Board of Adjustment

Planning Division Office (208) 612-8276 Community Development Services BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT October 27, 2022 City Annex Building, Council Chambers 680 Park Avenue Members Present: Kristi Brower Chair, Wendy Nobles, Daniel Devasirvath, James Wyatt Staff Present: Naysha Foster, Current Planner, Michael Kirkham, Assistant City Attorney Call to Order: Kristi Brower called the meeting to order at 12:26 p.m. Minutes: Daniel made a motion to table the minutes from May 26, 2022, and August 25, 2022, until the next meeting. Wendy seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Public Hearing VAR22-002: The applicant, Brian Crandall, located at 428 Shelley Ave, ID, stated that they are asking for a variance for the requirement of transparency making up seventy five percent (75%) of the façade located at 374 E Street. He said the top of the building façade is a solid concrete and cinderblock pony wall that goes above the roof. Crandall stated that this area has always been used for commercial signage. Additionally, it serves no purpose to make this area on the top section of the façade transparent as it extends above the roof line. James Wyatt asked what percentage of glass and transparency they would have moving forward? Crandall said they were between fifty (50%) and sixty (60%) for the project. Wyatt said they need to set some kind of minimum they have to reach. Foster explained to Crandall that the Board would need to have a specific minimum that they would have to meet in order to approve the variance. Crandall did not have a specify number but was confident that could meet 50%. Daniel Devasirvath asked if the door could come flush with the rest of the building? Crandall said no, he believes this would cut down on the transparency and this set back is used as an overhang for protection from the weather. Wendy Nobles asked if the door will be glass. Crandall said it will be glass. The photo the Board is looking at is a temporary wooden door. Rob Morley, applicant, 185 Park View, Shelley, ID, stated that they are renovating this building and stated that they are doing everything they can to keep the transparency there as before while keeping the structural integrity of the building. He said that other buildings in the area do not meet this transparency requirement, so this would be consistent with other commercial buildings in the area. Naysha Foster presented the staff report for the Variance to reduce the amount of transparency required by the Form Based Code. She stated that the building was built in 1948 and the Form Based Code was adopted in 2020. The building was considered a legal non-conforming structure, however due BOA Minutes 10-27-22 Page 1 of 2  Planning Division Office (208) 612-8276 to a recent remodel project the building is required to meet current standards. Foster informed the Board that the Form Based Code defines this building as a Storefront Building and is located in the Core A: Mixed Use Subdistrict. She said that the building type and Core A Subdistrict requires seventy five percent (75%) transparency along the street frontage. Due to the construction of the building, the 75% transparency would be difficult to meet and may change the structural integrity of the building. Foster stated that the construction of the building has created a physical limitation and is unique to the structure. As the current property owners did not create the hardship and granting the variance would not conflict with public interest or create a nuisance or potential harm to the neighborhood, staff would recommend approval of this variance and recommend the Board of Adjustment apply a minimum amount of transparency that can be met. Wyatt asked what the hard number is that they are asking for. Brower said they are asking for fifty percent (50%). Brower said they don’t know what the percent is yet. It is up to the Board to provide the percentage then it’s up to the applicants to meet it. Devasirvath asked if the façade was a solid roof or if it went up above the roof line. Crandall told the Board that the façade went above the roof line but was solid cement. There was no other Public Testimony. Kristi Brower closed the public hearing Board Discussion: Brower said 50% seems reasonable to her and that it’s up to the applicant to meet this criterion. She said it is pretty clear that it is a hardship that is a part of the building itself. Nobles made a motion to approve the variance with a 50% transparency requirement. Wyatt seconded the motion. The motion passed with a three to one vote. Wyatt-yes, Nobles-yes, Brower-yes, Devasirvath-no. Deversirvath voted no because he thinks there is room to raise the façade higher. Relevant Criteria and Standards passed with the addition of the 50% transparency with a unanimous vote. Adjourn: Kristi adjourned the meeting at 12:57 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Ann Peterson, Recording Secretary BOA Minutes 10-27-22 Page 2 of 2