Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout006 06 96 City of Chubbuck Land Use and Development Meeting June 6, 1996 biinutes of the regular meeting of the Land Use and Development Commission held in the City Hunicipal Building June 6, 1996. Present: Chairman Kent Kearns, Commission Members: Wally Wright, Gayle Anderson, Pete Anderson, Richard Pearson, Council member: LeRoy Quick; Attorney Tom Holmes; City Staff: Steve Smart, Gerd Dixon, Larry Kohntopp and secretary Myrna Crapo. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Kent Kearns at 8:10 p.m. Chairman Kearns asked for any additions or corrections to the minutes. Chairman Kearns asked that the motion by Gayle Anderson "and that the property be transferable with sale of the Property" be changed to "and that the conditional use be transferable with the sale of the property" Gayle Anderson moved to approved the minutes of May 2, 1996 with that correction. Pete Anderson seconded. All voted in favor. Chairman Kearns asked if any members had a conflict of interest. Chairman Kearns informed the commission that Charlie Frasure was his uncle so he will abstain from voting but would conduct the meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: ]. An application by Paula Waldal, 4926 Galena for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a child day care center. Property is presently zoned Limited Residential (R-2). Paula Waldal, 4926 Galena will have no employees and wants to leave open the number of children that she can have. The commission discussed: 1. Requiring more parking spaces if there were more children. 2. State licensing requirements. 3. Requiring a review every year. 4. How we would know if it exceeded the 6 to 8 children Chairman Kearns opened the meeting for public testimony in opposition to the proposal, there was none. The meeting was then opened to any public testimony in favor of the request, there was none. The meeting was then brought back to the commission for discussion and a motion. The com~nission discussed: 1. Limiting the amount to less than 12. Richard Pearson made a motion to grant and approve the conditional use permit to Paula Waldal, 4926 Galena to operate a child care center and State licensing people to take care of the requirements that are necessary. Pete Anderson seconded. Roll Call vote: Wally Wright, yes; Richard Pearson, yes; Pete Anderson, yes; Kent Kearns, yes; LeRoy Quick, yes; Gayle Anderson, yes. Land Use and Development Commission Page 2 June 6, 1996 2. An application by Cary Campbell, 5175 Tree Valley Road, Chubbuck, Idaho, for review of a preliminary plat for Tree Valley Subdivision. A subdivision located 1/2 mile north of East Chubbuck Road @ Johannsen. Chairman Kearns asked for any additional comments from the staff. 1. The developers should be required to hook to the sewer if within 200 feet. 2. A person could only put one house on a 4" sewer line. 3. The problems with separation of wells and sewer drains. We need to have a 100 foot separation between them. Cary Campbell, 5175 Tree Valley Road, told the commission he would not be selling the lots to anyone right now. He would like to hook onto the sewer. Hr. Campbell is willing to sign into the Tree Valley Road Agreement. The well would be one community well if the lots were developed with houses. The commission would like a dedicated easement and a notation that before construction will be allowed the sewer must be constructed and brought up to code. Cary Campbell is willing to give an easement for the 25' Road. The sewer would need to be an 8" ]inc. Chairman Kearns opened the public testimony portion of the meeting to any one in opposition to this preliminary plat. Veda Rupp, 1289 Hiline Road, questioned where the road would go. Ms. Rupp had no objections to the subdivision. Chairman Kearns asked for any public testimony in favor of the plat. There was none. It was then brought back to the commission for a recommendation to the council. Pete Anderson moved that we recommend approval of the preliminary plat to the City Council with the fo]lowing conditions: 1. Tree Valley Road agreement be signed by the developer 2. Tree Valley Road be a deeded easement for future road development 3. Some type of notation or indication on lots 1, 2, & 3 that at the time the lots are sold that a city standard sewer line will be put into those lots. Gayle Anderson seconded. Roll call vote: Wally Wright, yes; Richard Pearson, yes; Pete Anderson, yes; Kent Kearns, yes; LeRoy Quick, yes; Gayle Anderson, yes. 3. An application by Cary Campbell, 5175 Tree Valley Road, Chubbuck, Idaho for a change in Land Use District to Single Family Residential (R-l). Property is presently zoned Agricultural (A). The comprehensive plan shows that area as R-1. Chairman Kearns opened the public testimony in opposition to the zone change, there was none. It was then opened to public testimony in support of the proposal. There was none. Chairman Kearns then turned the meeting to the commission for discussion and a motion. Land Use and Development Commission Page 3 June 6, 1996 Pete Anderson moved to recommend to the City Council the zone change on the Tree Valley Subdivision to R-1. Gayle Anderson, seconded. Wally Wright, yes; Richard Pearson, yes: Pete Anderson, yes; Kent Kearns, yes; LeRoy Quick, yes; Gayle Anderson, yes. 4. An application by Homes West Inc., P.O. Box 5619, Chubbuck Idaho for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) conditional use permit and preliminary development plan with its accompanying preliminary plat for Homes West Planned Unit Development at Lots 1 & 2 of Block 4 Siebert Tract; North end of Ronald Road. The property is presently zoned Limited Residential (R-2). The staff passed out an updated preliminary plat and reviewed their staff report.. Derek Leslie, P.O. Box 5691, Chubbuck, Idaho. Mr. Leslie has developed the same type in the City of Pocatel]o. He is going to build 0 lot line twin homes. There ~.'ill be a common wall and each side will be sold. The people will own their own ground. The pr/ce would be in the low $70,000 and high $60,000. They will be built on one level with no basement. The commission discussed: 1. Treating them as duplex's in a R-2 zone. 2. Complying with the PUD ordinance to the fullest requirements. Chairman Kearns opened the meeting for public testimony in opposition to granting the PUD request. Dale Shook, 4021 Ronald Road had a petition signed by the people who lived 'within a 300' radius. He read a statement that he was against the development and submitted the statement to the Commission. Mr. Shook showed a drawing of the neighborhood indicating where the current houses were situated. He is concerned as to what will happen to the irrigation ditch. He wondered if there was enough property for cars to turn around. Dee Hoffine, 4058 Ronald Road, garbage trucks will have to back onto private property to turn around. He is concerned for enough room for a driveway. Frank Allen, 4031 Ronald Road, is in agreement with the two previous speakers. He is concerned about the canal head gate, turn around, etc. There would be a problem with emergency vehicles getting in. Helda Hudson, 990 W. Quinn Road she is against the increased traffic; and is full agreement with the others. The public hearing was opened to testimony by anyone in support of the application. There was none. Land Use and Development Commission Page 4 June 6, ]996 Derek Leslie, PO Box 5691, tie would comply with any easement that Fort Hall has. The ditch in front of the property would be maintained so others could gel; their water. He would at his expense fix it so the current property owners could have the same situation as they have now. He would accommodate a turn around for the residents. The density is in compliance · with four single dwellings and is well within the limits there. It is in compliance with the current zoning. He would be willing to make sure that the people would have access to their head gates. Chairman Kearns close(] the public testimony of the hearing and brought it back to the commission for a motion and discussion. Steve Smart explained that in the past they have required that the irrigation ditches be piped. Lot four is totally misleading, the entire frontage is within the canal easement. Access to lot 4 is questionable at this point. Chairman Kearns discussed: 1. Density - if we would put four single family dwelling in there. They would fit. 2. The property owner could approach the city to have duplexes built there. 3. The options that could be taken. Pete Anderson moved to table this item until we have a drawing that shows the actual concept that is going to be used in light of the information that has been presented here tonight regarding the accuracy of the drawings. Seconded by Roy Quick. Roll call vote: Wally Wright, yes; Richard Pearson, yes; Pete Anderson, yes; Kent Kearns, yes; Roy Quick, yes; Gayle Anderson, yes. 5. An application by Charlie Frasure, 102 Laurel Lane, Chubbuck, Idaho for a review of preliminary plat for Frasure Industrial Park. A subdivision located north of Chubbuck Road and East of Yellowstone Avenue (.East of 4900-5000 block Yellowstone). Chairman Kearns asked for any additional comments by city staff. There are three existing plats on that property. The old plats need to be vacated first. There are also two zones in that area. There will have to be some adjustments made on the plat. Chairman Kearns discussed: 1. Radius on the corners - should they be larger for truck traffic. 2. The radius on Laurel lane 3. The guide wire clearance 4. Industrial vs Commercial uses. 5. Lot sizes. Tim Shurtliff, 426 W. Lewis, explained that there were light industrial businesses in that area. There would be phases of the plat with the first phase being eight lots. They were willing to change the radius. Land Use and Development Commission Page 5 June 6, 1996 The commission discussed: 1. having access stubs 2. Using commercial lots for all of the lots that abut the houses on Hiway. Chairman Kearns opened it for public testimony in opposition to the preliminary plat. There was none. Chairman Kearns opened it for testimony in favor of the development. Dwain Kinghorn, 145 Hiway Avenue, He doesn't have any opposition to it. The size of the smaller lots make it easier for people to take care of them. Commission discussed: 1. Phases of the lots 2. The use is in an ideal location. 3. A road to the east for better circulation in the community and a second access to the property. 4. The north end being commercial Pete Anderson moved to recommend approval to the City council of the preliminary plat with the conditions that: 1. radius's be increased to a sufficient radius to handle truck traffic whether that's 40~ or larger. 2. Access to the East be provided either off the end of Light Industry Way, or someplace off Kristie Lane or extension of Holly Lane, whichever 3. The reconfiguration of Dusty Road depending upon where the guy wire falls into it. 4. Leaving the zoning up to the developer to request as he feels he needs a zone change. Richard Pearson seconded. Wally Wright, yes; Richard Pearson, yes; Pete Anderson, yes; LeRoy Quick, yes; Gayle Anderson, yes. GENERAL BUSINESS: 1. Finding of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision for Aledsandr Karmanor. Richard Pearson moved to approve the finding of fact with the correction of the name, Gayle Anderson seconded. All voted in favor in. 2. Discussion on "Regulating Billboards" Roy Quick explained the councils discussion. They were of the feeling of just banning them at this point. They talked about keeping the ones that exist. We need to have some control and banning any new ones. The commission discussed: 1. We could have the billboard owners not renew any contracts with the people who currently were renting their bill boards. 2. Addressing freeway signs in this ordinance. Land Use and Development Commission Page 6 June 6, 1996 Attorney Tom Holmes will put together an ordinance fox' the commission and present it at the next meeting. Kent Kearns mentioned that our next meeting will be July llth, 1996 because of the July 4th holiday. Steve Smart asked the commission if they would be willing to hold a special meeeting for plat for Ridgewind Subdivision on June 25 at 7:00 pm. They were not in favor of the extra meeting. The commission adjourned at ]0:35 pm. ~ent~earns, Chairman : lyrna C~a~o, Secretary'- 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 6, 1996, upon the application of Paula Waldal (hereinafter referred to as "applicant") for a conditional use permit to operate a child day care center on the real property located at 4926 Galena 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. n 3. The property in question is zoned Limited Residential (R-2) pursuant to the Land Use Ordinance of the City of Chubbuck. 4. The property is designated as Limited Residential (R-2) 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. Applicant will have no employees. B. Licensing requirements limit the number of children that can be present with no employees. C. There was no public testimony in favor or against the Applicant. BASED UPON THE FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT, the Land Use and Development Commission hereby enters the following: FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISON - Page t dec chbbck08277 '� 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 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 not conflict with aesthetic qualities of the surrounding lands. 7. The adverse impact 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 not expressed approval or 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: State licensing requirements shall be met. � 3. The conditional use permit requested by the Applicant is granted, subject to the foregoing conditions. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 2 dac chbbck05 2n � 4. Takings. Pursuant to Idaho Code S 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. 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 day of �,�� , 1996. LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION By: iU X_y------- �- Chairman FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCWSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 3 dsc chbbch08.277 CITY OF CHUBBUCK LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION This matter having come before the Land Use and Development Commission for public hearing pursuant to public notice as required by law, on June 6, 1996, upon the application of Cary Campbell (hereinafter referred to as "applicant") for a change in land use district for the real property described on Exhibit "A" hereto from A or Agricultural to R-1 or Single Family Residential, and the Land Use and Development 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 zone change from A to R-1 for the real property more particularly described on Exhibit "A" hereto. n 2. All legal requirements for notice of public hearing have been met. 3. The property in question is zoned A or Agricultural pursuant to the Land Use Ordinance of the City 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 the Comprehensive Plan in Sections B, B(5), B(6) and B(8) and in Idaho Code Sections 67-6502 and 67-6508. 6. The requested change in land use district is not in conflict with the provisions of existing zoning regulations or the duly adopted Comprehensive Plan of the City of Chubbuck. 7. The property in question is suitable for the proposed land use district, and such uses would be compatible with existing land uses in the area. 8. Owners of adjacent properties have not expressed approval of the proposed change in land use district. 9. The requested zone change is reasonable to provide orderly development of FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 1 dec chbbck08.275 -4-1 `\ �0 the City, and to promote economic values and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. 10. It is in the best interests of the public that the proposed change in land use district be granted. BASED UPON THE FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT, the Chubbuck Land Use and Development Commission hereby enters the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The requirements of Idaho Code Section 67-6509(d) have been met. 2. The proposed change in land use district is reasonable and necessary to provide orderly development of the City, and to promote economic values, and is not inconsistent with or detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. 3. The proposed change in land use district is consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Ordinance of the City of Chubbuck and the Local Planning Act of 1975, as codified in Chapter 65 of Title 67 of the Idaho Code. n 4. The requested change in Land Use District should be granted. 5. Takings. Pursuant to Idaho Code S 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. 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. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 2 dee chbbckOO.275 ,..%k DECISION It is recommended that the application for a change in land use district to designate the land described on Exhibit "A" be granted by the City Council. DATED this day of J� , 1996. Chairman, Land Use and Development Commission FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 3 deo chbbckDS. 75 ,-IN EXHIBIT "A" Commencing at the Northwest corner of the W� E� of the SW; of said Section 2, Township 6 South, Range 34 E.B.M., Bannock County, Idaho, thence South along the West line of said W� EA of SWC,, 264 feet; thence East 330 feet; thence north parallel to the West line of said W� E� of SWJ of said Section 2, 264 feet; thence West 330 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning... DCHIBIr'A' chbbckO7.031