Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2-2-1995 P&Z MINUTES ! ♦ PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES Meeting of February 2, 1995 Present: Madeline Buckendorf, Dorothy Davidson, Sonia Huyck, Terry McConnell, Bettie Pilote, Ken Rivers, Rick Wells Absent: None Staff: Dennis Crooks, Liz Yeary The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman, Rick Wells, at 7:15 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. The first item on the agenda was approval of the minutes for the meeting of January 19, 1995. Terry McConnell offered a motion to approve the minu#es. The motion was seconded by Sonia Huyck and passed unanimously. Before the public hearing portion of the agenda the Chairman gave a brief explanation of the public hearing process. The first item of public hearing was a request for a Special Use Pernrit by the City of Caldwell to install up to five (5) billboard signs on Caldwell Industrial Airport property adjacent to Interstate 84. Dennis explained that the request involved the placement of up to five billboard type signs between Aviation Way and Interstate 84 on property owned by the City of Caldwell. The Airport Commission was pursuing this as a revenue raising option. The request differed from the Sign Code in several ways. First, the proposed signs exceed sign area limitations prescribed by City Ordinance. Second, one of the sites indicated already has a sign. Third, the signs will create a conflict with potential businesses and theu ability to put up any additional signs to advertise their own activities. Dennis also explained some of the concerns identified in Staffs Report to the Commission: — Billboards are more than signs; they are considered a use of property and therefore have a qualify of permanence; — Sign regulations can address issues related to design, i.e. size, height, color, location, etc. However, sign copy or content cannot be regulated. — The past practices of the City in terms of processing billboards have been inconsistent. There is no clear precedent or policy. — The purpose of the City's sign regulations and the adequacy of the current ordinances to properly evaluate such a request. — Fairness and equitability in application of sign regulations involving other property owners along the freeway. — The City's Comprehensive Plan and the goals of community enhancement in the Community Design Component. — The policies emanating from City Council concerning beautification of the City, particularly its major entrances. — The effect the signs might have on the freeway corridor and the visual quality of the community. MINUTES P8Z 2-2-95 Page l . One of the questions the Commission might consider is what long term effect the signs could have on promoting business in the community. Part of the main purpose of planning and the role of the Commission is to protect property rights and to provide assurances that the local economy is protected and enhanced. In response to a question from the Chairman, Dennis stated that two people had contacted Staff concerning the request, Pete Echevarria, who had signed to testify, and Bill Gilbert, a neighboring property owner who has a sign himself, and did not indicate any opposition to the request as long as the number of signs was not excessive. Jack Pearson, Airport Manager, explained that he was directed by the Airport Commission to present the request to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Airport was constructed about 1974 and improvements had been made through funds made available by FAA and private enterprise. � Madeline Buckendorf asked Mr. Pearson what economic development benefits he saw for the City. Mr. Pearson stated that the Airport would lease property with an Idaho sign company, who would in turn lease the signs to businesses. There is no restriction intended to limit the signs to Caldwell businesses exclusivel . Mr. Pearson said that he did not think the land could be used for an other Y Y purpose. Major projects on the airport use 90% of FAA funds. This project will produce $12,000 revenue for the Airport. Those produce $100,000 in additional funds from the FAA. Mr. Pearson added that there is currently a Master Plan update, which should be completed by September of 1995. Long term plans include purchase of property for industrial use, and re-routing Ustick Road. All uses are required to be aviation-related. Bettie Pilote asked if the lease was contingent on five signs or if there could be less. Mr. Pearson stated that initially three signs would be built and advertisers would build two more at a later date. Steve Jarvis of Idaho Outdoor Advertising, leading contender in the lease bid process, explained that there are no advertising commitments or leases right now. Those signs facing motorists heading east could be sold to advertisers immediately and most likely would promote businesses in Nampa and Boise. Those facing west would require more aggressive selling. The signs would be leased under a 20-year agreement, and the Sign Company would have the first option to purchase the land on which the signs are located under the terms of the lease. Pete Echevarria, owner of property between Aviation Way and the freeway which is not incorporated in the City of Caldwell, objected to the proposal on the grounds that because his property is zoned agricultural he would not be permitted to install signs as a revenue raising venture, the signs would be a detriment to his property, and the proposed location of one of the signs appears to be on or next to his property. Steve Jarvis responded that the State allows signs within certain criteria. Only commercial and industrial properties are permitted to have the signs and there are spacing limitations, in addition to safety limitations relating to off ramps and overpasses. MINUTES P8Z 2-2-95 Pa;e : In response to a question from Madeline, Mr. Jarvis said that the leases are 20-year leases because each signs costs about $20,000 to install. In response to a question from Rick Wells, Mr. Pearson said that the signs will create revenue and excitement for the City, drawing people off the freeway into the Caldwell community. In response to a question from Sonia Huyck, NIr. Pearson stated that local businesses have not yet been approached. Signs installed will have to meet State Code and the State deternunes exact location. Dennis replied to a question from Madeline that because the request is a waiver from the Sign Ordinance it is governed by Special Use Pernut procedures. In response to a question from Sonia, Dennis said that the sign regulations currently under review are not associated with billboa.rd signs. However, the Sign Code has been evaluated for broad policy interpretations, particularly in regard to pernut procedures and enforcement. This review is at the City Council stage and the Council last fa11 requested a workshop session before proceedin� further. Sonia questioned whether any decision on the request should be tabled until the Code is amended. Dennis said that a Special Use Permit is evaluated in accordance with State Code and City Ordinance. State Code talks about a special use being a type of use that may be granted, in appropriate circumstances, that is otherwise prohibited by ordinance. Granting of a Special Use Pernut cannot be in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. A lot of these issues may go beyond the scope of the Planning and Zoning Commission. For example, the role of the City in promoting advertising that may be taking people out of the corporate limits of the City, is something that perhaps is more ' appropriate for the City Council to address. Terry McConnell asked whether this request, if granted, would inhibit other commercial business operations on that property. Dennis said that it could because only one sign is permitted on a parcel of record. Bettie Pilote said that she had no objection to Caldwell Airport but was not sure whether more business would be generated because signs are allowed on City owned property. Bettie said that she feels a strong airport is a major benefit to the community. She also stated that this is a very short term solution with a very long term effect. If the signs are installed,Mr. Jarvis' job is to sell those signs but she was not sure whether the signs will be a draw to Caldwell. The Code should be amended first before anything like this is permitted. She added that while one sign might be acceptable, five is too much, and with the Code still under review, now is not the appropriate time to approve something of this magnitude. Madeline agreed with Bettie, saying that she could not see an economic benefit to Caldwell, considering the impact on the surrounding properties and long term planning for that area. She also cited the potential for other commercial businesses to locate in the area who would want to advertise their business and be prohibited from doing so. This is a short term solution for long term commercial development for that area and a 20 year lease will cause problems. Everyone has worked very hard to get a new Sign Ordinance which keeps getting delayed. Terry expressed doubt about the idea as a revenue raising function, since the airport is expected to incur substantial growth and the utilization of the land could be a much more profitable invesiment. MINUTES P8Z 2-2-95 Page 3 Madeline Buckendorf then offered a Motion to deny the permit based on finding that the plans and proposal are unclear, the size of the signs and the number of the signs, the extent of departure from the Code being requested, that the signs would be detrimental to surrounding properties and the economic benefit to the community is negligible and short term and in fact could be an obstacle in attracting new business and industry to the City. Sonia Huyck seconded the Motion. ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Buckendorf, Pilote, Rivers, Davidson, Huyck, McConnell. Those voting no: None. Absent and not voting: None. MOTION CARRIED The second item of public hearing was a proposed amendment to the Caldwell Zoning Ordinance concerning farm animals and their offspring, and household animals, within the corporate limits of the City. Dennis explained that the Planning and Zoning Commission at its meeting of November 18, 1993, initiated the amendment in order to address the definition of cow/calf pairs or adult farm animals. Subsequently, the Staff was approached by the Potbellied Pig Association to have those animals classified as part of the definition of household pets. Dennis reminded the Commission that, in this instance, a Code Amendment is something which deals with all properties in the City and standards to be applied to all properties within a City even though some of the testimony might be related to a specific location. Dennis also indicated that the expectation of this evening's hearing was to receive public testimony and with that input help prepare a more definitive ordinance or document for consideration at a later date. A letter was received on February 2 which was circulated to Commissioners objecting to including potbellied pigs in the definition of household pet primarily because of a question of odor. Marty Stuf�lebeam of 904 N. Illinois stated that he had received a Special Use Permit to have the cow-calf pairs which had generated the initial discussion and amendment. He had contacted Fred Schley at the Bureau of Land Management who consider cow-calf pairs as calves becoming mature around 10 months rather than six (10 months being the natural weaning age). Smaller fann animals equate to large animals at a ratio of five sheep = one horse or cow. Jan Zimmerman, Animal Control Shelter Manager, agreed with Mr. Stu$lebeam, supporting the concept of one large animal or equivalent per acre. Ms. Zimmerman enforces the Animal Control Ordinance under contract with the City and said there have been problems with pigs and rabbits this past year. She stated that potbellied pigs are an exotic animal and should be spayed or neutered, have health certified vaccination records, be licensed, and not to exceed 100 pounds. They should be limited to not more than three per household and identifiable with collar or tag. Any ordinance should also address cleanliness of property since pigs will eat anything and produce foul odor. Ideally, pellets provided for such creatures should be the sole sustenance. MINUTES PSZ 2-2-95 Page �! . . In response to a question from Madeline, Ms. Zimmerman said that they really are not different from the problems a dog causes. In response to a question from Dorothy, she responded that pigs can get vicious. Ms. Zimmerman also asked for some language to address butchering of animals within city limits and commercial kennels. She recommended four rabbits to a household, with a baby rabbit considered as a one or two month old animal. Ms. Zimmerman expressed support for the enhancement of the ordinance and offered assistance. Nancy Curry of 918 N. Illinois spoke in opposition to farm animals within City limits, citing odor and groundwater contamination. She did not want the ordinance changed to allow cow-calf pairs. Lynette Uhl testified as the person who had requested a Code Amendment to address potbellied pigs. She agreed with the suggested standards, stating that the pigs are very clean and trainable, are not vicious and use a litter box. She felt they should be treated the same as dogs in terms of numbers per household. -� Gerald Curry of 918 N. Illinois testified in opposition to any change in the Code, citing a need to enforce the cunent Code. He did not agree using the Bureau of Land Management (BI.M) standards for the City since the BLM is a rural agency. He agreed that all pets should be spayed or neutered and that kennels should be regulated and inspected. Dan Erskine of 3104 S. Montana expressed concem about his farm property which is situated in the County but which is due to be annexed into the City. He stated that problems of odor concerning animals arise in the way animals are maintained. Francis Jewett of 403 Hill expressed concern about his farm property. He agreed with NIr. Erskine regarding the need for good management of property to avoid neighborhood problems. Bill Pilcher, DVM, of 120'7 Savannah, spoke as a veterinarian, agreeing that the suggested standazds seem fair. He stated that part of the quality of life in Caldwell is its rural flavor but that things have to be kept under control. He said that the majority of complaints are that animals get loose and cause problems with neighbors. He advised of other animals he has come across in his practice which could cause problems, such as badgers, raccoons, wolves, and bobcats. These aze wild animals and while they are illegal to own in other states there are no restrictions in Idaho. Part of the problem is that there are no approved vaccinations for wildlife. In response to a question from Rick, Dr. Pilcher suggested wording such as wild life indigenous to the State of Idaho, allowed by State or Federal statute. He also asked to see a draft of the ordinance when it is prepared, and o�ered assistance. NIr. Curry requested permission to add a final comment. He referred to a conversation he had with Robert Hobbs of the City of Boise about their definitions. He gave a copy of the draft Boise ordinance to Staff. Sonia asked Dennis if cats would be included in the review, but Dennis replied that in communicating with other agencies their experience showed it was impossible to regulate cats. Dennis commented that zoning ordinances are not generally retroactive and properties being annexed into the City are exempt from zoning regulations, such as the number of animals on a piece of , MINUTES P8Z 2-2-95 Pa;e � . property. Staf� are attempting, for the convenience of property owners, to ascertain numbers of animals on properties annexed and that such information is retained in the annexation file. There is a proviso that should such a property be reported subsequently as not being managed appropriately, problems of odor or flies, the matter can be addressed under other animal control or nuisance ordinances. Bettie thanked those that had taken the time to give testimony stating that the hearing had been positive and productive. After some further discussion and comment, Bettie Pilote offered a Motion to continue the Code Amendment until Apri16. Dennis agreed to notify all those signed to testify and any others who had signed on a mailing list. Madeline Buckendorf seconded the Motion. ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Pilote, Rivers, Davidson, Huyck, McConnell, Buckendorf. Those voting no: None. Absent and not voting: None. MOTION CARRIED In reporting on City Council action, Dennis stated that a joint CounciUPlanning and Zoning Commission Transportation workshop had been held and a Transportation Subcommittee had been formed. There would be two City Council members, two Planning and Zoning Commission members and representatives of City staff. The first item will be to work on updating the Transportation Component of the Comprehensive Plan to address the Area of City Impact. The Commission should designate two commissioners to serve on that subcommittee. After some discussion, it was decided that Dorothy and Terry would represent the Planning and Zoning Commission. Dennis outline some possible future agenda items. There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, � � . Liz eary, �� Rick Wells Recording Secretary Chairman MINUTES P8Z 2-2-95 ' Page 6