HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-07-14 HE MINUTES CALDWELL HEARING EXAMINER MINUTES
July 14, 2015
I. Call to order— Hearing Examiner, Mr.Jerome Mapp, opened the meeting for the public hearing
at 7:04 p.m.
II. Review of Proceedings--Mr.Jerome Mapp outlined the procedures for the public hearing.
Members Present: Jarom Wagoner(Senior Planner/Development Team Leader); April Cabello (Planning
Technician); and Jared Hale(Engineer Tech).
Members Absent: Brian Billingsley(Planning Director)and Robb MacDonald (City Engineer).
III. old Business:
A. Mr. Mapp approved the Minutes of the June 9, 2015 meeting as previously signed by
Hearing Examiner Mapp.
IV. New Business:
A. Case Number SUP-15-06:A request by Vernon Wireless/Jody Knopp for a special-use permit
to construct a cellular/wireless tower within the M-1 (Light Industrial) zone. The subject
property is located at 724 Paynter Avenue in Caldwell, Idaho.
Testimony:
1. Jarom Wagoner, Senior Planner/Development Team Leader, 621 Cleveland
Blvd., Caldwell, ID 53605, presented the staff report and stated that the
applicant is requesting special use permit approval to construct a 90-foot tall
monopole cell tower with 12 antennas within the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zone.
The property has frontage onto Paynter Avenue,a minor arterial roadway.
Z. Mr. Wagoner stated that staff recommends approval with conditions as listed
on the staff report.
3. Mr. Mapp verified the location the cell tower on the subject property and
confirmed it will be fenced and landscaped.
4. Mr.Wagoner confirmed.
5. Jody Knopp, Applicant Representative,TAEC, 5710 S. Green Street, Murray, UT,
54123 gave supporting testimony and stated that as the population of Caldwell
increases the demand for wireless usage increases. Each communications
facility accommodates a certain amount of users and it was determined by
Verizon Wireless that this area in Caldwell needs more support and efficient
service. The facility will be fully fenced 31' x 50' and will include a 90'
monopole with 12 antennas and two future microwave dishes and the ability
to accommodate future additional carriers. Next to the monopole will be an 8
ft x 16 ft platform that will house outdoor equipment cabinets and an
emergency diesel generator.This proposed wireless communication facility will
help strengthen the infrastructure of Caldwell by providing both social and
economic needs for the residents.
Hearing Examiner Minutes
Hearing on July 14,2015
y
6. Mr. Mapp confirmed with Ms. Knopp the location and that this will be one pole
with 12 antennas and also satellite dishes.
7. Ms. Knopp responded yes and the microwave dishes will be located at a lower
centerline and will only be for future use for fiber if they need them. At this
time they do not plan to put them up and are for future use if needed.
8. Mr. Mapp asked Ms. Knopp if they had read the conditions and if there are any
issues.
9. Ms. Knopp responded yes they have read the conditions and yes they have a
couple of requests for conditions 8.5 and 8.6.
10. Ms. Knopp expressed that their facility is a secondary use to the existing lot
and it will be setback from Paynter Ave approximately 140 feet and behind an
existing fence.
11. Mr. Mapp wondered what the percentage of the site the facility will occupy,
12. Mr. Mapp confirmed the request to strike conditions is due to the extent of the
improvements and that conditions 8.5 and 8.6 are excessive.
13. Ms. Knopp confirmed.
14. Mr. Mapp asked about 8.4.
15. Mr.Wagoner explained condition 8.4.
16. Mr. Mapp confirmed with Ms. Knopp that they are only leasing a portion of the
property.
17. Ms. Knopp responded they are only leasing the 31 x 50.
18. Mr. Mapp wondered if Ms. Knopp had shown the conditions to the property
owner.
19. Ms. Knapp responded she had not shown the conditions to the property
owner.
20. Mr. Mapp stated that he understood the reason for the conditions because
when an application comes in they must go by the code but this application is
only using 4%of the property so it makes no sense to dedicate 40 feet of right-
of-way nor the sidewalk and landscaping for the same reason. Conditions 8.4,
8.5 and 8.6 will be stricken.
MR. MAPP CLOSED THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
Comprehensive Plan Analysis for SUP-15-06(Special Use):The Hearing Examiner accepted the
comprehensive plan analysis as listed in the staff report.
Findings of Fact for SUP-15-06(Special Use):The Hearing Examiner accepted the general facts as
outlined in the staff report, public testimony,and the evidence list.
Conclusions of Law for SUP-15-06(Special Use):The Hearing Examiner accepted the Conclusions of Law
as outlined in the staff report.
ORDER OF DECISION FOR SUP-15-06(Special Use Permit):The Hearing Examiner ORDERED that Case
Number SUP-15-06 IS APPROVED with the following modified conditions:
8.2-8.6 with the following modifications:
8.2-8.3 as written
8.4—8.6 stricken
Hearing Examiner Minutes
Hearing on July 14,2015 _ 2
B. Case Number SUP-15-07: A request by Jalopy Jungle/Mark Salvi for a special-use permit to
operate a salvage yard/wrecking yard within the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zone. The subject
property is located at 6219 Cleveland Boulevard in Caldwell, Idaho.
Testimony:
1. Jarom Wagoner, Senior Planner/Development Team Leader, 621 Cleveland
Blvd., Caldwell, ID 83605, presented the staff report and testified that the
applicant is requesting special use permit approval to operate and expand an
existing salvage yard/wrecking yard within the M-1 Light industrial Zone.
2. Mr.Wagoner gave some background on this property stating that this property
was rezoned approximately two years ago going through a special use permit
and rezone hearing at that time. The rezone was approved from commercial to
industrial and the special use permit was approved which is the same request
that is being heard tonight. The reason that this has come before the hearing
body again is in that special use permit there were stipulations, requirements
for Certificate of Compliances to be acted on within a 12month time frame
which did not occur. There was extensive work that did occur on the site but
with the lack of the application for the Certificate of Compliance it did expire so
the applicant is back with the same request to expand the facility on the site as
necessary through a special use permit in the M-1 zone.
3. Mr. Wagoner further explained that the subject property has frontage on
Cleveland Boulevard. The site has three existing access points from Cleveland
Boulevard and has approximately 290 feet of frontage on Cleveland Boulevard.
The applicant should be required to close two of the three driveways to come
into compliance with standard access management policy. It is recommended
that the applicant close the driveways on the far sides of the property and
utilize the centrally located driveway for access.
4. Mr. Wagoner stated that after reviewing the comprehensive plan there were
policies in favor for the request, also some concerns regarding community
design to ensure that the use is properly screened and is proposing to
construct a sight obscuring fence along those portions of the property
proposed to contain the salvage yard, as shown in Exhibit A-3.
5. Mr. Wagoner stated that he met with Mr. Butlor and their concern is this
application is essentially the same application and now there are new
conditions that were not required or were waived with the original permit. Mr.
Wagoner also stated that after speaking with the Director there are a number
of changes or modifications that they would like to make to the proposed
conditions: 8.4 - strike prior to Oct 31, 2015. If this condition is not met, the
special-use permit approval shall become null and void. Replace with: in
conjunction with any development on that portion of the site all current
requirements will have to be met.
6. Mr. Mapp re iterated to the applicant that if this special use is approved with
the change to the condition 8.4, any building or expanding onto that first
portion of the site then all current requirements will have to be met.
7. Mr. Wagoner continued with other changes to the conditions 8.7 and 8.8
requiring the closure of the driveways along Cleveland Blvd.Currently there are
three driveways along Cleveland Boulevard on this frontage but does not need
any access requirements, the conditions do require a closure at this time but
would like to add verbage stating at any future time of any development on
that portion of the site that the driveways should be closed.
Hearing Examiner Minutes
Hearing on July 14,2015 g - 13
8. Mr. Wagoner continued with condition 8.9, regarding the paved parking on the
site and while the expansion of the site would create the need for additional
parking but there is already sufficient parking along their property next to it
that they already own and occupy and in lieu of all the paved parking stalls
would be to compromise and provide one paved handicapped spot on the site
and it would also help to meet the building code requirements.
9. Mr. Wagoner continued with condition 8.6 in regards to the 6ft solid fence
requirement along the front and west side of the property. Salvage yards are
required to be fenced and screened,the code is vague about what screening is,
requiring a solid fence or what could be considered a site obscuring fence such
as chain link with slats. often time chain link with slats are not a true sight
obscuring fence and staff has some concerns about that and understands too
that it is not easy to put up a solid fence and its difficult to find solid fencing for
a commercial type setting. The applicant did provide pictures of a certain type
of chain link fence with slats that they have used and would like to use. The
applicant has also offered not only to install the new fencing but to also fix the
dilapidated fence that is on the existing side.
10. Mr. Wagoner also spoke about the buffering between the two sites and the
property to the west.
11. Mr. Mapp expressed his concern about no water source for the buffering area,
the landscaping along Cleveland Blvd., and the 15ft landscape strip on the west
side.
12. Mark Butler, Applicant Representative, 1675 E. Bishop Way, Eagle, ID, 83616
gave supporting testimony and stated that the applicant relied on the previous
approved special use and were beside themselves that they missed one of the
conditions. Mr. Butler referred to a picture of the site showing how clean the
property was and addresses the conditions of the staff report. Mr. Butlor
stated that 8.3 is fine and 8.4 they think it is a good idea to remove the 20ft
buffer requirement along Cleveland Blvd.,as staff has recommended.
13. Mr. Mapp wondered what percentage of this expansion is to the entire
development.
14. Mr. Butler responded about 15 percent.
15. Mr. Butler stated that the accesses points are very critical because they don't
have any idea which will be utilized and which won't be utilized, if and when
development comes in. ITD in the previous application had deferred any sort of
requirements on the driveways until a development plan was submitted. The
applicant hopes that staff has recommended that the driveways would not be
required to be closed and that they would be dealt with upon development of
phase 2. If condition 8.7 and 8.8 are removed and don't deal with 8.11 then
there are still conditions with regard to the drive way closure so the
Engineering's letter needs to be modified to reflect whatever staff and the
Hearing Examiner choose on these conditions. To the applicant that would
mean to remove all the conditions because they all relate to frontage
development except for the condition that states don't block site visibility,
which is important to have no matter what. 8.8 should be deferred until phase
2 is developed, 8.9 they would like it deleted with a condition that says "the
applicant shall provide at least one paved handicapped space on the adjacent
property is sufficient", that is a great compromise. 8.6 is the most important
issue and the chain link fence the applicant is proposing is to not only be on the
subject property at the dividing line between phase 1 and phase 2, extending
Hearing Examiner Minutes
Hearing on July 14,2015
and replacing the entire property line fence with new fencing with slats that
are made from a UV protective plastic which withstands the sun to a point
where the maintenance is minimal for years.
16. Mr. Butler stated for the record that the applicant has been an upstanding
business folk in Caldwell for a long time and they have business throughout
Idaho. In 2008 they were awarded the Boise Enviroguard Award. They want to
have a clean facility, not a junky tacky facility.
17. Mark Salvi, Applicant, 6301 Cleveland Blvd., Caldwell, ID 83607 signed in favor
of the application but did not wish to speak.
MR.MAPP CLOSED THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
Comprehensive Plan Analysis for SUP-15-07 (Special Use):The Hearing Examiner accepted the
comprehensive plan analysis as listed in the staff report.
Findings of Fact for SUP-15-07(Special Use):The Hearing Examiner accepted the general facts as
outlined in the staff report, public testimony,and the evidence list.
Conclusions of Law for SUP-15-07(Special Use): The Hearing Examiner accepted the Conclusions of Law
as outlined in the staff report.
ORDER OF DECISION FOR SUP-15-07(Special Use Permit):The Hearing Examiner ORDERED that Case
Number SUP-15-07 IS APPROVED with the following modified conditions:
8.2—8.3 as written
8.4 with the following modifications: Install a 20-foot wide landscape buffer along
Cleveland Boulevard,abutting the site. The buffer area shall contain a
minimum of 12 Class II trees, 50 shrubs,and vegetative(grass)ground
covering. The landscape buffer shall be installed ,
1
ve+din conjunction with any future development on the undeveloped portion
of the site as shown in Exhibit A-13.
8.5 Install a 15-foot wide landscape buffer along the west property line of the site.
The buffer shall meet city code requirements and shall be installed in
conjunction with any future development on the undeveloped portion of the
site as shown in Exhibit A-13.
8.6 Install a 6-foot tall sight obscuring fence,substantially similar to the fence
shown in the photographs in Exhibit PR-2.
8.7 Stricken
8.8 Stricken
8.9 Provide.9 1 paved handicap parking stall ewe that meets all city ADA
requirements parking and landscaping requirements. This condition shall be
completed prior to
.occupying the site.
8.10 as written
8.11 with the following modification Comply with the City Engineering Department
requirements as stated iR Embibit PA 2.
C. Case Number SUP-15-08: A request by Raymond Parker for a special-use permit to construct an
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) within the R-1 (Low Density) Zoning District. The subject
property is located at 2223 Rice Avenue in Caldwell, Idaho.
Hearing Examiner Minutes
5
Hearing on July 14,2015
Testimony.
1. Jarom Wagoner, Senior Planner/Development Team Leader, 621 Cleveland
Blvd., Caldwell, ID 83605, presented the staff report explaining that the
applicant is requesting special use permit approval to construct a 700 square
foot accessory dwelling unit(ADU) in an R-1 (Low Density Residential)Zone.
2. Mr. Wagoner gave the definition of an ADU, that it is essentially a mother-in-
law quarters and has certain requirements as far as the size limited to 700 sq
ft, only one bedroom and in the R-1 zone it requires a special use permit. The
applicant will construct the ADU in the back portion of the lot in which will
have access onto Tyler Street. If the applicant is required to install curb, gutter
and sidewalk they will have the option to enter into the LID agreement.
3. Ray Parker, Applicant, 2223 Rice Avenue, Caldwell, ID, 83605 gave supporting
testimony and stated that the reasons he would like to build this unit is
because he has a large corner lot and the house currently has no garage. This
would give him a garage and will increase the property value and make it look
nicer. The mother-in-law suite would provide him with options to remodel the
front house and move into the unit while the front house is being remodeled.
His daughter lives with him and she might like to live in the unit and maybe his
mother would move in with him and it gives him options for the future.
4. Mr. Mapp stated for the record that property values have nothing to do with
approval or denial of this case.
5. Mr. Mapp expressed his concern for a senior person walking up stairs and is
not to convent.
6. Mr. Parker stated if his mother moved in she would take the front house and
he would move into the mother-in-law suite.
7. Mr. Mapp asked Mr. Parker if he agreed with the conditions in the staff report
and the sidewalk and curb.
S. Mr. Parker responded yes,and felt the LID is a good idea.
MR. MAPP CLOSED THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
Comprehensive Plan Analysis for SUP-15-08(Special Use):The Hearing Examiner accepted the
comprehensive plan analysis as listed in the staff report.
Findings of Fact for SLIP-15-08(Special Use):The Hearing Examiner accepted the general facts as
outlined in the staff report, public testimony,and the evidence list.
Conclusions of Law for SUP-15-08(Special Use):The Hearing Examiner accepted the Conclusions of Law
as outlined in the staff report.
ORDER OF DECISION FOR SUP-15-08(Special Use Permit):The Hearing Examiner ORDERED that Case
Number SUP-15-08 IS APPROVED with the following conditions:
8.2—8.5 as written
D. Case Number SUP-15-09: A request by Michael & Krista Wood for a special-use permit to
operate an amusement center/haunted attraction within the C-C (City Center) Zoning District.
The subject property is located at 810 Main Street in Caldwell, Idaho.
Hearing Examiner Minutes
Hearing on July 14,2015 P a 6
Testimony:
1. Jarom Wagoner, Senior Planner/Development Team Leader, 621 Cleveland
Blvd., Caldwell, ID 83605, presented the staff report and shared that the
applicant is requesting special use permit approval to operate an amusement
center/indoor haunted attraction within the C-C (City Center) Zoning District.
The applicant is proposing to operate the haunted attraction on weekends only
in September, Monday-Saturday the entire month of October and on Friday
the 13t"'s throughout the remainder of the year. The proposed hours of
operation will be from 7:30 pm to 1:00 am.
Z. Mr. Wagoner expressed staffs concerns that in reviewing the comprehensive
plan and in reviewing the City Center Zoning District; part of the plan calls for a
vibrant community and area in the downtown and the concern is the limited
use of the site throughout the year. The recommended conditions if this
application is approved, being condition 8.5 is not in city code and is something
that would be required above and beyond what is required by code.
3. Mr. Mapp stated that for this request they are only talking about land use, not
the final finish of the structure.
4. Mr. Mapp asked staff to explain why the applicant had to go through the SUP
process.
5. Mr. Wagoner responded that the City Center Code does require that this
facility which would be classified as an amusement center receive approval
through a special use permit; it is not an outright allowed use in City Center
and would not be classified as a Temporary Use.
6. Krista Brower-Wood, Applicant, 17022 Goose Lane, Caldwell, ID, 83602 gave
supporting testimony and stated that their objective is to revive downtown
Caldwell by attracting younger crowds. The building is over 100 years old and
they have put in a sprinkler system and have done numerous upgrades to bring
it up to code. on the economic side they are providing downtown with more
jobs and volunteer jobs for High Schools and Colleges. Drama and theater are
cut from public schools and this will give the ability for the students to
participate in something they enjoy doing.
7. Ms. Brower-Wood further stated they would be assisting the city, state and
county through the sales tax of the admissions to the tickets,the merchandise,
photo and make up booths.
8. Ms. Brower-Woods explained the tourism side and gave an example of a
Haunted House in Salt Lake which does over 60 thousand visitors in two
months and attracts numerous age groups of people. Just like the corn mazes
Haunted World, Armstead and Linder Farms, their attraction will be unique,
located in a historical building that has major history behind it. There are
several restaurants in the area that are not majorly packed as there are no
attractions to draw students out for a date night.
9. Ms. Brower-Woods further stated that Haunted Attractions are a multimillion
dollar industry,they do expos, magazines, how to videos and they would like to
see Caldwell get involved in this industry.
10. Ms. Bower-Woods stated that for safety they are going to go above and
beyond. They want cameras inside and outside for the safety of their patrons,
business around them and will have security inside and out. All of the props
being used are fire graded retardant dipped and completely tested. They will
have an emergency escape plan from the front door to the garage door, from
Hearing Examiner Minutes
Hearing on July 14,2015 17
the front to the back and from side to side. There will be an ability to get
people out if there was ever an emergency inside. All employees and
volunteers will be CPR trained, and trained for the automated external
defibulator, ED machine.
11. Ms. Bower-Woods also stated that they plan to keep up the code on the
outside of the building to make it look good. They do not plan on putting
anything scary on the front of the building, they plan on painting it grey with
the name of the business in the corner and that is it, they want to enhance
rather than distract from the visual image of the down town area. The back of
the build they made it to look like part of it is falling down and that is because
it was falling down and that brought character to the building.
12. Ms. Bower-Woods shared that in the six months that it took them to decide on
the haunted house and getting the building up to code, they came up with a
five year plan. So it will not be just two months a year that they will be open,
the first year it will be a haunted house, themed corporate parties and private
parties,the second year they would still do the haunted house, parties, and on
weekends will have murder mysteries, like the clue game, the theme changes
monthly. The third year they wanted to incorporate retail, costume sales and
rentals, the fourth year add a Christmas holiday workshop, kids could come in
and make a gift for their Mom, play in the areas, decorate the tree and have a
picture with Santa.The fifth year because this is a growing industry they would
like to have haunt workshops to teach business how start a haunted house on
their own property. The vision for their future is that they can form many
successful thriving businesses by demonstrating that they are able to succeed
in the downtown area. This will increase the amount of funds available to
schools through property tax, to the City through sales tax and will be a good
thing for Caldwell. It will show new business that downtown Caldwell isn't a
cemetery for businesses but rather a haunting new idea for innovative ideas.
13. Mr. Mapp asked staff what the parking requirements were for the downtown
area.
14. Mr. Wagoner responded that the city does not want parking lots but rather
shared parking areas. The business take up the full lot so there will not be any
off street parking requirements. Within the downtown the business are
allowed to count for their use all parking sites within 800ft. There is more than
enough parking for the proposed used by code.
15. Mr. Mapp asked the applicant if they had read the conditions of the staff
re po rt.
16. Ms. Bower-Woods responded that the only condition they have a problem with
is 8.5, removal of the security bars. It would create issues from security to
safety and to the cost.The windows were a selling point for them knowing that
they already had security and they did not have to go buy an alarm system.The
windows are 100 years old and to take them down would take away the history
of the building, to put vinyl windows in a 100 year old building would make it
look a lot different than as it looks right now.They talked to different insurance
agencies and if they take down the security bars it will increase their insurance
policy majorly and they spoke with the Caldwell City Police and did some
research and within five years they have had over 1,695 calls into the 4A
district and knowing that keeping the bars on the windows is financially
important to them. Ms. Bower-Woods asked if the City is willing and
guaranteeing to replace anything that is stolen because they will have major
Hearing Examiner Minutes
Hearing on July 14,2015 ?
amount of cameras, monitors, animated props that goes up into the
thousands.
17. Mr. Mapp asked staff why they want the bars to be removed.
18. Mr. Wagoner responded that it is for the ascetics, for the feeling, if windows
are bared throughout an area it creates a feeling of unsafe for people that walk
the area. Staff is aware of the concerns the applicant has and the safety the
bars provide for them.
19. Mr. Mapp responded that he would agree for new construction but not for
existing. It would probably cost more to take them down than to leave them
there. Mr. Mapp wondered if it is possible to re evaluate this condition after
one year.
20. Mr. Wagoner stated it is not required by code to remove the bars, it is
something above and beyond but with the Special Use conditions, you can go
beyond what code requires, but if it does appear to be a grey matter, the
reasoning behind it not there. It may be appropriate to not require removal of
the bars and allow it in the future if a change does occur or as things increase
in the downtown area with more eyes on the road, more feet on the street, it
increases safety and security and as this continues to grow and as the
downtown continues to grows the applicant will feel that security is there and
then remove the bars on their own decision.
21. Mr. Mapp agreed and stated that he has done a number of downtown
revitalization plans and the whole idea is having eyes on the street. The more
people you have walking up and down the street the more the less type of
issues you have regarding vandalism.
22. Mike Wood,Applicant, 17022 Goose Lane,Caldwell, ID 53602 signed in favor of
the application but did not wish to speak.
23. Jean Lujack, 2418 Ray Ave., Caldwell, ID 83605 signed in opposition of the
application and stated that she owns a building on Main Street and is excited
about the resurgent with the new plaza for the downtown and was dismayed
and is urging the Hearing Examiner to say no to this haunting idea. Ms. Lujack
shared that was invited to the neighborhood meeting and was surprised at the
time and money that the applicant has already invested in the building as
though they already had permission to do it. Mr. Lujack expressed her concern
about the name of the business being Requiem, to her that is a religious
connotation, a funeral mass and should stay away haunting and religious
names. Ms. Lujack stated that she vocally objected to the name but they have
persisted with it and that she does not understand the basic premise of a
business that is only open for a short time and that she did not hear about the
2, 3, 4 and 5 year plan and is glad that they are interested in Caldwell and
improving the downtown but does not think this is a wholesome thing for
downtown. Ms. Lujack expressed that she would not allow her kids or
grandkids to attend or work at this business and the fact that this use requires
a special use permit it needs some serious consideration and is asking the
hearing body to raise the bar for Caldwell and say no this request.
24. Dave Wishney, 723 Chardie, Boise, ID 83702 signed in opposition of the
application but supports what the Woods are trying to do. Mr. Wishney stated
that he owns the building that abuts the Woods property and his building is
about 4,500 sq ft of office space, downstairs is retail currently with three retail
tenants, Caldwell Floral, Minis Fashions and Barber / Salon. Mr. Wishney
expressed that his concern is about parking and it is an historical problem and
Hearing Examiner Minutes
Hearing on July 14,2015 9
in the 23 years he has been there he has seen the cycle of business downtown.
The source of the problem is self evident,very little surface parking and almost
all on street parking. Mr. Wishney stated that in 2008 he petitioned the city to
restripe Kimball with diagonal parking, it was eventually done and it was
helpful. Even after the striping in the area between 91" Avenue and 7t"Avenue
and between Arthur and the railroad tracts, there are only 93 parking spaces.
When times were better he found it necessary to lease 8-10 spot by the train
depot from the city for his tenants because there was not enough parking on
the street. History has shown in the last 23 years that there are a finite number
of spaces and even in moderate economic times those spaces are over taxed.
The current needs of his tenants are in conflict with the Woods proposed use,
Saturday is the largest day in a barber shop and if the Hunted House hours of
operations started before 7:30pm that would pose a problem for the barber
shop. Minis Fashions biggest business is Saturday and evenings, Caldwell Floral
busy day is Saturday. Upstairs tenants, Guidance Councilors hours of operation
start between 5pm and 6:30pm, six nights a week, Monday through Saturday
with a session on Sunday, so his tenants hours of operations of conflict with
the Woods hours of operation.
25. Mr. Wishney extended his wishes for the Woods and hopes they are successful,
and this business is likely to attract thousands of people per week but the
impact of that on the neighborhood is obvious. Even if they took two thousand
a week and divided it over six nights of operation that is over 333 a night and
according to the staff report one parking space for every three people that
would attend is required, that is 111 spaces and exceeds all the street parking
and ignores the needs of other users.
26. Mr. Wishney also stated that it is the applicant's burden to meet the legal
requirements, including those of the comprehensive plan and the ordinance.
The comp plan as noted in the staff report for this part of town for the core
states, highly automotive dependent uses are generally discouraged in the core
area,this business will bring a lot of cars. Mr.Wishney further quoted the staff
report and his review of the city code 10-12-04-16, parking is required and a
landscaping plan with a note listing the required number of parking spaces and
a note listing the provided number of spaces. None of this information has
been provided, no count, no study of what the likely growth of the business
will be.This creates a dilemma for the Hearing Examiner and City Council based
upon the extremely limited information available in the record, the minimum
number of required spaces may well exceed the number of spaces in the
immediate vicinity. The application does not include the required landscape
plan nor does it address how it proposes to meet the minimum requirements
and there is insufficient evidence in his opinion for any kind of finding whether
it be factual or legal that the proposal complies with the comprehensive plan
and parking requirements. The adequacy of the parking in the area will only
become an issue if the hours of operation are expanded beyond those that
were specifically identified in the application; and was disappointed to hear
tonight that the long term plan is to expand the hours. Mr. Wishney further
quoted Idaho State Code 67 65 12 D this body may attach conditions to the
special use permit and he is requesting in addition to the conditions that are
set forth on the staff report, that they limit the days and hours of operation of
this business to those specified in the application and before the applicant may
expand the hours or days of operation the applicant must submit a new
Hearing Examiner Minutes
Hearing on July 14,2015 110
application with the appropriate parking plan and information. Also all
employees and volunteers should be required to park remotely. The problem
here is that one business may completely dominate all the on street parking to
the detriment of the other business in the down town.
27. Mr. Mapp summarized what he felt Mr. Wishney was saying is that there is not
enough off-street parking downtown Caldwell.
28. Mr. Mapp stated at the code reads, 800ft, approximately three blocks in either
direction is where the parking is drawn from and by the code the applicant
parking is okay by what staff has said.
29. Mr. Mapp stated that he felt that Mr. Wishney wants to see some type of
parking management plan that the city should be put together of the
downtown core so people can see what parking is available.
30. Mr. Wishney responded that this is the perfect opportunity to foster the
creation of a plan, including the participation of the Woods, staff and the
owners of the other buildings because he felt it would be unreasonable to
deprive them of the opportunity to operate this September and October in the
scope of hours listed on the application. Know that they know it is the Woods
plan is in fact to expand the hours of operation they will have the time to go
through the process a second time and to help create or generate a plan that is
fair as apposed to an open ended permit that simply allowed one business to
dominate the parking.
31. Mr. Mapp responded that the applicant is requesting a certain land use, a
Haunted House and if they were asking to do something more extensive, the
five year plan is not part of the application tonight. We should not stop
anybody from moving forward but what we do need to come up with
identifying the parking and a master plan.
32. Mr. Wishney stated again this is the opportunity at a subsequent hearing when
the Woods want to roll out their five year plan to move forward with a parking
plan. There has been no notice of the five year plan and the hours to operate
beyond what was noted in the application.
33. Mr. Mapp addressed staff stating that they heard a five year plan but a five
year plan is not before him tonight so the issue that he is reviewing today is for
a Haunted House concept. The applicant will have to come back with a new
plan to show the five year plan.
34. Ms. Brower-Wood gave rebuttal testimony and stated that they completely
understand the parking issue and has no problem telling their employees to
park away and that it will take them awhile to start their five year plan. They
picked the hours to open at 7:30pm because they have been downtown at that
time and it is not busy and they see how much parking is available. Ms. Brower-
Wood addressed the concern with the name of the building and their building
in 1920 was an embalming and furniture store and that is how the name came
around, Requiem means celebration of death. It means numerous things but
they looked at the positive side of celebrating death. if someone comes
through the Haunt it is someone's view point of what they have been through
or seen, they wanted a name that people stopped and had to look it up to
know what it means. They could change the name in a heartbeat, they don't
have to name it Requiem if they don't want too but the constitution allows
them to name it whatever they want. The do understand and respect the
feelings about the name of the business and as for their employees, they will
have background checks. Ms. Bower-Wood gave further background on the
Hearing Examiner Minutes
Hearing on July 14,2015 age i 11
1
types of people whom own other Haunts in other states, explaining they are
owned by psychologist and burn therapist, numerous types of people own
haunts. It is a getaway, it's to become something else and the adrenalin rush
that people get is amazing and to have fun.
35. Mr. Mapp reviewed the hours of operation being the month of September
7:00pm to 1:00am.
36. Ms. Brower-Wood stated they would be open the weekends in September and
October and all Friday the 13ths.
37. Mr. Mapp re iterated that this approval if approved is based upon these times
and dates and will not be able to operate in July or any other month not stated
in the staff report and wanted to make sure the applicant was okay with the
conditions on the staff report regarding the dates and hours of operation other
than condition 8.5 pertaining to the bars.
38. Ms. Brower-Wood responded yes.
MR. MAPP CLOSED THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
Comprehensive Plan Analysis for SUP-15-09 (Special Use):The Hearing Examiner accepted the
comprehensive plan analysis as listed in the staff report.
Findings of Fact for SUP-15-09(Special Use):The Hearing Examiner accepted the general facts as
outlined in the staff report, public testimony,and the evidence list.
Conclusions of Law for SUP-15-09(Special Use):The Hearing Examiner accepted the Conclusions of Law
as outlined in the staff report.
ORDER OF DECISION FOR SUP-15-09(Special Use Permit):The Hearing Examiner ORDERED that Case
Number SUP-15-09 IS APPROVED with the following modified conditions:
8.2—8.4 as written
Strike-8.5
8.6--8.8 as written
Add 8.9—approval for Haunted House hours of operation weekends only in
September, Monday-Saturday the entire month of October,and on Friday the
13ths throughout the remainder of the year are 7:30pm to 1:00am. Any other
changes of use and hours will require the applicant to come before the Hearing
Examiner or PZ Commission for approval.
E. Case Number ANN-15-04:A request by Charles Saari to annex 8 parcels totaling 3.81 acres,
more or less,with an R-1 (Low Density Residential)zoning designation. The subject properties
are located at: 202 Marvin Street; 3509 Kimball Avenue; 112, 119, &203 Albert Street; 120,
128, &207 Amber Street in Caldwell, Idaho.
Testimony:
1. Jarom Wagoner, Senior Planner/Development Team Leader, 621 Cleveland
Blvd., Caldwell, ID 83605, presented the staff report explained this application
is an annexation of 8 parcels totaling approximately 3.8 acres with an R-1 (Low
Density Residential) zoning. The parcels are generally located east Kimball
Avenue, between Marvin Street and Amber Street.
Hearing Examiner Minutes
Hearing on July 14,2015 112
P
2. Mr. Wagoner gave the background on this case and stated that it is the
applicant's wish to annex into the City so as to utilize city services. These
dwellings currently access domestic water through a community well. There
have been recent issues regarding contamination with the well. This has led
the applicants to request City water services, which requires annexation into
the City.
3. Mr. Wagoner further explained that the city has put in new water lines along
Albert Street and Marvin Street for those people affected to have the
opportunity to connect to city water. Water is an essential resource and the
city wanted to make sure they had provided to them and if you are contiguous
to city you must annex into the city to have those services.
4. Mr. Wagoner stated that rather than require each individual property owner to
come forward with their own annexation, fees and reports and to the benefit
of the property owners and staff was to annex all the properties at once on one
joined application.
S. Mr. Mapp wondered about the other parcels in the area that are not annexing
and if they were not on the community well.
6. Mr. Wagoner responded that there are some properties in that area that were
built later and are on their own well and the property owners would have the
option to drill a new well to have their own personal well rather access the
community well. If in the future the property owner who did not annex at this
time may come in to annex but would have to do their own application and pay
their own fees.
MR. MAP P CLOSED THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
Comprehensive Plan Analysis for ANN-15-04 (Annexation): The Hearing Examiner accepted the
comprehensive plan analysis as listed in the staff report.
Findings of Fact for ANN-15-04 (Annexation): The Hearing Examiner accepted the general facts as
outlined in the staff report, public testimony,and the evidence list.
Conclusions of Law for ANN-15-04(Annexation):The Hearing Examiner accepted the Conclusions of Law
as outlined in the staff report.
RECOMMENDATION FOR ANN-15-04 (Annexation): The Hearing Examiner RECOMMENDED that Case
Number ANN-15-04 IS APPROVED with conditions:
8.2 -8.3 as written
F. Case Number ZON-15-04:A request by Randy McElveen to rezone 0.86 acres, more or less,
from C-1(Neighborhood Commercial)to R-1(Low Density Residential)and a Comprehensive
Plan Map Change from Commercial to Low Density Residential. The subject property is
located at 5107 S. 101h Avenue in Caldwell, Idaho.
Testimony:
1. Jarom Wagoner, Senior Planner/Development Team Leader, 621 Cleveland
Blvd., Caldwell, ID 83605, presented the staff report and stated that the
applicant is seeking approval for a rezone from C-1 (Neighborhood
Hearing Examiner Minutes
Hearing on July 14,2015 P a 13
Commercial) to R-1 (Low Density Residential) and it is a request rezone half of
the site.
2. Mr. Wagoner gave background on the subject property stating that it currently
houses a commercial office building, food stand (coffee house), and residential
structure. The applicant is requesting to rezone that portion of property where
the residential structure lies as it currently has a special use to have a residence
in the C-1 zone.
3. Mr. Wagoner stated that staff recommends approval with conditions and that
the applicant enter into a deferral agreement with the City of Caldwell for
future construction of street improvements on loth Ave including but not
limited to curb,gutter, sidewalk and street widening.
4. Randy McElveen, Applicant, 5107 S. loth Ave., Caldwell, ID 83607 gave
supporting testimony and stated that reason for the rezone is to refinance the
home.
MR. MAPP CLOSED THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
Comprehensive Plan Analysis for ZON-15-04 (Rezone): The Hearing Examiner accepted the
comprehensive plan analysis as listed in the staff report.
Findings of Fact for ZON-15-04(Rezone):The Hearing Examiner accepted the general facts as outlined in
the staff report, public testimony,and the evidence list.
Conclusions of Law for ZON-15-04 (Rezone): The Hearing Examiner accepted the Conclusions of Law as
outlined in the staff report.
RECOMMENDATION FOR ZON-15-04 (Rezone): The Hearing Examiner RECOMMENDED that Case
Number ZON-15-04 IS APPROVED with conditions:
8.2 -8.4 as written
V. Planning Issues—None
VI. Adjournment
The Hearing Examiner adjourned the meeting at approximately 9:40 p.m
MINUTES APPROVED AND IGNED BY THE HEARING EXAMINER, M.JEROME MAPP,ON THE DATE
NOTED BE -.
P
n r
,. ' ATTEST:
M.Jerome Map Date
Jarom Wagoner, Senior Planner/Development Team Leader Date
For detailed minutes,please request a copy of the digital recording.
Hearing Examiner Minutes
14
Hearing on July 14,2015