Board of Zoning Appeals Agendas and Minutes

AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF THE CITY OF HAMPTON, VIRGINIA, HELD IN THE HARDY CASH CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL, 22 LINCOLN STREET, AT 5:00 P.M. ON MONDAY, APRIL 16, 2012. Present: Chairman Thomas Savage and Board Members Linda Ellis, Rodney Gentry, Vice-Chair Burnett Peters, and John Pope. Also present were Zoning Administrator Steve Shapiro, Senior Deputy City Attorney Lesa Yeatts, Court Reporter Virginia Giles, and Recording Secretary Mary Cole. A motion was made by Board Member Pope and seconded by Board Member Gentry that the minutes of the April 2, 2012 meeting be approved as submitted. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Gentry, Pope, Savage NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Ellis, Peters ABSENT: None 12-014: A public hearing was held on the application submitted by Target Corporation,1911 Saville Row, LRSNs 7001204 & 7001205, an appeal of the Zoning Administrative Officer’s decision to not allow an abandoned nonconforming freestanding sign to remain on the parcel. This application was continued from the April 2, 2012 meeting. The applicant’s representatives, Jonny Cassells, Inside Sales Manager for SignMedia Incorporated, and Clarence Minter, District Facilities Manager for the Tidewater area, presented the basis for the appeal to the Board. Zoning Inspector Donnie Harris and Steve Shapiro, Zoning Administrator, presented the City’s position. After discussion, a motion was made by Board Member Gentry and seconded by Vice-Chairman Peters to uphold the Zoning Administrative Officer’s decision. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Ellis, Gentry, Peters, Pope, Savage NAYS: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None The applicant was advised that he has 30 days from April 16, 2012 to appeal the Board’s decision to the Circuit Court for the City of Hampton. Page 1 of 2 12-017: A public hearing was held on the application submitted by Bui Phuc, 1303 Grimes Rd, LRSN 12004513, a variance to reduce the required minimum side yard setback from 6’ to 5.2’ to allow a 5.3’X 21’ addition on the side of the dwelling. The applicant, Bui Phuc, presented the variance request to the Board. After discussion by the Board, there was general agreement that the respective side yard would not be visible from the front fence, that the property meets the 25% total side yard requirement, that the layout of the house and lot would prohibit this addition to the rear yard, that had the house been slightly shifted on the lot we would not have this issue, and that this hardship is shared by the few properties at the ends of the roads but not the other properties in the area. A motion was made by Board Member Pope and seconded by Board Member Gentry that the variance be granted because: 1. The strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship due to the placement of the house on this specific piece of property. 2. The hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity; and 3. The authorization of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the variance; and 4. The granting of the variance is in harmony with the intended spirit and purpose of the ordinance. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Ellis, Gentry, Peters, Pope, Savage NAYS: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 5:30 pm. __________________________ Thomas Savage, Chairman Page 2 of 2