HomeMy WebLinkAbout011.13.18 City of Chubbuck
Land Use and Development Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2018 - 7:00 pm
Minutes of the Land Use and Development Commission regular meeting held at Chubbuck City Hall, 5160
Yellowstone, on November 13, 2018.
Chairperson Jason Mendenhall: Commission Members: Mike Schwartz, Rebecca Beris, Brady Smith, Thais
Ayre, Carrie Holm, and TJ Budge.
Planning and Development Director: Devin Hillam, Public Works Director: Rodney Burch, City Planner: Paul
Andrus. City Attorney: Tom Holmes, Office Administrator: Ranelle Simmons
Chairperson Mendenhall called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
Smith led the commission in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Mendenhall asked if any board members have a conflict with the items tonight. Smith has with General
Business items 2, 3 and 4. Budge has with Public Hearing 1 and General Business 1. Holm spoke to Mr. Vern
Briscoe regarding the time of this meeting for Public Hearing 1 and she wanted it to go on record.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: September 18, 2018 Special Meeting
Mendenhall entertained a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Smith moved the minutes of
September 18, 2018 meeting be approved as emailed; Budge seconded. The full authority approved.
PUBLIC HEARING
1. An application for a Preliminary Planned United Development (PUD) called Sunset Townhomes
which includes the re-designation of approximately 9.4 acres of land for 88 residential units.
Location is 4933 Whitaker Road, Chubbuck, ID 83202, within SE 1/4 of Section 3, Township 6 South,
Range 34, of the Boise Meridian, Bannock County. Current zoning designation is Limited Residential
(R-2) and Industrial (I). Proposal will be evaluated against criteria established in municipal code
18.20.110 and Idaho Code 67-6511. Action Item: Recommendation to City Council
Blake Jolley 1150 Hollipark Drive Idaho Falls 83405 is in attendance representing the applicant Cal Kunkel.
These will be townhomes with a fire wall in the common wall and a single car garage. This project is 9.4
acres with 88 units. This acreage being Limited Residential (R-2) would allow 92 single family homes. Each
unit will have its own water and sewer connections. There is a storm water pond on site. Set-backs on the
east and the west are 15' to give more open space in the middle of the complex.
Mendenhall asked if commissioners had questions for Mr. Jolley. Answers to those questions were:
• It was not drawn up to actually see if 92 single family homes would fit in the acreage, we just used
the calculations.
• Sidewalks are on 1 side of the complex with cross walks.
• No fence will be around the complex unless it is required.
• There is 15' from the railroad tracks with no fence.
• The maintenance will be taken care of by a rental agency.
J:\Planning\LUDC\LAND USE SECRETARY\Minutes\Minutes 2018\011.13.18.docx 1
• Streets are 26' wide which is the minimum width for emergency vehicles.
• There will be a fire lane on 1 side of the roads with striping and signs. Residents will be fined if they
park on the fire lane.
Devin Hillam Chubbuck City staff. Hillam noted that this will be held in single ownership as a PUD. Went
over the criteria for approval that is found in City Code 18.21.110. City Council will be taking into account
subsection 18.28.040C when reviewing a PUD application.
Answers to questions from commissioners:
• Engineering Department at the City recommends that the secondary pressurized irrigation should
have a single stub on Whitaker Road for use in the future.
• School District is very hands off when it comes to development applications.
• Barrier gates will have key access for emergency services and Chief Miller is comfortable with that.
• Access road will be 27' wide and can handle 2 vehicles.
• Whitaker Farms owns both parcels—the townhomes and access road
• Potential design review could be a part of this application even though they don't usually review
residential applications.
Mendenhall had a copy of a letter that was received today in opposition of the project. Legal council
recommended not reading the letter because it does not fall into the 7 days prior to the meeting
guidelines.
Mendenhall opened the public hearing.
Heidi Buck Morrison is an attorney at Racine Olson. She is representing landowners surrounding the
proposed project. They include Rick and Linda Hillman, Dana Hillman Stone, Arley Lish, Kim and Lynn
Erickson, Brandon and LuJean Hoist, Dee and Janae Greene, Verle and Patricia Yensen and Kimberli Watt.
Clients do not oppose development of the property but do oppose development that does not meet zoning
regulations.
Morrison has 4 reasons why the application does not comply with Chubbuck City Code, zoning,
Comprehensive Plan and density restrictions. A copy of her Power Point presentation follows these
minutes.
1. Project does not qualify as a PUD
2. Apartments are not permitted within the R-2 zone
3. Apartments are not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
4. Project does not comply with R-2 density restrictions
Asking that the City should rely on the City Code and deny this application.
Dana Hillman lives at 4967 Whitaker Road. Dana is representing the Hillman family, Rick, Linda and Corey
residing at 5015 Whitaker Road. 4925 Whitaker Road is a rental. Opposed to this type of project being
built. Concerns are livestock and fencing, Fort Hall Irrigation, traffic and zoning.
Verle Yensen and his wife Patricia live at 4940 Whitaker Road. In opposition of the project. Concern is this
type of development, traffic with their headlights and only 1 access.
Jodi DaBell lives at 4895 Whitaker Road. Concerns are only 1 access, 15' instead of 20' set-backs. Agree
with what has already been said.
LuJean Hoist lives at 4941 Whitaker Road and is a new resident to Whitaker Road. Concerns are safety for
children, set-backs at 15', and only 1 access road. Agrees with other comments.
J:\Planning\LUDO\LAND USE SECRETARY\Minutes\Minutes 2018\011.13.18.docx 2
Kimberli Watt lives at 4924 Whitaker Road. Concerns with traffic, Fort Hall Irrigation and agrees with all the
other residents. Please deny the application.
Kim Hardy lives at 426 East Chubbuck Road. Concerns are privacy fence is needed, don't cut down trees,
and the mailbox location. Not in favor of the project.
Mike Jones lives at 5131 Whitaker Road. Agrees with his attorney Heidi and all the other residents. Traffic is
a concern and opposed to this type of development.
Brandon Hoist lives at 4941 Whitaker Road. Agrees with everyone and with Heidi Morrison. Against this
development.
Heidi Pope lives at 5273 Whitaker Road. She had to redesign an addition on her home to meet code so the
applicant should have to comply too. Concerned with traffic, kids and livestock. Oppose the project.
Arley Lish lives at 4913 Whitaker Road. Whitaker Road is going to turn into another Yellowstone Avenue.
Opposed. Agrees with all other comments.
Dee Greene lives at 410 E. Chubbuck Road. Irrigation water is a concern. Agrees with other comments.
Vern Briscoe lives at 5112 Whitaker Road. Irrigation is a concern. Agrees with all the other comments.
Please deny.
Mr. Jolley rebuttal to the questions were:
• City Code 18.20.110 PUDs are allowed in any land use district within the City
• 18.20.075 A strict zoning designation shall not be applied to a PUD
• Definition of a PUD has "may be" defined as
• Irrigation will be considered and there is no intent to disrupt. Applicant has to supply the same
irrigation water that they are getting now.
• Re-discussion on the access road can happen. Whitaker and Chubbuck Roads are both arterial.
• 4 of the 9 acres is landscaping showing that the applicant is not trying to put as many townhomes as
possible.
• The set-back can be changed from 15' to 20' if needed and fencing can be discussed
• Trees will be kept whenever possible
• Applicant can't address the mailbox location
• There is sewer and water capacity to supply this project
Mr. Jolley has met with City staff a number of times to ensure that they are meeting all the standards
required for this project.
No questions for the applicant from commissioners.
Mendenhall closed the public hearing bringing the meeting back to the commission.
Mendenhall reminded commissioners that this is a recommendation to City Council.
Mendenhall is taking into account the number of residents that have voiced concerns here tonight.
Concerned with the safety standards of this project including the west side that is next to the railroad
tracks.
Holm is not comfortable with the 15' set-backs, privacy and irrigation flooding with children's safety is a
concern.
Ayre is concerned with only 1 access. Lack of fencing is another issue along with the set-backs.
Berls agrees with the other comments but is also concerned with meeting State Code 67.65.15.
Smith asked for City staff to address how the presentation by Morrison did not match the staff report.
Hillam stated the applicant did a calculation on the plan which is accurate of the allowable density which
allows 96 units. Addressing the PUD that it may include a number of uses does not mean it has to. External
J:\Planning\LUDC\LAND USE SECRETARY\Minutes\Minutes 2018\011.13.18.docx 3
uses do not need to be associated with the PUD. In the past anything residential has been permitted as a
PUD. City did not look at the Northgate Interchange affecting the traffic. Whitaker Road is a minor arterial
Tyhee is planned to be a north south connector to Chubbuck Road as an arterial that should handle the
traffic.
Smith is worried about legal aftermath if this is approved. Maybe a revamp is warranted.
Holms stated the PUD ordinance has real issues. Developer may want to address the issues mentioned. If
this is approved it may get challenged in court. The PUD ordinance will be rewritten approx. next year and
will be more consistent. Staff is relying on City Code 18.20.075 but the strict zoning doesn't apply to PUD.
Mendenhall entertained a motion.
Berls moved that having reviewed the petition materials, staff report, and all testimony presented before
and by the City in this hearing as part of the record against criteria established. I make a motion to deny the
application on grounds that it may not comply with Idaho Code Section 67-6515 and City Code 18.08.010,
and the setbacks do not comply with City Code 18.08.080.
Roll Call Vote: Mike Schwartz, Yes; Rebecca Berls, Yes; Brady Smith, Yes; Thais Ayre, Yes; Carrie Holm,
Yes; Jason Mendenhall, Yes.
2. A request by the City of Chubbuck to amend a section of municipal code Chapter 17.16 titled," Park
and Recreation Lands or Cash Contributions"; providing however, that any existing development
implementing a park under Title 17 shall, at the discretion of the City, complete the development of
the park in accordance with previously approved plans. Proposal will be evaluated against criteria
established in Idaho Code 67-6511. Action Item: Recommendation to City Council
Hillam explained the background of Chapter 17.16. There has been an Impact Fee Study completed. If
Chapter 17.16 is repealed it will be conditional on the Impact Fee Ordinance being passed. Impact Fees
would be collected at the time of the building permit.
Mendenhall opened the public hearing.
No public comment—closed the public hearing bringing the meeting back to the commission.
Budge wanted to make sure that the City has the authority to make sure a developer builds a park if
Chapter 17.16 goes away.
Rodney Burch, City staff, explained to Budge that part of the Impact Fee Ordinance has Capital
Improvement Plan for parks which identifies the Parks Master Plan and the Comprehensive Plan to identify
those locations. In a development where a park is planned the developer will know from the start that
there will be a park in their development.
Mendenhall entertained a motion.
Budge moved to recommend approval of the repeal of 17.16 with the stipulation that City staff confirm
that the City Code does entitle the City to require an action for public parks. Smith seconded. Amendment
by Budge and Smith is that the Impact Fee Ordinance is approved.
Roll Call Vote: Rebecca Berls, Yes; Brady Smith, Yes; Thais Ayre, Yes; Carrie Holm, Yes; T1 Budge, Yes;
Mike Schwartz, Yes; Jason Mendenhall, Yes.
GENERAL BUSINESS
1. An application for a Preliminary Plat for Sunset Townhomes on 9.4 acres. Location is 4933 Whitaker
Road, Chubbuck, ID 83202, within SE 1/4 of Section 3, Township 6 South, Range 34, of the Boise
J:\Planning\LUDO\LAND USE SECRETARY\Minutes\Minutes 2018\011.13.18.docx 4
Meridian, Bannock County. Applicant proposes a single lot, private internal streets and parking areas,
and public utility easements. Proposal will be evaluated against criteria established in municipal code
17.12.100. Action Item: Recommendation to City Council
Stewart Ward Dioptra 4880 Clover Dell Road, Chubbuck ID 83202 was in attendance representing the
applicant. Sunset Townhomes is a single lot subdivision. The only issue is the name Sunset
Townhomes which is too close to other developments per Bannock County. Renaming will be done.
Holmes stated this is a different item then Public Hearing item # 1 and it needs to be considered for
the record.
No questions from the commissioners for the applicant.
Hillam stated a plat is a legal document and the plat can be approved. This is a clean-up of boundaries
and the name does need to be adjusted.
Holmes believes it would be simpler to just deny the preliminary plat application.
Mendenhall entertained a motion.
Schwartz moved to deny. Berls seconded
Roll Call Vote: Rebecca Berls, Yes; Brady Smith, Yes; Thais Ayre, Yes; Carrie Holm, Yes; Mike
Schwartz, Yes;Jason Mendenhall, Yes.
2. An application for a Preliminary Plat for a Preliminary Plat for Park Meadows 15th Addition. The
applicant requests a 14 lot Preliminary plat for 13 twin home lots in the Park Meadows subdivision.
Located in the SoutheastY4 of the Northwest % Section 9, Township 6 South, Range 34 East of the
Boise Meridian, City of Chubbuck, Bannock County, Idaho. Location is a portion of Pinewood Ave.
South off of W Chubbuck Rd. Proposal will be evaluated against criteria established in municipal code
17.12.100. Action Item: Recommendation to City Council
Mitchell Greer Rocky Mountain Engineering and Surveying, 600 Oak Pocatello, ID 83201 was in attendance
representing the applicant, Darris Ellis.
There are a number of parks in this subdivision and have walking paths thru out.
Originally in 2008 the entire area was approved and utilities were built. Mr. Ellis decided after the approval
and when the market began to struggle to divide into a number of smaller areas. This is the last Park
Meadows development.
Waiver is being requested for the roads to be consistent with the width of the previously built roads, 32'.
Mendenhall entertained a motion.
Schwartz moved to recommend approval of the preliminary plat as described in the application with the
waiver regarding the road width. Holm seconded.
Roll Call Vote: Thais Ayre, Yes; Carrie Holm, Yes; TJ Budge, Yes; Mike Schwartz, Yes; Rebecca Berls,
Yes; Jason Mendenhall, Yes.
3. An application for an amendment to the 2015 approved master plan for Copperfield Landing Planned
Unit Development. Market trends and other development has driven the need to change the
commercial uses to more residential uses. Proposal will be evaluated against criteria established in
municipal code 18.20. Action Item: Recommendation to City Council
Mitchell Greer Rocky Mountain Engineering and Surveying, 600 East Oak Pocatello, ID 83201 was in
attendance representing the applicant, Darris Ellis.
J:\Planning\LUDO\LAND USE SECRETARY\Minutes\Minutes 2018\011.13.18.docx 5
Higher density is not in the same demand as it was when the plan was developed. It will now have a more
residential feel and the mixed use that was originally conceived.
Mendenhall entertained a motion.
Schwartz moved that the modification to the Final Plan be recommended to City Council for approval. Ayre
seconded.
Roll Call Vote: Thais Ayre, Yes; Carrie Holm, Yes; Ti Budge, Yes; Mike Schwartz, Yes; Rebecca Berls,
Yes; Jason Mendenhall, Yes.
4. An application for a Preliminary Plat for Bilyeu Estates—Division 5. The applicant requests a Preliminary
plat for 15 lots in the Bilyeu subdivision. Located Southwest % of the SouthwestY4 Section 4, Township 6
South, Range 34 East of the Boise Meridian, City of Chubbuck, Bannock County, Idaho. Location is a
portion of Hyrum St. off of W Chubbuck Rd. Proposal will be evaluated against criteria established in
municipal code 17.12.100. Action Item: Recommendation to City Council
Eric Pope Rocky Mountain Engineering and Surveying 600 East Oak Pocatello, ID 83201 was representing
the applicant Stewart Nelson.
The preliminary plat is tying into previously developed Bilyeu Estates 3, 4 and Integrity Estates Subdivisions.
There will be 14 lots on what was previously farm land. Asking for approval.
300' curb radius for a cluster street was discussed. Andrus stated that City staff will accept.
Mendenhall entertained a motion.
Schwartz moved to recommend approval to City Council for the preliminary plat application. Budge
seconded.
Roll Call Vote: Thais Ayre, Yes; Carrie Holm, Yes; TJ Budge, Yes; Mike Schwartz, Yes; Rebecca Berls,
Yes; Jason Mendenhall, Yes.
Mendenhall entertained a motion to adjourn; Schwartz made the motion. Ayre seconded. All voted to
adjourn at 9:55 pm.
�ason Mendenhall, Chairperson '
410
Ra elle Simmons, Office Administrator
J:\Planning\LUDC\LAND USE SECRETARY\Minutes\Minutes 2018\011.13.18.docx 6
SUNSET TOWNHOMES PUD
APPLICATION
CHUBBUCK LAND USE
AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
November 13, 2018
Heidi Buck Morrison
IL4
RACINE OLSON
ATTORNEYS I PROBLEM SOLVED
Sunset Town Homes
..
, -OH:. '
'" ' ..I' ''
H:
iikE 'x,
11.
flr'itir. IIP
.,
,•t
+�
a `
v
$ R
r r
u,
}
3.`
,
y
41
.,
C la U. . ,___.,_ �U 1
.,.. . 1
, , . ,„,,
..
1 11111
x
.r..
' ,. re,...7.......
...pi, , ,,., ,
.., , .,
:,...: : '.. - ' --i ir-
,. .; 7, --vii . .. ..
',..,:::::,,..,L . . 4., , , IL. . ... . .,.. , . 1 ,,, , , ,,.11 '.: ' ,
111812018,4.37.30 PM 1.2257
0 0.02 004 0.08 mi
Bannock County l 1 I s i ti + ti 'I
Parcels 0 0.03 0.07 0.13 km
Source:Esri,DigifalGlabe,GeaEye,Earlhslar Geagraphias,CNES.,
Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeraGN!O, IGN, and the GIS User
Comm unit'
Onnook Caunty
D"oomimer:Ths product c lar inlarnolunal pureasesan1y,and may nol ba re bmnn pepamd,or hear iobE or Ego I,engineering,arsurrey pureases The County. nnal aaoeplarr espa raibilityisrerna,onanions,ar pasAianalaoourxy n theddimIdale.There arc na tits ira rdis expcooed ar implied forlho
#1
Project does not qualify as a PUD
LI
IDAHO CODE SECTION 67-6515 PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENTS:
A planned unit development may be defined in a local ordinance as an
area of land in which a variety of residential, commercial, industrial, and
other land uses are provided for under single ownership or control.
LI
18.06.180: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD):
One or more structures embracing a combination of land uses within an
integrated and harmonious scheme, developed under unified control.
(Ord. 755, 2016)
18.08.010: ENUMERATION OF DISTRICTS:
The following land use districts are hereby established:
J. Planned unit development (PUD): The purpose of this district is to
embrace a combination of land uses, provide a maximum choice of living
environments, it is the policy of the city to guide major land development
projects, embracing a combination of land uses, by encouraging planned
unit development to achieve the following:
LI
#2
Apartments are not permitted
within the R-2 zone
EXHIBIT StZ:MAPS-ZONING Parcel VVebmap
SUNSET DIV.1 PRELIM.PIAT
LUDC MEETING 11/133/15 �. i 1
`Y I EYnii 1. a t
PAGE ZOFd
1!illy,
�. r __ '
((
1 —
x ; 'mss. "+ e' ,l..L:o.lit Ire.
* . El 11111111 •
approx.ionthn i _..
` cuh 't Sit?
q
1111 1
L I�rJt-oc..II I I Ir ' ,ul'z N "i lid i'P r
.i --:,r 1f"." '4 — —
i
o' ,1 ic:I-n v�.l
e "—.
NM
-- +. ` L I — f—
.._ l g
;# .y� inyl.1 -I.I,i:1
N-
J
rr
I ... _______lii - - —
i
1
m , a
\ V
1 Ir i.l ,r.bili. �{ "I n.. _ _—_
)i 11:*1_iii I I. I in, I.
F.,111 R�.1,1ra, –
� rr-' 11: ,'iwa.. .(
!
7 1 I. I. , f 1 { .m �uT Fn S' (0,,..i.".
4 ., ,1111e,.1 1 nt§
iI 1.1 f 1 iN'e.rJ III-,F:1
I
November 5,2018 1:3,311
g– General Commercial(C-2) Limited Residential-P(R-2P) o 0.04 0.03 ale mi
Chubbuck Parcels Zoning_Land_Use ■
I-- <all othervalues> 0 OA5 01 0.2 km
Bannock County Parcels Industrial(I) ■ Planned Unit Development(PUD)
L Agriculture(A) Some earl,DgRi Glbe,GeoEye,Eartistar eeoywIrs,cNES"I
t- City_Limits_201 7 Limited Commercial(C-1) L Single Family Residential(R-1) .sUrbls DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, GN,aetl le GIS user
Dense Residential(R-4) ,- canmul
' Limited Residential(R-2) Unknown
COI ofGh Ibbsck
USDA FSA,DglloGbt ,Ge0Eye I mike PohorI
LI
18.08.010: ENUMERATION OF DISTRICTS:
The following land use districts are hereby established:
C. Limited residential (R-2): The purpose of this district is to provide
for neighborhoods of single household dwellings, class I
production buildings, and abutting zero lot line residences. An
abutting zero lot line residence may be conditionally permitted in
an existing R-2 development and is permitted in a proposed R-2
subdivision if each lot upon which a zero lot line residence
would be constructed is disclosed on the preliminary and final
plats. Duplexes may be conditionally permitted.
LI
Residential dwellings (subject to density Ill I
restrictions):
Li Single household dwelling PP P P C C C
II
Duplex El X P P P C X
Threeplex I X X P P CC 111
Fourplex XX X P P C C
III
Apartment building XX X XPCCC
Residential rental dwelling C p2 i P2 P P P C
IIZero lot line residence (subject to restrictions) CC P P P CC X
LI
18.06.210: RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES:
E. Apartment building: A structure or complex of structures
containing five (5) or more households
or living units. (Ord. 620 § 1 , 2006)
LI
SURVEY FOR: LEGEND
a'"
I SUNSET TOWNHOMES ;. �, ..ax,�N
—O p
CE
999r
AI
— '_ ,,xx ���� ." a.,,.,. .
0_ 3
11111r
LAW 0000 ON.
..t_._ � � - .:- F r ‘" morose.,wow a ovrr99
G _ xE
" _� — — r
/`' C? 1 .1 - — F B GB 7171
h r I'EI (� w j �: 1 r 1`,- c� Holt sa w m ,m , mw l�
.
I 00. 7L SS
1 � SS
o o" 28
g r r I I I x ' '3 u ,, i A-'Y�L.
d �--drr, u c." - 71 � N, ,.m O °m A 9909.9990 999199nr 9E19.199 NE i 7,LUO
t W
0
�I .
�a.NOR
�,i «Z,N "'"D diiilr �i ill p j SUMMINGM.00M.aM.a ."x.ex,.1E9.9 7L
• Nx w" amM x
w.a .M
I x .,E.e ®7L g
.M.WRE..xE
a • A.,, " w «A
ISI - n i m n I L jg by
EwE.�a,.x„. ,x,a r "." .�
I. I E M"
r H. E..ExExr
E
L ,am w,. x
, NI KS.0.11,110.1.1118.1111f GPM/WM 0.001.00.1011110 PROPOSED..0001.0
,' —--— MEP.ET,xowo.rEcxc,Tlresw.o I POO GENERAL
a.,.;,.:. �-{ x.axwIX11.90010.1110 000E 11001100.1.0.0.00.111.1.0
"xo .,xU � {t 4— I _ r I f ®�I _^'•* I ,_-(� f a ""res071:Mr ""Un' ''' c..1 Pill ORE ACCESS POP.SNALIAIEET.03.1VERSONOF I. { R? ==7,7....... u,e.xarc.ue.xana
� n nm , M«.0SOMCE..ws,.x,wwcE«."w.�oaa.wrare"
nm AN td U u L Si ® iJ U 0 I rnwaaeom"..wo
x." ENERU.x.E"xN.E,,,...�.� wa•' "°' SITE INFORMATION
SITE NOTES.
"u
MO ...,„,.�., �...,�,..Ureo",eeo..Mmen m r.- mm ouwm
.
.O
.®°•re m 0111103.cwc.E.E"owuxrE.encm
MS.01... ft
®WV..,RewxCURB PEP OFTNETuaw07
e ws
' .. ......._.._.._..._...._.__........_.._... ra"a..sm,"naw^+�MOU�ErwU PLUS xmoe..r To.E.cxPOOP xwu ®w.,.u.w..w.a.
REVISED PLAN RECEIVED 11!5/1$ 1, —.tot-- 551 O
_ wmx.reooM wo N.w...,"..T,. ..,,..,.. m . rewx
_
.Ea=..”, ®cx" wwa wre" 0 <
z
EXHIBIT#3.APPLICANT RESPONSES/REVISIONSPARKING .-----.__ ❑
SUNSET DIV 1 PRELIM PLAT . „oEa,„^^'^ELL„”^^
'1—,„..Ern,.aN,".,Nw,Tww d 0 U
LUDC MEETING 11/13/18 ,,,. ,OM ` I-- m
x.a.,.Ea.ROrmEO
„aOwE..wOxwTa. f R..E Te D3
PAGE 6 OF 6 >wM�.E.s>^�"" co............. co
mMM"n,wm".r w..wrE.x..x..c. t j•• STORM WATER REQUIREMENTS' .,wx n �`-- "OOflE°"'E z I
1-------- C/)TRASH NOTF5ux ` "nE.
ItR .xawE EOR TxR...w \ — IntrjxNa
COMMON OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS
Fili
RE cR i• �x`a
—''1 "."'mT I a..exMOM.SEE.1uu.N.olx.mu�� BASIS OFBEARING
"xoT.re . re"are��x ; yN4c4
• y uonworoaETnrwR . �TMPROPOSED PROJECT AMENITIES
• , urc.woxur. EL♦/I�V
6
S
\ E ,Dy\^
E
M ER,"roxwi...011041:101.4.0.0
oxuixTw,ERW".em.x"x.T PLANNED UNIT NFVFI OPMENT NOTFq \ REwswxa OPTE
ALL STPEETS APO P.1.4 AP.MEE POO.131.0.00.1.100
S. 0. ...L�x. N.Lw"x...E.ER.EOSLOB.xTNNNa,a.reETMNe.M . • a,M.E...N..n,R.E."xExT..
-w"E.aTcm,E.wpaEu"Na¢wn.. RISLd)N CX RR DETNL a. ',.".',°::',77.",:::2°.',',..°17,1....—....,......... ���.n
a ▪MxPa.,..E..01 PUB.w.reRPOOSW.SPI.EXT
® CHUBBUCK ROAD APPROVED BY DATE. Know what's below.
cly of CHUBBUCK Call before you dig. O 1 .xEE,s
LI
Residential dwellings (subject to density
restrictions):
Single household dwelling PP P P C C
Duplex CX P P P C C
Threeplex XX X P P C C
II
Fourplex XX X P PCCC
Apartment building XX X X P C C
III
Residential rental dwelling C p2 p2 P P P C C
11 Zero lot line residence (subject to restrictions) CP PPCCX
Li
#3
Apartments are not consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan
Parcel Webmap
:EXHIElfl Z MAPS-FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS(COMP PLAN)
.SUNSETM1 ,PLAT I ��
LUDO MEETING
1NG 11/1/1'�J1� ,-,
PAH 4CFI. —'—
Emma imi 1 _ ,..___
non ..,___
__III
�' '; '�' �� �•was lin
G �apprGx siteatian rJ
__ suhic_e:i site —~
_� - _ I 1 a. .
— ___ . 1 1I . a ill
NI
_a — _ - - mir
iuiu1-
L
1111111111—I - milli
MIN
1 _ 11,E
j • miii
tJ 1 :11,.:!,1 ,
1 1111
November 5,201 1.3,311
Chubbuck Parcels Future_Land_Use_Designation High Density 0 0.04 0 03 0.15 mi
.n <all other values> 0 005 01
L 0.2km
Bannock County Parcels Low Density
Commercial 90trot:E6tl.ogl6GlY+e,Ge6Eye,EartlEtar Geogr,�Yks,GN�F
Cibf_Umits_?017 Medium Density Alrbis DS, USDA, USCG,AeroGRID, GN,and ne G6 User
n Employment CommltIy
Mixed Use
Mon lIbbICu
USDA FSA,D IOIti G bte,Ge SEye I 1:0110 Powe I I
LI
Table 4-3: Plan District-Zone District Conversion
Plan Designation Zoning District Perm i tted
LDR - Low Density Residential R-1 - Single Family Residential
R-2 - Limited Residential
MDR - Medium Density Residential R-2 - Limited Residential
R-3 - General Residential
1 I D - I ligh Density Residcnti:d R-3 — General Residential
R-4 - Dense Residential
C — Commercial C-1 - Limited Commercial
C-2 - General Commercial
E - Employment C-2 - General Commercial
I - Industrial.
MU — Mixed Use R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, C-1
LI
#4
Project does not comply with R-2
density restrictions
A. Height And Area Regulations:
-,11.....mp
Minimum
Land Minimum Minimum Side Minimum Minimum Lot Area
Use Front Rear Yard Total Per Household
District Maximum Yard Yard Setback1 Yard Dwelling
Height Setback Setback Width (In Square Feet)
Pri----- 35' 25' 20' 14' - 5' 70' 1 acre
R-1 35' 25' 20' 14' - 5' 70' 7,000 first household,
plus 4,000 each
additional
I .
R-2 i 35' 25' 20' 14' - 5' 60' 6,000 first household,
plus Z500 each
—1--- — additional
R-2P 35' 25'
20' 14' - 5' 50' 5,000 per household ,
1
R-3 I 50' 15' 15' 10' - 0' 40' 5,000 first household,
plus 1 ,500 each
additional
R-4 60' 10' 10' 10' - 0' 40' 2,400 first household,
1 i plus 1 ,000 each
additional
C-1 45' 10' 10' 10' - 0' 40' Same as R-4
C-2 70' 10' 7---- - - -
11-- 70' 10 _ _
--- 1
1
1
I 1
1
I
1
18,500 sq . ft.
1 1 1
1
1
25,500 sq . ft.
1
1
L L 1
r , T T T T ..
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 ; 36,000 sq . ft.
11 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
V L L L L Li
H
LDDC should recommend that the City
Council deny the application because :
1 . Project does not qualify as a PUD
2. Apartments are not permitted in the R-2 zone
3. Apartments are not consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan
4. Project does not comply with R-2 density regulations