Board of Zoning Appeals

TOWN OF SUMMERVILLE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AGENDA December 14, 2021 5:00 PM Town Hall (annex) – Council Chambers 200 S. Main Street I. Approval of minutes from November 9, 2021 (For below item, signs posted on property November 29, 2021 and ad on November 28, 2021 in Post & Courier) II. OLD BUSINESS: 1. None III. NEW BUSINESS: 1. TMS # 144-04-07-007, 112 Mary Street, zoned GR-5 – General Residential, owned by Tess Graham. – Special Exception request to allow the operation of a Short Term Rental. Ordinance Section 3.4.3. 2. TMS #130-15-11-003, 202 W. 6th North Street, zoned N-MX – Neighborhood Mixed Use, Owned by Al C. Browder and Kelly J. Browder – Variance request to allow parking to be constructed in the front yard. Ordinance Section 2.5.6 A. 3. TMS #145-00-00-014, Corner of Gahagan Road and Garbon Drive, zoned N-R – Neighborhood Residential, Owned by Rolina Homes, LLC. – Variance request to reduce the front setback from 10 feet to eight feet for the buildings fronting Gahagan Road, and reduce the rear setback from 20 feet to six feet for lots 1-6; from 20 feet to 15 feet for lots 7-9; from 20 feet to seven feet for lot 10; from 20 feet to seven feet for lots 11-20. Ordinance Sections 2.5.3 A and 2.5.3 D. IV. MISCELLANEOUS: 1. None V. ADJOURN Posted November 29, 2021  Board of Zoning Appeals Tuesday, September 14, 2021 Council Chambers – 3rd Floor Summerville Town Hall Members Present: Staff Present: Denis Tsukalas, Chairman Tim Macholl, Zoning Administrator Don Nye, Vice Chairman Lionel Lawson John Thurmes John Witherspoon Items on the agenda: MINUTES: Approval of minutes from September 14, 2021 OLD BUSINESS: 1. None NEW BUSINESS: 1. TMS # 145-07-03-074, 213 Towhee Drive, zoned GR-5 – General Residential, owned by Loucious Hires Jr. – Variance request to increase the Maximum Lot Coverage from 35% to 42% for the construction of a detached garage. Ordinance Section 2.7.2.C. MISCELLANEOUS: 1. None The meeting was called to order at 5:00 PM by the Chairman. The Chairman asked for consideration of the minutes in the packet, hearing no corrections or edits he called for a motion. Mr. Witherspoon made a motion to approve the September 14, 2021 Minutes. The motion was seconded by Mr. Nye. The motion was approved 5-0. OLD BUSINESS 1. None NEW BUSINESS 1. 213 Towhee Drive – The first item under New Business TMS # 145-07-03-074, 213 Towhee Drive, zoned GR-5 – General Residential, owned by Loucious Hires Jr. – Variance request to increase the Maximum Lot Coverage from 35% to 42% for the construction of a detached garage. Ordinance Section 2.7.2.C. Mr. Macholl introduced the requested variance, and presented the staff report. The applicant, Mr. Loucious Hires came to the podium and addressed the Board. He explained he had spoken to his neighbors about his request and that none had objected to his request. He explained he had some classic cars he wanted to get into a garage. Mr. Jared Gilpin came to the podium and provided support for the request. He explained that he is a neighbor and that he had no objections concerning the variance. He felt that Mr. Hires kept a nice home and that he would complete a good project. Mr. Witherspoon asked if removing the shed would help with the percentage of lot coverage. Mr. Lawson asked if the applicant intended to build a driveway to the rear for access to the garage. Mr. Hires said that he had no intention to build a driveway. Mr. Tsukalas asked if the floor would be at ground level. Mr. Hires confirmed it would. The Chairman asked if there were any comments or questions. Hearing none he called for a motion. Mr. Nye made a motion to approve the variance as requested. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lawson. The Chairman asked for further discussion. Mr. Thurmes said that to approve a variance we have to show that there are extraordinary conditions that exist. He felt that it would be bending the rules to help allow this project get built. Mr. Tsukalas said that was true. Mr. Thurmes expressed a concern that there were no extraordinary conditions on this property. Hearing no further discussion the Chairman called for the vote. The motion to approve was passed 3-2, with Mr. Thurmes and Mr. Witherspoon voting against approval. MISCELLANEOUS: 1. None ADJOURN: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:15 PM on a motion by Mr. Nye and a second by Mr. Thurmes. The motion passed unanimously 5-0. Respectfully Submitted, Date: ________________ Tim Macholl Zoning Administrator Approved: Denis Tsukalas, Chairman _____________________________________; or, Don Nye, Vice Chairman ______________________________________ 2  Special Exception TMS#144-04-07-007 112 Mary Street, Summerville, SC STAFF REPORT BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS December 14, 2021 Request: Special Exception application for a Short Term Rental to be operated at the above address Property Zoning: GR-5 General Residential Surrounding Zoning: North: GR-5 General Residential South: GR-5 General Residential East: GR-5 General Residential Use West: GR-5 General Residential Ordinance requires: Ordinance Section 3.3 and 13.10.4 Background: The applicant has requested a Special Exception in accordance with the Town’s Unified Development Ordinance. On October 26, 2021 the Owner of the property applied for a Lodging Conditional Use Permit. Upon inspection of the application, Staff determined that based on the zoning of the property a Special Exception is required to be able to operate the proposed Short Term Rental (STR). It has been determined that the applicant has met the other requirements to operate a Short Term Rental at this location. Section 13.10.4 establishes the criteria that the BZA is required to evaluate the application. The following are the criteria: 1. Whether the proposed use is compatible with existing land uses in the surrounding area; 2. Whether the proposed site plan, circulation plan, and schematic architectural designs are harmonious with the character of the surrounding area; 3. The likely impact on public infrastructure such as roads, parking facilities, and water and sewer systems, and on public services such as police and fire protection and solid waste collection, and the ability of existing infrastructure and services to adequately service the proposed use without negatively impacting existing uses in the area and in the Town (A traffic impact analysis (TIA) may be required as determined by Town Staff); 4. Whether the proposed use and designs are in general conformity with the Town’s Comprehensive Plan and any other plans officially adopted by the Town; 5. Likely impact on public health and safety; and 6. Potential creation of noise, lights, fumes, dust, smoke, vibration, fire hazard, or other injurious or obnoxious impacts. Based upon staff review of the application, and the location of the property, staff does not feel that the STR, if operated according to the Town’s requirements, will be negatively impactful upon the neighborhood. Staff has received a phone call from an adjacent property owner that had concerns about the establishment of a STR across the street from their property. They did not indicate that they outright objected to the operation, but that there were concerns in the neighborhood. The BZA must evaluate the application against the stated criteria above and determine whether a Special Exception is appropriate at this location.  VARIANCE REQUEST TMS#130-15-11-003 202 W. 6 North Street, Summerville, SC th STAFF REPORT BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS December 14, 2021 Request: Variance request to allow parking to be constructed in the front yard Property Zoning: N-MX – Neighborhood Mixed Use Surrounding Zoning: North: N-MX – Neighborhood Mixed Use South: N-MX – Neighborhood Mixed Use East: N-MX – Neighborhood Mixed Use West: N-MX – Neighborhood Mixed Use Ordinance requires: Ordinance Section 2.5.6 A – Parking not permitted in the front yard 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: This issue was identified at the time of application for a Business license, the proposed addition of parking in the front to accommodate the change of use from a residential use to a business use. Staff feels that the applicant does meet all four criteria, and that a hardship is present. a. Extraordinary conditions do exist on the property. It is staff’s opinion that because this is a conversion of a residential structure to commercial property there is a hardship based on the size of the property and the configuration of the structures on the lot. This prevents the establishment of parking to the rear of the structure. b. Other property in the area have similar situations. c. Utilization of the property is not eliminated but will be only slightly diminished. Without parking it will be extremely difficult for this property to be utilized as a commercial property. d. Detriment should not be caused to other properties by the issuance of this variance on this property. Other properties within the corridor already have parking in the front yard areas, previously developed prior to the passage of the UDO requirements. If the parking is designed per the SCDOT requirements it will be less impactful on traffic and safety in the area. Staff recommends that the BZA impose the following conditions if they determine that a Variance is warranted: 1. That the Variance will cease to apply upon the complete redevelopment of the property for a new commercial development. 2. The parking will be screened according to Section 8.5.2  SURVEY EXHIBIT D. Scott Wilson Land Surveyor, LLC # 202 WEST 6th NORTH STREET 310 South Main Street for Summerville, SC 29483 BROWDER 2021 REVERSE EXCHANGE, LLC as EAT (843) 708-8065 THE TOWN OF SUMMERVILLE dswscpls@aol.com DORCHESTER COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA NOVEMBER 9, 2021  VARIANCE REQUEST Parent Parcel TMS 145-00-00-014 Proposed Lots 1-20, Gahagan Townhomes, Summerville, SC STAFF REPORT BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS December 14, 2021 Request: Variance request to reduce the front setback from 10 feet to eight feet for the buildings fronting Gahagan Road Lots 11-20, and reduce the rear setback from 20 feet to six feet for lots 1-6; from 20 feet to 15 feet for lots 7-9; from 20 feet to seven feet for lot 10; from 20 feet to seven feet for lots 11-20. Ordinance Sections 2.5.3 A and 2.5.3 D. Property Zoning: N-R Neighborhood Residential Surrounding Zoning: North: PUD Planned Unit Development South: PUD Planned Unit Development East: PUD Planned Unit Development West: Out Dorchester County Ordinance requires: Ordinance Section 2.5.3 A Front Setback – 10 feet; Section 2.5.3.D – Rear Setback – 20 feet 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 setback reductions on the respective lots was determined at the time of Plat Approval. The planning for this development began prior to the approval of the UDO. After approval there were further revisions to the UDO, resulting in the oversight of the required rear setback by staff. The front setback was changed from 0 feet to a minimum of 10 feet. Because this is a straight zoned property, and it was being developed by right, the changes require that the applicant obtain the variances. Staff feels that the hardship for this property was caused by the changes approved for the UDO. The plat for the property cannot be recorded, therefore building permits for the structures cannot be issued. Site work has been completed and building pads are in place, it would be a significant hardship to regrade the site to comply with the new requirements.  VICINTY MAP - NOT TO SCALE 11 ft 6 ft 11 ft 15 ft 16 ft 15 ft 7 ft 11 ft 7 ft 7 ft 7 ft 21 ft 8 ft 9 ft 8 ft 8 ft 9 ft 8 ft 0 60 30 1" = 30'