HomeMy WebLinkAbout05 Hearing Examiner PLANNING AND ZONING Wec -�i n�f l;i
J
ITEM DATE SUBMITTED BY
� -- ( 5ttz -7 - a -ems
pry bi Lc54b7L
2- 3 01,` ' '° -�l-6?) e=t
L _,
PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT SHEET
(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)
NAME: 7-," Y r' �°� I e'r - W6110-1
STREET ADDRESS: 91/ ji4 4
CITY/STATE/ZIP: id w fC I 440 37ac
NAME OF CASE BEING HEARD: §(J - 9 _ 0®
Check the appropriate line:
CApplicant or Representative
Neutral/
wish to speak
do not wish to speak
In favor/ )
wish to speak V I Opposed/
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.
PZ
Nape. �.
BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
CITY OF CALDWELL,IDAHO
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ) CASE NO. SUP-92-00,
BRYAN WALKER FOR A SPECIAL USE ) COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS,
PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL ) GENERAL FACTS,APPLICABLE
STRUCTURE LOCATED IN AN R-3 ZONE AS ) LEGAL STANDARDS,
AN OFFICE ) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS,
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW,AND ORDER OF DECISION
I COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS
1.1 The Caldwell Community Development Department issued a notice of Public Hearing on application
SUP-92-00 to be held on July 11, 2000 before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Public notice
requirements set forth in Idaho Code, Chapter 65, Local Planning Act, were met. On June 26, 2000
notice was published in the Idaho Press Tribune; on June 23, 2000 notice was mailed to all property
owners within 300 feet of the project site; and on July 3, 2000 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 were available for review at the hearing.
II GENERAL FACTS
2.1 APPLICANT(S): Bryan K. Walker,Walker Law Offices,PUC, 911 Main Street, Caldwell,ID. 83605
2.2 OWNER(S): The subject property is located at 617 S. 6th Avenue and is owned by the Applicant.
2.3 REQUEST: Approval of a special use permit to use an existing residential structure as a law office.
The Applicant notes the following in his narrative (A-3): there will be two attorneys sharing the office
space; the number of attorneys and staff may change in the future; there are other similar and/or
commercial uses within the near vicinity; the public would be benefited because this structure is nearly
unmarketable because of the low cost of new homes in Caldwell and using this house for law offices
would provide for upkeep and maintenance; the house is located in historic area and the law office use
would be harmonious with the neighborhood; clientele are quiet and unobtrusive and vehicle trips
would be minimal; and, the requested use will not adversely affect the public interest.
2.3.1 Section 10-02-02, Land Use Schedule, Zoning Ordinance No. 1451, permits an office to be located
within an R-3 (Multi-Family Residential) zone if a special use permit is applied for and receives
approval.
2.3.2 Section 10-02-05 of Zoning Ordinance No. 1451 sets forth requirements for off-street parking spaces.
An office requires one space for every 350 square feet. The square footage of this structure is
unknown and it is unknown as to how much of the structure will be used for office space. The site
plan shows a potential off-street parking area; however, until more information is provided, the
number of parking spaces required cannot be determined. The Applicant noted in his narrative that
there are only two off-street parking spaces available at this time and that the side-yard could be
converted to parking but this is not immediately desirable. (See A-4, site plan)
2.4 LOCATION: 617 S. 6th Avenue.
o��
2.5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPONENTS:
2.5.1 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.
2.5.2 School Facilities and Transportation: The Caldwell and Vallivue School Districts were notified of the
request through mailing of the public hearing notification on June 23, 2000
2.5.3 Economic Development: The house is currently vacant. If the special use permit is approved, a
building that is standing vacant will be used commercially.
2.5.4 Land Use:
Residential Land Use — Although this property is zoned residential, an office can be located in a
residential zone if a special use permit is approved. There is an assisted care facility located to the
northeast of the subject site, just across the alley. The surrounding adjacent area is primarily
residential.
2.5.5 Natural Resources: Gordon Law, in a memorandum dated June 26, 2000 (PA-1) noted that any
additional impervious area created by modifications to the existing structure and grounds must be dealt
with in accordance with the City's Storm Drainage Policy.
2.5.6 Public Services, Utilities and Facilities: The property is connected to the City's public water/sewer
systems. In a memorandum dated June 26, 2000 (PA-1) Gordon Law noted that the special use permit
may subject to additional connection fees if the proposed use increases demand on the City's sewer
and water systems.
2.5.7 Transportation: The property fronts S. 6th Avenue. Mr. Law (PA-1) noted that the existing right-of-
way on S. 6th is adequate for the existing proposed uses and the right-of-way width is consistent with
existing City policies and ordinances.
2.5.8 Community Design: There are existing old-growth shrubs and deciduous trees on the property.
However, if the special use permit is approved the use will be considered commercial and subject to
the landscaping requirements of Section 10-02-05, Subsection 11 of Zoning Ordinance No. 1451.
III TESTIMONY
3.1 Linda James presented the staff report.
3.2 Brian Walker, Applicant, testified and stated the following: it is expected that there will be two
attorneys and one secretary occupying the office space; the house is 1300 square feet without the
basement and the basement will not be used; according to his calculations, four off-street parking
spaces would normally be required under the Zoning Ordinance; there is a gravel drive and concrete
driveway, which provides two off-street parking spaces; the front yard area or side yard area might be
able to used for additional off-street parking but he would rather not have to provide any additional
spaces other than the two already there; the office will only be used during the day and there is plenty
of parking along the street; he has contacted a landscaping company to draw up landscaping plans; he
will be contracting for a 2 x 4 sign that will be designed to compliment the office; he has spoken with
several property owners in the neighborhood and that have indicated that they are not opposed.
3.3 No other persons signed up in favor or in opposition.
}
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 request meets 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.
5.2 School Facilities and Transportation-
GOAL: To provide the on-going opportunity for school representatives of Caldwell and Vallivue
School Districts to participate in the community planning process.
POLICY 1: Include the school districts in the review process when considering land-use proposals. At
a minimum, notice of the hearing for each proposal should be provided to the districts and any
additional information that the districts might subsequently request. The Caldwell and Vallivue
School Districts were notified of the request through mailing of the public hearing notification
on June 23,2000.
5.3 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.
Residential
POLICY 1: Encourage special uses in areas where they can be appropriately integrated with the
surrounding area and where the health, safety, and general welfare of the neighborhood would not be
adversely impacted. Realistic conditions that would assist in ensuring that the proposed use is
compatible with the surrounding area should be carefully considered and applied on a case-by-case
basis. The property is located in an area that is primarily residential in character. However,
there is an existing assisted care facility adjacent to the northeast side of the subject property,
just across the alley. Conditions of approval that can be placed on a special use permit can assist
in ensuring that the use of this structure as an office is compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood.
5.4 Natural Resources—
GOAL: Preserve,protect, and enhance the water quality and quantity of the Boise River, Indian Creek
and their natural environments.
POLICY 1: Prevent the collection and conveyance of untreated stormwater, created by new
development, into surface bodies of water by requiring developers to comply with local, state and
federal stormwater policies. If the special use permit is approved, the Applicant will be required
to apply for a "change in use permit" through the building permit process, which will be
reviewed by the Engineering Department. Any changes to the site that will create additional
impervious surfaces will be required to meet the City's Storm Drainage Policy. This would
include creating additional off-street parking spaces.
5.5 Transportation-
GOAL: To provide for the efficient, safe, and cost effective movement of people and goods.
OBJECTIVE A: To protect public safety and the environment. Section 10-02-05 of Zoning
Ordinance No. 1451 requires off-street parking spaces to be provided for specific uses. If the
special use permit is approved, the Applicant may be required to provide additional off-street
parking spaces as a condition of approval. The City Engineer has reviewed the Applicant's
request and has found that there is adequate existing right-of-way for the propose use and that
the right-of-way width is consistent with existing City policies and ordinances.
5.6 Community Design—
GOAL: Foster growth in a manner than will enhance and improve the visual image of the city.
OBJECTIVE A: To promote, encourage and maintain an aesthetically pleasing city.
POLICY 6: Include the City's forester/horticulturist in the review process for all new or expanding
developments that include landscaping requirements. If approved, a condition of approval would
include requirements set forth in the City's Zoning Ordinance regarding landscaping.
VI FINDINGS OF FACT
6.1 Accept the general facts outlined in the staff report as findings of fact and include the following facts
from testimony: the Applicant stated that he would prefer not to provide additional off-street parking;
landscaping will be installed.
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 Idaho
Code and City ordinances.
VIII ORDER OF DECISION
8.1 Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Caldwell Planning and Zoning
Commission hereby orders that Case No. SUP-92-00, a request by Brian Walker for a special use
permit to convert an existing residential structure into an office located on lot in an R-3 zone, more
commonly known as 617 S. 6th Avenue, is approved with the following conditions of approval:
r
snr
8.2 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,
amended, or replaced with another approved use.
8.3 The Applicant, or future assigns having an interest in the subject property, shall fully comply with all
conditions placed upon the special use permit.
8.4 No changes in the conditions and terms of the 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. If the Director determines that the
proposed change(s) is significant, an amendment for change shall only be approved through the public
hearing process.
8.5 Any violation of the terms and conditions of the 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.
8.6 Prior to the change in use commencing, the Applicant, or future assigns having an interest in the
subject property, shall obtain all applicable permits and shall comply with all requirements placed on
the permit by the Community Development Director,Building Official, City Engineer and Fire Chief.
8.7 The Applicant, or future assigns having an interest in the subject property, shall apply for a change in
use (building)permit within six months from the date of signing the Order of Decision or shall request
approval of a six-month extension from the Community Development Director. If an application for a
change in use permit has not been submitted within the six month time frame, or a six-month
extension is not requested and approved,the special use permit shall become null and void.
8.8 Two additional off-street parking spaces are required. As a part of the change in use permitting
process, the Applicant, or future assigns having an interest in the subject property, shall submit a
parking plan, which shall be approved by the Engineering Department. The Applicant, or future
assigns having and interest in the subject property, shall also submit a landscape plan to the
Community Development Director for approval. The landscape plan shall identify the types and
species of plants and their location on the site.
8.9 Any sign erected at the site shall be in accordance with Section 10-02-06 of Zoning Ordinance No.
1451 and shall require approval of a sign permit prior to installation.
CASE NO. SUP-92-00 WAS HEARD BY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEMBERS AT A
PUBLIC HEARING HELD JULY 11, 2000.
WRITTEN FINDNGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND THE ORDER OF DECISION WAS
ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED AND SIGNED BY CHAIRMAN JIM BLACKER ON THE DATE
NOTED BELOW.
_._. 7-( 7- oo ATTEST:
ai an Jim Blacker Date
)4‘.
Community D:o,pment Director
Linda James presented the staff report.
Testifying in favor were:Bill Pugh,Applicant's Representative,and Joe Doan,Applicant.
In opposition was Pat Steadman, who expressed his concerns that the area is primarily single-family and the guest
house might be rented.
Public Testimony Closed—Chairman Blacker closed public testimony.
Comprehensive Plan Analysis - Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The
request is in compliance with: Property Rights — Goal, Objective B, and Policy 1; School Facilities and
Transportation — Goal and Policy 1; Land Use Goal, and Residential — Policy 1; Hazardous Areas — Goal and
Objective A; Public Services, Utilities and Facilities — Goal, Objective A, and Policies 1 and 5;Transportation—
Goal, Objective A, and Policy 5; Housing — Goal, Objective C, and Policies 1, 3, and 6; Community Design—
Goal and Objective E. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Findings of Fact — Motion: Commissioner Archuleta. Second: Commissioner Teraberry. Accept the general
facts outlined in the staff report as Findings of Fact and include the following facts from testimony: Southwest
District Health has issued a permit for this site and the septic system will accommodate the two structures;
conditions could be placed on the special use permit that would not allow the guesthouse to be rented; the
Community Development Department periodically visits sites that have special use permits in order to determine
continued compliance. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Conclusions of Law — Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The Commission
has the authority to hear this case and approve or deny;public notice requirements were met; and the hearing was
conducted within the guidelines of Idaho Code and City ordinances. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
,Order of Decision — Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The Commission
approved Case No. SUP-91-00 with the standard conditions outlined in the staff report and include the condition
that this permit is only applicable to the Doan's owning the property. If it changes hands, the permit is null and
void. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Public Hearing Closed — Chairman Blacker closed the public hearing and noted anyone wishing to appeal his
decision should see the Director of Community Development.
D. Case No. SUP-92-00, a request by Bryan Walker for a special use permit to use an existing residential
structure located in an R-3 (High Density Residential) zone as a law office, in accordance with Section
10-02-02, Land Use Schedule, Zoning Ordinance No. 1451. The site is more commonly known as 617 S.
6th Avenue.
Testimony—
Linda James presented the staff report.
Bryan Walker,Applicant,testified in favor. He stated the home has 1300 square feet of usable space;a 2 foot by 4
foot wooden sign is planned;and he would prefer not to add additional off-street parking spaces.
No one testified in opposition.
Public Testimony Closed—Chairman Blacker closed public testimony.
Comprehensive Plan Analysis - Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The
request is in compliance with: Property Rights — Goal, Objective B, and Policy 1; School Facilities and
Transportation— Goal and Policy 1; Land Use Goal, and Residential — Policy 1; Natural Resources — Goal and
Policy 1; Transportation—Goal and Objective A; Community Design—Goal, Objective A, and Policy 6. Passed:
Unanimous roll call vote.
Findings of Fact — Motion: Commissioner Archuleta. Second: Commissioner Teraberry. Accept the general
P&Z Minutes of July 11,2000 ��
)1/4rt,
facts outlined in the staff report as Findings of Fact. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Conclusions of Law — Motion: Commissioner Archuleta. Second: Commissioner Teraberry. The Commission
has the authority to hear this case and approve or deny;public notice requirements were met; and the hearing was
conducted within the guidelines of Idaho Code and City ordinances. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Order of Decision — Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The Commission
approved Case No. SUP-92-00 with the standard conditions outlined in the staff report and include the condition
that the additional two off-street parking spaces are to be installed. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Public Hearing Closed—Chairman Blacker closed the public hearing.
*************************:*********************************************************
E. Case No. ANN-35-00, a request by Crestline Development, LC and Heartland Development, LLC to
annex approximately 149 acres into the City of Caldwell. Approximately 19 acres of the 149 acres is
requested to be annexed as a C-2 (Community Commercial) zone, and the remaining 130 acres is
requested to be annexed as an R-1 (Single-Family Residential) zone. The site abuts the north side of
Highway 20/26 and lies between the east side of KCID Road and the west side of Ward Road.
Testimony—
Linda James presented the staff report.
Scott Stanfield,Applicant's Representative testified in favor.
Testifying in opposition: Jesse Downs; Susan Puga; Morris Mattox; Cordell Lammey. Concerns were: changing
from a rural atmosphere; crowded schools; irrigation flooding; wet lands; dairy farming nearby with noise and
-dust;dog control.
In rebuttal, Scott Stanfield stated the water supply is from the City; flooding will decrease with development; the
CCC&R's will make homeowners aware of the dairy nearby; and the west side of Ward Lane will be improved to
City's standards by the developer.
Public Testimony Closed—Chairman Blacker closed public testimony.
Comprehensive Plan Analysis - Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The
request is in compliance with: Property Rights — Goal, Objective B, and Policy 1; School Facilities and
Transportation— Goal and Policy 1; Economic Development— Goal and Policy 2; Land Use Goal; Area of City
Impact— Objective A and Policy 5; Natural Resources — Objective A; Public Services, Utilities and Facilities —
Goal, Objective B, and Policy 5; Transportation—Goal, Objectives A, E, Policies 2 and 8. Passed: Unanimous
roll call vote.
Findings of Fact — Motion: Commissioner Archuleta. Second: Commissioner Teraberry. Accept the general
facts outlined in the staff report as Findings of Fact and include the following facts from testimony: the site is
contiguous to the City's boundaries and is within the Area of City Impact; the request follows the requirements of
the City and this area has been planned for future growth; a traffic study, which includes this area, has been
undertaken by the Applicants' at their expense; future development of the site will be done under the requirements
of the City's ordinances and codes; Ward Lane will be improved at the time of development of the site, and the
City's water/sewer systems will be extended to serve the site; all improvements will be at the Applicants' expense;
mitigation measures would have to be taken if encroachment on wetlands is anticipated; there is an existing Dairy
adjacent to the site and this type of operation includes flies and dust; irrigation water currently floods in this area
but the Applicants' engineer stated that development of the site would actually begin to alleviate the flooding
problem; the Caldwell and Vallivue school districts were notified of the request but did not offer a response.
Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Conclusions of Law — Motion: Commissioner Archuleta. Second: Commissioner Teraberry. The Commission
has the authority to hear this case and recommend approval or denial; public notice requirements were met; and
the hearing was conducted within the guidelines of Idaho Code and City ordinances. Passed: Unanimous roll call
vote.
P&Z Minutes of July 11,2000
Recommendation to City Council — Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Archuleta.
Recommend to Mayor and City Council that Case No. ANN-35-00 is approved. Passed: Unanimous roll call
vote.
Public Hearing Closed—Chairman Blacker closed the public hearing.
**********************************************************************************
F. Case No. SUB-51P-00 a request by Crestline Development, LC for preliminary subdivision plat approval
of South Park Subdivision No. 2, which consists of 483 residential and 9 common-area lots located on
approximately 118 acres within an R-1 (Single Family Residential) zone. South Park Subdivision No. 2
includes a replat of a portion of the preliminary plat of South Park Subdivision. The number of new lots
that will be created by South Park Subdivision No. 2 is 344,replatted lots are 148,for a total of 493 lots.
Testimony—
Linda James presented the staff report. Mrs. James stated that she, Gordon Law, and the Applicant's Engineer
were all in agreement that the preliminary plat should be redrawn to accommodate Mr. Law's requirements. Mrs.
James told members that under Subdivision Ordinance No. 1758, Section 11-02-04, Stage 2, Preliminary Plat,
Subsection(5)A,they had the option to"recommend that the plat is approved or denied or to return the plat to the
subdivider for modification. The recommendation would be to continue this case to the next hearing date. That
would be with the Hearing Examiner on July 27,2000 at 7:00 p.m.
Scott Stanfield, Applicants' engineer, testified that he was in agreement with the plat being returned for
modification and that continuing the hearing to July 27 would be appropriate. The plat will be redrawn to show
the easement area along the Phyllis Canal in keeping with what Pioneer Irrigation District requires, and the row of
lots along the southern boundary of the plat will be eliminated in order to provide the right-of-way for the
-extension of Moss Lane.
William Kelly testified in opposition and stated he had stormwater and irrigation issues related to construction of
Vallivue Heights No. 1.
Chairman Blacker suggested that Mr. Kelly and Scott Stanfield meet outside the realm of the public hearing in
order to work out Mr.Kelly's concerns. He also recommended that if the hearing is continued to July 27 that Mr.
Kelly return on that night in order to present testimony relevant to this case.
Action - Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Commission members voted to
continue this case to July 27,2000,to be held before the Hearing Examiner. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Public Hearing Continued—Chairman Blacker continued the public hearing until 7:00 p.m. July 27,2000.
**********************************************************************************
VII. Planning Issues—There were no planning issues presented.
VIII. Adjournment—Chairman Blacker adjourned the meeting at approximately 9:15 p.m.
MINUTES APPROVED AND SIGNED BY CHAIRMAN BLACKER ON THE DATE NOTED BELOW:
7-(7- UO ATTEST: _
an Jim Blacker Date Community Dev ment Director
P&Z Minutes of July 11, 2000