Muyni
← Back to Murfreesboro

Board of Zoning Appeals

Regular Meeting

Murfreesboro, TN · April 22, 2020

AgendaMinutes

Minutes

Regular Meeting Minutes of the Murfreesboro Board of Zoning Appeals April 22, 2020 – 1:00 P.M. Zoom Video Meeting MEMBERS VIDEO PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Davis Young, Chair Ken Halliburton, Vice-Chair Tim Tipps Julie King Misty Foy STAFF PRESENT Jafar Ware, Planner Brad Barbee, Landscape Site Plan Inspector Amelia Kerr, Planner Marina Rush, Principal Planner David Ives, Deputy City Attorney Roman Hankins, Assistant City Attorney Greg McKnight, Planning Director Matthew Blomeley, Assistant Planning Director Brenda Davis, Recording Assistant Chairman Young called the meeting to order at 1:00 P.M and determined that there was a quorum present. Chairman Young asked for a motion to perform the meeting electronically as necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Tennesseans and Murfreesboro citizens in light of the COVID-19 outbreak. Mr. Halliburton made a motion to perform the meeting electronically. The motion was seconded by Ms. Foy. Upon roll call the motion was passed by the following vote: Aye: Misty Foy Ken Halliburton Julie King Tim Tipps Davis Young Nay: None BZA Minutes Regular Meeting April 22, 2020 The minutes from the February 26, 2020 regular meeting were approved as submitted. New Business Special Use Permit Requests Application Z-19-027 by Ms. Kristy Allen, requesting a special use permit in order to conduct a home occupation (a beauty shop) at her residence located at 3877 Manson Pike. The property is located in a Residential Single-Family (RS-15) zone. Mr. Ware reviewed the application and staff comments. If the Board approves this request, Staff recommends the following conditions of approval: 1) Customer visits shall be by appointment only. 2) No more than one customer at a time shall visit the home-based business and there shall be no overlapping appointments. 3) Any proposed signage shall comply with the Zoning and Sign Ordinances, shall be attached to the home, shall not exceed 3 square-feet, and shall be subject to any applicable permitting requirements. 4) The business shall open only on Tuesdays thru Saturdays and it shall open no earlier than 8:30 AM and shall close no later than 5:30 PM. Mr. & Mrs. Dan and Kristy Allen were present to answer any questions. Mr. Tipps asked Mr. Ware to address the surrounding neighborhood relative to the subject location at 3877 Manson Pike. He was under the impression this property was located close to the Chamber of Commerce and the event facility at the end of Manson Pike. Mr. Ware made Mr. Tipps aware the Chamber of Commerce is on the other side of I-24, adding this property is located to the west of I-24. Mr. Tipps asked again about the surrounding neighborhood. He said there looks to be another site nearby that is zoned Commercial Fringe. Mr. Ware agreed there is a site nearby zoned Commercial Fringe, across the street is unincorporated Rutherford County, and southeast of the property is an apartment complex zoned RM-16. Mr. Blomeley added that these houses were built in the unincorporated County and annexed into the City about nine or ten years ago. He said this is a small single-family residential subdivision and nearby to the east is a proposed multi-tenant commercial building. Mr. Blomeley said there is a developing apartment complex to the south of the proposed commercial building. He said when Mr. Ware referenced the appearance of 2 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting April 22, 2020 the building, Staff wanted to bring that up for Board discussion. He referred to additional standard #3 for home occupations, which says “that there should be no alteration of the residential building which changes the character thereof as a dwelling.” Mr. Blomeley thought it was worth discussion by the Board as a potential issue and that it is the Board’s determination whether or not that specific standard has been met. Ms. King asked how the Board determines what is an appearance of a residential building and what is the appearance of a commercial building. She asked if there is a specific standard or is that just up to the observer. Mr. Blomeley said there is not specific guidance in the Zoning Ordinance beyond the sentence he read. He said it would be discretionary by the Board. Ms. King said she didn’t know how the Board would be able to make that determination without it being arbitrary to future petitioners. Mr. Tipps agreed with Ms. King but also added that it is apparent this is an addition to what is a typical residential ranch-style home. Mr. Tipps said it looks like it could be retrofitted for a garage which would be a normal use for a residential property. Chairman Young asked if the addition was built with proper permits and other than the visual appearance if there is nothing out of line with it. Mr. Ware said the addition meets all the setback requirements for a residential home in the RS-15 district, which is 40-feet from the front lot line, and they did apply for building permits. Chairman Young asked the applicants if they had anything to add. Mr. Allen said initially this was built as an addition to the house. Mr. Allen said that until July 2019, Mrs. Allen had a full commercial operation at a commercial location and she was only seeing an average of 1 to 1.5 clients a day. Mr. Allen looked at her books and thinks she will have 1 to 2 people on a Saturday. He said there will not be any walk-in capability like you would have in a commercial location. She is just going to be taking care of her current client base and again that worked out to be about 1 to 2 clients per day. Mr. Allen said she doesn’t take appointments until 10:00 a.m. and the last appointment would be 5:00 p.m. so they would be finishing at 6:00 p.m. if that meets the Board’s approval. Chairman Young thanked Mr. Allen and asked if there were any questions for the applicant. Chairman Young opened the public hearing. 3 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting April 22, 2020 Mr. Blomeley said no one contacted Staff by the deadline to register to speak. There being no one to speak, Chairman Young closed the public hearing. Chairman Young opened the floor for any further discussion or motion. Mr. Halliburton said the condition of approval dictates that their operating hours would be from 10:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m., but the applicant just said the client would leave by 6:00 p.m. He said if the Board approves this, it may need to condition that the ending time would be 6:00 p.m. versus 5:30 p.m. Mr. Blomeley said we would need clarification on the hours of operation, relative to that proposed condition. Mr. Blomeley said that the applicants indicated they wish to take advantage of the option to have the 3 square-foot attached sign for their business. That is why that recommended condition of approval regarding signage was included in the staff report. Chairman Young recognized the applicant would like to speak. Mr. Allen said prior to Mrs. Allen moving into the commercial property they also had a home-based business on John R Rice Boulevard, and this would be use of the same sign that the Board previously approved, if they desire to use the sign. He said they are not sure if they are going to put the sign up or not, but they want the Board’s permission. Chairman Young said that, as long as the sign meets the square-footage and size requirements according to City Staff, it is allowed by right. Mr. Blomeley said the sign is not allowed by-right. It would have to be expressly approved as a part of the BZA application. Chairman Young asked if there were stipulations on where that sign could be located like the front or side of the house. Mr. Ware said the sign can be attached to the front. Chairman Young asked if there were any further questions or a motion. Mr. Tipps said it meets the requirements that the applicant has to have and with respect to that design, as you look at that neighborhood especially on Manson Pike there appears to be somewhat of a transition from a rural/suburban residential to some light commercial along Manson Pike. He said the owner’s plans seem to be consistent with the requirements of a special use permit. 4 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting April 22, 2020 Chairman Young asked if the conditions of approval would include the sign. He also asked what closing time Mr. Tipps wished to recommend as 5:30 p.m. was in the staff comments and the applicant requested 6:00 p.m. Mr. Tipps made a motion to approve the special use permit request with the following conditions: 1) Customer visits shall be by appointment only. 2) No more than one customer at a time shall visit the home-based business and there shall be no overlapping appointments. 3) Any proposed signage shall comply with the Zoning and Sign Ordinances, shall be attached to the home, shall not exceed 3 square-feet, and shall be subject to any applicable permitting requirements. 4) The business shall open only on Tuesdays thru Saturdays and it shall open no earlier than 8:30 AM and shall close no later than 6:00 PM. The motion was seconded by Ms. Foy. Upon roll call the motion was passed by the following vote: Aye: Misty Foy Ken Halliburton Julie King Tim Tipps Davis Young Nay: None Application Z-20-009 by Mr. Clyde Rountree of Huddleston-Steele Engineering, Inc, for Believers Tabernacle, Inc., requesting a special use permit for the expansion of an existing institutional group assembly use (a church) in a Residential Single-Family (RS-15) zone for property located at 700 County Farm Road and on the adjacent parcel to the west identified as Tax Map 136E, Group A, Parcel 00400. The proposed expansion consists of the construction of a parking lot. Mr. Ware reviewed the application and staff comments. If the Board approves this request, Staff recommends the following conditions of approval: 1) The applicant shall submit a site plan for review and approval in accordance with the regulations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. 2) A subdivision plat combining the church parcel and the lot with the parking lot expansion shall be recorded prior to the issuance of the site work permit. 3) The site plan shall be revised to remove parking spaces from the required front yard. However, if a variance is approved in the future by the BZA to allow 5 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting April 22, 2020 parking spaces in the required front yard, an amendment to the special use permit shall not be required. 4) A Type C buffer with a 6’ privacy fence shall be provided along the west property line as far south as the southern limits of the proposed parking lot. Mr. Clyde Rountree was present to answer any questions. Chairman Young asked if there were any questions for staff. Mr. Rountree said Mr. Holder would like to add a commentary on the history of the parking lot. Mr. Rountree said they are requesting the best use of the parking lot today but will be coming back to the BZA to request a variance to the requirement that the parking spaces may not be located in the required front yard. Mr. Holder would like to give the logic behind the upcoming variance for the parking spaces. Mr. Blomeley offered to provide some additional history before Mr. Holder begins. Mr. Blomeley said there is an existing gravel parking lot on this property that is in violation. The church is proposing to construct this parking lot as a means to remedy that violation. He said their options were to either remove the gravel from the property and then seed and straw the area or to construct a compliant parking lot. Mr. Blomeley said the church is proposing to construct a compliant parking lot. He said that they do wish to apply next month for a variance to the standard that prohibits parking for institutional group assembly uses in the required front yard (i.e. the required front setback). Mr. Blomeley said that is not an issue in today’s meeting. He said what the Board will be doing is determining whether or not the use that is being requested in the special use permit application meets all of the standards to be located on this property which is in an RS-15 zone. Mr. Blomeley said the variance to allow parking in the front setback will the subject of a separate application next month. He said that would not be something to deliberate on at today’s meeting because a separate public hearing will be required. Mr. Blomeley said Staff has no issue with the Board acting on the special use permit request today. Regarding the special use permit, if the variance is granted next month, then the site plan could show parking in the required front yard. If the variance is not granted next month, the site plan will have to be revised to remove the parking from the required front setback. Chairman Young said even though their use is not really changing, anytime that an applicant that has a special use permit makes any changes then it comes back before the Board of Zoning Appeals for review. Mr. Blomeley said we make a determination on whether or not the changes are significant enough to warrant an amendment to the special use permit. He said what they would be coming back to you for next month would be a variance to allow parking in the front setback. He said one of the standards for institutional group assembly uses 6 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting April 22, 2020 in residential zones is that parking may not be located in the required front building setback. Mr. Blomeley said the applicant did not request a variance to that standard for today’s agenda and all they requested was a special use permit. He said because that has to be advertised as a separate variance and it was not advertised for this meeting, they will have to make a separate application for that proposed variance. Mr. Blomeley said regardless of that, the Board can act today on the special use permit request to allow the construction of this parking lot with the knowledge that the layout may change a little bit depending on whether or not a variance is granted for parking in the front setback. He said we would not require it to come back to the Board of Zoning Appeals for an amendment to a special use permit if the special use permit is approved today. However, if they choose to request a variance, that will need to come back. Chairman Young opened the public hearing. Mr. Blomeley said no one contacted Staff by the deadline to register to speak. Mr. Blomeley reminded Chairman Young that Mr. Rountree mentioned the applicant, Mr. Holder, would like to say a few words. There being no one to speak, Chairman Young closed the public hearing. Mr. Greg Holder with Believers Tabernacle spoke stating he understands about the variance request and told there was no other recourse but to appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Holder said Mr. Blomeley emailed him last night and said the church could attempt to obtain a variance and that is what they are planning to do. He said they have been waiting a couple of months for this meeting today and they would like to have the variance on next month’s agenda. He was not sure if they have missed the deadline to turn in for the next agenda but because of COVID-19, two months have gone by and had they known sooner, they would have applied for a variance. Mr. Holder said if the State opens things back up so they can have services, he would like to make sure their certificate of occupancy is not delayed while they continue to go through the process. Chairman Young thanked Mr. Holder and asked if there were any questions or if someone would like to make a motion. Mr. Holder asked if the special use permit is approved today, are they required to follow the requirements of landscaping as they are shown. He said a fence has been recommended but if the landscaping will be connected with the variance instead of the special use permit, they will wait and discuss it then. Mr. Blomeley said there are some recommended conditions of approval pertaining to the special use permit, adding there is a vacant residential lot to the west. Rather than having parking next to that vacant residential lot, when there is a house built on that lot 7 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting April 22, 2020 Staff would like to add some screening there to mitigate the impacts of having a parking lot right next to it. Staff has recommended a landscape buffer with a privacy fence. Mr. Blomeley said the main purpose of the privacy fence is to keep headlights from shining into that residential lot. Mr. Blomeley said that is a recommended condition, as Mr. Ware read earlier, but it is up to the Board’s discretion as to whether or not to follow the condition that Staff has recommended or to modify it or to remove it altogether. Mr. Halliburton referred to Mr. Holder’s reference about a certificate of occupancy and asked if anything the Board did today would cause a delay of the church not being able to have services or something of that nature, assuming services would be permitted after May 1st. Mr. Blomeley said he has been working with Mr. Holder and with Ms. Marina Rush, Principal Planner, on trying to bring that gravel parking lot into compliance and trying to come up with an appropriate path to that. Mr. Blomeley said the church is doing an addition onto the existing church building, so they were planning to tie the C of O for the addition to bringing the parking lot into compliance. He said they will revisit that with the applicant and look at the timing of when they are going to be complete with the building addition and see what our options are at that time. Mr. Blomeley said right now he is not prepared to commit one way or the other as to the timing. Mr. Rountree said the new facility should be complete within the next 30 days. He asked Mr. Holder to verify. Mr. Holder agreed with Mr. Rountree and said it looks like the addition should be complete within the next 30 days. He also mentioned he lost the Zoom connection and did not hear what Mr. Blomeley said. Mr. Blomeley told Mr. Holder that after today’s meeting he would talk with him independently and look at the timing of when the parking lot will be completed versus when the addition will be completed and evaluate what the opportunities are there. Mr. Holder said they would prefer not to install the privacy fence along the western property line. He requested the Board to consider this. Chairman Young said the recommendations from the Staff to the Board were to include a Type-C buffer and the privacy fence along the western property line. Mr. Holder asked if the approval today of the special use permit is contingent upon having the fence there or not having the fence there. He said they do not want to install a fence there. He said the fence will make the property look unsightly and give a closed- in feeling. 8 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting April 22, 2020 Chairman Young said that is one of the items the Board is discussing. He said anytime a non-residential use is proposed in a residential zone, screening and fencing are always items that are discussed. Mr. Tipps asked if Staff feels that a fence or screening is necessary to preserve the residential dwelling next door so that lights and other things would not impact it adversely. Mr. Blomeley agreed and added the lot next door is a residential single-family lot, but the lot is vacant at the present time. Staff was suggesting some appropriate screen or transition so that when a house is built there, the residents won’t have headlights shining into their yard or house. He said oftentimes a privacy fence is how we accomplish that in conjunction with a buffer. Mr. Blomeley said privacy fences can be used to reduce the amount of plantings adding a Type C option is what Staff recommended in the staff comments however there is a Type B option which is a 10-foot wide buffer instead of a 12-foot wide buffer that may allow for more flexibility because it is a narrower width. Mr. Blomeley said Staff recommended the fence but that is certainly at the Board’s discretion as to whether or not the Board feels that is appropriate. Mr. Tipps asked Mr. Blomeley if landscape screening would accomplish the same thing as a privacy fence to obscure any adverse lighting to the neighbor next door to the subject property. Mr. Blomeley said in this case that might be appropriate, adding if it were a developed lot next door with a house, he would feel more strongly about a privacy fence because a privacy fence will have a more immediate impact. He said the buffer will allow lights to shine through because for the first few years there are gaps in between the plantings. Mr. Blomeley said since there is no house right now, it may be appropriate to not have the fence since immediate measures would not be needed to eliminate lights shining into a house next door. Chairman Young asked if the fence is Mr. Holder’s main concerns or if he is concerned with the landscaping as well. Mr. Blomeley thinks Mr. Holder’s concern is more with the fence than the landscaping if he is hearing Mr. Holder correctly. Mr. Holder agreed adding trees and bushes will make it look nice but feels a fence is an intrusion to it and seems to fence you in. He said landscape looks natural. He said they are doing everything they can to save every tree and every bush on the property so adding trees or bushes is good for them and looks good for the property and neighborhood. 9 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting April 22, 2020 Mr. Joseph Hamid, the Pastor of Believers Tabernacle, said the reason they are leaning toward the trees is as far as their services and how they are conducted here, there will be no headlights affecting any of the neighborhood. He said they only have two services, one on Sunday morning and one on Wednesday evening from 7:00 until 8:30 p.m. He said if someone should purchase the property beside their parking lot, the front of their home would be facing County Farm Road. There will be no direct lighting into their property. He said this is why they are leaning towards more of the trees. Mr. Hamid feels that a fence will block out the sight of the church building. Ms. King asked what change the Board might want to make to that condition. Would they want the buffer to remain a Type C buffer with no fence? Mr. Blomeley said the Type C buffer would be 12-feet wide and a little thicker than the Type B buffer which would be 10-feet wide. Mr. Barbee said the main difference between a Type C buffer and a Type B buffer is the reduction of two feet in width and there is a reduction of a single row of shrubs. He said the shrubs in a Type C buffer usually catch on and grow faster than the trees, so they will catch the debris that might blow across a parking lot or the headlights that might go across a parking lot and to fill-in those lower areas very quickly with the larger trees filling in, in the following years. You usually see the buffer mature in about a 3 to 4- year timespan. Ms. King asked if the City would be ok with a Type B buffer and changing that recommendation. Mr. Blomeley said he would be comfortable with either a Type B or Type C buffer knowing that there is not existing house. A Type B buffer would have an opportunity to grow in between now and when a house would be constructed to fill in some of those gaps that would be present with the initial planting of the buffer. Chairman Young asked if there were any other questions or a motion. Ms. King made a motion to approve the request with the following conditions: 1) The applicant shall submit a site plan for review and approval in accordance with the regulations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. 2) A subdivision plat combining the church parcel and the lot with the parking lot expansion shall be recorded prior to the issuance of the site work permit. 3) The site plan shall be revised to remove parking spaces from the required front yard. However, if a variance is approved in the future by the BZA to allow parking spaces in the required front yard, an amendment to the special use permit shall not be required. 10 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting April 22, 2020 4) A Type B buffer shall be provided along the west property line as far south as the southern limits of the proposed parking lot. The motion was seconded by Mr. Tipps. Upon roll call the motion was passed by the following vote: Aye: Misty Foy Ken Halliburton Julie King Tim Tipps Davis Young Nay: None Special Use Permit Amendment Request Application Z-20-010 by Mr. Clyde Rountree of Huddleston-Steele Engineering, Inc., for the South Central Conference Association of Seventh Day Adventists, requesting to amend a special use permit that was approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals in May 2019 for the expansion of an existing institutional group assembly use (a church) in a Residential Single-Family (RS-8) zone for property located at 711 North Maney Avenue. The proposed expansion consists of a building addition at the rear of the existing church building. This amendment seeks to modify the design and footprint of the proposed building addition that was approved in May 2019. Mr. Ware reviewed the application and staff comments. If the Board approves this request, Staff recommends the following conditions of approval: 1) A site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2) A Type C buffer with a 6’ privacy fence shall be installed along the north property line and along the common property line with 638 Courtland Street. The Type C buffer shall maintain the required 12’ width except where shown on the attached landscape plan. 3) The exterior materials of the proposed addition shall match the existing building in appearance, although the materials used may be different. 4) The solid waste enclosure shall consist of a masonry wall. Mr. Rountree and Mr. Bill Huddleston were present to represent the application and answer any questions . Chairman Young asked if there were any questions for Staff. 11 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting April 22, 2020 Mr. Blomeley said the approved footprint from May 2019 was included in the agenda materials. He referred to the exterior materials of the existing building, Staff was not aware that the existing church building had metal siding until today because the architectural elevations Staff received showed both the existing church building and the proposed addition to consist of fiber-cement siding. Mr. Blomeley received a text from the contractor today that indicated the church wished to use board and batten hardi- board siding, which is fiber-cement siding, on the addition to match the existing metal siding as best they can. He said that the Board doesn’t act as an architectural review board. He said the Board’s major concern is to make sure that the architecture is not going to have a negative impact on the adjacent residential area. With the new information provided to Staff today regarding the existing exterior materials, Staff recommended a modification of the original condition in the agenda materials, so that the proposed exterior materials match the existing exterior materials. Mr. Blomeley said that would be whether or not they use the same type of materials as the existing church which are architectural metal panels or whether they are able to install fiber-cement siding that is able to match the existing church building. He said the main concern is to make sure the addition is compatible with the area around it and because there is a little bit of uncertainty with regards to the architectural elevations, Staff revised that recommended condition to be a little more open-ended, allowing more flexibility, provided that the Board is comfortable with the revised condition as Mr. Barbee stated it. Chairman Young asked if there were any other questions for Staff. Mr. Huddleston said he understands the requirement about the Type C buffer which is 12-feet in width; however, at one corner it looks like we have got a sidewalk slightly encroaching into that 12-feet. He asked if that would be ok. Mr. Barbee said as part of the conditions of approval, the Type C buffer was referenced to be 12-feet except where it is shown as being less than that on the landscape plan that was submitted. Chairman Young opened the public hearing. Mr. Blomeley said no one contacted Staff by the deadline to register to speak. There being no one to speak, Chairman Young closed the public hearing. Mr. Tipps made a motion to approve the request with the following conditions: 1) A site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2) A Type C buffer with a 6’ privacy fence shall be installed along the north property line and along the common property line with 638 Courtland Street. The Type C buffer shall maintain the required 12’ width except where shown on the landscape plan submitted. 12 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting April 22, 2020 3) The exterior materials of the proposed addition shall match the existing building in appearance, although the materials used may be different. 4) The solid waste enclosure shall consist of a masonry wall. The motion was seconded by Ms. Foy. Upon roll call the motion was passed by the following vote: Aye: Misty Foy Ken Halliburton Julie King Tim Tipps Davis Young Nay: None Staff Reports and Other Business Mr. Blomeley and Mr. Ives thanked the Board members for their patience while working thru this difficult time and use of the Zoom to hold the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 2:00 P.M. _____________________________ _______________________________ CHAIRMAN SECRETARY 13

Agenda

CITY OF MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Regular Meeting, April 22, 2020, at 1:00 p.m. City Hall, 111 West Vine Street, Council Chambers, 1st Floor In accordance with Executive Order No. 16 issued by Governor Bill Lee, the Murfreesboro Board of Zoning Appeals April 22, 2020 meeting will be conducted electronically and there will not be physical public access to the meeting as necessary to protect public health, safety, and welfare in light of the coronavirus. The public may view the meetings electronically through Murfreesboro CityTV which is broadcast on Comcast Xfinity Channels 3 and 1094 and on AT&T U-verse Channel 99. The meeting can also be streamed on Roku, YouTube (www.youtube.com/cityofmurfreesboro), Facebook (www.facebook.com/cityofmurfreesborotn), and the City’s website (and www.murfreesborotn.gov). AGENDA 1. Call to order 2. Determination of a quorum 3. Determination that meeting electronically is necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Tennesseans and Murfreesboro citizens in light of the COVID-19 outbreak 4. Consideration of minutes for the regular meeting on February 26, 2020 5. New Business Special Use Permit Requests a. Application Z-19-027 by Ms. Kristy Allen, is requesting a special use permit in order to conduct a home occupation (a beauty shop) at her residence located at 3877 Manson Pike. The property is located in a Residential Single- Family (RS-15) zone. (Project Planner: Jafar Ware) b. Application Z-20-009 by Mr. Clyde Rountree of Huddleston-Steele Engineering, Inc., for Believers Tabernacle, Inc., is requesting a special use permit for the expansion of an existing institutional group assembly use (a church) in a Residential Single-Family (RS-15) zone for property located at 700 County Farm Road and on the adjacent parcel to the west identified as 1 Tax Map 136E, Group A, Parcel 00400. The proposed expansion consists of the construction of a parking lot. (Project Planner: Jafar Ware) Special Use Permit Amendment Request c. Application Z-20-010 by Mr. Clyde Rountree of Huddleston-Steele Engineering, Inc., for the South Central Conference Association of Seventh Day Adventists, is requesting to amend a special use permit that was approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals in May 2019 for the expansion of an existing institutional group assembly use (a church) in a Residential Single-Family (RS-8) zone for property located at 711 North Maney Avenue. The proposed expansion consists of a building addition at the rear of the existing church building. This amendment seeks to modify the design and footprint of the proposed building addition that was approved in May 2019. (Project Planner: Brad Barbee) 6. Staff Reports and Other Business 7. Adjourn 2 Regular Meeting Minutes of the Murfreesboro Board of Zoning Appeals February 26, 2020 – 1:00 P.M. Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Davis Young, Chair Ken Halliburton, Vice-Chair Tim Tipps Julie King Misty Foy STAFF PRESENT Jafar Ware, Planner Brad Barbee, Landscape Site Plan Inspector Austin Cooper, Planner Roman Hankins, Assistant City Attorney Matthew Blomeley, Assistant Planning Director Brenda Davis, Recording Assistant Chairman Young called the meeting to order at 1:00 P.M. The minutes from the January 22, 2020 regular meeting were approved as submitted. Old Business Special Use Permit Request Application Z-20-001 by Mr. Clyde Rountree of Huddleston-Steele Engineering, Inc., representing Enterprise Holdings, Inc., requesting a special use permit in order to establish a motor vehicle sales and rental facility on property in the Commercial Highway (CH) district located along the south side of Franklin Road east of Franklin Heights Drive (the subject property is also identified as Tax Map 0920, Group B, Parcel 00200). Mr. Ware reviewed the application and staff comments. If the Board approves this request, Staff recommends the following conditions of approval: 1) A site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The site plan set shall include architectural elevations and demonstrate BZA Minutes Regular Meeting February 26, 2020 compliance with all requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and Design Guidelines. 2) The design of the gates will be subject to the final review and approval of the Planning Department to ensure that there are adequate turnaround areas for vehicles and to ensure that vehicles will not be forced to back out into the public right-of-way. 3) A privacy fence and earthen berm shall be required along the south and west property lines. The privacy fence and berm shall not be a substitute for any of the standard Type E buffer yard plantings; rather, it shall be in addition to the standard Type E buffer yard. Mr. Blomeley said Staff met with the applicant and their design team shortly after the January BZA meeting to discuss the concerns that were brought up at that BZA meeting. He said Staff has had adequate time to review their plans this month. Mr. Blomeley said the applicants added an earthen berm. With the conditions on-site, they were able to get a 2.7-foot earthen berm to include within that 20-foot Type E buffer yard along the west and south property lines. He said they are doing a threefold plan to mitigate the negative impacts on the adjacent neighborhood -- the 20-foot Type E buffer, the 2.7-foot tall earthen berm, and the 6-foot-tall privacy fence. Mr. Blomeley said the fence and the berm are in addition to the standard buffer yard plantings, not in lieu of any of those plantings. He said the applicants also relocated the Dumpster, so it was a little further away from the adjacent neighborhood. Mr. Blomeley said the Dumpster is actually closer to but not oriented to face the new public street along the eastern property line. Staff felt it was more important to get it further away from the neighbors than it would to get it further away from that new public right-of-way. Mr. Blomeley said their plans show a little bit different front parking layout to specify the maximum number of vehicles they can have for sale or rent on the property at any point in time. Staff feels comfortable they are meeting the standards that are specific for motor vehicle sales facilities in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Blomeley said there is no requirement for another public hearing as the public hearing for this matter was held last month. He said Mr. Bill Huddleston and Mr. Clyde Rountree from Huddleston-Steele Engineering are here as representing Enterprise Holdings. Mr. Halliburton asked if the location of the fence would be on top of the earthen berm or in the middle between the berm and trees. Mr. Blomeley said the fence will be located on the outside, closer to the property line. He said the fence is not as much for visual screening as to be a physical barrier between the car lot and the adjacent neighborhood. 2 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting February 26, 2020 Mr. Halliburton made a motion to approve with the following conditions of approval: 1) A site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The site plan set shall include architectural elevations and demonstrate compliance with all requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and Design Guidelines. 2) The design of the gates will be subject to the final review and approval of the Planning Department to ensure that there are adequate turnaround areas for vehicles and to ensure that vehicles will not be forced to back out into the public right-of-way. 3) A privacy fence and earthen berm shall be required along the south and west property lines. The privacy fence and berm shall not be a substitute for any of the standard Type E buffer yard plantings; rather, it shall be in addition to the standard Type E buffer yard plantings. The motion was seconded by Mr. Tipps and carried unanimously in favor. New Business Variance Requests Application Z-20-005 by Mr. Matt Taylor of SEC, Inc., for Mr. Eric Blum, is requesting a 19’ variance from the minimum required 25’ rear building setback for principal structures, as stated in Chart 2 (Minimum Lot Requirements, Minimum Yard Requirements, and Land Use Intensity Ratios) of the City of Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance, for property located in the Residential Multi-Family (RM-16) zone at 627 East Street. Mr. Barbee reviewed the application and staff comments. If the Board approves this request, Staff recommends the following condition of approval: 1) A site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for administrative review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. The applicant was present to answer any questions. Ms. King asked if this is within the City Core Overlay District (CCO). Mr. Blomeley said this property is right outside of the boundaries of the CCO. Ms. King asked if other houses in this area are in similar circumstances as the ones in the CCO. 3 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting February 26, 2020 Mr. Blomeley said when Staff looked at expanding the CCO District, the decision was made not to include the streets that are just to the east and west of campus like Fairview, Eaton, Crestland, East Street, and West Street. He doesn’t know the reason why those streets were not included but it may be something they need to look at in the future. He said the lots on the west side of East Street are all very shallow, adding that most of the structures are very close to the rear property line. Mr. Blomeley said this lot was platted in 1946, prior to the adoption of the current Zoning Ordinance in 1984. With them wanting to redevelop the lot and tear down the existing structure, it makes it very difficult with the current lot depth and the existing setbacks, resulting in about a 25-foot deep building envelope. Mr. Matt Taylor said he feels this is a difficult situation that may be solved in the future with an ordinance amendment. He thanked the Board for their consideration and will answer any questions they might have. Mr. Halliburton said that there is only 1.5 feet difference of where the existing structure is today versus what is being proposed. Chairman Young opened the public hearing. There being no one to speak, Chairman Young closed the public hearing. Mr. Tipps made a motion to approve the request with the following condition: 1) A site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for administrative review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. The motion was seconded by Ms. Foy and carried unanimously in favor. Application Z-20-006 by Mr. Matt Taylor of SEC, Inc., for RaceTrac, is making the following requests regarding a proposed solid waste enclosure for property located in a Highway Commercial (CH) zone at the northeast corner of Shelbyville Pike and Tiger Hill (also identified as Lot 3 of the Wal-Mart Supercenter Subdivision and Tax Map 126, Parcel 02701): ▪ A variance from Section 25(E)(5) of the City of Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance, which states that, in commercial zoning districts, accessory structures shall comply with the same front setback as is required for the principal structure. ▪ A 33’ variance from the minimum required 42’ front building setback in the CH zone, as stated in Chart 2 (Minimum Lot Requirements, Minimum Yard Requirements, and Land Use Intensity Ratios) of the City of Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Ware reviewed the application and staff comments. Chairman Young asked for clarification on why there were two variance requests. 4 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting February 26, 2020 Mr. Blomeley said sometimes when we have a variance request, there are two parts of the Zoning Ordinance that say the same thing, so Staff makes sure to include every applicable part of the ordinance. Mr. Matt Taylor said the site has about 25-foot of fall from the rear to the front toward the street which makes this location very unique. He said most of the commercial sites are very flat and used Medical Center Parkway as an example adding they are about 2% or less grade. The uniqueness of the grade on the subject property and having three front setbacks are the primary reasons why he has made this request. Because they couldn’t fit everything inside the setback, they found the least intrusive location on the site. Mr. Taylor reviewed a couple of street view renderings which were also included in the agenda packet. He said the Dumpster and parking are placed within the hillside along with the required shrubbery and trees to block the view even more. Mr. Taylor said they evaluated several other locations for the Dumpster, one being at the rear of the property close to the transformer pad as shown on the site plan. He said at that location the grade change went up and down with ramps about five or six different times just to be able to make those grades work. They also looked at another area, which did not meet the intent of the ordinance or design guidelines on the Dumpsters being hidden. He said that location would face toward the public right-of-way and would be more intrusive than the chosen location. Mr. Tipps asked if the elevation in the southeast corner at Christie Knob and Tiger Hill is a little over 700 feet. Mr. Taylor said yes. Mr. Tipps verified they are proposing the enclosure be placed just below that. Mr. Taylor said the Dumpster would sit at approximately 685 feet. The enclosure wall is 8-foot and there is also a retaining wall that goes around that and is about 15-16 feet tall. Mr. Halliburton asked if the retaining wall will act as the rear wall. Mr. Taylor said there are actually two walls, a retaining wall and the Dumpster wall. Chairman Young opened the public hearing. There being no one to speak for or against the application, Chairman Young closed the public hearing. Chairman Young said two motions would be needed, one for each variance request. 5 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting February 26, 2020 Ms. King made a motion to approve a variance from Section 25 (E)(5) of the City of Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance, which requires that accessory structures adhere to the same front and side setbacks as the principle structure. The motion was seconded by Mr. Tipps and carried unanimously in favor. Mr. Halliburton made a motion to approve a 33’ variance from the minimum required 42’ front building setback in the CH zone, as stated in Chart 2 (Minimum Lot Requirements, Minimum Yard Requirements, and Land Use Intensity Ratios) of the City of Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance. The motion was seconded by Ms. Foy and carried unanimously in favor. Special Use Permit Request Application Z-20-004 by Ms. Jennifer Thibodeaux, for Trinity Presbyterian Church, is requesting a special use permit for the expansion of an existing institutional group assembly use (a church) in a Residential Single-Family (RS-15) zone for property located at 1020 North Rutherford Boulevard. The proposed expansion consists of a building addition and parking lot modifications. Mr. Barbee reviewed the application and staff comments. If the Board approves this request, Staff recommends the following conditions of approval: 1) A site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2) The proposed architectural elevations shall be revised to show brick that is consistent with the existing structure. 3) A masonry solid waste enclosure shall be constructed for the Dumpster. The applicant was present to answer any questions. Mr. Tipps asked if it is possible or practical to match the existing brick. Mr. Rick Thurman with the Trinity Group, representing the applicant, said they did the addition to the back of the building in 2016-2017 and the reason they ended up using board and batten in the rear is because they were unable to match the brick they had. Mr. Thurman said the building was originally built in approximately 1997 and they could not find one that matched in both color and texture and that looked good enough to use. He said if they cannot do what is proposed on the drawing, they have thought of other options they could do besides the board and batten. Mr. Thurman said they could try a complementary brick and referred to the drawing. He said they will need to demolish the end of the building to do the expansion and will try to salvage enough brick to use on the front of the building so it will match. He said there is also a line of brick around the bottom of the wall to tie everything together. Beyond that, there is not enough brick to do the rest of the expansion. If board and batten is not acceptable 6 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting February 26, 2020 maybe they could come up with a complementary brick He said if that doesn’t work, possibly paint the brick a complementary color that would work. Chairman Young opened the public hearing. Being there was no one to speak for or against the application, Chairman Young closed the public hearing. Mr. Blomeley said the Board does not have to iron out the details of the architecture today but asked for the leeway to work with the applicant understanding the difficulties finding the brick. He said the Design Guidelines envision the siding like they are showing for the board and batten siding as more of a secondary material than a primary material. He said Staff is not saying they can’t use the board and batten at all but instead it should be a secondary material instead of a primary material on the new façade. Mr. Blomeley said Staff will be happy to work with the applicants during the site plan review process to work out an alternative. Mr. Tipps said that he doesn’t want the BZA to get into being the “brick police” because that is a little extreme. As long as it is simple, complementary, and tasteful he sees no issue with it. Ms. King asked if the Board could remove that as a condition and then we would expect the applicant to work with Planning to meet the guidelines for this type of structure. Mr. Blomeley agreed. Mr. Tipps made a motion to approve with the following conditions: 1) A site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2) The proposed architectural elevations for the addition shall be revised to demonstrate compliance with the City of Murfreesboro Design Guidelines subject to the review and approval of City Planning Department. 3) A masonry solid waste enclosure shall be constructed for the Dumpster. The motion was seconded by Ms. King and carried unanimously in favor. Mr. Blomeley pointed out the purpose of the BZA is not to be an architectural review board but one thing he does not want to do is set up any incorrect expectations for the applicants. When they submit architectural elevations and he sees there might be issues with those, he doesn’t want to set the expectation in the applicant’s mind that those are approved after the BZA acts on the application. Mr. Tipps said he lives in that area. Not very far from there is a commercial area, adding there is a Taco Bell with every type of siding imaginable on it. He said with an institutional type of building he thinks it can lend itself to various looking exteriors. 7 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting February 26, 2020 Mr. Blomeley assured the Board that Staff will work with the applicants on the architecture. Special Use Permit Amendment Request Application Z-20-003 by Mr. Neil James, for Redeemer Classical Academy, is requesting to amend special use permits that were approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals in July 2013, January 2014, and January 2015. The special use permits established an institutional group assembly use (a private school) in a Residential Single-Family (RS-10) zone for property located at 1503 Sulphur Springs Road. The approval of the January 2015 special use permit amendment was conditioned upon the requirement that all portable classroom buildings must be removed from the property no later than July 31, 2020. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the special use permits for a two-year extension to this deadline in order to allow the portable classroom buildings to remain on-site until July 31, 2022. Mr. Cooper reviewed the application and staff comments. If the Board approves this request, Staff recommends the following conditions of approval: 1) All portable classroom buildings must be removed from the property no later than July 31, 2022 or when Redeemer Classical Academy vacates the property – whichever comes first. 2) The maximum number of students allowed to be enrolled at the school is 65. If the school desires to have a greater number of students, then it must apply to the BZA to amend the special use permit. A traffic study will be required at that time. 3) No staging or queuing of school traffic will be allowed on either Myers Drive or Sulphur Springs Road. The applicant was present to answer any questions. Mr. Neal James said the school purchased 20 acres of property on Old Salem Road last year. He met with Ms. Marina Rush, Principal Planner, on Monday for the pre- application process. They are in the process of fund-raising and it took them a little bit longer to find property in Murfreesboro. He said they are ready to go and just need time to build. Chairman Young opened the public hearing. There being no one to speak for or against the application, Chairman Young closed the public hearing. Ms. Foy made a motion to approve the request subject to the following conditions: 1) All portable classroom buildings must be removed from the property no later than July 31, 2022 or when Redeemer Classical Academy vacates the property – whichever comes first. 8 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting February 26, 2020 2) The maximum number of students allowed to be enrolled at the school is 65. If the school desires to have a greater number of students, then it must apply to the BZA to amend the special use permit. A traffic study will be required at that time. 3) No staging or queuing of school traffic will be allowed on either Myers Drive or Sulphur Springs Road. The motion was seconded by Mr. Tipps and carried unanimously in favor. Staff Reports and Other Business None The meeting adjourned at 1:41 P.M. _____________________________ _______________________________ CHAIRMAN SECRETARY 9 MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT APRIL 22, 2020 PROJECT PLANNER: JAFAR WARE Application: Z-19-027 Location: 3877 Manson Pike (Map 078L, Group A, Parcel 00500) Applicant: Kristy Allen Owner: Dan and Kristy Allen Zoning: Single-Family Residential District (RS-15) Requests: A special use permit to conduct a home-based business (a hair salon) Special Use Permit Request Overview The applicant, Ms. Kristy Allen, a Certified Master Cosmetologist, has operated a hair salon in Murfreesboro for 17 years. The applicant has decided to close her full-service beauty salon in the Oaks Shopping Center to order to relocate her business to her residence. The location of the property is 3877 Manson Pike, which is in a Single Family Residential (RS-15) zoning district. Because her home-based business will generate customer traffic, a special use permit is required. The proposed home-based business would only have space for one chair and would be by appointment only. The applicant says, based on her experience with her commercial storefront she has previously operated, she averages two clients per day from Tuesday to Friday and up to four clients on Saturdays. There would be no employees besides herself at the business and the customers would park in the off-street parking area. The hours of operation would be from 10 am to 5:30 pm on Tuesday through Saturday; by appointment only. Relevant Zoning Ordinance Section Chart 1 of the City of Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance allows home occupations as a special use in the RS-15 district. City of Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance Section 9(D)(2)(rr) sets forth Standards for home occupations in addition to the Standards of General Applicability in Section 9(C). The applicant has affirmed in her special use permit application letter that the home-based business will be operated in compliance with all zoning requirements. The applicable standards are listed below with information from Staff on how the applicant intends to address them. Standards of General Applicability with Staff analysis: (1) The proposed building or use will not have a substantial or undue adverse effect upon adjacent property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, utility facilities, and other matters affecting the public health, safety, and general welfare: Staff does not anticipate any such adverse impact as a result of this home occupation. (2) The proposed building or use will be constructed, arranged, and operated so as to be compatible with the immediate vicinity and not to interfere with the development and use of adjacent property in accordance with the applicable district regulations: The applicant has added an addition to the home for use in conjunction with the home-based business. The RS-15 zoning district does not require specific building materials for principal structures. Pictures of the addition are included in the staff report. Staff is concerned that the building addition has the appearance of a commercial structure. The BZA should discuss the appearance of the building addition and determine whether it is compatible with the adjacent neighborhood, considering its proposed use as a home-based hair salon. (3) The proposed buildings or use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, parking spaces, drainage structures, refuse disposal, fire protection, water and sewers; or that the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use will provide adequately for such services: It is Staff’s opinion that the traffic generated by the proposed business will not put undue stress on the public street network. In addition, it should not put an unnecessary burden on utilities and other public infrastructure. (4) The proposed building or use will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of any feature determined by the BZA to be significant natural, scenic, or historic importance: No features of significant natural, scenic, or historic importance have been identified on the subject property by Staff or the applicant. (5) The proposed building or use complies with all additional standards imposed on it by the particular provision of this section authorizing such use: The applicant has indicated in her letter to the Board that she believes that the proposed use will comply with the additional standards for home occupations. (See below for additional detail.) Additional Standards for Home Occupations with Staff Analysis: (1) No person who is not a resident of the dwelling unit may be employed in connection with the home occupation at the dwelling unit or on the property; The applicant will be the only employee. (2) One attached business sign, not exceeding three square feet, may be permitted subject to approval by the BZA. Such signs shall not be permitted by right; The applicant is requesting a three square-foot attached sign as a part of this application. The BZA must determine whether or not a sign is appropriate. (3) There shall be no alteration of the residential building which changes the character as a dwelling. No display of products shall be visible from the street; No display of products is proposed to be visible from the street. There has already been an alteration of the residential building for the proposed home-based business. An addition has been constructed at the front right corner of the existing house. A plot plan submitted by a licensed surveyor, a site plan provided by the applicant, and pictures of the addition are included in this staff report. Staff is concerned that the building addition has the appearance of a commercial structure. The BZA should discuss the appearance of the building addition and determine whether it is compatible with the adjacent neighborhood and whether it changes the character of the existing dwelling. (4) The home occupation shall be incidental and subordinate to the residential use of the dwelling unit. No more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the area of a residential dwelling unit and accessory structure, if used as part of the home occupation, shall be devoted to the home occupation. In the event the home occupation is to be conducted totally from within an accessory structure, no more than five hundred square feet of area may be devoted to such home occupation. No more than one home occupation shall be permitted per residential dwelling unit and any related accessory structure; The applicant meets these requirements. Per the licensed surveyor, the home addition is 274.1 square-feet and residential portion of the home is 2290.5 square-feet. Therefore, approximately 12% of the total square-footage of the residential dwelling unit, including the addition, is proposed by the applicant to be devoted to the home occupation. (5) No mechanical or electrical equipment may be used in a residential dwelling unit or accessory structure in connection with a home occupation except such types as are customary for domestic, household, or hobby purposes; personal computers and facsimile machines may be used. Machinery that causes noise likely to be heard by neighbors or interference with radio or television reception shall be prohibited; The applicant understands this requirement. Standard hair salon equipment, such as a hair dryer and a hair-washing sink, will be used. (6) There shall be no storage outside a principal building or accessory structure of equipment or materials used in connection with the home occupation; The applicant understands this requirement; no outdoor storage is proposed. (7) There shall be adequate provision for any traffic generated by such home occupation including off-street parking if required by the BZA; Staff believes there will be adequate parking on-site for the traffic generated by this business. There is an existing parking area to the rear of the house. In addition, the applicant has added a 405 square-foot off-street parking area in front of the house specifically for use by the hair salon customers. (8) Group instruction in connection with the home occupation may be permitted subject to approval by the BZA. For the purposes of this subsection, instruction shall be group instruction if it involves more than two students at any time. The BZA may place a maximum number of students that may be on-site at any time and may establish limitations on the frequency of such group instruction. This is not applicable to this application, as the applicant does not propose to conduct any group instruction. (9) The following activities and land uses shall not be permitted as home occupations: automotive repair (body or mechanical), upholstery or painting; kennels; taxi service; gun dealers; or, charter bus service; This is not applicable to this application, as the applicant does not propose any of the home occupations listed above to be conducted at her residence. (10) The BZA may require additional standards in order to assure the compatibility of the home occupation with other property in the vicinity of the home occupation and to assure the residential character of the neighborhood is maintained. The applicant understands this provision. Recommended Conditions of Approval If the Board approves this request, Staff recommends the following conditions of approval: 1) Customer visits shall be by appointment only. 2) No more than one customer at a time shall visit the home-based business and there shall be no overlapping appointments. 3) Any proposed signage shall comply with the Zoning and Sign Ordinances, shall be attached to the home, shall not exceed 3 square-feet, and shall be subject to any applicable permitting requirements. 4) The business shall open only on Tuesdays thru Saturdays and it shall open no earlier than 8:30 AM and shall close no later than 5:30 PM. The applicant will be in attendance to respond to any questions the Board may have. Attached Exhibits A. Application B. Letter from applicant C. Site Photos D. Plot Plan E. Floor Plan Attachment A: Application Attachment B: Letter from applicant Attachment C: Site Photos Facing Southeast – Street View Facing South ‐ Close Facing Southeast Gravel Off‐Street Parking MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT APRIL22, 2020 PROJECT PLANNER: JAFAR WARE Application: Z-20-009 Location: 700 County Farm Road (Tax Map 136, Group A, Parcel 01300) Applicant: Clyde Rountree of Huddleston-Steele Engineering, Inc., for Believers Tabernacle, Inc. Owner: Believers Tabernacle, Inc. Zoning: Single-Family Residential District (RS-15) Requests: A special use permit for the expansion of an existing institutional group assembly use (a church). The proposed expansion consists of the construction of a parking lot. Overview of Request Believers Tabernacle, Inc. is requesting a special use permit for the expansion of an existing institutional group assembly use (a church) at 700 County Farm Road with an additional parking lot with 26 parking spaces. No building additions are proposed with this request. The parking lot addition will be used to accommodate the growing congregation. The church has acquired additional land to the west of its existing facilities for this parking lot expansion. It is currently developed with a non-compliant gravel parking lot, which was established without City approval. It is currently in violation, and the proposed parking lot improvements will rectify that violation. The subject property is zoned RS-15 (Residential Single-Family 15). It is adjacent to RS-12 (Residential Single-Family 12) zoning to the southwest (the Chestnut Hill single-family residential subdivision), RS-10 (Residential Single-Family 10) zoning to the north (the Stevens Bend single- family residential subdivision), and unincorporated land east of the church property. According to the applicant, the sanctuary holds 148 seats, and according to the site plan, the sanctuary holds 160 seats. There are 29 existing parking spaces shown on the site plan submitted by the applicant. In accordance with Chart 2 of the Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance, expansion of a church use in an RS-15 zone requires a special use permit from the Board of Zoning Appeals. Relevant Zoning Ordinance Sections Chart 1 of the City of Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance allows churches as a special use in the RS- 15 district. Special provisions are set forth for institutional group assembly uses in Section 9(D)(2)(zz) in addition to the Standards of General Applicability in Section 9(C). The applicant has affirmed in his special use permit application letter that the proposed use will be constructed in compliance with all zoning requirements. The applicable standards are listed below with information from Staff on how the applicant intends to address them. Standards of General Applicability with Staff analysis: 1) The proposed building or use will not have a substantial or undue adverse effect upon adjacent property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, utility facilities, and other matters affecting the public health, safety, and general welfare: No adverse impact regarding the above-referenced items will be associated with this proposed use in Staff’s opinion, provided that the appropriate screening is in place to mitigate any negative impacts on the residential lot to the west. Staff recommends a 12’-wide Type C landscape buffer with a 6’-tall privacy fence as the appropriate screening. 2) The proposed building or use will be constructed, arranged, and operated so as to be compatible with the immediate vicinity and not to interfere with the development and use of adjacent property in accordance with the applicable district regulations: It is Staff’s opinion that the proposed parking lot addition will be compatible with the adjacent uses, provided that the appropriate screening is in place to mitigate any negative impacts on the residential lot to the west. Staff recommends a 12’-wide Type C landscape buffer with a 6’-tall privacy fence as the appropriate screening. 3) The proposed buildings or use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, parking spaces, drainage structures, refuse disposal, fire protection, water and sewers; or that the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use will provide adequately for such services: Church parking requires 1 parking spot for every 8 fixed or mobile seats in the auditorium or sanctuary or largest place of assembly within the facility. The proposed addition will add parking to the property increasing its already-compliant parking facilities. Staff does not anticipate a strain on other utilities or services as a result of the parking lot addition. 4) The proposed building or use will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of any feature determined by the BZA to be significant natural, scenic, or historic importance: No features of significant natural, scenic, or historic importance have been identified on the subject property in the vicinity of the proposed parking lot expansion. 5) The proposed building or use complies with all additional standards imposed on it by the particular provision of this section authorizing such use: The applicant indicates that the proposed use will comply with the additional standards for institutional group assembly uses. (See below for additional detail.) Additional Standards for Institutional Group Assembly Uses with Staff Analysis: (1) Parking areas shall be designed and arranged so that backing from the site onto a public right-of-way will not be necessary and adequate space will be available for vehicles to turn around on-site. An on-site off-street area shall be provided for vehicles to load and unload passengers. Parking areas shall not be permitted in the required front yard; The proposed parking spaces will not back into public right-of-way and there is already an area for loading and unloading on-site on the adjacent church parcel to the east. Proposed parking is shown on the site plan to be located within the required front yard. All parking in the required front yard in the proposed parking lot addition must be removed from the plan in order to comply with this requirement. (2) In all residential districts an institutional group assembly use shall have a lot size not less than three times the minimum lot size permitted in the zoning district where the institutional group assembly use is proposed to be located. In the event the institutional group assembly use is proposed to be located on land that has two or more different zoning classifications, the minimum lot size shall be calculated by applying the larger required minimum lot size; According to the site plan, the property totals 1.44 acres, or approximately 62,726 square-feet, which is greater than the 45,000 square-foot minimum for a church in the RS-15 zone. (3) On-site lighting for parking areas, fields for athletics, scoreboards, and grounds shall be arranged in such a manner as to minimize intrusion of lighting into areas zoned or used for residential or medical purposes. To this end, a plan depicting the proposed location of on-site exterior lighting fixtures shall be submitted for review by staff and the BZA. Such plan shall depict the arrangement of the lighting fixtures, their height, their specifications, and the direction in which lighting will be oriented. Additional information may be required by the staff or the BZA in order to verify whether the lighting will be intrusive into areas zoned or used for residential or medical purposes; The site will comply with City lighting standards so as to not allow more than 0.5 footcandles at the property line. A photometric lighting plan has been submitted to demonstrate compliance with this minimum requirement. Two new parking lot lighting fixtures are proposed. (4) Applications for an institutional group assembly use shall indicate the proposed locations of garbage dumpsters or receptacles. These shall be located in such a manner as to minimize adverse affects upon neighboring properties and aesthetics from the public right-of-way. The use of dumpsters may be prohibited in the event the BZA determines that such would have a detrimental effect upon the adjacent property; The applicant has not proposed to add any new garbage receptacles with this parking lot addition. (5) Areas for outdoor recreational use or outdoor group activities shall be screened or fenced in such a manner as to provide an effective buffer for adjacent uses. Screening shall be required pursuant to Section 27 of this article or as required by the BZA; No new areas for outdoor recreational use have been proposed with this parking lot expansion. (6) The number of required parking spaces provided on-site shall be in accordance with Chart 4 of this article provided, however, if the applicant can present evidence satisfactory to the BZA that a substantial portion of the expected users will arrive at the institutional group assembly use by bus, bicycle, walking, or by car pooling or that off-street parking areas on adjacent or nearby properties will be available on a long term basis, the BZA shall have authority to determine the number of required parking spaces to be provided on-site. The BZA may require that a reserve area be retained on-site for future expansions of the parking area; Based on the number of seats in the auditorium (160), twenty parking spaces are required. There are already 29 parking spaces on the adjacent church lot. The proposed increase in parking will further exceed the required amount on-site. (7) An application for a special use permit for an institutional group assembly use shall be accompanied by a description of uses or activities proposed for the facility which may be subject to separate regulation or which may result in unusual traffic patterns, traffic volumes, or other detrimental impacts upon adjacent properties, including but not necessarily limited to those uses which would require a special permit if not a part of the institutional group assembly use; The church is used at the following times: Sunday Bible Study 10:00 am Worship Services 11:00 am Wednesday Worship Service 7:00 pm The applicant has not indicated any additional activities that would warrant any additional action or consideration by the BZA. (8) the BZA shall have authority to approve an on-site location with water, sewer, and electric utility connections for accommodations for travel trailers or R.V.s (recreational vehicles) for use by visiting or traveling speakers or guests associated with the institutional group assembly use. Provided, however, such location for travel trailers or R.V.s shall not be permitted for use as a permanent residential dwelling unit; The applicant does not propose installing any water, sewer, or electrical utility connections for travel trailers or RVs with this application. (9) the BZA shall have the authority to grant variances to the standards imposed by this subsection for temporary or short term uses of property for the institutional group assembly use purposes. In such cases, the BZA may impose conditions of approval to assure the compatibility of the short-term land use with other property in the vicinity of the proposed use; and The applicant does not propose requesting approval for any short-term uses or variances for this development with this application. (10) the application for a special use permit for an institutional group assembly use shall indicate any intentions for the use of systems for the external broadcast of speech, music, or other sounds. If such are proposed, the applicant shall indicate the times of day and duration of their proposed use. The BZA shall have the authority to place restrictions upon their use in order to minimize excessive noise from intruding upon neighboring properties especially those zoned or used for residential purposes. In no event shall the BZA approve the use of such which would be in violation of the City Code or ordinances regulating noise. BZA approval does not constitute a waiver of any City Code or ordinances regulating noise. The church facility does not use carillons, bells, chimes, or electronic speakers that produce sounds that would disturb neighboring properties and it does not propose any such activity with this application. Recommended Conditions of Approval: If the Board approves this request, Staff recommends the following conditions of approval: 1) The applicant shall submit a site plan for review and approval in accordance with the regulations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. 2) A subdivision plat combining the church parcel and the lot with the parking lot expansion shall be recorded prior to the issuance of the site work permit. 3) The site plan shall be revised to remove parking spaces from the required front yard. 4) A Type C buffer with a 6’ privacy fence shall be provided along the west property line as far south as the southern limits of the proposed parking lot. Attached Exhibits A. Application B. Letter from applicant C. Site photos D. Site Plan Set Attachment A: Application Attachment B: Letter from Applicant Attachment C: Site Photos Street view Street view Facing North Facing East Facing West STEVENS BEND DRIVE SITE COU NTY FAR M ROA D C:\Land Project 3\sbend4\dwg\BELIEVERS TABERNACLE MAR2020.dwg, ACAD108, PDF Complete, 1:30 STEVENS BEND DRIVE COU NTY FAR M ROA D C:\Land Project 3\sbend4\dwg\BELIEVERS TABERNACLE MAR2020.dwg, ACAD108, PDF Complete, 1:30 STEVENS BEND DRIVE COU NTY FAR M ROA D C:\Land Project 3\sbend4\dwg\BELIEVERS TABERNACLE MAR2020.dwg, ACAD108, PDF Complete, 1:30 STEVENS BEND DRIVE COU NTY FAR M ROA D PLANT MATERIAL LIST SHRUBS & TREES QTY KEY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE HEIGHT ROOT 9 BS Buxus sempervirens Boxwood 24inches Cont Compact evergreen shrub 1 LT Liriodendrum tulipifera Tulip Poplar 4"cal. Cont 5'CLEAR TRUNK,SINGLE,STRAIGHT CENTRAL LEADER, FULL CANOPY 1 LT Liriodendrum tulipifera Tulip Poplar 3"cal. Cont 5'CLEAR TRUNK,SINGLE,STRAIGHT CENTRAL LEADER, FULL CANOPY 5 LT Liriodendrum tulipifera Tulip Poplar 221"cal. Cont 5'CLEAR TRUNK,SINGLE,STRAIGHT CENTRAL LEADER, FULL CANOPY 6'tall 40 JV Juniperus virginiana Eastern Red Cedar Cont Evergreen Tree at planting 20 ICR Ilex cornuta rotunda Chinese Holly 24inches Cont Compact evergreen shrub C:\Land Project 3\sbend4\dwg\BELIEVERS TABERNACLE MAR2020.dwg, ACAD108, PDF Complete, 1:30 STEVENS BEND DRIVE COU NTY FAR M ROA D C:\Land Project 3\sbend4\dwg\BELIEVERS TABERNACLE MAR2020.dwg, ACAD108, PDF Complete, 1:30 MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT APRIL 22, 2020 PROJECT PLANNER: BRAD BARBEE Application: Z-20-010 Location: 711 North Maney Avenue Applicant: Mr. Clyde Rountree of Huddleston-Steele Engineering, Inc., for the South Central Conference Association of Seventh Day Adventists Owner: South Central Conference Association of Seventh Day Adventists Zoning: RS-8 and RM-12 Request: To amend a special use permit that was approved in May 2019 for the expansion of an existing institutional group assembly use (a church). The proposed expansion consists of a building addition at the rear of the existing church building. This amendment seeks to modify the design and footprint of the proposed building addition that was approved in May 2019. Overview of Request The South Central Conference Association of Seventh Day Adventists requests an amendment to a special use permit originally issued in May 2019 for the expansion of an existing institutional group assembly use (a church) located at 711 North Maney Avenue, just to the south of Oaklands Mansion and Park. In this request, a 2,898 square-foot building addition is proposed at the rear of the existing church building. The addition consists of an expansion to the auditorium and fellowship hall as well as a new kitchen, bathrooms, and classrooms. The subject property is located in Residential Single-Family District (RS-8) and Residential Multi-Family District (RM- 12) zones. It is bordered by single-family residential property to the north and south, multi-family residential property to the west, and North Maney Avenue to the east. The May 2019 special use permit included a 2,123 square-foot addition, which was never constructed. Since that time, the church has reconfigured the proposed addition. Because it is substantially different from what was represented to the Board of Zoning Appeals in 2019, an amendment to the 2019 special use permit is required. The plans considered by the Board in 2019 have been included in the agenda materials for reference. Relevant Zoning Ordinance Sections Chart 1 of the City of Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance allows institutional group assembly uses as a special use in the RS-8 district. City of Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance Section 9(D)(zz) sets forth standards for institutional group assembly uses in addition to the Standards of General Applicability in Section 9(C). The applicable standards are listed below with information from Staff on how the applicant intends to address them. After reviewing the criteria for the special use requirements for institutional group assembly uses, this project appears to meet the criteria. Standards of General Applicability with Staff analysis: 1. That the proposed building or use will not have a substantial or undue adverse effect upon adjacent property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, and utility facilitates, and other matters affecting the public health, safety and general welfare. It is Staff’s opinion that this expansion will have minimal impact on the character of the neighborhood, or the other items listed above, provided that appropriate screening is in place and appropriate building materials are used. Staff recommends that a Type C buffer with a 6’ privacy fence be required along the north property line as well as adjacent to the property located at 638 Courtland Street. Staff also recommends the Board require the applicant to utilize the board and batten fiber cement siding that is depicted on the elevations submitted. 2. That the proposed building or use will be constructed, arranged and operated so as to be compatible with the immediate vicinity and not to interfere with the development and use of adjacent property in accordance with the applicable district regulations. It is Staff’s opinion that the expansion will be compatible with the immediate vicinity, provided that appropriate screening is in place and appropriate building materials are used. Staff recommends that a Type C buffer with a 6’ privacy fence be required along the north property line as well as adjacent to the property located at 638 Courtland Street. Staff also recommends the Board require the applicant to utilize the board and batten fiber cement siding that is depicted on the elevations submitted. 3. That the proposed buildings or use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, parking spaces, drainage structures, refuse disposal, fire protection, water and sewers; or persons or agencies responsible would provide such services. It is Staff’s opinion that the proposed expansion will have minimal impact on the above items. 4. That the proposed building or use will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of any feature determined by the BZA to be significant natural, scenic, or historic importance. Neither Staff nor the applicant are aware of any such features associated with this property. 5. That the proposed building/use complies with all additional standards imposed on it by the particular provision of this section authorizing use. The proposed use will comply with the additional standards for institutional group assembly uses. (See below for additional detail.) Additional Standards for Institutional Group Assembly Uses with Staff Analysis: Institutional group assembly uses shall be subject to the following additional standards: [1] Parking areas shall be designed and arranged so that backing from the site onto a public right-of-way will not be necessary and adequate space will be available for vehicles to turn around on-site. An on-site off-street area shall be provided for vehicles to load and unload passengers. Parking areas shall not be permitted in the required front yard; No parking requiring vehicles to back out onto public right-of-way is existing or proposed. The request depicts adequate off-street area for parking and for vehicles to load and unload. There are existing parking spaces that encroach into the required front yard (i.e., the required front setback). However, no new parking areas are proposed within the required front yard. [2] In all residential districts an institutional group assembly use shall have a lot size not less than three times the minimum lot size permitted in the zoning district where the institutional group assembly use is proposed to be located. In the event the institutional group assembly use is proposed to be located on land that has two or more different zoning classifications, the minimum lot size shall be calculated by applying the larger required minimum lot size; The property is zoned RS-8 and RM-12 and consists of approximately 0.86 acres or ~37,461 square-feet. The minimum lot size required in the RS-8 district is 8,000 square-feet, so the minimum lot size for an institutional group assembly use in an RS-8 zone is 24,000 square-feet. The minimum lot size for properties located in the RM-12 district is 7,500 square feet, so the minimum lot size required in an RM- 12 district is 22,500. The subject property meets this requirement for both districts. [3] On-site lighting for parking areas, fields for athletics, scoreboards, and grounds shall be arranged in such a manner as to minimize intrusion of lighting into areas zoned or used for residential or medical purposes. To this end, a plan depicting the proposed location of on-site exterior lighting fixtures shall be submitted for review by staff and the BZA. Such plan shall depict the arrangement of the lighting fixtures, their height, their specifications, and the direction in which lighting will be oriented. Additional information may be required by the staff or the BZA in order to verify whether the lighting will be intrusive into areas zoned or used for residential or medical purposes; According the applicant, there are no plans to alter the existing site lighting. Additional lighting may be needed, however, to illuminate non-defensible spaces, such as parking areas and walkways. If it is determined that additional lighting is needed, then it will be required to adhere to all lighting standards found in the Zoning Ordinance and the Design Guidelines. [4] Applications for an institutional group assembly use shall indicate the proposed locations of garbage dumpsters or receptacles. These facilities shall be located in such a manner as to minimize adverse effects upon neighboring properties and aesthetics from the public right-of-way. The use of dumpsters may be prohibited in the event the BZA determines that such would have a detrimental effect upon the adjacent property; According to the submitted site plan, a proposed solid waste cart storage area is located behind the building and will not be easily visible from the public right-of- way or adjacent properties. The site plan depicts that this cart storage area will be enclosed within a masonry wall. [5] Areas for outdoor recreational use or outdoor group activities shall be screened or fenced in such a manner as to provide an effective buffer for adjacent uses. Screening shall be required pursuant to Section 27 of this article or as required by the BZA; According to the applicant, no outdoor recreation areas are associated with this addition. [6] The number of required parking spaces provided on-site shall be in accordance with Chart 4 of this article provided, however, if the applicant can present evidence satisfactory to the BZA that a substantial portion of the expected users will arrive at the institutional group assembly use by bus, bicycle, walking, or by carpooling or that off- street parking areas on adjacent or nearby properties will be available on a long term basis, the BZA shall have authority to determine the number of required parking spaces to be provided on-site. The BZA may require that a reserve area be retained on-site for future expansions of the parking area; Chart 4 of the Zoning Ordinance requires 1 space for every 8 seats in the main worship center. According to the applicant’s letter, the church is not increasing the size of the worship center. However, the building plans indicate a 650 square-foot expansion of the worship center space and the site plan indicates that 30 additional seats will be added. After reviewing the increase in seating, the site is currently providing adequate parking spaces to support the addition. No additional parking spaces are required. [7] an application for a special use permit for an institutional group assembly use shall be accompanied by a description of uses or activities proposed for the facility which may be subject to separate regulation or which may result in unusual traffic patterns, traffic volumes, or other detrimental impacts upon adjacent properties, including but not necessarily limited to those uses which would require a special permit if not a part of the institutional group assembly use; According to the applicant, the service times are Sunday at 9:15 am and 11:00 am. The applicant has not indicated any additional activities that would warrant any additional action or consideration. [8] the BZA shall have authority to approve an on-site location with water, sewer, and electric utility connections for accommodations for travel trailers or R.V.s (recreational vehicles) for use by visiting or traveling speakers or guests associated with the institutional group assembly use. Provided, however, such location for travel trailers or R.V.s shall not be permitted for use as a permanent residential dwelling unit; According to the applicant, the church does not intend to install any water, sewer, or electrical utility connections for travel trailers or RV’s. [9] the BZA shall have the authority to grant variances to the standards imposed by this subsection for temporary or short term uses of property for the institutional group assembly use purposes. In such cases, the BZA may impose conditions of approval to assure the compatibility of the short-term land use with other property in the vicinity of the proposed use; and According to the applicant, the church is not requesting approval for any variances or short-term land uses on site at this time. [10] the application for a special use permit for an institutional group assembly use shall indicate any intentions for the use of systems for the external broadcast of speech, music, or other sounds. If such are proposed, the applicant shall indicate the times of day and duration of their proposed use. The BZA shall have the authority to place restrictions upon their use in order to minimize excessive noise from intruding upon neighboring properties especially those zoned or used for residential purposes. In no event shall the BZA approve the use of such which would be in violation of the City Code or ordinances regulating noise. BZA approval does not constitute a waiver of any City Code or ordinances regulating noise. The applicant attests that the use will comply with this standard. According to the applicant, the proposed church facility does not use carillons, bells, chimes, or electronic speakers that produce sounds that would disturb neighboring properties. Recommended Conditions of Approval: If the Board approves this request, Staff recommends the following conditions of approval: 1) A site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2) A Type C buffer with a 6’ privacy fence shall be installed along the north property line and along the common property line with 638 Courtland Street. The Type C buffer shall maintain the required 12’ width except where shown on the attached landscape plan. 3) The exterior material of the proposed addition shall consist of board and batten fiber cement siding as depicted on the attached architectural elevations. 4) The solid waste enclosure shall consist of a masonry wall. The applicant will be in attendance to respond to any questions the Board may have. Attached Exhibits 1) BZA Application 2) Applicant Letter 3) Site Photos 4) Site Plan Set and Architectural Elevations from current submittal 5) Site Plan and Architectural Elevations from 2019 submittal 1. BZA Application 2. Applicant Letter 3. Site Photos Front of Building Front of Building Rear of Property Current submittal Current submittal Current submittal Current submittal Current submittal Current submittal Current submittal 2019 submittal METAL STANDING SEAM ROOF OVER NEW ADDITION AND OVER EXISTING ROOF (FELLOWSHIP HALL AND KITCHEN) SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH 711 NORTH MANEY AVENUE FRONT ELEVATION 2019 submittal METAL STANDING SEAM ROOF OVER NEW ADDITION AND OVER EXISTING ROOF (FELLOWSHIP HALL AND KITCHEN) ROOF SLOPES FROM FRONT TO BACK ALL NEW ADDITION SIDING BRICK TO MATCH AREA ON REAR AS ON FRONT VERTICAL BOARD AND BATTEN HARDY BOARD SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH 711 NORTH MANEY AVENUE REAR ELEVATION 2019 submittal METAL STANDING SEAM ROOF OVER NEW ADDITION AND OVER EXISTING ROOF (FELLOWSHIP HALL AND KITCHEN) EXISTING METAL ROOF TO STAY AS CURRENTLY IS ALL NEW ADDITION SIDING VERTICAL BOARD AND BATTEN HARDY BOARD SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH 711 NORTH MANEY AVENUE RIGHT ELEVATION 2019 submittal METAL STANDING SEAM ROOF OVER NEW ADDITION AND OVER EXISTING ROOF (FELLOWSHIP HALL AND KITCHEN) EXISTING METAL ROOF TO STAY AS CURRENTLY IS ROOF SLOPES FROM FRONT TO BACK ALL NEW ADDITION SIDING VERTICAL BOARD AND BATTEN HARDY BOARD SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH 711 NORTH MANEY AVENUE LEFT ELEVATION 2019 submittal 2019 submittal

Get email alerts for Murfreesboro

A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.

Report an issue with this meeting