CITY OF MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Regular Meeting, January 28, 2009, at 1:00 p.m. City Hall, 111 West Vine Street, Council Chambers, 1 st Floor 1. Call to order 2. Old Business 3. New Business A G E N D A Application Z-08-069 by Mr. Masoud John Baluch, for Smitty s Auto Parts, is requesting a special use permit in order to construct an automobile dismantler and recycler facility in a Heavy Industrial (H-I) zone for property located along the west side of South Molloy Lane west of New Salem Highway. Variance Requests a. Application Z-09-001 by Ms. Kathy Moore Nobles, is requesting a 10-foot variance from the minimum required 30-foot front setback for principal structures and a 9-foot variance from the minimum required 20-foot side setback for principal structures in a Residential Multi-Family (RM-16) zone for property located at 724 and 728 Greenland Drive. b. Application Z-09-002 by Mr. Kevin Guenther of Design Resource and Huddleston-Steele Engineering, Inc., for Mays and Company, is requesting a 7-foot variance from the minimum required 7-foot separation between buildings and parking in the Gateway Design Overlay District (GDO-2) for property located at the southwest corner of North Thompson Lane and Robert Rose Drive. c. Application Z-09-003 by Ms. Beth Smith, for Rutherford County Habitat for Humanity, is requesting an 18-foot variance of the minimum required 30-foot front setback for principal structures in a Residential Duplex (RD) zone for property located at 410 South University Street.
Sign Variance Requests d. Application S-09-004 by Mr. Otto J. Diaz, Jr., is requesting a variance from Section 25 ¼-24 (A)(22) of the City of Murfreesboro Sign Ordinance which prohibits a sign placed in or over a public utility or drainage easement on property located at 1822 East Northfield Boulevard. e. Application S-09-005 by Mr. Kent A. Burns, for Oak Park TN, LP, is requesting a variance from Section 25 ¼-24 (A)(22) of the City of Murfreesboro Sign Ordinance which prohibits a sign placed in or over a public utility or drainage easement on property located at 1211 Hazelwood Street. 4. Staff Reports and Other Business 5. Adjourn
MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF COMMENTS JANUARY 28, 2009 Application: Address: Applicant: Zoning: Request: Z-08-069 Along the west side of South Molloy Lane west of New Salem Highway Mr. Masoud-John Baluch, for Smitty s Auto Parts Heavy Industrial (H-I) A special use permit in order to construct an automobile dismantler and recycler facility The subject property is located along the west side of South Molloy Lane west of New Salem Highway and is zoned H-I (Heavy-Industrial). The applicant filed a request for a special use permit for an automobile dismantler/recycler use in August 2008. At that time, it was determined that the applicant was not meeting the following standard from the Zoning Ordinance: 5) The application shall be accompanied by a sworn affidavit by the applicant that all permits and approvals required by any local, state, or federal environmental laws or
regulations, including, but not limited to, water and air pollution laws and regulations, have been secured, and that such use shall be operated in accordance with any such local, state, or federal environmental laws or regulations. The applicant submitted a sworn affidavit with his original application, but it did not contain all of the required language. Because of this, the Board voted to defer action on this request at its August 27, 2008 meeting. The original staff comments and the minutes from this previous meeting have been included for the Board s review. The original staff comments discuss the standards for automobile dismantlers and recyclers and also summarize the proposed operation of the use. Since that meeting, the applicant has supplied the Planning Staff with the required affidavit and has asked to appear before the Board to be considered once again. This item has been placed under Old Business and no public hearing will be held, as the public hearing for this request was held at the August 27, 2008 meeting. Several changes have been made to the site plan since the August meeting. First, the applicant has increased the height of the proposed wooden privacy fence along the southern, western, and northern property lines from 7-feet to 8-feet. Second, the plan has been revised to eliminate the parking lot islands and parking lot landscaping from the storage lot. The applicant said that the storage lot will not be functional for the proposed use with landscape islands. Staff agreed that this portion of the site is a storage lot and not a parking lot; therefore, landscape islands are not required. However, the applicant has proposed additional evergreen plantings on the site plan along the block wall in order to provide additional landscape screening for the use itself. The City Traffic and Engineering Staffs do have concerns regarding the substandard condition of Molloy Lane and the added traffic that the proposed use will bring. Staff stresses that any approval be subject to the recommended condition #4 listed below, so that the necessary road improvements will be in place for traffic to function properly to and from this site. If the Board approves this application, staff recommends the following conditions: 1) The Planning Commission must grant site plan approval for the proposed development. As a function of its site plan review, the Planning Commission will also have final architectural review of the development and all building orientation requirements must be met to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission. 2) The final grading and drainage plan will subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. The site design must include adequate room for storm water management and must comply with the Storm water Quality Ordinance. 3) The landscape plan, including the required buffer, will be subject to the final review and approval of the City Horticulturist. 4) Molloy Lane is a substandard street. The developer will be required to construct improvements to Molloy Lane (including possible off-site improvements) and/or submit payment in lieu of construction for these
improvements, as determined by the City Engineer. The final construction plans must also demonstrate that the types of vehicles that will be accessing the proposed use will be able to adequately navigate Molloy Lane and the site itself. Mr. John Baluch will be in attendance at the meeting to answer any questions that the Board may have.
MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF COMMENTS JANUARY 28, 2009 Application: Z-09-001 Address: 724 and 728 Greenland Drive Applicant: Ms. Kathy Moore Nobles Zoning: Residential Multi-Family (RM-16) Requests: A 10-foot variance from the minimum required 30- foot front setback for principal structures and a 9- foot variance from the minimum required 20-foot side setback for principal structures The subject properties are located along the south side of Greenland Drive and along the west side of Givan Court across Greenland Drive from Evergreen Cemetery. A total of two (2) parcels are involved with these variance requests. The applicant intends to resubdivide the subject parcels in order to combine them into one lot of record for multifamily residential redevelopment. Included with the agenda materials is a letter from the applicant, an engineered site plan, a landscape plan, and architectural elevations.
Both parcels are currently zoned Residential Multi-Family (RM-16) and they both contain an existing triplex. The applicant s site plan shows the construction of a 25-unit apartment development, which is the maximum number of units allowed with acreage of 1.58. The development is proposed to be constructed in two (2) phases. Phase I will consist of eleven (11) 1-bedroom units to be located in the southern half of the property. Phase I will also include the requisite paved parking, a Dumpster, and the development s access from Givan Court. Phase II includes an "L-shaped" building at the front of the site along both Greenland Drive and Givan Court containing fourteen (14) 2-bedroom units as well as the requisite parking. The applicant intends for the two (2) triplexes to remain and be used until she is ready to construct Phase II. The Phase I building will be 1-story, while the Phase II building will be 2-stories. Staff has identified four (4) areas where variances are needed, according to the plan submitted. The front of the Phase II building will be approximately 20-feet from the front property line along Greenland Drive, instead of the required 30-foot front setback. The building does not have a flat front, so there some portions of the building along this property line that are in compliance with the front setback and some that are not. In addition, the Phase II building is proposed to be located roughly 11-feet from the east side property line. The Phase I building is proposed to be located approximately 11-feet from the east side property line and 15-feet from the west side property line. In all instances, variances are needed from the required 20-foot side setback for the proposed multi-family buildings. In her letter, the applicant points to two main reasons for her requests. First, she wants the Phase II building to frame the street corner, while keeping the paved parking lot to the rear of the building hidden from view of the public street. She believes this will achieve the more urban feel that she is trying to achieve. Also, she points to the oblong shape of the lot, making it difficult to develop with the allowable number of units that the zoning allows. In particular, the back portion of the property, where the Phase I building is proposed to be located, is virtually unusable once the setbacks are applied due to its narrowness. The applicant has submitted the architectural elevations and the landscape plan to help illustrate to the Board how the proposed buildings will relate to the street and to the surrounding properties. There are a number of items on the site plan that need to be addressed prior to the BZA meeting. Six (6) copies of the revised civil/landscape plans should be submitted no later than 12:00 PM on Tuesday, January 27 th. Please see below for staff comments/revisions: 1) Label each proposed building with the number of stories. 2) Correctly label the distance from the closest point on the proposed Phase II building to the northern front property line. It is Staff s understanding that the current plans do not show the nearest point, which is slightly less than 10-feet away, according to the design engineer. 3) Correctly show a 25-foot rear building setback line on the subject property, adjacent to the north lot line of the James Clayton property.
4) Correctly show a 20-foot side building setback line on the subject property, adjacent to the east lot line of the James Clayton property. 5) Call out the necessary side setback variance needed for the Phase I building adjacent to the James Clayton property. 6) On the existing conditions sheets, label the two existing principal structures on the subject parcels as Existing triplex. If the Board approves these variance requests, staff recommends the following conditions: 1) A surveyor will be required to help lay out the footing of the buildings and a surveyor s certification must be provided that the building is in compliance with the action of the BZA as well as all other setback requirements. 2) The Planning Commission must grant site plan approval for the proposed development. As a function of its site plan review, the Planning Commission will also have final architectural review of the development and all building orientation requirements must be met to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission. 3) A resubdivision plat combining both lots into one (1) lot of record must be recorded prior to the issuance of any building permits. Ms. Moore Nobles will be in attendance to answer any questions that the Board may have. The front and side setback variances should each be taken in separate motions.
MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF COMMENTS JANUARY 28, 2009 Application: Location: Applicant: Zoning: Request: Z-09-002 At the southwest corner of North Thompson Lane and Robert Rose Drive Mr. Kevin Guenther of Design Resource and Huddleston-Steele Engineering, Inc., for Mays and Company Commercial Highway (CH), Light-Industrial, Battlefield Protection Overlay (BPD), and Gateway Design Overlay (GDO-2) A 7-foot variance from the minimum required 7-foot separation between buildings and parking in the Gateway Design Overlay District (GDO-2) The subject property is located at the southwest corner of North Thompson Lane and Robert Rose Drive. It is zoned L-I (Light-Industrial) and CH (Commercial Highway) and
is also located in the Gateway Design Overlay District (GDO-2) and the Battlefield Protection Overlay District. The subject lot is directly to the north of the existing Hampton Inn and Suites and the proposed Burger King. Also at this intersection is a convenience market, a bank, a strip retail center, and a grocery store. The subject property is the proposed future site of a new Firestone tire retailer. The applicant has received initial design review approval from the Planning Commission for the proposed project. He is seeking a variance of the requirement that on lots of less than 1.5 acres (the subject property is 1.3 acres) in the Gateway Design Overlay District that there must be 7-feet of separation in between the building and the parking lot. At initial design review, the Planning Commission did not express any objection to the proposed variance and recommended that the applicant proceed to the Board of Zoning Appeals before being considered for final design review approval. Included with the agenda materials is a letter from the applicant, a site plan, a landscape plan, and architectural elevations. The area of the site in question is the area adjacent to the bay doors on the south side of the building. The applicant has requested a full 7-foot variance of the required 7-foot separation between the building and the parking lot in this area. As is customary with tire retailers, the bulk of the building will be comprised of service bays to the rear of the retail portion of the building. In order for vehicles to be able to access the service bays via the service doors, the applicants need for the edge of the building to directly abut the parking lot. In his letter, Mr. Guenther goes on to further explain that additional landscaping has been provided to help mitigate the effects of the lack of space in between the building and the parking lot. The south side of the building will be primarily visible to northbound traffic on North Thompson Lane. To help with this viewshed, the applicant proposes a continuous curbed landscape island with vertical evergreen plantings south of the building. In addition, the south side perimeter planting yard will also contain additional shrubbery. If the Board approves this variance request, staff recommends the following conditions: 1) The Planning Commission must grant site plan approval and final design review approval for the proposed development. Mr. Guenther will be in attendance at the meeting to answer any questions that the Board may have.
MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF COMMENTS JANUARY 28, 2009 Application: Address: Applicant: Zoning: Request: Z-09-003 410 South University Street Ms. Beth Smith, for Rutherford County Habitat for Humanity Residential Duplex (RD) An 18-foot variance of the minimum required 30-foot front setback for principal structures The subject property is located along the west side of South University Street, north of Reid Avenue and south of East State Street. The subject property, 410 South University Street, is currently developed with a single-family residence. The applicant intends to demolish the existing residence and build a new single-family home on the subject property. In order to keep the proposed house in harmony with existing and future single-family development on this block, the applicant has requested a front setback variance. Included with the agenda materials is a letter from the applicant, as well as a survey of the property, and a proposed building envelope drawn on the survey. The Board should note that the applicant has no specific house plan in mind yet for this lot;
however, in planning for its development, she wishes to firm up the setback parameters for the development of the lot once a house plan is chosen. The size of the lot is roughly 117-feet deep by 65-feet wide. The area of the lot is approximately 7,600 square-feet. The subject lot is zoned RD (Residential Duplex). The minimum front setback requirement in the RD zoning district is 30-feet. Given the size of the lot, the applicant could actually build a house on it without seeking any variances. However, the Planning Staff urged the applicant to seek a variance to be consistent with previous requests on adjacent properties to give this block more of a uniform appearance. The Board will recall that the applicant was granted front setback variances in October of 2008 for the three lots directly adjacent to 410 to the north. 400 South University Street was approved with a 12-foot front setback, while 402 was approved with a 10-foot front setback, and 406 was approved with a 12-foot front setback. Habitat also built the home at 420 (on the corner of Reid and University) in 2006 but did not request a variance from the 30-foot front setback requirement for this lot along University at that time. The applicant has officially requested an 18-foot front setback variance for 410, which would put the house 12-feet off of the front property line. However, she states in her application that she would prefer that a 15-foot front setback variance be approved instead, so that there will be a more gradual transition to the newer houses from the existing house at 420 South University Street. She seeks the Board s opinion on this matter and is willing to accept whatever the Board feels is an appropriate setback. The driveway for the proposed house is proposed to be located on the north side of the lot. The BZA will recall that when it approved the setback variances for 406, approval was conditioned on a driveway easement being recorded on 410 for the benefit of 406. The applicant is in the process of having this driveway easement recorded and anticipates having it recorded prior to the BZA meeting. The driveways for both lots would be located side-by-side on the north side of the proposed house at 410. Staff believes that the subject lot is a good candidate for a front setback variance, although a single-family home could be built on this lot without any variances. In the past, Habitat has tried to build in harmony with the existing homes in the surrounding neighborhood that predate current zoning regulations and are built much closer to the front property line. After visiting the subject property, staff observed that most of the houses in the immediate vicinity are indeed closer to the front property line than 30-feet. Photographs depicting the proximity of the surrounding housing to the street have been included for the Board s review. In addition, as stated previously, the three (3) adjacent lots to the north will be developed by Habitat with houses closer to the front lot line than 30-feet per variances received in October 2008. In addition, this request is generally consistent with the recommendations of the Maney Avenue Comprehensive Plan, which is used as a planning tool for the subject area by the Planning and Engineering Department as well as the Planning Commission and the Board of Zoning Appeals. The Plan identifies the subject property as being in the Patterson Park Revitalization District. It is important to note that with regards to the Patterson Park Revitalization District the plan stated that future redevelopment efforts in this area should focus on the provision of single-family, owner-occupied housing as a catalyst for positive change in the
neighborhood. The applicant is attempting to honor this particular goal of the plan. With regards to the Patterson Park Revitalization District, the plan recommends as a key design standard reduced front setbacks to better relate homes to the street. It recommends a minimum front setback of 15-feet and a maximum front setback of 25- feet. The Plan noted that in many instances the suburban zoning requirements that are currently in place are not conducive to redevelopment of the older, more urbanized areas of the City. If the Board approves this application, staff recommends the following condition: 1) A surveyor will be required to help lay out the footing of the building and a surveyor s certification must be provided that the building is in compliance with the action of the BZA as well as all other setback requirements. Ms. Smith will be in attendance to answer any questions that the Board may have.
MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF COMMENTS JANUARY 28, 2009 Application: Address: Applicant: Zoning: Request: Z-09-004 1822 East Northfield Boulevard Mr. Otto H. Diaz, Jr. Planned Commercial District (PCD) A variance from Section 25 ¼-24 (A)(22) of the City of Murfreesboro Sign Ordinance which prohibits a sign placed in or over a public utility or drainage easement The applicant, Otto H. Diaz, is requesting a variance from Section 25 ¼-24 (A)(22) of the City of Murfreesboro Sign Ordinance which prohibits a foundation or sign placed in or over a public utility or drainage easement without consent of the easement holder and Board of Zoning Appeals approval. The sign location proposed is 1822 East Northfield Boulevard. The applicant is requesting permission to legally establish an externally illuminated, freestanding wall sign with 19 square-foot display area and an overall height of 3 2,
within a 20 drainage easement and a 30 water line easement that was installed prior to permit. The Agreement for a Sign in a City of Murfreesboro Easement has been signed by the Murfreesboro Water and Sewer Department, the City Engineer, and the Director of the Building & Codes Department. All other setbacks and regulations will apply.
MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF COMMENTS JANUARY 28, 2009 Application: Address: Applicant: Zoning: Request: Z-09-005 1211 Hazelwood Street Mr. Kent A. Burns, for Oak Park TN, LP Residential Multi-Family (RM-16) A variance from Section 25 ¼-24 (A)(22) of the City of Murfreesboro Sign Ordinance which prohibits a sign placed in or over a public utility or drainage easement The applicant, Kent Burns, representing Oak Park TN, LP is requesting a variance from Section 25 ¼-24 (A)(22) of the City of Murfreesboro Sign Ordinance which prohibits a foundation or sign placed in or over a public utility or drainage easement without consent of the easement holder and Board of Zoning Appeals approval. The sign location proposed is 1211 Hazelwood Street at Ashwood Cove Apartments.
The applicant is requesting permission to erect one (1) non- illuminated freestanding wall sign with 33 square-foot display area and an overall height of 7. The sign location has been field-staked and certified by a licensed civil engineer and will be located within a 30 drainage easement and a 20 water line easement. The Agreement for a Sign in a City of Murfreesboro Easement has been signed by the Murfreesboro Water and Sewer Department, the City Engineer, and the Director of the Building & Codes Department. All other setbacks and regulations will apply.