HomeMy WebLinkAbout5-16-1991 P&Z MINUTES t � , •
�{ •
�
u PLANNING AND ZONING COMMTSSION
MINUTES
Meeting of May 16, 1991
Present: Chairman Chuck Randalph, Tam Ensley, Rita Earl, Mary
Higdem, Tom Page and Wanda �nthony.
Absent: George B3nta �nd alternate Les Carter.
Chairman Chuck Randolph called the meeting to arder at 7:00 p.m.
in the City Hall Council Chambers.
The first item of busiriess was the approval of the minutes for
the regular meetinq of April 18, 1991. With no corrections or
additions being offered by the Commission member�s, Tom Ensley
rnade a motion to approve the minutes as distributed. Mary Higdem
seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed
unanimously.
TYie next item of business was the approval of the minutes for the
special meeting on May 2, 1gg1. With no corrections or additions
� being offered by the Commission members, Mary Higdem made a
- mation ta approve the mir�utes as distributed. Rita Earl seconded
the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimausly.
The first public hearing before the Commission was to consider a
Comprehensive Plan land use designation of proparty under
consideration for annexati�n. Ttie property is located at the
southeast corner of Montana Avenue and Larch Street. Ida Hest,
applicant. �
Dennis expl�ined that in April of 1991 the City C�uncil accepted I �
a request from the applicant and property owner for annexatian of
the subject property and directed the Planning and Zoning staff
to begin the arinexation process. Dennis further explained that
the Comprehensive Plan designates this property as low density
r�esidential and the Zoning District c�assification is County R-1
and the request to the Commission is to retain a law density
residential classifacation and r�ezone the property from County R—
1 ta City R-1.
Mary Higdem asked Dennis if City services were available to the
subject property. Dennis indicated tYlat all services are
r..urrently available.
The first person to offer pttblic testimony was Ida Best,
applicant. Ms. Best offered to take any question� from the
C'ommission. There were no questions from the Commission for Ms.
Ne�t.
Uennis stated that there was no correspondence received regarding
this matter.
1
. � �
� Tom Paae made a matian to make a iecommendation to the City
Council for approval af the Comprehensive Plan designation of Low
�ensity Residential. Mary Higdem seconded the motion.
Tom Ensley asked Dennis if any of the surrounding prnperty owners
were notified of the ar�nexation and if any of them showed an
interest for annexation of their property. Uennis st.ated that .
ther�e were problems with the septic tank system on tYie prop�r�ty
c�wned by the applicant and she approached the Gity Council with a
request to hook u� ta the City sewer systen�. In order to
alleviate an environmental probl�rn on the subject property tl�e
Council a�proved Ms. Best ta hook up to City sewer provided that
a request for anr,exation would k�e submitted to the Planning
L�epartment. Dennis stated that the Council directed the staff
to send ne�tice t.o property owners in the arzz and invite them to
particip�te in tl7e annexation pr��eSS. Appi�ximately 15 letters
were sent to property owners in the area. There were inquiry
phone calls rECeived by staff and sorne interest was �xpressed for
possible annexati�n in the future but t�here were no applications
fil�d ia� as: aciation witl� this r�ques�.
Chuck Randolph asked if ther�e were any other proper currently
haoked up to City sewer at this time. Dennis stated tY�is is the
anly County property that currently has the potential for hook
up to the City sewer systern.
With no further discussion a vote was taken and the rnotian passed
unanimausly.
Tom Ensley made a motion to recommend approval to the City
Council for a zone change of the subject property to R-1. Tom
Page seconded the cnotion. A vote was taken and the rnoti�n passed
unanimously.
The next public Y►earing was a Special Use Permit to allow the
aperation of a child care facility located at the northw�st
corner of Ohio Avenue and Beech Street (1809 Beech Street).
Shannan Brawn, applicant.
Dennis explained the request, lacation of the subject property
and the special characteristirs associated with this request.
Pennis stated th�t this day care facility is currently
operational in a two family dwelling or� a corner lat. He stated
that the applicant has located a play area isolated from the
other dwelling unit and other surrounding properties. �
Mary Higdem asked Dennis wh�t the reason was that the facility is
r.urrently operating witnout the benefit of. a Special Use Permit.
Dennis stated that there have been no complaint� frorn any
�urrounding property owners and the applicant initiated the
r for a permit.
The first person ta offer public testimony was the applicant,
Shannari Brown. Ms. Brown stated that the facility has been in
operation for approximately 1 1/2 years and sY�e w�s unaware of
the need for a Special Use Permit. She further stated that there
have been no complaints expressed to her during the 1 1/2 years
she has been operating the facility.
2
• �
+ Rita Earl asked Ms. Brown if anyone currently lives in the
adjacent dwelling unit. M�. Brown stated that the other unit is
occupied at this time. Ms. Brown further stated that she
isolates the children from the other surrounding properties.
Chuck Randolph asked Ms. Brown what the enrollmerzt is at the
present time. Ms. Brown stated that she has �n enrollment of 10
chi ldreri.
Tom Ensley asked Ms. Brawn if she was the property owner. Ms.
Brown stated that she rents the unit and does not own the
property. Ms. Prown stated that she has a letter from the
owner's agent stating that she has approval from the property
owner.
Chairman Randolph asked Dennis how many adjac�nt property owners
were notified regarding this issue. Dennis stated that all
property owners within 300 feet of the subject property,
including the subject property's out—of—state owner, were
notified.
Mary Higdem asked Dennis what the legal limit of enrollment for
the facility would be. Denni� stated that 12 would be the
maximum number of children allowed.
Chairman Randolph asked Dennis if the Fir� Department has
conducted inspections on tY�is property. Dennis stated that the
Fire Department has reviewed the site and approved the premises.
Chairman Ranclolph asked Ms. Brawn if she riacl reviewed the terms
and conditions offered by the staff. Ms. Brown stated that she
had and does agree with �11 the terms and conditions.
Rita Earl stated that she feels written communication from the
property owner indicating he is aware of and approves the use
should be received by the Planning staff. She further statad
that she has concerns regarding day care centers in multi—family
units, the impact that it may have on surrounding property owners
and the precedent that may be set for future requests for day ,
care facilities in two family dwellings. She also stated that
�he has a concern regarding loading/unloading in this area and
although there is a large amount af street frantage there is not
adequate aff—street parking. Rita also stated that she feels a
salid type fencing should be considered.
Chairman Randolph asked Dennis staff's opinion �n allowing day
car�e facilities in a two—family dwelling. Dennis stated that
with the approval of the property awner these types of facilities
could be evaluated on individual merit. Dennis furthex stated
that the circurnstances zssociated with this request may be unique
due to the location and size of the subject property and the
attempts the applicant has rnade to isolate the �lay area and day
care activities frc�m the surrounding property owners and adjacent
dwelling unit.
3
. . � , .
' M�ry Higdern ata�ed t.hat sYx� feel� tli� characteristics assc,ciated
with the subject property are unic.�ue and �he facility has been
operational for appraxim�tely 1 1/2 years and there have been no
complaints recorded.
Chairman Rand�lph asked Dennis if staff felt that solid fencing
was appropriate. Uennis stated t2�iat staff felt the pla�y area is
removed from.other units by a substantial distance.
Rita Earl asked Dennis if staff was aware of other �xisting day
care facilities Uperating in tYlat area. Dennis stated that
staff is not aware of any in the irrunediate area.
With no further discussion Tom Ensley made a motion to approve
the Special Use Permit subject to the terms and conditions
recommended by staff. Warida Anthony seconded the motion.
Tom Paga sugqested that an additional recanuriendation be addecl ta
rec�uire �uthorization be obtaine�� frorn the pr�operty awner. Tom
Ensley agreed to adding t��►is term to the original mation. A vote
was taken and the motion passed unanirnausly.
Rita Earl stated that the decision to approve thi� request is
made because of t} sp�cial circumstances associated with the
property and the approval of the owner to allow the t�se an the
property. She further stated t.hat the Comrni�sion d�es not want
t.c.� ��t a�r��Ges�ent io�:� allc.7winy c��y car facilitie� in twa—fa►nily
dwellings.
The next p,ublic hearing was a Variance application to allow
reduction of required stx�eet side yard setback of twenty (20)
feet to zero (0) feet ta accommodate r.onstructian af a detached
accessory patio enclosure t.o the Fairview Golf Course. City Gf
Caldwell, applicant.
Dennis explained the reyuest, lacation of the subject property
and characteristics associated with this request.
Mary asked Dennis if the seventeen foc�t setback from the curb was
owned by the City af Caldwell and if that setback was adequate
for utility lines or any future construction. Dennis stated that
the seventeen feet was part of tY�e public right—of—way and that
utilities were located within that area.
kita Earl asked Dennis wtlat the required setback is. Dennis
stated that twenty (20) feet is the require�l s?tb��k from the
property line.
Rita Earl asked Dennis the reasons for requesting a Variance.
Dennis stated that the applicant had cited uniq circumstances
assaciated with the golf course which resulted in a har�dship.
M:ary Higdem asked Dennis if an alley existed as demonstrated
on the provided map. Dennis stated that there are alleys and
right.s—�f—way that exist on the course. Dennis further stated
that there is an existing sewer lir,e through the property that
the site plan takes into consideration.
4
..- s �
The first person to offer public testimony was Mr. Don Tolley,
representing the Golf Board of the City of Caldwell. Mr. Tolley
stated that the Golf Board is willing to accommodate any sewer
line repair if that becomes necessary. Mr. Tolley further
stated that the crawded conditions surrounding the club house,
the existing cart storage and the putting green placement are
some of the reasons for selecting the site for the patio
enclosure. .Mr. Tolley also stated that the shelter� being built
will house the scoreboard and hopefully encourage parking on the
Kimball Street frontage. He further stated that this pro�ect is
being funded with a grant from the Caldwell Foundation
Incarporated.
Mary Higdem ask�d Dennis if a bike lane was located on Kimball.
Dennis stated that the designated bike lane is located on Tenth
Avenue.
Rita Earl asked Dennis if there was any direct contact with Mr.
Larre Rabertson, the individual who sent correspondence to staff
regardiny this request. Dennis stated that ttiere was no contact
other than the letter.
Tom Page asked Dennis if Mr. Rabertson lived within 300 feet of
the proposed structure. Dennis stated that Mr. Robertson does
not live within 300 feet.
Mary Hiydem made a motion to approve the Vari�nce request sub.]ect
to the terms and conditions recommended by Staff. Tom Page
seconded the motion.
Rita Earl stated that approving the Variance wc�ulcl not be
granting the applicant any special privilege that other• property
owners are denied in the same clistrict.
A vote was taken and the mation passed unanimously.
The next itern of business was a preliminary plat involving a re-
design of Willowbrook Estates Sul�division. Art Solis, applicant.
Dennis explained that this item involved a r�vised preliminary
glat in Connection with a seven acre piece of property locatecl on
the south side of Linden Street. A previous preliminary plat was
approved by the Corrunission in OctobEr of 1990. Uennis stated
that the original design has been abandoned �nd replaced with the
desiqn offered to the Commissi.on at this time. Dennis i
distributed to the Commission a revised site plan. !
There was discussion regarding the preliminary plat and the
r�elationship to surrounding properties and future development in
the area.
Dennis stated that the proposed length of the cul-de-sac exceeds
the code regulations c�f 400 feet and a Variance application
needs to be filed with the Commission to accommodate this excess
of length.
5
- . •
• Tom Page asked Uennis if the sub-out street design st�ould be
revised to reflect a tem�orary cul-de-sac. Denni� stated that
the Code does not require a cul-de-sac due to the fact that the
street is proposed at 100 feet long it is adequate for ernergency
vehicle turn-around.
M�ry Higdem asked if the concept of the greenbelt �nd bike path
was incorporated into the. revised site plan. Dennis st.ated that
on the preliminary plat the concept of the greenbelt has not been
abandoned but the preliminary plat does not reflect actual plans
far it. Dennis further stated that the applicant is working
with the School District to develop plans for a bridge across the
Dixie Drain to accommodate the school ��e�estrian traffic.
Rita Earl stated that in r�eviewing the Compr.ehensive Plan it was
her understan�ing that it was the intent of the Comprehens�ve
Plan to develop both sides of L�ir.ie Drain as a greenbelt/open
space type develapment. Denni� stated that the GompreYiensive
Flan clearly indicates the Dixi.e I)rain as a major bikeway ar�d
pedestrian way and greer�belt bttt the precise method of clesign is
unclear.
Tom Page asked Dennis if staff was aware of the reason to change
the design from the one that the Commission approved at the
meeting in October. Dennis stated that the revised design has
larger lots and the expense of street impravements may have been
a contributing factor.
Rita Earl asked L�e.nnis what regulations �re in place regarding
fencing far public safety along the Dixie L�rain. Dennis stated
that the requirement of fencing could be addressed by the
Commission along with the street improvement proqram in the
approval of the plat.
Rita Earl asked Dennis if the Parks and Recreation has had input
regarding the gr�eenbelt and bike �ath asp�ct c�f this request.
L)ennis statecl that Staff has communicated with the Parks and
Recreation Director and the Planning and ZonincT Commission may
request a repart from the Parks �nd Recreation Board in review of
the proposed plat.
Rita stated that she felt it is important to maintain the concept
of the Comprehensive Pl�n in deveJ.oping this greenbelt area.
C'huck Randolph asked Dennis if there was any additional
correspondence on this request that the Commission did not
r in their informational packet. Dennis statecl that all
the correspondence received was given to the Commission members.
Chairman Randolph recognizecl Mr. Bill McDaniel, associate with
the applicant, Art Solis.
Mary Higdem asked Mr. McDaniel why the greenbelt/pedestrian area
r,oncept was abandoned from the plan as presented in the original
preliminary plat. Mr. McDaniel stated that he was not involved
with the original preliminary plat and became involved wheri the
original plat was revisecl to a subdivision with larger lots and
t.here have been many atfiempts to design the praject to meet
6
.�.., .,, _. . .. ,, . . . : -�>, . , �;, � -
' � �
' subdivision regulations. There are difficult�ies with the
greenbelt cancept in the site plan �resentecl for approval because
th� greenbelt would be ic�cated on the rear property line of one
section of homes and caulci possi�ly interfere with the privacy of
thase residents.
Tom Ensley asked Mr. McD�niel what the lot depth would be on the
plan presented. Mr. McUariiel stated that the lots would be
approx,imately 130 feet. He further stated that there is an
easement allowed for ttie L�ixie Drain.
Mary Higdem stated that �he felt input from the Police Department
should be requested in regarc� ta the safety of the greenbelt
area.
Dennis stated that in looking at the proposed design , the
Commission should also consider tr�e issue of security in
relationship to the greenbelt area.
T'here was also brief discussion regarding the easements for the
Hureau of Reclamation ar�d t.he existing sewer line.
Rita Earl asked Mi McDaniel wY�y the design was submitted with a
cul-de-sac type street as c�pposed to a through street. Mr.
McDaniel stated that they were attempting to abide by block
Ienyth regulations of 66t1 feet, unaware of Cade regulations far
cul-de-sac lengths of 400 feet. Mr. McDaniel stated that they
are willing to decrease the project by one lot and extend an
additional road to the west.
Mr. McDaniel alsa stated that the developers are willing to make
mi nar c2�ianges to the des i gn i n order to get the Cor�uni ss i on ' s
approval on the prelimin�ry plat presented sa that they can move
forward with the project as soori as pos�ible.
Mary Higdem stated that she would like a written agreement with
the Schaol District concerning to the greenbelt concept.
Rita Earl asked if the issue of storm cirains had been resolved.
Dennis stated that issue of dr�inage is still being discussed
with the Bureau of Recl�m�tion.
Tom Ensle}r stated that. he felt the Commissian nee_ds to be
presented with a plan regarding the greenbelt concept, comments
from the Parks and Recreation Board and a Variance request for
t.he cul-de-sac length.
With no further discussion Tam Ensley made a motion ta cont.inue
the pre 1 imi nary p 1 at to tlie regu 1 ar rneet ing of June i ri order to
qive the applicant time to addr�ess concerns of the Ureenbelt
concept, block length, Par�ks and Recreation review, possibility
of fencing, and written corrununicatian from the School District.
Rita Earl seconded the rnotion. A vate was taken and t.he motion
passed unanimously.
7
. ` I � �
� UentZis indicat�d t.hat th� r me�ting dafi.e for the Planning
and �4ninu Cc.�mr►�issi�n �cl��edul?d for June 20th is in canf 1 ir.t wit.h
the annual Ass�riati�n of Idahc:� Cities. It is st�ff.'s suggestion
that the meeting be held on June 13th. It was the corasensus of
the Commission tv hold the next meeting on June 13th.
The next item of business was a report on Gity Council actian.
Dennis repor�_ed that City Council is scheduled to have the third
and final reading on the ordinance involving fences, walls and
hed_qes .
The Council also had an initial hearing on the ordinance
involving parking lots. They continued the hearing to June 3 to
allow for more discussion and receive public testimony.
The Council will be considering the zone change and plan
amendment recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission on
property located at Lake. Avenue and Ustick Road.
The next item of business was the tentative �qendz for� the
meeting of June 13, 1991. Dennis indicated that in addition to
the preliminary plat discussed at this meeting, there will be
another preliminary plat for the consideration of the Commission.
Thare is alsa a request far a Special Use Permit to allow a two—
family dwelling unit in an R-1 zone.
With no further busine�s the meeting was acljourned �t 8:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sue Mullen,
Recording Secretary
I
i
Approvecl by ,
Chuck Randolph,
Chairman
S