Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout003 06 97 CITY OF CHUBBUCK LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION March 6, 1997 Minutes of the regular meeting of the Land Use and Development Commission held in the City Municipal Building March 6, 1997. Present: Chairman Kent Kearns, Commission Members: Ray Rosen, Wally Wright, Myma Cain, Mary Harker, Dusty Whited, Gayle Anderson; Attorney Tom Holmes; City Staff: Larry Kohntopp, Steve Smart, Secretary Myrna Crapo. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Kent Kearns at 8:15 PM. Chairman Kent Kearns asked for approval of the minutes of the February 6, 1997 meeting. Wally Wright moved to approve the minutes as received, Myrna Cain seconded with all voting in favor. Chairman Kearns asked if any member had a conflict of interest with the item. There was none. PUBLIC HEARING: 1. An application by L. Don Han~mond, Dale Hancock, Scott Jackson of Aftbrdable Residential Communities, 555 17th street, Suite 850, Denver Co. 80202 for a conditional use permit for a Class II production building cluster arrangement; a preliminary plat; a change in Land Use District upon requested annexation to R-3 General Residential. Property is located west of 10555 N. Hiline Road and south of 4600 Hiline Briarwood Subdivision. Chairman Kearns opened the meeting for a discussion on the zone change. The commission discussed with Steve Smart the staff report, asking for any addition information. Bill Chisum, 1555 Agate Drive, representing the applicams, explained that they owned about 30 manufactured homes communities throughout the west and mid-west and have been doing business for 14 years. They need to have 230 lots to make it workable. The units will never be sold to the people living there. Expensive homes do not usually locate in a mobile home park. Mitchell Greer, 203 S. Garfield, Shepherd Engineering, the park has been designed on what they feel their future needs are. They want the R-3 zoning because it fits in that type of zone. The 50 lot is what they feel they will need the most. Most of the trailers will be single wide, 16 foot. They do not plan on selling any of these lots, but in maintaining them. The commission discussed: 1. Lot 14 Block 3, Lot 35 block 10, lot 1 block 11 being under the, required size 2. The trailers will be privately owned. 3. Lots being maintained by the renters, under certain requirements LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION March 6, 1989 Page 2 Chairman Kearns opened up the meeting to public testimony in regards to the zone change. John Hendrickson, 4511 Mt. Park Road, asked if R-3 could be limited to single family residential? Does an R-3 line allow 0 lot line developments. Chairman Keams closed the public testimony portion of the meeting and brought it back to the commission/hr a discussion and a motion. Mary Harker moved to recommend to the City Council annexation of this piece of property into the City of Chubbuck with an R-3 zoning which is in compliance with our comprehensive Plan. Dusty Whited seconded. Roll call vote: Ray Rose, yes; Wally Wright, yes; Myma Cain, yes; Kent Kearns, yes; Mary Harker, yes; Dusty Whited, yes; Gayle Anderson, yes. Chairman Kearns opened the discussion for the comprehensive plan and asked for any additional comments fi'om the staff. There was none. The commission discussed: 1. Almno street being stubbed from Hiline to the Railroad. 2. Putting a park in the development. Chairman Kearns asked for the representative to address the commission. Mitchell Greer with Shepherd Engineering informed the commission that arterial streets have a lot of traffic. The railroad crossing would sometime need to have the street go across it. A arterial needs to be a straight through street. They would like to see if that is really going to happen before designating it at the north end of their property. The frontage on Hiline will be with their own entrance. The park area would be under sized and used for disposing of the mn off water. They want to get the project approved. The commission discussed: 1. A fence being built along the railroad tracts. 2. The park area being the full 4.1 acres 3. The need for a park, there being no place for the children to play 4. The Glacier entrance to Hiline 5. The Hiline road setback, about 20'. Bill Chisum, they need 230 lots to make a go of it. They have bought out the Cowboy Oil Park last year and are in the process of fixing it. Steve Smart suggested to have the commission make the recommendations and then let the developers decide whether to build or not. [,and Use and Development Commission March 6, 1996 Page 3 The commission discussed: 1. The platted size of the lots- they haven't decided whether to have one big lot platted or each of the smaller lots platted. Chairman Keams opened up public testimony for or against the preliminary plat. John Hendrickson, 4511 Mountain Park Road, We need to keep the standards in a community and if they don't we need to say no. It will cost the citizens if it isn't done right. He is concerned about the R-3 zoning. Mr Hendrickson is concerned about the park land, and with a railroad, Hiline Road park access. There are parks that have been built where the park will double as water storage areas. What are the plans for the parks in the area. Additional set-backs for increased usage. He would like to have us require them to development right up to that property and that it be landscaped to that area and that they continue the landscaping along Hiline. The development costs of the railroad crossing; some of that needs to be gotten from the developer. He would like to see Glacier Road enter Hiline further down the road. Turn lanes needs to be built both ways in and out of the park. A light might be needed at that area and should be gotten from the developer. He is concerned about the kids that will be living there. Mitch Greer, Shephed Engineering The access can be moved to Pinon Ledger Lane. Chairman Kearns closed the public portion of the meeting and brought it back to the commission for a discussion and a motion. 1. Movement of access from Glacer to Pinon 2. All park requirements be made as per ordinance without cash involved 3. The developer being able to decide how to develop the lots in the blocks Dusty Whited moved to recommend to the City council approval of the plat with the conditions: 1. The Hiline Right of way being dedicated 45 ' from center line 2. The 4.11 acres of park be included in to the plat instead of cash in lieu 3. That the entrance on Hiline be moved from Glacier to Pinon 4. That the platting be at the developers discretion whether it be platted as blocks or individual lots. Myrna Cain Seconded. Roll call vote: Ray Rosen, yes; Wally Wright, yes; Myrna Cain, yes; Kent Keams, no; Mary Harker, no; Dusty Whited, yes; Gayle Anderson, yes. Land Use and Development Commission March 6, 1997 Page 4 The conditional use permit was then opened for discussion by the commission. Mitch Greer, 203 S. Garfield, would like to see the project approved with the conditions that the Commission would like to see imposed on the project. They are proposing newer manufactured homes that are constructed after 1986. The owners will enforce those covenants and bring them back for the city's approval. The developers need to know what is required. The commission discussed: 1. The fencing along the railroad tract and freeway. 2. The type of fence Bill Chisum, the developers requested to have the fence a solid fence. Steel posts with 6' high cedar fencing. Chairman Keams opened the meeting for public testimony for issuance of the conditional use permit. There was none. The public heating portion was closed and brought back to the commission for a discussion and a motion. The commission then discussed: 1. Management planning rules 2. Age of trailers 3. Restrictive covenants being reviewed 4. Looking to owner and manager and nor individual tenant for property maintenance 5. The frontage on Hiline. 6 Requiring a street light to be put there 7. Postal Boxes being required 8. Fencing John Hendrickson, 4511 Mountain Park, we need to be consistent in the requirements. Myma Cain moved to grant the condition use permit with the following conditions: 1. Review management plan and restrictive covenants (Design Review). 2. Conditional use permit not transferable with the sale of property 3. Gang postal mail boxes being required 4. Solid fence along railroad and the freeway 5. Landscape to be reviewed by the design review committee 6. Class II production dwellings without being "multi sectional" 7. Problems that arise when things aren't being properly taken care of instead of going to the individual renter; city staff would go to manage and owner and they are responsible for the appearances of the lots. Mary Harker seconded. Land Use and Development March 6, 1997 Page 5 Roll call vote: Ray Rosen, yes; Wally Wright, yes; Myma Cain, yes; Kent Keams, no; Mary Harker, yes; Dusty Whited; Gayle Anderson, yes. Chairman Keams closed the public Hearing. Gayle Anderson moved to adjoum at 10:45 PM with Mary Harker seconding. Ken-'n-"~Kear~s,s, Chairman Myrr~aXCr~o, Secretary - \ Al"*N 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 March 5, 1997, upon the application of Stewart Nelson, (hereinafter referred to as "applicant") for a Planned Unit Development on the real property located at 5273 Whitaker 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 Planned Unit Development as particularly described above and has submitted a Preliminary Development Plan and preliminary plat. 2. All legal requirements for notice of public hearing have been met. 3. The property in question is zoned R -I pursuant to the Land Use Ordinance of the City 1001N of Chubbuck. 4. The property is designated as R-1 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 Chapter 18.20. 6. The facts relevant to an evaluation of the relevant criteria and standards are as follows: A. This application does not fit the purposes of Chapter 18.20 and does not accomplish infill development as defined in section 18.20.085 of the Chubbuck Municipal Code. B. This development is not compatible with the surrounding properties which are single family residences on large lots. BASED UPON THE FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT, the Land Use and Development Commission hereby enters the following: r CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 1 chbbck08.153 it 15� i I . The proposed PUD will be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. 2. The proposed PUD will produce an adverse impact on the economic values of adjacent properties. 3. The proposed PUD will produce a negative impact on transportation facilities, public utilities, schools, public parks, or the natural environment 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 proposed PUD is sought, when analyzed in conjunction with the noise and traffic conditions now existing does indicate that the proposed PUD should be denied. 5. The use for which the proposed PUD is sought shall 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 of the proposed use on other development within the City has not been minimized by Applicant as much as is reasonably possible. 8. Owners of adjacent property have expressed disapproval of the proposed PUD. DECISION 1. The Land Use and Development Commission, pursuant to the foregoing, recommends to the City Council that the request of the applicant be denied. 2. Takings. Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-8001 et seq., the Commission makes the following findings with respect to the decision in this action: A. This Action does not result in a permanent or temporary physical occupation of private property. B. This Action does not require the property owner to dedicate a portion of the property or to grant an easement. C. This Action does not deprive the owner of the property of all viable uses of the property. D. This Action does not have a significant impact on the landowner's economic interest because other uses of the property exist or are available to landowner. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 2 chbbckO8.153 J E. This Action does not deny a fundamental attribute of ownership. F. This Action does not serve the same purpose that would be served by directly prohibiting the use or action; nor does the condition imposed substantially advance such purpose. DATED this J-)1 day of tAaa1 , 199 FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 3 chbbck08.153 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION By: C rman