HomeMy WebLinkAboutDR Jackson Foods 01 Jan 03DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
January 3rd, 2001
APPLICANT:
John Jackson, Boise, Idaho
DATE:
January 3rd, 2001
PROJECT TITLE:
Jackson' s Food Stores, 101 E. Burnside Ave.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Truck Stop Addition to east of Jackson Food, 101 E. Burnside Ave.
Present: Mayor John O. Cotant, Attorney Tom Holmes, Jerry Rowland, Merlin Miller, Ray
Griffin, Charlie Dickman, and Ron Conlin.
John Jackson was present to present another site plan for his proposed addition of a truck stop to
the property just east of his Jackson's Food Store on E. Burnside Ave.
Mr. Jackson said the E. Burnside Ave. Store is losing money and they he has to do something to
generate a profit.
Mr. Jackson said he is willing to move the pole and change the radius from Yellowstone Ave. to
E. Burnside Ave. Mr. Jackson said the cost of doing this is $35,000.00.
Considerable discussion about the two accesses allowed, maximum of 40' each:
Mr. Jackson said he would like to continue the 22' and 40' accesses on E. Burnside Ave.
and a larger access on Burnside Ave. Mr. Jackson felt that if the accesses are only 40' the
trucks would not be able to make the turn efficiently. Mr. Jackson said the trucks would
tear up landscaping, curb and sidewalk. Mr. Jackson was told unless a variance is allowed
the 40' maximum accesses are required. Discussion about signs installed that will tell the
trucks to go in the E. Burnside Ave access then leave through the east exit to Burnside
Ave.
Discussion about E. Burnside Ave. being designated as one way, requiring all vehicles to leave by
way of Kings Way and Evans Lane. Mr. Jackson said he would oppose this because it
would hurt his smaller vehicle business having to drive all the way around.
Mr. Jackson said he will contact Jim Thilmont about participating in constructing Kings Way
Road and what it would cost.
RONALD E. BUSH
EMaih REB@hteh.corn
HAWLEY TRDXELL
ENNIS & HAWLEYLLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
333 South Main Street
P.O. Box 100
Pocatello, Idaho 83204-0100
(208) 233-0845 · Fax (208) 233-1304
www. hteh.com
February 8, 2001
Ron C. Conlin
City Clerk/Treasurer
City of Chubbuck
P.O. Box 5604
Chubbuck, Idaho 83202-0006
Jacksons Food Stores, Inc.
101 E. Burnside
Dear Ron:
Our office represents Jacksons Food Stores, Inc. We have been asked to assist
Jacksons with a site change request for the Jacksons store at 101 E. Burnside in Chubbuck. The
Design Review Committee and Mr. Jackson met on January 3, 2001 to discuss this matter. I've
reviewed the meeting minutes of the January 3, 2001 meeting of the Design Review Committee
and the applicable provisions of the Chubbuck City Code.
The minutes from that meeting do not include a decision on Jackson's application
for the proposed changes the Jacksons Food Store at that location.
According to Chubbuck City Code § 18.16.40(D), the committee sets forth its
decision in a written memorandum which is lodged with the City Clerk. Our client has not
received a copy of a written decision by the Design Review Committee. We assume that such
a decision has not yet been prepared and request tlmt ~ written decision be iss~ied so that Jacksons
may take this matter up with the City Council as provided for in section 18.16.40(D).
Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please do
not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours,
~EY TROXELL ENNIS & HAWLEY LLP
Ronald E. Bush
REB/r
cc: John Jackson
FEB-i2-Ol ]T:4O FROM-JONES CHARTERED 208-232-5962 T-1BT P.Di/Oi F-493
LAMONT JONES
3ACK H. ROBISON
THOMAS J. HOlAVIES
JI~SSE c ROBI.~3N
JONES, C_HARTEKED
415 soUTH ARTHUR
P.O. BOX 967
I~OCATELLO. IDa. HO 83204-0967
TF-L~PHONE: (20g) 232-5911
FAX; (208) 232-5962
E-M.,,dI.: xlmla~a~Uom:a~.eom
IVIK. HOLMES' TELEPHONE EXTENSION: 103
February 12, 2001
Ron Conlin
City of Chubbuck
P_O. Box 5604
Chubbuck, 1D 83202
Re: Jacks, on' s Texaco
Dear Ron:
My recollection is we were waiting for him to get back to us with a redesign that would
use one forty foot wide entrance. I don't think any final decision has been made. If he wants to
stop with the submittal he has already made, we should issue a decision.
I think we may be making a mistake in letting this go through and go ;o the City Council
without further proceedings. For instance, if we issue a Design Review decision on the issue of
the access, we may preclude a consideration of whether or not this use should even be allowed
there in the first place. Chubbuck Code {} 18_08.030 C indicates the building official or- design
review "in reviewing an application for design review clearance, may dmermine that a particular
land use, although designated in the schedule of general controls as a permitted use, should be
allowed only upon the issuance of a conditional use permit." There may be some benefit in having
this matter considered by Land Use with its collective afisdom.
IfJackon is, by asking for this decision, indicating he can't design something to work with
one forty foot access, then we may be justified in thinking it may not fit the criteria of 18.28040
C and should have a conditional use permit application to give the neighboring uses an
opportunity to give input on thc project and the impact_
In direct answer to your question, I think we should advise the attorney we are waiting for
additional information from Jackson and, if he chooses not to submit it, then we will get hack
together and issue a decision, which may include a decision that it needs to go through land use.
TIH/t