HomeMy WebLinkAbout05 Hearing Examiner I PLANNING AND ZONING it ea vl ti ' r
ITEM DATE SUBMITTED BY
P2_- Did"- 64- (--61:54:ex" I
f/a.-Z - S � _ I 3-0z) KG'rert
PE" 3 P -I- 2_
� 3 8f
BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
CITY OF CALDWELL,IDAHO
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ) CASE NO. SUP-71-99,
KAREN RYALS FOR A SPECIAL USE ) COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS,
PERMIT TO CONDUCT DRIVER- ) GENERAL FACTS,TESTIMONY,
TRAINING CLASSES IN AN R-1 ZONE ) APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS,
) 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-71-99 to be held on January 13, 1000 before the Planning and Zoning
Commission. Public notice requirements set forth in Idaho Code, Chapter 65, Local Planning
Act, were met. On December 29, 1999 notice was published in the Idaho Press Tribune; on
December23, 1999 notice was mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site;
and on January 6, 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): Karen Ryals, Driving School, LLC, 204 E. Spruce, Caldwell, ID., 83605
2.2 OWNER(S): Same as Applicant.
2.3 REQUEST: Approval of a special use permit to conduct driver training classes in her home. The
Applicant notes in her narrative that there is only one other school in the State that holds driver-
training classes in a home and that she has been conducting these classes for several years without
a special use permit. When she learned that Caldwell requires a SUP, she submitted her
application for the same. The Applicant started the first class in 1991 (in her present home). The
maximum number of students she can handle.in a session is 24; she teaches both teens and adults
throughout the day. It appears from her narrative that the training classes consist of hands-on
driving and a 2-hour classroom session. Students are dropped off at her home; classes are held
two to four times a week (actual days are not identified); and the family room is used as the
classroom. Included in the narrative is a floor plan of the family room and parking spaces along
the front of her home are identified.
2.3.1 Section 10-02-02, Land Use Schedule, Zoning Ordinance No. 1451, does not specifically identify
"driver training classes." In interpreting the Ordinance, the Community Development Director
has the authority to determine uses that are similar in nature and to act accordingly. In this
instance, driver-training classes considered to be similar to a school. A school is permitted in an
R-1 zone by special use permit.
2.4 LOCATION: 204 E. Spruce.
2.5 NATURAL RESOURCES AND HAZARDOUS AREAS: The home is not within the vicinity of
the Boise River or Indian Creek and is not within a floodplain.
2.6 LAND USE: The parcel is zoned R-1 (single-family residential) and is surrounded by R-1 zoning
on the north, east and west, and by County R-1 on the south.
2.7 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low-Density Residential.
2.7.1 Low-Density Residential is defined as "suitable primarily for single-family residences. Other
uses characteristic of low-density residential areas such as churches, schools,neighborhood parks,
comparable public facilities and essential utility installations are appropriate."
2.8 AREA OF CITY IMPACT: The site is within the City and therefore is not within the Area of
City Impact.
2.9 PUBLIC FACILITIES:
2.9.1 Schools—Notice of the request was sent to Caldwell and Vallivue School Districts on December
23, 1999.
2.9.2 Water/Sewer—The home is served by the City's public water/sewer systems. If approval of the
special use permit is granted, the Applicant will be required to apply for a change in use permit.
The Engineering Department and Fire Department will review the application for a change in use
permit and may place additional conditions on the use of the home for driver training classes.
2.10 TRANSPORTATION: The site is accessed from E. Spruce Street.
2.11 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE: The Applicant does not propose providing parks,
recreation or open spaces.
2.12 HISTORIC AREAS: The parcel is not within the City's Area of Historic Significance.
2.13 HOUSING: The Applicant is requesting approval of a special use permit in order to conduct
driver-training classes within her home.
III TESTIMONY
3.1 Linda James presented the staff report and Exhibit PR-1, which was a letter from Earl and Avis
Martin who live at 223 E. Spruce. Mr. and Mrs. Martin expressed their support of the
Applicant's request.
3.2 Karen Ryals, Applicant, testified in favor and stated the following: the driver training school is
only one of two in the State of Idaho that offers classes out of the home; the home is in
compliance with ADA; there are usually 24 students that come together at any one time.
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 FINDINGS OF FACT
5.1 Accept the general facts outlined in the staff report as Findings of Fact and include Exhibit PR-1,
the letter of support.
VI CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
6.1 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.
VII ORDER OF DECISION
7.1 Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Planning and Zoning Commission
hereby orders that Case No. SUP-71-99, a request by Karen Ryals for a special use permit to
conduct driver-training classes within her home located at 204 E. Spruce Street is approved with
the following conditions of approval:
7.2 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.
7.3 The Applicant, or future assigns having an interest in the subject property, shall fully comply with
all conditions placed upon the special use permit.
7.4 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.
7.5 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.
7.6 The Applicant, or future assigns having an interest in the subject property, shall apply for a
change in use permit no later than January 24, 2000 and shall comply with all requirements that
may be placed on the change in use permit by the City Engineer and Fire Chief.
CASE NO. SUP-71-99 WAS HEARD BY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEMBERS AT
A PUBLIC HEARING HELD JANUARY 13, 2000.
WRITTEN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND THE ORDER OF DECISION
WAS ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED AND SIGNED BY CHAIRMAN JIM BLACKER ON THE
DATE NOTED BELOW.
ATTEST:
.N, //a ba
aiY'man Jim Blacker Date '"
Community D AIII!pment Director
PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT SHEET
(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)
NAME:
STREET ADDRESS: cR 0q E,
,
CITY/STATE/ZIP: . �d i Q I/
NAME OF CASE BEING HEARD: n 'a "f ' /
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.
120-foot tall advertising sign in a C-2 zone.
Testimony—
Linda James presented the staff report.
Clayton Jones, Applicant, testified in favor and stated the following: the sign will be placed on the site in
compliance with the Engineering Department's requirements;the 75-foot variance is necessary in order to install a
sign that can be seen from persons traveling I-84; approximately 30-to 50%of the restaurant's business will come
from persons traveling I-84;he is requesting the same visibility as other businesses along 10th;as far as the line-of-
sight goes,the sign will not be any higher than the other business signs in the neighborhood.
Public Testimony Closed—Chairman Blacker closed public testimony.
Findings of Fact— Motion: Commissioner Beebe. Second: Commissioner Teraberry. Accept the general facts
outlined in the staff report as Findings of Fact and include the following Facts: all five of the variance criteria are
true;the Applicant testified that he will comply with the requirements of the Engineering Depaitnient and that the
variance is necessary in order to provide the same advertising visibility as the other businesses along 10`s already
have. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Conclusions of Law — Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The 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. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Order of Decision—Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Beebe.Approve Case No. VAR-
16-99,with the standard conditions outlined in the staff report. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Public Hearing Closed —Chairman Blacker closed the public hearing and noted anyone wishing to appeal their
decision should see the Director of Community Development.
D. Case No. SUP-71-99, a request by Karen Ryals for a special use permit to conduct driver training classes
in her home. The site is within an R-1 zone and is located at 204 E. Spruce.
Testimony—
Linda James presented the staff report and Exhibit PR-1,which was a letter from Earl and Avis Martin who live at
223 E. Spruce. Mr.and Mrs.Martin expressed their support of the Applicant's request.
Karen Ryals,Applicant,testified in favor and stated the following: the driver training school is only one of two in
the State of Idaho that offers classes out of the home; the home is in compliance with ADA; there are usually 24
students that come together at any one time.
Public Testimony Closed—Chairman Blacker closed public testimony.
Findings of Fact—Motion: Commissioner Beebe. Second: Commissioner Teraberry. Accept the general facts
outlined in the staff report as Findings of Fact and include exhibit PR-1,the letter of support. Passed: Unanimous
roll call vote.
Conclusions of Law —Motion: Commissioner Teraberry. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The 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. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Order of Decision—Motion: Commissioner Beebe. Second: Commissioner Teraberry. Approve Case No. SUP-
71-99,with the standard conditions outlined in the staff report. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Public Hearing Closed—Chairman Blacker closed the public hearing and noted anyone wishing to appeal their
decision should see the Director of Community Development.
**********************************************************************************
E. To hear concurrently Case Nos. SUP-72-99 and VAR-17-99, a request by Bryan Kiser for variance from
?q:
Minutes of January 13,2000
the required lot size of 6000 square feet to 4500 square feet and a special use permit to construct a duplex
, in an M-1 (Light Industrial) zone. The two-family dwelling would replace an existing single-family
dwelling.
Testimony—
Linda James presented the staff report and stated that the lot was a legal non-conforming lot and could have a new
single-family home constructed on the site because the existing single-family home was "grandfathered" in. The
variance is required because the Applicant wants to build a two-family dwelling and the lot does not meet the
required 6000 square feet. She also noted that there are numerous small,non-conforming lots in the City that were
legally created prior to adoption of the Zoning Ordinance.
Brian Kiser, Applicant, testified in favor and stated that the existing house is not in very good condition and that a
new duplex would be an improvement to the neighborhood. The standard setback requirements can be met even
though the lot is small.
Public Testimony Closed—Chairman Blacker closed public testimony.
Findings of Fact — Motion: Commissioner Beebe. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Accept the general facts
outlined in the staff report as Findings of Fact and include the fact that all five of the variance criteria were found
to be true. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Conclusions of Law— Motion: Commissioner Archuleta. Second: Commissioner Teraberry. The 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. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote.
Order of Decision—Motion: Commissioner Beebe. Second: Commissioner Teraberry.Approve Case Nos. SUP-
72-99 and VAR-17-99, with the standard conditions outlined in the staff report. Passed: Unanimous roll call
vote.
Public Hearing Closed —Chairman Blacker closed the public hearing and noted anyone wishing to appeal their
decision should see the Director of Community Development.
VII. Planning Issues-There were no planning issues brought forward.
VIII. Adjournment—Chairman Blacker adjourned the meeting at approximately 8:30 p.m.
MINUTES APPROVED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS, AND SIGNED BY CHAIRMAN BLACKER, AT A
REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING HELD ,2000.
Nlcuc9ti
C---- y
C.:irm.n Jim Blacker
ATTEST:
Community Develo.+.e _ Director
Minutes of January 13,2000