HomeMy WebLinkAbout008 04 83LAND USE & DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ~NUTES
August 4, 1983
Minutes of the regular meeting of the Land Use and Development Commission
held in the meeting room of the City Fire Station, 4727 Yellowstone,
August 4, 1983.
Present: Acting Chairman Thomas Nield, Commission Members: Dee Stalder,
Ron Nelson, Myrna Cain, Janet Williams and Pete Anderson. City Attorney
B. Lynn Winmill, Public Works Director Steven Smart, Secretary Dorothy
Ward. Chairman Richard Allen was excused.
Meeting called to order at 8:10 by Chairman Nield.
Chairman Nield ~.skedfor any additions or corrections to the minutes of July
7, 1983. A correction had been made at the request of Steven Smart after
the minutes had been mailed. Janet Williams made motion minutes be
accepted as corrected. Ron Nelson seconded the motion, with all commission
members voting in favor.
PUBLIC HEARING:
1. PROPOSAL BY ARSHAD ALI, 525 SOUTH MAIN, POCATELLO, IDAHO, FOR A CHANGE
OF LAND USE 'DISTRICT TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C-2) and for a change of the
City's comprehensive plan if necessary to allow construction of a super
market at 225 E. Chubbuck Road. The existing land use district for parcel in
question is Industrial (I). Mr. Ali is contract purchaser of property.
Mr. Ali was present and said he desired to build a super market on the ground
in question.
Chairman Nield asked for testimony in favor of request. There being none, he
then asked for testimony against request.
James Humble, 232 E. Chubbuck Road, said he objected as he felt there was
adequate grocery stores in the Chubbuck area.
Connie Howell, 224 E Chubbuck Road, said she had lived across from a grocery
store before. That it was not the store that caused the litter but the
people discarding trash.
Venna McCallum, 223 E Chubbuck Road, asked how the change of zoning would
affect her property.
Steven Smart told her that the change of zoning would only affect the piece
of property that Mr. Ali was interested in buying. With the property zoned
Industrial there could be a number of Uses that might not upgrade their
property as much as the applicant asking for a General Commercial use.
Mrs. McCallum asked if it would affect them having livestock. She was assured
the change of zoning would only affect the property of Mr. Ali.
PUBLIC HEARING -ARSHAD AL!
Larry Rawlins, 244 E. Chubbuck Road, asked for a definition of a super market,
and what useS were allowed in an Industrial zone.
Commission members discussed uses allowed in an Industrial zone.
Attorney Winmill said commission members should be concerned abot~t creating
an island zoned Commercial in an Industrial zone. He reminded those present
that they were discussing only the property that Mr. Ali was interested in
and was~cOnc6rned if the Industrial and Commercial zones dovetailed in that
area.
Dwain Kinghorn, 145 Hiway Avenue, asked about the lOcation of property. He
said he was concerned that Mr. Ali would be asking for a change of zoning
on a piece of property that he had no interest in and maybe never build on.
Mr. Kinghorn was assured that Mr. Ali was the contract purchaser of the property,
and Mr. Ali said he would be ready to build within two months if the change
of zoning was approved.
Mr. Kinghorn said residents must face the fact that Chubbuck Road will be a
Commercial area and that it would be more favorable with businesses than
Industrial development. He said that it would enhance their property.
However, he said, he was opposed to spot zoning.
Mary Byington, 225 E. Chubbuck Road, asked when the zoning was changed, she
said they had never been notified of any hearings on changes. She was told
there had been numerous public hearings over a period of about three years.
Mrs. Byington asked how the change of zoning would affect the real estate value
of their property. Attorney Winmill told her that was knowledge they would
have to seek for themselves.
Delbert and LaRae Caudill, 435 E. Chubbuck Road, said they opposed the change
due to the increased traffic on Chubbuck Road.
Sylvia Hayball, 242 E. Chubbuck, said there is already to much traffic on
Chubbuck Road and she didn't feel they needed the additional problems that
would be created.
Mary Brennan, 263 Locust Street, North, Twin Falls, Idaho, asked if zoning not
changed, what type of business would be allowed on this property.
Attorney Winmill read from the Land Use Ordinance #241 the permitted uses in an
Industrial zone.
Chairman Nield closed the public testimony and asked for discussion from the
commission members.
Chairman Nield said the proposal on the map shows it surrounded by Industrial
zone and he asked Steven Smart about it. He said it appears not to be
flush with a Commercial zone.
PUBLIC HEARING - ARSHAD AL~
Steven Smart said in the general layout of the comprehensive plan, half
way between Yellowstone and the Railroad tracks the division between
Commercial and Industrial was to be made, not necessarily on property lines.
He said it was not the intent of the council, he did not think, to split
a small piece of property into two zones.
Inga Anderson, Realtor, said she had talked to the property owners of the
vacant lot and duplex to the west and she was quite sure they would
rather have their property zoned Commercial.
Pete Anderson said if property dovetails a Commercial zone he felt like
request was valid but otherwise he felt it was spot zoning. He said he
felt item should be tabled until it was clarified.
Attorney Winmill advised commission members Judge Beebe had ruled against
spot zoning and he felt it would be advisable to table the item and see
if adjoining property owners would like to join in and have entire area
rezoned to Commercial. He said even though the people might be against
a grocery store they might feel this a better use than something Industrial.
Pete Anderson made motion to table the request of Arshad Ali, 525 South
Main, Pocatello, Idaho, for a change of land use district to General
Commercial (C-2) and for a change of the City's comprehensive plan if
necessary to allow construction of a super market at 225 E. Chubbuck
Road, until it can re resolved what the zone is in that particular area,
and where the boundaries are lOcated.
Janet Williams seconded the motion. Roll call vote, Anderson, yes; Williams,
yes; Cain, yes; Nield, yes. Nelson, yes and Stalder, yes.
e
PROPOSAL BY R. J. EVANS, 1860 JEAN, POCATELLO, IDAHO, FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT TO CONVERT OFFICES ON THE UPPER LEVEL AT 146 E. CHUBBUCK ROAD
into an apartment for residential purposes. Property is presently
zoned General Commercial.
Mr. Evans said they wanted to convert office space above their business
for residential purposes. He stated it would be for their personal use.
Chairman Nield asked for testimony in favor of request. There being none, he
asked for testimony against proposal.
Dwain Kinghorn, 145 Hiway Avenue, said he was concerned about the fire risk,
having living quarters above a business. He said he felt the Building
Inspector should be consulted.
Ann Evans, 1860 Jean, said they had visited with the Building Inspector,
Danny Stuart, on several occasions as to having their living quarters
above the store. She said there would have to be very little modification
to the offices to make a nice three bedroom apartment.
Beverly Hewlett, 4698 Burley Drive, asked if apartment would be used for a rental.
Chairman Nield closed the Public testimony and asked for discussion from the
commission members.
PUBLIC HEARING - R. J. EVANS
The commission discussed the idea if commercial standards would have to
be met, as to curb, gutter and sidewalk. It was determined that the
request was for a conditional use permit for living quarters therefor
they could not require these items.
Myrna Cain made motion to grant to R. J. Evans, 1860 Jean, Pocatello, Idaho,
the conditional use permit to convert offices on the upper level at 146
E. Chubbuck Road into an apartment for residential purposes. That the
findings of fact and conclusion of law had been met and that this
be granted with the condition the conditional use permit will expire
when residence is no longer occupied by owner of property.
Pete Anderson seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Anderson, yes; Williams,
yes; Cain, yes; Nield, yes; Nelson, yes and Stalder, yes.
Ron Nelson made motion to adjourn at 9:25 p.m., seconded by Dee Stalder.
All commission members voted in favor.
Dorothy L. W~rd~ Secretary
Thoma~ Nield, Acting Chairman
CITY OF ~ LAND USE & DEVELO~ C~MMISSIfkN
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER
This matter having cc~e before the Coumission for public hearing
pursuant to public notice as re~34red by law, on /~5'7' ~' , 19~__S,
upon applicant's application for ~ng~e ~_~. ~ =~--~ ' '
-~~,~ ~c~Cond~tional Use Permit ' '
FINDLNC~ OF FACT
1. Applicant has applied for: ~'-'~~9
2. The existing land uses in th~ area are: to the north,
~~ ~i ; to the _~ast, ~
3. That the Compr~ive Plan designates this area as
4. That the existing zoning of the property is ~ ~~ <¢-. 7~
Se
e
That all legal requirerents for notice of the public hearing have been
fulfilled.
Owners of adjacent ~roperty have~~ expressed approval of the
application.
e
Relevant criteria and sta~dards for construction of this ~application
are set forth in ~ ~~k- ~ ~ 0~
e
The facts relevant to an evaluation of the relevant criteria in
sta~ar~ are as follows:
nj
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
Conclusions of Law
1. The use for which the permit is sought m~l/will not be
injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public
health, safety or w~lfare.
2. The permit sought ~i~l-1/will not produce an adverse impact on
the econo,~tic values of adjacent properties.
3. The permit sought ~/v~ii! not produce a negative impact on
t,.~anspo~-~rt~ltion facilities, public utilities, sclnools, public parks,
or %he natural environment,~ fr~-=-~ +_'~=--n ba~l-~h~ z~i~f the
4. R~e noise and traffic cor~itions generated by the use for which
the permit is SOught, when aD~]yzed in conjunction with the noice and
traffic oonditions now existing in t~ vicinity ~/does not irOn,cate that
the pennnit should be denied.
5. The use for which the permit is sought ~t/~1 not work an
unrea~onable hardship upon surrour~ing property owp~rs by virtue of the
legal nature or by the impact of changes made in the landscape of the land.
6. The aesthetic qualifies of the proposed use ~l/will not oonflict
with the aesthetic c~m] ities of t~he surrounling l~nds.
the ordinance.
8. Adverse impact on other develol~ment within the City will/w~]~
be minimized by the applicant's use sought by the penmit.
11. The requested c~nditional use permit should be granted, subject to
the conditions, if any, set forth hereinafter.. ~ ~ ~ ¢~ ~
Decision & Order
The Land Use & Develotm~_nt Cc~sion, pursuant to the foregoing,
finds that the request of ~ ~-, ~
fora c~~~
should be ~p~roved subject to the following conditions/~.
CO~Z~ZGNS
Motion by: Myrna Cain , seconded by Pet~ Andpr~nn
to adopt the foregoing Findi~s of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Or, er.
lqOILCAT;,:
Cor~nissionerAnders0n
Corm~issioner Williams
Cormtissioner Cain
ConmttssionerNield
Cor~ssionerNels0n
Co~ssionerStalder
Voted Yes
Voted Yes
Voted Yes
Voted Yes
Voted Yes
Voted Yes