Board of Zoning & Building Appeals

City of Hudson, Ohio Meeting Minutes - Final Board of Zoning & Building Appeals David Lehman, Chair John Dohner, Vice Chair Robert Drew Frederick Jahn Louis Wagner Kris McMaster, City Planner Nicholas Sugar, Associate Planner Matthew Vazzana, City Solicitor Thursday, August 16, 2018 7:30 PM Town Hall I. Call to Order Chairman Lehman called to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Zoning & Building Appeals at 7:30 p.m., in accordance with the Sunshine Laws of the State of Ohio, O.R.C. Section 121.22. II. Roll Call Present: 5 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Drew, Mr. Jahn, Mr. Lehman and Mr. Wagner III. Identification, by Chairman, of Nick Sugar, Associate Planner; and Matthew Vazzana, City Solicitor. Except where otherwise noted, public notice as required in the Land Development Code was provided for all matters that come before this meeting of the City of Hudson Board of Zoning and Building Appeals. IV. Swearing in of Staff and Audience Addressing the Board. Mr. Vazzana swore-in staff and all the persons wishing to speak under oath. V. Approval of Minutes This matter was approved A. BZBA 7-19-2018Minutes of Previous Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting: July 19, 2018 Attachments: BZBA Minutes July 19, 2018 - Draft Mr. Drew made a motion that the minutes from the July 19, 2018 meeting be approved as submitted, Mr Wagner seconded the motion. The motion carried by the following vote. Aye: 4 - Mr. Drew, Mr. Jahn, Mr. Lehman and Mr. Wagner Abstain: 1 - Mr. Dohner City of Hudson, Ohio Page 1 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final August 16, 2018 VI. Public Hearings - New Business Mr. Sugar stated that all due notices and public posting have been made. Chair Lehman noted that it is the burden of the applicant to convey why an exception should be granted to the Land Development Code. A. BZBA 2018-24 A request for variances pertaining to new home construction for parcel #3202168 include the following: 1] a variance of fifty (50) feet from the required wetlands setback of fifty (50) feet resulting in a zero setback pursuant to Section 1207.03(e) (2), “Wetland/Stream Corridor Protection - Wetland Setbacks”; 2] a variance of twenty (20) feet from the required stream corridor setback of seventy-five (75) feet resulting in fifty-five (55) foot setback for construction of a driveway pursuant to Section 1207.03(e)(1)(ii), “Wetland/Stream Corridor Protection - Stream Corridor Setbacks”; 3] a variance from the prohibited activity of disturbance, including clearing of vegetation within stream corridors, wetlands and their setbacks pursuant to Section 1207.03(c), “Prohibited Activities”; and 4] a variance of eighty-six (86) feet from the requirement that buildings must be located within one hundred fifty (150) feet of an emergency access road resulting in a distance of two hundred thirty-six (236) feet from an emergency access road, pursuant to Section 1207.13(c)(9)(A)(iii) “Street Design Standards - Emergency Access - Fire Protection Requirements” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. The applicants are Tracy and Thomas Corpus, 7310 Valley View Road, Hudson, OH 44236 and the owners are Susan K. and Ryan A. Kowalske, 2445 Danbury Lane, Hudson, OH 44236 for Parcel #3202168 located east of 265 Ravenna Street, Hudson, OH 44236 in District 3 [Outer Village Residential Neighborhood]. Attachments: BZBA 2018-24 Staff Report Mr. Sugar introduced the case for this vacant parcel that is 110 by 712 feet located on Ravenna Street in District 3 stating that the applicant has a contract with the owner to purchase the property. Approval from the Army Corps of Engineers will also be required for work in this location. The applicants, Ms. Tracy Corpus and Mr. Tom Corpus; along with Ms. Carrie Ricker, representing the Wetlands Consulting Company and working with the Army Corps of Engineers were present for the meeting. Mr. Corpus stated they propose to build a 2000 square foot house in the center of the property with a driveway located as far away from the stream as possible. In the development of the plans they have complied with all the requirements and suggestions presented by the City of Hudson, the fire department, the wetlands consultant and the Army Corps of Engineers. Also, everything on the site plan meets all the requirements of the Engineer of the City of Hudson. Mr. Corpus further stated that the impact of the effect on the wetlands and stream corridor, both of which are considered U.S. waterways by the Army Corps of Engineers, is so minimal that no buyback, mitigation or offset is required. The Board asked what impact will this project have on the existing waterflow? Ms. Ricker stated the waterflow will City of Hudson, Ohio Page 2 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final August 16, 2018 not be altered in any way. A culvert for the stream water entering the property will traverse the driveway, but is not needed for the wetlands. Ms. Ricker stated the additional impervious surface area will have minimal impact on neighboring properties. Ms. Corpus read a memo from the site plan preparer that the driveway culvert is being designed to maintain the current drainage pattern. Mr. Sugar explained that the fire department's concerns in regards to the driveway have been resolved, therefore, the fourth variance is not needed. Mr. Sugar also noted that the stream setback needs a variance for the building of the driveway and the house. Also, if the homeowner would like to add to the footprint of the house by a deck or other addition, a variance will be required. Chair Lehman read into the record a portion of an email regarding water problems in the neighborhood and asked if a builder would have to ensure that there is no added discharge to the runoff to other properties? Mr. Sugar noted comments from the engineering preliminary report that stated no malicious discharge would be permitted and the overall drainage will be reviewed in the site plan review. The Army Corps of Engineers will also review the discharge. Chair Lehman opened the meeting to public comments. Mr. Christopher John, 96 Manor Drive, spoke of the lot in question and believes that the property will provide a sufficient return without the granting of the requested variances because of the positive ecological impact it has on the neighborhood. The water runoff issues need to be professionally examined. Mr. John is concerned the proposed variances may add to the water problems on his property. Mr. Tony Vacanti, Land Use Council with the firm of Buckingham, Doolittle and Burroughs, representing Mr. Michael and Ms. Cindy House, nearby property owners, distributed information regarding his testimony. Mr. Vacanti noted the Supreme Court decision, Murr vs Wisconsin, speaks to the issue of the requested variances, Mr. Dohner disputed the direct application of Murr vs Wisconsin to this case. Mr. Vacanti’s testimony concerned: the three parcels that should be considered as a whole, the Duncan factors as they relate to the application and the driveway causing damage to the trees on Mr. House’s property. Mr. Vacanti stated that the Board is being asked to circumvent the Land Development Code by granting these variances. Mr. Vacanti also stated that he believed that the relocation of the driveway to another part of the property would remove Mr. and Ms. House’s objection to the variances. After stating that the property was sold to Ms. and Mr. Corpus at an exceptionally low-price, Mr. Vacanti noted that the owner is not entitled to the highest and best price, only a reasonable price. Mr. Vacanti also noted that the Army Corps of Engineers is considering navigable waters, not the Duncan Factors that the BZBA is required to consider. Mr. Michael House, 104 Manor Drive, who owns the adjacent eight acres to the property in question, described his care of the property and stated his main concerns regarding this variance are the destruction of trees to build the driveway and the effects of water, over the long term, on the trees along the driveway along with the flow of water across the property being blocked by the driveway. Mr. Vacanti commented on the Duncan factor regarding substantial justice being done and noted that the Land Development Code, section 1207.03E, states the purpose of a setback is to promote, preserve and enhance the important biological and ecological benefits that a stream corridor provides. Mr. Ken Kuryla, owner of KGK Gardening, stated that the shag bark hickory trees will be damaged by cutting in the driveway and that the driveway will create a dam which will slowly kill trees. Mr. Kuryla also stated that the twelve-inch culvert will not be adequate for the amount of water flow. Mr. Don Toth, 305 Ravenna Street, stated that Mr. House has been a great neighbor who has helped with water drainage problems across his property. Mr. Toth stated that parts of the land in question will have six to twelve inches of standing water and discouraged allowing the driveway in the proposed location. City of Hudson, Ohio Page 3 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final August 16, 2018 Mr. Bob Price, 108 Fox Trace Lane, distributed a letter to the Board members and stated that others have discussed the issues he planned to cover. Mr. Price distributed pictures of flooding on his property and stated that the woods on his property will have standing water for weeks following a substantial rain. Mr. Rob Kagler, 65 Manor Drive, stated his concern regarding the application and requested that the property be viewed as a whole, not just the particular parcel in question. Mr Kagler also questioned if the proposed driveway, sewer line and electric lines will fit on this narrow strip of rolling topography. He also expressed concern about the effect of the water that now sheet drains across the property being restricted by one, twelve-inch culvert, which he believes is insufficient. Mr. Kagler also stated that Hudson has higher wetlands standards than the Federal Government. Ms. Ann Ortega, 255 Ravenna Street, stated that previous owners did not believe the property was buildable. When Ms. Ortega’s home was built she had constant flooding. The city engineering department put in a lift station to alleviate the storm water problem to the house. However, Ms. Ortega's property, following rain will have eight to ten inches of standing water. In rebuttal Ms. and Mr. Corpus stated, they did consider using the existing driveway, however, it is 100 percent through wetlands making it not an option to support a 60,000 pound fire truck. Ms. Corpus also noted that Mr. Stoffer, who developed the site plan, is a professional engineer and is on record, and certifies that a 12-inch culvert is sufficient to drain the property and that both the city engineer and the Army Corps of Engineers will be required to approve the site plan. Ms. Ricker stated that the stream that is not being impacted in any way, is the stream that carries the majority of water. Mr. Vacanti stated that the professional engineer is not here and did not submit anything to show the 12-inch culvert is sufficient. Ms. Jessie Obert, 76 Parmelee Drive, stated she attempted to reach Mr. and Ms. House to negotiate the purchase of the property and that she believes there is value in having a nice home in this location. Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Chair Lehman closed the public comments portion of the meeting. The Board decided to combine the three variance requests into one motion. Mr. Dohner, stated that the proposed variances seem like a practical solution for a way to build on this property. He further noted that other than Mr. Kuryla testifying that trees may be damaged, the Board has not heard anything except speculation and that the purchasers have stated they will put in larger culverts if needed. While he respects the impact to neighbors situation, Mr. Dohner cannot see a practical use of the property without the granting of the variance. Mr. Drew made a motion, seconded by Mr. Wagner, that after reviewing the application, the hearing of evidence under oath, reviewing all documentary submissions of interested parties and by taking into consideration the personal knowledge of the property in question, that the Board of Zoning and Building Appeals deny the variances: The Board finds and concludes: 1. To determine whether or not there can be a beneficial use of the property, the entirety of the property must be considered. This was purchased as one parcel, the fact that there are three separate tax bills does not negate that this is one parcel. Since there is a house on the property and access to the house, there is a beneficial use of the property. City of Hudson, Ohio Page 4 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final August 16, 2018 2. The variances are substantial since they include: a one-hundred percent variance to the fifty-foot setback and a thirty-five percent variance to the stream corridor setback and a one-hundred percent variance to the prohibited activity within the stream corridor setback. 3. To the question of will the essential character of the neighborhood be substantially altered and will adjacent properties suffer a substantial detriment if the variance is granted? Since none of the Board members are engineers and since testimony has been given on both sides of this point, the answer to the question is unknown. However, since the stream that goes across the property is substantial, since it drains the neighborhood, it will cause the essential character of the neighborhood to suffer. 4. To the question of will the the variance adversely affect the delivery of governmental services, (e.g. water, sewer, garbage), because of the drainage problems the answer is yes. 5. The applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the zoning restriction. 6. Can the applicant's predicament feasibly be resolved through some method other than the requested variance? This is not a predicament that the Board needs to resolve. Since the current owner of the property owns all three parcels, has a house on the property and use of the land of the three parcels, it is not the Board's responsibility to resolve any issue the owner has in selling the parcel. 7. The spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would not be observed and substantial justice would not be done by granting the variances because of the effect on the neighbors and that the Board is not taking away from the current owner, since they will still have use of the entire property. The motion failed by the following vote: Aye: 2 - Mr. Drew and Mr. Wagner Nay: 3 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Jahn and Mr. Lehman Mr. Dohner made a motion, seconded by Mr. Jahn, that after reviewing the application, the hearing of evidence under oath, reviewing all documentary submissions of interested parties and by taking into consideration the personal knowledge of the property in question, the Board of Zoning and Building Appeals grants the variances requested with the following condition: 1. As part of any site improvements on the property subject to this variance, the Applicant shall also install sufficient storm water management measures to mitigate any effects on the immediate area’s storm water system that are caused by Applicant’s site improvements and such storm water management measures shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineering Office. The Board finds and concludes: 1. The property in question will not yield a reasonable return and there cannot be a beneficial use of the property without the requested variances because this is a property in a residential neighborhood and cannot be developed as such without the requested variances. 2. The variances are substantial; however, the variances are justified based on both the site conditions City of Hudson, Ohio Page 5 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final August 16, 2018 and the steps the applicant has agreed to take to address any potential impacts on the neighboring area. 3. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered and adjacent properties would not suffer a substantial detriment if the variance is granted because the applicant will be required and has agreed to properly mitigate and drain any water caused by the proposed driveway and house. 4. The variance would not adversely affect the delivery of governmental services, (e.g. water, sewer, garbage). 5. The applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the zoning restriction. 6. The applicant's predicament feasibly cannot be resolved through some method other than the requested variance. The applicant’s proposal creates minimal impact in the wetland adjacent to the property line given the need to provide access to the proposed home. 7. The spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would be observed and substantial justice would be done by granting the variances. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 3 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Jahn and Mr. Lehman Nay: 2 - Mr. Drew and Mr. Wagner B. BZBA 2018-25 A request for a variance of seven hundred fifty (750) feet from the requirement that buildings must be located within one hundred fifty (150) feet of an emergency access road to allow for a pavilion resulting in a distance of nine hundred (900) feet from an emergency access road, pursuant to Section 1207.13(c)(9)(A)(iii) “Street Design Standards - Emergency Access - Fire Protection Requirements” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. The applicant is Ernest D. Roma, Club Manager for Lake Forest Country Club, 100 Lake Forest Drive, Hudson, OH 44236 and the owner is Lake Forest Country Club, 100 Lake Forest Drive, Hudson, OH 44236 for the property at 100 Lake Forest Drive, Hudson, OH 44236 in District 3 [Outer Village Residential Neighborhood]. Attachments: BZBA 2018-25 Staff Report Mr. Sugar introduced this application to build 5,832 square-foot golf cart storage facility. The proposed building will be 900 feet from a suitable emergency access road, however, the Fire Marshal has stated the proposal will reasonably comply with the standard. Mr. Sugar also stated that the design of building was approved by the Architectural and Historic Board of Review. Mr. Ernest Roma, representing Lake Forest County Club, was at the meeting and stated that eight different sites were considered for the building and the proposed site has been determined to be the best for the neighbors and City of Hudson, Ohio Page 6 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final August 16, 2018 the future plans for Lake Forest County Club. The Board discussed the fire department conditions for fire alarms and fire detection and the effects of building an access road that is twelve feet wide and suitable for a 60,000 pound fire truck. Mr. Jahn made a motion, seconded by Mr. Dohner that after reviewing the application, the hearing of evidence under oath, reviewing all documentary submissions of interested parties and by taking into consideration the personal knowledge of the property in question, the Board of Zoning and Building Appeals grant the variance requested with the following conditions: 1. The structure is to be built with two open sides. 2. A fire detection and alarm system is to be installed per Hudson Fire Department Requirements. The Board finds and concludes: 1. The property in question will yield a reasonable return and there can be a beneficial use of the property without the requested variance, however, granting the variance will allow the Country Club to operate more efficiently. 2. The variance is substantial because it far exceeds the one hundred fifty (150) foot requirement. 3. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered and adjacent properties would not suffer a substantial detriment if the variance is granted because the location of the building will be out of public view and will be located far enough from the main building to not impact the functions of the Country Club. 4. The variance would not adversely affect the delivery of governmental services, (e.g. water, sewer, garbage). 5. The applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the zoning restriction. 6. The applicant's predicament feasibly cannot be resolved through some method other than the requested variance. 7. The spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would be observed and substantial justice would be done by granting the variance because the proposal will provide an important need to the applicant. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Drew, Mr. Jahn, Mr. Lehman and Mr. Wagner VII. Other Business Mr. Vazzana updated the Board regarding the appeal of the 102 Aurora Street decision. VIII. Adjournment Mr. Drew made a motion to adjourn, Mr. Jahn seconded the motion. Mr. Lehman adjourned the meeting at 10:33 p.m. City of Hudson, Ohio Page 7 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final August 16, 2018 ________________________________ David W. Lehman, Chair ________________________________ John M. Dohner, Vice Chair ________________________________ Joe Campbell, Executive Assistant Upon approval by the Board of Zoning & Building Appeals, this official written summary of the meeting minutes shall become a permanent record, and the official minutes shall also consist of a permanent audio and video recording, excluding executive sessions, in accordance with Codified Ordinances, Section 252.04, Minutes of Architectural and Historic Board of Review, Board of Zoning and Building Appeals, and Planning Commission. * * * City of Hudson, Ohio Page 8