Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning & ZoningPLANNING AND ZONING ITEM DATE SUBMITTED BY I BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CITY OF CALDWELL, IDAHO IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION) OF CANYON COUNTY HABITAT FOR ) HUMANITY FOR A 50 FOOT VARIANCE ) WHERE 60 FEET OF LOT FRONTAGE IS ) REQUIRED ) COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS CASE NO. VAR-20-01, COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS, GENERAL FACTS, TESTIMONY, APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS, VARIANCE PROCEDURE, FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER OF DECISION 1.1 The Caldwell Community Development Department issued a notice of Public Hearing on application VAR-20-01, to be held before the Planning and Zoning Commission on February 23, 2001. Public notice requirements set forth in Idaho Code, Chapter 65, Local Planning Act, were met. On February 8, 2001 notice was published in the Idaho Press Tribune, and on February 6, 2001 notice was mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site; and, on February 16, 2000 notice was posted on the site. L2 Files and exhibits relative to this application are available for review in the Community Development Department, Caldwell City Hall, and were available for review at the hearing. II GENERAL FACTS 2.1 APPLICANT (S): Canyon County Habitat for Humanity, 3304 Iowa Ave., Caldwell, ID 83605. 2.2 OWNER (S): Same 2.3 REQUEST: Approval of a 50-foot lot frontage variance in order to build a residence. Section 10- 02-03, Height, Lot Line Setback and Lot Dimension Schedule, of Zoning Ordinance No. 1451 provides for a minimum 60 foot lot frontage unless a variance is applied for and approved through the public hearing process. 2.3. i Section 10-03-05, Zoning Ordinance No. 1451 sets forth procedures for granting a variance. A variance can only be granted by Commission members finding that all five listed criteria (A through E of subsection 1) are "true." 2.4 LOCATION: The parcel is located 100 ft. northwest from the corner of 16'h Avenue and Main Street on the southwestern side of Main Street. 2.5 AGENCY RESPONSE: The Fire Department requests that the trees be trimmed along Main Street and along the alley to allow safe passage of fire apparatus. III TESTIMONY V L, 6.1 Jerome Mapp gave the staff report. Mr. Mapp explained that for an approval of a variance, the applicant must meet the five criteria, as set forth in Section 10-03-05(IA through 1E) of Zoning Ordinance No. 1451. Each question must be answered as true.) It was explained that this parcel is part of the original township, where the lot are divide in twenty-five (25') foot lot frontages. The original ownership included lots 7-12 lots of block 9. The original owner sold lots 9-12 of block 9, which left lots 7 and 8. Each lot has in twenty-five (25') foot lot frontages or a total of fifty (50') foot of frontage. The zoning ordinance, Section 10-02-03, Table 2, requires that a lot frontage must be sixty (60') feet. 6.2 Tony Elordi, representing Canyon County Habitat for Humanity, spoke in favor. He agreed with the staff report and the conunents made by Mr. Mapp. 6.3 Kevin Jensen spoke against the request. He stated that if the zoning ordinance requires a sixty (60') foot frontage, he feels that it should not be modified. IV APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS 4.1 City of Caldwell 1977 Comprehensive Plan, as amended. 4.2 City of Caldwell Zoning Ordinance No. 1451, as amended. 4.3 Idaho Code, Title 67, Chapter 65, Local Planning Act V COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS - The request is applicable to the following Comprehensive Plan Components: 5.1 Property Rights - GOAL: To ensure that land use policies, restrictions, conditions and fees do not violate property rights, adversely impact property values or create unnecessary technical limitations on the use of the property. OBJECTIVE C: To consider on a case -by -case basis economic hardship variances that would allow legitimate, economically beneficial uses of property in situations where regulations would have an extreme result. POLICY 1: Require staff to follow the Attorney General's Checklist Criteria outlined in the Idaho Regulatory Takings Act Guidelines prior to any proposed regulatory or administrative action on specific property, and to request legal counsel's review if any one of the criteria is answered in the affirmative. Staff reviewed the five criteria outlined in the Takings Act Guidelines and did not answer yes to any of the criteria. VI VARIANCE PROCEDURE 6.4 Planning and Zoning Commission members found all five criteria to be true. (The following five criteria, as set forth in Section 10-03-05(1 A through 1 E) of Zoning Ordinance No. 1451 must be answered as true.) A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions, applicable to the property involved, which do not apply generally to other properties within the same zoning district. (true) B. That the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances in conjunction with a literal interpretation and application of the regulation would result in undue hardship by depriving the applicant of reasonable use and enjoyment of the property or of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties located in the same zoning district. (true) C. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege. (true) D. That the granting of such relief will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or interest, or injurious to the property or improvements of other property owners, or the quiet enjoyment of such property or improvement. (true) E. That the granting of the variance will not be in conflict with the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and will not effect a change in zoning. (true) VII FINDINGS OF FACT 7.1 The applicant has met the requirements for a variance as stated in Section 10-03-05 (1A through IE) of Zoning Ordinance No. 1451. (Section VI VARIANCE PROCEDURE of this report) 7.2.1 The parcel is in a R-2 (Combined Medium Density Residential) zone, which allows for single family, duplex and triplex dwelling units. All require a minimum of sixty (60') feet of frontage. Not allowing the development of a single family dwelling unit would make the parcel useless. (See Property Rights, Objective C) VIII CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 8.1 The Planning and Zoning Commission has the authority to hear variance requests and to approve or deny; public hearing notification requirements were met, and the hearing was held within the guidelines of applicable codes and ordinances. IX ORDER OF DECISION 9.1 Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Planning and Zoning Commission members find that Case No. VAR-20-01, a request by Canyon Co. Habitat for Humanity for a variance to build a residence on a lot with a 50 ft. frontage where a 60 ft. frontage is required is approved with the following conditions: 9.2 .. The specific terms and conditions placed on this variance shall run with the land and remain valid upon a change of ownership. The variance approval is not transferable from the project site to another site within Caldwell. 9.3 The Applicant shall, within one year following the signing of the Order of Decision, apply for a building permit. A six-month extension may be requested by the Applicant and approved by the Community Development Director. Construction of the residence shall commence within six months of the date of approval of the building permit application. No other extensions shall be granted unless approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission following the public hearing I process. All conditions placed upon the special use and/or building permits by the Building Official, City Engineer and Fire Marshall shall be met prior to the use of the site commencing. CASE NO. VAR-20-01 WAS HEARD BY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEMBERS AT A PUBLIC HEARING HELD FEBRUARY 23, 2001. WRITTEN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND THE ORDER OF DECISION WAS APPROVED BY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEMBERS AT A REGULARLY S HEDULED MEETING HELD MARCH 12, 2001. ATTEST: Community Dev ment Direct CALDWELL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 23, 2001 I. Call to Order - Chairman Blacker called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. IL Roll Call Members Present: Chairman Jim Blacker, Janie Archuleta, Jack Teraberry, Sylvia Robison, "fracy Coller Staff Present: Jerome Mapp, Joan Holmes Legal Counsel: Mark Hilty III. Review of Proceedings - Chairman Blacker reviewed the procedures for public hearings. IV. Poll Members for Conflict of Interest - Chairman Blacker polled members for conflicts of interest: Commissioner Teraberry and Corr nissioner Coller stated they were abstaining from Case A (Crystal Springs) New Business on the agenda. V. Old Business - Approve Minutes of November 14, 2000. Motion: Commissioner Archuleta, Second: Commissioner Teraberry. Approve as written, Passed: Unanimous voice vote. VI. New Business - Hearings A. Case No. SUB-41P-(E)-99 (Crystal Springs, a Planned United Development), a request by Jerry Jerikins for a one-year extension of prelinunary plat approval granted by City Council on December 6, 1999. The Planned Unit Development is approximately 4.34 acres and consists of 23 residential and 2 conunon-area lots located in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) zone. The site is located along a portion of the south side of W. Logan St. and the north side of Elm St. and is approximately 330 feet east of Marshall Avenue. Testimony - Jerome Mapp presented the staff report. Kent Brown, Applicant's Representative, testified in favor. Public Testimony Closed - Chairman Blacker closed public testimony. Findings of Fact - Motion: Commissioner Archuleta. Second: Commissioner Robison. Accept the general facts outlined in the staff report as Findings of Fact and include the following facts from testimony: 1) An agreement has been met between the applicant and Pioneer Irrigation District in order to drill a well for the pressure irrigation system. Negotiations are being Completed; 2) the applicant will begin the construction of the project once approval of the extension is granted; 3) Exhibits PA-1, a memo from the Fire Marshall and PA-2, a memo from the City Engineer were submitted for the record; 4) The applicant shall comply to the conditions of previous approvals. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Conclusions of Law - Motion: Conunissioner Robison. Second: Com mnissioner Archuleta. The Commission has the authority to hear this case and approve or deny; public notice requirements were met; and the hearing was conducted within the guidelines of Idaho Code and City ordinances. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Order of Decision - Motion: Commissioner Archuleta. Second: Commissioner Robison. The Commission approved Case No. SUB-41P(E)-99 with the standard conditions outlined in the staff report. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Public Hearing Closed - Chairman Blacker closed the public hearing and noted anyone wishing to appeal the Commission's decision should see the Director of Community Development. B. Case No.VAR-20-01, a request by Canyon Co. Habitat for Humanity for a variance to build a residence on a lot with a 50 ft. frontage where a 60 ft, frontage is required in a R-2 (Medium Density Residential) VZr 3 I zone. The parcel is located 1W ft. northwest from the corner of 16".- Ave_ arkd Main Street on tiie southwestern side of Main St. Testimony — Jerome Mapp presented the staff report. Tony Elordi, Applicant's Representative, testified in favor. Kevin Jensen testified in opposition. Tony Elordi testified in rebuttal. Public Testimony Closed — Chairman Blacker closed public testimony. Comprehensive Plan Analysis — Motion: Commissioner Archuleta. Second: Commissioner Teraberry. The request was applicable to the following Comprehensive Plan components set forth in the staff report: Property Rights — Goal, Objective C, and Policy 1. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Findings of Fact — Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Coller. Accept the general facts outlined in the staff report as Findings of Fact and include the following facts: 1) all five criteria in the Variance Procedure were answered true; 2) The parcel is in a R-2 (Combined Medium Density Residential) zone, which allows for single family, duplex and triplex dwelling units. All require a minimum of sixty (60') feet of frontage. Not allowing the development of a single family dwelling unit would make the parcel useless. (See Property Rights, Objective C). Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Conclusions of Law — Motion: Commissioner Teraberry, Second: Commissioner Coller, The Commission has the authority to hear this case and approve or deny; public notice requirements were met; and the hearing was conducted within the guidelines of Idaho Code and City ordinances. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Order of Decision — Motion: Conunissioner Robison. Second: Commissioner Teraberry. The Comwrission approved Case No. VAR-20-01 with the standard conditions outlined in the staff report. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Public Hearing Closed — Chairman Blacker closed the public hearing and noted anyone wishing to appeal the Commission's decision should see the Director of Community Development. C. Case No. ANN-48-01 a request by the Roman Catholic of Boise to annex approximately 4.64 acres into the City of Caldwell as an�R-1 (Single Family Residential) zone. The intent of the applicant is eventually seek a special use permit to build a church, parish center, office, ball fields and play area. The subject property is contiguous to the incorporated boundaries of Caldwell and is located on the northeast corner of Farmway Road and W. Linden Street, Testimony Jerome Mapp presented the staff report. Jean Lujack, Applicant's Representative, testified in favor. Public Testimony Closed — Chairman Blacker closed public testimony. Comprehensive Plan Analysis — Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The request was applicable to the following Comprehensive Plan components set forth in the staff report: Property Rights Goal, Objective B, and Policy 1; School Facilities and Transportation — Goal, and Policy l; Land Use Goal, Objectives Applicable to all Land Uses — C; Area of City Impact — Objective A and Policy 5; Public Services, Utilities and Facilities — Goal, Objective B, and Policy 5. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. P & Z Minutes of February 23, 2001 1 Efrain Lara testified in rebuttal. Public Testimony Closed - Chairman Blacker closed public testimony. Comprehensive Plan Analysis - Motion: Commissioner Archuleta. Second: Commissioner Teraberry. The request was applicable to the following Comprehensive Plan components set forth in the staff report: Property Rights - Goal, Objective B, and Policy 1; School Facilities and Transportation - Goal, and Policy 1; Land Use - Goal; Public Services, Utilities and Facilities - Goal, Objective A, and Policy 2; Community Design - Goal and Objective A. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Findings of Fact Motion: Commissioner Archuleta. Second: Commissioner Robison. Accept the general facts outlined in the staff report as Findings of Fact and include the following facts from testimony: Exhibits PR-1, PR- 2, PR-3, PZ-1000, and the hours of operation requested are 7 p.m. till I a.rn Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Conclusions of Law - Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The Commission has the authority to hear this case and approve or deny; public notice requirements were met; and the hearing was conducted within the guidelines of Idaho Code and City ordinances. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Order of Decision - Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Conunissioner Robison. The Commission denied Case No. SUP- 116-01. Passed: Roil call vote to deny - Commissioner Terraberry and Commissioner Robison; to approve - Commissioner Archuleta and Commissioner Coller. Chairman Blacker cast the deciding vote to deny. Public Hearing Closed - Chairman Blacker closed the public hearing and noted anyone wishing to appeal the Commission's decision should see the Director of Community Development. VU. Planning Issues A. Elect Officers - Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Commissioner Teraberry nominated Jim Blacker as Chairman. Members voted to continue elections of a vice chairman until a later meeting. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. VIII. Adjournment - Chairman Blacker adjourned the meeting at approximately 9:25 p.m. MINUTES APPROVED AND SIGNED BY CHAIRMAN BLACKER AT A REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING HELD MARCH 12, 2001: ATTEST: ommunity Dev opment for P & Z Minutes of February 23, 2001 PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT SHEET (PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY) NAME: / 11-1 L V! N f - 1%NII [N �L6" STREET ADDRESS: CITYISTATEIZIP: NAME OF CASE BEING HEARD: wrwwwwwww*wwww***wwwdew**,kw�rww*w*w**,t�,kw*wwwwwww*w*w*wwwww**www*�r*w*wwww**w**wwww*w* Check the appropriate line: Applicant or Representative I Neutral/ I wish to speak I do not wish to speak 1 In favor/ I Opposed/ wish to speak I wish to speak do not wish to speak I do not wish to speak I Written comments may be attached to this form or you may write them in below. �Z� 2 PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT SHEET (PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY) NAME: STREET ADDRESS: 330 LV %4!% CITYISTATEIZIP: c e /C, l / NAME OF CASE BEING HEARD: ilea r d ^ a w**wwwwwwwwwwwwww*,t*�rwwwww*w***,r*www+rwwwwwwwwww�*w***wwwwwwerwwwwwwww**wwww�rw*wwwwwwww*ww** Check the appropriate line: Applicant or Representative I Neutral/ wish to speak do not wish to speak I In favor/ I Opposed/ wish to speak I wish to speak do not wish to speak ! do not wish to speak I Written comments may be attached to this form or you may write them in below.