Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Contractor Yard topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Ada County denies Fence Unlimited contractor yard permit after neighbor health and nuisance complaints

2173954 · January 1, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Dec. 4 — The Ada County Board of Commissioners denied an application (202401312 CU MSP) from Fence Unlimited for a conditional use and master site plan to operate a contractor’s yard at 600 Luker Road, citing staff recommendations and neighbor testimony about ongoing odors, noise and health impacts.

Dec. 4 — The Ada County Board of Commissioners denied an application (202401312 CU MSP) from Fence Unlimited for a conditional use and master site plan to operate a contractor’s yard at 600 Luker Road, citing staff recommendations and neighbor testimony about ongoing odors, noise and health impacts.

Staff told the board the property is approximately 0.88 acres in the Rural Urban Transition district and that contractor’s yards in that district are normally required to be on five-acre parcels with storage and structures set back at least 50 feet from property lines. Amelia, a county planning staff member, told the board the application sought a variance to allow the contractor’s yard and storage area to encompass the entire backyard and to keep structures in place; staff recommended denial. "Based on these factors, staff is still recommending denial of the application," Amelia said as part of the staff presentation.

The board considered the item after tabling it at an Oct. 9 hearing to give the applicant and an adjacent neighbor an opportunity to reach a compromise. At the earlier hearing, the applicant and the property owner described business activities that included storage of fencing materials and use of a large shop on the site for manufacturing fence components. At this hearing, neighbors and the applicant provided updates limited to whether any new agreement had been reached.

The neighbor who has direct exposure to the backyard, Megan Nuno De Guzman, described continued health impacts and told the board her family had not seen the concerns addressed. "The symptoms are immediate. It is 100% directly related to what he is doing," Nuno De Guzman said, describing smelling fumes and experiencing immediate reactions when business activity increased.

The property owner, Justin Stucker, acknowledged mitigation steps his business had taken and said his mother had met with the neighbor after the previous hearing. Stucker described measures including placing recycled asphalt to reduce dust, reducing welding and painting in certain areas, insulating two sides of the shop that face the neighbor, offering to install a taller privacy fence and moving some painting activity to the far side of the property. "We have ... gone to pre-painted uprights where we just have to do a minimal amount of touch up," Stucker told the board, and said he had purchased a nearby light-industrial property with the intent of eventually moving the business.

Nuno De Guzman said those changes had either not been communicated to her in a timely way or were insufficient. She told the board her family had repeatedly sought remedies since 2022 and that, in her view, the problem worsened as some operations moved closer to her children’s bedroom windows. She said earlier efforts to involve code enforcement had resulted in a withdrawal of a complaint after an encounter she described as being done "under duress." Nuno De Guzman said, "The last two summers have been completely ruined. Three summers." She also said written submissions from the applicant misrepresented what had occurred in meetings.

Commissioners discussed the county’s acreage requirement for contractor yards and the difficulty of approving operations that affect nearby residents when the property is well under the five-acre minimum. One commissioner said the case "exemplifies why we have the acreage limit" and indicated an inclination to deny the permit. Another commissioner said mediation or legal representation can sometimes help neighbors communicate, but that the limited parcel size and repeated complaints weighed in favor of denial.

A commissioner moved to deny project number 202401312 CU MSP "based on the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the two hearings," another commissioner seconded, and the board voted in favor. All three commissioners present voted yes and the motion carried; the application was denied.

The public hearing for the item was closed after the vote; the board moved on to other agenda items.