HomeMy WebLinkAbout05 Hearing Examiner PLANNING AND ZONING 4ear,-,h, t6,3. YY(-G
•
ITEM DATE SUBMITT D BY
PZ /M 4- Z3 -0 / .001 d CriP,X
pz_ 0_5(}20-eiti+ Skaa- e 44
ai _ z-5 Lai) I 0,6-K
Pa- J y `S .QQk _-0( nry%�
ez:_q - 5hc.-E
P÷ 2-
PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT SHEET
(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)
NAME: L, ��I ^.
STREET ADDRESS: :7 t-a P e��t r c cs�'�(/.�� C.Pr-vt-Av- ,
CITY/STATE/ZIP: f we l a 3Jq
NAME OF CASE BEING HEARD: bz.cC Aid Sgf- 1I6 -d Avd2.,
********************************************************************************************
Check the appropriate line:
Applicant or Representative I Neutral/
wish to speak
do not wish to speak
In favor/ I Opposed/
wish to speak 1/ I wish to speak
do not wish to speak I do not wish to speak
Written comments may be attached to this form or you may write them in below.
PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT SHEET
(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)
NAME: eAti/0 a/ / JCA/& lePer(SiCsk ;,#Ceti., / C_
STREET ADDRESS: e:O Xvi fsva 4v(
CITY/STATE/ZIP: G.i44'i.5 /iv 3e/03
NAME OF CASE BEING HEARD:
********************************************************************************************
Check the appropriate line:
7.
Applicant or Representative I Neutral/
I wish to speak
I do not wish to speak
In favor/ ,9aAcC44te 7c A ce2eO I Opposed/
wish to speak I wish to speak
do not wish to speak I do not wish to speak
I
Written comments may be attached to this form or you may write them in below.
PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT SHEET
(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)
SiZ
STREET ADDRESS: a/R L3 CU- I j A
CITY/STATE/ZIP: ) " -�` 3I 9)2r,._
NAME OF CASE BEING HEARD: C J -- 1 .0 1 \l8, . L(? i Ig--6�
********************************************************************************************
Check the appropriate line:
Applicant or Representative \( I Neutral/
. \ wish to speak
do not wish to speak
In favor/ I Opposed/
wish to speak % I wish to speak
do not wish to speak I do not wish to speak
Written comments may be attached to this form or you may write them in below.
Q�ji
PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT SHEET
(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)
NAME:
STREET ADDRESS: 3 6, L -1 ate"
CITY/STATE/ZIP: Cin_/ L.. -ems// • 4 0 s
NAME OF CASE BEING HEARD: &5..— - S tt. ? — /1 'D /
Check the appropriate line:
Applicant or Representative I Neutral/
wish to speak
do not wish to speak
In favor/ I Opposed/
wish to speak I wish to speak
do not wish to speak I do not wish to speak
Written comments may be attached to this form or you may write them in below.
PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT SHEET
(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)
NAME: Z k_ M/'Ian wi
STREET ADDRESS: / a/ i4i/(4]1 i./ r
CITY/STATE/ZIP: (.,t'/ v1?e// .L7) q j , 5
NAME OF CASE BEING HEARD: SLIP l ig- 0 I Zre .gi G/riacv,gt.►^k�91
********************************************************************************************
Check the appropriate line:
Applicant or Representative I Neutral/
wish to speak I/
do not wish to speak
In favor/ I Opposed/
wish to speak I wish to speak
do not wish to speak I do not wish to speak
Written comments may be attached to this form or you may write them in below.
1/./
BEFORE THE CALDWELL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
CITY OF CALDWELL,IDAHO
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ) CASE NO. SUP-118-01, COURSE
AUTO ZONE,INC.,FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT) OF PROCEEDINGS, GENERAL FACTS,
TO LOCATE AN OFF-STREET PARKING LOT ) TESTIMONY,APPLICABLE LEGAL
ON BLOCK 32,LOTS 20-24 CALDWELL ) STANDARDS, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
ORIGINAL TOWNSITE ) ANALYSIS,FINDINGS OF FACT,
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,AND
ORDER OF DECISION
I COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS
1.1 The Caldwell Community Development Depal lment issued a notice of Public Hearing on application
SUP-118-01 to be held before the Caldwell Planning and Zoning Commission on April 23, 2001.
Public notice requirements set forth in Idaho Code, Chapter 65, Local Planning Act, have been met.
On April 7, 2001 notice was published in the Idaho-Press Tribune; on April 6, 2001 notice was mailed
to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site and to all political subdivisions providing
services to the site; and on April 16, 2001,notice was posted on the site.
1.2 Files and exhibits relative to this application are available for review in the Community Development
Department and will be available for review at the hearing.
II GENERAL FACTS
2.1 APPLICANT(S): AutoZone,Inc. 60 Madison Ave., Memphis, Tn. 38103.
2.2 OWNER(S): AutoZone, Inc. 60 Madison Ave., Memphis,Tn. 38103
2.3 REQUEST: Approval of a special use permit to include a construct an off-site parking facility on lots
20-24,Block 32, Caldwell Original Townsite.
2.3.1 The Applicant noted in his narrative the following: Zoning Ordinance No. 1451, Section 10-02-05,
Paragraph 6 states a Special Use Permit be obtained for an off-site parking facilities that are located on
a secondary lot. The proposed AutoZone retail store building with supporting driveway and seven
parking spaces will be located in Lots 1 through 6 of Block 32 of the Caldwell Townsite. The
additional off-site parking that is required will be located in Lots 20 through 24 of Block 32. The two
areas are separated by an alley that will be paved with concrete. The entire facility will have three
access points. One from East Chicago Street to the northeast, one at the alley entrance off Tenth
Avenue to the northwest,and one at the southwest edge from East Belmont Street.
2.4 LOCATION: 210 North Tenth Avenue.
2.5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: Commercial.
2.6 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPONENTS APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST:
2.6.1 Property Rights: The five checklist criteria set forth by the Attorney General in the "Idaho Regulatory
Takings Act Guidelines" was reviewed by planning staff and none of the criteria was answered in the
affirmative.
2.6.2 School Facilities and Transportation: The Caldwell and Vallivue School Districts were notified of the
request through mailing of the public hearing notification on April 6, 2001.
SCANNED K)" l�
2.6.3 Land Use: Commercial — The property is currently is vacant and is zoned C-2 (Community
Commercial). Section 10-02-05 (6) states: Off street parking facilities may be located on a secondary
lot other than the lot occupied by the use which requires it, provided that the zoning classification of
the secondary lot is appropriate and provided approval of a Special Use Permit is obtained for both
lots. The use is allowed, auto services and retail services, in a Community Commercial zone. The
building is 73'x100' or 7,300 square feet. Section 10-02-05 requires one parking space for every 250
square feet. Twenty-nine (29)parking spaces are required,where thirty-three(33)are provided.
2.6.4 Public Services, Utilities and Facilities: In summary, a memorandum dated April 4, 2001 Gordon
Law, Chairman of the Caldwell Transportation Commission stated that they did not object to the
proposal. Gordon Law, City Engineer, noted in a memorandum dated April 11, 2001 the City's
Stormwater Management Policy, Caldwell Infrastructure Improvement Policy, Vision Triangle Policy,
the location of the Chicago driveway approach should be kept as far as practical from North 10th
Avenue and no structures area allowed in the alley.
III TESTIMONY
3.1 The staff gave the report. He explained Zoning Ordinance, Section 10-02-05 (6) which states: Off
street parking facilities may be located on a secondary lot other than the lot occupied by the use which
requires it, provided that the zoning classification of the secondary lot is appropriate and provided
approval of a Special Use Permit is obtained for both lots. Staff noted that the alley will be used as
access.
3.2 Mr. Rex Harding, JUB Engineering, representing the applicant, spoke in favor of the request. He
agreed with staff's report regarding why a Special Use Permit was required. He explained the
following:
1. The placement of the parking lot was to utilized the existing traffic signal on
East Chicago Street;
2. The design meets City of Caldwell parking requirements;
3. Drainage will remain on site;
4. Infrastructure will be completed as required by the City Engineer;
5. Access will be from East Chicago Street the alley(on North 10th Avenue) and
East Belmont Street;
6. We will comply to the conditions of Mr. Law's memo (PA-2), except we plan
to keep the building on the corner of East Belmont Street and North 10th
Avenue;
7. The building will be located outside of the vision triangle.
3.3 Mr. David Cox,representing AutoZone, explained AutoZone's business philosophy and the following:
1. Annual business report;
2. Jobs would be created;
3. The building cannot be redesigned, because this is the standard prototype for
AutoZone and any changes could kill the project.
3.4 Orville Collins spoke in favor. He stated that this project would enhance the area.
3.5 Gene Hemingway spoke in opposition. He stated the following:
1. This is the last vacant parcel on North 10th Avenue;
2. North 10th Avenue is the gateway to the City of Caldwell and this building
would not be appropriate for this location;
3. The project would not comply to the City's beautification project;
4. The reason why they are applying for a special use permit is because this is
not an allowed use;
5. The building is on the corner and we don't know how tall the AutoZone will
be. In addition,the AutoZone will hide the Canyon County Courthouse;
6. The building will impact the area. The public was not notified regarding this
development; if they had, they would be against it;
7. You have a unique opportunity to make a choice and define the entry into our
community;
8. It is the wrong use; we have other auto parts stores in the city;
9. Since October I have also had an option on this parcel of land. I have a back
up offer to place a bank on this property and we are ready to move forward in
30 days; a bank would be a better use;
10. I'm against this because of the location of the building, the impact to the
entrance to the city; and that it will impact other existing auto parts stores in
Caldwell.
3.6 Mr. Blacker and Ms. Collier asked questions about the bank. Mr. Mapp stated that the bank was not
the issue and was not before this commission. Any questions regarding the bank were out of order.
3.7 Virginia Manwill spoke neutral to the project. Her comments included the location of the building on
the corner; the need for handicap ramps on all the corners; and walk in traffic.
3.8 Mr. David Cox,representing AutoZone, spoke in rebuttal.
1. This is not the last vacant parcel. Other parcels of land with buildings are located
on North 10th Ave;
2. Their architect is working on the landscaping plan and it will exceed the City of
Caldwell landscaping requirements;
3. The building height is 17 feet;
4. The placement of the parking lot was to utilize the existing traffic signal on East
Chicago Street;
5. The Special Use Permit is for the parking. The building is allowed by ordinance.
3.9 The Public Testimony was closed.
IV APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS
4.1 City of Caldwell 1977 Comprehensive Plan, as amended.
4.2 City of Caldwell Zoning Ordinance No. 1451, as amended.
4.3 Idaho Code, Chapter 65, Local Planning Act
V COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS - The Commission found that the request complies to the
following Comprehensive Plan Components:
5.1 Property Rights-
GOAL: To ensure that land use policies, restrictions, conditions and fees do not violate property
rights, adversely impact property values or create unnecessary technical limitations on the use of the
property.
OBJECTIVE B: To identify potential takings of private property prior to a regulatory or
administrative action on specific property.
POLICY 1: Require staff to follow the Attorney General's Checklist Criteria outlined in the Idaho
Regulatory Takings Act Guidelines prior to any proposed regulatory or administrative action on
specific property, and to request legal counsel's review if any one of the criteria is answered in the
affirmative. Staff reviewed the five criteria outlined in the Takings Act Guidelines and did not answer
yes to any of the criteria.
5.2 Land Use—
GOAL: To establish land-use management policies that protect property rights and the environment,
maintain a high quality of life, provide adequate land for all types of development, and adequately
buffer non-compatible uses.
5.3 Public Services,Utilities and Facilities—
GOAL: To ensure that there are adequate police, fire, emergency services, and public utilities to meet
the needs of the public.
OBJECTIVE A: To protect the safety of people and their property.
POLICY 2: Require emergency service providers, such as police and fire departments and EMS, in
the development review process.
VI FINDINGS OF FACT
6.1 The general facts outlined in the staff report are accepted as Findings of Fact as well as the following:
1. Testimony of the applicants.
2. Testimony of the opponents.
3. Testimony of those who were neutral.
4. The Staff Memos of the City Engineer, Gordon Law, (PA—1 and 2) and comply to the
conditions of Mr. Law's memo (PA-2), except the applicant may keep the building on
the corner of East Belmont Street and North 10th Ave.
VII CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
7.1 The Planning and Zoning Commission has the authority to hear this case and to approve or deny;
public notice requirements were met and the hearing was conducted within the guidelines of
applicable Idaho Code and City ordinances.
VIII ORDER OF DECISION
Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Caldwell Planning and Zoning Commission hereby
orders that Case No. SUP-118-01, a request by AutoZone, Inc. for approval of a special use permit to construct
an off-site parking facility for AutoZone, Inc., is approved with the following conditions:
8.1 The specific terms and conditions placed on the Special Use Permit shall run with the land and remain
valid upon a change of ownership, or until such time that the Permit may be revoked, become invalid,
or replaced with another approved use. The Special Use Permit is not transferable from the approved
site to another site.
8.2 The Applicant, or future assigns having an interest in the subject property, shall fully comply with all
conditions placed upon this Special Use Permit.
8.3 No changes in the conditions and terms of this Special Use Permit, as approved, shall be undertaken
by the Applicant, or future assigns having an interest in the subject property, until the Community
Development Director has reviewed the proposed changes and determined whether or not they are
substantial. If the changes are considered to be substantial, an amendment to the special use permit
can only be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission or Hearing Examiner through the public
hearing process.
8.4 Any violation of the terms and conditions of this Special Use Permit by the Applicant, or future
assigns having an interest in the subject property, will be deemed a misdemeanor and subject to the
provisions set forth in Idaho Code, 18-113. Each day's continued violation will be deemed a separate
offense.
8.5 The Applicant, or future assigns having an interest in the subject property, shall apply for a building
permit within one year from the date of signing the Order of Decision. A six-month extension may be
granted by the Community Development Director if a request for an extension has been submitted
prior to expiration of the initial approval. No other extensions shall be granted unless the Applicant
receives approval of an amendment granted through the public hearing process
8.6 All applicable permits shall be obtained prior to construction commencing on the site. All of the
requirements (if any) placed on the building permit by the Building Official, Fire Marshall and City
Engineer shall be met prior to the permit being issued.
8.7 The Applicants shall obtain a sign permit prior to installing any sign at the site.
8.8 The Applicant will comply with the conditions of Mr. Law's memo including: 1)provisions are to be
made for disposal of stormwater drainage in accordance with the City's stormwater policy; 2) the
applicant will be required to adhere to the City's infrastructure improvement policy; 3) property
improvements are subject to vision triangle restrictions as per Idaho Code No. 49-593. The original
site plan shows the building on the corner of 10th and Belmont in violation of this code, although the
new site plan shows this to have been corrected; 4) no structures are allowed in the alley; the alley is
public right-of-way and needs to remain clear of all obstruction; and 5) the location of the Chicago
driveway approach should be kept as far as practical from North 10th Avenue.
CASE NO. SUP-118-01 WAS HEARD BY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEMBERS AT A PUBLIC HEARING HELD APRIL 23, 2001.
WRITTEN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION WAS
ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED AND SIGNED BY CHAIRMAN JIM BLACKER ON THE
DATE NOTED BELOW.
i c� ATTEST:
C an Jim Blacker Da e
OOP
'ommunity De - opment Di ector