Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission held March 29, 2022, 6:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of City Hall.
Mike Cook – Chairman
Kevin Asker – Vice Chair
City Staff: City Administrator Kennedy
The meeting was called to order by Mike Cook at 6:00 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: On motion by Dan Gautney, second by Kevin Asker to approve the minutes of March 3, 2022 as presented. Motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING #1: Minor Land Division application submitted by Timothy and Elizabeth Denton, 1109 S Hall Street to divide the property into three parcels. Roger Nuxoll was present as the representative for the applicant.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION: The public hearing was opened at 6:02 pm. Roger Nuxoll explained the property is basically 100’ wide by 300’ deep. The intent of the minor land division is to split the property into three 100’ x 100’ parcels. The parcel along Hall Street with the 1109 Hall Street address has a house on it and the City’s Hall Street booster station, which makes it a little smaller than the other two lots. Greg Skinner did the survey which included three legal descriptions for the split. The survey shows a 25’ section between parcel 2 and 3 as a floating boundary in case someone wanted a bigger or smaller lot. The middle lot has an older barn/out building which Danny and Dixie Schwartz are interested in. Both lots have 10th Street access with water and sewer available.
STAFF PRESENTATION: City Administrator Kennedy reported all notices of hearing were delivered and published as required. A minor land division has set criteria it has to be meet. Public Work Director Mager and Kennedy reviewed the application to make sure it met all the requirements prior to scheduling the public hearing.
WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE: None
NEUTRALS: David Chriss, 201 E South 10th Street adjoins the proposed 3rd parcel. He stated he was reading City Code and three splits should trigger the subdivision ordinance which would require sidewalks. He has a tepid concern about what is going in on the lots. He is concerned about the possibility of mobile or manufactured homes going in as they tend to lower property values. He would like them prohibited. He also stated lot 3 is very wet and he doesn’t know if it’s a water way but it always stays wet. There is also the issue about snow removal on 10th Street. In the past, the city used that street frontage along the empty lot to plow snow against so driveways wouldn’t be blocked. If these lots are developed it could cause snow plowing issues.
APPLICANT REBUTTAL: Roger stated they have no intent to put manufactured homes in however you can’t guarantee something in the future. The saturation with water could be due to piling snow. Roger lives close to the neighborhood and understands concerns with snow plowing. If Danny buys the lot, he plans to park his toys there instead of on his property across the street. Lot 3 is the lot the Dentons were planning to build on but he doesn’t know if that’s still in the works.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: The public hearing closed at 6:18 pm. Kennedy addressed David Chriss’s concerns. It is correct, creating a third split on the property creates a subdivision. However, the minor land division is an exception allowed in the subdivision code. If the property meets all the requirements, then they can proceed using the minor land division process. This application met the criteria. On sidewalks, a building permit that exceeds a $75,000 value would require installation of sidewalks, curb and gutter. With snow removal, the City currently utilizes street frontage along vacant properties. If the property is developed, then the City will adapt and change how the snow plowing occurs. David Criss stated the north side of 10th Street has rolled curb and gutter. Roger Nuxoll stated there is a 4’ rise to Criss’s property, which is adjacent lot to #3. Brian Perry recommended all the lots stay at 100’ x 100’ instead of allowing the floating boundary.
On motion by Dan Gautney, second by Graydon Galloway to recommend to the City Council that the Minor Land Division submitted by Timothy and Elizabeth Denton be approved to split the property into three parcels at 1109 S Hall Street, with the condition that all lots stay at the 100’ x 100’. Motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING #2: The public hearing was opened at 6:26 pm for the variance application submitted by Lance Delgado, 636 Dawn Drive to build a pole building within the required setbacks.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION: Lance Delgado explained he planned to build a 22’ x 24’ pole building in the northeast corner of his property. He has a boat and side by side and would like to be able to park them inside for security reasons and to keep them out of the weather. He currently rents a storage unit to hold them. His proposed plan would place the building 2’ from his neighbor to the north and 4’ from the property line on Grangeville Salmon Road. The building will then fit between the existing shed and the north property line. His neighbor is not concerned about the building being located within 2’ of her property. After talking to some of his neighbors and hearing their concerns about a pole building, he thinks he’s going to do a stick building so it matches and looks better. He doesn’t want to degrade the neighborhood by putting in a metal building. His request is now for a two-car garage, stick built and no pole building. Prices are high right now, so the project would be kicked down the road for a bit. He questioned how long the variance good for. Lance submitted pictures with his camper and side by side parked beside the existing shed to show how close the new structure would be to the property line. The back bumper of the trailer reflected how close it would be to the Grangeville Salmon road and the side by side showed how close it would be to the neighbor property line.
Brian Perry questioned if the shed was permanent or if it could be moved over to the south. Lance stated it was portable but there is a retaining wall about 2’ from the shed so it can’t go far. He had considered having it moved to the southeast corner of his property. Brian stated with the proposed design of building, his neighbor would take the brunt of the water runoff from the building which is a concern.
Yolanda Stout questioned what happens if his neighbor goes to sell her property and now that building is too close. Lance stated he did talk to his neighbor about it and let her know it could be a concern of a future buyer if she tries to sell the property.
Brian stated with the building that close to the highway, he’d most likely have the problem with the road district blasting snow against building. Lance stated that is already an issue but that’s why he put the privacy fence slats in.
Dan Gautney stated if Lance moved the shed, it would solve all the setback issues. He questioned if Lance was opposed to that. Lance stated he would prefer not to move it as he has power to the building now. If he did move it, then it wouldn’t have power. Dan also questioned how Lance would address run off from building. Lance stated he would need to install gutters and a drain line to maintain the runoff.
Mike Cook questioned if he would commit to putting in drainage? Lance stated he would and already did that in the front yard.
Brian asked if he would encroach into the setback at the wall or the eave. Lance stated it would be at the wall. Brian stated that makes the building within 1’ which makes it difficult and could be harder to work with the neighbor to clean your own gutters or any other maintenance on the building. That tight to the highway district would just be Lance’s issue to deal with.
STAFF PRESENTATION: City Administrator Kennedy reported all notices of hearing were delivered and published as required. Building code does prohibit drainage onto another property.
WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE: None
NEUTRALS: Wilma Woods, 619 Dawn Drive is to the west of Lance. If her property was backing up to the highway, she’d like to block the noise. In theory she doesn’t have a problem with what he’s doing, but she is concerned that this goes against the covenants of the Blewett subdivision. She questioned what kind of precedence this set for others in the neighborhood. She doesn’t have a problem with what Lance is doing, just wondering what could happen in the future.
APPLICANT REBUTTAL: Lance stated he understands Wilma’s concern. His change in how he’s putting up his building is to impact the neighborhood the least. He didn’t want to impact someone’s view. Now isn’t the time to address subdivision covenants, but he wished the subdivision had an active committee to address the CCRs.
Mike Cook stated if anyone else would apply for a variance in the City, it would be addressed individually based upon their application.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: The hearing closed at 6:50 pm. Kevin Asker stated it appears there is enough room on property that he wouldn’t have to have a variance on either of the setbacks. He could locate the building so it doesn’t infringe on the neighbor to the north or along the highway. He understands there would be the additional burden to get power to the shed if it’s moved.
Dan Gautney agreed. There is plenty of room on the property and he felt it would be better to move the building so there wouldn’t be as much expense of addressing all the drainage issues.
Brian Perry agreed.
On motion by Kevin Asker, second by Brian Perry to recommend to the City Council to deny the variance application submitted by Lance Delgado to put in a 2-car garage in the setbacks as he could build the building without infringing on the setbacks. Motion carried.
NEXT MEETING: The next meeting is April 26, 2022 at 6:00 pm.
Adjourned by Mike Cook at 6:44 p.m.
Tonya Kennedy – City Clerk