HomeMy WebLinkAbout001 23 97 Special-435 E Chubbuck City of Chubbuck
Land Use and Development Commission
January 23, 1997
Minutes of the special meeting of the Land Use and Development Commission held in the City
Municipal Building January 23, 1997.
Present: Acting Chairman Mary Harker; Commission Members: Dusty Whited, Gale Anderson,
Wally Wright, Myma Cain, Ray Rosen, Pete Anderson; City Staff Steve Smart and Larry
Kohntopp; Attorney Tom Holmes; Secretary Myrna Crapo.
The meeting was called to order by Acting Chairman Mary Harker at 4:00 p.m. The review of
Mr & Mrs Steve Campolattaro, 435 E. Chubbuck home Conditional Use permit was the reason
for the meeting. This item was tabled at the January 9, 1996 meeting. The commission drove to
435 E. Chubbuck to do an on site inspection of the premises.
After the inspection, the commission was joined by Mr. & Mrs. Campolattaro. Larry Kohntopp
presented to the commission the photo's that had been taken. Acting chairman Mary Harker read
Chairman's Kent Keams letter to the commission and then turned the meeting to discussion by
the commission.
Attorney Tom Holmes reminded the commission that they needed to focus on the Land Uses
permit and not the other violations.
The Commission then Reviewed the provisions of the original permit and discussed:
1. Fence Requirement
2. Appearance as a residential site
3. Location of the property
4. Best use for the lane
5. Violations
6. Number of vehicles stored there
7. Lack of a green area
8. Their intent to comply
9. Dust control measures
Pete Anderson moved to extend the conditional use permit for 180 days which will allow them
time to comply and in addition limiting the vehicles on a daily basis to four vehicles in front;
gravel drive and install a 6' solid screening fence on the east side of the property from Chubbuck
Road to south property line, and make an effort to control the dust. The commission will review
this in 180 days. Wally Wright seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Pete Anderson, yes; Myrna
Cain, yes; Gale Anderson, yes; Dusty Whited, yes; Ray Rosen, yes; Wally Wright, yes and Mary
Harker, yes.
The meeting adjourned at 5:15 p.m.
Mym~-C}a~ Secretary
To~
From:
Chubbuck Land Use and Development Commission
Kent Kearns
January 21, 1997
Re: Steve Campolattaro, 435 E. Chubbuck Rd., Major Home Occupation- Review
Members,
I was unable to attend January's meeting and now find that I will not be able to
attend the scheduled site visit to the Campolattaro residence? (I now question the use of
the word "residence" when referring to this property.)
As Chairman of the Land Use and Development Commission I remember Mr.
Campolattaro's application and his testimony, when he came for issuance of the original
conditional use permit allowing his Major Home Occupation. Mr. Campolattaro implied
at that time through his discussions with us, that we would have a hard time distinguishing
whether he was running a business out of his home or not. He also particularly
acknowledged that he was to be a "good neighbor".
However and because we are such a suspecting commission, we imposed several
conditions that were to be maintained and guaranteed by Mr. Campolattaro. One of those
conditions was that we were to have a two year review of his permit. In my opinion, Mr.
Campolattaro has repeatedly violated the letter and intent of the conditions we imposed.
As I recall the discussions, he explicitly guaranteed that he would not become a
problem for the city and would blend in with the neighborhood. I can testify that the
residence now looks like a business and has become an even greater nuisance to the
community than the previous "trailer factory" that preceded Mr. Campolattaro at the site.
Mr. Campolattaro has not maintained the looks of the property as well as the trailer
factory, another broken condition of the use permit we issued. Mr. Campolattaro also
continues to increase the size and number of items stored on the property, the longevity of
their stay at the site and has collected items in his southwest comer that makes him look
like a small, salvage operation. I drive by the site on a daily basis and have made
numerous mental notes concerning the increasing violations of our intent as a commission
when we granted Mr. Campolattaro's permit.
It seems that the primary purpose of the property has become commercial and that
the residential use is now a secondary, complimentary use. Mr. Compolattaro has not met
all of the conditions originally imposed and has increasingly become a bigger problem.
I am therefore opposed to the continuation of Mr. Campolattaro's business
operation as a permitted Major Home Occupation unless he immediately complies with all
of the conditions of his permit and any other applicable zoning or City ordinances. I look
forward to further discussions with you concerning this issue in February.
Thank you,
Kent Kearns