Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES MAY 28, 1992• Those Present: Chairman: Members: Planning & Zoning May 28, 1992 7:30p.m. John Millar Mary Ann Mounts Jeff Walters Davawn Beattie Dave Pincock Marsha Bjornn Excused: Scott Mortensen Rose Bagley, City Clerk Attorney: J.D. Hancock Council Member: Jim Flamm Janet Williamson was present to take minutes for Rose Bagley. A motion was made by Dave Pincock and seconded by Mary Ann Mounts to approve the minutes of May 13 with a couple of corrections. All Aye. RE: DISCUSSION OF A VARIANCE FOR CARL THURGOOD --- 165 E 1ST S First item on agenda - Carl Thurgood asking for a variance for a garage at 165 E. 1st South. Carl passed out maps (see end of minutes) showing his property and those surrounding him. The garage will be built right on the property line. The problem that he has is that the foundation had already been laid before they bought the home. The concrete poured, electricity from the house going under ground, etc. It was asked how long ago the foundation had been poured and it was decided that it had been poured years ago. Many of the neighbors have garages built on the property line. He has contacted all his neighbors and the officers of Autumn Arbor and the tenants and they do not object to his putting the garage there. There was some discussion on the easement and the asphalt driveway owned by Autumn Arbor. The foundation is about 8 feet from the house. The driveway is already there. There was some discussion on the height and size of the building. Mary Ann said it met conditions 2,3, and 4 for a variance. Jim Flamm was worried about the roof overhang on to the next property line. Davawn asked if Autumn Arbor was required to have that exit. Carl did not know. Some discussion on whether it could be grandfathered. It was asked if there was an actual foundation above the parking pad. Yes, there is a 2 foot foundation, rebarbing, rods, etc. Mary Ann said it is not just a pad but John said it is not a structure. But it is started and they had talked about anything that was started should be considered. John said due to the fact that it has been started, and meets requirements 2,3, and 4 for a variance, (page 48-49, 6.12 variances, A, 1-4) and there is some possible grandfathering there for requirement #1, that we could proceed to a variance and let it go to a public hearing. J.D. said he needed to get a legally binding agreement that they (Autumn Arbor) would permit it to over hang on to their property and to allow his snow and ice to fall there. Carl said the road is not an access in the Winter. John said if he could get a written easement from Autumn Arbor that is a legally recorded easement, due to the conditions that it was built when it was commercial which did allow 0 lot line, then we could go to public hearing on it on certain conditions that he will handle drainage and so forth. Mary Ann moved that they have a public hearing and if there is no opposition, that under certain conditions they grant him a variance. Davawn seconded the motion. All Aye. J.D. pointed out that there is an appeal period of 15 days following the public hearing. RE: DISCUSSION OF RETRIX ADDITION Mike Ferguson was present to discuss the proposed addition to Retrix and whether or not a variance was required. Mike said the property was all zoned Highway Business District. It is his understanding that residential uses require a set back. Now is that set back from the property, side or back? According to the Zoning Book he could only see where you are talking about along the City's major streets to protect the City's road scope and limited highway access. As far as a set back goes, we are talking about the back of a persons property that would like to apply for a business license and if she does can she, in Highway Business District, live on that property and run a business. At that point and time do they have to apply for a variance or can they go to a 0 property line, or do they have a grandfather that grandfathers it back to when it was a 0 property line when he bought that property and what it was intended for. He doesn't want to go through getting a variance. He can go out the front with out one; but it would be an eye sore and a menace to the people that go up and down that road. He would rather have it look nice with a nice frontage. He just doesn't have the time to wait 30-45 days for a variance. Davawn asked about the drainage and Mike said it all drains to the center. John said if it goes to a variance he won't meet the requirements. J.D. asked Mike if Alice Binghams property was still in Mike's name. Mike said yes it is. J.D. asked if it was in escrow or deed of trust. He wasn't sure about that. If he still owns Alice's property then he could just go ahead. Mike needs to check and see how the ownership of that property is vested. If he owns it then we don't have to go through publishing notice, adjoining property, etc; it falls under the zoning ordinance and you go build, your in compliance, your back to Highway Business District set backs which is 0 allotment. Next on the agenda was the Walker Final Plat. No one was there to present it. RE: REVIEW OF THE HENDERSON SUB DIVISION The next item was a review of the Henderson sub division final plat. Because of personal involvement John Millar asked Mary Ann Mounts to Chair this item. John showed everyone final plot plane. They plan to develop it in 2 or 3 phases. The main concern was the utility easement. Glen and Sharon Rowberry were there as residents adjacent to this development. Glen said that all of the residents on the south site of Park Street have encroached over the past 31 years into the property of this new development. There are trees 20 feet high and there are buildings and there are fences and it is going to take them some time to move this. There is a designated easement through the south side. It is going to take some effort to move all this back. What kind of a time period do they have? How extensive is it going to be? Sharon said that the old board fence that has been there forever is 3 1/2 feet past their property line. Everyone has just presumed that the property goes out there. There are 14 lots down through there. Jim said there seems to be 2 issues: one the easement and the other the encroachment on to the property line. The easement is there no matter what - if somebody needs to get in there they will. The property line problem - the owners should go to Hendersons and try to work it out. Planning and Zoning can't do anything to help them on that. John said the plan on this is that Henderson will develop the lots this Summer and sell them this Summer. J.D. said until it has been legally surveyed you don't know who is encroaching on whom. The final plat cannot be approved until it has been surveyed and staked out. John brought the plane tonight to show some changes and slight modifications in this plan verse the earlier preliminary plan. They eliminated one of the cul-de-sacs and made the lots larger and totally left the area where the canal is. There was some more discussion on the actual lay out of the sub division. On the entrance way there is an 80 foot wide entrance. The plan is to put in a split access that would have an island down the middle and then plant trees down both aides of the entrance. The postal service now requires a central mail box location so there will be no mailboxes in the sidewalk. Main water and sewer line is 5" and will tie in behind the church and on South 5th West. The sub division drains to the northwest and they will collect the storm water at the northwest corner into the existing storm drain. One question J.D. had was if some of the cul-de-sac inside corner lots met the minimum frontage requirement. John said he would check and have his technicians figure it out. RE: HENDERSON APARTMENTS - 2ND EAST AND HARVARD Henderson Apartments was the next item discussed. Mary Ann again Chaired this issue. John had new plans to show the committee. At the public hearing that was held there was a lot of opposition because of the increased traffic on to Harvard. This new plan abandons the street, Harvard Avenue, back to the property owner, and then all traffic would come out through the parking lot on to 2nd East or to the south. It would cut off all traffic to Harvard Avenue. He has left a 30 to 40 foot buffer zone between the parking lot and the adjacent properties. The parking lot will have 134 spaces and there will be about 180 students. Bill's position is - is it worth pursuing or is everybody against it. Mary Ann would like to drive up there again before she gives her opinion and check it out. The general feeling seemed to be that the critical part was abandoning Harvard. If the City will not relinquish that street then this plan does not exist. All felt there was potential there depending on what the City would do about Harvard. District 7 Health was not present. RE: LOT FENCING RESTRICTIONS FOR RANDY TOWNSEND & GARY AIMAN Rusty Townsend and Gary Aiman have bought lots where they own clear through to the cul-de-sac. Their question is how can they fence that. They can go to the property line with a 3 foot high fence and 15 feet back from the property line go as high as 8 feet. (Zoning Ordinance pg. 33, B., a.) RE: INFORMATION ON AGRICULTURAL ZONE Planning and zoning have discussed developing an agricultural zone. J.D. has received some information from Renae MaGee giving some alternative descriptions. Members were asked to read over them and be prepared to discuss them at the next meeting. J.D. said ReNae felt they needed to keep 2 considerations in mind: 1)any agricultural zone within the City cannot have livestock and 2) you may want to go to a minimum lot size for agriculture within the City. She said that in the County what you want to be careful of, is you want to protect the farmer . RE: R.V. PARKING John said that City Council has asked planning and zoning to reconsider the R.V. parking restriction in the Zoning Ordinance. Dave Pincock moved that they leave the ordinance as it is. .Mary P.rn .M.ourts seconded the motion. All Aye.. RE: BLAINE SHAW CONDOMINIUMS - NEED CURB, GUTTER, AND SIDEWALKS It was mentioned that there is no curb and gutter or sidewalks by the condominiums on 2nd West that Blaine Shaw is building. The building inspector, Terry Leishman, is to talk to him and let him know that a "Certificate of Occupancy" cannot be issued until the curb, gutter, and sidewalks are in. This does not fall under an L.I.D. Meeting adjourned. ~g5 .7 10 T4ay 1992 To Whom It May Concern: Carl J. Thurgood of 165 E 1st So. would like to build a garage on his property. However, there is a conflict with the building code of Rexburg and the existing garage foundation. The garage would be built in the Northwest corner of Carl's property line. The city building code states that there needs to be 6' from the side of the garage to the property line and 20' from the rear of the garage to` the property line. The conflict is that the foundation for the garage had been built before these new building codes were passed, and is located directly on the borders of the property. Since you are owners of the adjacent property, we are see}°>ing your approval showing you have no abjection to the building of this garage that would be located on the praperty line behind 165 E and to e est of the same address. Thank you. _. / ~ - ~= ~ y---- - - --------------------------------- ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~ ,~ .~1 ~,-, ~. C~ ~: U r ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~/t~~ ~t~ ~~,! d ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ,~ .. ~- s y~~ - `~ ~ ` ~~ ~,~~~ ~~~~ ° ~ ~ -.-~` i J r'' ` ~ ~ - - --_ ._ "-__r.___._. .___..t_~..__._~~... ~.... ......._w.__.__. ~ Y __~__ 1 ' i ~ ~ r t~ / E ~ f ~ ' k !' ~~ ~ f-'~ 57 ~ ~ ~ y~ ~ ~~ ~~ t r / °~ t ~ ' /// S ~w~0 / t u>~N~~~' may' ~ ~ ~ v ,l ~~ ~ i ti , I ~'~~ ~ y ~~~ `~ .~ L ~ .._ _ _ ~- -- _ , ~ __ _ __ _ti . ,. . ~ _ .._ _ _. - - ___,~ \ S": •