Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraft Minutes Land Use and Development Commission Regular Meeting March 12, 2024 6:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 290 East Linden, Chubbuck, ID 83202 MINUTES Board Members Present: Chair Jason Mendenhall, Darell Stewart, Mike Schwartz, Carrie Holm, and Adam Thayer. Staff Members Present: Attorney Ryan Lewis, Planning Manager Don Matson, Community Services Director Devin Hillam, and City Clerk Joey Bowers. Mendenhall called the meeting to order at 6:00pm. Mendenhall asked if any commissioners had a conflict of interest with the items before the board. Holm recused herself from Public Hearing #1. PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: February 13, 2024. Mendenhall entertained a motion to approve the minutes as emailed. Schwartz moved to accept the meeting minutes of February 13, 2024 as emailed; Holm seconded. The full commission approved. PUBLIC HEARING 1. An application for a Conditional Use Permit for an annual spook alley and fund raiser in the Single Family Residential (R-1) zone on approximately 1 acre of land. Subject property is located at 5297 Whitaker Rd, Chubbuck, Idaho. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates this area as Medium Density Residential. The application will be reviewed against criteria in section 18.28.020.C.5 of City Code. Type of action: Decision. Applicant Jared Turner presented an application for a Conditional Use Permit for an annual spook alley and fund raiser in the Single Family Residential (R-1) zone on approximately 1 acre of land. Planning Manager Don Matson stated that this application had been reviewed by City Staff and appears to meet the comprehensive plan and the standards of Titles 16, 17 and 18 of City Code, and recommended approval. Mendenhall declared the public hearing open for public comment, due to no public comment Mendenhall closed the public hearing. Schwartz motioned to approve a Conditional Use Permit for an annual spook alley and fund raiser in the Single Family Residential (R-1) zone on approximately 1 acre of land located at 5297 Whitaker Rd as presented, including the findings, facts and conclusions of law, and conditional upon activity will be limited to the month of October, and must comply with the quiet hours ordinances of the city. Thayer seconded. With all commission members understanding the motion they voted. Roll Call Vote: Darell Stewart, Yes; Adam Thayer, Yes; Jason Mendenhall, Yes; Mike Schwartz, Yes; Carrie Holm, Recused; Motion carried. 2. An application for a Conditional Use Permit for a school in the Village (V) zone on approximately .17 acres. Subject property is located at 121 Evans Ln, Chubbuck, Idaho. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates this area as Village. The application will be reviewed against criteria in section 18.28.020.C.5 of City Code. Type of action: Decision. Public Hearing #2 was removed from the agenda. 3. An application for a Title Map Amendment from Single Family Residential (R-1) to Limited Residential (R-2) on approximately 3.55 acres located at 5450 Cole St. in Chubbuck, Idaho. At the meeting, the Commission will consider whether the proposal satisfies the approval criteria in municipal code section 18.28.050.B. Type of Action: Recommendation. Applicant Scott Harris presented an application for a Title Map Amendment from Single Family Residential (R-1) to Limited Residential (R-2) on approximately 3.55 acres located at 5450 Cole Street. This property was farmed until 2016 and was previously owned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and planned for a future church building. Plans changed for the church and the site was sold to Scott and Beau Harris in 2023. Mr. Harris stated that he currently does not have a concept layout for this project. Thayer asked why the applicant was requesting a title map amendment from Single Family Residential (R-1) to Limited Residential (R-2). Mr. Harris stated that due to the shape and limited access, the main reason for their request was the difference in lot size requirements between (R-1) and (R-2). Planning Manager Don Matson stated that this application had been reviewed by City Staff and appears to meet the comprehensive plan and the standards of Titles 16, 17 and 18 of City Code, and recommended approval with a zoning development agreement (ZDA). Mr. Matson stated that these two zones make up the Low Density Residential category in the Comprehensive Plan. There are only two differences between them, permitted or conditionally permitted housing types, and minimum lot size requirements. Duplexes are not permitted in R-1; to be built in R-2 it would need a public hearing and Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Zero lot line homes are conditionally permitted (by a CUP) in R-1. In R-2 they may be permitted by the City Council without a CUP only under certain conditions; if not they require a CUP. Zero lot line means the home is against the property line, each unit has it’s own property, such as twin homes or townhomes – each is individually owned. The minimum lot size in R-1 is 7,000 square feet. If a twin home is built in R-1, 11,000 square feet are required for the two units. In R-2 6,000 square feet is the minimum size for a single home. Twin homes in R-2 must share at least 8,500 square feet. Neither zone allows apartment buildings and both zones have a maximum building height of 35ft. Mendenhall declared the public hearing open for public comment. Resident Jackie Reader, was Opposed. Mrs. Reader felt like the applicant should have a concept layout for this project before requesting for a title map amendment. Mrs. Reader was also concerned about the increase in traffic, and didn’t feel like the proposed zone was harmonious to the surrounding neighborhoods. Resident Justin Reader, was Opposed. Mr. Reader felt like the applicant should have a concept layout for this project before requesting for a title map amendment. Mr. Reader was concerned about the increase in traffic, and didn’t feel like the proposed zone was harmonious to the surrounding neighborhoods. Resident Sue Burton, was Opposed. Mrs. Burton was concerned about the increase in traffic, parking, and didn’t feel like the proposed zone was harmonious to the surrounding neighborhoods. Resident Eileen Krammen, was Opposed. Mrs. Krammen was concerned about the increase in traffic, building heights, property values, and felt like the applicant should have a concept layout for this project before requesting for a zone change. Mrs. Krammen also didn’t feel like the proposed zone was harmonious to the surrounding neighborhoods. Thayer stated for clarification that this application was only for a zone change and if the applicant had presented a concept layout for this project it would not necessarily be a binding agreement. Community Services Director Devin Hillam stated that the Board could recommend approval with a zoning development agreement (ZDA). Resident James Krammen, was Opposed. Mr. Krammen was concerned about the increase in traffic, building heights and setbacks from property lines. Resident Don Potter, was Opposed. Mr. Potter was concerned about the increase in traffic and safety. Resident Dalisa Potter, was Opposed. Mrs. Potter didn’t feel like the proposed zone was harmonious to the surrounding neighborhoods. Resident Blake Harrington, was Opposed. Mr. Harrington was concerned about the increase in traffic, building heights, and didn’t feel like the proposed zone was harmonious to the surrounding neighborhoods. Resident Shelley Schaugaard, was Opposed. Mrs. Schaugaard was concerned about the increase in traffic, and property values. Resident Travis Burton, was Opposed. Mr. Burton was concerned about the increase in traffic, loss of privacy, and property values. Mr. Burton also didn’t feel like the proposed zone was harmonious to the surrounding neighborhoods. Resident Danielle Van Wagoner, was Opposed. Mrs. Van Wagoner didn’t feel like the proposed zone was harmonious to the surrounding neighborhoods. Resident Brittany Anderson, was Opposed. Mrs. Anderson was concerned about the increase in traffic, safety, increase in crime, and property values. Resident Amanda Reading, was Opposed. Mrs. Reading was concerned about the increase in traffic, safety, and property values. Resident Johnathan Fisher, was Opposed. Mr. Fisher was concerned about the increase in traffic, loss of privacy, and property values. Mr. Fisher also didn’t feel like the proposed zone was harmonious to the surrounding neighborhoods. Mr. Fisher stated that he was not concerned about the applicant and the quality that would be put into a project. Resident Jamie Larson, was Opposed. Mrs. Larson was concerned about the increase in traffic, building heights, lot sizes, loss of privacy, and property values. Resident Virgil Larson, was Opposed. Mr. Larson was concerned about the increase in traffic, building heights, lot sizes, loss of privacy, and property values. Mr. Larson also didn’t feel like the proposed zone was harmonious to the surrounding neighborhoods. Resident Miranda Asper, was Opposed. Mrs. Asper was concerned about the increase in traffic, safety, increase in crime, and property values. Resident Jason Rock, was Opposed. Mr. Rock was concerned about the increase in traffic, building heights, lot sizes, loss of privacy, and property values. Mr. Rock also didn’t feel like the proposed zone was harmonious to the surrounding neighborhoods. Due to no more public comment Mendenhall closed the public hearing. Mr. Harris stated that he was waiting to hire an architect until after the zone change, so that the architect could design a project that enhances the surrounding neighborhoods, and was also considering a 55 and older project for this property. Community Services Director Devin Hillam stated for clarification that both (R-1) and (R-2) zones allow the same maximum building height of 35ft. Mendenhall didn’t feel like the proposed application met policy 2 of city code 18.28.050B.8A. Schwartz wondered if it would be better if the applicant had a concept layout for this project before requesting for a title map amendment. Thayer didn’t feel like the applicant had done their due diligence to show how this application meets all the policies within section 18.28.050B.8A of city code. Thayer motioned to recommend denial of an application for a Title Map Amendment from Single Family Residential (R-1) to Limited Residential (R-2) on approximately 3.55 acres located at 5450 Cole St. as presented to the City Council. Due to the fact the proposed application does not met policy 2 of city code 18.28.050B.8A. Which states that the list of uses permitted by the land use ordinance would blend with surrounding land uses and the uses permitted in the proposed zoning district would be harmonious in terms of their scale, mass, coverage, density, and intensity with adjacent land uses. Stewart seconded. With all commission members understanding the motion they voted. Roll Call Vote: Adam Thayer, Yes; Jason Mendenhall, Yes; Mike Schwartz, Yes; Carrie Holm, Yes; Darell Stewart, Yes; Motion carried. GENERAL BUSINESS 1. Discussion on the Comprehensive Plan Update. Planning Manager Don Matson gave an update on the Comprehensive Plan update. ADJOURN: Mendenhall adjourned at 7:23. _____________________ Jason Mendenhall, Chairperson ____________________________________ Joey Bowers, City Clerk