Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1-30-1997 P&Z MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT ' T�ie City o� Ca Planning & Zoning Director 621 CLEVELAND BLVD. CALDWELL ID 83605 • TELEPHONE 455-3021 FAX 455-3003 Special Meeting of January 30, 1997 MINUTES OF THE CITY OF CALDWELL PLANNING AND ZO1vING COMMISSION AND CANYON COUNTY PLANNING AND ZO1vING COMNIISSION JOINT POWERS A Joint Hearing with Canyon County Planning and Zoning and the City of Caldwell Planning and . Zoning was called to order by Chairman Lee Gilbertson, at 7:05 p.m., in the first floor Public Meeting Room, at the Canyon County Court House. PRESENT: Lee Gilbertson (Chairman Canyon P&Z) Alan Mills (Rural Middleton, Secretary) Roger Wright (Rural Caldwell, Canyon P&Z) Norm Alder (Rural Melba, Canyon P&Z) Rhonda Kren (Rural Nampa, Canyon P&Z) Bill Shaw (Canyon Developmental Services Director) Jerry Jones (P&Z Administrator) Cyndi Eaton (Canyon P&Z Recording Secretary) Chuck Saari (Canyon County Legal Representative) William Roos (City of Caldwell P&Z) Mike Nachtigall (City of Caldwell P&Z) Sonia Huyck (City of Caldwell P&Z) . Bill Gilbert (City of Caldwell P&Z) • Ed Christopher (City of Caldwell P&Z Planner) Ann Marie Reyes (City of Caldwell Recording Secretary) Chairperson Gilbertson turned the meeting over to Jerry Jones. Jerry Jones explained the Joint Exercise of Power Agreement for the area of City Impact between the City of Caldwell and Canyon County, Idaho. Jerry Jones stated the reason for the meeting and public hearing would be to fulfill requirements of Idaho Code 67-6526(a), which required that separate ordinances be established for the administration of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Subdivision Ordinance that are pertaining to the impact areas. On October 19, 1996, the boundary of the impact area was established. The impact area for the City of Caldwell was agreed upon and established in an � COU.CIT - I Ordinance. On December 23, 1994, the Ordinance was adopted for the boundary. The City's Subdivision Ordinance applied to the impact area. This agreement was titled Joint Exercise of Power Agreement (J.E.P.A.) for area of City impact between the City of Caldwell and County of Canyon, Idaho. He further stated that it provides for the application for those Ordinances that are already in place and adopted. The J.E.P.A. pointed out that it was necessary, expeditious, and desirable that procedures were adopted for the process of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, implementation ordinances on Land Use, and applications for land divisions, as well as, subdivision plats. It is desirous to facilitate interaction between the County and the City of Caldwell. The J.E.P.A. is simply to give it structure, it would have nothing to do with the actual agreement. The duration would be to continue until it is terminated. This would not create any legal or administrative entities. The purpose would be to facilitate the legal duties of both the County and the City and also in processing land use and division applications. There would be no joint financing. Either party would establish their own fees and be responsible for the collection of those fees. The ordinances that have already been adopted are in effect and would apply to the procedures as set forth in this Agreement. It would not change those ordinances, the only way those are changed is by a re-amendment. The next section pertained to the Plan Amendment, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and all proposals to the County's Comprehensive Plan, which applied in the impact area would be referred to the City at least thirty (30) prior to any hearing. Then a recommendation could be made by the City on that action. The recommendation would not be binding on the County, but would be given great consideration as long as it was factually supported. Any amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, to the text, or the map would be applied for at the County and referred to the City. The City could apply at any time to amend the County's Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance and should participate as any other applicant in the process. The input from the City would be given documentary evidence status. Any final documents would be sent to both parties. The City would receive final documents from the County. Any land divisions requiring notification or a public hearing would be referred to the City, those . that do not require publication or notification would be handled by the County. Mobile/manufactured homes not set up pursuant to manufacturers' recommendations shall not be allowed in any zone, in which the County's Zoning Ordinance excluded mobile/manufactured homes. As for temporary residences, the County shall receive input from the City on application for County temporary mobile/manufactured homes. The City's comments shall be given great weight, provided they were factually supported. The County approval of any temporary residence that does not afford the permit holder any nonconforming use or structure grandfather rights status prior to or upon City annexation. The County does not want to force the City to take in a mobile home on a permanent basis unless the City has the chance to process it. Planned Unit Developments would be according to the definition in the County's Zoning Ordinance. The City could apply to the County and amend that. If the Subdivision Plat Application met the County's Comprehensive Plan and designated Zoning Ordinance, they would be allowed uses. The administrator would prepare a letter to the City confirming the same, indicating a minimum lot cou.c�T - z size according to the County's Zoning Ordinance. The City would then be able to take action under the City's Subdivision Ordinance and development standards, but the minimum lot sizes determined by the County's Zoning Ordinance would not be an issue of the processing of that plat. Upon approval of the development standards and acceptance by the City the final plats would be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners for final review and signature, but the Broad of County Commissioners would have no need to reconsider any development standards, they would be set forth by the City's Ordinances. If there is no conformation with the City's Comprehensive Plan Zoning Ordinance then the applicant would be encouraged at the County level to either make application for those amendments or not move forward with the project. All land divisions defined as "subdivisions" by the City shall be considered subdivisions. All Planned Unit Development applications shall first come to the County and be referred to the City. The County could attach Conditions of Approval, which may pertain to the type and relative quanty of the uses permitted. Once this was determined it would be forwarded to the City. The City would process the Planned Unit Development as any other subdivision plat. Recommendations for City impact area representation on the County's Planning and Zoning Commission are welcomed by the County. They would be made to the County's Board of Commissioners. Annexation notification would be given to the County whenever annexation is being considered and also when it is complete. Each entity would establish its own internal procedures and any appeals would be handled by the entity that was responsible for the decision. The County and/or the City many pursue the establishment of a County Comprehensive Plan City Component. The City or the County may pursue the establishment of a Special Area/Impact Area Overlay in the County's Zoning Ordinance. Then the City would be able to help tailor the County's Zoning Ordinance to better fit what the City would feel more proper for that boundary. All notices and communications as set forth would be sent to the County Board of Commissioners and the City Clerk. Any party proposing to amend this agreement shall make a written notice to the other party. The form of the amendment shall be set forth in writing and the reasons for the proposed amendment. . The responding party shall have thirty (30) calendar days to respond. In the event the action of the City Council and the Board of County Commissioners, on the proposed amendment, was not the same, then each governing body by vote shall select one representative of that body to meet with the other representative to negotiate a compromise. If a compromise was agreed upon then each board would consider the proposed compromise. In the event an agreement is not met by that procedure, then Idaho Code 67-6526(b) shall be followed and go as far as a public hearing. This document has been drafted by the efforts of the staff of both the City and County. It was prepared in a form that is ready for public input. Alan Mills stated he had a few questions he would like to address. In regards to Planned Unit Developments, he questioned if Canyon County Zoning Ordinance No. 93-002 should state, or as amended, instead of as amended for future amendments. Mr. Saari explained that amended COU.CIT - 3 meant as amended currently or later and would be sufficient to cover everything. Mr. Mills further questioned the requirement for a Planned Unit Development to be platted in the City impact area. He wondered if that would allow an exception for something that is done under one ownership with never any intention of a sale or division. Mr. Jones stated that it would be up to the City to make that decision. Commissioner Gilbert questioned on the time frame for the annexation notifications. The County should be notified in writing both when annexations are being considered and when annexations are completed. Mr. Jones stated that there is some flexibility, but they would like to be notified as soon as possible so that a building permit would not be issued in the City annexed area. Commissioner Nachtigall questioned in what circumstances would the County refer a Planned Unit Development back to the City. Mr. Jones stated that all Planned Unit Developments would first make application with the County and then be referred to the City. Mr. Mills stated the City governing the platting procedure, but in the case of a Planned Unit Development the County would be putting conditions on it and then referring it to the city. Mr. Jones stated that would be prior to the plat procedure as a land use condition. The County would take care of a land use procedure first, once the conditions on that were established then it would be turned to the City for plat processing. The lot size comes from the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Wright inquired where the public hearings for a Zone Change request be heard. Mr. Jones stated it would be referred to the City. The City would have thirty(30) days to send their response. Then the public hearing would be heard at the County. The City's response would be given great weight at the County's public hearing. Chairman Gilbertson inquired whether the audience had any public comment regarding this matter. Chairman Gilbertson recognized Rita Earl. Mrs. Earl stated she was requesting the Commissioners favorable recommendation to their respecting governing bodies for the adoption of the J.EP.A. During the past two years she served as a member of the City of Caldwell's Area of Impact Committee. This committee had held . numerous meeting with the County Impact Area Committee. There has been a number of studies • of proposed agreements and have discussed the various issues related to this type of agreement. She believed this agreement protects the authority of both entities and at the same time provides a vehicle by which the County and the City could cooperate and work together. The agreement does not place a unreasonable burden on either entity and it does not require the formation of an additional jurisdictional entity. However, it does provide for means by which the County and City could work together to provide good sound land use planning, development standards in growth management to our community. This agreement would provide the City of Caldwell with the tools necessary to plan for the City's future in a pro-active manner rather than just being reactive to growth. At the same time it would assure the County and the citizens of our community of the City's intentions and methods for future expansion. If there was a burden in this agreement it mainly falls upon the City of Caldwell. The City is willing to accept this burden. In that the City would begin the process of updating the area of impact component to it's Comprehensive Plan. Also, the City would study the zoning designations in those area adjacent to the City, in order to COU.CIT - 4 provide for future City requirements. The agreement also provides a method by which the City could propose to the County requests for changes to the County's Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. The agreement provides for a better working relationship between the two entities in County land use applications. The agreement provides the City with a more efficient and effective way of participating at the County level and will provide additional and hopefully better information to the County as it makes its land use decisions in the impact area. This agreement would provide a better way to serve the public to protect the general health, welfare, and safety of our community; not only today but in the future. Chairman Gilbertson questioned if there were any further questions or comments. Mr. Mills stated one thing that bothered him a bit was the Planned Unit Development process goes to the County first for conditions in land use issues. And then it is to be referred to the City. Then it is to follow the procedure of 8.2 (B) which refers it right back to the County for approval of Subdivision Plat. He would be in favor that those could be combined. The land use and the preliminary plat all in one. Then you would only have to go to the County once, instead of twice. Mr. Mills questioned Rita Earl if the City Ordinance allows you to plat one track of ground without division. Mrs. Earl stated that it did because there will be certain circumstances where a split will take place and it would have to be platted. She stated when the City gets down to a final plat, that plat has to come back to the County Commissioners have to sign it, at the last stage. Mr. Mills stated the agreement states it would require a land use hearing, a referral to the City, and then back for a preliminary plat to be then resubmitted to the City. He would like the land use issue and the plat combined than referred to the City as a whole. She stated that the City's understanding the land use portion would be taken care of, by the County you would give us your requirements on what that land use would be, the lot sizes and so forth. We would then use our development standards for the platting process. She thought it would be beneficial to everyone to just have to final plat come back before the County, and they would have the assurance from the City that everything has already been taken care of. Maybe that wording should be clarified in the agreement. Commissioner Huyck questioned if that would eliminate the County setting the minimum lot size. . Mr. Jones stated that it wouldn't because that is in the first three, under "C" three is minimum • lot size. Chairman Gilbertson recognized Mayor Winder in the audience. Mayor Winder stated he would like to acknowledge the Chairman Mr. Gilbertson and Mr. Roos and the members of the Commission. He thought the results that the two Commissions have before them is a landmark in achieving an agreement between two bodies in a timely manner. The public can readily understand how to precede when they aze dealing with both the County and the City in the impact area. The City started, a long time ago, trying to develop a concept we could precede with. It became so cumbersome and costly to the people that were involved that we decided as a City to come back to the County and simplify the whole process. The County could do the land use portion. It has solved a lot of problems for everybody. It elects a lot of things, and he thought the public would enjoy the fact that both bodies here are giving them the COU.CIT - 5 > opportunity to have a really simple process that they could understand, participate in, and enjoy the benefits of. He would like to commend both Commissions and the committees that worked on this. He knows it's never easy when you are trying to figure out how the power is going to be divided up between various governmental bodies. He thought this would be an excellent document. The City is pleased by it, he hoped the County was also pleased. There being no further speakers or questions Chairman Gilbertson asked for a motion. MOTION FOR CANYON COUNTY PLANNING AND ZOIVING COMMISSION: A motion was made by Commissioner Mills that the Joint Exercise of Power Agreement for the Area of City Impact between the City of Caldwell and the County of Canyon, Idaho is recommended for approval to the Board of Canyon County Commissioners. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Kren. Roll Call Vote: Commissioner Wright, Commissioner Mills, Commissioner Alder, Commissioner Kren, Chairman Gilbertson. MOTION FOR CITY OF CALDWELL PLANIVIIVG A1VD ZOIVING COMMISSION: A motion was made by Commissioner Huyck that the Joint Exercise of Power Agreement for the Area of City Impact between the City of Caldwell and the County of Canyon, Idaho is recommended for approval to the Caldwell City Council. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Nachtigall. Roll Call Vote: Commissioner Huyck, Commissioner Nachtigall, Commissioner Gilbert, Chairman Roos. Motion Carried. Jerry Jones clarified that the agreement does not address the flood plain which is exempt; the addressing which is established by ordinance; and, the country roads with the Caldwell City Impact Area. The Chairman Gilbertson declared that portion of the public hearing closed. COU.CIT - 6