Granville Community Calendar

BZBA Minutes June 9, 2011

Granville Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Minutes

June 9, 2011

7:00 p.m.

 

Members Present:  Scott Manno, Fred Ashbaugh, and Jeff Gill.

Members Absent: Bradley Smith and Rob Montgomery.

Also Present: Alison Terry, Village Planning Director, Assistant Law Director Mike King (arrived late.)

Visitors: Steve and Michelle Rivers, Raymond McKenna, Flo Hoffman, Steve Mershon, Laura Hunt, Anne Aubourg, and Steve Mershon. 

Description of Procedure:

Ms. Terry provided a description of the procedure for the meeting as follows:

Note:  The items listed on this agenda under New Business are open to the public, but are not a public hearings.  Any witness offering testimony or presenting evidence at a hearing shall be placed under oath prior to offering testimony or evidence. The following persons may appear at hearings as parties and be heard in person or by attorney:

(1)        The applicant;

(2)        The owner of the property that is the subject of the application, if the owner is not the applicant or appellant;

(3)        The owner of property that is adjacent or contiguous to the property that is the subject of the application; and

(4)        Any other person who claims that a direct, present injury or prejudice to a personal or property right will occur if the application is approved or denied. 

A person authorized to appear and be heard may:

(1)        Present his or her position, argument and contentions;

(2)        Offer and examine witnesses and present evidence in support of his or her position, arguments and contentions;

(3)        Cross-examine witnesses purporting to refute his or her position, arguments and contentions;

(4)        Offer evidence and testimony to refute evidence and testimony offered in opposition to his or her position, arguments and contentions;

(5)        Proffer any evidence or testimony into the record if such evidence or testimony has not been admitted by the Board. 

New Business:

Scott and Martha Keyes, 418 West Broadway, Application #2011-50 AMENDED

Suburban Residential District-B (SRD-B) - Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for review and approval of a variance to reduce the required rear yard setback from forty (40’) feet to thirty-seven (37’) feet to allow for the construction of an eight (8’) foot cedar trellis.  

Discussion:  Ms. Terry explained that this application would have to be tabled because they would not have a quorum with Mr. Ashbaugh recusing himself.  She stated that this application would be rescheduled to the July meeting.  

Raymond and Marilyn McKenna, 5 Sunset Hill, Application #2011-52

Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A) – Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for a variance to reduce the required front yard setback from thirty-five (35’) feet to twenty-two (22’) feet to allow for the construction of a deck.  

Discussion:

(Alison Terry and Raymond McKenna were sworn in by Mr. Ashbaugh.)

Raymond McKenna, 5 Sunset Hill, stated that he would like to build a wood deck approximately eight (8’) feet by twelve (12’) feet and also replace a concrete slab in the same area.  He explained that they would like to provide easier access to the front door.  Mr. McKenna stated that the house is close to the street and built on a formerly private road where they are the last lot on one side.  Mr. Manno questioned if the house as it stands now has a thirty (30’) foot setback.  Ms. Terry stated yes.  Mr. Manno asked if construction has already begun on the deck.  Mr. McKenna stated yes and he would call what is in place a “prototype.”  Mr. Gill stated that he walked the property and viewed the deck and the existing concrete doesn’t have any historical value.       

The BZBA reviewed and read aloud the following Findings of Fact during their discussion of Application #2011-52: 

a.         That special circumstances or conditions exist which are peculiar to the land or structure(s) involved and which are not applicable to other lands or structures in the same zoning districts.  Mr. Gill and Mr. Manno unanimously agreed TRUE.  Mr. Ashbaugh agreed FALSE.  Mr. Gill stated TRUE based on the slope.         

b.         That a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Zoning Ordinance would result in practical difficulties for the owner of the property.  The factors to be considered by the Board in making this determination are: 

(1)        Whether the property in question will yield a reasonable return or whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance.  The BZBA unanimously agreed TRUE. 

(2)        Whether the variance is substantial.  The BZBA unanimously agreed that the proposed variance is not substantial.  

(3)        Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered, or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance.  Mr. Gill, Mr. Manno, and Mr. Ashbaugh stated FALSE. 

(4)        Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of governmental services (e.g., water, sewer, garbage).  Each member of the BZBA stated FALSE. 

(5)        Whether the property owner purchased the property with knowledge of the zoning restriction.  The BZBA unanimously agreed TRUE.    

(6)        Whether the property owner’s predicament feasibly can be obviated through some method other than a variance.  Mr. Manno and Mr. Ashbaugh stated FALSE.  Mr. Gill stated TRUE.  

(7)        Whether the spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would be required to be observed and substantial justice done by granting the variance.  Each member of the BZBA stated TRUE. 

c.         That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.  Each member of the BZBA stated TRUE. 

d.         That the granting of the variance will in no other manner adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the persons residing or working within the vicinity of the proposed variance, and not diminish or impair established property values within the surrounding areas, and not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, and not unreasonably increase the congestion in public streets.  Each member of the BZBA stated TRUE. 

e.         In granting a variance, the board may impose any requirements or conditions regarding the location, character, and other features of the proposed uses or buildings or structures as the board deems necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Zoning Code, and to satisfy the other conditions set forth in Division (d) of this Section.  Each member of the BZBA agreed that there are no special conditions.   

Mr. Gill made a motion to approve Application #2011-52 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Manno. Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2011-52: Manno (yes), Ashbaugh (yes), Gill (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.  Application #2011-52 is Approved.

Granville Historical Society, 115 East Broadway, Application #2011-54

Village Business District (VBD) – Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD)

The request is for the following variances: 

1)         To reduce the western side yard setback from ten (10') feet to zero (0') feet;

2)         To reduce the eastern side yard setback from ten (10') feet to six and half feet (6 1/2');

3)         To reduce the required off-street parking requirements from twelve (12) parking spaces to zero (0) parking spaces; and

4)         To increase the maximum lot coverage from seventy (70%) percent to ninety-eight (98%) percent to allow for the construction of a two story addition on the rear, southern side of the structure.  

Discussion:

(Alison Terry, Flo Hoffman, Laura Hunt, and Anne Aubourg were sworn in by Mr. Ashbaugh.) 

Laura Hunt, 88 Arden Place, Hebron, indicated that she is the project architect.  She explained that the applicant would like to build a 30 foot x 50 foot building footprint and they would be doing landscaping at the front entry.  She stated that the Granville Historical Society is in need of a building of this size to accommodate artifacts.  Ms. Hunt stated that they having parking at the front of the building on the street and shared parking in the back lot.  She explained that there is no written agreement on the parking.  Mr. Gill asked how many parking spaces are shared.  Ms. Hoffman stated that there are seven spaces and some of these are located near Lisa McKivergin’s property and some near the church.  Ms. Hoffman explained that they are presenting zero parking spaces in the application, but they actually have seven and this hasn’t been a problem.  Mr. Manno asked if the new building would be used for storage purposes.  Ms. Hunt stated that it would be used for archives, processing, and display.  She added that there would be a meeting room used for display and special events.  Mr. Manno questioned if there would be added traffic.  Ms. Hunt stated that there could be some pre-arranged events, and they do not expect more traffic on a daily basis.  Ms. Terry asked if the hours of operation would be different.  Anne Aubourg stated that the Historical Society has made a statement to the public that they would be open more hours with this expansion.  Mr. Gill stated that for the record he would like it noted that he has a running concern because of what is stated in the Comprehensive Plan in regards to protecting off-street parking in the downtown area.  He added that the BZBA sees projects that they want to affirm and if they keep affirming with zero parking they begin to lose all of the downtown parking.  He stated that at some point they have to draw a line.  

Flo Hoffman, 713 Friends Lane, stated she works at the historical society.  She stated that she has never had to go more than a block for parking.  Ms. Hoffman stated that there is sufficient parking behind Park National Bank.  Mr. Gill questioned what the Park National Bank guidelines are in regards to using the rear parking lot.  Ms. Hoffman stated that she has never been told that she cannot park back there.  Mr. Gill stated that authorizing a twelve car variance makes it harder to say no to future applicants for off street parking variances, but the BZBA is not a precedent setting board.  Ms. Terry stated that regarding the encroachment to the west on the property owned by the Village, the Historical Society did go to Council to get approval to encroach on that space.  She further explained that the property owned and operated by the Historical Society provides access to other properties owners in the rear area and because of this access there is no ability to provide parking on their property.  Ms. Terry stated that this in part is very neighborly of them to provide access to other properties.  Mr. Gill stated that this is helpful information for him in making his decision.  Ms. Terry explained that the Historical Society had a work session with the Planning Commission and they suggested shifting the addition to the west to get further away from the Park National Bank basement wall.  Mr. Gill asked if this shift was for structural reasons.  Ms. Terry stated yes.  Mr. Ashbaugh questioned if the building moves closer to the right-of-way for the alley.  Mr. Hunt stated that the building is already located within the right-of-way.  Mr. Ashbaugh asked if the proposal to have the building two stories tall has been an issue.  Ms. Terry stated that there are other two story buildings in the same district.  Mr. Manno asked if the current building holds historical value.  Ms. Hoffman stated yes that the front of the building is historic and was built in 1815.  

Anne Aubourg, 526 West College, stated that they have given an easement to Park National Bank for part of the alley to use for their drive up window. She stated that they were being good neighbors to them and “they have been good neighbors to us.”  Ms. Aubourg stated that there are other possibilities for parking if some of the neighbors donate land for public parking.  Ms. Terry stated that additional parking in the rear has been discussed, but it was determined that there would only be a few spaces gained.  Ms. Terry stated that this application has not yet gone through the Planning Commission for architectural review and approval.   Mr. Gill noted that a Council member was present and he would welcome any clarification by Council in regards to the Comprehensive Plan’s charge to protect off street parking in the downtown area.  He stated that he would like to see his concerns on this matter addressed.  

The BZBA reviewed and read aloud the following Findings of Fact during their discussion of Application #2011-54: 

a.         That special circumstances or conditions exist which are peculiar to the land or structure(s) involved and which are not applicable to other lands or structures in the same zoning districts.  The BZBA unanimously agreed TRUE.      

b.         That a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Zoning Ordinance would result in practical difficulties for the owner of the property.  The factors to be considered by the Board in making this determination are: 

(1)        Whether the property in question will yield a reasonable return or whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance.  The BZBA unanimously agreed TRUE.   

(2)        Whether the variance is substantial.  Mr. Manno and Mr. Ashbaugh agreed that the proposed variance is substantial.  Mr. Gill stated that the proposed variance is not substantial.    

(3)        Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered, or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance.  Mr. Gill, Mr. Manno, and Mr. Ashbaugh stated FALSE. 

(4)        Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of governmental services (e.g., water, sewer, garbage).  Each member of the BZBA stated FALSE. 

(5)        Whether the property owner purchased the property with knowledge of the zoning restriction.  The BZBA unanimously agreed TRUE.    

(6)        Whether the property owner’s predicament feasibly can be obviated through some method other than a variance.  Each member of the BZBA stated FALSE. 

(7)        Whether the spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would be required to be observed and substantial justice done by granting the variance.  Each member of the BZBA stated TRUE.

c.         That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.  Each member of the BZBA stated TRUE. 

d.         That the granting of the variance will in no other manner adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the persons residing or working within the vicinity of the proposed variance, and not diminish or impair established property values within the surrounding areas, and not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, and not unreasonably increase the congestion in public streets.  Each member of the BZBA stated TRUE. 

e.         In granting a variance, the board may impose any requirements or conditions regarding the location, character, and other features of the proposed uses or buildings or structures as the board deems necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Zoning Code, and to satisfy the other conditions set forth in Division (d) of this Section.  Each member of the BZBA agreed that there are no special conditions.   

Mr. Gill made a motion to approve Application #2011-54 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Manno. Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2011-54: Manno (yes), Ashbaugh (yes), Gill (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.  Application #2011-54 is Approved.

Steve and Michelle Rivers, 445 West Maple Street, Application #2011-55

Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A)

The request is for review and approval of the following variances: 

1)         To increase the maximum cumulative size of accessory structures from 1,208 square feet, 0r 40% of the gross livable area of the principal structure to 2,025 square feet, or 67% to allow for the construction of a swimming pool and single story detached garage; and

2)         To increase the maximum size of an accessory structure from an 864 square foot footprint to a 1,425 square foot footprint to allow for the construction of a single story detached garage.  

Discussion:

(Alison Terry and Steve Rivers were sworn in by Mr. Ashbaugh.)

Steve Rivers, 445 West Maple Street, stated that he would like to build a garage and add a pool and driveway.  Mr. Gill clarified that the proposed variance is not for lot coverage.  Ms. Terry stated that this is true and the variance is for the size of an accessory structure allowed on the property.  Ms. Terry stated that the pool is considered an accessory structure.  She explained that this is part of the cumulative size of accessory structures based on 40% of the gross livable area of the principal structure and an 864 square foot footprint.  Ms. Terry stated that this stipulation is in effect to keep someone from building a large detached garage that is larger than the front structure and to deal with massing.  Mr. Manno asked if the driveway affects lot coverage.  Ms. Terry stated not in this district (SRD). 

Mr. Ashbaugh questioned what the Code says regarding pools.  Ms. Terry stated that pools are allowed according to code.  Mr. Rivers explained that his lot levels out a little bit in the back of his house.  Mr. Manno asked what is located on the property to the west.  Mr. Rivers stated a two story brick house and then the condos.  Mr. Gill asked if the applicant has talked to his neighbors about his plans.  Mr. Rivers stated he has talked to the neighbors to the west and across the street.  Ms. Terry stated that she did not hear from any neighbors.  Mr. Manno clarified the size of the proposed garage.  Mr. Rivers stated that he was unsure if it would be 30' x 30' or 30' x 34'.  Ms. Terry stated that if the applicant enlarges the garage from what is proposed in the application today he would need another variance. Mr. Rivers stated that he would build the garage as proposed in the application – 30' x 30'.  Mr. Manno clarified that there would be a fence connecting back to the garage surrounding the swimming pool. Mr. Rivers stated yes. 

The BZBA reviewed and read aloud the following Findings of Fact during their discussion of Application #2011-55:

a.         That special circumstances or conditions exist which are peculiar to the land or structure(s) involved and which are not applicable to other lands or structures in the same zoning districts.  The BZBA unanimously agreed FALSE.      

b.         That a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Zoning Ordinance would result in practical difficulties for the owner of the property.  The factors to be considered by the Board in making this determination are: 

(1)        Whether the property in question will yield a reasonable return or whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance.  The BZBA unanimously agreed TRUE.   

(2)        Whether the variance is substantial.  Mr. Manno and Mr. Ashbaugh agreed that the proposed variance is substantial.  Mr. Gill stated that the Variance is not substantial.    

(3)        Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered, or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance.  Mr. Gill stated FALSE.  Mr. Manno, and Mr. Ashbaugh stated TRUE. 

(4)        Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of governmental services (e.g., water, sewer, garbage).  Each member of the BZBA stated FALSE.

(5)        Whether the property owner purchased the property with knowledge of the zoning restriction.  The BZBA unanimously agreed TRUE.    

(6)        Whether the property owner’s predicament feasibly can be obviated through some method other than a variance.  Each member of the BZBA stated FALSE. 

(7)        Whether the spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would be required to be observed and substantial justice done by granting the variance.  Each member of the BZBA stated FALSE.

c.         That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.  Each member of the BZBA stated TRUE. 

d.         That the granting of the variance will in no other manner adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the persons residing or working within the vicinity of the proposed variance, and not diminish or impair established property values within the surrounding areas, and not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, and not unreasonably increase the congestion in public streets.  Each member of the BZBA stated TRUE. 

e.         In granting a variance, the board may impose any requirements or conditions regarding the location, character, and other features of the proposed uses or buildings or structures as the board deems necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Zoning Code, and to satisfy the other conditions set forth in Division (d) of this Section.  Each member of the BZBA agreed that there are no special conditions.   

Mr. Manno made a motion to approve Application #2011-55 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Gill. Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2011-55: Manno (yes), Ashbaugh (yes), Gill (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.  Application #2011-55 is Approved.

Finding of Fact

Raymond and Marilyn McKenna, 5 Sunset Hill,  Application #2011-52

The Board of Zoning and Building Appeals found the request to be consistent with the Granville Codified Ordinances Chapter 1147, Variances, and Chapter 1163, Suburban Residential District, and hereby gives their approval of the application as submitted by the applicant.  

Mr. Manno moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2011-52.  Seconded by Mr. Gill. Roll Call Vote: Manno (yes), Gill (yes), Ashbaugh (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.  The Findings of Fact for Application #2011-52 are approved.  

Granville Historical Society, 115 East Broadway,  Application #2011-54

The Board of Zoning and Building Appeals found the request to be consistent with the Granville Codified Ordinances Chapter 1147, Variances, Chapter 1159, Village District and Chapter 1183, Off-street Parking and Loading and hereby gives their approval of the application as submitted by the applicant.  

Mr. Gill moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2011-54.  Seconded by Mr. Manno. Roll Call Vote: Manno (yes), Gill (yes), Ashbaugh (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.  The Findings of Fact for Application #2011-54 are approved.  

Steve and Michelle Rivers, 445 West Maple Street,  Application #2011-55

The Board of Zoning and Building Appeals found the request to be consistent with the Granville Codified Ordinances Chapter 1157, General Zoning Regulations, Chapter 1147, Variances, and Chapter 1163, Suburban Residential District, and hereby gives their approval of the application as submitted by the applicant. 

Mr. Manno moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2011-55.  Seconded by Mr. Gill. Roll Call Vote: Manno (yes), Gill (yes), Ashbaugh (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.  The Findings of Fact for Application #2011-55 are approved.  

Motion to Approve Absent BZBA Member:

Mr. Manno made a motion to excuse Bradley Smith and Rob Montgomery from the BZBA meeting on June 9, 2011.  Seconded by Mr. Gill. Roll Call Vote: Manno (yes), Ashbaugh (yes), Gill (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.    

Approval of the Minutes:

May 12, 2011

Mr. Gill made a motion to approve the minutes for May 12, 2011 as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Manno. Roll Call Vote: Manno (yes), Ashbaugh (yes), Gill (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.  The minutes are approved as presented.  

Motion to Adjourn

Mr. Gill made a motion to adjourn.  Seconded by Mr. Manno. Motion carried 3-0.  The meeting adjourned at 7:55 PM.     

Next Meeting:

July 14, 2011 (Mr. Gill stated that it is possible that he will not be able to attend this meeting.  Mr. Ashbaugh stated that he may not be able to vote on one of the applications because he would have to recuse himself.  Ms. Terry stated that Rob Montgomery indicated that he might not be able to attend this meeting.)

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.