Granville Community Calendar

BZBA 07/23/98

BOARD OF ZONING AND BUILDING APPEALS
July 23, 1998
Minutes
Present: Ashlin Caravana, Bob Essman, Eric Stewart
Members Absent: Lon Herman, Greg Sharkey, Betty Allen
Also Present: Matt Trumbull, Acting Village Planner
Visitors: Scott Hickey, Cherry, Richard Downs, Richard Mahard, Richard J.M. Morey
Minutes: June 25: Page 1, No. (2) under the School District, {?}.
Page 2, change " grant" to confer under (D) . MINUTES WERE
APPROVED with one abstention.
Citizens Comments:
Public Hearing:
None
Scott and Marjorie Hickey, 211 South Main Street
The applicants wish to (1) enlarge the kitchen, which will extend 21' west from the house, by 16' wide and 18' high, totaling 315 sq.ft. This will require a 3' variance on the north side.
2) They also wish to construct a carriage house garage/ office in the SW corner of the property, set back 4' from south property line and set back 0' from west property line. This will rseoquuthiresidae.variance for the 0' setback in the rear and 6' on the In the absence of the Hickeys, Richard Downs explained wthiethavpaprliiacnactieosn. and thought the plans would fit within the criteria
the TCOTDheiscanrroiat ge house would be farther than 100' from the ROW so affected. There will be 64.8 per cent open space. sTidheereudnpaved patio will be counted as open space and is not con- in the current application. If paved, it would be a structure. opposition. Neighbors Mr. Mahard and Ms. Jordan have expressed no
There was a discrepancy in the actual boundary lines. Mr. Mahard explained the jog in the eastw/est line as having been sold noeffightobotrhinegnpeirgohpbeorrtya. t one time because the house encroached on the There is a monument in the NW corner of the pfolar to, tahnedr tphreopbeenrtcihemsark noted has been an assumption over the years in the area. He discussed the surveying of the Academy Building, and there is no problem here.
The applicant has not considered the carriage house as home bocuciludpinagtios.n. Home occupations are not to be carried out in accessory
Richard Cherry, neighbor two doors to the south, feels that
6-
the design will set a precedent toward having a possible dwelling with bath in the carriage house. He is opposed to the carriage
house idea and would prefer a garage. In Arlington people are not
allowed to have living space over a detached garage. He noted that
the applicants bought a nice small house in the village want to expand it and now to what is not logical. A garage would cut off
his nice view and would be very massive. The question is whether
this plan is living space or office space; it will have no kitchen.
With plumbing, itO,«lbcecuomkes a dwelling, noted Ms. Caravana.
What options did the applicant consider without requiring a variance? Ms. Caravana said that putting it elsewhere would eat up too much greenspace but wondered whether the proposed use of space is allowable.
Having a home office in an accessory building crosses the line toward home occupation, she thought. Although there is more of this going on, she did not want to start a precedent. This type of plan is what the ordinances caution against. She thought that with
no customers, no advertising, no sign, just a phone, the plan would not comprise home occupation. With no people coming and going, it is just an office, but she wanted more information. Answering
alonwoethreedr . question, Mr. Downs did not think the roofline could be
1) Regarding the kitchen addition, Ms. Caravana said we haven't had much problem with additions continuing the line of the
CARAVANA MOVED TO APPROVE THE 3'
house.
MS.
THE GREATROOM ADDITION.
UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
She applied the criteria:
SIDE YARD VARIANCE FOR
MR. STEWART SECONDED, AND IT WAS
A) That special circumstances or conditions exist which are peculiar to the land or
applicable
district.
continuing
to
The
the
other structure(s) involved and which are not lands or structures in the same zoning special circumstance is that applicants are only north wall of the building, not creating greater In the past this board has
encroachment into the sideyard setback.
treated this kind of application positively. B) That a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Zoning Ordinance would deprive the applicants of rights commonly penrojovyiseidonbsy other properties in the same zoning district under the of this Ordinance. This situation is similar to others dineprtihvies area; therefore a literal interpretation probably would the applicant of rights enjoyed by others. resultC) That the special conditions and circumstances do not from the actions of the applicant. Applicant bought the house before the ordinances were in effect.
applicaDn)t That the granting of the variance will not confer on the any undue privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands granting will or structures in the same zoning district. This not confer undue privilege.
E) adversely That the granting of the variance will in no other manner affect the health, safety and general welfare of the vpearrsiaonnscer.esiding or working within the vicinity of the proposed Extending the existing wall would would not affect health, safety, general welfare of others.
2) Regarding the carriage house, the issues are (a) the uses proposed, b() whether bathroom should be allowed in a detached nsetriguhcbtoursre. , c() appearance of the planned structure to the immediate
MISSS.UECSARAVANA MOVED TO TABLE THE APPLICATION UNTIL THESE THREE COULD BE CONSIDERED IN MORE DEPTH. MR. STEWART
SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Adjournment:
Next Meeting: August 27, 1998, 7:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen (transcribed from tape

Employee Payroll / Compensation

The Village has thirty-six (36) full-time employees, 16 regular part-time employees and seaonal employees. Village Personnel Policy

Go to My Pay Stub and login.