Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

I'll now call the roll. Simmons. Bibb. Here. Woodard.

Here.

Sherrod.

Here.

Vetchecker. Here. We have a quorum.

The next is going to be the approval of the minutes. Yeah, the next is on the approval of the minutes since there's not a chairperson. We'll ask for you all to make a motion.

I make a motion to approve the minutes. Second.

All in favor say aye. Aye.

The only people signed up for public comment were related to the agenda item that was removed.

You did not sign up for public comment.

Next on our agenda is the public hearing. I'm going to make a motion that I ask that this board consider moving new business item 3.1 discussed and possibly take action on an appointment of chairperson ahead of the public hearing.

So moved. Second. Okay.

Good evening. This first item on tonight's agenda is the board's appointment of a chairperson. This appointment provides leadership for conducting meetings, ensuring orderly procedure and serving as the presiding officer for quasi judicial hearings before this board. I will defer to the board for nomination and action on that item. I will remind you that if you need to, you can defer the item to the next agenda item, but we'll have to, if it gets deferred, you will have to appoint somebody to act as chairperson for the remainder of this meeting. I know that was still a lot. Essentially, you need a new chairperson because you have a new member. You need someone to act as chairperson tonight because your vice chair, Mr. Simmons, is not here. Hopefully that all made sense.

For over singing tonight? Is that what you said first?

You can either decide if you want to go ahead and just... have an actual chairperson. If somebody on this board wants to act as a chairperson and the board here is in agreement, you have a quorum. So you can elect a new chair from the four of you that are here. Or potentially you could defer to the next meeting when Larry is here. And then if you defer to the next meeting when every member is here, presumably, you could choose someone just to run for, or just to be acting chairperson for tonight. Yes, ma'am.

I think it would behoove us if anybody wants to volunteer to be the chairman. My question would be, has Mr. Simmons been talked to about, as vice chair, would he consider taking the chair position?

That conversation has not been had.

Because if you elect him as the chair, then you're going to have to elect a new vice chair.

Absolutely.

Dr. V, would you be considered serving as the chairperson of this committee?

I would. I think I'm able to get here pretty frequently.

Thank you. Carolyn, would you rather have it? I think we can catch lots pretty easily.

I might rather do vice, too.

As long as people are patient with my Roberts rules.

Yeah, and honestly, the chairperson is enforcing the Roberts rules. That's a primary role of that position.

Would y'all rather wait and defer and just get somebody tonight, or do you want to go ahead?

I'll defer that to y'all. Y'all have been here much longer. I'm the newbie.

I suggest we defer it until we have the full board here and if Dr. B would agree to serve as the chair for tonight. Okay. Do we need to make a motion to that effect? Yes. Well, I'll make that motion.

Motion to defer. Do we have a second?

Second. Second.

on the spot.

So you're going to act as the chair tonight, which means I'm going to go back to the public hearing.

We need to do a vote real quick. Oh, yeah, we do need to do a roll call vote. We have the motion deferred by Ms. Sherrod, seconded by Ms. Woodard. I'm going to call the roll. Bibb?

Yes.

Simmons?

Not here.

Woodard? Yes. Sherrod? Yes. Light checker. Yes. Motion to defer passes 4-0.

Thank you all. I appreciate that. I know that was a little confusing at the beginning of this meeting.

Is that motion also included that Adam would, Dr. B would serve as the acting chairman?

For tonight's meeting. So now we, because we were only moving the one item, we can go back to the regular meeting. Okay.

So next item in the agenda is item 2.2, conditional, a public hearing regarding the conditional use permit for the Skyview Terrace Apartments. Make a motion to open public comments for public hearing.

So moved. Second.

You have to ask if anybody's here to speak.

Is anyone here to speak regarding the conditional use permit of the Skyview Terrace Apartments? We have a gentleman here.

Good evening, members of the board. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you so much for indulging me this evening and listening to my request for a conditional use permit. The conditional use permit is requested because the property is located, it's a multifamily development that's operating in a R10 medium density residential district. which the development, it causes that development to be a legal non-conforming use. And in order to be able to rehabilitate that development and request funds for such from the state, we need it, excuse me, to be a conforming use. So the conditional use permit is requested to allow the multifamily development to continue as a multifamily development as a legal conforming use in that district.

And, sir, what is your name? Oh, I'm so sorry.

My name is Charles Ramsey.

So currently in R10, multi-unit is not permitted, is that correct?

It is permitted by conditional.

Oh, but only by conditional. And it has not had a conditional yet?

We don't believe so. The development was built in the early 80s, so it's about 40 years old and in great need of repairs at this point. We were able to secure funds for the property next door, Robin Hood, and it's set to undergo that rehabilitation very soon, and we're trying to do the same thing for Skyview. Okay. And we did come before you and ask for the conditional use permit for Robin Hood, which was in the same situation. And upon securing that, we then went on to win the award of funds.

For both of these Section 8 housing?

No, sir. I believe they're both USDA. It's USDA's 515 program, rural development program, was what they originally built under. So they are receiving some rental subsidies from USDA, but I don't think every unit is subsidized.

Okay. Any other questions regarding 2.2, the conditional use permit? On the public hearing. On the public hearing.

Can we get your address for the record, sir?

Yeah. My address is 400 Heron Cove Road, Killin, Alabama, 35645. Okay.

And sir, are you also here to speak? Can you speak to the variance request? I am 2.3 as well.

Yeah, absolutely. So the variance is basically a similar item. The property as it sits is 48 units positioned on four acres. So it's a it has more than the requisite number of units per acre, the unit density on the property. So the various request is uh to allow it to have that number of units um basically for the same purpose to be able to be in a legal conforming situation to be able to acquire funds to rehabilitate the development for the existing density for the existing density that's correct and our rehabilitation proposes to add no additional apartments but not by additional land next to it or something Unfortunately, what is it, the Y and the other folks might have something to say about that.

Do you even have any other questions regarding the public hearing 2.3?

I'm sorry, I might have missed it. How many apartments are there?

Skyview Terrace, I believe, is 48 apartments currently.

That's eight units per building?

Correct. That's correct, sir.

And Robin Hood, about the same size? About the same.

I know there was a conditional use permit request for Robin Hood. Was there also a variance request?

I don't believe so.

Does it have a different density for the acreage?

Oh, I would have to look at the acreage and all that good stuff. Perhaps. I mean, they look about the same size, you know, from just remembering the layout. But I think Robin Hood actually may have a little bit more land, so may not have run into the density issue. It's actually pretty close.

Does anyone have any more questions regarding the public hearing section? No. I move to close the public hearing on items 2.2 and 2.3.

Thank you again for your time and consideration.

Thank you. Now we're on to new business discussed and possibly take action on conditional use permit for Skyview Terrace Apartments. So, Karen, let me have you from the city. Would you like to make a motion to open up discussion regarding?

I know 3.3. Motion to put it on the table or a motion to review. So moved.

I'm going to take items 3.3 and 3.4 together because they do work in tandem. Agenda items 3.3 and 3.4 are two requests associated with Skyview Terrace Apartments, which are located at 500 Skyview Terrace. This is, as Mr. Ramsey said, an existing multifamily development. It was constructed in 1987 prior to adoption of the current zoning ordinance. The property is located in the R10 medium density residential district. Within the R10 district, multifamily residential development is permitted only with approval of a conditional use permit. However, approval of just the conditional use does not waive the underlying zoning standards, including the maximum permitted density of approximately 4.4 units per acre. The existing development contains 48 units on approximately four acres, resulting in a density of roughly 12.12 dwelling units per acre. As a result, the development is non-conforming with respect to density. The applicant is requesting two approvals this evening. First, a conditional use permit to authorize the multifamily residential use within the R10 zoning district. And second, a variance to provide relief from the density requirement in order to allow the existing density to remain and ultimately to permit limited modifications to 10 of the existing units. Specifically, the proposal that was presented by the management company involves adding one bedroom to 10 existing two bedroom units, similar to the same thing that was recently approved at Robin Hood. Years ago, Robin Hood came before the board to get a conditional use permit so that they can move forward with that. That construction is currently underway. There is no increase in the number of dwelling units in this apartment complex. The applicant also intends to complete general rehabilitation and improvements to the property. From a conditional use standpoint, staff finds that the existing development is compatible with surrounding residential uses and is not anticipated to create adverse impacts related to traffic, utilities, infrastructure, or neighborhood character. The use has existed on this site for nearly 40 years. and no expansion of the site footprint or unit count is proposed. With respect to the variance request, staff evaluated the application under the nine criteria contained in section 11-1305 part C of the zoning ordinance. Staff does not find that the criterion related to unique physical hardship is met as the request is based on existing development conditions rather than physical characteristics of the property. However, we do find that the remaining criteria are satisfied, including that the request is not self-created, does not permit a prohibited use, represents the minimum necessary relief, and is not anticipated to adversely impact surrounding properties or public welfare. Based on this analysis, staff recommends approval of both the conditional use permit and the variance request subject to any conditions the Board may determine appropriate. And I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.

So the current maximum density for R10 is 4.4 per acre?

Approximately, yes. It's based on 10,000 square feet per unit. But this was built before the zoning ordinance was in place. And so they built it per whatever criteria was in place at the time that it was constructed.

And will this conditional use permit be good for any additional units that they wanted to rehab other than the 10 without them having to come back and do it again?

No.

So they'll have to come back every time they want to improve any of the other units?

Potentially, yes, because you're expanding the footprint. unless there's a code change sometime between now and at that point, similar to what we just approved. Right. I'm the way the code is written right now.

They're not expanding the footprint when they, when they improve the interior.

They're not. Yes. But to add the additional bedroom, they are expanding the footprint. That's what triggers all of this. They need the building permit. The building permit requires that the site be in zoning compliance.

It's not expanding the footprint. It's changing the footprint, but it's not making it any bigger.

The addition of the bedroom.

Is that correct?

The addition of the bedroom adds approximately 120 square feet. At least that's what it did on Robin hood somewhere around there.

The development is currently comprised of one and two bedroom units in order to better target families. 10 of those two bedroom units, we're going to add a bedroom to, to make them three bedroom units. That and the rehab itself, because of the extent of that, will require a building permit. As was just stated, the building permit requires us to be in zoning employment. So it's kind of like a domino effect of all these.

It's a nominal amount of square footage that gets added to each building because the units are typically stacked.

So you're going to have to go out somewhere? Are you going out into the breezeway? Or are you going out to the side of the building? On Robin Hood, it went out in the side. As I recall from Robin Hood, it was...

but it's mirrored from the center and they came down to the side.

It expanded the building size slightly on Robin Hood, but it did not change the density. They did other improvements to the property that overall it's a capital improvement that benefits the community.

And also to answer another question, if I may, we are going to rehab every unit on the property. It's just those ten units, ten of the 48 that we're adding a bedroom to. And that's a requirement of the fines in order to target families at the development. Right. To have a certain number of .

Okay.

Does the staff have any concern that granting these variances will allow undeniable request of similar variances for any other property?

No, because this is precedented on the fact that it's an existing complex. We're just bringing the existing complex into compliance.

Do you think it would be wise to add to if motion for approval is given to add for existing complexes as a specific provision? Absolutely. To make it exclusive to this property?

The more specific you make your motions, then they're tied uniquely to the actual properties.

saying into the microphone so that it can be recorded. Does anyone have any other questions?

The conditional use permit and the variant should be treated as two separate to keep it clean, though.

Okay. You want a separate motion for each one?

Separate motion, separate vote, because they're technically two separate requests.

Vote. I move to approve the conditional use permit, finding the existing multifamily development complies with section 11-1306 and will not result in adverse impacts to surrounding properties. I further find that eight of the nine criteria in Sections 11-1305C are satisfied, including the request is not self-created, does not permit a prohibited use, represents the minimum necessary relief, and will not be detrimental to public welfare. I'd like to make the provision that this conditional use permit is also limited to properties that have this multi-use function prior to existing R10 zoning establishment within our city. And if approval is granted, it's subject to any applicable conditions.

Second.

You're going to do a vote on the conditional use permit.

I was waiting for him to call a vote. Please make a call to vote on the motion. Water.

Yes.

Bibb. Yes. Veitcheker. Yes. Sherrod.

Yes.

Motion passes 4-0.

I make it a motion to approve a variance request. Similar findings. The family development complies with the same section as mentioned in the last motion, will not resort in adverse impact to surrounding properties, and that eight of the nine criteria are met and satisfied, including the request is not self-created, does not permit a prohibited use, represents the minimum necessary relief, and will not be detrimental to public welfare. And I would like to add that this motion for approval for a variance request is specific to properties that have this higher density existing prior to establishment of the R10 zoning in our city. Approval is granted and subject to any applicable conditions.

Mr. Chair, we need a motion to discuss it first.

I make a motion to discuss the request for variance for the density of the Skyview Terrace apartments.

So moved.

Any second?

Like we've already discussed it, so.

Okay, so now you can do your vote. Now you can do your vote.

But you made a vote. I second his motion.

Perfect. I make a motion to please call for a vote on the motion of the variance. Sherrod?

Yes.

Bychecker? Yes. Bibb? Yes. Woodard? Yes. Motion passes 4-0.

All right. Next on agenda item is the Community Development Director's Report.

Melanie? The only thing I have tonight is I want to provide an update on board training. My plan right now is to have another joint training. We're going to start with one hour. This board ideally will come and join the planning commission because this board is smaller at either the July or the August meetings for the first of the four hours. As required by Tennessee law, board members must complete annual training related to ethics, private property rights, and the relationship of those rights to the public planning and zoning process. Then we have an option on what we can do the other remaining three hours on. To begin satisfying those requirements, staff proposes a joint training session with the Planning Commission following either the July or August planning meeting. Depending on the length of their agenda, the first hour of that session will fulfill the required ethics and property rights training component. The remaining training hours will be scheduled later in the year, likely divided into two separate one and a half hour sessions. Both of those sessions I plan to do as a more case study format, giving everyone an opportunity to review a situation and then discuss amongst themselves how different laws and things would be applicable in each situation. That's all I have right now. A date has not been set formally for that training, but I just wanted you to put it on your kind of notification that it was starting to be thought about and that you would All need to be present. So if there's days that don't work, we can work around those.

Okay. Thank you.

That's all I have.

In that case.

If there's questions, happy to answer them. But otherwise, that's it.

Any questions? No. Well, I make a motion to adjourn. Second. All right. Do it.