City denies county’s conditional use request

Published by admin on Wed, 10/02/2024 - 7:00pm

Washington County Commissioners were denied a conditional use permit by the City of Weiser on the above-pictured property after a public hearing on Sept. 23. Sitting in the middle of a residential block on East Main Street, the property had once served as a chiropractic office, but had reverted to residential since. The county bought the house with the intent of making it the permanent Washington County Prosecutor’s office. Photo by Nancy Grindstaff
By: 
Signal American staff
 Washington County’s commissioners will be going back to the drawing board in search of a space to house a county prosecutor’s office after the Weiser City Council unanimously denied a conditional use permit request on a recently purchased East Main Street property. 
 The Sept. 23 decision came on the heels of the Weiser City Planning and Zoning Commission’s unanimous recommendation to deny the county’s request after a public hearing in mid-August. The county paid the appraised value of $230,000 for the house at 343 East Main just shortly before the Aug. 19 city planning and zoning hearing.
 Due to a 2021 decision passed by commissioners eliminating meetings on the fifth Monday of any month in which they fall, the board will likely take up discussion on what to do next during the regularly scheduled meeting on Monday, Oct. 7.
 At the city council hearing Commission Chairman Lyndon Haines told council members the county had purchased property this summer for a prosecutor’s office, and were seeking a conditional use permit for it. The building sits near the center of a residential block. 
 “It was at one point a chiropractor’s office, I think, and a residence again in between,” Haines said. “We purchased that because the courthouse is full. We are remodeling the Annex at this time for the sheriff’s office, and trying to get the assessor and the DMV all in one place, but even when that’s done, we’re still busting at the seams.”
 Councilor Larry Hogg questioned the county’s choice of the East Main Street location for the prosecutor’s office.
 “It’s close enough to where it’s within walking distance,” Haines said. “In the past, we’ve never…we’re actually supposed to provide a place for the prosecutor, but historically, they’ve always had their own office, so we’ve never had to.
 “So now, when the situation changed, the (primary) election went the way it did, we have to provide a space for them, and there is no space in the courthouse to do this,” he continued. “We looked at a couple of other properties, as well, and this is the one that seemed to be the closest. The secretaries would like to be within walking distance of the courthouse, so they can bring stuff over, and the sheriff’s office, and, this is just a block and a-half away. That was the main appeal of it.”
 Haines said employee parking would have been off the alley behind the building, mentioning some cleanup and tree trimming needed in the area that is covered in a gravel/dirt mix.
 “We have a sewer line to fix back there first, and it will probably end up in parking,” he said. “The sewer line goes clear to the alley, so we are going to have to have that dug up in a place and fixed.”
 Further describing the building itself, Haines said the 1,900 square feet includes a basement that might be useful for storage, but not for office space. He said a window above might be a void space. The building’s listing indicated 961 square feet of usable space.
 “There’s stairs that go up there that you can’t use,” he said. “I don’t know if there is a space above that you can actually utilize or if it’s a window for light. I don’t know, nobody dared to go up the stairs.”
 The P&Z commission’s recommendation for denial was based on a lawyer’s office not being mentioned in the list of permitted uses in the city’s ordinance.
 “It’s not specifically mentioned,” said councilman Herb Haun. “I believe the city’s attorney (Reece Hrizuk) believes we could pass this because it’s a like-business to the ones that are mentioned, so I think he…am I right, Natasha?”
 City office manager Natasha McDaniel said the ordinance describes a list of permitted uses for professional services from a residence.
 “That’s basically stating anything listed can be there, as long as the person (service provider) is residing there, so that would say it would not qualify,” McDaniel said. “But, then, under conditional uses it states every single one of those as permitted, except for a lawyer. Or, do you jump down to (where it says) that in other uses deemed similar by the city to the uses above may be considered under conditional use applications.”
 “So, are you saying the city attorney addressed this particular issue and said it was allowable under a conditional use permit?” Councilor Marg Chipman asked.
 Haun said Hrizuk had told the P&Z if we (the city) want to pass it, “we would be okay in doing so.”
 Opening the floor to public comment, only one neighboring property owner submitted a comment. Joe Vaughn, who bought his home on the corner of East Main and 4th in 2021, repeated the same argument he had entered during the August P&Z hearing, including the fact that the county’s property purchase was a residence then.
 Before taking a vote, each councilor made it clear they don’t question the county’s intentions.
 “Although there is nothing wrong with the county and their intentions, I just don’t think that this is a good precedent for us to set, and I think it’s zoned residential for a reason,” Hogg said. “When you buy a piece of property in the city, you make a deal with the city that you will abide by the rules of the zoning and the city says we’ll make everybody else do the same.”
 “I feel like people who are around (neighbors) have property rights,” councilwoman Katie von Brethorst added. “No doubt, the county would try to make it as historically pleasing as possible, but I don’t want to go against our own planning and zoning.”
 “I’m also a strong believer in supporting our planning and zoning commission, and they thoroughly researched this and their finding was to deny it, so until proven otherwise, I think we need to back them up,” Chipman said.
 Councilmen Sterling Blackwell and Mike Hopkins both said they agreed.
 Haun concluded his thoughts with, “Down the road I would like to see if there was a reason it (the ordinance) was written this way, that obviously a legal office was not mentioned or if it was an oversight, but at this time, that’s not really the question. The question is whether we grant this conditional use and I’m in favor of not giving them the permit.”
 Hogg moved to deny the request, and Chipman submitted a second on the motion, with the full council voting for denial.
County’s permit fees waived
 At the same meeting, the city approved a waiver of the county’s building permit fee of $7,150 on the expansion and remodel of the Annex building located at the corner of East Court and 3rd streets. 
 

 

Category:

Signal American

18 E. Idaho St.
Weiser, ID 83672
PH: (208) 549-1717
FAX: (208) 549-1718
 

Upcoming Events

more

Connect with Us