Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission held February 27, 2024, 6:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of City Hall.
Members present:
Mike Cook – Chairman
Dan Gautney
Brian Perry
James Zehner
Members absent: Kevin Asker – Vice Chair
Yolanda Stout
Lee Spencer
City Staff: City Administrator Kennedy
Public Works Director Bob Mager
The meeting was called to order by Mike Cook at 6:00 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: On motion by Dan Gautney, second by Brian Perry to approve the minutes of September 26, 2023 as presented. Motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING #1: The public hearing was opened at 6:01 pm.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION: James Moody owns property at 306 N Mrytle. It was formerly in disrepair. He took a construction crew and revamped it to make it a new house. There is an alley to the north of the property. Part of the project was an old deck. They tore off the deck and replaced it. They found out it was in the setback as it’s only 1.5” from the property line.
Brian Perry questioned if the old deck was the same size as the new deck? Jim stated as near as he could tell it is. James Zehner asked if the trees are in the setback? Jim stated the trees are in alley along with the power poles. Mike Cook asked if the trees were part of the request before P&Z and Tonya Kennedy stated they were not.
Brian questioned if prior to starting the project, did the contractor reach out to Tonya. Jim didn’t think he was aware he need to as the deck was about the same size. Brian asked if the deck was already built when you found you were 1.5” off the setback. Jim stated the deck was built first. Mike questioned if the house was going to be a rental and Jim said he will probably sell it.
Brian questioned if a fence was built along the property line, would the deck interfere with it? Jim stated no. The adjoining property owner maintains the alley, so he felt a future owner will probably use the alley as a yard. Dan Gautney asked if the alley was abandoned? Tonya stated it is not. Jim felt it would be a good alley to abandon if someone wants to, there’s nothing in the alley except power. Brian asked if Avista needs to get in there, and who’s trees are they. Bob Mager responded technically they are the city’s trees since they are in the alley. Avista can access the alley for their utilities. Brian stated the deck is 6’ wide. Other than moving posts, what is the downfall of having a 3’ deck? From a fire perspective, a fence that close to the deck would inhibit movement of firefighters. If it was a 3’ deck, you’d meet building code with the correct amount of egress. From what he has read, the code says you must have 36”. His opinion is that 1.5” is really tight. Jim stated there are only two houses on the alley and a parking lot on the other side. James Zehner asked if the new deck is the same size? Jim stated pretty much and provided a picture of the new deck.
STAFF PRESENTATION: City Administrator Kennedy reported all notices of hearing were delivered to adjoining property owners and published in the paper as required. City Staff observed deck work on the property and the owner was called to get a permit. During discussion, one permit was issued for interior work and the second permit was for construction of two decks. During the review process, it was determined the deck on the north side of the house was only 1.5” from the property line on the alley and a 5’ setback was required. The permit has not been issued for the decks, as it is out of compliance. Jim then applied for a variance.
Public Works Director Mager stated there are Centurylink and Avista at both ends of the alley. There are no city utilities in the alley. The trees are mostly taken care of through the trimming by Jim, except for one by Myrtle.
James Zehner asked if there was a request for alley vacation. Bob explained Jim considered going that route, but there are utilities in the alley and city staff wouldn’t recommend a vacation. Homeowners could choose to leave it as grass, looking nice or future owners may choose to drive in it and use if for access. Other utilities could be added to the alley. City staff reviews building permits, which would have caught this; however because there was not building permit, now P&Z needs to look at it and make a recommendation to the council.
Brian Perry was very concerned with it so close to property line. He explained, in the future, people like to cover decks, which have eaves and then the eave hangs over the property line into the alley. Jim submitted another picture of the neighbor’s house that is also at alley line.
WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE: None
SUPPORTERS: None
NEUTRALS: None
OPPONENTS: None
APPLICANT REBUTTAL: Dan Gautney questioned why Jim didn’t get a permit? Why would you not check with the city? Jim stated is was an oversite at the time for not getting a permit.
Hearing closed 6:25 p.m.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: James Zehner felt because the deck was built the same size, the commission should allow the variance.
Brian felt properly built egress needed to be met from that door. However, Jim could make the deck smaller and still meet egress. Brian’s concern is for the future. At some time in the future, a property owner will probably want to cover the deck. When covering it, it will have an eave and that eave will project into the alley. Mike Cook questioned if there could be a stipulation added to the property that prohibits covering the deck in the future. Brian stated we are here today because people don’t get building permits so the stipulation wouldn’t do any good.
Dan asked if he’ll get a permit for the deck. Tonya explained a permit can’t be issued unless a variance is approved. If a variance is approved, then the permit will be issued. Any time work is started without a permit, there is a double fee when it is issued. Brian questions how far it was from the foundation of the building to the property line. It is 6’ 1.5”.
James Zehner made a motion to recommend to the council to approve the variance. Motion died for lack of second
Brian felt Jim should be allowed a deck 42” wide. According to building code, 36” for egress is needed to meet code. According to the building code Brian read (R311.3), 36” is required for egress, but if you also account for a handrail, that would add a little bit so by making it 42” wide, it would allow access but still keep the deck about 2’ off the property line. This allows space for a future fence or if a new owner covers the deck.
Due to the need for additional comments, Mike Cook re-opened the hearing at 6:33 pm.
Jim stated he would like to have them go onsite to view the property. Brian stated he has been there. He walked the alley, looked at the property line and looked at trees. The alley is owned by the city. If Bob felt the trees were in his way or the alley developed, he would remove them. Brian knows in the residential zone, you can’t build on property line. He appreciated all the work Jim has done to the house and commend him for improving community. Once the deck is there and problem arises it’s harder in the future. Jim stated he was happy to put a restriction on property that the deck can’t be covered. No one is using alley and hasn’t in forever. He has trimmed the trees and he is asking for consideration on this project. For emergencies, it’s easier for access on a 6’ deck. He stated he doesn’t live in town so he didn’t know the process and depended on his contractor.
Hearing closed at 6:40 p.m.
On motion by Brian Perry, second by Dan Gautney to recommend to the city council to allow a 42” deck deviation into the setback which allows egress from the north facing door at 306 N Myrtle. This will still keep him 2’ off property line.
ROLL CALL: Yes Brian Perry, Dan Gautney, James Zehner, Motion carried.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Mike Cook welcomed James Zehner as a new member. Current officers are Chairman Mike Cook, Vice-Chair Kevin Asker and Secretary Dan Gautney. Brian Perry made a motion, second by Dan Gautney to keep the current slate of officers. Motion carried.
MISCELLANEOUS: Dan felt some people say let’s build it and then I’ll ask for forgiveness. They get charged a double fee on the permit but felt it should be more. Tonya explained the building permit process and that’s it’s hard because the permits are based upon value, so the double fee changes based upon the project. If Jim’s application is approved as recommended by the commission, then it is a punishment because Jim will need to remove some of the deck. At this time, the city has adopted if you start work without a permit, then you pay a double fee.
Brian stated if people would just start at city hall, it could be reviewed and there wouldn’t be these issues. The city would provide all the necessary information so they could meet regulations or change their project before building. There are some that will build without asking and it works until they don’t meet code and have to go through the variance process. Brian feels there is a certain responsibility for him to say no. Tonya stated when it’s noncompliant and doesn’t meet code, then it goes to P&Z to hear their application. At that time, P&Z needs to make a decision whether they should meet code or should there be a variance granted. State code says variance should be given sparingly. A variance is permanent and stays with the property compared to a conditional use which is for the person applying.
Brian stated in this situation, the current owner doesn’t want to cover the porch or build a fence which is fine but a future owner may want to. Brian was concerned if this variance is granted and a future owner wants to add on, could they now run the deck the full length of the house. Tonya stated because of the current building permit process, this would be caught during review and not allowed, as long as the owner took out a building permit. Not all owners do. If this project would have started with a building permit, staff would have caught this issue and even though the existing deck was 6’ wide, if it didn’t meet code, city would not have allowed it to be rebuilt the same size.
Bob commended the commission for looking to what a future buyer may want to do, rather than a current owner as everyone has their own dream for their property.
James stated he is gone for the March meeting.
NEXT MEETING: The next meeting is March 26, 2024 at 6:52 pm.
Adjourned by Mike Cook at 6:52 p.m.
Tonya Kennedy – City Clerk
