Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the ADU Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board recommends approval with conditions for 1,000‑sq‑ft ADU inside shop
Summary
The board recommended approval of a variance allowing a previously approved 1,000‑square‑foot accessory dwelling unit to be built within an existing shop shell rather than as a freestanding structure, with conditions including a 30‑foot side setback, prohibition on rental, and restriction on subdivision.
Meade County planning staff and the applicant outlined a request to place a previously authorized 1,000‑square‑foot accessory dwelling unit (ADU) inside a shop structure rather than as a freestanding building. The board recommended approval with conditions that echo the prior variance: the ADU must be at least 30 feet from the side lot line, cannot be used as a rental, the property cannot be subdivided, and no shop area may be used for residential purposes beyond the approved 1,000 square feet.
The applicant (identified in the record as Tracy/Tracy Khan) said the shop was already permitted as a shell and that the original variance application had been understood to apply to the living area; the subsequent building permit for an ADU had been denied because plans did not explicitly say the unit would be within a shop. "We were granted that thousand square foot ADU," the applicant said, noting a misunderstanding in earlier paperwork; he described the existing shell as 36 by 76 feet and identified how the internal walls and entrances would be arranged.
Staff clarified that the current building permit covers a shop shell (concrete floor and electrical) and that if the applicant proceeds with an interior ADU build‑out he will need to resubmit interior plans and obtain the additional building permit. Board members emphasized mechanical separation and access (separate heating/mechanical, separate entrances) and asked staff to ensure conditions prevent conversion of shop space to additional living space beyond the approved area.
A board member moved to recommend approval subject to staff recommendations (setbacks, non‑rental covenant, non‑subdivision, and limitation on residential finish in shop areas); the motion passed by voice vote. The recommendation will go to the County Commission for final action on related permits.
Provenance: topic begins at SEG 060 with staff framing and applicant presentation and continues through motion and passage at SEG 335–353.
