Board of Zoning & Building Appeals

City of Hudson, Ohio Meeting Minutes - Final Board of Zoning & Building Appeals John Dohner, Chair Kerri Keller, Vice Chair Lydia Bronstein Robert Kahrl Louis Wagner Greg Hannan, Community Development Director Amanda Davey, Associate Planner Thursday, November 17, 2022 7:30 PM Town Hall 27 East Main Street I. Call to Order Chairman Dohner 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: 7 - Ms. Bronstein, Ms. Bronstein, Mr. Dohner, Mr. Dohner, Ms. Keller, Mr. Wagner and Mr. Kahrl III. Identification, by Chairman, of staff in attendance. Chair Dohner introduced Mr. Greg Hannan, Director of Development, and Mr. Marshall Pitchford, City Solicitor. IV. Swearing in of Staff and Audience Addressing the Board. Mr. Dohner swore-in staff and all the persons wishing to speak under oath. V. Approval of Minutes BZBA Minutes of Previous Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting: October 20, 10-20-2022 2022. Attachments: 10-20-2022 Meeting Minutes - DRAFT A motion was made by Ms. Bronstein, seconded by Ms. Keller, that the October 20, 2022, Minutes be approved as submitted. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 - Ms. Bronstein, Mr. Dohner, Ms. Keller, Mr. Wagner and Mr. Kahrl VI. Public Hearings - New Business City of Hudson, Ohio Page 1 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final November 17, 2022 BZBA 2022-1059 The subject of this hearing is for two (2) variance requests to allow construction of an addition to the rear of the home and an addition to the front of the home. The variances are: 1. A variance request of seventeen (17) feet from the required fifty (50) foot rear yard principal structure setback, resulting in a thirty-three (33) foot rear yard setback pursuant to section 1205.06(d)(5)(E)(1), “Property Development/Design Standards - Setbacks” to permit a rear yard addition and; 2. A variance request of fifteen (15) feet from the required fifty (50) foot front yard setback, resulting in a thirty-five (35) foot front yard setback pursuant to section 1205.06(d)(5)(C)(1), “Property Development/Design Standards - Setbacks” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code to permit a front yard addition to the home. The applicant is Rebecca Pantuso - Pantuso Architecture, 30 South Franklin Street, Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44022. The property owners are, Christopher and Lauren MacLaren, 70 York Drive, Hudson, Ohio 44236 for the property at 70 York Drive in District 3 [Outer Village Residential Neighborhood]. Attachments: BZBA Staff Report - 70 York Mr. Hannan displayed and described the variances regarding setbacks, reviewed the staff comments, noted the existing garage violates the rear setback requirement and the proposed front variance will not extend further into the setback than the main mass of the house already does . Ms. Rebecca Pantuso, Pantuso Architecture, described the house on the curve of a cul-de-sac and explained how the cul-de-sac is causing the need for the variances . The Board, staff and the applicant discussed: How attached verses detached structures are subject to setback requirements, the definition of detached for this application, renderings of the proposed front addition, that footers will be installed under the fireplace but not the rest of the structure, that the lack of infrastructure will preclude the rear addition from becoming an enclosed room, the size of the additions, the size of the existing garage, various design alternatives which would minimize the intrusion into the setbacks, the homeowners strong desire for the front addition and what may be built if no further intrusion into the setback is granted. The Board spoke to the need for these additions opposed to this being a desire of the homeowners. Ms. Pantuso stated that that the existing mudroom is too small for the number of children who use it on a daily basis and to place the mudroom in the rear of the house will incur greater expense, not be as functional and may hurt the value of the property. Ms. Pantuso stated she has authority to speak for and accept conditions on behalf of the homeowners City of Hudson, Ohio Page 2 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final November 17, 2022 The Board discussed: The addition not encroaching further into the front yard than exists now, the difficult shape of the lot, the rear addition adding to an existing non-conforming use, that other alternatives exist for the rear yard addition which will not require a variance, that the house was built prior to setbacks being established, that any placement of an addition for a mudroom will require a variance and these variances will result in too much building for this lot. The Board noted their evaluation is based on this being an insubstantial variance . Ms. Keller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Wagner, based on the evidence presented to the Board of Zoning and Building Appeals to deny the following: A variance request of seventeen (17) feet from the required fifty (50) foot rear yard principal structure setback, resulting in a thirty-three (33) foot rear yard setback pursuant to section 1205.06(d)(5)(E)(1), “Property Development/Design Standards – Setbacks” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code to permit a rear yard addition to the home. 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 denies the variance as requested. The Board finds and concludes; 1. The property in question will yield a reasonable return and there could be a beneficial use of the property without the variance. 2. The requested variance represents a 34% deviation from the Land Development Code. 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 the property has an existing detached garage that does not meet the rear or side yard setbacks. Granting the variance would cause more non-conformance on the property. 4. The variances would not adversely affect the delivery of governmental services . 5. The existing regulations were in affect when the applicant purchased the property in 2016. 6. The applicant's predicament can be resolved through some other method other than granting the variance. The applicant could do a detached roofed pergola structure that would be considered an accessory structure and would not require a variance . 7. The spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would not be observed and substantial justice would not be done by granting the variance. Granting the variance would allow for multiple non-conforming uses on the property. Aye: 5 - Ms. Bronstein, Mr. Dohner, Ms. Keller, Mr. Wagner and Mr. Kahrl City of Hudson, Ohio Page 3 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final November 17, 2022 Ms. Keller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Wagner, based on the evidence presented to the Board of Zoning and Building Appeals to grant the following: A variance request of fifteen (15) feet from the required fifty (50) foot front yard setback, resulting in a thirty-five (35) foot front yard setback pursuant to section 1205.06(d)(5)(C)(1), “Property Development/Design Standards – Setbacks” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code to permit a front yard addition to the home . 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 variance as requested. The Board finds and concludes; 1. The property in question will yield a reasonable return and there could be a beneficial use of the property without the variance. 2. The requested variance is relatively substantial; however, the proposed addition would not extend further than the existing main mass of the house. 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 the proposed addition will not extend further than the main mass of the existing house. 4. The variances would not adversely affect the delivery of governmental services . 5. The existing regulations were in affect when the applicant purchased the property in 2016. 6. The applicant's predicament cannot be resolved through some other method other than granting the variance. Any addition on the front of the house would likely require a variance. The proposed location is the most practical given the property circumstances. 7. The spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would be observed and substantial justice would be done by granting the variance. The lot shape with the location of the cul-de-sac does justify the need for the variance. Aye: 4 - Ms. Bronstein, Ms. Keller, Mr. Wagner and Mr. Kahrl Nay: 1 - Mr. Dohner City of Hudson, Ohio Page 4 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final November 17, 2022 BZBA 2022-1060 The subject of this hearing is a variance request of five (5) feet from the required twenty-five (25) foot side yard setback for an attached side facing garage in District 3, resulting in a side yard setback of twenty (20) feet pursuant to section 1205.06(d)(5)(D)(3)- “Property Development/Design Standards - Setbacks” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. The applicant is Timothy Conti, 36 Pinewood Lane, Hudson, Ohio 44236. The property owners are, Timothy and Amy Conti, 36 Pinewood Lane, Hudson, Ohio 44236 for the property at 36 Pinewood Lane in District 3 [Outer Village Residential Neighborhood]. Attachments: BZBA Staff Report - 36 Pinewood Lane Mr. Hannan introduced the application by displaying and describing the variance request and reviewing the staff comments. Mr. Jim Repas, stated he has authority from Mr. and Ms. Conti to speak on their behalf and agree to conditions. Mr. Repas noted three car garages are common on this street, detailed the difficulties of building a detached garage on this property, the sloping nature of the rear yard, the difficulty presented by the ninety-degree turn into a single car garage, alternatives that were considered before bringing the request to the Board and that the house currently does not meet setback requirements . The Board, staff and applicant discussed: The slope in the rear of the yard, that the existing garage is in violation of the setback requirements, that the net effect of this variance request is approximately two and one half feet over the existing situation and the concrete steps inside the garage, The Board discussed: Alternatives to the proposed plan with the garage steps in a different location, that in past cases for houses in this neighborhood, the Board has suggested adding to an existing garage instead of building a new detached garage, that the larger door is the owner’s desire and that the variance is only five-feet and only two and one half feet more than today’s intrusion into the setback . Ms. Bronstein made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keller, based on the evidence presented to the Board of Zoning and Building Appeals to grant the following: A variance request of five (5) feet from the required twenty-five (25) foot side yard setback for an attached side facing garage in District 3, resulting in a side yard setback of twenty (20) feet pursuant to section 1205.06(d)(5)(D)(3)- “Property Development/Design Standards – Setbacks” of the City of Hudson Land Development Code. 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 variance as requested. The Board finds and concludes; 1. The property in question will yield a reasonable return and there could be a beneficial use of the property without the variance; however, granting the variance will allow the homeowners to access their garage and better use the space . City of Hudson, Ohio Page 5 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final November 17, 2022 2. The variance represents a 20% deviation from the LDC, therefore it is insubstantial. 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 . The variance is towards the back of the house and will not impact neighboring properties. 4. The variances would not adversely affect the delivery of governmental services . 5. The existing regulations were in affect when the applicant purchased the property in 2020. 6. The applicant's predicament cannot be resolved through some other method other than granting the variance. The solution that was presented to the board is the most reasonable solution for the given circumstance. 7. The spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would be observed and substantial justice would be done by granting the variance. This is an insubstantial variance and would improve the use and function of the garage . Aye: 5 - Ms. Bronstein, Mr. Dohner, Ms. Keller, Mr. Wagner and Mr. Kahrl VII. Other Business BZBA - AdminAmendments to the Board of Zoning and Building Appeals Administrative 2022 Rules. Attachments: Memo to BZBA - Administrative Rules 2022 - Revised BZBA Administrative Rules 2022 DRAFT - Revised The Board discussed whether written consent is given when someone is speaking on behalf of the property owner and/or applicant. Mr. Pitchford and Mr. Hannan led a discussion on amendments to the BZBA administrative rules . BZBA 2023 2023 Board of Zoning and Building Appeals Meeting Schedule Attachments: BZBA 2023 Meeting Calendar No vote was taken on the meeting schedule. VIII. Adjournment A motion was made by Ms. Bronstein, seconded by Ms. Keller, that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried by an unanimous vote. City of Hudson, Ohio Page 6 Board of Zoning & Building Appeals Meeting Minutes - Final November 17, 2022 ________________________________ John M. Dohner, Chair ________________________________ Kerri Keller, 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 7