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