Loading...
2010 05-20Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting May 20, 2010 Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of May 20, 2010, was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Michael Rohm. Members Present: Chairman Michael Rohm, Commissioner Joe Marshall, Commissioner Tom O'Brien, and Commissioner Scott Freeman. Members Absent: Commissioner Wendy Newton-Huckabay Others Present: Machelle Hill, Ted Baird, Anna Canning, Sonya Wafters, Scott Steckline and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance: Roll-call Wendy Newton-Huckabay X Tom O'Brien X Scott Freeman X Joe Marshall X Michael Rohm -Chairman Rohm: Good evening, everyone. At this time I'd like to call to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission and begin with roll call, please. Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda: Rohm: Okay. The first thing I'd like to do is have a motion to adopt the agenda as prepared. Freeman: So moved. Marshall: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to accept the agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 3: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of May 6, 2010 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting. B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 10-001 Request for Conditional Use Permit approval of a drive-thru esetablishment within 300 feet of another drive-thru establishment Meridian Planning and Zoning May 20, 2010 Page 2 of 9 for Pioneer Federal Credit Union by Pioneer Credit Union - 850 E. Fairview Avenue: Rohm: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and there are two items on that. The first item being the minutes of the May 6th, 2010, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and the second item, B, is the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for approval of CUP 01-001, request for a Conditional Use Permit for adrive-thru establishment within 300 feet of another drive-thru establishment for Pioneer Federal Credit Union. Any additions or corrections? Freeman: No. Marshall: Mr. Chair, I move that we approve the Consent Agenda. O'Brien: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 4: CUP 10-002 Request for Conditional Use Permit approval to extend the existing nonconforming residential use of the property located at 503 W. Broadway Avenue in the I-L zoning district for Creekside by Juston Hall - 503 W. Broadway Avenue: Rohm: Okay. Got through that. At this time I'd like to open the public hearing on CUP 10-002, a request fora Conditional Use Permit approval to extend the existing nonconforming residential use of the property located at 503 West Broadway Avenue in an I-L zoning district for Creekside by Juston Hall and could I get the staff report for that, please. Wafters: Thank you, Chairman Rohm, Members of the Commission. The subject property consists of .94 of an acre and is zoned I-L, light industrial, and is located at 503 West Broadway Avenue. The surrounding area consists of residential and industrial uses, zoned I-L and R-15. The uses abutting this property to the east and west are all nonconforming residential uses zoned I-L. The application is for a Conditional Use Permit approval to extend the existing nonconforming residential use of the property by constructing a garage and carport for the existing dwelling on the site. The applicant's request originally included a contractor's yard on the rear portion of the site, but the applicant has since withdrawn that portion of the Conditional Use Permit request. A residential use is not allowed by the UDC in the I-L district. However, because the residential use existed prior to the rezone of the property to I-L, the use is allowed to continue as a nonconforming use in the I-L district. As such, Conditional Use Permit approval is required to extend the nonconforming use. Construction and reconstruction of structures is considered extending the use. There are no outstanding issues for the Meridian Planning and Zoning May 20, 2010 Page 3 of 9 Commission. One letter was received in support of the application from Dennis Taggert, a neighbor from across the street. This is a copy of the site plan submitted by the applicant. The dwelling is right here where my arrow is. There is a driveway access on each side of the house. The proposed garage structure is right here and there is a 25 by 36 foot carport here on the end. The addition of this garage and carport will actually make the use more conforming in the -- as a residence, because the UDC requires four parking spaces be provided, two in an enclosed garage and two on a parking pad. Staff is recommending approval of the subject application per the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the staff report. Staff will stand for any questions the Commission may have at this time. Rohm: Thank you, Sonya. Any questions of staff? Marshall: I do, Mr. Chairman. Sonya, so with the contractor yard and the driveways, ACRD was requiring that the -- the 27 foot access, the driveway, be paved and I take it that that is still a condition required, even though the contractor yard is no longer there? Wafters: Chairman Marshall, Members of the -- or, excuse me, Commissioner Marshall, Members of the Commission, ACHD is not -- as far as I know it is. They have not revised their report. However, they probably did not get notice that the contractor's yard was no longer part of the application. I think that they still require driveways be paved 30 feet into the site. Do you -- well, I can't speak to their requirements for sure, but the applicant can get with them and make sure that condition still stands. Marshall: Thank you. O'Brien: Mr. Chair, I just have a question about nonconforming use. You say that by putting the garage there, et cetera, it's more towards conforming than nonconforming. What is that line between the two? I should probably look in the UDC, but maybe you can explain it to me easy enough I hope, what makes it conforming, nonconforming in this situation? Wafters: Commissioner O'Brien, Commissioners, all residential uses are required to provide parking spaces based on the number of bedrooms in the unit. O'Brien: Okay. Wafters: Two, three, and four bedroom units are required to provide two and a covered -- a garage and two on a 20 by 20 foot parking pad. So, currently this -- this dwelling does not have a garage, so with constructing this garage that will actually make it comply with the residential standards. O'Brien: Even though it's in a light industrial use? Wafters: Yes. It is a nonconforming use in the I-L district, meaning it's allowed, because it was an existing permitted use prior to the rezone of the property to I-L. Meridian Planning and Zoning May 20, 2010 Page 4 of 9 O'Brien: Okay. How long has that been there? Wafters: But that's the reason for the Conditional Use Permit is that it is a nonconforming use, so it does require Commission approval to expanding the use. O'Brien: Do you have any idea how long it has been in this condition or if it -- I have no idea. Wafters: The home has been renovated. It's very very nice now. They have done a lot of improvements to the property. If you're asking when the property was zoned, it was several years back. I don't know the year. O'Brien: Okay. That's all I have. Thank you. Rohm: Thank you. Canning: Chairman Rohm, my understanding it was either the '80s or '90s. So, it's been quite some time. What happened was the developer requested the rezone to I-L thinking he would combine all the -- buy all the property owners out and, then, develop something there and the rezoning got done, but the project fell through, so we were left with a multitude of houses down there that have an I-L zoning and some of them have converted to industrial and some have not. O'Brien: Oh. Okay. Wafters: The abutting uses directly to the east and west and across the street are all residential. However, there are a mix of industrial and residential on the south side of Broadway in that area. O'Brien: So, what could cause it to change, then, from an I-L to a residential, like an R- 4 or R-8? I mean it's -- if they make all these improvements or whatever, is it possible that they could be rezoned to a different status? Wafters: It is possible, Commissioner O'Brien. They could apply for a rezone. The Comprehensive Plan future land use designation is medium density residential, so a residential district would be consistent with that designation. An R-8, for example. O'Brien: Okay. Thank you. Rohm: Would the applicant like to come forward, please. If you have anything to state in addition to what the staff report -- now is that time. Hall: My only question -- Rohm: Please state your name and address for the record. Meridian Planning and Zoning May 20, 2010 Page 5 of 9 Hall: Yeah. My name is Juston Hall. My residing address or the property address? Rohm: Either is fine. Hall: My residence is 235 North Pinedale Way, Eagle, Idaho. 83616. Rohm: Thank you. Hall: So, no questions I don't think anything more than what she stated is just the confusion of the homeowners on that property about this I-L versus residential. The I-L is a minority and I'm not sure the planning department if -- there is just a few of them, so it's really confusing for the homeowners there to deal with this thing that happened in 1977 or '73 and everybody there is -- you know, 90 percent of them are residential use and, then, to have this industrial zone thing pop up that kind of just took us by surprise and Ireally -- and I don't know how to change it, you know, because everybody kind of is in the same boat, what do I have to do or do I have to go through all these hooplas to leave my house here, so we are nonconforming and everybody's really conforming -- mean is nonconforming is their standard, because they have been there for 25 years. So, it's -- it's really confusing and I don't know why -- how we can change that or if that's -- that's the only question I have is that if -- Rohm: I suppose you could have done just like Commissioner O'Brien was -- kind of his point, is you probably could have requested a rezone, rather than a Conditional Use Permit, but this, actually -- either one of these works to address the issue at hand, so maybe the Conditional Use Permit is easier and it's final once it leaves this Commission, rather that having to go before City Council. So, that's -- this probably is the easiest way to address the issue and comply with ordinance. So, I guess that's probably the answer to the question. Canning: Chairman Rohm, the applicant's correct, it's a mess, there is absolutely no doubt about it, and we have struggled with what to do, because there are businesses there. We are kind of in a no win situation. If we do a blanket rezoning the industrial uses will be upset. If we leave it the way it is the residential uses are penalized. We were waiting for the downtown plan to be done, the destination downtown, and that gives us a little guidance on perhaps a way we can at least know what the desired outcome is for the area now and maybe we can move forward, but I've had -- had it on my radar for some time. It's just kind of not an easy solution, unfortunately. But we will note it is what I'd like to tell you and I will try and figure out something. Hall: And, then, one question on the ACHD letter that I got yesterday. So, I guess because that most likely they didn't have the letter that withdrew our application, so I would hate to be bound by this thing if it doesn't really need to be bound by -- because they weren't notified. So, I don't know how to -- because would that be a condition of my approval of this meeting because of the ACHD letter or -- Meridian Planning and Zoning May 20, 2010 Page 6 of 9 Wafters: It's the condition you would have to work out with ACHD. I can notify them first thing in the morning that you did withdraw that portion of the Conditional Use Permit. I'm not sure if it changes their condition, but I will for sure let them know. Hall: I think -- well, I don't know -- from what I can recall the adjacent seven, eight, nine properties I don't think have any paid driveways. So, I don't know if that matters because I'm redoing it and -- but that's what -- you know so, yeah -- Wafters: Yeah. Hall: When we come to -- we are just trying to improve the property, you know, unlike, you know, 89 percent of everybody else in this valley has give up and give it back to the bank. We are not likely to do that, we are trying to make it an improvement and it's a nice place to live and it's a good area and we have invested monies and investments to make it right and we just want to be legal and conform and not be penalized for trying to do what's right. Rohm: Appreciate your coming forward with that. Thank you. Marshall: Mr. Chair, I would like to say I appreciate what you're doing and I am sorry that it does take some of these hoops and, you're right, I do realize a number of those houses aren't going to meet the paving requirements and things that ACRD requires. Unfortunately, I think it typically is probably something that would go hand in hand. As times change, if they did -- added the garage 20 years ago, that requirement may not have been there. When you add it now it may be there. It may or may not and I would guess it might be a requirement of any vehicles entering or exiting Broadway Street, they don't want the gravel carried in and out. And so anybody that comes in after that would probably have to pave. Hall: Or concrete. Marshall: Or concrete. Hall: Does it have to be multiple entrances or can it one entrance paved? Marshall: I don't know and that's something you're going to have to ask ACRD about. really don't know. That is their requirement. Hall: Then I don't know -- I have one question, sir, for -- the 30 foot is that coming from the center line of the street, then? What -- Marshall: Again, 1 don't not know. Freeman: Chairman Rohm? Rohm: Yes. Meridian Planning and Zoning May 20, 2010 Page 7 of 9 Freeman: I was looking at that and the language does include both driveways as written and the 30 feet into the site is specified as from edge of pavement of the roadway. Marshall: I think the question, then, is will they allow it with one driveway considering he is doing away with the contractor yard, since they were unaware of that at that time. Freeman: Yes. I had some of the same questions and I looked in here for something that told me that this was conditioned on having the contractor's yard in the back, but don't see any such conditions, so I assume that this is going to apply to our approval and, again, the applicant wanted to work that out I assume with ACHD. Hall: Except for under the subject it says conditional use and design review application to use the back portion of an existing lot for a contractor's yard, so it seems like it might be a hundred percent -- well, no, it's and, I guess. Conditional use and use of back portion, so -- anyway, we can figure that out tomorrow, then. Marshall: Here he's got a paved driveway back there now. Concrete driveway. Rohm: Any other questions for the applicant? O'Brien: Yeah. Mr. Chair. Sir, so it appears that currently it's like a circular drive, except it goes to the rear and back. What's the purpose of having two driveways? don't know what the situation is in your court as far as getting it paved or not in the front on both, but he would have to I think delete one of the entrances if he wanted to only do one, but I don't know, that would be up to you, I assume. Marshall: I guess that might be a bargaining chip. Agree. O'Brien: That's all I have. Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Marshall: One last question for Anna before we close this. So, the city's looking at doing something over there, trying to clean that up for the residents. I assume that before any final decision is made on that there would -- all those residents will be notified and have their input on that; right? Canning: Of course, sir. They would not dare to rezone the property without involving all those property owners along there. It would be nice to have consensus from among them, but we may not be able to achieve that, but we could at least go for a majority perhaps. We will have to see how it goes. Marshall: Appreciate that. Meridian Planning and Zoning May 20, 2010 Page 8 of 9 Rohm: You need to be on the microphone. Canning: It's hard to be formal when you're the only one in the audience, but we do need to have it on the record. Hall: Yeah. We need to get Meridian hopping again so there is more people in the audience. So, technically speaking, should all the adjacent property owners that have residential uses have to apply for nonconform residential conditional use on these properties to be in compliance with the code? Wafters: They are a permitted use as long as they don't expand or extend their use. That's the reason you're having to go through Conditional Use Permit. You were fine as you were, but because you're adding to nonconforming use you have to get special approval for it. Hall: All right. That's it. Thanks. Rohm: Thank you. Freeman: Chairman Rohm? Rohm: Commissioner Freeman. Freeman: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve -- oh, I'm sorry. I would move to close the public hearing. Thank you. Rohm: Okay. Good. Marshall: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on CUP 10-002. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Freeman: Now I can make a motion. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number CUP 10-002 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 20th, 2010. Marshall: Second. Rohm. It's been moved and seconded to approve CUP 10-002, to include the staff report -- including the staff report. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carried. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian Planning and Zoning May 20, 2010 Page 9 of 9 Rohm: One more motion. Marshall: Mr. Chair, I move we adjourn. Freeman: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and. seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:20 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APP VE CHA L ROHM -CHAIRMAN ATTEST: JAYCEE L. HOLMAN,