Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout009 05 91LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION September 5, 1991 Minutes of the regular meeting of the Land Use and Development Commission held in the city municipal building September 5, 1991. Present: Chairman Kent Kearns, Commission Members: Ron Andersen, Gayle Anderson, Pete Anderson, Richard Pearson, Luther Perkins; Council Representative David Landon; Attorney Tom Holmes, Public Works Director Steve Smart; Project Director Gerd Dixon; Secretary Myrna Crapo Chairman Kent Kearns called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. Chairman Kearns asked for approval of the August 1, 1991 meeting. Ron Anderson moved to approve the Minutes of the August 1, 1991 meeting. Luther Perkins seconded the motion with all commission members voting in favor. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Kearns asked if any Land Use Members had a conflict of interest with any proposals before them tonight. There was none. (1) A PROPOSAL BY LEMAN WHITED, 207 BRISCOE, FOR A CHANGE OF USE DISTRICT to C-2 (General Commercial). Project Director Gerd Dixon presented the city staff report to the commission. Chairman Kent Kearns then opened the public hearing on the zoning change. Edith Reed, 156 Briscoe was opposed to the change. She felt that there was to much commercial land already in the city. There is also a dust problem that makes it impossible to see across the street at certain times. There are no sidewalks on the street and children walk to and from school on the road. The sun both rising and sitting prevents a vision problem. The courthouse records show that Mr. Lacey owns part of the ground that they are going to use. Leman Whited, 207 Briscoe told the commission that the insurance company required that he move the equipment further from his home. They try to have their equipment in by 4:30 pm. He just purchased the property a year ago from Mr. Lacey. They intend on putting up a 6' wood fence along Briscoe Road. Land Use and Development September 5, 1991 Page 2 Edith Reed presented a picture to the commission of the dust problem. Dusty Whited, 719 Bonanza, is co-owner in the business. If this proposal was not accepted the land would just be let go. They are trying to cut down on the dust problem with the pasture that they plan to put in. They will be graveling the appropriate areas. Their off season is in the spring and fall and that is when they want to do the work. They try to be safe when driving down the road and their equipment is parked safety on their ground. The water rights to the proposed pasture are was given up by Mr. Lacey so they will have to provide a different way to water the pasture. Joyce May, 219 Briscoe lives next door to the Whited's. She had no complaints with their driving, etc. Chairman Kearns closed the oral testimony and opened the meeting to commission discussion. David Landon made a motion to recommend to the city council to change the zoning from R2 to C2, with Gayle Anderson seconding. Roll call vote: Pete Anderson, yes; David Landon, yes; Richard Pearson, yes; Kent Kearns, yes; Luther Perkins, yes; Gayle Anderson, yes; Ron Andersen, yes. AN APPLICATION BY LEMAN WHITED, 207 BRISCOE FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PARK CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES, AND EQUIPMENT ON PROPERTY. Project Director Gerd Dixon explained the ordinances involved in the conditional use. Attorney Holmes asked if the buffer ordinance would be satisfied. They need a 40' buffer which can be reduced to 20' with a solid fence along the property line. The east and south sides would need to be buffered. Chairman Kearns asked for testimony for or, against this proposal. There was none and the public hearing was closed. The meeting was opened to commission discussion. The Commission discussed with Mr. Whited the fencing required. They discussed whether this was a vehicle storage site. It was decided that it was an equipment storage site. Land Use and Development September 5, 1991 Page 3 Pete Anderson moved to grant the conditional use to Mr. Whited to permit the parking of construction vehicles on the property with the following conditions: 1. The proper buffer or screening be provided as per ordinance 2. That a sealing or some kind of dust control method for the graveled surface be provided 3. Those areas not to be used for driveways or equipment parking be planted in some type of grass or ground cover and maintained. 4. That the time frame for completion is: a. Wood Fence by May 30, 1992 b. Pasture be planted by November 30, 1992 c. Driveway graveled by May 30, 1993 d. Work lot graveled by November 30, 1993 5. A 6' wood fence be put on the north side of the property. That the proper screening on the east and south sides be provided. .-. 6. All the necessary visual clearance requirement be met 7. The 40' buffer area for south and east side of the property be done upon granting of the conditional use permit and the north fence be completed as per the time frame listed. David Landon seconded, roll call vote: Pete Anderson, yes; David Landon, yes; Richard Pearson, yes; Kent Kearns, yes; Luther Perkins, yes; Gayle Anderson, yes; Ron Andersen, yes: 2. AN APPLICATION BY WALLACE SMITH, JR., 310 WEST CHUBBUCK, FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A VEHICLE STORAGE SITE AND AN 8 FOOT FENCE FOR SCREENING AT 410 W. Chubbuck, property is presently zoned C-2 General Commercial. Gerd Dixon gave the city's input on vehicle storage sites. The vehicle storage site definition was given. Chairman Kent Kearns opened the public hearing. Walley Smith, 310 W. Chubbuck explained the reason for the requested storage site. He needed to keep cars for customers who can't pay. Storage fees must equal the amount owed before he can get the title. He has 4 automobiles in back that he owns. He would construct an 8' wooden fence around the storage area, it will conform to those in the area. A great -� deal of work and moneyhas been g it up. The put into cleaning back two lots were to be fenced off. Land Use and Development September 6, 1991 Page 4 The fence will be at the base of the slope of the canal. All four sides would be fenced by May 1992. Carol Carter, 4856 Hawthorne was opposed to the conditional use. She felt that a business needed to be controlled. The use of the area may become salvage parts for other cars. Freida Wichhorst, 4836 Hawthorne. Is not in favor of the conditional use. There is no time set for removal of cars or the number to be stored. Darlene Crump, 420 W. Chubbuck had concerns about how it would affect the sale of their place, about the beautification of the city with a storage yard there, about junk cars being stored there, about the fence being kept in good repair and the weeds around it kept out. A letter received from Dorothy Ward, 4930 Hawthorne Road in opposition to the proposal and a petition signed by 12 residents of 330 W. Chubbuck Road Trailer park was entered into the record. Boyd Crump, 420 W. Chubbuck doesn't want W. Chubbuck to look like Yellowstone Highway. Letting in a business of a storage yard will provide the way for other to follow. They could see over an 8' fence from their upper story. Linda Wickhorst, 557 Scott, informed the commission that the weeds in the back are as high as the car windows. The area should be an automotive repair and not a storage area. It needs to be kept clean. How many cars could he put in it and how high would the cars be stacked. Chairman Kearns asked Walley if he would like to address any of these issues. Mr. Smith told the commission that he has worked hard to improve the building and the area. The former owners of the property has until October 1 to get their thing cleared off and then they will clean up the back. He has a reputation to uphold and wanted to have a high class business. His regular hours are from 8:00 am to 6:30 pm. Chairman Kearns then closed the public hearing and opened it up to discussion by the commission. They following were discussed: 1. Future land patterns 2. Community growth 3. Allowed use in a C-2 zone that would be worse then present application. 4. Storing of used parts Land Use and Development September 5, 1991 Page 5 Discussion continued: 5. Impact on the community 6. Home owners vs business growth. The balancing of home owners and business. 7. Vehicles being operable that are stored 8. Past history of the business using the building 9. Requiring cars to be operable 10. Storage area vs. place to keep cars until a title can be obtained 11. Idaho Mechanics lien law 12. Weed Control 13. Lighting in fenced area 14. Conditional use staying with applicant 15. Devaluation of property David Landon made a motion to allow Walley Smith to have a conditional use permit under the following conditions: 1. That an 8' solid wooden fence be put up on all four sides of the property and that it is maintained, kept up, and the weeds are kept down inside and outside. 2. There will be no work done inside the fenced yard past 6 PM. 3. No salvage operation done inside the fenced area meaning no cars will be put on blocks, stripped down for parts and left there to rot. 4. That all cars inside the fence will be cars that Walley is working on, has business with or is trying to get a title too, (cars have tires on them and they are not rusting, they can be removed.) 5. Vehicles cannot be stacked. 6. Shelving not higher then fence and kept in an organized way. 7. A conditional use is not being granted on the trailer behind the building. Pete Anderson seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Pete Anderson, yes; David Landon, yes; Richard Pearson, yes; Kent Kearns, abstain; Luther Perkins, no; Gayle Anderson, abstain; Ron Andersen, no. O` Meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m. nt earns, Chairman GO,OJp.e- Myrna C po, Secreta'YY 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 - September 5, 1991, upon the application of Lehman Whited (hereinafter referred to as "applicant") for a conditional use permit to park construction equipment and vehicles on the real property located at 207 Briscoe Road, Chubbuck, Idaho 83202 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 conditional use permit as particularly described above. 2. All legal requirements for notice of public hearing have been met. 3. The property in question is zoned R-2 pursuant to the Land Use Ordinance of the City of Chubbuck. 4. The property is designated as C-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. The Commission has voted to recommend a change in the Land Use District from R-2 to C-2. B. The property has been used for the proposed use for the past it years; the owners have been misadvised by a realtor that such use was allowed. C. A significant value of the neighbors support the proposal. D. Applicant proposes to mitigate the impact on the neighbor across the road who does not approve of the proposal. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 1 chbbck09.184 01 -IN 1. The proper buffer or screening be provided as per ordinance. 2. That a sealing or some kind of dust control method for the graveled surface be provided. 3. Those areas not to be used for driveways or equipment parking be planted in some type of grass or ground cover and be maintained. 4. A six foot wood fence be built on the north side of the property and property screening on the east and south sides be provided. 5. That the time frame for completion is: A. Wood fence on north side by May 30, 1992; B. Pasture be planted by November 30, 1992; C. Driveway graveled by May 30, 1993; and, D. Work lot graveled by November 30, 1993. 6. All the necessary visual clearance requirements of City ordinances be met. 7. The forty foot buffer area for south and east side of the property be done upon granting of the conditional use permit and the north fence be completed as per the time frame listed. 3. The conditional use permit requested by the Applicant is granted, subject to the foregoing conditions. DATED this �� 8- day of 01-�k4e.z 1991. LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION By: hairman FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 3 chbbck09.184 n 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 September 5, 1991, upon the application of Leman Whited (hereinafter referred to as "applicant") for a change in land use district for the real property described on Exhibit A hereto from R-2 or Limited Residential to C-2 or General Commercial 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 R-2 to C-2 for the real property more particularly described on Exhibit A hereto. 2. All legal requirements for notice of public hearing have been met. 3. The property in question is zoned R-2 or Limited Residential pursuant to the Land Use Ordinance of the City of Chubbuck. 4. The property is designated as C-2 or General Commercial 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. Some owners of adjacent properties have expressed approval of the proposed change in land use district and one has expressed disapproval. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 1 dsc chbbck09.183 X13 9. The requested zone change is reasonable to provide orderly development of 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. 4. The requested change in Land Use District should be granted. 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 3'11 day of 1991. ehfi rma , Land Use and Development Commission FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 2 dsc chbbck09.183 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 September 5, 1991, upon the application of Wallace Smith, Jr. (hereinafter referred to as "applicant") for a conditional use permit to maintain a vehicle storage site on a portion of the real property located at 310 W. Chubbuck Road, (said area being outlined in yellow on the attached map 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 conditional use permit as particularly described above. 2. All legal requirements for notice of public hearing have been met. 3. The property in question is zoned C-2 pursuant to the Land Use Ordinance of the City of Chubbuck. 4. The property is designated as C-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. A vehicle storage area is necessary for applicant's business as he must hold cars for parts and to await payment for repairs made. B. The proposed storage site is less of a negative visual impact than past operation on the site. C. The required eight foot sold fence around the property would eliminate all views of the site and vehicles except to the Crumps. D. The majority of any negative financial impact, if any, � would be caused by the commercial zoning of the property and not by this use. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 1 chbbck09.182 BASED UPON THE FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT, the Land Use and Development Commission hereby enters the following: 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 exiting does not 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, due to the requirement of an eight foot screening fence. 7. The adverse impact of the proposed use on other development within the City has been minimized by Applicant as much as is reasonable possible. 8. Owners of adjacent property have not expressed approval 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: FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 2 chbbck09.182 n 1. An eight foot solid wooden fence be put up on all four sides of the property; it must be maintained, kept up, and the weeds kept down inside and outside the fence. 2. There will be no work done inside the fenced yard past 6:00 p.m. 3. No salvage operation can be done inside the fenced area. No cars will be put on blocks, stripped down for parts or left there to rot. 4. All cars inside the fence will be cars that applicant is working on, has business with or is trying to get a title to. (Cars must have tires on them and they are not to be in a rusting, deteriorated condition. If they are, the City may order them removed.) 5. Vehicles cannot be stacked. 6. No shelving can be higher then fence and any shelving and its contents must be kept in an organized way. 7. This conditional use permit does not include or permit the semi -trailer behind the building. 3. The conditional use permit requested by the Applicant is granted, subject to the foregoing conditions. DATED this 314 day of OA -1- ,c_ , 1991. LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION By: S --'ChairVfam FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 3 chbbck09.182