Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04 Public Response PUBLIC RESPONSE • ITEM DATE SUBMITTED BY pp- � «ate'•`^ - 30 —`i8 rrc--4/ eetiv< VL4-19 , IQ& hz-3/7! .s' Ztv, syy6? aup 'a' 0/?/ Paul L. Alldredge 3107 Arilington Avenue Caldwell,Idaho 83605 July 30, 1998 Ms.Linda James,Community Development Director Caldwell 621 Cleveland Blvd. Caldwell,Idaho 83605 Dear Ms James: I am writing to protest the conversion of the property at 3116 Ponderosa Place,Caldwell,Idaho into a duplex (Reference your Case No. SUP-41-98 petitioned by Robert and Nancy Cris). It is my understanding that the apartment in question already exists as a part of this residence and was built under a zoning variance as an attachment to the property for an elderly parent to live and for the owners to provide care to this parent. I had no problem with this variance of the zoning laws to accommodate this request. However,I am opposed to converting this property to a duplex in a R-1 zone. I fail to understand how this change of zoning will either MAINTAIN OR ENHANCE my property value should this happen. I understand their desire to want to use this property as an apartment but the original conditional use permit carried with it the understanding that it was to be occupied by an elderly parent. If that is no longer the case then the property needs to be used as originally zoned....R-1. The neighbors in this area purchased property with R-1 Zoning for a reason and the conversion of this parcel to R-2 or a duplex negates good planning and zoning and devalues our property. In the event that I am unable to attend the meeting on this case scheduled for the 13th of August, 1998 I would like to have my protest entered into the record and stand ready to protect my position in this matter by whatever legal means necessary to prevent this matter from moving any further toward ratification. 'ncerely, I Pad .�ud� � �ge /I? c ,( ,l NU 3 REQUEST TO EXAMINE FILES On A uS 74- L , 1998, I visited the Caldwell Community Development Department (Planning and Zoning) and examined the case files for Case No. S C,C,P - 4 ( -5 ? I requested copies of the following documents taken from the files: lva r V ) 3441-D /cLe e r. ,e.ei-y COO f / I understand that this request to examine files will be made a part of the permanent file regarding this Case. — ed 7 gn (tot F — :?'S �.. z()� Assisted ty REQUEST TO EXAMINE FILES On g'' , 1998, I visited the Caldwell Community Development Department (Planning and Zoning)and examined the case files for Case No. S C-t f 4 i , ED I requested copies of the following documents taken from the files: c✓e 6 GV �ZC. I understand that this request to examine files will be made a part of the permanent file regarding this Case. Signed Assisted By pe_ 3 Paul L. Alldredge 4) /_ • 3107 Arilington Avenue © � Caldwell,Idaho 83605 August 10, 1998 Ms.Linda James,Community Development Director Caldwell 621 Cleveland Blvd. Caldwell, Idaho 83605 Dear Ms.James: I am supplying this cover letter at your request so that the attached three citations of the Idaho Code Sections 67-6502, 67-6506,and 67-516 are properly entered into the record pertaining to your case SUP- 41-98, regarding the property at 3116 Ponderosa Place Caldwell,Idaho. I have underlined the portions that cause me and the neighbors in the area concern and I will attempt to verbalize my issues as follows: Section 67-6502 This change will not protect or enhance the property values in the neighborhood. This is an even greater concern given that the property at 3116 Ponderosa Place is currently for sale and will be sold as a duplex unit and will probably not enjoy the presence of a an owner occupied main unit with an attached rental unit. The parking situation at the front and off-street parking of the"pie-shaped"lot creates a parking situation that is an infringement to the neighbors in the area. Section 65-6506 There is a conflict of interest with the City of Caldwell given that they issued a permit in the first place for a duplex apartment at 3116 Ponderosa Place Caldwell,Idaho in that the variance procedures in the city zoning codes were sidestepped and now the neighbors are asked to"grandfather"in a mistake. The current owners are leaving the neighborhood! Why are we even being asked to approve a mistake or at worse a blatant violation of city zoning requirements? Section 65-6516"A variance is not to be considered a right or special privilege,but may be granted to the applicant only upon special hardship because of the characteristics of the site and that the variance is not in conflict with the public interest." Again, I go back to the fact that the property at 3116 Ponderosa Place is currently up for sale by the Chris family ! How does this change to a permanent duplex serve the public interest of the residents of the neighborhood? Where is the undue hardship if these folks are leaving the neighborhood? I am asking that this letter and the appropriate sections of the Idaho Code be entered into the record in the event that I am unable to attend the scheduled mee�ng on 8-13-98. I would also like this document and my previous letter dated 7-30-98 be read into the recor of the meeting. 1 • cerely, Paul L. Alldredge • 41111 . al 6ovkricoal � v 'FAIRS 580 ` !. 581 ii o LOCAL LAND USE PLANNING 67-6503 L as the"Local Land Use 67-6502. Purpose. — The purpose of this act shall be to promote the iy 1975, ch. 188, § 2, p. : '-' health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the state of Idaho as follows: (9.) To protect property rights and enhance property values while making indiction to decide such issues ,.:~ accommodations for other necessary types of development such as low-cost n the district court. Jerome =_ If housing and mobile home parrs. Bd. of Comm'rs v. Holloway, 1.- 799 799 P.2d 969(1990). (b) To ensure that adequate public facilities and services are provided to the people at reasonable cost. ie Local Planning Act of 1975, ,` (c) To ensure that the economy of the state and localities is protected and intended to give local govern- . gi g .e. enhanced. d powers in the area of plan- = (d) To ensure that the important environmental features of the state and ing. Worley Hwy. Dist. 'v. by, 104 Idaho 833, 663 P.2d `r localities are protected and enhanced. .983). (e) To encourage the protection of prime agricultural, forestry, and Street Naming and Num ,' mining lands for production of food, fibre, and minerals. (f) To encourage urban and urban-type development within incorporated -poses of the Local Planning .t cities. —67-6536) and the duties of = (g) To avoid undue concentration of population and overcrowding of land. with its administration are , to the planning and zoning z 4 (h) To ensure that the development on land is commensurate with the lave long been the domain of . physical characteristics of the land. ties, since of necessity these (i) To protect life and property in areas subject to natural hazards and send the boundaries of local ',� districts, since § 40-501 was s`*,: disasters. I to the duties of the county - (j) To protect fish, wildlife, and recreation resources. he duty to rename streets and .. (k) To avoid undue water and air pollution. n the county by proper ordi- _ < Cl) To allow local school districts to participate in the community planning 50-1301-50-1329 governing , iivision plats provide that all : and development process so as to address public school needs and impacts 'esented to the proper govern- °,, z- on an ongoing basis. [I.C., § 67-6502, as added by 1975,ch. 188, § 2,p. 515; ;y and/or county for approval am. 1992, ch. 269, § 1, p. 830; am. 1994, ch. 245, § 1, p. 764.] lust show all the streets and .d,since nothing in the Plan- '4:` is a legislative intent for the Compiler's notes.For words"this act"see zoning ordinances. Olson v.Ada County, 105 ,andard setting of the Act in - Compiler's notes, § 67-6501. Idaho 18,665 P.2d 717(1983). vays to flow to highway din Section 2 of S.L. 1992, ch. 269 is compiled Section 67-6529, exempting agricultural of the language of§ 40-1611 -4 as§ 67-6508. land, must be construed harmoniously with -6501-67-6536 were enacted - Section 2 of S.L. 1994, ch. 245 is compiled other provisions of the Local Planning Act to .and 40-1615,the Local Plan- as§ 67-6508. the extent reasonably possible and must also t county the authority to set " .°' Cited in: City of Lewistown v. Knieriem, be construed to give effect to the legislative street naming and address 107 Idaho 80, 685 P.2d 821 (1984). intent and purpose in enacting the Local K Lin the boundaries of a local . Agricultural Land. Planning Act.Olson v.Ada County, 105 Idaho ct. Worley Hwy. Dist. v, When § 67-6529 is read in the context of 18, 665 P.2d 717(1983). y, 104 Idaho 833, 663 P.2d , the other sections of the Local Planning Act, Opinions of Attorney General.Although 983). ,. and in light of the purposes and objectives set authorized generally to establish zoning ordi- Attorney General. A state' A,.; forth in this section,it is clear that the legis- nances under the Local Planning Act, a nply with valid county ord.': leture did not intend to give agricultural land county is preempted from regulating lake pursuant to the Local P `° allegedly being used for agricultural purposes encroachments by the Lake Protection Act. '-6501 to 67-6537, unl- ' a carte blanche exemption from all county OAG 83-6. stitutional provision pro mption for the agency ° 67-6503. Participation of local governments. — Every city and pts the application of the 2-5. $''. COUnty shall exercise the powers conferred by this chapter. [I.C., § 67-6503, e Local Planning Act,it- a$added by 1975, ch. 188, § 2, p. 515.] intent that local . - - e steps to minimize f. ', odatory, lished commissions, is made mandatory by Wing ordinances and the;; i `' etdae of the authority to zone and plan, this section. Gumprecht v. City of Coeur to agencies, as shown .Y. ' ' by governing board or by the estab- D'Alene,104 Idaho 615,661 P.2d 1214(1983). ;7-6528. OAG 92-5. K \� 67-6516 STATE GOVERNMENT AND STATE AFFAIRS 596 597 L( other land uses are provided for under single ownership or control. Planned unit development ordinances may include, but are not limited to, require- ments for minimum area, permitted uses, ownership, common open space, 1984). In reviewing a variance decis utilities, density, arrangements of land uses on a site, and permit process- p� tion of the reviewing court is ing. Planned unit developments may be p whether the zoning board's find y permitted under processing for ported by substantial evidence special use permits as defined in this chapter. Permits for planned unit whether the board's conclusion: developments may be granted following the notice and hearing ply the Zoning ordinance to the f provided in section 67-6512, Idaho Code. [I.C., § 67-6515, as added by 1975, Idaho 906,693 P.do Lo8ion(A ch. 188, § 2, p. 515.] Variance. Sec.to sec.ref.This section is referred to or buildings in the neighborhood"it was error —Defined. in§ 32-4304A. for the local zoning board to allow a land- ; A variance, as defined in this Variance. owner to increase density of land use in order not include a change of author Where a local zoning ordinance limited to make needed remodeling economically fea- &x variances to circumstances "peculiar"to the Bible. City of Burley v.McCaslin Lumber Co., 67-6517. Future acc property and not applicable"generally to land 107 Idaho 906,693 P.2d 1108(Ct.App. 1984). I the planning or planning adopt, amend, or repeal 67-6516. Variance — Definition —Application — Notice —Hear- notice and hearing procec ing.—Each governing board shall provide as part of the zoning ordinance r° map shall designate lane for the processing of applications for variance permits. A variance is a maximum twenty (20) y modification of the requirements of the ordinance as to lot size, lot coverage, include land for: othE width, depth, front yard, side yard, rear yard, setbacks, parking space, (a) Streets,roads, tern height of buildings, or other ordinance provision affecting the size or shape for construction or alter of a structure or the placement of the structure upon lots, or the size of lots. (b) Proposed schools, 4 "A variance shall not be considered a right or special privilege, but may be (c) Proposed parks or granted to an applicant only upon a showing of undue hardship because of (d) Lands for other pt Characteristics of the site and that the variance is not in conflict with the Upon receipt of a req public interest. Prior to granting a variance,notice and an opportunity to be building permit as defin /� tTheard shall be provided to property owners adjoining the lands designated upon t] + /� /11 consideration. [LC., § 67-6516, as added by 1975,ch. 188, § 2, p. 515.]der �(, and zoning commission o proposing to acquire the Iv y , ( Compiler's notes.As enacted the section constitutionally mandated in all cases where notice, the public ages 14 0 V' heading of this section read"Variance." zoning authorities are requested to change ' 00') the land use authorized for a particular parcel governing board to susp VV- ANALYSIS of property. Gay v. County Comm'rs, 103 from the date Of the regL 1�1 Procedural requirements. Idaho 626, 651 P.2d 560(Ct.App. 1982). land owner to obtain ar. 1°` Review. Were no transcribable record was kept of a institutdtion Variance. county rezoning hearing and, without such a —Defined. record,a reviewing court could not determine Code. It the Con pub11C condemnation age —Improper. that the interested parties received notice of commission or governin all meetings at which information concerning in chapter Procedural Requirements. the rezoning request was received,or that an The requirement of procedural due process opportunity to rebut such information was x orothidinancng es this as required is applicable to proceedings on a request to afforded,the county's decision authorizing the acquisitions map. [I.C., change the land use authorized for a particu- rezoning had to be set aside. Gay v. County N lar parcel of property, regardless of whether Comm'rs, 103 Idaho 626, 651 P.2d 560 (Ct. am. 1994, ch. 90, § 1, p the subject of such proceedings carries the App. 1982). label"variance"or"rezoning."Gay v. County Review. 67-6518. Standard Comm'rs, 103 Idaho 626, 651 P.2d 560 App. 1982). view of administrative action are set forth in(Ct. General standards governing judicial re- such things as:building , greenbelts, planting st Notice,opportunity to present and to rebut I.C., § 67-5215, r evidence, preparation of specific findings of Procedure Act,but specific standards w: parking spaces;r grades, a] fact and conclusions of law,and the keeping of ing review of a zoning decision depend upon k rights-of-way,grades, al a transcribable record comprise a common the nature of the power exercised in making ,. public utilities; access core of procedural due process requirements, the decision.City of Burley v.McCaslin Lum- ''< sewer systems; storm d 67-6505 STATE GOVERNMENT AND STATE AFFAIRS 584 ,85 l 67-6505. Joint planning and zoning commission—Formation_ Duties.—The boards of county commissioners of two(2)or more adjoining professional, or other'or ;commission shall endeav counties, alone or together with the council of one(1)or more cities therein, :ing of the commission's or the board of county commissioners of a county together with the council E of one(1)or more cities within the county, or the councils of two(2) or more ,* 4`' The commission may, adjoining cities, are empowered to cooperate in the establishment of a joint fib ing board concerning the planning, zoning, or planning and zoning commission,hereafter referred to plan. as a joint commission, and may With the consent of the y provide for participation by invitation of and employees, in the pe other public agencies deemed necessary to exercise the powers conferred in land and make examinat this chapter. The number of members of a joint commission, the method of monuments and marks t appointment, and the allocation of costs for activities to be borne by the The commission may i participating governing boards shall be agreed upon by the governing by the governing board. boards and agencies involved.A joint commission is further authorized and The commission shall empowered to perform any of the duties for any local member's governing necessary to enable it to board when the duties have been authorized by that member government. 1975, ch. 188, § 2, p. 51; [I.C., § 67-6505, as added by 1975, ch. 188, § 2, p. 515.] Cited in: Langmeyer v. Sts Opinions of Attorney General. In read- application of the city's plan to the area of 53,656 P.2d 114(1982);Coeur] ing subsection(a)of§ 67-6526 in conjunction impact only occurs when ordinances adopting Park Property Owners Assn v. with all of Chapter 65, and in particular such plan are enacted by the city council and D'Alene, 108 Idaho 843, 702 § 67-6504 and this section, and the remain- the board of county commissioners. Reading ;" App. 1985); Lowery v. Boas der of§ 67-6526,it is clear that the ordinance § 67-6526(a)(1) as giving cities the power to Commis, 117 Idaho 1079, 7 governing the area of impact must be adopted act unilaterally in adopting ordinances gov- (1990). by both the city council and the board of erning unincorporated areas of impact would Initiative Legislation Prohi county commissioners. Section 67-6526(a)(1) render it unconstitutional as violating Idaho The legislature clearly inte] merely states that a plan drafted by a city Const., art.12, § 2. OAG 95-1. authority to enact comprehen: may be applied to the area of impact. The tablish zoning districts and a :, tory ordinances be exercised 67-6506. Conflict of interest prohibited.—A governing board creat- ing a planning, zoning, or planning and zoning commission, or joint 67-6508. Planning c commission shall provide that the area and interests within its jurisdiction planning and zoning co are broadly represented on the commission. A member or employee of a process designed to prep, governing board, commission, or joint commission shall not participate in ".' hensive plan, hereafter r any proceeding or action when the member or employee or his employer, within the jurisdicti business partner, business(,) associate, or any person related to him by previous and existing col affinity or consanguinity within the second degree has an economic interest desirable future situatio 4 in the procedure or action.Any actual or potential interest in any proceeding maps, charts, and report shall be disclosed at or before any meeting at which the action is being heard may apply to land u: or considered. A knowing violation of this section shall be a misdemeanor. reasons why a particular [I.C., § 67-6506, as added by 1975, ch. 188, § 2, p. 515.] (a) Property Rights— to insure that land use Compiler's notes.The comma in the - �'? i 5 S tee'ci ` p'r\` 4-- violate private property i and sentence was placed in parentheses by l ` � the compiler as surplusage. 1'T 1"�b v — ‘Aft t 3nr C---•—• unnecessary technical lii �/La�¢.elve,G� prescribed under the dec l o,,..r� Code. 67-6507. The planning process and related powers of the com- mission. —As part of the planning process, a planning or zoning commis- (b) Population — A p trends in population inch sion shall provide for citizen meetings,hearings, surveys,or other methods, to obtain advice on the planing process, plan, and implementation. The - sex, and income. commission may also conduct informational meetings and consult with (c) School Facilities ar. public officials and agencies,public utility companies,and civic,educational, '. e capacity and transportati ment.