Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREASON FOR DECISION - 18-00275 - 261 N 1st E - Storage UnitsPage 1 of 4 Rezone 18-00275 247 N 1st E Conditional Use Permit: Household Warehousing & Storage in Mixed Use 1. May 22, 2018 Application was received for a Conditional Use Permit and fees were paid. 2. May 13, 2018, the Staff Review Summary and the Planning & Zoning agenda were emailed to the applicant. 3. May 14, 2018, the Staff Review Summary was sent to the applicant after a review of a submitted revision. 4. May 30, 2018, notice was sent to the newspaper to be published on June 5th and June 19th, 2018. 5. June 7, 2018, notice was mailed to adjacent landowners. 6. June 14, 2018, Notice was posted on the property. 7. June 21, 2018, the application was presented to the Planning & Zoning Commission by Johnny Watson. Hearing 4. 6:50PM - (18-00275) 261 N 1st E – Conditional Use Permit for Warehousing and Storage in a Mixed Use zone. Johnny Watson – 1152 Bond Ave. – This is a strange proposal. This is a crazy looking lot, but the usable piece is not even close to this. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as Mixed Use. He appreciates staff’s optimism for this area. There is a nice park and a housing development that developed to the North. There is a huge investment in structures currently in this area. These would have to disappear for Mixed Use to come to fruition. A nice housing development would be a good place next to the park. He has stood before the Commission for multi-family projects. At this time, the projects could not pencil economically. It is extremely difficult to build multi-family housing unless you are on bare ground on the outskirts of our community. He represents the owner. (The parcel was shown with the easement.) The buildable area is in the northeast corner of the property. When they first went to staff, they wanted to rezone back to Light Industrial. Staff is optimistic and wants the park to be surrounded by multi-family housing in the future. Staff suggested the conditional use permit to allow Mixed Use in the future. They have designed a more attractive building than what exists there, but fits nicely with the area. He has more pictures, but he prefers to keep this as more of a land use issue at this time. 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Phone: 208.359.3020 Fax: 208.359.3022 www.rexburg.org Reason for Decision City of Rexburg Page 2 of 4 Rory Kunz, do you know why they didn’t hold to Light Industrial? Johnny assumes this zoning will establish a buffer between the park and the commercial center. The zone was changed because the Grove originally anticipated a 2nd and 3rd phase. Mark Rudd is going to recuse himself and move to the audience. Kristi Anderson asked about the Light Industrial zoning in this area. The four structures to the north are Light Industrial. The Comprehensive Plan Map would also have to be changed from Neighborhood/Mixed Use to Light Industrial, then the parcel would have to be rezoned. Chairman Heidi Christensen asked for any other clarifying questions. None. Chairman Heidi Christensen opened the public input portion of the hearing at 8:18 p.m. Favor: Bret Stoddard – 1025 Country road in Sugar City. He is part owner in this venture. What Johnny stated is completely accurate. He was thinking of housing as far as a 4-plex or a 6- plex. However, in the middle of a light industrial zone with semis pulling out on this road, this is a danger. There will not be any living quarters at all. In the event, someone comes in, the entire area would be purchased, and they would entertain an offer. Tyler Peterson – 686 Tanglewood Drive – He is part owner. He has talked with as many neighbors as he could get a hold of. He told them their plans. He wanted to let them know they are trying to make good use of the parcel and raise the values of everyone’s property. Stephanie Stoddard – 1025 Country road in Sugar City. She is in favor. Neutral: Page 3 of 4 Randall Porter – P.O. Box 401, Rexburg. He owns the warehouse directly to the north of the property with two of his brothers. Will you show us the buildable property lines? How many square feet does this represent? He has looked at the property in the past. He was not sure if the building would be the same size as what is already there. Chairman Heidi Christensen asked Staff to answer these questions in their staff report. Mark Rudd – 530 Rolling Hills - He knows the history of this area. In the past, this area had a concrete plant. At one time, he wanted to build some storage units. He identified an alley at the back of the park. They brought in a semi-truck, turned it around, and identified how much room is needed to determine the easement. The easement is judge-ordered. He was prohibited by the design standards that are required today. If they can fit this project in, and make it work, and doesn’t prohibit anyone else, he is for the project. Opposed: Chuck Hill-264 S 5000 W – He owns one of the shops. He has a couple of semi-trucks he works on in the buildings to the south. He uses the easement to turn those trucks around in. He needs to be able to turn those trucks around. He is concerned about parking blocking the easement. Written Input: None Rebuttal: Johnny Watson responded. There is very little parking required for storage units. The Mixed Use allows 90% lot coverage. The IBC does not allow the builder’s structure to be in noncompliance. There is a 10’ separation. 0 front yard is required. He cannot create a circumstance that places the current buildings to be in nonconformance with fire-rating. It is less expensive to give the neighboring buildings the separation. Chairman Heidi Christensen closed the public input portion of the hearing at 8:29 PM. She invited staff to report. Scott Johnson said staff’s job is to look at the development long-term. He doesn’t say that this area will change any time soon. They do believe that housing will come in this area. The Grove took advantage of subsidies. Staff is not opposed to this project and this use can go away fairly easily if the housing development presents itself. Kristi Anderson asked what the Comprehensive plan designation is for this area? It is planned Neighborhood Commercial/Mixed Use. Steve Oakey asked about the judge reference. Bret Stoddard said the survey has been done currently and reflects the buildable land. Motion to recommend City Council approve the conditional use permit to allow the property owner to maximize their property and because it fits with the surrounding uses of the area. Action: Moved by Steve Oakey, Seconded by Rory Kunz. Commission Discussion: None. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8). Yes: Bruce Sutherland, Chairman Heidi Christensen, Gil Shirley, Greg Blacker, Kristi Anderson, Melanie Davenport, Rory Kunz, Steve Oakey. Johnny Watson asked if the Commission will approve the Conditional Use Permit instead of sending the request to City Council. Steve Oakey asked the motion be amended to reflect Johnny’s request. Page 4 of 4 Motion: Motion to approve the conditional use permit to allow the property owner to maximize their property and because it fits with the surrounding uses of the area., Action: Moved by Steve Oakey, Seconded by Rory Kunz. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8). Yes: Bruce Sutherland, Chairman Heidi Christensen, Gil Shirley, Greg Blacker, Kristi Anderson, Melanie Davenport, Rory Kunz, Steve Oakey.