Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 08-09-2016PZ Minutes August 9, 2016 Page 1 CALDWELL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES August 9, 2016 Call to Order –Chairperson Doty-Pomoransky called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll Call – Members Present: Ed Doty-Pomoransky, Dana Vance, James Nelson, and Roger Page. Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Jarom Wagoner (Senior Planner); Brian Billingsley (Planning & Zoning Director), April Cabello (Planning Technician), Robb MacDonald (City Engineer), and Mark Hilty (City Attorney). Staff Absent: None. Review of Proceedings – Chairperson Doty-Pomoransky announced the procedures for the public hearing. Old Business: Approve minutes of July 12, 2015 regular meeting. MOTION: Commissioner Nelson. SECOND: Commissioner Vance. Passed: Unanimous voice vote. New Business: A. Case Number SUP-16-09 a request by Canyon County for a special use permit to expand the Canyon County Jail located at the intersection of Chicago Street and 12th Avenue. Testimony: Brian Billingsley, 621 Cleveland Blvd., Caldwell, ID 83605, Planning & Zoning Director, presented the staff report and reviewed the property where the expansion is taking place. He explained that the county wants to expand the current jail facility closer to Chicago Avenue. He said the jail expansion would contain between 270 to 280 beds; and also house a medical treatment area, laundry and a community work release center for women. Mr. Billingsley further stated that this property is on the comprehensive plan map as Traditional Neighborhood and is zoned as Traditional Neighborhood, which is a mixed use zone where commercial and residential uses are both allowed. The uses nearby are buildings owned and operated by Canyon County except across Chicago Street which is a single family residential neighborhood. Mr. Billingsley stated that the applicant submitted a landscaping plan which staff has reviewed and approved. There will be an 18 foot wide landscape buffer along Chicago PZ Minutes August 9, 2016 Page 2 Avenue and a 16 foot wide landscape buffer along 12th Avenue. The current parking lot will be eliminated and they plan to build a parking lot across the street from the work release center to compensate for the lost parking spaces. Mr. Billingsley stated that staff has asked the applicant to submit a parking study where they had studied all the parking spaces that were available at the court house complex. Mr. Billingsley confirmed that even if the expansion is approved the applicant will be in compliance with Caldwell City Code for parking. Mr. Billingsley explained that since this special use is in a neighborhood where there are several single family homes, a jail would bring a lot of concern to nearby property owners. He asked the Commission to adopt the proposed conditions in the staff report if they granted the special use permit. Mr. Billingsley stated that he was trying to mitigate the effects of the jail expansion on neighboring properties. Mr. Billingsley went over the conditions listed in the staff report and asked the Commission to keep in mind that section 2.10 of the staff report contains permissible conditions that the Commission can place on the special use permit. The Commission can place conditions that will minimize the adverse impact on other development. They can control the sequence and time of development. They can control the duration of the development. They can assure that the development is maintained properly. They can designate the exact location and nature of the development. They can require the provisions for onsite of offsite public facilities or services and can also require more restrictive standards than generally required in city code. Mr. Billingsley further explained that the Order of Decision spells out all the proposed conditions and reviewed the required conditions; landscape buffers are required, all exterior lighting fixtures must be downward facing so they are not shining into the homes next door, prisoner transport locations and trash receptacles shall be screened from residential properties, no barbed wire and concertina fencing can be seen from the residential properties, jail employees are prohibited from parking vehicles on the residential streets, and that the County must pave, stripe and landscape the parking lot at 1201 Chicago Street. Mr. Billingsley informed the Commission that they can approve the special use permit with these conditions. He also stated the Commission can add more conditions, can modify conditions, or delete any of the conditions. He stated they also have the ability to deny the special use permit. Mr. Billingsley reminded the Commissioners that they are here to determine whether or not this jail expansion is suitable for the neighborhood. He also introduced City Attorney Mark Hilty and stated that Mr. Hilty would be available to answer any legal questions. Russell Moorhead, applicant’s representative, LCA Architects, 1221 Shoreline Lane, Boise gave supporting testimony and stated that as noted by staff, this project does consist of a two story approximately 42,700 square foot addition with a design capacity of about 281 beds. The county will be taking out of service 34 beds from the old 1942 annex in the jail as well as a 35 bed unit that was part of the 1991 addition which is the Dale Hale facility. It will net about 212 beds at ultimate design capacity and that this neighborhood has been the site of the county jail since 1915 and was part of the original county court house so the expansion to the jail they do not see as a issue with compatibility to the neighborhood. Mr. Moorhead reviewed the site plan explaining that they are leaving the elections building, the Dale Hale building and that the new detention center takes up all the way from north 12th PZ Minutes August 9, 2016 Page 3 Avenue to east Chicago Street. There will be a female work release entrance off east Chicago Street and the other main entrance to the jail, which is the current entrance to the jail, is off of north 12th Avenue which is going to remain the same entrance as it is today. Mr. Moorhead stated that the city has required them to comply with the landscape plan to city standards and further stated that this is a two story substantial building of masonry that is on the building that you can see from 12th Avenue, Chicago Street and as well as the west elevation which is pretty much covered up with the elections building. Mr. Moorhead stated that he feels it is an enhancement to the neighborhood and certainly not a detriment in the design of the facility. Mr. Moorhead shared a power point showing the elevations of the facility. Mr. Moorhead further stated that there are no exceptions to any of the recommended conditions of approval at this time. Commissioner Vance stated that there is a lot of controversy tonight and wondered if the applicant had meetings to address the concerns with the citizens other than just the neighborhood meeting. Mr. Moorhead responded that he has not had any meetings other than the community meeting with the citizens and stated that the elected officials with the county would have to answer that question. Vicky Holems, 416 N. 12th Avenue, Caldwell signed in opposition of the application and testified that they are planning to do away with parking lot and the plan to move it to a residential area where children play, where the children need sleep at night to go to school in the morning and thinks the plan to get rid of busy parking lot and move it next to the houses will not work. Donald Holems, 416 N. 12th Avenue, Caldwell signed in opposition of the application but did not wish to speak. Robert Whitney, 11568 Paul Lane, Caldwell signed in opposition of the application and thanked the commission for their service this evening and that he comes before the commission as a tax payer, not a citizen of Caldwell City but he is a citizen of Canyon County and as a tax payer. Like the people of Caldwell and the people of Nampa they have a vested interest in this building or what it proposes to the people. The jail expansion project he feels is very short sided as it stands this process that they are taking tonight is how we as the people are going to keep the checks and balances in place. Issues like this one are put before the commission. The expansion as proposed with the latest projections will be north of 14 million dollars, while two people have determined that this is the best that we can do and he says no we can do better. Yes the canyon county board of commissioners can and has the legal right to spend this money but is it a moral and just right. Mr. Whitney stated that he thinks the tax payers should have a say in this. The building itself was said that it is sustainable for the neighborhood and he would ask the larger question is it sustainable for canyon county not just the neighborhood itself. The main question he always asks is how it benefits the public, as described the jail expansion would be dependent on the existing Dale Hale Detention Facility. In that there are some logistics that play into supporting that jail expansion, the largest being the kitchen. The facility that they currently have was built in the 1970’s and at best is marginal in its structure and in its design and in its mechanical structure. They have seen on the news and has been well documented that there has been many PZ Minutes August 9, 2016 Page 4 problems, and now the sewer problem that has been shown on the news. Mr. Whitney continued and asked that tonight that the commission be the cog in the wheel of the system for checks and balances and do not allow for this permit to go through. Nicholas Whitney, 16698 N. Investor Loop #103, Nampa, ID signed in opposition of the application but did not wish to speak. Cassandra Whitney, 16698 N. Investor Loop # 103, Nampa, ID signed in opposition of the application and stated that she comes before the commission as an employee of canyon county. She stated that the applicant has pointed out the elections building and she works in the elections office and their secure back door is in the alley and they have to lock everything and come out that door in the morning and at night, which is their secure exit and entrance. So they lose their parking space and now have to exit into this tiny little alley that hopefully will be lit and walk up the block if they park in that other parking lot because it was stated that they cannot park on the street by the residents. They would have to cross two streets in the in the dark. Commissioner Vance asked Ms. Whitney if her major concern is the parking and security and if there was something that could be improved upon to make it better for her. Ms. Whitney responded that she is opposed to the whole jail expansion for lots of reasons but those would be her work reasons. Chairperson Doty-Pomoransky asked Ms. Whitney if she would like to state her other reasons for opposition. Ms. Whitney responded stated that her husband was a jail deputy and has seen how the jail has operated and as stated it is not in great condition and just got off an ACLU lawsuit which could happen at any time and if have this nice, pretty expansion that could be all part of that. She feels it is short sided and they need a long term plan and does not feel this is a long term plan. Pam White, 3710 E Manowar, Nampa signed in opposition of the application and stated that she is against the expansion of the current Canyon County jail facility and she is here tonight to ask them to deny this special use permit. Ms. White stated that she understands that staff gave several reasoning’s that they need to use to make their decision. With regard to parking, it is inadequate. They have a parking lot right now that is nothing but potholes and gravel and it’s against the railroad, nothing is stripped, it’s just a free for-all and then adding this is going to take away even more. She is confused if the parking is for staff or will it be visitors or both and another question is that she does not believe that there is any site security out in that area and just listening to an employee speak about having to come in the dark and leave in the dark and that sort of thing and crossing a very busy street, which Chicago Street is, as it connects from 10th down to 21st out to the freeway. She said if the County adds on to the existing facility and the tent across the street, which is not secure, does not go away it would be a huge red flag because they are going to spend 16 million dollars on the expansion and still have a facility that is not adequate. As far as safety with two recent escapes, that is a concern for her for the safety for the employees as well as those in the neighborhood and she is not saying that the sheriff’s department is week or lax in their job, just saying it’s not a good situation and this addition does not take care of that. She believes that this project is unsustainable on a number of PZ Minutes August 9, 2016 Page 5 levels, economically and socially because of the interference in the intrusion of the neighborhood. Economically not sure what this will do, Chicago connects with 10th and that is a great business corridor and a connection corridor for businesses as well. She believes the jail expansion will become land lock the jail from any future expansions and it eliminates parking. She worries sometimes when she drives over there to park, with cars on both sides of the streets, if there was an emergency and or a fire emergency and the truck came in and then when an ambulance was needed and that is kind of a scary thing. She asked if there was a traffic study. She wonders about the current infrastructure, they have recently heard about the problems where the sewer lines are compromised and the current facility is 42 years old and that means the infrastructure is pretty old and with compromise and the issues that are already existing she worries about that. She believes the current facility is confusing to the general public; nobody is sure if they are walking into the employee’s entrance or the visitor’s entrance. She wondered how this would impact property values. She will be sworn in as a Canyon County Commissioner on January 9th and has been very public during her campaign about not supporting this addition to the current facility. When she becomes seated on the County Commission she will vote against furthering this project. She thinks if the project is delayed it now could spare the City of Caldwell a large hole in the ground or streets that are broken up or a partly constructed building so she is asking the Commission to deny this special use permit. Commissioner Nelson confirmed which street Ms. White spoke about for parking. Commissioner Vance reviewed the concerns of Ms. White being traffic, having a traffic study done, safety issues going across the streets, sewer and wondered if some of these things were addressed, would that change her feelings at all. Ms. White responded no. Tom Dale, 723 W. Bitteroot, Nampa signed in opposition of the application and thanked the Commission for their services and stated that he is a County Commissioner for District 2 in Canyon County. Mr. Dale stated that he wanted to give three primary reasons why he has been opposed to this project for the last several years, ever since he heard about this plan being proposed and then restate his opposition to it. First there has been no strategic plan developed for the jail needs of Canyon County for the future. It has been alluded to at a company called Carter Goble Lee did a strategic needs analysis for the jail and he has it in his desk drawer. There is no strategic needs analysis for a jail, it was proposed several years ago when they did an overall campus design for Canyon County, just to focus on what can they do best with the campus. It was proposed that they do an in-depth strategic analysis for the needs of the future of canyon county jail but the price tag was high and the commissioners did not fund that jail plan; so there is no jail plan within the Carter Goble Lee plan. Without a strategic plan there has not been a needs assessment for how long this current proposal will last the needs for Canyon County. There has not been any in-depth analysis done on the impact on the neighborhoods. He does not think you can mitigate the impacts of a jail across the street or and expansion of the jail, there is no strategic plan for growth. He asked what happens when this jail runs out of space and wonders where they are going to go. Will the City of Caldwell benefit from having more residential lots purchased and bought up to expand the jail in the heart of Caldwell. Secondly, this proposal does not get us shut down the old Dale Hale facility; he has stated for several years that any plan for jail expansion or jail enlargement that does not include a plan PZ Minutes August 9, 2016 Page 6 to get them out of the old Dale Hale facility as a place to house inmates is short sided. That facility was poorly designed to begin with, it’s structurally sound from everything that he can believe in and the deputies and our sheriff’s department have done an incredible job to get us out from under the consent decree that was put on us by the ACLU and their decision, but that’s just inefficient the way it is operated today. It requires much more man power than a modern, efficiently designed facility would require and it also does not get us out of the tent. There have been three escapes in the last year out of the tent facility, but that facility will still be required to house inmates 24 hours a day. It was originally designed to be a work release center where people will go and stay the evening and then go out and work. It is being used as 24 hour facility and will continue to be used that way into the future if this proposal is allowed to go through. Mr. Dale stated that he did not think that was a good plan for the City of Caldwell. Mr. Dale continued and said that because of the classification of prisoners you’ve heard and that because of the loss of beds in the old facility and in the old, old facility, they are not gaining 280 beds in this constructer, maybe 212 beds. But when you consider the classification of inmates that are a large number of cells within this facility design that are designed for two inmates, well because of classification of prisoners those cells will not be able to be utilized for two prisoners but just one, so that will cut down the bed space that is functional to about 160 – 170 beds. Finally the most important reason why he will be opposed and will oppose it into the future and will vote to halt the construction of the jail expansion come January and that is because it is financially risky. The proposal is to take fund balance and build this without impacting property tax, well if you take the fund balance down to the level that will be required to build this facility is a level that is not recommended by our County Clerk, or the County Controller. It’s not a fund balance level that is acceptable on the City level and it would have to be increased over the years and that would require property tax to build that fund balance back up to where it should be. It is not sustainable financially operationally; it will require a minimum of a 3 million investment increase in property taxes to hire the deputies to operate this facility. That is about an 8% property tax that could start this year and further stated that he will vote against continuing for those reasons as well, the financial part of it to him is the biggest thing. He stated that he is responsible for using the tax dollars reasonably and planning for the future, so to sum up, there is no future plan, there is no plan to get them out of the old jail to mitigate risk and liability and there is no financial plan that makes sense for this facility so he will be voting in January to halt the process where ever it is at. Commissioner Vance asked if in January this project was built to a certain degree, millions of dollars invested in to it, you would stop it. Wouldn’t that be a waste of tax payer dollars as well? Mr. Dale responded the waste of tax payer dollars would occur prior to that knowing it was going to be stopped in January. The waste of tax payer dollars would continue for years and years, if this facility is allowed to be constructed. He believes that they need to back up, save some money so that in the future we can go to the people with a reasonable request for a bond and saying that they have half the money saved up but it would take 3 or 4 years to do that and then the sheriff has assured us, over and over again that he can run a facility of approximately 600 beds for just about the same amount of people that he has today on staff. He might have to add a few but not 40 – 45 like that he will have to have for this facility, which is the high tax dollar that will have to go on for years and years into the future. Yes it would be a waste of tax dollars to stop the facility; it’s a waste of tax dollars to allow it to continue to that point where it would have to be stopped. PZ Minutes August 9, 2016 Page 7 Chris Yamamoto, 818 Suncrest Lane, Caldwell signed in opposition of the application and stated that he is the elected Canyon County Clerk. Mr. Yamamoto stated that the commission has heard most of what he thinks they need to hear. His opinion is the jail expansion is a bad plan and it is a financial disaster for Canyon County. He believes the P&Z Commission’s biggest concern should be the viability of what is in downtown Caldwell. He reminded the Commissioners that they have heard from a Commissioner-elect and a sitting Commissioner that on January 10th they are going to shut this project down in whatever stage it is in. Mr. Yamamoto stated that he thinks that the City of Caldwell does not want a hole in the ground so he suggested using Section 2.10 C and D (reference to the staff report), which would give the P&Z Commission the authority to control the timing of this project. Since the make-up of the Canyon County Commissioners will change on January 9th it would make sense to wait until that time before issuing any permits on this project. He is afraid of seeing a hole in the ground in downtown Caldwell if this project is granted a building permit. Chairperson Doty-Pomoransky asked the audience if there was anyone else that wanted to speak that did not sign up. Steve White stated that he signed up but not to speak and now would like to speak. Steve White, 3710 E. Manowar, Nampa signed in opposition of the application and stated that he has listened to the testimonies but there is one thing that he thinks needs to be brought to their attention and that is they need to think 10, 15 maybe 20 years ahead and that facility will not be able to be used properly in 10 or 15 years which means they would have to go to a new location. Mr. White stated that his question would be if all of this was built and in 10 – 15 years the jail moves, what will this facility be used for? Chairperson Doty-Pomoransky called Mr. Moorhead for rebuttal testimony. Mr. Moorhead responded to the concerns about the actual site and stated that one of the conditions that staff has asked for, if approved, is to make sure that cross walks are lit. So it is his understanding that if condition 8.7 is requested then Chicago will have to be lit by this project. Mr. Moorhead read condition 8.7, night lighting must be provided for all pedestrian walkways and where stairs, curbs, ramps and crosswalks occur so the existing entrance out of the elections building will also have to be lit, it is part of their plan right now and that is about the only item that he can rebut. Mr. Moorhead stated that he wanted to note that the parking study that was completed by a third party, T-O Engineers, that their study concluded that there was adequate parking without utilizing any of the existing on street parking, so they have met the City of Caldwell standards without utilizing those right now. There is additional parking on street that was not part of that study. Chairperson Doty-Pomoransky asked if the employee parking for the elections building is being eliminated. Mr. Moorhead responded that parking lot will be relocated across the street and is the replacement for that parking lot, almost for a one to one basis, whether this other parking available in the county for elections to park he does not know. Commissioner Vance said that some of the questions brought up, one was the sewer problem. Has that been addressed? PZ Minutes August 9, 2016 Page 8 Mr. Moorhead responded that he is not aware of what the sewer problem they are talking about. Chairperson Doty-Pomoransky stated maybe we can rephrase it a different way. In the expansion, are we bringing the old building up to current standard and is there anything being done to replace plumbing, wiring or anything. Mr. Moorhead responded not in the existing building other than the areas that are being remodeled which is one of the dormitory areas which is currently being used for housing protective custody, is being remodeled into a medical component. The sewer line coming out of this addition goes directly into the existing sewer line; it doesn’t go through the existing facility to enter the main sewer. Chairperson Doty-Pomoransky asked about the kitchen. Mr. Moorhead responded that it is his understanding that the kitchen has the capacity to handle this addition so they are not expanding the kitchen, they are expanding and replacing the existing laundry which is in the basement of the 1942 annex, so that will get relocated to this and gets expanded and that is part of this addition. MOTION TO CLOSE TESTIMONY: Commissioner Nelson SECOND: Commissioner Page. Passed: Unanimous voice vote. The commission held a discussion to determine if they had enough testimony and evidence to make a decision. Commissioner Vance asked Mark Hilty, the City Attorney about if the commission can control the sequence and the time of the development and the duration of the development. Can they postpone the start to a later date? Mr. Hilty clarified the question and that they were right in city code and statutorily, one of the conditions that can be attached and just for reference reading form 10-3-4 subsection 5b conditions can be imposed controlling the sequence and timing of development, subsection c, controlling the duration of the development and he agrees those allow them to impose conditions if they are seen as necessary to mitigate an adverse impact to development they can use those to establish conditions relative to the timing and sequence of development and the duration of development, he feels that is true. Chairperson Doty-Pomoransky asked Mr. Hilty if the commission approved the special use tonight and as they heard tonight that it could be shut down, is there any condition that would stop that or would it automatically be shut down and as told would be a waste of tax dollars and an unfinished project. Mr. Hilty responded that there has been a lot of testimony about the use of public funds and that’s one component of this and he would redirect the Planning and Zoning Commission to the land use component of this. Mr. Billingsley talked about it in terms of suitability in his staff report. He advised the Commission to determine if this request will cause damages, hazards, nuisances or other detriments to persons or properties in the vicinity. He explained that it is a little bit different than looking at it from a tax payer stand point; you would want to look at it from a land use stand point. PZ Minutes August 9, 2016 Page 9 Mr. Hilty also added that as far a condition that would requires it to continue it till completion, can you put a condition that says that the project cannot be abandoned he does not know, you can try a condition like that and if they abandon it there would be a violation of the special use permit conditions and typically you lose the special permit which would be the opposite effect of what they are trying to achieve. Mr. Hilty stated that he does not know how you can craft that kind of a condition. Commissioner Page stated that he has heard plenty of evidence contrary to allowing this project, one of the main concerns that he has is related to the property, parking, to the way the old building will mesh with the new building and just does not see it as a feasible option at this point and so when speaking to the land use it does not seem like it’s a good choice for the neighborhood. As for postponing this to the future, he does not see this ever as a feasible plan for this property or for this neighborhood. His concern is that there is no evidence to state that it would be feasible for this particularly piece of property. Commissioner Nelson concurred. Commissioner Vance stated that basically it will not pass if Commissioner Page and Commissioner Nelson agree. Chairperson Doty-Pomoransky stated that they were ready to make a motion. Mr. Hilty explained to the Chair that as a point of order, the Commission needs to complete the comprehensive plan analysis and would recommend that part of the motion be whether or not on the whole they think that the proposal complies or does not comply with the comprehensive plan. Comprehensive Plan Analysis for Case Number SUP-16-09 - MOTION: Commissioner Vance SECOND: Commissioner Page Passed: Unanimous roll call votes that the request is found inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan components, emphasis on 5.2. Findings of Fact for Case Number SUP-16-09 - MOTION: Commissioner Vance SECOND: Commissioner Page Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Conclusions of Law for Case Number SUP-16-09 – MOTION: Commissioner Page SECOND: Commissioner Nelson Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. ORDER OF DECISION FOR SUP-16-09 (Special Use Permit): MOTION: Chairperson Doty-Pomoransky SECOND: Commissioner Page that Case Number SUP-16-09 BE DENIED with a SPLIT voice vote. B. Case Number OA-16-04 a request by the City of Caldwell Planning and Zoning Department to amend portions of Chapter 10, the zoning ordinance, of City Code. Testimony: Jarom Wagoner, 621 Cleveland Blvd., Caldwell, ID 83605, Senior Planner, presented the staff report and reviewed the annual zoning ordinance update. PZ Minutes August 9, 2016 Page 10 Mr. Wagoner explained that every year staff updates portions and parts of the Zoning Ordinance that either they have had issues within the past year or just do not make sense anymore. Mr. Wagoner further explained that the Zoning Ordinance is a living, breathing document and things change and needs to make sure it is up to date. Mr. Wagoner reviewed each change to the code with the commission: 10-02-01, 10-02-03, 10-02-05, 10-02-07, 10-02-13, 10-03-11, 10-07-07, 10-08-02, 10-11-07, 10-12-03, and 10-13-03. MOTION TO CLOSE TESTIMONY: Commissioner Nelson. SECOND: Commissioner Vance. Passed: Unanimous voice vote. Comprehensive Plan Analysis for Case Number OA-16-04 - MOTION: Commissioner Nelson SECOND: Commissioner Page Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. RECOMMENDATION: MOTION: Commissioner Vance that Case Number OA-16-04 BE APPROVED with modifications to 10-3-11: Definitions: VEHICLES with a change in verbiage to remove private property and include public property and or the right-of-way. SECOND: Commissioner Nelson. APPROVED by unanimous voice vote. V. Planning Issues – A. The next regularly scheduled Planning and Zoning Commission hearing is October 11, 2016. VI. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at approximately p.m. MINUTES APPROVED AND SIGNED BY CHAIRPERSON ED DOTY-POMORANSKY ON THE DATE NOTED BELOW: ____________________________________ _____________________ Ed Doty-Pomoransky, Chair Date ATTEST: ____________________________________________ Jarom Wagoner, Senior Planner FOR DETAILED MINUTES, PLEASE REQUEST A COPY OF THE RECORDING.