that it is an ordinary and necessary expense and
appropriate unintelligible and that it is being done quite a bit in various parts of the country
including these high voltage transmission lines such as this 138 K v line here. As far as the
standards what the standards are of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission, I don t know. I mean
I can t answer that. I believe your legal council has begun to investigate that, but there are I
believe these other~ I mean they could Ok this is part of the rate base. Now does that mean the
rate base for all of Idaho, an area, a more defined area and could it relate to a surcharge within
the city of Eagle that has a sunset provision that after it is paid, or your share is paid maybe there
is room for negotiation. Maybe there s a you pay 30% they pay 70%, I don t know, I'mjust
making up those percentage numbers as I go along. But anyway, I think having before you and
perhaps with the cooperation with Idaho Power a fair examination of what those altemati yes are
maybe the Public Utilities staff could join in on those, although I don t know the standards and
criteria that they would use. Idaho Power s staff has told me that ~'well it is inevitable at
sometime, somewhere in Idaho we will have to start under grounding the Hnes, and this may be
the place we do it". I hope it is.
Mayor swears in Mr. Khorsand
Hossein Khorsand 4132 Ballantyne Lane Eagle, Idaho. I want to thank you for this opportunity
to gi ye my opinion. It seems that Idaho Power has succeeded to reduce this problem to two
choices. Either you bear the 9 million or three million or whatever the figure is or you change
the character of the City by these high poles. From my experience with Idaho Power, I have a
doubt. And let me qualify that, why I have a doubt. They are suggesting to put a substation very
close to someone' s house on Linder Road and when I come and ask them for the technical
analysis that why don t you put the substation on State Street or on Emmett Highway or on
Highway 55 and show that the power loss because of the smaller distribution line does not
amount to any significant increase of cost. The letter that I received from them is a very general,
generic letter which the most direct answer that they have in that letter states land availability. In
other words, this is an example of how they are going to profit because there was cheap land
available on Linder Road they choose to put a substation close to someone s house, very close.
Therefore, I think we should take a look back and question Idaho Power. Show us a bigger
picture, where the power comes from, how its distributed, what is the area of use. And we
should take that, if we cannot analyze it ourselves we should hire some technical people to take a
second look of what is the broader picture. And if the broader picture does not bring us possibly
other solutions then we say ok, these are the two choices and we make our choice. Thank you
very much.
Mayor swears in Mr. Butler.
Mark Butler, 52 N. Second Street, actually my home address is 1640 W. Washam Rd. I know it
is really difficult to testify against something like this, which is what I plan to do, mostly because
of Layne and Blake. They are great people and you get up and you have to testify against and
you feel really bad about that, so I can understand how Council feels sometimes, you know when
they have to vote one of my projects.
BASTIAN: Mayor, may I interrupt?
MERRilL: Stan.
Pate 6K:\COUNCn.\MINUTES\Teuporwy MiPulO Work Aru'CC-I~ l4-03iDILOOc
BASTIAN: Observation Mark, we are dealing with the issue here. And when we work as a
Council we have to deal with issues and not each other. So that is the way we can walk away
being friends when we disagree and vo~e against each other, that's ok. And we have some fine
people here representing Idaho Power that s their job and that's what they re here to do, is to
represent Idaho Power s case the best they can. But it is not the individual, it s the issue we are
dealing with.
BUTLER: Thank you. With that in mind its also the zoning code and comprehensive code which
that guides your decisions, and that is where I want to concentrate my comments to is the code
and the comprehensive plan. First there is a conditional use permit which has been applied for,
as you know section 8-2 General Standards for conditional uses outlines several findings that
need to be made by this Council to approve a conditional use permit. I believe there are several
findings in here that cannot be made and will provide my evidence for why I believe that's the
case. Finding B, and I'll read through these very quickly, the use is suppose to be "harmonious
with and in accordance with the general objectives or with any specific objective of the
comprehensive plan and/or this title." And I will specifically point out a section of the
comprehensive plan that it does not comply with, in my opinion. uC. Will be designed,
constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the
existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the
essential character of the same area." And I think again that a section of the comprehensive plan
I'm going to bring out and talk to you a little bit would show that C. cannot be complied with.
D. Will Dot be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses.We have already
heard testimony on bow this will be disturbing to neighborhood uses, and so I don t think I need
to go there. But, I did provide the City with a packet of information on a study that has been
done by a couple people fro~ I believe Texas. and I would like that to be in the record. And
what they show there is that values have tended to go down where these large power poles have
been constructed adjacent to properties. And I think that is an important issue. "F. Will not
create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will
not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.We have heard testimony that
this would be detrimental to the economic development of Eagle River. for which, as you know,
we spent years working on that to try and get that approved, and it s coming about to where it'
totally awesome. I., and most importantly "Will not result in the destruction. loss or damage of a
natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance." Now, jumping to the comprehensive
plan there is a line on the Comprehensive Plan that is called a scenic conidor line, and this line
was developed by previous Zoning Administrator, it was taken out to focus groups in 1999 and
2000, and the focus groups supported this line and this line is also defined with language in the
comprehensive plan. And I think this is a key issue, because this line shows the area along State
Street, as well as Eagle Road. but the area along State Street is where they re proposing these
towers. Before we jump to the text in the Comprehensive Plan, an interesting point is in the
zoning code there is a map that also uses this line. And that map is exhibit 8, to subsection 8-
5s13, and that map is the map that is utilized to show where cell towers are not to go. And if you
look at the section on cell towers, you could almost interpret a lot of that to be related to towers,
but I know that wasn t the intent of when that was written. But there seem to be several
inconsistencies with that section, but irregardless if you look at this map here and say in this
section here telecommunication towers are not permitted. Why then would be allow numerous
towers that are as high or close to the same height as cell towers in this area? And then we ask
what is this area. It is the scenic corridor area. Chapter 11 talks about this area, of the
Comprehensive Plan, 11.1. "It is a special area and site it's a defined area. sights or structures of
historic architectural...1 don t need to read it, you have it. But basically what it says is that this
is an area to be preserved as visual, a visual corridor for the city that's 11.1. There is another
Pap 7
K:\COUNCJL\MJNU'I'BS\TaJ'f'OfIIY Minu1e. Work Area'CC-10-14-0JaiD.doc
section in the camp plan the State StreetlEagle Road corridor which is this conidor. And since
that is only 2 sentences I will read those. "This State StreetJEagle Road corridor is designated as
a special area to its historical, architectural and scenic significance. This area is depicted on the
comprehensive plan. So why would we take an area of scenic significance and put towers. What
is scenic significance, it's a type of architecture we re seeing there, it's the type of landscaping
that we, the City has required Eagle River to put in. It is the entry features that are right there at
Eagle Road and State Street, it's the water feature that Eagle River put in there, it s the statue of
the Eagle that's at the intersection. These are scenic features of major importance. And, I
believe if we look at the zoning code and the comprehensive plan its, pretty clear that we need to
recommend denial, or deny the poles and come up with some other alternative. Another location.
or underground, or at least a portion underground. And lastly with regard to committees, I'm all
for committees, I got the mailing I thought about going to the meetings and being on the
committees and I know its great to get public involvement that's really important. But you go
the code and the comprehensive plan and I think both the code and the comprehensive plan say
this is the wrong spot. Something needs to be done here. So, I think that concludes my
testimony. One other thing, cost there is nothing in the comprehensive plan or code that says,
because something is going to cost too much you can then go against the comp plan and code,
and isn t that true of all of the developers, myself who has added on downtown Eagle, all these
people who put money and come to you and say they can t afford. Remember when we tried to
get 28,000 square feet on Eagle River, it was brutal, ya know. So to say here that we are going to
use cost as an issue, I know it s important and now being on the private side, I know how
important it is. But I think again the guidance we have is the code and comprehensive plan and
they are great to work with. You have to be able to come up with a solution that works. Thank
you.
Mayor swears in Mr. Hanaford.
Dave Hanaford 3062 N. Linder Rd. I just want to say a couple things. Number one, I am outside
of the city limits of Eagle, but we love Eagle as if we are within the city limits so remember that
in the future. And I am also opposed to these huge towers, I mean anyone can go and look at
McMillian Road and get a much better idea that the computer generated graphics of what Eagle
is in store for. I read in last weekends paper how Idaho Power is going to PUC to get rates upped
for a power plant in Mountain Home, I think. So why can t we go to PUC and have rates raised
to make underground the standard, ya know. We re beyond the year 2000 it should be the
standard. The other thing, I know it was brought up at one of the earlier meetings I was at, has
Idaho Power made any effort to team up with the gas companies and the cable companies and the
folks who are constantly digging underground anyway? I mean get all of the services there at
once and share the costs. And lastly as far as going to PUC as far as raising rates, maybe that
could just be a percentage, maybe the individual towns that want the underground lines pay some
percentage, but the rate payers allover the state pay the other percentage. That's really all I had
to say, thanks.
Mayor swears in Mr. Buschart.
Russ Boschert 235 W. Floating Feather Road. A couple of ideas, number one I don t see a real
obvious alternative to that particular route that is being proposed. It's sort of seems to be the
point A and point B and the least unintelligible, but I'm not sure if all of the alternatives have
been looked at. So we re talking, and I'm getting a little bit out of my realm here, but I think I
can give us some suggestions to look into. A 138 kv means 138 thousand volts, I believe, and to
run that high of voltage that means you d have to go way up in the air to get to the same safety
level and whatever. So, if we dropped the voltage down to 60 or 40 or something like that what
re really trying to do is get current.. We re trying get an amount of current over to Middleton
Paae IK:\COUNaI..\MINU'JES\T~ MiDuteI Wort Area'CC-lo..l~uin.doc
or wherever it's going to be. So if we drop the voltage considerable and ran a much thicker
cable, so instead of%" or whatever it would be, you went to 1 Vz , you could potentially get to
the same current level. And if you are down to 40 thousand volts, I don t know what the height
things are for that, but you might be down to 50 feet or something like that which would be a
whole lot more palatable. And unintelligible, it's going to cost them more because if you
running a lot thicker cable and you gotta run probably more poles, 'cause they can stretch,
etcetera, but it s not 9 million dollars, instead of, ya know it might be a half million dollars more
in aluminum or whatever. So I think there are some options that we ought to try and look at. But
from a location prospective I don t know of any other.
BASTIAN: Russ are you testifying as an expert on this?
BUSCHERT: No, I'mjust trying to say, I think there are some alternatives that haven t been
looked at and can we get the experts in here to do the math. This is a simple engineering
problem. That somebody that knows this stuff, rm sure there is probably somebody in the room
here that could say. Maybe you could recall the Idaho Power guy up here to ask him those
questions too.
Mr. Dodson provides rebuttal on the public testimony presented tonight. States that the original
application did propose to use exiting right of ways. He does not feel that power lines thwart
development, lists the example of Krispy Kreme Donuts and the Cross Roads development in
Meridian. Dodson concedes that Mr. Butler has valid comments regarding how the application
relates to the Comprehensive Plan. Also notes that the engineers have explored numerous
alternatives and this proposal is the most cost effective.
Mayor closes the public hearing.
City Attorney stands for question.
City Engineer, Vem Brewer, addresses questions regarding the use of large lines and shorter
power poles. Brewer does not think the outside consultant addressed this option, but is very
confident that they could. Brewer states he is not qualified to provide specific connnent
regarding electrical specifications.
Discussion. Bastian feels that based on the information tonight, he does not feel this application
meets the requirements of a conditional use permit, but perhaps there are alternatives which need
to be reviewed. He would be in favor of delaying a decision. Guerber feels that the existing
route should be looked at again, and perhaps other alternatives such as burying a portion of the
line or larger lines should be brought back for further review and discussion. Nordstrom concurs
with the comments from Bastian and Guerber. Also feels that this is really a regional power
issue and perhaps other entities that will be impacted by the addition of this line should be solely
shouldered by Eagle. He is prepared to deny this based on non..conformance to the
Comprehensive Plan. Mayor Merrill enjoys the uncluttered feel of Highway 44. She feels the
issue should be taken to PUC at this pOint and plead the case for the need for the line to be
buried. In the interim the City should be exploring acceptable alternatives which would be
acceptable in lieu of burying the lines. Discussion.
Bastian moves to continue this item to the next regular scheduled meeting, and in the mean
time I would Uke to work with staff develop a motion of denial based upon testimony given
tonight and based on the requirements of the CUP, and come back for the next meeting so
that we have our reasons clearly stated and that we can stand by our motion if we have to
in a legal action.. Seconded by Guerber. Discussion. ALL A YE...MOTION CARRIES.
Mayor calls a 5 minute break.
Pap 9
IC:\COUNCIL\MINUTES\TaJ1IOI'8)' Minute. Wodt Area'CC. )0-14-03mi11.doc
B. RZ.03 ~2l"eement From R-4 To MU-DA - Paramount
Parks at Ea21e LLC:Paramount Parks at Eagle LLC, represented by Gerald Teal with Teal
Architects, is requesting a rezone fromR-4 (up to four dwelling units per acre) to MU-
(Mixed Use with development agreement). The 2.9-acre site is located on the west side of Eagle
Road approximately 800-feet south of Floating Feather Road at 813 N. Eagle Road. This item
was continued from the September 23,2003 meeting.(WEV)
Mayor introduces the item.
The applicant has requested this item be continued.
Bastian moves to continue item RZ-3-03 Rezone with Development Agreement from R-
MU-DA. Seconded by Guerber. ALL A YE...MOTION CARRIES.
C. Review of proposed chanees to the solid waste contract with BFI.The public hearing is
for the adoption of fees and regulations in relation to recycling and trash service within the
corporate City limits. (SKM)
Mayor introduces the item.
Mark Miller, Chairman of the Let s Talk Trash Committee, 646 Palmetto Dr. Mr. Miller reviews
the history of this issue and the purview of the Committee. The goal has been to extend the life
of the landfill and provide equitability to residents. Mr. Miller reviews the findings of the public
opinion survey and of the committee.
Mayor opens the public hearing.
Mayor closes the public hearing.
Discussion. Guerber is pleased with the amount of public input this issue has garnered. Bastian
is concerned with some of the rates proposed feeling they may be somewhat higher than
necessary.
Tanya Mericle 11101 W. Executive Dr. Boise, Idaho representing BPI addresses Council
member Bastian s question regarding fees. Discussion.
Bastian moves to continue this item to the first regular meeting in November and at that
time BFI, having worked with the committee members, come back with several possibilities
of rates that would indicate at what point they can make a profit and contribute to
education and to the recyc:ling effort. Seconded by Guerber. ALL AYE...MOTION
CARRIES.
D. PPIFP-03. Merrill Subdivision No.ock Mountain Business Park - Dave Evans
Construction:Dave Evans Construction, represented by Dave Evans, is requesting combined
preliminary plat and fmal plat approval for Merrill Subdivision No.4 (a fe-subdivision of Lot 12,
Block 3~ Merrill Subdivision No.2, formally known as.Rocky Mountain Business Park). The
29-acre, 6-10t commercial subdivision is located at 501 S. Fitness Place. (WEV)
Mayor introduces the item.
Mayor swears in Mike Guyagos.
Mike Guyagos 2721 Cinnamon Placet Meridian. Mr. Guyagos makes himself available for
questions.
Jeff Lowe, City Staff, reviews the staff report.
Mayor opens the public hearing.
Mayor closes the public hearing.
Pqc 10
K:'COUNCD..\MIN\ImS\TeIqIOJWY MDmw Wort ARaICC-IO-l4-03mzLlb:
Mayor states she has no interest in this property and would generally recuse herself from
conducting this meeting, but as there is no chance of a tie tonight so she will continue to conduct
the meeting, and she will not participate in discussion.
Discussion.
Bastian moves to approve PP/FP-03 - Merrill Subdivision No.4. Seconded by
Nordstrom. ALL A YE...MOTION CARRIES.
E. CU-4-03 & PP-03 - Paddy Row Subdivision - Steve Roth:Steve Roth, represented by
Jane Suggs, is requesting a conditional use permit and preliminary plat approval for Paddy Row
Subdivision, a 30-lot (24-buildable, 5-common, I-private street) residential subdivision. The
55-acre site is generally located on the north side of txi Street approximately 50-feet north of
Plaza Drive at 150 South 200 Street. (WEV)
Mayor introduces the item.
Mayor swears Ms. Suggs.
Jane Suggs 200 Louisa St. Boise" Idaho representing Steve Roth. Ms. Suggs reviews the
application.
Jeff Lowe, City Staff, presents the staff report.
Vern Brewer, City Engineer, provides comment on the variance. Their office did review the
application and recommended approval. Discussion regarding FEMA maps.
Larry Sale" with Ada County Highway District, provides comment regarding the future extension
of Plaza Street.
Mayor opens the public hearing.
Suggs provides comment regarding the interaction with the Drainage District No.
Mayor closes the public hearing.
Bastian moves to approve CU-4-03 & PP-2-O3 Paddy Row Subdivision adding site specific
condition# 33: Construct a 61t vertical curb and gutter abutting both sides of the private
roadways within the development. Plans detailing the roadway improvements shall be
submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to City approval of the final
plat. #34: Developer shaD provide 3" caUper trees on both sides of Tranquil Street. #35
break away wrought iron fence shall be installed along the south side of the drainage ditch
within the subdivision. Seconded by Nordstrom. Discussion. Bastian amends his motion to
include all site specific and standard conditions of approval, as well as the drawings and
representations submitted by the applicant. Second concurs. ALL A YE...MOTION
CARRIES .
F. 03 - Variance From The Minimum Finished F1oor Elevation Above The Base Flood
Elevation - Steve Roth:Steve Roth, Represented By Jane Suggs, Is Requesting City Approval
Of A Variance From The Requirement To Construct The Residential Finished Floor Two-Feet
(2') Above The Base Flood Elevation, And From The Requirement To Construct Roadways And
Manholes ~-Foot (0.) Above The Base Flood Elevation. The Site Is Generally Located On
The Northeast Comer Of 2nd Street And Plaza Drive, At 150 South 2nd Street. (WEV)
Mayor introduces the item.
Guerber moves to approve V -2-03 variance from the minimum finished Door elevation
above the base flood elevation. Seconded by Nordstrom. ALL A YE_.MOTION CARRIES.
Pip II
K:\COUNCIL\MINU'J'ES\TeqJOlW)' MiDutea wortc ARa\CC-IG-I4-03D1iD.doc
G. ZOA.03 - Zonin Ordinance Amendment - Ci of Ea Ie: City of Eagle is proposing to
amend Eagle City Code Title 8 "Zoning , Chapter 2 "Zoning Districts and Maps , Article A "
Design Review Overlay District", amending the code to modify the architecture and site design
criteria for development located within the DR design review overlay district, and to adopt a
supplemental guidebook to define specific period architectural styles, themes, and elements
envisioned for the further enhancement of the City. Staff is requesting this item be continued to
the October 28 2003 meeting. (WEV)
Mayor introduces the item.
Guerber moves to continue ZOA -1-03 - Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the October 28,
2003. Seconded by Guerber. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES.
Mayor would like to re-arrange the agenda to hear the final plat for Countryside prior to the final
public hearing.
Nordstrom moves to hear item SA prior to item 6H. Seconded by Guerber. ALL
A YE...MOTION CARRIES.
SA. FPUD.03 & FP-I1-03 - Final Develo ment Plan and Final Plat for Count side
Estates Pun Subdivision No.3 - Countryside Estates LLC.: Countryside Estates LLC,
represented by Steve Arnold with Briggs Engineering~ are requesting final development plan and
final plat approval for Countryside Estates Subdivision No.3, a 27-lot (22-buildable, 5 common)
residential subdivision. This 11.02-acre phase of Countryside Estates PUD Subdivision is
located near the northwest comer of Ballantyne Road and State Highway 44 (State Street).
(WEV)
Mayor introduces the item.
Dave Yorgason, 6200 N. Meaker PI. representing Countryside Estates. Mr. Yorgason reviews
the application. Discussion regarding drainage concerns and mold issues throughout the valley.
City Engineer notes that they are planning on bringing forward some recommendations for
Council ~ s review.
Jeff Lowe, City Staff, makes himself available for questions.
Council discussion.
Nordstrom moves to approve FPUD-03 & FP-I1-03 - Final Development Plan and Final
Plat for Countryside Estates PUD Subdivision No.3 per staff recommendations and
findings all inclusive, with one exception that we strike the portion of site specific condition
number 10 that refers to tiling the ditch on the western boundary of the development only,
and that we leave the portion otherwise dictating tiling of the ditch. Seconded by Guerber.
ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES.
H. Resolution No. 03-12:Adoption of fees in association with general business licenses. The
proposed annual fee is in the amount of $25.00. (SKM)
Mayor introduces the item. Discussion.
Bastian moves to approve Resolution 03.12 a resolution of the city council of the city of
Eagle Idaho, relating to license fees for general business license and providing an
effective date. Seconded by Nordstrom. Discussion. TWO AYE; ONE NAY (Guerber)
MOTION CARRIES..
Staff is directed to contact the State Tax Commission and Ada County in an effort to notify all
businesses in town of their responsibility to obtain a business license.
Paae 121C:\COUNm\MINUIES\T~ MiDatei Work ALeaVX-I0-14-03aiD.doc
7. PROCLAMATIONS a RESOLUTIONS:NONE
8. FINAL PLATS
A. FPUD.03 & FP-I1-O3 - Final Develo ment Plan and Final Plat for Count side
Estates PUD Subdivision No. 3 - Count side Estates LLC.: Countryside Estates LLC,
represented by Steve Arnold with Briggs Engineering, are requesting final development plan and
final plat approval for Countryside Estates Subdivision No.3, a 27-10t (22-buildable, 5 common)
residential subdivision. This 11.O2-acre phase of Countryside Estates PUD Subdivision is
located near the northwest comer of Ballantyne Road and State Highway 44 (State Street).
(WHV)
See above.
B.
, -
03 ,. FP-03 - tjnal Develo,ment Plan and Final Plat for Brookwood
Subdivision No.9: Aries Develo men LLC: Aries Development, LLC represented by Mike
Hormaechea, is requesting fmal development plan and fmal plat approval for Brookwood
Subdivision Phase 9, a 38-lot (32-buildable, 6-common) residential subdivision. This 16.44-acre
(approx.) phase of Brookwood PUD is located on the north side of Floating Feather Road and
west of Feather Nest Estates Subdivision. The site is within the Eagle City Limits.
Mayor introduces the item.
See above.
C. FPUD-8-03 & FP-l0-03 ~ Final DeveloJ)ment Plan and Final Plat for Brookwood
Subdivision No. 10 - Aries Development LLC:Aries Development, LLC, represented by Mike
Hormaechea, is requesting final development plan and final plat approval for Brookwood
Subdivision Phase 10, a 22-1ot (lS-buildable, 4-common) residential subdivision. This 15.82-
acre (approx.) phase of Brookwood PUD is located on the north side of Floating Feather Road
and west of Feather Nest Estates Subdivision. The site is within the Eagle City Limits.
Mayor introduces the item.
See above.
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
A. ~Dd aDD!pval of cjtan2es t~ the oersonnel DOUty manual.This item was continued
from the August 12, 2003 meeting. Staff is requesting this item be continued to the November II,
2003 meeting. (SKM)
Mayor introduces the item.
Nordstrom moves to continue this time to the November 11,2003 meeting. Seconded by
Guerber. ALL A YE...MOTION CARRIES.
B. DR.36-03 - Common Area Landscauinl! for Brookwood Subdivision Phases 9 and 10-
Aries Development LLC:Aries Development LLC, represented by Phil Hull with The Land
Group, is requesting design review approval of the couunon area landscaping within Brookwood
Subdivision Phases 9 and 10. The two phases are located on the north side of Floating Feather
Road adjacent to Phase 6 and adjacent to Feather Nest Estates and Lexington Hills Subdivisions.
(WEV) This item was continuedfrom the September 9~ 2003 meeting. It should be heard in
conjunction with items 8B
&:
BC.
C. Discussion to determine if the Councll wishes to hold a Ci Hall bond election in
Fe bruan 2004.(NM)
Paae 13
Ie: 'OXJNCIL \MJ NUTES\ T csqxmry MiDwa W Oft Am! 'CC -~ 14-C3 JJin. doc
Mayor introduces the item.
Guerber moves that we schedule a bond election on a new civic center for February 2004.
Seconded by Nordstrom. Discussion. Perhaps we need to go out to bid for a marketing
firm. Discussion. TWO A YE...ONE NA Y (Bastian). MOTION CARRIES.
Buxton states that any marketing in favor of a City Hall would need to be paid for by private
funds. Informational marketing is allowable~ but nothing promotional would be allowed.
Discussion.
Community meeting seeking public input on City Hall facility needs will be held on November 5.
2003.
10. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Ordinance No. 459:An ordinance of the City of Eagle, Idaho amending Title 3, Chapter 1
General Licensing Provisions and providing an effective date. (SKM)
Mayor introduces the item.
Nordstrom moves, pursuant to Idaho Code, Section 50-902, that the rule requiring
Ordinances to be read on three different days with one reading to be in full be dispensed
with, and that Ordinance # 459 be considered after being read once by title only.
Nordstrom reads Ordinance # 459 by title only. Seconded by Bastian. TWO AYE. NAY
(GUERBER) MOTION CARRIES.
Nordstrom moves that Ordinance #459 be adopted. Seconded by Bastian
(roD call vote) Bastian: AYE; Guerber: NA Y: Nordstrom: AYE: TWO A YE: ONE NAY:
MOTION CARRIES.
B. Ordinance No. 460:An ordinance of the City of Eagle, Idaho. amending Title 1. Chapter 9,
Municipal Elections and providing an effective date. (SKM)
Mayor introduces the item.
Guerber moves, pursuant to Idaho Code, Section 50-902, that the rule requiring
Ordinances to be read on three different days with one reading to be in full be dispensed
with, and that OrdilUlPce # 460 be considered after being read once by title only. Guerber
reads Ordinance #460 by title only. Seconded by Nordstrom. Discussion. ALL AYE:
MOTION CARRIES.
Bastian moves to amend the ordiDance and strike out section B, adopting the remainder of
the ordinance as presented. Seconded by Guerber. Bastian: A YE;Guerber: AYE:
Nordstrom: AYE: ALL AYE: MOTION CARRIES.
C. Discussion of the FY 2008-2009Trans rtatlon 1m rovement Pro ram TIP and the
Ada County ffie:hway District Five Year Worlt PrO21"am.(WEV)
Mayor introduces the item.
Vaughan reviews the recommendations forwarded by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Council discussion regarding fe-prioritizing the recommendations as forwarded by the Planning
and Zoning Commission.
Bastian moves to continue this item to the October 28,2003 meeting. Seconded by Nordstrom.
Discussion. B astian rescinds his motion.
1'914
K:'tCOUNCD.\MINUTES\Teqxmuy Mamte5 Work Area'CC-lo.I4-O3oia.doc
Bastian moves to approve the plan as revised tonight. Seconded by Nordstrom. ALL
A YE...MOTION CARRIES.
D. Claims A ainst the Cft
~ayor inttoduces the issue.
Guerber moves to pay the claims as presented. Seconded by Nordstrom. Bastian AYE,
Guerber A YE, Nordstrom AYE... ALL A YE...MOTION CARRIES.
Larry Sale, the ACHD liaison, states that in regards to landscaping and medians they will try and
work with the entities. We would not be willing to pay for it, but would be willing to discuss the
Issue.
11. REPORTS
1. Mayor and Council's Report: Bastian updates Council on the Design Review meeting and
actions taken at that meeting. Reports on the Library and current activities there. They have
someone who may be coming in to train staff in reference on a conttact basis similar to the city
arbonst and code enforcer. If would behoove the City to have the Library Director reports
quarterly. It will improve relations with the Council and the Library Board and Director. Ron
Baker may be contacting the Clerk's Office to be added to a November Pre-Council agenda.
Guerher states that the locations for the Parks signs were detennined last week and should be
installed within the next week. Eagle Fire Department had an open house with great response.
They will he getting 2 new trucks from Green Bay Wisconsin. Air Quality Board met last week
and they are doing an investigation about educating the public about air quality. Nordstrom
attended the Senior Center Board meeting today. The Clerk is directed to see if the insurance for
the van could be added to the City s policy. The Seniors would still have to pay for the fee, but if
they could get a reduced rate that would be a great help to the Seniors. Nordstrom also feels that
the van is not being utilized to its maximum, perhaps City staff could help organize them. Mayor
relays an idea that she is working on with Sgt. Borgquist to help get the youth in the community
teach Senior Citizens to work on computers. Gives an update on the Pat Summerall award.
Bastian states perhaps a consultant should be hired to work on a comprehensive plan update for
the area of impact. Mayor would like to direct the Zoning Administrator to come up with a list
of potential consultants and bring them back to Council for review
2. City Engineer Report: Report on pathways the and Corp permits. The fence construction is
underway and should be finished up within the next 2 weeks. Letters to the fife department
should be sent for their help clearing the pathway Holladay will also be bringing some drainage
requirements for consideration. The Mayor had asked Holladay to see about utilizing the City
water shares at the Hill Road location. It has been somewhat challenging getting together with
the Dry Creek Ditch Company representatives to discuss the issue. A meeting. is being sought
with Dry Creek, HECD, and the Mayor.
3. City Clerkffreasurer Report: Deputy Clerk gives a report on a request from the Senior Center
regarding making modifications to the parking space for the new van. Nordstrom moves to
allow the Sr. Center to redesign the overhead awning and add a pad, but if there is a
request for monies it would need to come back before Council. Seconded by Guerber.
ALL AYE_MOTION CARRIES. Clerk is directed to move forward obtaining proposals for
the re-roofmg of City Hall this Fall. Invitation to bid for park maintenance.
Place the Lloyd Campbell agreement on the October 28, 2003 meeting.
4. Zoning Administrator s Report:
Vaughan asks Council's input regarding a banner sign to be placed over Eagle Road by a local
church. He wanted to confirm that Council also felt it was inappropriate for it to be placed
across the roadway. Vaughan also comments on the type of fencing for Cottonwood
Paae IS
K:\COUNCIL\MIN\ITES\iaqlOnry Minutes Wort Ara.'CC-IG-I4-03DiB.doc
Subdivision. The museum parking lot issue is discussed, and the bids which were received.
Vaughan is seeking Council approval to be directed to obtain 3 bids and if Council would
approve a not to exceed amount then we can move forward. Guerber moves to have staff go
through the informal bid process and authorize payment up to the $5000. Seconded by
Bastian. ALL A YE...MOTION CARRIES.
5. City Attorney Report: Chase hearing has been scheduled. Letter has been sent off to Wagner
Farms. A letter has been sent to ACHD that we will no longer collect fees on their behalf.
Would like a quick executive session for the ITD case.
Nordstrom moves to go into Executive Session for litigation and personnel. Seconded by
Guerber. BASTAIN, AYE; GUERBER, AYE, NORDSTROM, AYE: MOTION CARRIES.
12.
Hearing no further business, the Council meeting adjourned at 12:30 am.
Bastian moves to adjourn at 12:30 a.m.. Seconded by Guerber. ALL AYE: MOTION
CARRIES...
Respectfully submitted:
N K. MOORE
CITY CLERKlfREAS URER
t""""""
", oP B.A.~.#.#
.. ~ ......
. f.~ ',I :\. " v' ~
i V ~,OR-4l' .
..
(:0"
.. ~~ .. _.-- ..
I\.T ,,
,. ~
n1'~:
--'" ....
i$. .0 .
.. ~
I?Pr:"
. "''" .:~ '.. -, ... ~#.
..of "l ~
" ~
~ ")0,
' '" ..", .' ..
"'1..1 I"
APPROVED:
PIICJ6
K:'COUNCIL\MINUI'ES\TeIqIOnry MInuIeI Work Are.'CCIO-l4-()3ni11.doc
Case No. IPC-04-
Exhibit 127
July 15, 2003
Eagle Planning and Zoning Minutes
IPC Height Exception Application for 138 kV lines Public Hearing
ORIGINAL
EAGLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Special Meeting
July 15, 2003
6:30 PM
The Planning and Zoning Commission met in a special session on July 15,2003
Chairman Deckers presiding.
CALL TO ORDER: Meeting called to order at 6:35 p.
ROLL CALL: The following members were present BANDY, BLOOM,
DECKERS, CROOK, GLA V ACH. A quorum is present.
CONSENT AGENDA: None
OLD BUSINESS: None
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. CU-02 - Sub. Transmission Line-Idaho Power: Idaho Power
represented by Layne Dodson, is requesting conditional use approval to
construct a 138kV sub-transmission line, and a height exception request to
construct the poles ranging in height from approximately 70 to 90-feet, (35
to 55-feet higher then the required maximum of 35-feet).
Deckers introduces the item
Jeff Lowe, City Staff presents the staff report. Mr. Lowe gives a brief history of this
application, the hiring of the consultant firm to study the route and the proposed route
Decker asks the Commission to disclose any exparte contact. Bandy states that he has
spoken with his neighbors about this proposal.
Layne Dodson, representing Idaho Power, 10790 Franklin, Boise. Mr. Dodson presents
the plan for the line and the need for the line in the City.
Mr. Dodson clarifies for the Commission that the proposed line is not along Floating
Feather but extends east from the substation down to Edgewood crossing State
Highway and along the bypass into Star.
Ted Aguilar with The Black and Veatch Company located in Kansas City, MO, is an
electrical engineer who has been with the company for over 30 years.
Mr. Aggelar was hired by the City of Eagle to prepare the study for the proposed power
line. Mr. Aggelar presents this study. Mr. Aggelar states that the proposed route is the
best route for the overhead line.
Discussion between Mr. Aggelar and the Commissioners.
EXHIBIT 127
CASE NO. IPC-O4-
Page 1 of 5
K:\P&Z\MINUTES\T~rary Minutes Work Area\PZ-O1-IS-03 sprtfa miD.doc
Deckers opens the public hearing
Mark Billings, 3083 West Wind Drive, Eagle, Mr. Billings states this is big, ugly,
monstrous, industrial, this is 60's harsh, crash and environmentally obtrusive,
Jeff Kline, 569 N. Cove Colony, Eagle. Mr. Kline disagrees with a couple issues. One
being this does affect property values. Does not believe the study showed any
additional information.
Susan Thomas, 249 Riverview, Eagle. Ms. Thomas lives along the bypass and is
opposed to an overhead route. States that this imposes upon those who contend with the
bypass and might have to contend with the visual look of the power poles. This area
was suppose to be kept as wildlife habitat.
Lance Pamperin 1547 W Kinai, Eagle. Mr. Pamperin recently moved to Eagle. What
attracted him was the cuteness of Eagle and does not want to see this change by the
installation of 80 foot power poles.
Lauren Friedman, 368 E. Stonewater Court. Ms. Friedman was on the advisory
committee that choose this route. Ms. Friedman states that we need power and this is
the best and cheapest route at this time.
Dave Hanaford, 3062 N. Linder Road, Eagle. Mr. Hanaford feels that there is enough
open space to be able to install this without impacting any of the residences. States that
substations should never be placed in anyone s back yard.
Marie Hanaford, 2888 N. Linder Road, Eagle. Ms. Hanaford carne to the meeting to
discuss the new substation along Linder Road.
Randall Johnson, 785 N. Cove Colony, Eagle. Has one question on the 1.6 mile
amount. Would like the per mile cost.
Barbara Smith, 1377 W. Chance Crt., Eagle, representing her daughter Shelly Krejce
who could not attend. Would like to know more about the health risks. Ms. Smith
states that the area along the bypass needs to be preserved and not destroyed.
Sue Donnellan, 274 N. Wind Weaver, Eagle. Ms. Donnellan recently moved to this area
because of the beauty and is concerned about the safety and the hazards of the power
poles. Feels they are unsightly and does not want to see them in Eagle.
City Attorney, John McFadden discusses the legalities of the health hazards and what
can be taken into account.
Kelly Daudt, 1350 W. Chance Court, Eagle. Ms. Daudt reads a letter written by her
neighbor Lisa Norton (attached to minutes). Ms. Norton bought in Pine Ridge
Subdivision for the small town feel and the views. Does not want to have the poles
running through her neighborhood. She has safety concerns and property value
. concerns.
Bob Luffel, 1141 N. Cove Colony Way, recently moved to Eagle for the rural feel.
Would like to hear other alternatives and options available.
Christy Williams, 347 Harlan Street, Eagle. Ms. Williams is concerned about the
Page 2 of 5
K:\P&Z\MINUTES\TCJI1IOrB1Y Minutes Work Area\PZ-07-15-o31pm111 min.doc
wildlife along the river and the damage the poles will have on them. Is also concerned
about property values.
Nicole Cromwell, 2961 W Dorchester, Eagle. Ms. Cromwell is concerned about the
health issues along the pole route.
Steven Ricks, 1560 N Crestmont Drive, Meridian, Mr. Ricks owns property East of
Albertsons. Objects to overhead lines along the bypass because of power lines in the
gateway. He has a CBD zoning on his property and feels this will be negatively
effected by the power lines. Also, does not think contiguous property owners should be
the only ones to bear the costs of this project.
R. E. Wood, 214 E. Stonewater Court, Eagle. Does not want to pay for the costs of
putting the lines underground and is all for putting the poles along the cheapest route.
Francie Agrusa, 2631 W Conifer, Eagle. Would like the Planning & Zoning
Commission to speak with other cities who have overcome these obstacles.
Mary? 353 N Cove Colony Way, Eagle. Most areas she has lived in have had
underground power lines. Not sure what the solution is but feels there is additional
studies that need to be done.
John Barrutia, 2508 E Oakborough Court, Eagle. Werks for Idaho Power and does not
want to pay for the costs of underground poles. The cost would be significant.
Wayne Davis, 2874 W Colony Court Eagle. Recently moved to Eagle. We are all
investors in Eagle and the decisions made by the City are important to the property
owners. Poles will decrease the desire to live here. Mr. Davis believes the cost of the
poles will pay for itself overtime
Dennis Baker, 250 S. Beechwood Boise. Mr. Baker is a developer in Eagle which has
lead him to the conclusion that Eagle is the toughest City to do business in, but one of
the best cities to work in. States let the PUC make this dicision.
Bin Clark, 479 Main S1. Boise. Mr. Clark submits a letter into the record (attached to
minutes). Mr. Clark has approximately 1 mile of land that will be affected by this
project within Eagle River. Mr. Clark feels that the study should have been more
detailed. The impacts on his property values will decrease with overhead lines. Mr.
Clark states that this line needs to go underground.
Chris Wier, 1531 N. Tadpole Court, Eagle. Mr. Wier would like to know if there has
been a possibility of joint trenching to minimize the cost. Would like to know if the
Star substation can come off the Cogen plant proposed for Middleton? Have all the
possibilities been discussed
Hossein Khorsand, 4132 Ballantyne Lane, Eagle. Mr. Khorsand would like more
details that are not so technical. Also, would like to know how much growth is
anticipated and will the houses that are not built yet share in the same benefits as those
that exist now. Are there figures to support how Idaho Power justifies the need for the
line.
Christy Basil, 1547 W Knight Court. Recently moved from Denver to Eagle because it
Page 3 of 5
K; ',P &z\M I NlTI'ES\ T e J11!O nry M iIIu res W 0 rIc Area 'J'ZAJ1. 15.Q3 IpUt miD. doc
was different. As a realtor she states that there is a definite decrease in the value of a
house.
Jason Gibson, 2217 W Bums St. Eagle. Mr. Gibson is not happy about lines running
through his view. Would like the underground lines given more consideration.
Andrew Peter, 1297 W Chauncer, Mr. Peter asks, what do we want the community to
look like two years from now? We have the chance to protect this area and more
research needs to go into the costs of placing the poles underground.
Deckers call a break at 8:55 p.
Layne Dodson provides rebuttal.
Mr. Dodson addresses most of the questions asked tonight.
Bloom asks Dodson to provide information from the PUC. Dodson suggests that staff
contact the PUC to set up a meeting for additional information on undergrounding and
rates.
Ted Aggelar provides rebuttal.
Discussion between Mr. Aggelar and the Commissioners.
Deckers asks Staff how an underground line would be financed.
The City Attorney explains the process for an LID.
Deckers closes the public hearing
Deckers reopens the public hearing for written testimony only.
City Staff, Jeff Lowe states that written testimony must be submitted 5 days prior to the
day of the meeting.
Bandy states that we should not have to bear the cost for power that is going to other
communities. Crook states for the record that he does not agree with Deckers.
Deckers would like Bill Clark to submit a formal appraisal on the Eagle River project.
Bloom moves to continue CU.02 - Sub-Transmission Line-Idaho Power
August 11,2003 at the Senior Center. Seconded by Bandy. Discussion. ALL
AYE...MOTION CARRIES.
6. NEW BUSINESS: None7. REPORTS: None8. ADJOURNMENT: Crook moved to adjourn at lO:30p.m. Seconded by
Bloom. ALL A YE...MOTION CARRIES......,1111""'"
",. ~~#.~ ~
OF B~
f1
~ ..."...
. O~ ~I'" ~ .8 .. '-.AI. ~
~ ~.
.v-
: .
-y..1" -1 ~ 8
: ,
9 #':". "" v'
: * . -.- . _
0 :
y..-. ./ '?, \ ~~
SEALN
foP .o '
,;.. .
.'!POR ;...'t~~.
. ~'\.:' #. ~
')0, -
....... ~#.
"'1:1
~~ ~
e 4 of 5 #'11 OF
8..&111"K:\P&Z\MlNUTES\TeJT4X)rary Minurcs Work ArcaWAfl-I:J!4111p11111 min.cb:
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
SHARON K. MOORE
CITY CLERKffREASURER
APPROVED:
STEVE DECKERS
CHAIRMAN
A TRANSCRIBABLE RECORD OF THIS MEETING IS A AILABLE AT
CITY HALL.
Page 5 of 5
K:\P&XlMlNUTES\T~rary MiDuteI Work Area\PZ-07-tS-O3 spmtg iDn.doc