Motion by Member Jim Martzke, Second by Member Nathan Watkins

Vote: 6 - 0 Approved

Motion by Member Jim Martzke, Second by Member Pati Fickett After the vote to remove the item from the table, Chair DePew opened the public hearing. Case planner Taylor provided a presentation, which is preserved in the files. Pamela Colabella, applicant, provided an applicant's statement. Elinor Angel spoke in opposition to the request. Deborah Chatham spoke in opposition to the request. Corry Larson spoke in opposition to the request.

Pamela Colabella, applicant, provided a rebuttal. Chair DePew closed the public hearing.

Commission discussion:

Member Saunders asked if this would be a daily use or long-term lot use. The applicant stated that typically it would attract snow birds, but they were flexible. Chair DePew asked whether the applicant would market towards long-term users that would be less impactful. The applicant stated she would do so if that was favored by the commission. Vice Chair Montgomery commented that the applicant had done a good job providing the site history. He noted the proposed development was in compliance with the factors for an against a special use.

Staff recommended conditions related to a cap on spaces, quiet hours, maintenance, road treatment, and perimeter landscape.

Vote: 7 - 0 Approved

Motion by Member Nathan Watkins, Second by Member Jim Martzke Chair DePew opened the public hearing. Case planner Taylor provided a presentation, which is preserved in the files. Jeff Thiede, applicant, provided an applicant's statement. No one spoke in opposition or favor of the request.

Jeff Thiede, applicant, waived his rebuttal. Chair DePew closed the public hearing.

Commission discussion: None. Case Planner Taylor stated no conditions were recommended to be attached.

Vote: 7 - 0 Approved

Motion by Member Jim Martzke, Second by Member Nathan Watkins Chair DePew opened the public hearing. Case planner Taylor provided a presentation, which is preserved in the files. James Mercer, applicant, stated he had nothing further to add. Jeff Christer submitted a letter of support, which Chair DePew read into the record.

James Mercer, applicant, waived his rebuttal. Chair DePew closed the public hearing.

Commission discussion: Chair DePew asked staff about right-of-way permitting requirements and requirements for conex box containers. Case planner Taylor stated staff supported a recommendation of approval with no conditions attached.

Vote: 7 - 0 Approved

Motion by Member Jim Martzke, Second by Member Nathan Watkins Chair DePew opened the public hearing. Case planner Taylor provided a presentation, which is preserved in the files. Daniel Barnett, applicant, provided an applicant's statement. No one present spoke in favor or in opposition.

Daniel Barnett, applicant, waived his rebuttal. Chair DePew closed the public hearing.

Commission discussion: None. Case planner Taylor stated staff supported a recommendation of approval with no conditions attached.

Vote: 7 - 0 Approved

Motion by Member Jim Martzke, Second by Member Nathan Watkins Chair DePew opened the public hearing. Case planner Taylor provided a presentation, which is preserved in the files. Robert Malony, the applicant's representative, provided an applicant's statement. No one present spoke in favor or in opposition.

Robert Malony, applicant's representative, waived his rebuttal. Chair DePew closed the public hearing.

Commission discussion: Chair DePew asked about the dedication width of James Ranch Road. Director McLachlan stated the road is still be studied but the right-of-way would be at least 200' in width.

Case planner Taylor stated staff recommended approval subject to a right-of-way dedication condition.

Vote: 7 - 0 Approved

Motion by Member Jim Martzke, Second by Member Pati Fickett Chair DePew opened the public hearing. Case planner Taylor provided a presentation, which is preserved in the files. Robert Malony, the applicant's representative, provided an applicant's statement. No one present spoke in favor or in opposition.

Robert Malony, the applicant's representative, waived his rebuttal. Chair DePew closed the public hearing.

Commission discussion: Member Watkins asked whether the applicant is currently acquiring more property in the area that could come before the commission. The applicant's representative stated that while the applicant owned a lot of property in the area, and could acquire more, these rezonings were currently the only ones planned.

Case planner Taylor stated staff recommended approval subject to a right-of-way dedication condition.

Vote: 7 - 0 Approved

Motion by Member Jim Martzke, Second by Member Larry Saunders Chair DePew opened the public hearing. Case planner Taylor provided a presentation, which is preserved in the files. Nichole Gaskill-Hull and Luke Webb, applicant, provided an applicant's statement. Marisol Auten spoke in support of the request. Cassandra Potts spoke in support of the request. Richard and Denise Rice provided a written response, read into the record, in support of the request. Jessica Wood spoke in support of the request. Nicole Brown spoke in favor of the request. Tom Gillam spoke in opposition to the request due to noise. He requested the construction of a wall. Patrick Dome submitted a letter in opposition, but did not speak.

Nichole Gaskill-Hull and Luke Webb, applicants, provided a rebuttal. Chair DePew closed the public hearing.

Commission discussion:

Member Watkins asked whether the applicant planned on building barns. The applicant stated they did not have plans to build more structures and would use tarps. Member Watkins noted he appreciated that the applicant addressed the fire hazard. Vice-chair Montgomery asked about the current fencing on the property and noted the neighbor's objection to the view of the hay. The applicant responded that the neighbor's view was not obstructed by the hay. The applicant added he planned on adding a fence. Vice-chair Montgomery asked whether pests were a concern. The applicant responded that the hay was on pallets and rodents were not a concern. Chair DePew asked how many semi trucks and how often the trucks were on the property. The applicant stated once a week. Chair DePew asked about the weight limit of the road. Case planner Taylor stated there was not a weight limit, but the paved road should be able to accommodate the semi owned by the applicant. Chair DePew asked how long the business had been on the property and the status of the code compliance complaint. Director McLachlan stated enforcement of the complaint was on hold. The special use process was an attempt to resolve the complaint. Chair DePew asked about the timing of compliance with building a fence. The applicant stated he could construct a fence in a few weeks. The applicant requested some clarification about the fence/wall requirements. Member Fickett stated a shade cloth on a chain-link fence could be appropriate. Member Watkins stated hay bales along the property line could muffle noise. He also asked about the hours of operation of the semi. The applicant stated he did enter/leave the hours during nighttime hours, however teh hay on the perimeter could help reduce the noise of the truck. Case planner Taylor asked whether the commission would like to strike the final condition related to hours of operation based on the discussion. The commission decided to leave the recommended conditions as-is.

Staff recommended conditions related to permitting, treatment of parking and loading areas, screening, and hours of operation.

Vote: 7 - 0 Approved