HomeMy WebLinkAbout2-3-1994 P&Z MINUTES r
� MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WORKSHOP
Thursday, February 3, 1994
Present: Tom Ensley, Madeline Buckendorf, Phii Frye, Mary Higdem, Terry
McConnell, Bettie Pilote, Reed Taylor, Rick Wells and Rita Earl, Council
ex officio
�
Staff: Dennis Crooks, Liz Yeary
Dennis began by explaining the purpose and intent of the workshop, requesting input
from the Commission on the process we follow for regular meetings and how we can
work with the Commission as a team.
The first item for discussion was the list of goals for 1994. Dennis stated that Area of
Impact negotiations were still in progress. One informal meeting had been held with
Jerry Jones and the County Commissioners. Two significant points to note are that
the state has changed the deadline for adopting an area of City Impact from 1977 to
October 1, 1994. The other point is that the City will not be able to annex any
property as of January 1995 unless it is part of a recognized Area of Impact adopted
by both City and County.
In response to a question from Mary Higdem, Dennis said that the disputed Area of
Impact between Middleton and Caldwell will have to be resolved at some future date.
In addition to agreeing on a geographical area of City Impact we also have to agree
on which Comprehensive Plan and which Ordinances are to be effective in those
areas.
Rita brought up the possibility of a joint committee with Nampa to administer planning
for the Boulevard corridor. Dennis reported that Canyon County and Ada County have
been named part of a Statistical Metropolitan Area which will necessitate the formation
of some sort of area wide planning association which will be mandatory for federal
funding, e.g. transportation funds. In other large metropolitan areas, each county has
its own regional planning group made up of 3 or 4 cities and other agencies and
districts which feed into a large umbrella regional organization. In all likelihood, this
will happen within the next five years as part of the 2000 census.
Dennis described the portions of the Comprehensive Plan which have to be updated,
namely the Public Facilities Component and the Transportation Component and the
need to develop a School Facilities and Transportation Component, all of which will be
affected to some degree by the geographical area of city impact.
The Subdivision Ordinance is projected to undergo a major update within the year and
the Zoning Ordinance has recently been amended to reflect State Code changes.
1
,I
,.
, Tom Ensley asked whether it would be prudent to form a subcommittee of the
Planning and Zoning Commission to look into the Subdivision Ordinance. Dennis
agreed, reminding the Commission that they were also planning to evaluate the R-2
zoning district, particularly in regard to density and lot size, and also the Land Use
Schedule. ,
The consensus was that there should be a subcommittee of the Commission to look at I
- the Subdivision Ordinance and a subcommittee to look at the R-2 zone.
In regard to the Sign Committee, the Resolution of Interpretation is scheduled for
review by City Council in March. Dennis emphasized to the Commission that the
Council wanted the public very informed as to the implications before it is enacted.
The next item on the agenda was the issue of pro-active annexations and reasons for
them, linked to roads and provision of city seniices. Rita asked Dennis if it would be
beneficial for the Commission to present a statement to Council re pro-active
annexation. Dennis said that both the City Engineer and himself plan to present such
a statement to Council regarding the benefits and why there should be a pro-active
annexation program now.
Another issue to consider is appropriate use of the public right of way. Like the Sign
Committee, work on this project will involve wide public input and information sharing
before it is successful.
Bettie Pilote said that she would like to see a clearer explanation of a Planned Unit
Development. She said that there will be more of these kinds of development as the
City grows, and she felt the current definitions were not specific. There was general
agreement to look at this, and it was added to the work program under potential code
amendments.
Dennis explained the permit application process, and the need to obtain as much
information as possible before a hearing. The Commission were reminded to state the
code sections and policies upon which their decisions are based. They agreed that
having Code sections listed in the Staff Report will help. Dennis said that we are
required to enact a Hearing Procedures Ordinance and will work with the Chairman to
come up with a draft.
He then explained the handouts provided by the City Attorney on ex parte contact,
conflict of interest, a case history of Manookian v. Blaine County, and Ethics in
Government from the State Code.
The final discussion centered on voting procedures of the Chairman. Tom stated that
he did not wish to vote except to make or break a tie as he sees his role very much
as a moderator. If the Chairman thinks something needs to be brought out, he is able
2
p .�
� to participate but he did not wish to vote. It was felt that in those cases, the record
should show that the Chair abstains. Mary Higdem added that she did feel Tom
should continue to provide input to generate questions.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted
�
� I
G� �
Liz Yeary, Recording Secretary Tom Ensley, Chairm an �
3