Granville Community Calendar

BZBA Minutes April 11, 2013

Granville Board of Zoning & Building Appeals

Minutes

April 11, 2013

 7:00 p.m.

 

Call to Order:  Mr. Gill called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

 

Members Present:  Bradley Smith, Kenneth Kemper, Larry Burge, Scott Manno, and Jeff Gill.

 

Members Absent: None.

 

Also Present: Alison Terry, Village Planning Director; Michael King, Law Director.

 

Visitors: Mark Clapsadle, Rev. Stephen Applegate, Bill Haynes, and Brian Rapp. 

 

Description of Procedure:  Mr. Gill 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 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:

St. Luke’s Church, 107 East Broadway, Application #2013-32

Village Square District (VSD).  The request is for review and approval of a variance to reduce the required number of parking spaces for a building addition from seven (7) parking spaces to zero (0) parking spaces. 

 

(Alison Terry, Rev. Stephen Applegate, and Bill Haynes were sworn in by Mr. Gill.)

 

Discussion:

Rev. Stephen Applegate, 117 South Plum Street, stated he is the Reverend of St. Luke’s Episcopal Church on East Broadway.  He stated their request is for a variance to reduce the required number of parking spaces from seven (7) parking spaces to zero (0) parking spaces.  Rev. Applegate stated they have removed some of the seating within the church, specifically in the balcony, and are adding additional pews on the ground floor.  He added this interior expansion would trigger the need for seven (7) additional parking spaces.  Mr. Gill stated he didn’t realize churches were impacted by such an expansion in the Code.  He questioned if there were any exceptions for churches.  Law Director King stated there is language in the code that is especially applicable to churches.  Rev. Applegate stated St. Luke’s has had a very informal agreement with Park National Bank to utilize parking spaces on their lot for Sunday mornings and this has been done for quite some time.  Mr. Manno asked if Sunday is the only day for services.  Rev. Applegate stated they also have a weekday service on Wednesday afternoons and the average attendance is six people.  Mr. Burge questioned if parking for funerals is sufficient.  Rev. Applegate agreed parking for funerals is an ongoing issue and all four churches on the corner informally put up ‘no parking’ signs for street parking during funerals. 

 

Ms. Terry stated First Presbyterian was required to provide 25 additional new parking spaces with their most recent addition.  She stated the church did receive a variance from the BZBA to reduce the requirement from 25 spaces to 0.  She stated this variance was granted because the hours and days that parking would be utilized for the church are not times when parking is an issue in the downtown area.  Ms. Terry stated Centenary United Methodist church received a similar reduction for an addition done to the church in 2002.  She added that Centenary does have a private parking lot.  Ms. Terry stated another addition in the area, Granville Historical Society, was granted a variance to reduce the required number of parking spaces from 12 to 0.  Mr. Manno stated this is not a precedent setting board and the parking variances granted were not based on any relation or impact to businesses.       

 

The BZBA reviewed and read aloud the following Findings of Fact during their discussion of Application #2013-32:

 

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. Burge stated  FALSE.  Mr. Kemper stated TRUE.  Mr. Manno stated TRUE.  Mr. Smith stated FALSE.  Mr. Gill stated 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.  Law Director King mentioned the grandfathered status of parking for St. Luke’s church.   
 

(2)        Whether the variance is substantial.  The majority of the BZBA members agreed the proposed variance is substantial.  Mr. Smith and Mr. Gill stated FALSE.  Mr. Burge, Mr. Kemper, and Mr. Manno stated TRUE.   

 

(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.  The BZBA unanimously agreed 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 FALSE.   

 

(6)        Whether the property owner’s predicament feasibly can be obviated through some method other than a variance.  The BZBA unanimously agreed 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.    Mr. Gill stated true, the church has made changes to the interior seating.  All other BZBA members agreed with Mr. Gill.

 

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 on all points, except Mr. Manno stated FALSE regarding the variance unreasonably increasing the congestion in public streets. 

 

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 there are no special conditions.  

 

Mr. Kemper made a motion to approve Application #2013-32 as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Smith. 

 

Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2013-32: Smith (yes), Gill (yes), Kemper (yes), Burge (yes), Manno (no).  Motion carried 4-1.  Application #2013-32 is Approved as Presented.

 

Brian Rapp, 679 Burg Street, Application #2013-33

Village Business District (VBD) – Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for review and approval of a variance to reduce the required side yard setback from sixteen (16’) feet to eleven-feet-eight-inches (11’8”) to allow for the construction of a one-story addition on the side of the home. 

 

(Alison Terry, Brian Rapp, and Mark Clapsadle were sworn in by Mr. Gill.)

 

Discussion:

Mark Clapsadle, Granview Road, stated he is representing the homeowner, Brian Rapp, and they are requesting a variance for a side yard setback to add a dining room to the west side of the home.  Mr. Clapsadle stated this is the most logical place to put the addition because it is a narrow deep lot and the other side of the home (east) is already developed with a driveway, landscaping, garage, and established access to the basement.  Mr. Clapsadle stated the addition if done on the east side would be more cost prohibitive.  Mr. Clapsadle stated the house is 132 feet away from the existing home to the west.  He added there is a lot of vegetation and growth between the two homes in this area, as well as an easement.  Mr. Gill asked if Mr. Rapp has had any conversation with his neighbors.  Mr. Rapp stated no, but they are aware of their plans.  Mr. Manno asked if the applicant is aware of the amount of square footage located in the area where the setback is needed.  Mr. Manno stated this appears to be minimal.  Mr. Clapsadle stated he does not have an exact measurement.    

 

The BZBA reviewed and read aloud the following Findings of Fact during their discussion of Application #2013-33:

 

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. Smith stated true, the nature of the lot includes a significant drop off in the rear of the property.  All other BZBA members concurred with Mr. Smith.

 

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 FALSE.             

 

(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.  The BZBA unanimously agreed 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 FALSE.   

 

(6)        Whether the property owner’s predicament feasibly can be obviated through some method other than a variance.  Mr. Burge, Mr. Kemper, and Mr. Smith stated FALSE.  Mr. Manno and 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.  Mr. Smith indicated true, the addition would be on the side of the home.  All other BZBA members concurred with Mr. Smith.

 

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.  The BZBA unanimously agreed 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. Burge made a motion to approve Application #2013-33 as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Manno. 

 

Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2013-33: Smith (yes), Manno (yes), Kemper (yes), Burge (yes), Gill (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.  Application #2013-33 is Approved as Presented.

 

Finding of Fact

St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, 107 East Broadway,  Application #2013-32

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

 

Mr. Smith moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2013-32.  Seconded by Mr. Kemper.

 

Roll Call Vote: Burge (yes), Kemper (yes), Manno (no), Smith (yes), Gill (yes).  Motion carried 4-1.  The Findings of Fact for Application #2013-32 are approved. 

 

Brian Rapp, 679 Street,  Application #2013-33

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 give their approval of the application as submitted by the applicant. 

 

Mr. Smith moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2013-33.  Seconded by Mr. Manno.

 

Roll Call Vote: Burge (yes), Kemper (yes), Manno (yes), Smith (yes), Gill (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.  The Findings of Fact for Application #2013-33 are approved. 

 

Motion to Approve Meeting Minutes:

Mr. Manno made a motion to approve the BZBA meeting minutes for March 14, 2013.  Seconded by Mr. Kemper.

 

Roll Call Vote: Burge (yes), Kemper (yes), Manno (yes), Smith (yes), Gill (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Other Business:

Ms. Terry stated the BZBA are invited to attend the 2013 Central Ohio Planning & Zoning Workshop on Friday, May 17, 2013 in Columbus.  She asked for members to contact her if they are interested in attending.   

 

Motion to Adjourn

Mr. Manno made a motion to adjourn.  Seconded by Mr. Burge. 

Motion carried 5-0.  The meeting adjourned at 7:35 PM.   

 

Next Meeting:

May 9, 2013

June 13, 2013 (Mr. Gill indicated he cannot attend this meeting)

July 11, 2013

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.