Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout011 07 85LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AGENDA November 7, 1985 Minutes of the regular meeting of the Land Use and Development Commission held in the city municipal building, November 7 1985. ' Present: Chairman Pete Anderson, Commission Members: Sue Parrish, Myrna Cain, Steven England, Janet Williams, City Attorney B. Lynn Winmill, Public Works Steven Smart and Dorothy Ward. Robert Allen was present after 8:15 p.m. Meeting called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Anderson. Chairman Anderson asked for any additions or corrections to the minutes of October 3, 1985, the~ being none, Janet Williams made motion to accept minutes as written. Sue Parrish seconded the motion, with all commission members voting in favor. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: PROPOSAL BY WAYNE G. AND/OR MILLIE TAYLOR FOR A VARIANCE IN THE minim~required for a backyard from 20 feet to 12 feet for purpose of having a full sized building lot, property located at 810 E. Chubbuck Road. Property is presently zoned Limited Residential (R-l). Chairman Anderson asked Steve Smart for comment. He stated the Taylor's have a very large lot and want to sell back part that fronts Elizabeth Street, for a building lot. In order to have a full size building lot, the back yard of their own home needs to be reduced from 20 feet to 12 feet. He said the home is set back from the road, and they would still have a large lot. Mr. Taylor said the comments made by Steve Smart were true, if they had foreseen the problem they would not have built a 16 foot patio. Chairman Anderson opened meeting for public comment, there being no comment, public hearing closed. Sue Parrish said there was a suitable distance around house, and she felt it would b a hardship not to be able to sell the lot. Sue Parrish made motion to approve the variance for the minimum required for a back yard from 20 feet to 12 feet for the purpose of having a full sized building lot for Wayne G. and /or Millie Taylor, 810 E. Chubbuck Road. The lot is of such size and configuration that it would create a private hardship not required to protect public interest to compel the applicant to adhere strictly to set bas requirements of the ordinance. Myrna Cain seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Cain, yes; Williiams, yes; England, yes; Parrish, yes; Anderson, yes. PROPOSAL BY CHARLENE TOVEY AND LORI HANSEN FOR A CONDITIONAL use permit to operate a temporary child care business, Santas Playland, at the Pine Ridge Mall #164. Property is zoned General Commercial (C-2). Chairman Anderson asked for comment from Steve Smart. He stated all child care business comes before the commission, even though in the mall and a different situation, this is the reason item on agenda. Charlene Tovey and Lori Hansen, said they had complied with the requirements of the Pine Ridge Mall and intend to comply with the ordinances of the City of Chubbuck. They said they would be open from November 25, 1985 to December 31, 1985, they would be open the same hours as the mall. The area would handle about 60 children, with a ratio of one staff for each 15 children. Chairman Anderson asked for public comments, there ~being none, he closed the public hearing. Myrna Cain made motion to grant the conditional use permit of Charlene Tovey and Lori Hansen for a conditional use permit to opprate~ a temporary child care business, Santas Playland, at the Pine Ridge Mall #164. The commission finds there was no opposition by way of factual findings, that the location satisfys all normal objections or complaints. That the applicants have advised the commission they will be licensed by the State of Idaho and all notices given, property is presently zoned for this use and no objections expressed by adjoining landowners based upon that,they have met the following conclusions of law, the use whichsoug~ wi~ n~be injurious to the neighborhood and will not produce ~.~adverse impact on the economic values of adjacent properties and will not produce a negative impact on general facilities, public and private, area and noise and traffic conditions will not be adversly affected in any way. The use for which permit is sought will not work unreasonable hardship on surrounding property owners. Based upon these conclusions of law would grant requested conditional use permit. Janet Williams seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Cain, yes; Williams, yes; England, yes; Parrish, yes, Anderson, yes. 3.PROPOSAL BY JOHN AND JESANN C. ALLEN FOR A CONDITIONAL USE permit to operate a, one station, Suntanning Salon from their home at 148 Abraham. Chairman Anderson asked for comment from Steve Smart. He said all home occupations require a conditional use permit. The Building Inspector had said with this use an additional exit would be required. Attorney Winmill read the definition of a home occupation from Ordinance #241. John and JesAnn Allen said they had talked to building inspector and were not aware an additional exit would be required. He had informed them if room used for a bedroom a larger window would be required. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: JOHN AND JESANN C. ALLEN CONDITIONAL USE Commission members discussed the following: a) Exits b) Electrical c) Window b) Parking Mr. Allen said they could comply with the window. Mr. Allen was told that whatever building codes covered a home occupation, he would have to abide with them. Mrs. Allen said they would operate from 8:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m.; she said they would have only one customer at a time; which would be about one customer an hour. Chairman Anderson asked for public comment. Chris Bergmans, 176 Abraham, said he was concerned about allowing business in neighborhoods, he expressed concern if this would be setting a precedent. Attorney Winmill explained the ordinance allows home occupations any place within th city, regardless of where it is, so no precedent would be set. He said home occupations are allowed conditionally to allow the Land Use & Development Commission to review the conditional use permit to be sure no adverse impact upon traffic or economic values of adjacent properties. Public hearing closed. Steven England made motion to grant the conditional use permit of John and JesAnn C. Allen to operate a, one station, Suntanning Salon from their home at 148 Abraham. They are to meet all fire and building codes, with all ordinances and conditions to be complied with, limited to a one station, the hours to be from 8:00 a.~. to 8:00 p.m., that it would not impose an adverse impact of the proposed use in other developments within the city. Janet Williams seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Cain, yes; Williams, yes; England, yes; Parrish, yes; Anderson, no. PROPOSAL BY FRED AND JOAN LEE FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT to build a duplex on Lot 7, Block 14, Heights Subdivision, 810 Canal. Chairman Anderson asked for comment from the city. There being none, he asked for comment from Mr. Lee. At this point Chairman Anderson asked Sue Parrish to act as chairman due to a conflict of interest. Mr. Lee said he had had plans drawn up at their request specifically for use of his daughter and granchildren and he and his wife. He said they did not intend to use the duplex commercially. Chairman Parrish asked if there were other duplex in the area. She was told this is the only one on Canal Street. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: FRED AND JOAN LEE FOR A CONDITIONAL USE Mr. Lee was asked if the duplex would be two seperate living units. He said it would, with his daughter and grandchildren in one side and he and his wife in the other. Chairman Parrish opened the public hearing for comments in favor of conditional use. There being none, she then ~sked for comment against. Leah Potter, 750 Natalie, said the people in the Heights Subdivision had been in requesting no more duplexes in the area. She asked the city support them in denying any more duplexes until they could file a class action suit against the Heights Subdivision. She said a majority of homeowners are against any more duplexes, she presented a petition with 153 signatures out of 193 in the subdivision. She said the restrictive covenants state where duplexes would be built; and the lot the Lee's are asking for a duplex on, is not one of them. Mr. Fred Lee withdrew his application for the conditional use permit to build a duplex at 810 Canal. Chairman Parrish closed the public hearing. PROPOSAL BY HAL OVERDORF FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM GENERAL RESIDENTIAL (R-2) to INdustrial (I) on property located at 4535 Burley Drive. Chairman Anderson asked for comment from Steve Smart. He said property is presently zoned General Residential (R-2); but the comprehensive plan shows it to be Industrial (I). He told the commission Mr. Overdorf would like to open a cabinet shop. Mr. Overdorf's mother owns this property, she had sent a letter stating he had her permission to use the property however he wished. Attorney Winmill said the commission could act on Mr. Overdorf's request; but before it could go before the city council, a request wou~ have to be before the council that Mrs. Overdorf joined with Hal Overdorf requesting a change of zoning. Chairman Anderson asked for public comment. public hearing closed. There being none, Commission discussed the request of Mr. Overdorf and it was generallly agreed the request would be consistant with the comprehensive plan. Janet Williams made motion to recommend to the city council the change of zoning from General Residential (R-2) to Industrial (I) on property at 4535 Burley Drive; subject to condition a letter be received from Mrs. Dean Overdorf stating she joins in the request for a change of zonig. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: HAL OVERDORF CHANGE OF ZONING Sue Parrish seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Cain, yes; England, yes; Williams, yes; Parrish, yes; Anderson, yes. OTHER BUSINESS: 1. Review of conditional use permit for Nancy Merrell, 4716 Mountlake, to operate a Dance Studio in her home. Chairman Anderson asked if there had been any ~mplaints made to the city. There having been none, Keith Merrell stated she was operating the studio as requested in original hearing. Myrna Cain made motion to grant continual use for the dance studio of Nancy Merrell, 4716 Mountlake, for as f_long as she meets the conditions set forth in original conditional use permit; she will not need a yearly review. Steve England seconded the motion, with all commission members voting in favor. 2. Review of an ordinance ~f the City of Chubbuck, amending Ordinance #241, Land Use Ordinance, modifying the provisions of Chapter 3 to include density restrictions for duplexes, threeplexes, fourplexes and apartments. Commission members discussed areas they were concerned about. Such as the Design Review and Schedule of General Controls. Janet Williams made motion to recommend to the City Council they adopt the multiple housing ordinance with the changes recommended by the zoning commission. Myrna Cain seconded the motion - Ail Commission Members voted in favor. Sue Parrish made motion the Land Use Commission will start process of reviewing the Schedule of General Controls to bring them into compliance wi~.this ordinance. Robert Allen seconded the motion; with all commission members voting in favor. Attorney Winmill asked the commission to prepare a map to show where R-i, R-2, R-3 and R-4 zones would be. The R-4 zone will not be created unlesss it is already an apartment complex. At that time if some one comes in and applies for apartments, the city would consider changing the zoning to R-4. Chairman Anderson announced there would be a joint planning meeting at the Bannock County Court House, Thursday, November 14, 1985, at 7:30 p.m. Meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. ~D0rothy L. ~ard, Secreta~j~ P:e Ande~ Chairman CITY OF CHUBBUCK LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER This matter having come before the Commission for public hearing pursuant to public notice asrequiredby law, on November 7 198_' upon application of Charlene (hereinafter referred to as applicant' or a conditional use permit to oDPr,+P tPmnrnrl child care business on the real property located at pine Ridge Mall 416g and the Commission having heard testimony from I interested parties and being fully advised in the matter, now makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Applicanat has applied for a condtional use permit as particularly described above. 2. All legal requirements for notice of public hearing have been met. 3. The property in question is zonedc-2 or pursuant to the Land Use Or finance o e City of Chubbuck. 4. The property is designated as c-2 Ge in the duly adopted Comprehensive an of the City of Chubbuck. 5. Relevent criteria and standards for consideration of this application are set forth in Section - 6. The existing neighboring land uses in the immediate area of this property are: To the north, C-2 General romwg-rnJ@J- to the south, C-2 General rnmmarciaj to the east C-2 General Commercial to the west C-2 General Commercial 7. The facts relevant to an evaluation of the relevant criteria and standards are as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 1 A. Applicant has advised commission that they will hi- licensed alicensed by the State of Idaho. B. C. D. E. F. G. n H. 8. Owners of adjacent property hA/v/(E�/// have not expressed`*$P 6P the issuance of the requested conditional use permit. n 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 W�JX / will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. 2. The permit sought wg" / will not produce an adverse impact on the economic values of adjacent properties. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 2 n 3. The permit sought miff / 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 condition now existing/ft(OS / does not indicate that the permit should be denied. 5. The use for which the permit is sought qoq�/ shall not work an unreasonable hardship upon surrounding property owners by virtue of its physical nature or by the impact of changes made in the landscape of the land. 6. The aesthetic qualities of the proposed use yli/1/1/ / will not conflict with aesthetic qualities of the surrounding lands. 4Y/ **4ggY /91� /T3AW jap/ A)r'/ f)P-/aPpP*/W'/ 8. 9. 10. The requested conditional use permit, if granted, should be maintained subject to the condtions set forth herinafter. 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, should be 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 DECISIONS - Page 3 A AL= 1 i rant u7i 1 1 pri nr tl npgnn i n7 tQ= bj1 g J AQQS 11"N ar=rnva1 of land nwnar anH nhta n Stato liCens® 3. The Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant is / ij�/hbk/granted, subject to the foregoing conditions. DATED this 7 day of 198 5 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CO By Motion by , seconded by TO adopt the foregoing In Ings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision. ROLL CALL: Commission Member Vote Cain vPG Williams Yes England Yes Parrish Yes Anderson Yes FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISIONS - Page 4 ,1-N CITY OF CHUBBUCK LAI4D USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER This matter having come before the Commission for public hearing pursuant to public nottic5 asurequirpon ed by law, on application of (hereinafter referred to as applican ") for a conditional use permit to Suntannina Salon on the real property located at 148 Abraham and the Commission having heard testimony from I interested parties and being fully advised in the matter, now makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Applicanat has applied for a condtional 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- or pursuant to the Land Use r inance eoetWe City of Chubbuck. 4. The property is designated as R-2 in the duly adopted Comprehefi-sive-TTarii of the City of Chubbuck. 5. Relevent criteria and standards for consideration of this application are set forth in 6. The existing neighboring land uses in the immediate area of this property are: To the north, R-2 General Residential to the south, ; to the east _ to the west 7. The facts relevant to an evaluation of the relevant criteria and standards are as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 1 D. E. F. G. H. 8 . a"'YM@cRp p j c tutproperty have expressed pprov f the issuance of the requested conditional use permit. 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 / ,4JTJ/ti6f/be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. 2. The permit sought will / ififf /A6i produce an adverse impact on the economic values of adjacent properties. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION - Page 2 3. The permit sought will / w/*/1/� t 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 condition now existing does / 000p/ ppt/ indicate that the permit should be denied. 5. The use for which the permit is sought shall / -pial f /rldt work an unreasonable hardship upon surrounding property owners by virtue of its physical nature or by the impact of changes made in the landscape of the land. 6. The aesthetic qualities of the proposed use will / yfit/46k/conflict with aesthetic qualities of the surrounding lands. 7. The adverse impact of the proposed use on other development within the City has / 440/900 been minimized by Applicant as much as is reasonably possible. 8. 9. 10. The requested conditional use permit, if granted, should be maintained subject to the condtions set forth herinafter. DECISION 1. The Land Use and Development Commission, pursuant to the foregoing, finds that the request of the applicant should / Vc)/p9y be approved. 2. The following conditions, if any, should be 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 DECISIONS - Page 3 B Operation limited to one station -- Hours of operation limited to 8.00 a.m. to 8.00 b.m. 3. The Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant is granted, subject to the foregoing conditions. DATED this 7thday of Novemher 198 5 . LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COM By: Motion by ctCxrc rn Rami and seconded by TO adopt the foregoing Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision. ROLL CALL: Commission Member Vote Cain Yes Williams Yes England Yes Parrish Yes ANDERSON YES FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISIONS - Page 4