Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout006 02 94LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING June 2, 1994 Minutes of the regular meeting of the Land Use and Development Commission held in the city municipal building. Present: Chairman Kent Kearns, Commission Members: Myrna Cain, Mary Harker, Gayle Anderson, Richard Pearson; Attorney Tom Holmes, Project Engineer Gerd Dixon, Public Works Director Steve Smart and Secretary Myrna Crapo. Chairman Kent Kearns called the meeting to order at 8:00 PM. Chairman Kearns asked for approval of the minutes of the May 5, 1994 meeting. Myrna Cain moved to approved the minutes with Mary Harker seconding. All voted in favor. Chairman Kearns asked if any of the commission members had a conflict of interest. There were none. PUBLIC HEARING: A PROPOSAL BY RANAE WORTHEN, 730 E. CHUBBUCK ROAD, CHUBBUCK, IDAHO FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN RV STORAGE located north of 242 and 244 E. Chubbuck. Property is presently zoned Industrial (I). Gerd told the commission that according to Cary Campbell, Fire Chief they would need a fire hydrant. The city would require extension of water and sewer lines. Ranae Worthen, 730 E. Chubbuck, they had purchased 1.7 acres hoping to put a R.V. Park on it. There would be an apartment for security reasons and it would just be a studio apartment that would have a couple with no children. They were planning on putting in a 6' chain link screening fence with slats. The commission discussed whether an apartment would be allowed in a Industrial zone as the ordinance read that single family dwellings are not allowed in Industrial Zones. There being a need to have a security apartment and the way in which it might be allowed. Attorney Tom Holmes informed the commission it could be interpreted as being more integrated with the storage for security purposes and not considered as a residence. It would need to have some conditions put on it. The commission needs to be sure that further on down the road that it wouldn't be used as a duplex. Land Use and Development Commission Page 2 June 2, 1994 Mr. Holmes suggested the commissions consideration: following conditions for the 1. Live in guards on sites allowable as long as the guards are staying there as a condition of their employment. 2. Not a permanent residence and not to be construed as allowing a residential use in an industrial area. The commission discussed the apartment being allowed and the conditions needed. A couple without children, two adults. Tim Shurtliff, 426 W. Lewis suggested that the commission could consider a new ordinance to allow for security in a storage complex and tag it with the apartment has to be used for that reason. It could also be limited by the amount of area you would need to have and a definition of what that house could be like. Attorney Holmes advised it to be part of the main building. Steve Smart, Public Works Director suggested that the commission leave the requirements as they are and address this problem with a conditional use as part of its use and part of the property. Chairman Kearns opened the meeting for public testimony: James Humble, 230 E. Chubbuck told the commission that he would like to have the ground surveyed and marked where the line would be so he could get his fence straightened out. Noise wise he would like to limit the time it could be used. He needs to be able to clean his ditch and have access to the ditch to be able to do that. Steve Smart informed Mr. Humble that he needed to check with Kimberly Nursery to see if they did a survey when the property was sold. He could then use that survey to measure from. Tim Shurtliff told the commission that he would be surveying the right of way and marking those parts of it, if the project goes through. Chairman Kearns turned the meeting back to the commission. The commission members discussed: 1. The hours of operation 2. The definition of occupancy of security structure and limiting it to two adults one being an employee of the storage facility. The purpose being for security. 3. Approving of phase I Land Use and Development Commission Page 3 June 2, 1994 4. Protection in the conditional use permit process. 5. The need for a 8' or 6' screening fence. 6. The live in facility is limited to being used as an intergial part of the business operated in the area and not approved to be a separate living unit. Richard Pearson moved that we approve the proposal by RaNae Worthen, 730 E. Chubbuck Road for a conditional Use Permit for an R-V storage located north of 242 and 244 East Chubbuck Road. 1. This is phase 1 that we are defining tonight. Further development beyond what we speak of tonight needs to come back and be approved and reviewed by the Land Commission in stages if that is necessary. 2. Security structure that is included in the property. The residential section will be used only for security and is limited to two adults one of which must be an employee and it must be used for security purposes as part of the business and not be used as a dwelling or residential area. 3.That a 6' fence will be placed around the property, chain link slated. 4. That the property is a vehicle storage site repair facility, etc. only for that purpose and not for salvage or anything like that. Myrna Cain seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Myrna Cain, yes; Richard Pearson, yes, Kent Kearns, yes; Mary Harker, yes; Gayle Anderson, yes. A PROPOSAL BY THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK AMENDING SECTION 17.16.070 TO PROVIDE FOR A THREE YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD ON IMPROVEMENTS DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC. Gerd Dixon told the commission that he had talked to Brad Frasure and he concurred that three years was a good period of warranty. Anything beyond that would tend to build in additional costs in your estimate and inflate the development costs. Gayle Anderson expressed concern about the length of time being three years. It would inflate the costs. What would happen if the business would go out of business before the three years were up. The commission discussed the bonding process and how it helps to protect the city. Land Use and Development Commission Page 4 June 2, 1994 Chairman Kearns opened the meeting to public testimony. There being none the testimony was closed and the meeting was opened to the commission for discussion. Myrna Cain made a motion that we recommend to the city council that they approve the proposal by the city of Chubbuck amending section 17.16.070 to provide for three year warranty period on improvements dedicated to the public. Mary Harker seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Myrna Cain, yes; Richard Pearson, yes; Kent Kearns, yes; Mary Harker, yes; Gayle Anderson, no. GENERAL BUSINESS: 1. DISCUSSION ON A PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO DECREASE THE MINIMUM AREA REQUIRED FOR A PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT. The commission reviewed the discussion on the ordinance at the previous study session. Town houses vs apartments, it was felt that town houses are more stable. The R-1 area of the city needed to be protected. The Residential Development for an R-1 would be one acre; R-2, R-3 and R-4 would be no minimum area. Three acres for residential use with subordinate commercial or industrial uses. Five acres for commercial use and five acres for industrial use. Richard Pearson moved to put out for public notice the proposed ordinance with the changes listed above. Gayle Anderson seconded the motion with all voting in favor. DISCUSSION ON A PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE BAY WINDOWS MAY EXTEND INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK UP TO TWO FEET. The commission discussed where you measure from for the bay window. The reason for this ordinance being considered was because of some violations in set back requirements. Richard Pearson moved to go to publication with Myrna Cain seconding. Ail voted in favor. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT FOR WHITAKER FARM ASSOCIATION· Myrna Cain made a motion to approve the Finding of Fact for Whitaker Farms Association. Mary Harker seconded, with all voting in favor. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT FOR CALVARY CHAPEL. Mary Harker moved that we approve the finding of fact for Calvery Baptist Land Use and Development Commission Page 5 June 2, 1994 Finding of Fact (Cont.d) Church· Myrna Cain seconded with all voting in favor. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT OF HAROLD L. SCALF. Chairman Kearns noted an error in the first paragraph where it says A-1 it needs to be R-1. Gayle Anderson moved to approve the finding of fact for Harold L. Scalf. Mary Harker seconded the motion with all voting in favor. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT FOR MICHAEL BUCHANAN AND SELVY TRUJILLO. Myrna Cain made a motion that we approve the finding of fact for Mike Buchanan and Selvy Trujillo with Gayle Anderson seconding; all voted in favor. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT FOR DUSTIN AND HOLLY WHITED· Myrna Cain made a motion to approve the finding of fact for Dustin and Holly Whited with Mary Harker seconding; all voted in favor. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT FOR DONALD AND BRENDA CURTISS. Mary Harker moved to accept the finding of fact for Brenda and Donald Curtiss with Gayle Anderson seconding; all voted in favor. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 pm with a motion from Richard Pearson and a second from Mary Harker. '~kent'~mearns, Chairman yrn~ C~apo, Secret~ry CITY OF CHUBBUCK LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION This matter having come before the Commission for public hearing pursuant to public notice as required by law, on June 2, 1994, upon the application of Ranae Worthen (hereinafter referred to as "applicant") for a conditional use permit to place an RV storage on the real property located at 242 and 244 E. Chubbuck Road, and the Commission having heard testimony from interested parties and being fully advised in the matter, now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Applicant has applied for a conditional use permit as particularly described above. 2. All legal requirements for notice of public hearing have been met. 3. The property in question is zoned (I) Industrial pursuant to the Land Use Ordinance of the City of Chubbuck. 4. The property is designated as (I) Industrial in the duly adopted Comprehensive Plan of the City of Chubbuck. 5. Relevant criteria and standards for consideration of this application are set forth in Idaho Code section 67-6512 and in Chubbuck Code section 18.28.040 (C). 6. The facts relevant to an evaluation of the relevant criteria and standards are as follows: A. Area is zoned industrial and the use, as regulated by the Chubbuck Code, is compatible with the zoning. B. No neighbors have objected or opposed the application. James Humble, 230 E. Chubbuck Road, has asked for help in getting his fence line located as part of the process, but he has not indicated an opposition to the project. Mr. Humble has also expressed the concern about being able to maintain his irrigation ditch and have access to it. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 1 dsc chbbck06.141 BASED UPON THE FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT, the Land Use and Development Commission hereby enters the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The use for which the permit is sought will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. 2. The permit sought will not produce an adverse impact on the economic values of adjacent properties. 3. The permit sought will not produce a negative impact on transportation facilities, public utilities, schools, public parks, or the natural environment any greater than had the strict terms of the Land Use Ordinance been complied with. 4. The noise and traffic conditions generated by the use for which the permit is sought, when analyzed in conjunction with the noise and traffic conditions now existing does not indicate that the permit should be denied. 5. The use for which the permit is sought shall not work an unreasonable hardship upon surrounding property owners by virtue of its physical natures or by the n impact of changes made in the landscape of the land. 6. The aesthetic qualities of the proposed use will not conflict with aesthetic qualities of the surrounding lands. 7. The adverse impact, if any, of the proposed use on other development within the City has been minimized by Applicant as much as is reasonably possible. 8. Owners of adjacent property have expressed neither approval nor disapproval of the issuance of the requested conditional use permit. 9. The requested conditional use permit, if granted, should be maintained subject to the conditions set forth below. DECISION 1. The Land Use and Development Commission, pursuant to the foregoing, finds that the request of the applicant should be approved. 2. The following conditions, if any, are hereby imposed upon the granting of said conditional use permit and applicant, by taking advantage of said conditional use permit agrees to the imposition of the same: FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 2 dsc chbbck06.141 A. Only phase 1 of the project, as presented to the Land Use Commission, is approved. Further development will be approved and reviewed by the Commission in stages as necessary. B. A security structure is approved as part of the property. The section in which the security officer or individual would reside may be used only for security and is limited to two adults, one of which must be an employee of the owners. The security structure must be used for security purposes as part of the business and may not be used as a dwelling or residential area except to the extent it is an integral part of the security purposes for the business. The permit specifically does not approve a residential section on the property as that is not compatible with the property's zoning and the industrial area and approval is not given for present or future use of that structure or portion of the structure as a separate residence. C. A six-foot fence must be place around the property, chain linked and slated where required by Code Section 18.12.030(N)(1) to screen the vehicles on the premises from public view and from the view from existing and adjoining residential property or residentially zoned areas. ^ D. The property is a vehicle storage site and repair facility and may only be used for that purpose and not for salvage of vehicles. 3. The conditional use permit requested by the Applicant is granted, subject to the foregoing conditions. DATED this � day of j�,, , 1994. LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION By: C rman FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 3 dsc chbbck06.141 CITY OF CHUBBUCK LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION This matter having come before the Commission for public hearing pursuant to public notice as required by law, on June 2, 1994, upon the application of Ranae Worthen (hereinafter referred to as "applicant") for a conditional use permit to place an RV storage on the real property located at 242 and 244 E. Chubbuck Road, and the Commission having heard testimony from interested parties and being fully advised in the matter, now makes the following: above. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Applicant has applied for a conditional use permit as particularly described 2. All legal requirements for notice of public hearing have been met. ^ 3. The property in question is zoned (I) Industrial pursuant to the Land Use Ordinance of the City of Chubbuck. 4. The property is designated as (I) Industrial in the duly adopted Comprehensive Plan of the City of Chubbuck. 5. Relevant criteria and standards for consideration of this application are set forth in Idaho Code section 67-6512 and in Chubbuck Code section 18.28.040 (C). 6. The facts relevant to an evaluation of the relevant criteria and standards are as follows: A. Area is zoned industrial and the use, as regulated by the Chubbuck Code, is compatible with the zoning. B. No neighbors have objected or opposed the application. James Humble, 230 E. Chubbuck Road, has asked for help in getting his fence line located as part of the process, but he has not indicated an opposition to the project. Mr. Humble has also expressed the concern about being able to maintain his irrigation ditch and have access to it. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 1 dsc chbbck06.141 BASED UPON THE FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT, the Land Use and Development Commission hereby enters the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The use for which the permit is sought will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. 2. The permit sought will not produce an adverse impact on the economic values of adjacent properties. 3. The permit sought will not produce a negative impact on transportation facilities, public utilities, schools, public parks, or the natural environment any greater than had the strict terms of the Land Use Ordinance been complied with. 4. The noise and traffic conditions generated by the use for which the permit is sought, when analyzed in conjunction with the noise and traffic conditions now existing does not indicate that the permit should be denied. 5. The use for which the permit is sought shall not work an unreasonable hardship upon surrounding property owners by virtue of its physical natures or by the impact of changes made in the landscape of the land. 6. The aesthetic qualities of the proposed use will conflict with aesthetic qualities of the surrounding lands. 7. The adverse impact, if any, of the proposed use on other development within the City has been minimized by Applicant as much as is reasonably possible. 8. Owners of adjacent property have expressed neither approval nor disapproval of the issuance of the requested conditional use permit. 9. The requested conditional use permit, if granted, should be maintained subject to the conditions set forth below. DECISION 1. The Land Use and Development Commission, pursuant to the foregoing, finds that the request of the applicant should be approved. 2. The following conditions, if any, are hereby imposed upon the granting of said conditional use permit and applicant, by taking advantage of said conditional use permit agrees to the imposition of the same: FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 2 dsc chbbckO6.141 6 A. Only phase 1 of the project, as presented to the Land Use Commission, is approved. Further development will be approved and reviewed by the Commission in stages as necessary. B. A security structure is approved as part of the property. The section in which the security officer or individual would reside may be used only for security and is limited to two adults, one of which must be an employee of the owners. The security structure must be used for security purposes as part of the business and may not be used as a dwelling or residential area except to the extent it is an integral part of the security purposes for the business. The permit specifically does not approve a residential section on the property as that is not compatible with the property's zoning and the industrial area and approval is not given for present or future use of that structure or portion of the structure as a separate residence. C. A six-foot fence must be place around the property, chain linked and slated where required by Code Section 18.12.030(N)(1) to screen the vehicles on the premises from public view and from the view from existing and adjoining residential property or residentially zoned areas. D. The property is a vehicle storage site and repair facility and may only be used for that purpose and not for salvage of vehicles. 3. The conditional use permit requested by the Applicant is granted, subject to the foregoing conditions. DATED this 4� day of } , 1994. LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION By: Zr Chairma-n FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 3 dsc chbbckO6.141