The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPLANNING & ZONING - 06-00558 - Powell Subdivision - CUPs 14 Duplexes in LDR2m Planning and Zoning Department STAFF REPORT 12 North Cen ted" Rexburg, ID 8.440 arWeA ting- org Phone: 208}359.3020 X314 Fax: 208.359.3024 T- - i� • - " } . '' SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit, file # 06 00558 APPLICANT: See Exhibit A for Iist of Applicants and Owners PROPERTY OWNER: Same PURPOSE: Requests to allow existing Duplexes to continue tooperate tinder theCondxtional Use Permit provision cif the Rexbur Devela o-fdwelling units.��'rxien� ��de fortw PROPERTY LOCATION: ILarious (see Exhibit B) within the Powell and Mleek1sen Subdivisions CONIYREHENSIVE PLAN: Low -Moderate Residential Density ---,'.ZONING DISTRICT: Low Density Residential2 (LD -R-2) APPLICABLE CRITERIA: City of Rexburg Development Cede (Ordinance Code 926)§ 5.S Requit�ed .Nuniber of Parkin S aces § x,13 Conditional Use Permits AUTHORITY § x.13 (F)(7) "The Planning and Zoning Commission may, iwthout approval of the Council, giant (hefollowing conditional use pei wits � ... (7)Perinitsfor devel�p�ents with f�uY or less divelling unrts... „ I. BACKGROUND conditional use permits are permitted uses Nvithin a zone but. are uses that may have special circumstances which require the City to consider and either approve, deny, or approve with condi.tians. Any conditions of approval should seek to minimize or elim%nate potential impacts � proposal or use mai have on its surroundings. e The Rexburg Development code allows two�faaniiy dwellings or duplexes within the LDR2 zany, subject to obtaining a condztianal use permit (CUP). All of the properties requesting a CUP in this application are located within an LDR2 zoning district. 1'.he area knows as the Po)vell neighborhood was encouraged bvl the Planning Commission during a recent Public hearing to come in to Gornpliance with the zoning requirements for obtaining a CUP io operate, a duplex. Through a neighborhood effort, all of the properties operating as duplexes were Case No. 06 00558 Page 1 ig W. identified and those desiring to come into compliance with the development code submitted an application for a CUP., which are included in Exhibit C. Ordinance 851- Life Safery The City passed Ordinance 85 1 on April 18, 200 1 in an effort to identify all structures Within the C 'ty that were beingoperated as a residential use other than a single family home, i.e. duplexes, triplexes, etc. The City made an effort to notify all property owners affected including mailings, 0 information contained with water bills, and notices zn the local newspaper. Tile purpose of Ordinance 851 was tv identify property that was being used to house multiple families, or uni ts and ensure that the safety aspect of the units was acceptable to applicable codes. Once identified, these properties were required to retrofit the structure for life and safety purposes ta meet the building code standard that a -p -plied either at the time the Ian& 'kS conversion occurred or to a modified standard if change of use occurred prior fo 1985. Each property owner was given a date of December 3 L 2002 to identify all applicable building code issues that needed to b C-S01v d. The property owners were then given a deadline of July 1, 2004 io have a final inspection to ensure compliance. Due to the City's Building Department being overwhelmed with these inspections and day to day inspections, some final inspections occurred after the July 1 S date' * but all inspection requests had io be in by then. If a property that claims io have been operating as a multz-famzly structure for many Years an dfailed 9. to satisfy Ordinance zs.*), I when it was issued, or was unaware of the act U-- al doc is today required to have a building inspection and to satisfy all current applicable codes. Ordinance 851 as it Applies to the Current C'UP Aliplicatians Most Of the CUP applicants for this hearing were able to complete the r equirements of Ordinance 85 1 and were given an approval" status from the City; two of the applicants did not. The status of city "approval" gave most property owners the understanding that they were identified, went through structural upgrades, and were then considered a legitimate land use and had City approval to operate as a multi -family land use. What this process apparently vias not intended io do Nvas to w i ve requirements for conditional use permits, or other development co -de 'issues related to operating a property as in a multi -family manner. What the City was then facing was to go back to many of these property owners that competed leted there Life Safety, Ordinance 8 51 requirements and inform them that their lot was too small and therefore cannot operate any more as a multi-farnily structure. The City has at least recognized this issue with regards to the Powell and Mickeisen Subdivisions. The City Council' when asked if an applicant that had their property meet the Life Safety requirements when required to do so can then have a ``brandfathering" status for the use regardless of general standards such as lot size,, said yes 1. The applications before the Cammrs�zan tonight are therefore divided ii1io two �araups, those that ffI.-ha-ve compIeted their Life Safety inspectionto satisfy Ordinance zs:) I nd thane that have not. Those 10 that have passed the Life Safety requirements should be considered as "grandfathered" land use,, while those that have not should also be considered "grandfathered," but should, as a condition of approval, obtain a duplex building permit and pass inspection through the C%iy' s bui.lding department. 6perrnitted Conditional use pen-nitsare uses within a zone but are uses that m -,q -,,V have special Circumstances which require the City to consider and either approve, deny, or approve with City Colmoil, Rexburcr 701 November 10 2006 Case No. 06 00558 Page 2 II. can.dxtians. Any conditions of approval should seekto minimize or eliminate potential impacts a proposal or use may have on its surroundings, SITE DESCRIPTION The subject Properties are vacated within an existing neighborhood platted and known as the Powell and Mickelsen Subdivision. The neighborhood is generally built out with alb utilities and major infrastructure provided. Access to the neighborhood is mainly from Main Street 'in front of the Madison Hospital, and from 2nd Sough, and to a les s er degree, I 5t sough and Millho How Road. The surrounding ��ei�hborhood is predominantlyIsngle-fainiiy names. There are, three lots within the Powell neighborhood that contain existing duplexes that have obtained CUP status in the past (see, Exhibit D), ANALYSIS The following are the criteria,for granting a conditionaluse permit. Some of the criteria is followed by staffs analysis. A conditional use will: U. Constitute a conditional use as established in Table 1, Zoning Districts, and Table 2, Land Use Schedule. A two-family u�1it is listed as a conditional use within the LDR2 zoning district, therEfoxe, this criterion is met. h-. Be in accordance with a speck or general objective of the City's Comprehensive Plan and the regulations Qf'this Ordinance. The City's comprehensive plan has designated the subject properly as Low -Moderate Residential Density. The zoning district of LDR2 is in compliancy with the comprehensive plan designation, therefore this criterion is met, c. Be designed and constructed in a manner to be harmonious with the existing character of the neighborhood and the zone in which thero�erty is located. The subject properties are all existing and have been part of the existing character of the neighborhood, vvhicll is a single-family amviance. The character of the neighborhood should be .ma iniained, therefore, reasonable conditions of approval could be applied to ensure this, e.g. screened trash receptacle enclosures, sidewalk installation, screened parking, etc. This criterion is therefore mei or can be m.etwish reasonable conditions of approval. d. Arot crate a nuisarzce or safety hazardfor neighboring properties in berms of'excessive noise or vibration, improperly directed glare or heat, electrical inteiference, odors, dust or air paZlut�cnts, slid waste generation and storage, haZardo its materials or wase, excessive trajjte generation, or interference with pedestrian trafJiL Regarding glare, heat, electrical interference,,. dusk, air pollutants, There are no foreseeable impacts to the neighborhood. Regarding noise, vibration, odors, these are prospective standards, the commission should explore these, standards and deteimine if reasonable conditions of approval might address them. Regarding solid wase a eneraiioY�. and storage, excessive traffic generation, or interfere -nee with pedestrian traffic, the Conamission should determine if these staaidaids can be addressed through reasonable conditions of approval. Case No. 06 00558 Page 3 Solid wase generation and storage- Likely, solid waste Will double if the unit operates as a two -unit dwelling therefore, staff recommends as a conditional of approval, that both units have their awn waste receptacles for trash service. To decrease visual impacts of the receptacles, staff recommends located them so that neither recepiacl� is visible form the pubic right-of-way, or adjacent property, The City recognizes that trip generation for a single faintly home is 10 gips per day, that is leaving one's home and returfung, as two (rips. A, two-family dwell'ng, generates 8 trips per day, per unit, or 16 trips per day total. The Commission should determine if this constitutes excessive traffic for the area, which i's comprised of local neighborhood streets. The Commission could Izmir the number of vehicles on site as a moray to ensure that the impacts of a two-family unit do not detract from the ambiance of the surrounding neighborhood, or interfere with pedestrians. Furthermore', a two-family dwelling will generate greater pedestrian activity in an area With sidewalks in. front of most properties, therefore staff recon ends a condition of approval, where applicable, to require sidewalks to be installed to City standards along all portions of the property abutting public right-of-way, The Commission should deterinine if though reasonable conditions of approval this criterion can be met. e. Be adequately served hy Essential public facilities and services such as access streets, police and fire protection, clrui��age structures, refuse disposal, water and sewex service, and schools. If existing. facilities are not adequate, the developer shall show that suchfacilities shall he upgradeal sufficiently to serye the praposed rise. The site is served by all essential public facilities and services; therefore, his criterion is met. f. Not generate traffic in excess of the capacity of public streets or access po��ts serving the proposed use and wall assure adequate visibility at traffic access points. els mentioned in the criterion D,, above, a tNN�o-famlly dwelling will generate approximately 16 trips per day, versus 10 trips per day for single family homes. The local streets serving the property are paved, two-way local streets, The Commission should determine if the increase. in traffic generation exceeds the capacity of the public streets. The Commission should also determine if locations of driveways and parking areas ars adequate and do not obstruct visibility at traffic access points. The Commission should detennine if through reasonable conditions of approval this criterion can be met, g.Bee. ffectively buffered to��ee�a adjoini.Bng properfiesfrom adverse impacts of noise, building SlZe and resulting Shadow, traffic, andparking. The Commission should explore this criterion and identify any impacts and detennine if ihey can be minimized or elx�z�.inated through reasonable conditions of approval such as screened parking areas for a certain number of parking spaces, etc. Iii. Be compatible with the slope of the site and the capacity of the soils and will not be in an area of natural hazards unless suitably designed to protect lives and property. Not applicable Case No. 06 00558 Page 4 i. Not result 1' 11 the destruction, loss or damage of a historic feature of signtfxcance to the community of Rexburg. Not applicable IV. STAFF RECOMMENpATION Staff recommends that the Commission fake public testimony, and determine if the proposed conditional use pen -nits can be approved, denied, or apparoved with conditions. Staff has proposed some conditions of approval should the Commission choose to approve with conditions. Proposed Conditions of Approval To apply to all properties except as noted I . Boni units shall have their own wase receptacles for trash service. 2. Trash receptacles shall not be visibly form the pubic right-of-way, or adjacent property. Trash receptacles shall be paced inside the garage on days of no trash service for the site. 3. Sidewalks shall be installed and maintained to City standards along all portions of the property abutting public right-of-way. Sidewalks must pass inspections performed by the City. Sidewalks shall incorporate ADA access standards ��here applicable, e.g. corner lot rami access, slope, etc. 4. Parking arias of four or more spaces out side of a garage shall have landscaping adequate to screen all but two of the spaces from the right-of-way and adjacent properties. 5. Existina lots less than 10,000 square feet shad not through any lot dine adjustment or other lana transfer or dedi cation decrease their current lot sire. Those that are over 10, 0 0 Q square fejt shall not decrease their lot sizes below 10' 000 square feet through any lot line adjustment, lard transfer, or dedication. Should the City sta.ndardS regarding minimum lot sizes for duplexes be modified in the future to allow for less than 10',000 squaxe feet, then this condition shall fallow that standard. 6. Because Life Saf-ety Inspections were not obtained per Ordinance 8 5 1, the properties located at 475 Linden Avenue and 75 Oak, shall obtain a building permit through the City of Rexburg for the structural use as a two -unit dwellino, or duplex. 11 EXHIBITS: A. List of CUP Applicants/Owners B. Map Depicting Subject Properties C. Submitted Applications D. Existing CUPs for Duplexes Within the Powell Neighborbood E. Letters Submitted Case Na. 06 005 5) B Page 5 1W 0 I LOU I V ILI List of CUP Applicants/OlAmers Parcels 1 } 76 Birch- Stephen Parkinson 2) 106 Birch- Paul and Kathey LaFollette 3 ) 43 a Linden Ave - a. Amlieant- ,Aaron Romnev 53 Millhollow Rd. R b. Property Owner- Millhollow Frozen Yogurt, Inc& 4) X34 Elm Ave-- Jeanene B Hensley exburg ID n. 83440 48 S I " E, Rexburg ID 83440 5) 4 15 El 2 "d S_ a. Applicant- Saxon Smith, President of HanTest Home., LLC. 1242 Meadowview Ave, Rexburg ID, 8344Q b. Owner- Harvest Home, LLC. 1242 MeadoWview Ave 6) 431 E 2"d S- Josh Clark 7} 522 Linden Ave- Michael and Susan Tatum S) 531 Linden Ave- Dani Izatt 9) 484 Maple Dr- Francis E Keele 10) 7.5 Oak- Charles Mickelsen 11) 475 Linden- Donald Hammer 12) 525 M4ple Dr- Edward Malstrom 13) >3 5 Maple Dr- Terry Madsen 14) 545 Ma e Dr- Richard Ferguson Case No. 06 00558 Page 6 M FMO Ol Case No. 06 00558 fW, I�Rfll:-0-so' - Map Depicting Subject Properties 0 Page 7 I ai+ 9 2nd 1� 0 01-0 8 0 3, Powell Subdivision Proposed Conditional Use Permits ms--µ•— R-,, { - _� sir i ®rawmialm-, 0 3, Powell Subdivision Proposed Conditional Use Permits