Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAMD 22 05 Signage Appeal CCODBefore the Mayor and City Council City of Caldwell, Idaho Public Hearing held November 15, 2022 Subject: Case No. AMD-22- 05 Canyon Crossing Storage Signage Appeal The following Land Use Action is the primary feature of this application: Request for an appeal of the Hearing Examiner’s conditions of approval for SUP22-000006 which limited the square footage of the electronic reader board to 48 square feet. TABLE OF CONTENTS: I COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS II GENERAL FACTS III TESTIMONY IV APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS V COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS VI FINDINGS OF FACT VII CONCLUSIONS OF LAW VIII ORDER OF DECISION I COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS 1.1 The Caldwell Planning and Zoning Department issued a notice of Public Hearing on application AMD-22-05 to be held before the Caldwell City Council on November 15, 2022. Public notice requirements set forth in Idaho Code, Chapter 65, Local Planning Act, were met. On, or before, October 30, 2022, notice was published in the Idaho Press Tribune, and on, or before, October 28, 2022 notice was mailed to all political subdivisions providing services to the site and to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site; and on, or before, November 3, 2022 notice was posted on the site. 1.4 Files and exhibits relative to this application are available for review in the Planning and Zoning Department, 621 Cleveland Boulevard, Caldwell and at applicable public hearings. II GENERAL FACTS 2.1 APPLICANTS: David Baker, Aim Signs, 1976 S. Century Way, Boise ID, 83709 Dave@aimsign.com 2.2 OWNER: MTP ACQUISTION, 520 FLORIDA LLC, 3605 ARTHUR ST, Caldwell ID, 83605 2.4 REQUEST: A request by David Baker of Aim Sign on behalf of Canyon Crossing Storage, for an appeal of the Hearing Examiner’s conditions of approval for SUP22-000006 which limited the square footage of the electronic reader board to 48 square feet. The applicant is requesting City Council approve amending the condition of approval to allow for the installation of a 98 square foot electronic reader board on a 40 foot pylon sign in the C-3 (Service Commercial) zone. 2.5 BACKGROUND: SUP22-000006 was an application for an increase in the allowed electronic reader board size from 48 square feet to 98 square feet. During the Hearing of SUP22-000006 the planner assigned to the case was not present and the application was not presented as it should have been. The focus of the hearing was on the size and height of the sign itself not the reader board. The Hearing Examiner approved the SUP with the added condition “8.7 The sign applied for and the cited exhibits will be allowed but the reader board itself will be at the allowed dimension of 48 square feet”. The SUP was for an enlarged electronic reader board, the added condition is essentially a denial of the SUP. The applicant would like to have this condition removed to make the approval a true approval. III PUBLIC TESTIMONY 3.1 Before the Mayor and City Council, November 15, 2022: Alex Jones (Associate Planner) 621 Cleveland Blvd., provided an overview of the request for appeal of the Hearing Examiner’s Conditions of Approval. The Hearing Examiner limited the square footage of the electronic reader board to 48 sq. ft. Mr. Jones stated he was the original planner on the request; however, he was not able to attend the hearing due to medical reasons. The sign meets all City codes and requirements, except for the reader board. The applicants is requesting a larger reader board due to the frontage and the new sound wall that is being built at the site by Idaho Transportation Department. The Hearing Examiner approved the Special Use Permit with the condition that the reader board be limited to 48 sq. ft. Mr. Jones provided a PowerPoint presentation showing the location of the reader board and surrounding uses in the immediate area. No comments or objections were received from public agencies. The request complies with the City Code and the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends its approval. Mayor Wagoner asked if the request was considered a billboard. Mr. Jones stated it is not a billboard since it would only advertise for the property storage business. Mayor Wagoner noted that the City Code only allows billboards every quarter mile including both sides of the freeway. He noted his concern with the animated reader board. If the request is approved it should be with strict conditions addressing limited use of the sign only for advertising for the subject business on the property and not used as a billboard. Mr. Jones stated that would be appropriate and could be added as a condition in the Special Use Permit, noting that the amendment would clarify its use only for the business itself and could not be used for any other advertising purposes. David Baker 1976 S. Century Way., signed in favor of the request and provided information via a PowerPoint presentation. He stated that the sound wall was constructed has completely obscured the view to the storage facility. He providing diagrams showing the difference between a 48 sq. ft., and 98 sq. ft. reader board. He recommended approval for placement of the 98 sq. ft. signage. He reported the sign would comply with the Caldwell City Code provisions addressing light pollution. Councilor Stadick asked if the sign would block anyone’s view. Mr. Baker referenced the height of the sound wall and the need for a higher sign. He did not think anyone in the apartments would have an obscured view of the freeway. Sue Kushlan, 121 S. Louisiana., signed in opposition and expressed her concern regarding the request. She read her comments into the record: “I am somewhat concerned that this issue is again before you. The City of Caldwell has made codes, to the best of their ability, for the benefit of all residents. All of us, as citizens, whether we agree with the codes or not, are obligated to follow them. When someone asks for a variance of the code, I feel it opens the door to have people negotiate any or all of the code. The surrounding residents previously made a good case against allowing the variance. First and foremost, since this project was brought before Planning & Zoning and Council in 2015, this developer has continually niggled away at the City to change things. Remember he is an “out of state” developer living in Montana. Also, in the last presentation by Mr. Baker (where he was denied the change) he showed an example of what the electric sign could read: “RV Spaces Available”. This may only be an example, but his foot is in the “door”. If this is passed, be expecting before you yet another Special Use Permit to allow RV storage at this site. According to the development agreement (dated August 16, 2017) under Article II Conditions of Approval – Item 12: “Any uses permitted within the C-3 (Service Commercial) zone, other than the currently approved mini-storages, shall require approval through the Special Use Permit process.” I would like to see the developer complete this project as agreed to by himself and the City with no further changes.” Mayor Wagoner clarified that the request is for a Special Use Permit and not a variance. Phyllis Jewett 403 Hill Lane spoke in opposition of placement to such a sign within her residential neighborhood. She noted many aspects of the development, which have not been completed. Ms. Jewett presented pictures of unfinished projects (including a tot park) at the development site. Mayor Wagoner labeled the pictures as Exhibit CC-1001. In rebuttal, Mr. Baker stated that he was unable to comment on anything besides the sign. The sound wall is something new and does create a hardship for the property since it now has no visibility from the freeway. Mayor Wagoner emphasized that other aspects of the development cannot be considered tonight. In response to questions from Councilor McGee, Mr. Baker confirmed that the sign is double faced and is oriented towards both the east and west. Councilor Register asked if there is already a sign on the right side of the property. Mr. Baker responded the construction of the sign in pending approval of its size. A sign permit is required, which would require conditions addressing design guidelines and landscape requirements. Councilor Stadick if the request is not approved, would the existing sign still be above the sound wall? Mr. Baker confirmed that the message center would not be as functional if the larger sign request is not approved. MOVED by Stadick, SECONDED by Doty to close the public testimony portion of the hearing. MOTION CARRIED COMMENTS FROM CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS REGARDING THE REQUEST: Councilor Register recommended they find another place to place it where it does not affect the residential neighborhood. In response to questions from Councilor McGee, Mr. Jones stated that the staff member who presented for him to the Hearing Examiner, did not fully understand the application. When it was presented, it was presented with the idea of the sign itself and not as a reader board. The Special Use Permit was only for the reader board. The Hearing Examiner said the sign is fine, but the reader board needs to be smaller. The Hearing Examiner approved the Special Use Permit but added the condition addressing the size of the reader board thus making the Special Use Permit invalid. EVIDENCE LIST FOR CASE NO. ANN22-000013/SUB22-000024: 1. Staff Report and Presentation documents 2. Sign-up sheets 3. Applicant’s PowerPoint Presentation (CC-1001) ORDER OF DECISION ON CASE NO. ANN22-000013/SUB22-000024: MOVED by Register, SECONDED by Stadick based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Caldwell City Council orders that the request by David Baker to appeal condition 8.7 of SUP22-000006 to allow the electronic reader board be 98 square feet be denied. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Register, McGee, Williams, Doty, and Stadick. Those voting no: none. Absent and/or not voting: Allgood. MOTION CARRIED MOVED by Stadick, SECONDED by Register to close the public hearing. MOTION CARRIED IV APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS 4.1 City of Caldwell Zoning Ordinance No. 1451, as amended City of Caldwell Comprehensive Plan, as amended Idaho Code, Title 67, Chapter 65, Local Planning Act V COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS The Caldwell City Council accepts that a Comprehensive Plan analysis is not required. All adopted city ordinances, standards and codes were used in evaluating the application. VI FINDINGS OF FACT 6.1 The Caldwell City Council accepts the facts outlined in the staff report, public testimony and the evidence list. All adopted city ordinances, standards and codes were used in evaluating the application. VII CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 7.1 The Caldwell City Council has the authority to hear this case and order that it be approved or denied. The public notice requirements were met and the hearing was conducted within the guidelines of applicable Idaho Code and City ordinances. VIII ORDER OF DECISION 8.1 Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Caldwell City Council orders that the request by David Baker to appeal condition 8.7 of SUP22-000006 to allow the electronic reader board be 98 square feet be denied. THE APPEAL FOR CASE NO. AMD-22-05 WAS HEARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT A PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD NOVEMBER 15, 2022. WRITTEN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION WERE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR AT A REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING HELD DECEMBER 6, 2022. ______________________________________ Jarom Wagoner, Mayor ATTEST: __________________________ __________________________ Debbie Geyer, City Clerk Date EXHIBIT A-10 / EXHIBIT A2 / SUP22-000006 Order of Decision / / / / / / / / / / / / /