Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6-3-1993 P&Z MINUTES M> PLANNING AND ZOI�JING COMMISSION NIINUTES Meeting of June 3, 1993 Present: Chairman Tom Ensley, Wanda Anthony, Rita Earl, Phil Frye, Mary Higdem, Terry McConnell, Rick Wells Staff: Dennis Crooks and Liz Yeary The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Tom Ensley, at 7:1 S p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. The Minutes of the Plaiuiing and Zoning Commission Meeting of May 20, 1993 were '� approved as amended to show abstention of Commissioner Earl on the annexation hearing for Manchester Park, with motion submitted by Mary Higdem and seconded by Rita EarL The first public hearing on the agenda was a request for a Special Use Permit to operate a group ch�d care facility in the R-1 (Single Family Residential) zoning district at 2415 Roosevelt Street, applicant Sbaron Skogrand. Dennis explained the nature of the request, reminding the Commission that the case would be considered and evaluated under the ordinance existing prior to June 1, 1993 since the application was subnutted prior to that date. The facility has been operating since August of 1991. In response to a question from Rita Earl, Dennis confirmed that State licensing deals with children in attendance at one time rather than children enrolled at one time. The applicant, Sharon Skogrand, then testified that she is attempting to bring her facility into compliance with City Code, that her hours will be from 6 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, but that only three children arrive at 6 a.m. The majority of children arrive between 7:30 a.m. and 8:30 a.m. When asked by Rita Earl about the suggested condirions, the applicant stated that she is in agreement with them, except for #6 concerning installation of a 6' high wooden fence. She reported that her neighbor did not want the fence since there is an adequate 4' chain link fence. She went on to state that her activities are carefully scheduled and outside play times are not more than 45 minutes to one hour, once in the morning and once in the evening. Dennis reported no communications concerning the request, and the public heari.ng portion was closed. After some further discussion, Rita Earl offered a MOTION to approve the Special Use Permit subject to the amended terms and conditions, finding that the proposed use is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, is in compliance with the Ordinance that MINUTES P&Z 06/03/93 Page 1 existed at the time the application was made, and that the use provides a valuable service to the communiry. Wanda Anthony SECONDED the motion. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Wells, Frye, Anthony, McConnell and Higdem. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED The ne�ct public hearing concerned a request for a Special Use Permit to place a duplex in the R 1(Single Family Residential) zoning district on properry located at the southwest corner of Kimball and Oak (R,oy Hardy, applicant). Dennis explained the background, citing reasonable compatibility with the neighborhood, there being other multi family dwelling units in the vicinity. Concern was expressed about compliance with the Cit�s Comprehensive Plan regarding density requirements, stating that if this project is evaluated on its own, the density would be higher than the maximum. If j it is evaluated as part of the larger neighborhood, it was felt that the density requirement !, could be satisfied. �� Rita Earl questi.oned the possibility of a Local Improvement District (LID) on Parker or on I Oak. Gordon Law, City Engi.neer, responded that no LIDs for street improvements for this � area have yet been instituted. However, the applicant has agreed to participate should this become a reality. Rita then asked if the City could still obtain the Kimball Avenue right-of- way, if a single family dwelling is constructed. The Engineer and Dennis stated that at the Buildi.ng Permit stage the Engineer has the ability to require infirastructure improvements. The Ordinance as written gives the City Engineer a lot of discretion in working with owners of properry and making evaluations and decisions on a case by case basis. In response to a question from Mary Higdem, Dennis said that he understood from the Board of Realtors that the rental housing market in Caldwell is very tight and there seems to be a need for it both now and in the fiiture. Lynn Hardy, representing applicant Roy Hardy, then spoke describing the project as a "fairly nice" development, one side of which Mr. Roy Hardy would occupy. If the pennit was not granted, the applicant intends to build a low income rental house with the support of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, since there is a demand for large family rental units. Ln response to a question from Rita Earl, Mr. Hardy said that he was in agreement with the terms and conditions suggested by Staff. MINUTES P&Z 06/03/93 Page 2 i Roy Hardy then advised the Commission that he had contacted one neighbor who had ind.icated a willingness to partiripate in an LID to improve W. Oak. Gordon agreed that the City had been contacted regarding participation. Rita Earl commented that she is concerned about the Comprehensive Plan and had called another member of the Land Use Committee to discuss what the Committee was trying to accomplish in amending the Land Use Plan. The feeling was the intent of the Comprehensive Plan regarding densiry is for newer subdivisions rather than infill development. Wanda Anthony commented that if the lot had been saleable as a single family dwelling lot, it would already have been sold, given toda�s housing market. Rita Earl then offered a MOTION to approve the Special Use Permit subject to suggested conditions based on finding that: a) the property is a corner lot with frontage on a minor arterial roadway and thus is an appropriate location for a two-family dwelling unit. b} the proposed two-fanuly dwelling is reasonably compatible with the surrounding established development pattem of the area and thus will not result in any daraage or detriment to surrounding properry. c) development of the properry provides an opportunity to acquire dedication of needed right-of-way particulariy along the Kimball Avenue frontage. d) the proposed two-family dwelling was determined to be in conformance with the Cit�s Comprehensive Plan. Wanda Anthony seconded the Motion. Mary Higdem asked that the record should show this decision does not set a precedent but that each decision is made on its own merits and , this is an appropriate use for this parcel of land. , Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Wells, Frye, Anthony, McConnell and Higdem. ', Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED ' Under Miscellaneous, the Commission discussed the preliminary plat application for I�imball I Estates Subdivision on Kimball Avenue south of Amber Street. Dennis explai.ned that this I item covers properry located outside the corporate limits of the City of Caldwell but withi.n I the Area of City Impacr and therefore is evaluated according to the City Subdivision ' Ordinance. Mary Higdem asked and Dennis confirmed that technical details will be taken ' into consideration upon approval of the final plat. In response to a further question from MWU'1'ES P&Z 06/03/93 Page 3 Mary, Gordon responded that there are no plans to extend the Ciry sewer to this area within the next five years. Keith Bradshaw then spoke describing the project, saying that really there are only 10 parcels since they are already building their home on one parcel. They had originally intended to split two two-acre parcels but had been advised by Canyon Highway District (CHD) that there could only be one access onto Kimball Avenue for the whole property. In response to a question from Mary Higdem, the applicant stated that he would prefer to have a 56' right-of-way. C.H.D. requires a 60' right-of-way, which would involve ded.icating an additional 4 foot right-of-way, and no additional improvements other than i those required by the City. �, The applicant protested the granting of right-of-way to have the srreet go through to the I east although he is agreeable to having utility easements there. Dennis commented that �, it is not as critical to have the through street in this particular case. However, it is recommended to retain that flexibility to help design for future s�eets in the event that a connecrion is needed. After some further discussion conceming plans for irrigation and storm water retention, Mary Higdem asked the applicant if he agreed with the terms and conditions outlined in the Staff Repon. Mr. Bradshaw raised the issue of srreet improvements on K'imball, since there are no improvements, apart from paving on either side of the parcel. At this point, Mr. Bradshaw questioned the possibility of changing this review to a"short plat" review since really the discussion only concerns ten lots but Deiuus said at this stage that would not be possible. There was more discussion concerning a sidewalk installation on Kimball Avenue. Phil Frye asserted that this should be done as part of the development or a deferral agreement should be provided to ensure its completion. Greg Ski.nner, engineer for the applicant, appeared, stating that to require curb, gutter and sidewalk makes it a city street when in fact it will not be a city street. He did not feel a sidewalk should be installed on Kimball Avenue because of future developments which would necessitate removal of the improvements. Sallie Bradshaw questioned the possibility of an LID for Kimball Avenue or a deferral agreement to participate since there will be development in the future. Dennis explained that a deferral agreement would be recorded along with the title deed which would bind future owners of each parcel. Mary Higdem commented that the 56' right-of-way should be a decision the Bradshaws make, knowing that the CHD requires 60' right-of-way. MINUTES PBrZ 06/03/93 ' Page 4 Y The discussion moved on to the need for the through street right-of-way at the eastern end of the development. Dennis explained that as a general policy the Planning Department and the Engineering Department feel that there is a need to retain as much fle�ribility as possible in planning future streets and roads. Gordon Law added that the primary point of discussion was tiying to provide streets. We have to maintain the flexibility to provide the necessary public services to other people in the future. The applicant then asked that if it is a requirement could there be a notation on the plat restiicring development on the eastem properry from putting that road through without review of the Ciry? Dennis agreed that this was a good suggestion. A notation could read "no access will be provided through this easement unless a plan is approved by the Caldwell Planning and Zoning Commission". Phil Frye stated that one of the conditions calls for one fire hydrant but the Fire Department in its review calls for two hydrants. Dermis said that this can be worked out before approval of the final plat. The applicant requested waiver of the streetlight requirement, commenting that it would be difficult to collect this fee. The Commission and Staff said that a homeowners association could provide for this in its covenants. Mary Higdem, in offering a MOTION to approve the preliminary plat, commented that the street light was a reasonable requirement. The plat was approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Preliminary Plat of Kimball Estates is approved for a period of twelve (12) months, at which time said approval shall expire unless the application for final plat approval is filed. Final plat approval is to be obtained from the Ciry Council in accordance with Subdivision Ordinance provisions. 2. That the Preliminary Plat is granted for Kimball Estates Subdivision as shown on Exhibit "A", subject to: a) Provision of street lighting in accordance with the Cit�s Subdivision Ordinance. b) 32± (40) foot dedication along the Kimball Avenue frontage and construction of fiill s�eet improvements to City standards to inciude installation of five (5) foot wide sidewalks along this frontage. Said improvements along the Kimball Avenue frontage may be deferred at this time subject to a deferral agreement between the subdivider and the City being executed which binds the subdivider as well as any future owners of Parcel One (1) and Parcel Fleven (11) to participate in any future LID for those improvements. The MINUTES P&Z 06/03/93 Page 5 deferral agreement shall be prepared, executed and recorded prior to final map recordation. c) Provision of right-of-way and mulri-purpose utiliry easements to be e.�ttended to the east for possible road and future utility service extension. Any future road extension or access to the east shall be subject to the review and approval of the City of Caldwell Plazuung and Zoning Conunission. A notation of this restriction shall be included on the final plat. d) Provision of fifty-six feet (56') of right-of-way for the interior street which is to be developed to City standards with a recommendation to provide a minim� of sixty feet (60') of right-of-way to satisfy Canyon Highway District standards. Sidewalk installation on the interior street is waived. 3. Septic systems for the individual lots is subject to the approval of Southwest District Health which is to be provided prior to the approval of the final plat. 4. A detailed storm drainage plan shall be submitted for the review and approval of the City Engineer prior to the approval of the final plat. 5. A detailed domestic water system plan to include provisions for adequate fire flow and placement of fire hydrants shall be submitted for the review and approval of the City Engineer and Fire Department prior to the approval of the final plat. 6. The applicant shall make provisions for the delivery of irrigation water, or approved alternative system, to individual lots to the satisfaction of the Pioneer Irrigation District. Design issues concerning irrigation facility service to the project shall be resolved to the satisfacuon of the Pioneer Irrigation District and the City Engineer prior to any final plat approval. 7. The subdivider shall enter into guarantees of construction agreement joindy with the City of Caldwell and Canyon Highway District No.4 and shall bond or provide an acceptable form of security to insure construction of improvements as prescribed in Section 5-8-4 (G) of the Subdivision Ordinance. 8. The subdivider shall proyide testing and inspection of roadway construction to the satisfaction of Canyon Highway District and the City of Caldwell. Teny McConnell SECONDED the motion. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Higdem, Wells, Frye, Anthony, and McConnell. Those voting no: none. Those abstaining: Earl. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED 1tiQNU'TFS P&Z 06/03/93 Page 6 i . '� The next item of business was presentauon of the new Housing Component of the I Comprehensive Plan. Dennis explained that this would be presented to the Commission �' for recommendation in September with other updates to the Comprehensive Plan. I Dennis then outlined items acted upon by the Ciry Council, including the Schuetz hearing ' concerning the appeal of the Special Use Permit for the Barber Shop at 1422 Cleveland, � and the Area of Impact negotiations. The Commission discussed the possibiliry of a �i, workshop where Council ex officio representatives of the Planning and Zoning Commission, I could interact with the Commission and discuss why some decisions of the Commission are �, being reversed after careful evaluation. ', In view of the date of the Caldwell Night Rodeo the meeting scheduled for August 19 was brought forward to August 12, 1993. Dennis indicated that there did not appear to be a ' need at this time for a second meeting in July, but that in all likelihood there would be two I meetings in September. ' With no further business the meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m. ', �.2:��� Recording Secretary, Chairman, Liz Yeary Tom Ensley I MINUTES P$Z 06/03/93 Page 7