Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9-16-1993 P&Z MINUTES r �. � PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES Meeting of September 16, 1993 Present: Vice Chair Mary Higdem, Rita Earl, Phil Frye, Terry McConnell, Rick Wells Absent: Wanda Anthony, Tom Ensley. Staff: Dennis Crooks and Liz Yeary The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Corrunission was called to order by Vice Chair Mary Higdem, at 7:15 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. The Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of September 2, 1993, were approved, with motion submitted by Rita Earl and seconded by Terry McConnell. . . . The first public heanng on the agenda was the continuation of a review of a Special Use Pernut for a Group Day Care Facility at 1805 Blaine Street, which was continued from the August 12 agenda. Rick Wells indicated that he would not be speaking or acting on this item. Dennis explained the background to the case, the reason for the review and the objectives stated in requesting the hearing be continued to this date. He emphasized that the key issue is one of site and location and he reported that the applicant has informed staff she is trying to come to an arrangement with a neighbor to assist with loading and unloading. He added that a neighbor to the south has complained that parents are using his property for loading and unloading. The owner of the facility, Sherry Summers, then spoke reiterating that there had not been an accident at the facility, there had been a near accident, after hours, after the children had been released to the custody of the parents. She referred to the complaint from the owner of the triplex and stated that her parents were no longer parking there. She reported that she is negotiating with a neighbor who may have room to assist with parking off the alley. In reference to the issue of the excessive number of children during the summer, and in response to a question from Rita Earl, she explained that a large part of the time the older children attend other programs during the day and she has extra people to help her with that. She does not want to expand to a child care center except for the two summer months, which she understands is not possible. With regard to the fencing suggestion, she did not see how this would stop people using the sidewalk and did not feel fencing would be a solution. She reported that the parents are cooperating by not parking on Blaine Street. The next person to offer testimony was Tina Lewis who expressed support for the facility, and stated that she and all parents are repeatedly reminded by the applicant to use 18th Avenue or the , alley to pazk. She added that signs have been placed on the door reminding parents to not use Blaine Street for loading/unloading. In response to a question from Terry McConnell, Ms. Lewis said that she parks on 18th Avenue. MINUTFS P&Z 09-16-93 Page i � Vernon Sniith, a property owner in the area, then testified that he was against increasing the number of children to be cared for, which he understood from previous testimony was not permitted. Since the last meeting Mr. Smith has not observed anyone parking on Blaine Street. He had seen boys playing in the front yard and running onto the sidewalk. He felt that if 12 children was the permitted limit then someone should enforce this. In response to a question from Rita Earl he stated that the boys' ages would be about S and 7. In response to a question from Phil Frye, he felt that a fence would not solve the problem. Gail Gumaer then spoke saying that she was present when the boys were playing and that they are not part of the day care facility but are neighboring children. She said that she has been bringing her son to Sherry's for many years and had never seen children from the daycare playing outside. Sarah Miles testified stating that her children were the ones involved in the near accident in the summer and that it had happened after they had been released to her care. She said that the parents aze cooperating by using 18th Avenue. Ms. Summers came back to the podium and confirmed that the boys were not part of her facility. In res nse to a uestion from Mr. Frye, Sheny stated that the total square footage of her P� q building is 3100 sq ft. and therefore has ample room for more than 12 children, but the Fire Marshall had inspected the two play areas and had not taken the whole house into consideration. In response to a question from Rita Earl, Sherry said that they are taking up the deck and will replace the childproof lock when the area is accessible. In response to a question from Terry McConnell, Sherry stated that she has between 18 and 24 children in the suminer, mostly siblings ' of her regular children, and these older siblings are usually busy with outside activities during the summer days. She added that the day caze facilities in Caldwell are full and she herself has a waiting list for children. With no further public testimony the public hearing was closed. Mary asked Dennis to explain the options stated in his report. Dennis conf'u�med that if the applicant wishes to expand the daycaze to take more children, she would ha.ve to apply for a State License for that number which would trigger a fire safety inspection. Such a license would not be for 2 or 3 months during the summer but would cover 12 months of the year. The second option is one of modification of the pemut, adding conditions to address the safety issue. One such modification would be a fencing requirement. The third option is revocation of the permit. In response to a question from Rita Earl, Dennis pointed out the neighboring property with which the applicant is negotiating for loading space. Phil Frye felt that fencing along Blaine Street would be a solution and that 12 children should be the occu anc for the 12 months of the year. Rita Earl agreed stating that safety of the P Y children is the first issue but that safety of the neighborhood is also an important consideration. MINUTES P&Z 09-16-93 Page 2 Terry McConnell agreed. Dennis reminded the Commission that under the new ordinance of June 1, 1993, child caze centers are required to have on-site loading and unloading and employee parking. Rita then questioned Dennis on the issue of potential liability involving the City. Dennis indicated that in cases involving the granting of discretionary pernuts such as a Special Use Pernut and there is evidence presented concerning the safety of the location, the Commission should make reasonable efforts to address and mitigate those safety concerns. Otherwise, the City may assume some liability in the event an accident would occur. Dennis agreed that fencing would be a consideration in making the facility safer, and reduce potential for libaility, but matters of liability are usually decided in Court on specific cases. After some further discussion, Phil Frye offered a Motion to approve continuing the Special Use Permit with all original conditions intact, emphasizing this is a facility with a 12 child maximum limit, that fencing will be constructed along Blaine Street to satisfy requirements of the Plannuig and Zoning staff, such as vision fencing between 36" and 42" high including a return fence along the south edge of the property, to meet existing fencing, that a walkway will be established between 18th Avenue and the entrance into the day care facility so there will be no use of the sidewalk of Blaine Street. These modifications to be effective within 60 days of approval of the continuance of the Permit. Motion was seconded by Rita Earl. ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Frye, McConnell, Earl. Those voting no: None. Those abstaining: Wells. Absent and not voting: Anthony, Ensley. MOTION CARRIED The second public hearing was an application from H3, Inc. for a Comprehensive Plan Amendrnent from High Density Residential and Professional Offices to Low Density Residential, and Zone Change from R-3 (Multi-Family High Density Residential} to R-1 (Single Family Residential) for property located at the southeast corner of Lake Avenue and Ustick Road. Dennis reminded the Commission that a Preliminary Plat for property involving the subject area. had been approved at the previous meeting. Marshall Hickman, developer, of 2009 KCID Rd. then addressed the Commission, saying that when the original subdivision was designed two years previously, the concept of commercial use along Ustick Road had seemed feasible. However, in today's market, a single family residential development is more viable. The applicant has agreed to provide bernung between Ustick Road and the development as required by the Commission, and they also have agreed that the zoning should be changed to be consistent with the type of development being proposed in order to protect the integrity of the future single family housing in the subdivision. MINUTFS PBr.Z 09-16-93 Page 3 After some further discussion, Rita Earl offered a Motion to forward the request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment to City Council for approval. Motion was seconded by Rick Wells. ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Earl, Frye, McConnell, Wells. Those voting no: None. Absent and not voting: Anthony, Ensley. MOTION CARRIED Rita Earl offered a Motion to forward the request for Zone Change to City Council for approval. Motion was seconded by Terry McConnell. ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Earl, Frye, McConnell, Wells. Those voting no: None. Absent and not voting: Anthony, Ensley. MOTION CARRIED The next public hearing was a request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential and Professional Offices for property located at the eastern terminus of Morrison Street north of Logan. A companion case was a zone change request for the same property from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to R-3-20 (Multi-Family High Density Residential, Medium Range 10-20 dwelling units per acre}. The applicant is Briggs Engineering for Roy and Phil Roark. Dennis explained the background to the request stating that the Comprehensive Plan does provide some criteria for plan changes. He said that there is an expectation that Sunset Avenue would be extended as a future through street and that Airport Avenue would be extended from La.urel to Logan as a future collector through street. He also identified the natural drainage channel on the western portion of the property which is identified as a greenway in the City's Comprehensive Plan and that the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan indicates a need for a neighborhood park in the general vicinity. The street system in the azea is substandard, particularly Morrison Street, and the intersection of Kimball and Logan is a recognized substandard intersection. Dennis recommended the Commission evaluate the potential effect such a zone change might have on the vacant property to the north and also the possibility of utilizing the development agreement provision in the ordinance. The City recognizes the need for multi-family housing but this should not be accomplished at the expense of existing neighborhoods. The character of the property appears to ' lend itself toward a Planned Unit Development concept which would pernut density transfers taking advantage of the natural drainage azeas around the site. A major concern is traffic generation and a comparison of a higher density project versus a low density project under the current zoning in terms of the number of vehicle trips generated should be considered. Trip generation factors for multi-family development are less that that for single family residential. Thus, a 20 unit multi-family project, for example, would actually generate less traff'ic than a 20 unit single family project. MINiTI'ES P8r.Z 09-16-93 Page 4 i Van Elg appeared as a representative of the applicants, stating that the proposed development would probably be a mixture of 3-, 4- and 5-plexes, but possibly limiting it to 4-plexes. Mr. Elg referred to the Comprehensive Plan which cites a shortage of high density housing and the practice of infill land and transitional azeas being used for such housing. He also referred to other zoning designations mentioned in the Staff Report. In response to items in the Report, Mr. Elg stated that sewer service could be provided from the west. Regarding the topographic constraints, this would be addressed when the development plans are submitted. With regard to right-of-way problems they were informed by Dennis that there is a potential to extend Sunset north and if necessary Airport Avenue could be extended. The developer will also extend Morrison to better serve the property. The developer expressed a willingness to make some considerations with regard to the natural features of the site and submitted a map showing the area in question. This area consists of 1.1 acres which runs from the eastern high watermark of the stream to the western part of the property and could be a potential pazk site. The developer would consider dedication of the site to the city and provide for protection of the greenway. Mr. Elg went on to state that while obviously traffic would increase, the development would be designed so as to disperse the traffic in varying directions. There is compatibility with the senior housing directly to the south and the proposed park site would be an amenity to that facility. The developer is willing to enter into a development agreement with the City and set up a work session with staff to iron out any agreements re density, park space, new and existing rights-of- way, and building height. Mr. Elg stated that the buildings would be no more than two story. No off'ice space is planned for this development. Rita Earl asked Mr. Elg whether the developer had considered R-3-15 as well as R-3-20, to which Mr. Elg responded that R-3-15 would not permit the density for the proposed development. In response to a question from Phil Frye, Mr. Elg stated that traffic would be dispersed through Morrison, Sunset and possibly Airport north and south. Mary Higdem questioned the recommendation of staff to look at R-2 zoning medium density but Mr. Elg stated that such a density does not provide much incentive for the owner to provide a park site. With provision of rights-of-way and the pazk site, it is not economically feasible to look at the lower density. However, they are willing to negotiate. John Milligan then spoke raising the issue of traffic for the neighborhood, stating that Morrison is substandard and that Sunset or Parker would have to cazry the traffic to Logan. He could not see how Morrison could be widened since the city does not have the right-of-way. He questioned the traffic figures saying that most people have at least two cars and make multiple trips. In response to a question from Rita Earl, Mr.Milligan felt even R-2 zoning would be excessive as MINUTFS P&Z 09-16-93 Page 5 this would provide at least 45 homes and associated tr�c. The traffic on Logan has already increased since the Oddfellows senior housing development, and the addition of 200 - 300 cars would make a big bottleneck. Trudi Heinz spoke citing increases in traffic on Kimball and Logan and the difficulty already experienced getting from Momson to Kimball. She was also concerned about who would pay for Momson improvements. Dennis Crooks replied that the developer would have to obtain a number of permit requests, one of which would be a plat to subdivide the property. One of the things evaluated would be streets and street improvements, both on-site and off-site and to a limited degree other improvements could be addressed. He added that a concept has been shown to staff showing Momson coming through at Sunset and Parker and looping up northward. Jim McGarvin testi�ed that while he is in favor of growth he feels the streets should be put in order first. The streets are all substandard and the increased traffic would be too intense for the neighborhood. Joe Frost, owner of property on Morrison, questioned how the street would be widened since the azea is developed. He also presented a list of signatures of people opposed to the zone change. Mr. Frost referred to the northern property, the natural spring, the poor soil, and the substandard streets. In response to a question from Rita Earl, Mr. Frost asked how the developer plans to widen a street he does not own. He also considered that making Morrison a one-way street would penalize people living on Parker and Morrison. Robert Schaffer, an architect, testified on behalf of Hal Hogan and the Oddfellows Organiza.tion, owner of Friendship Manor. Mr. Schaffer described the history of the Oddfellows charitable works in Idaho and in Caldwell and stated that they would not support something detri.mental to the community. He felt that Friendship Manor was a positive addition to the City and the proposed zone change and Comprehensive Plan Amendment would also be a positive step. With Sunset extended and Airport Avenue put through, with the cooperation of Simplot, the dispersion of traffic should work. He felt the traffic would grow whether or not the zone change and amendment are approved. Mr. Elg returned to the podium to address some of the concerns. He stated that his clients are willing to negotiate and that they would prefer action on the Plan amendment and Zone Change and negotiate when they come in with development plans. He suggested that the zone change be reduced to R-3-15 which would be in between the original request and what staff feels is the better zone. The R-3-15 does have a density limit and could be mediated as part of the development agreement. R-3 allows unlimited density and they are not requesting that. a) they could specify the number of units to be develop: 80 units would generate 400 trips per day, 60 units would generate 300 trips per day. 60 units is very similar to a R-1 density. b) density could be transferred to provide protection for the greenway. MINUTES P&Z 09-15-93 Page 6 c) dedication of the park site to the city. d) the number of extensions required, utilities, and rights-of-way, would not be economically feasible to remain R-1. The zoning map shows a large area of R-2 property which is not being developed to maxixnum capacity or is vacant. He felt R-3 would be appropriate for the area. A typical development of this size only has two access points. With respect to right-of-way, there is limited access to Morrison, and two other points of access. Any proposed development would include the extension of Morrison and Sunset. In response to a question from Rick Wells, Mr. Elg asserted that extension of Morrison and distribution of tra�c could be worked out in a development agreement. The public hearing was then closed. In response to a question from Rita Earl, Denrus stated that a development agreement has to accompany and be part of a zone change. If there is a change to an R-3 zone, whatever the range, it would have to be consistent with the land use designarion. When the designation is High Density Residential, and zoning is R-1 the land use plan designation is the long range planning tool which identifies areas that perhaps may be suitable for a certain type of development in the future. The zoning, in this case R-1, sets the standards and parameters for development. Long range designations such as the Comprehensive Plan land use designa.tion, could make an assumption that utility extensions or other infrastructure improvements would have to be in place before a rezoning for higher land use could take place. Dennis also indicated that the Land Use Schedule states that Planned Unit Developments aze allowable with a Special Use Pernut. If the developer so chooses, they could apply for a Special Use Permit to vary the type of housing to attached, condominium type apartments, 5-plexes even in the R-1 zone, but the density would have to be consistent with the land use desigation. The Planned Unit Development concept is not a license to change the zoning. Dennis also said one option available to the Commission would be to take action on the proposed plan amendment but to table the zone change request in order to allow preparation of a draft development agreement. Rita Earl felt that there are several things to take into consideration. 1. There is a need for R-3 zoning. 2. There is a need for affordable housing in the region. 3. There is a need to protect the integrity of existing neighborhood and potential infringement. 4. There is a need to protect the property rights of the owner of this piece of property, MINUTFS P&Z 09-16-93 Page 7 Phil Frye stated that the request is an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan which does not guarantee anything. The applicant still has to show that it can work. Rick Wells refened to Mr. Milligan's comments about what it would look like, what sort of buildings, and the amount of the traffic. Rick was not convinced that the applicant could not build sornething which would be compatible with all parties, and be beneficial to the City, and that the applicant should be given an opportunity to fiuther negotiate without having to wait for another six months. With some further discussion concerning the time frame, the "windows of opportunity" for amending the Comprehensive Plan and the relationship between Comprehensive Plan and Zone changes, Rick Wells offered a Motion to forward the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Council for approval. Terry McConnell seconded the Motion. ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Wells, Earl, Frye, McConnell. Those voting no: None. Absent and not voting: Anthony, Ensley. MOTION CARRIED Rita Earl then offered a motion to continue the Zone Change request to an indefuute time. Phil Frye seconded the Motion. ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Earl, Frye, McConnell, Wells. Those voting no: None. Absent and not voting: Anthony, Ensley. MOTION CARRI�D The final public hearing was a request for an Amendment to the Caldwell Zoning Ordinance to permit the placement of Mobile Home Parks in the R-2 zoning district as a Special Use, and also addressing an amendrnent to the Mobile Home Park Section of the Zoning Ordinance mandating placement of Class A and B standard mobile homes in Parks and prohibiting the placement of Class C Mobile Homes. After some discussion it was agreed to review separately the portion of the amendment restrictittg mobile homes in parks to Class A and B. Dennis expla.ined that prior to 1976 there had been no requirements for inspection during construction at the factory. It was very common for manufactured housing to be built with aluminum wiring and other substandard features, which made them susceptible to fire and other potential hazards. This request is submitted by the Fire and Building Department to limit all . mobile homes to post-1976 units which are safer for occupants. The Code Amendment will not have any effect on pre-existing units in place now. MINi1TFS P&Z 09-16-93 Page 8 • Dick Winder testified that under current State Law, the landlord-tenant provisions allow a person to be evicted from a mobile home park without cause and that this new Code Amendment could leave evicted parties without a place to locate a pre-1976 trailer unit. Rick Wells felt that the good this amendment will do outweighs the bad. Other municipalities are enacting similar standards for reasons of safety. Rita Earl agreed with Dick Winder, stating that this was something to be considered and that she was not comfortable taking action at this time. Housing is usually occupied by a segment of the population who through circumstances beyond their control can live nowhere other than where they are currently living. Rick Wells offered a motion to recommend approval of the Code Amendment. The Motion died for lack of a second. Rita Earl theu offered a motion to table the item until staff has had time to further research and bring back more information on the situation. Phil Frye sec:anded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Earl, Frye, McConnell. Those voting no: Wells. Absent and not voting: Anthony, Ensley. MOTION CARRIED The second portion of the item was then discussed. John Madden is proposing to reopen Nick's Mobile Manor which has a grandfathered non-conforrning use until December of 1993. To expand the park into the adjacent property requires a Special Use Permit which under current code is not applicable. Dennis explained that the people around Nicl�s Mobile Manor had been notified of the hearing, since a comrnitment had been made to them when the park was closed down previously to inf�a� them of any developments. Mr. Madden testified that he plans to reopen the park, bring it up to current City standards and put a nice family park there. Hilda Morgan testified that houses would enhance the city in that location rather than a mobile home pazk Theresa Yost reported that she had purchased her home on Cherry a year ago and was not av��°� a mobile horne park could be developed there. She cited low income, vandalism, and a potential for lowering her property values. She was also concerned that her access to irrigation would be retained and that her property is affected because two sides of her property abut the mobile home park. Dana Healey stated that mobile homes aze not maintained well and will affect property values. MINUTES P&Z 09-16-93 Page 9 Kate House felt mobile home parks should be restricted to R-3 zones and all should be Class A or B. She expressed concern that property values would depreciate because of a mobile home park. In response to a question from Rick Wells, Ms. House stated that she is not objecting to people on low income, but mobile home parks aze not maintained by the people who live in them, regazdless of income. Bill Moore stated that he had bought his home in the neighborhood because his neighborhood on the other side of town was surrounded by mobile homes and reduced property values. He agreed that modern mobile homes aze acceptable but he did not lrnow there was likely to be a mobile home park next to him. Betty Budock owns property opposite the subject property. Dennis explained the grandfather clause under which the park falls and the December expiration. He also explained the position with the adjacent portion which requires a Special Use Pernut to expand. Mrs. Budock wants to be informed of the expansion, so that she may see plans. She also was concerned about traffic on Indiana generated by the mobile home park and by Fairoaks Subdivision. Mrs. Budock did not object to mobile home parks as long as they are well maintained. The public hearing then closed. Rita Eazl asked Dennis if there had been a demonstrated need in the past for more mobile home parks to be made available in the City. Dennis responded that two of the mobile homes pazks already existing are expanding rapidly which seems to indicate a need. There are some areas in the R-2T zone which would look a lot better if they had been developed as mobile home parks rather than mobile home subdivisions. The Special Use Permit process helps in developing standards that are acceptable. Phil Frye commented that there is potential for this type of development in the R-2 zone. This amendment would give the Commission an opportunity to look at them very closely and add any requirements that might help protect adjoining areas. Terry McConnell agreed stating that there is a dernand for mobile home parks and a Special Us� Permit helps keep them attractive especially with the present mobile home park standards. Rita Earl added that this is a way of providing housing for a particular segment of the population. After some further discussion, Phil �-ye offered a motion to forward the amendment to Council with a recommendation for approval. Terry McConnell seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Frye, McConnell, and Wells. Those voting no: Earl. Absent and not voting: Anthony, Ensley. MOTION CARRI�� MINUTFS P&Z 09-16-93 Page 10 The final public hearing was an amendment to the text of the Comprehensive Plan, which had been continued from the September 2 agenda. Dick Winder testified complimenting the Commission on the amendments, and pointing out some typographical date errors specifically, Page 3- 1880 should be 1890 Page 4- 1880 should be 1890 Page 11 - 1880 should be 1890 He was still concerned about Policy 2 on Page 21. Page 26 appeared to have some wording missing. On Page 56, 2: Residential should be included. Rick Wells offered a Motion to forward the amended text to City Council with recommendation for approval. Rita Earl seconded the Motion. ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Wells, Frye, McConnell, Earl. Those voting no: None. Absent and not voting: Anthony, Ensley. MOTION CARRIED Dennis then reviewed City Council action and potential items for the October 7 and October 21 meetings of the Commission. He also advised the Commission of a proposed City Council hearing on September 27, 1993, to discuss and receive comments on parking for the Bushnell Comxnunity Center, Library, Senior Center and Sebree Park. With no further business the meeting adjourned at 12:30 a.m. ���:L �t'- `��'`� � Recording Secretary, Vice Chair, Liz Yeary Mary Higdem MINUT'FS P&Z 09-16-93 Page 11