Board of Zoning Appeals

TOWN OF SUMMERVILLE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AGENDA January 12, 2021 5:00 PM Town Hall (annex) – Council Chambers or Zoom Virtual Meeting 200 S. Main Street I. Approval of minutes from November 12, 2019 (For below item, signs posted on property December 23, 2020 and ad on December 27, 2020 in Post & Courier) II. OLD BUSINESS: 1. No Old Business III. NEW BUSINESS: 1. TMS # 129-13-12-009, 112 Riviera Drive, zoned PUD – Planned Development District, owned by John and Linda Lienau – variance request to reduce the required rear setback for an accessory structure from 10 feet to 5 feet. Ordinance Section 2.10. IV. MISCELLANEOUS: 1. Election of Officers V. ADJOURN Posted January 7, 2020  Board of Zoning Appeals Tuesday, December 8, 2020 Zoom Virtual Meeting App Members Present: Staff Present: Denis Tsukalas, Chairman Tim Macholl, Zoning Administrator Elise Richardson, Vice Chairman Don Nye Lionel Lawson Items on the agenda: OLD BUSINESS: 1. None NEW BUSINESS: 1. TMS # 137-09-02-103, 106 Classic Street zoned GR-5 – General Residential, owned by Jacquelynn Mariest – Special Exception request to operate a Short Term Rental, Ordinance Section 3.3. 2. TMS # 153-08-07-001, 103 Heritage Lake Drive, zoned PUD Planned Development District, owned by Charles and Tina Kimmel – Variance to reduce the required rear yard setback from 20 feet to 9’-4” for the construction of an in ground pool. Ordinance Section 2.10. MISCELLANEOUS: 1. None The meeting was called to order at 5:05 PM by the Chairman. Mr. Tsukalas asked for any comments or edits for the minutes from the November 10, 2020 meeting minutes. A motion was made by Mr. Nye to approve the minutes as presented. The motion was seconded by Ms. Richardson. The motion passed 4-0. OLD BUSINESS 1. None NEW BUSINESS 1. 106 Classic Street – The first item under New Business TMS # 137-09-02-103, 106 Classic Street zoned GR-5 – General Residential, owned by Jacquelynn Mariest – Special Exception request to operate a Short Term Rental, Ordinance Section 3.3. Mr. Macholl explained the request from the applicant and highlighted that the situation requires a Special Exception to allow the applicant to be able to operate at this location. He pointed out that the Short Term Rental had been operating at this location and the Town had not received any complaints. There were no additional questions from the Board, and the applicant had nothing to add to Mr. Macholl’s explanation. Mr. Nye made a motion to approve the request. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lawson. The Chairman asked for the vote. The motion passed unanimously 3-0. 2. 103 Heritage Lake Drive – The second item under new business TMS # 153-08-07-001, 103 Heritage Lake Drive, zoned PUD Planned Development District, owned by Charles and Tina Kimmel – Variance to reduce the required rear yard setback from 20 feet to 9’-4” for the construction of an in ground pool. Ordinance Section 2.10. Mr. Macholl explained that the variance was identified at the time of permit. The variance is required for the actual pool structure, not the pool deck. The applicant had no additional comment to add to the description. There were no additional questions from the Board concerning the application. The Chairman asked for a motion. Mr. Tsukalas made a motion to approve the request. The motion was seconded by Mr. Nye. The Chairman asked for the vote. The motion passed unanimously 3-0. MISCELLANEOUS: 1. None ADJOURN: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:27 PM on a motion by Mr. Nye and a second by Mr. Lawson. The motion passed unanimously 3-0 Respectfully Submitted, Date: ________________ Tim Macholl Zoning Administrator Approved: Denis Tsukalas, Chairman _____________________________________; or, Elise Richardson, Vice Chairman ______________________________________ 2  VARIANCE REQUEST TMS #129-13-12-009 112 Riviera Drive, Summerville, SC STAFF REPORT BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS January 12, 2021 Request: Variance request to reduce the required rear yard setback from 10 feet to five (5) feet for an accessory structure Property Zoning: PUD Planned Development District Surrounding Zoning: North: PUD Planned Development District South: PUD Planned Development District East: PUD Planned Development District West: PUD Planned Development District Ordinance requires: Ordinance Section 2.10 Planned Development District Response: In order for a variance to be issued by the Board of Zoning Appeals, an applicant is required to show that all four of the conditions listed below have been met and an unnecessary hardship must be shown. (b) Variances. The board has the power to hear and decide requests for variances when strict application of this chapter's provisions would cause an unnecessary hardship. (1) The following standards must apply for finding an unnecessary hardship: a. Extraordinary conditions. There are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property, which could exist due to topography, street widening or other conditions which make it difficult or impossible to make an economically feasible use of the property. b. Other property. Extraordinary conditions generally do not apply to other property in the vicinity. c. Utilization. Because of these extraordinary conditions, the application of this chapter's provisions to a particular piece of property would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property. d. Detriment. The authorization of a variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property or the public good, and the character of the district will not be harmed by granting of the variance. Background: The need for a setback variance was determined during application for building permit a. Extraordinary conditions do exist based upon the size of the property and relative size of the house on the property. Being a PUD the lot coverage is already well above the typical and does not require a variance, but the location of the shed is pushed into the setback. b. Other property in the area do have similar shapes with very shallow rear yards. c. Utilization of the property is reduced but not eliminated due the existing setbacks and easements. The engineering department has approved the shed location within the easement. d. Detriment will not be caused to other properties by the issuance of this variance on this property. 9"452#5 Existing Shed Location 012345689 9  225434432546 22289 9 ! 11/10/20 The 10’ drainage easement in the rear of the property limits the use of the property for the installation of a shed. If the shed is not allowed to encroach into the easement as shown on the site plan, the structure would be located too close to the primary structure. The existing drainage easement does not contain any drainage structures or piping which has been verified by the Engineering Department. The shed installation will not impact any drainage from this property or the adjacent properties. The property abuts HOA property which then drains to a wetland. We have met with the Engineering and Planning departments about this matter and they have no concerns for this request. Requested 5 foot Setback