Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Caldwell council denies developer's request to cut planned commercial at Sotera subdivision, 5-1
Summary
The Caldwell City Council on June 15 voted 5-1 to deny a developer's request to rezone about 11.36 acres of the Sotera site from community commercial (C2) to neighborhood residential (R2), preserving the original development-agreement expectation for more commercial frontage after neighbors and staff raised concerns about the comprehensive plan and traffic.
On June 15, the Caldwell City Council voted 5-1 to deny a development agreement modification, rezone and preliminary plat for Sotera Subdivision Phases 2 and 3 that would have reduced the site's commercial acreage and added roughly 51 single'family lots.
The motion to deny, made and seconded during deliberations after a public hearing, followed testimony from neighbors who said the proposal conflicted with the city's comprehensive-plan vision for a community center and with an earlier development agreement. Councilor Allgood moved to deny; the motion carried 5 to 1.
Why it mattered: The 15.77'acre phase had been annexed as community commercial in 2022 with an expectation of substantial commercial frontage. The developer, represented by JD Lyle of Ardura, argued market conditions make a 15'acre mid'block commercial pad impractical and offered 3.17 acres of smaller commercial pads fronting Ustick along with 51 single'family lots and expanded pathways.
"What we have came up with is a sensible common'sense buffer of smaller lots that transition from the larger lots into the commercial," the developer's representative said, asking the council to approve a plan he characterized as "immediately actionable."
Neighbors and several councilors disagreed. Laura Shannon, who spoke in opposition, urged denial and cited the development agreement: "Please deny Sotera phase 2 because it does not align with the comprehensive plan's vision for this property and it is bound to a development agreement and its current C2 status is appropriate in a commercial corridor," she told the council.
Staff and code context: City planning staff noted the proposal would yield a residential density of about 4.49 dwelling units per acre in the area proposed for R2, below the code and comprehensive'plan guidance of 8'15 units per acre for that place type; the developer requested the lower density through a development agreement modification. Staff also recommended adding pedestrian crossings and other connectivity measures if the council were to approve changes.
Outcome and next steps: With the denial, the development will remain subject to the existing development agreement and the council's earlier direction; the applicant may choose to return with a revised proposal or pursue other avenues. The council did not set an alternative approval condition.
