Board of Zoning & Building Appeals

City of Hudson, Ohio Meeting Minutes - Final Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Robert Drew, Chair John Dohner, Vice Chair Frederick Jahn Jeffrey Minar Louis Wagner Greg Hannan, Community Development Director Amanda Davey, Associate Planner Thursday, December 17, 2020 7:30 PM Via Video-Conference & Live-Stream I. Call to Order Chairman Drew 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. Present: 5 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Drew, Mr. Jahn, Mr. Minar and Mr. Wagner II. Roll Call III. Identification, by Chairman, of Amanda Davey, Associate Planner and Nick Sugar, City Planner IV. Swearing in of Staff and Audience Addressing the Board. Mr. Sugar and Ms. Davey were placed under oath by Chair Drew. V. Approval of Minutes A. BZBA Minutes of Previous Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting: 11-19-2020 November 19, 2020. Attachments: 11-19-2020 Meeting Minutes A motion was made by Mr. Dohner, seconded by Mr. Wagner, that the November 19, 2020 Minutes be approved as submitted. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Drew, Mr. Jahn, Mr. Minar and Mr. Wagner VI. Public Hearings - New Business Chair Drew announced this meeting was available via-public live stream A. BZBA 2020-1017Variance requests in order to allow a lot consolidation. The variances are 1] a variance of fifteen (15) feet from the required City of Hudson, Ohio Page 1 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final December 17, 2020 minimum lot width of two hundred (200) feet resulting in a one hundred and eighty-five (185) foot lot to the north and 2] a variance of fourteen (14) feet from the required minimum lot width of two hundred (200) feet resulting in a one hundred and eighty-six (186) foot lot to the south pursuant to Section 1205.12(d)(4), “Property Development/Design Standards - Minimum Lot Width” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. The applicant is Bradford Nelson, 67 South Hayden Parkway, Hudson, OH 44236. The property owner is Coer Properties, P.O Box 1333, Stow, Ohio 44224 for the properties at 5108 and 5122 Darrow Road District 9 [Darrowville Commercial Corridor]. Attachments: 20-1017 BZBA Packet Chair Drew placed the applicant, Mr. Brad Nelson under oath. Ms. Davey reviewed the staff report for the three parcels on 1.6 acres with two existing buildings. Ms. Davey also reviewed the staff comments noting the proposal will limit the existing non-conforming issues and the Darrowville buildings are mentioned in the code which allows for untypical setbacks. Mr. Nelson explained that inquiries regarding purchasing the properties have been hindered by having two buildings on one parcel. The requested variance to allow a lot consolidation will divide the parcels with one building on each property, allowing for greater salability. The Board questioned the entrances and exits of properties. Staff and Mr. Nelson explained both properties will have driveways to Route 91. Mr. Nelson also explained that both buildings are occupied, that the granting of the variance should have no impact on the tenants and the heritage of the existing buildings. The Board and Staff also discussed a lot consolidation like this which took place in the same area a number of years ago. Mr. Jahn made a motion, seconded by Mr. Minar, 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 to allow a lot consolidation. The variances are 1] a variance of fifteen (15) feet from the required minimum lot width of two hundred (200) feet resulting in a one hundred and eighty-five (185) foot lot to the north and 2] a variance of fourteen (14) feet from the required minimum lot width of two hundred (200) feet resulting in a one hundred and eighty-six (186) foot lot to the south pursuant to Section 1205.12(d)(4), “Property Development/Design Standards - Minimum Lot Width” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. The Board finds and concludes: 1. The property in question will yield a reasonable return and can be beneficial without the variances. However, the variances are to consolidate three lots into two lots and would separate these buildings and allow for separate ownership. 2. The variances are insubstantial as from a percentage standpoint the variances are small in relation to the requirement. 3. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered, and adjoining properties would not City of Hudson, Ohio Page 2 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final December 17, 2020 suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variances because the board has approved similar variances on the same side of Darrow Road in the past. 4. The variances 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 other method. 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: 5 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Drew, Mr. Jahn, Mr. Minar and Mr. Wagner B. BZBA 2020-1051Variance requests in order to allow construction of a self-storage building. The variances are 1] a variance from the requirement to provide sidewalks for new development pursuant to Section 1205.11(e)(9)(B)(1), “Property Development/Design Standards - Pedestrian Amenities/Linkages - Sidewalks”, 2] A variance from the requirement that the use or building housing such use shall be located a minimum of five hundred (500) feet away from the lot line of any residential use in pursuant to Section 1206.02(c)(16), “Conditional Uses: Special Conditions and Standards - Special Conditions Addressing Compatibility.” And 3] A variance of eight (8) feet from the required fifty (50) foot front yard setback resulting in a forty-two (42) foot front yard setback in pursuant to Section 1205.11(e)(3)(A), “Property Development/Design Standards - Setbacks” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. The applicant is Joe Salemi, 10121 Northfield Road, Northfield, Ohio 44067. The property owner is Salemi/Redi Wash Family Limited partnership, 10121 Northfield Road, Northfield, Ohio 44067 for the properties at 5698 Hudson Drive District 8 [Industrial/Business Park]. Attachments: 2020-1051 BZBA Packet Ms. Davey reviewed the staff report for a variance request in District 8 on 2.65 acres noting the applicant proposes a 28,270 square foot self-storage building requiring three variances which Ms. Davey reviewed. Ms. Davey noted that conditional approval has been given by Planning Commission and reviewed the staff considerations regarding the variances. Mr. Joe Salemi was sworn in by Chair Drew. Mr. Salemi explained that he currently owns six, self-storage facilities and has designed the proposed buildings to fit on the property in the best way possible. He also stated on average less than ten cars per day will visit this type of facility . Mr. Salemi reviewed the reasons for requesting the variances including: 1) The lack of need and high cost of the sidewalks in comparison to the proposed business type. 2) His lack of understanding for the requirement of a commercial facility City of Hudson, Ohio Page 3 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final December 17, 2020 being 500-feet from a residence and noting he has many similar facilities located in neighborhoods. 3) Regarding the 50-foot setback, Mr. Salemi noted he has downsized the building size to the minimum. Mr. Salemi noted this type of facility is needed and in demand by Hudson residences, the high quality of his other facilities and his belief that this will be an improvement for the property in question. The Board and Mr. Salemi discussed: 1) The use of the property since the purchase in 2000. 2) Gate controls and maximum height fencing are at all Mr. Salemi’s facilities. 3) The size of the individual storage rooms. 4) The cost of the sidewalk was determined by a professional engineer and approved by Hudson Engineering and is being built as determined by the LDC at a cost greater than the value of the property. 5) The building will have interior roll up doors. Staff noted there are no sidewalks on Terex Road and it is unknown why the LDC requires a 500-foot separation between this type of commercial and residential properties. Mr. Sugar also discussed the District 8 standards as they apply to residentially zoned properties. The storage use of concern in the LDC is likely outdoor storage, as compared to this indoor storage. Staff noted no residence may be built on this property because of zoning. The Board discussed the decision by the City of Hudson to have more sidewalks in Hudson, sometimes at the cost of economic development. Mr. Sugar discussed the sidewalk fund as an alternative to building at the property site. The Board and Mr. Salemi discussed alternative funding of sidewalks in Hudson. Mr. Salemi commented on the 500-foot setback and decisions by the courts overruling this ordinance. The Board discussed the possibility of the applicant funding an alternative sidewalk and then, at a later date, the City billing the applicant for the cost of the sidewalk in front of the property. The date and details of Mr. Salemi’s purchase of the property and various transfers of the property within his family was discussed. The Board discussed the unknown cost of building the sidewalk and any alternatives to building the sidewalk. Mr. Salemi stated he does not know what a ‘fair’ amount of money to the alternative sidewalk fund would be. Mr. Salemi requested the application be tabled until more information is gathered. Mr. Sugar stated that the City Solicitor recommended tying the sidewalk installation requirement to the property, not placing the money in the alternative sidewalk fund. The Board and staff discussed if the new salt dome and bus garage were impacted by the 500-foot requirement. Mr. & Mrs. Dravis, 5682 Hudson Drive, were placed under oath by Chair Drew and commented that Mr. Nathan Monroe, City of Hudson employee, discussed Mr. Dravis’ property in relation to the 200-foot tank battery setback. The Board discussed voting on three separate variances as opposed to the application as a whole. Mr. Salemi requested the application be continued until a later meeting. Mr. Drew requested more information for the next meeting including: 1) The Georgetown Road sidewalk. 2) The Salt Dome and Bus Garage setback requirements. 3) Staff verify that Mr. Salemi’s other facilities have not received complaints from their neighborhood. 4) Verify the cost of the required sidewalk and discuss ‘fair’ amounts of money to contribute to the alternative sidewalk fund. 5) The cost of a partial sidewalk. 6) The city propose the amount of partial sidewalk. 7) The City owned frontage on Terex Road up to the City driveway. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Drew, Mr. Jahn, Mr. Minar and Mr. Wagner City of Hudson, Ohio Page 4 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final December 17, 2020 C. BZBA 2020-961 A request for variances in order to permit construction of an addition to an attached garage. The requests are 1] a variance of two (2) feet from the required fifty (50) foot setback resulting in a forty-eight (48) foot setback pursuant to Section 1205.04(d)(5)(C) (5), “Property Development/Design Standards - Setbacks”; and 2] a variance from the requirement that doors of attached garages shall not face the street pursuant to Section 1205.04(d)(7)(C)(1), “Building Siting and Orientation - Private Garages” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. The applicant is Michael Cantrell with New Creation Builders, 818 E. 73 Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44103. The property owners are Matthew & Jennifer Dunn, 1904 Weymouth Drive, Hudson, OH, 44236 for the property at 1904 Weymouth Drive in District 1 [Suburban Residential Neighborhood]. Attachments: 20-961 BZBA Packet Mr. Matthew Dunn, homeowner, was sworn in by Mr. Drew. Ms. Davey introduced the application by displaying photos of the property and describing the garage addition, variance requests and reviewing the staff comments. Mr. Dunn stated a rear yard garage was considered; however, it would also require a variance. The reason for building the addition is more space is needed, the garage as is, is too small for the Dunn’s vehicles. The Board and Mr. Dunn discussed: 1) The size of the addition and detached alternatives which would require additional driveway. 2) The purpose of the diagonal driveway. 3) The owners desire for a larger garage for additional storage. 4) If all variances are granted each of the four-bays may be used for parking. Mr. Jahn made a motion, seconded by Mr. Minar, 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: A request for variances in order to permit construction of an addition to an attached garage. The requests are 1] a variance of two (2) feet from the required fifty (50) foot setback resulting in a forty-eight (48) foot setback pursuant to Section 1205.04(d)(5)(C)(5), “Property Development/Design Standards - Setbacks”; and 2] a variance from the requirement that doors of attached garages shall not face the street pursuant to Section 1205.04(d)(7)(C)(1), “Building Siting and Orientation - Private Garages” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. The Board finds and concludes: 1. The property in question will yield a reasonable return and can be beneficial without the variances. However, due circumstances of this property and previous renovations to the garage the variances will permit the homeowner to have facilities that will enhance the functionality of the house. 2. The setback variance is insubstantial as it represents a four (4) percent variance. And the garage door orientation variance is insubstantial because surrounding properties also have front facing garage doors. City of Hudson, Ohio Page 5 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final December 17, 2020 3. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered, and adjoining properties would not suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variances because there are other properties in the area with front facing garages. 4. The variances 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 other method. 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: 5 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Drew, Mr. Jahn, Mr. Minar and Mr. Wagner D. BZBA 2020-1033A request for variances in order to permit construction of a detached garage. The requests are 1] a variance of ten (10) feet from the required fifteen (15) foot rear yard setback resulting in a five (5) foot rear yard setback pursuant to Section 1205.06(d)(5)(E)(3), “Property Development/Design Standards - Setbacks” ; 2] a variance of eight (8) feet from the required fifteen (15) foot side yard setback resulting in a seven (7) foot side yard setback pursuant to Section 1205.06(d)(5)(D)(4), “Property Development/Design Standards - Setbacks”; and 3] a variance of one hundred and thirty-four (134) square feet from the maximum building size of one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet resulting in a one thousand three hundred and thirty-four (1,334) square foot detached garage pursuant to Section 1206.03(d)(5), “Accessory Use Development and Operational Standards - Maximum building or structure size” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. The applicant is Rick Hawksley, 160 North Chestnut Street, Ravenna, OH 44240. The property owners are Matthew & Jennifer Mitchell, 167 Hudson Street, Hudson, OH, 44236 for the property at 167 Hudson Street in District 3 [Outer Village Residential]. Attachments: 20-1033 BZBA Packet Mr. Rick Hawksley, architect. and Mr. Matthew Mitchell, homeowner, were sworn in by Chair Drew. Ms. Davey introduced the application by displaying photos of the site, the site plan, describing the project, reasons for the project, variances and staff comments. Ms. Davey also noted this application was before AHBR on December 16, 2020. The Board and staff verified the addition does not contain a kitchen or bedrooms and is not intended to be a living facility. Mr. Hawksley noted AHBR requested the height of the building be reduced to be not higher than the house and to replicate the dormers on the house, AHBR did not discuss the footprint of the addition. Mr. Hawksley also noted the City of Hudson, Ohio Page 6 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final December 17, 2020 purpose of the addition, why the variances are being requested as well as other changes to structures on the property . Mr. Mitchell described the rear of the property as very wet and owned by Western Reserve Academy. The Board and applicants discussed the height of the addition, the permissible limits and the interior height of the dormer areas. Mr. Hawksley stated a bathroom is desired, however if a condition is placed on the project, he would agree to it. The Board and applicant also discussed staff comment number six, regarding moving the addition to the rear of the house which the applicant described as possible but not optimal. The Board discussed the drainage ditch easement which staff noted has no setback. Mr. Mitchell stated he believes that the structure, from the street, will be hidden. The Board discussed the need for setback variances and the WRA greenspace behind the property. The Board also discussed not allowing sewer service to the structure. Mr. Jahn made a motion, seconded by Mr. Dohner, 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 approve: A variance of one hundred and thirty-four (134) square feet from the maximum building size of one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet resulting in a one thousand three hundred and thirty-four (1,334) square foot detached garage pursuant to Section 1206.03(d)(5), “Accessory Use Development and Operational Standards - Maximum building or structure size” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. With two conditions: 1. The accessory structure will not obtain any kitchen or bathroom facilities of any kind. 2. The accessory structure will not have any habitable living space. The Board finds and concludes: 1. The property in question will yield a reasonable return and can be beneficial without the variance, however; the variance would allow for usable garage and storage space and would enhance the property. 2. The variance is insubstantial from a percentage standpoint as it represents eleven (11) percent of the requirement. 3. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered, and adjoining properties would not suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance because there are other accessory structures of similar size within the area. 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 other method. 7. The spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would be observed and substantial justice would be done by granting the variance. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Drew, Mr. Jahn, Mr. Minar and Mr. Wagner The Board requested the applicant speak to the issue of relocating the addition to the rear of the home so that variances will not be required. Mr. Mitchel requested the Board visit his home to see the reason for the variances. The Board and applicants discussed the effects of denying the variances and the lack of a strong reason for granting this variance. Mr. Jeremy Paul, Western Reserve Academy was sworn in by Chair Drew. Mr. Paul stated about 30-feet of the rear of the property is a drainage ditch. WRA does not object to the rear yard setback being violated. City of Hudson, Ohio Page 7 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final December 17, 2020 Mr. Hawksley noted the garage to be demolished is already in the side yard setback. Mr. Minar made a motion, seconded by Mr. Dohner, 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 deny: Variances in order to permit construction of a detached garage. The requests are 1] a variance of ten (10) feet from the required fifteen (15) foot rear yard setback resulting in a five (5) foot rear yard setback pursuant to Section 1205.06(d)(5)(E)(3), “Property Development/Design Standards - Setbacks”; 2] a variance of eight (8) feet from the required fifteen (15) foot side yard setback resulting in a seven (7) foot side yard setback pursuant to Section 1205.06(d)(5)(D)(4), “Property Development/Design Standards - Setbacks” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. 1. The property in question will yield a reasonable return and can be beneficial without the variances. 2. The setback variance is substantial as the side yard variance represents fifty-three (53) percent of the requirement and the rear yard variance represents sixty-six (66) percent of the requirement. 3. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered, and adjoining properties would not suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variances. 4. The variances 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 restrictions. 6. The applicant's predicament can be feasibly obviated by moving the structure outside of the setbacks. 7. The spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would not be observed and substantial justice would not be done by granting the variances as all construction shall obey the setbacks unless there is a compelling reason why it cannot. Through the Board’s discussion and review of this case, no such reason has been found. The motion to deny the variances was approved by the following vote: Aye: 3 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Jahn and Mr. Minar Nay: 2 - Mr. Drew and Mr. Wagner E. BZBA 2020-1019A variance request to allow an accessory structure shed to be located in the side yard when regulations require accessory structures to be located in the rear yard pursuant to Section 1206.03(d)(3), “Accessory Uses/Structures - Accessory Use Development and Operation Standards” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. The applicant is Jeremy Paul with Western Reserve Academy, 115 College Street, Hudson, OH, 44236. The property owners are Western Reserve Academy, 197 Hudson Street, Hudson, OH, 44236 for the property at 73 Hudson Street in District 4 [Historic Residential Neighborhood]. City of Hudson, Ohio Page 8 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final December 17, 2020 Attachments: 20-1019 BZBA Packet Ms. Davey introduced the application by displaying photos of the placement and site plan of the requested shed in the side yard of the property. Ms. Davey noted the accessory structure is already built and reviewed the staff comments. Mr. Jeremy Paul, applicant, stated the requested position will keep the shed out of the greenspace to the north, away from a high traffic student walkway and he believes is better aesthetically. Mr. Paul stated the shed is easily moved with an excavator and is built on treated 6 x 6 wood. Chair Drew stated he observed the shed as placed seems to fit in well with the house. Mr. Jahn made a motion, seconded by Mr. Minar, 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 deny: A variance request to allow an accessory structure shed to be located in the side yard when regulations require accessory structures to be located in the rear yard pursuant to Section 1206.03(d)(3), “Accessory Uses/Structures - Accessory Use Development and Operation Standards” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. The Board finds and concludes; 1. The property in question will yield a reasonable return and can be beneficial without the variance. 2. The variance is substantial because it is in the side yard when the code requires it be in the rear yard. 3. The essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered, and adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance because it does violate the requirement that accessary structures be in the year yard. 4. The variance would not adversely affect the delivery of governmental services, (e.g. water, sewer, garbage). 5. The applicant purchased the property without knowledge of the zoning restriction. 6. The applicant's predicament feasibly can easily be resolved through some other method, as the applicant stated, he is able to drag the structure to the back. 7. The spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would not be observed and substantial justice would not be done by granting the variance. The motion failed by the following vote: Aye: 2 - Mr. Jahn and Mr. Minar Nay: 3 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Drew and Mr. Wagner Mr. Dohner made a motion, seconded by Mr. Wagner, 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 grant: A variance request to allow an accessory structure shed to be located in the side yard when regulations require accessory structures to be located in the rear yard pursuant to Section 1206.03(d)(3), “Accessory Uses/Structures - Accessory Use Development and Operation Standards” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. City of Hudson, Ohio Page 9 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final December 17, 2020 The Board finds and concludes; 1. The property in question will yield a reasonable return and can be beneficial without the variance. However, due to the nature of the property and the surrounding properties it makes more sense for the structure to be located in the side yard. 2. The variance is insubstantial due to the size of the structure and the property being in the middle of a campus. 3. The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered, and adjoining properties would not suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance. 4. The variance would not adversely affect the delivery of governmental services, (e.g. water, sewer, garbage). 5. The applicant purchased the property without knowledge of the zoning restriction. 6. The applicant's predicament feasibly can be resolved through some other method. The lot being in a campus setting it would make more sense to grant the variance. 7. The spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would be observed and substantial justice would be done by granting the variance. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 3 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Drew and Mr. Wagner Nay: 2 - Mr. Jahn and Mr. Minar VII. Other Business Chair Drew thanked Mr. Jahn for his service to the Hudson Community by serving on the BZBA and noted he has termed out making him ineligible for immediately being reappointed. Mr. Sugar stated he believes there will be two applications for the January meeting. BZBA 2021 2021 Board of Zoning and Building Appeals Meeting Schedule Attachments: BZBA 2021 Meeting Calendar A motion was made by Mr. Dohner, seconded by Mr. Minar, that the proposed 2021 schedule be approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 - Mr. Dohner, Mr. Drew, Mr. Jahn, Mr. Minar and Mr. Wagner VIII. Adjournment A motion was made by Mr. Jahn, seconded by Mr. Dohner, that this be adjourned. The motion carried by an unanimous vote. City of Hudson, Ohio Page 10 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final December 17, 2020 ________________________________ Robert P. Drew, 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 11