Board of Zoning Appeals Agendas and Minutes

AT A REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING 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, MARCH 4, 2013. Present: Vice-Chairman Burnett Peters, Board Members Linda Ellis, John Pope, and Rodney Gentry. Also present were Zoning Administrator Steve Shapiro, Senior Deputy City Attorney Lesa Yeatts and Recording Secretary Victoria Byrd. Absent: Chairman Thomas Savage. In Chairman Savage’s absence, Vice-Chairman Peters was the acting Chairman for the meeting. Vice-Chairman Peters called the meeting to order and asked that the minutes be considered. A motion was made by Board Member Gentry and seconded by Board Member Ellis that the minutes of the January 7, 2013 meeting be approved as written. A roll call vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Ellis, Gentry, Pope, Peters NAYS: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Savage Variance Request No. 13-00001: ARC SEHPNVA002, LLC, 2605 Kecoughtan Road, LRSN 1003452, a variance to reduce the required rear yard setback from 9’ to 5’ to allow an existing convenience store to remain as a legally-conforming structure. Zoning Administrator, Steven Shapiro, advised there were only four board members present and that three positive votes are required for a motion to pass. He stated that the applicant was entitled to request that his case be continued so that the matter could be heard by a full Board. The applicant’s attorney, Lawrence Cumming, stated he wished to proceed. Mr. Cumming presented the case to the Board. Mr. Shapiro stated that since the request met all criteria the staff recommended approval and that on June 3, 1985, a variance was granted allowing the construction at 9’ but for unknown reasons it was actually constructed at 5’. After discussion, a motion was made by Board Member Pope and seconded by Board Member Ellis that the request meets all criteria and the variance should be granted because: Page 1 of 2  1. The strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship; 2. The hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity; 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, Pope, Peters NAYS: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Savage Consideration of proposed revision to the By-Laws was postponed due to corrections to Article III. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 5:12 p.m. ____________________________ Burnett Peters, Vice-Chairman Page 2 of 2