BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

17 MARCH 1998

7:00 P.M.

 

 

  1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman James Squires.

II. ROLL CALL

Members Present: James Squires, Barbara Ewing, Councilmember

Kathy McNear, Dave Whitaker and Councilmember

Robert Wilson

Members Absent: David Okum and Thomas Schecker

Others Present: Bill McErlane, Building Official

III. MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF 17 FEBRUARY 1998

Mrs. McNear said since we have not had a chance to review them, I

suggest that we approve them at the next meeting. The Minutes were tabled

to the April meeting.

IV. CORRESPONDENCE

    1. Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting- 10 February 1998
    2. 2/19/98 Letter to Robert Fondong, Walker Pontiac GMC, 150 Northland Boulevard re removal of variance request from February Agenda
  1. REPORTS
    1. Report on Council Activities Ė Kathy McNear
    2. Mrs. McNear reported that MARS was approved at the last Council meeting, and I anticipate we will see them in here concerning signage. They are a music store; they sell instruments microphones, sheet music etc. It is 38,000 square feet, so it is a very large addition.

    3. Report on Planning Commission Ė David Okum

Mr. Squires said since Mr. Okum is absent, we will skip that report.

VI. STATEMENTS CONCERNING VARIANCES

A. A variance once granted will be referred back to the Board of Zoning Appeals if after the expiration of six months no construction is done in accordance with the terms and conditions of the variance.

If a variance appeal is denied, the applicant may resubmit the appeal six months after the denial.

B. Chairmanís Statement

Ladies and gentlemen, this is a Public Hearing, and all testimony given in cases pending before this board are to be made part of the public record. As such, each citizen testifying before this board is directed to sign in, take his place at the podium, state his name, address and the nature of the variance. Be advised that all testimony and discussion relative to said variance is recorded. It is from this recording that our Minutes are taken.

 

  1. OLD BUSINESS
  2.  

     

    BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

    17 MARCH 1998

    PAGE TWO

     

  3. NEW BUSINESS
    1. LTD Improvements and Maple Knoll Village request approval of the construction of a deck at 611 Maple Trace to be 15í from the property line. Said variance is requested from Section 153.165(F) and the 35 foot variance granted March 16, 1993.

Tim Hedgren owner of LTD Improvements and contractor for the deck said we built an addition there and we would like to put a small deck outside there. The swale area is pretty damp most of the time. Mr. Grant is an avid flower grower and he would like a deck. It is not puddled but it is wet because of the swale area and to cross to the other side of the yard where he wants to plant flowers, he would like this deck.

I have a couple of pictures of the addition (showed them to the members).

Mr. Hedgren added I have checked on their lawn cutting equipment, and anything Maple Knoll would need to get in and out there would not be a problem. I submitted it to them with all the drawings also.

Mr. Wilson said I went out there yesterday morning and walked around and spent some soul searching moments. I have to ask myself and you- first the room addition, now a patio. Will step three be a covered patio or something else? Was this originally planned and given to us piecemeal?

Mr. Hedgren answered it wasnít planned this way originally. It was thought of after we had the addition up. Mr. Grant came to me and wanted an estimate for the deck. I asked if we would need another variance and applied for it.

Mr. Wilson continued I feared after granting one request others would follow. Now we are at the third request but only two residents. Who is to say that someone in that quadrangle will want something else? These setbacks are there for a reason, and there are times when we make an exception. I think to make a third exception in this same quadrangle would send a message that I am not prepared to send. I donít feel comfortable, and I canít support it.

Mrs. McNear asked the distance from the step to the end of the property and Mr. Hedgren answered it is probably in the 20 foot range. Mr. Wilson said if you look at the edge of the patio step, it says 15 feet. I paced it off, and that is pretty close. Mr. Hedgren added it is a little deceiving, because the privacy fence is inside the lot line a little bit. Directly behind there is a GE Training Center, so the encroachment in the back isnít a problem.

Mr. Hedgren added four feet of the deck extending out the back doesnít have to be that large. In drawing it, we are not sure exactly where that will be. It could be smaller than that. All we are trying to do is get access across that swale. It will be one step off the ground.

Mrs. McNear asked if we have anything from Maple Knoll indicating their feelings on that? I know we have a representative from Maple Knoll present.

Lena Mares, Associate Executive Director of Maple Knoll stated we are in support of the resident getting a variance for this option.

You can see from the contour that there is a drainage swale that comes along that area. In order for Mr. Grant to get to this garden area, you almost need something for him to step off. There is a swale that goes back the entire length of that building so he is wanting to step off. That area remains pretty wet most of the time because of the drainage.

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

17 MARCH 1998

PAGE THREE

VIII A CONSTRUCTION OF DECK AT 611 MAPLE TRACE

Mr. Wilson said on your scale you have what appears to be a wall separating the two units. Is that part of your plan? Mr. Hedgren answered yes, it is a privacy fence six feet out.

Mr. Wilson added you mentioned being able to walk out to the garden area; itís almost like a little hill. Why do you need a deck to do that? Why not a cement walkway up to that area?

Mr. Hedgren answered the sole purpose of the deck is not to get across there. The deck would be a larger patio area. When we built the addition, it was right where the patio was. We are trying to reincorporate something, rather than a patio, it would be a deck close to the ground to give him a little more room, patio furniture and so forth. Most of the deck doesnít extend any further than the addition does. It goes 15 feet, and the addition on that side is 11 feet. We would just go four feet beyond the addition. Mr. Wilson added for a total of eight feet because of the walkway. Mr. Hedgren agreed, our main concern is not that little walkway. We can work something out with stones or something beyond that.

Mr. Wilson wondered if the room addition hadnít been large enough initially, and Mr. Hedgren said no, it isnít a question of living space. It is more outside dry off grass space. Mr. Grant has a large dog and likes to walk him outside without walking through the wet and mud.

Mr. Morton Grant said I am the person living at 611 Maple Trace. I moved from Hyde Park where I had a large house and Mr. Hedgren had built me a similar type solarium and I also had a large deck. The room is wonderful; it is a real addition to the unit. It gives me more living room in the unit during the year. I do like being outside, entertaining outside and having flowers.

That area outside the back of the units could be improved to make it a more attractive sitting area. That is basically what I am trying to do, putting a deck up which is extending the room. I didnít think I would be doing this at the time I originally asked for the addition, or I would have done both at the same time. I am adding a 10í x 12í deck, but because of the swale and my large dog, if I could have a place for him to walk this would be a help also. That is basically why I have asked for the extension. If you want to modify it, fine. It certainly would not be more than four feet out; it could be less, but I would like it someplace where I can sit and be able to walk across this damp area to the landscaped area. What I am doing is trying to improve the look of that part of the unit. Certainly I have no plans to come back again asking to put a roof or anything like that over the deck; this is it.

Mr. Whitaker asked Mr. Grant if a 10í x 12í deck would work with pavers. Mr. Grant answered yes, but the deck will not impede the soil. Underneath the deck will be stones, so the water will be able to flow naturally. By putting the deck on, I can have flower boxes on the railing to enhance it. A deck seems to finish it off more professionally. Four feet wide may be more than I need, but three feet or somewhere in that area would be sufficient. If we can bridge the wet part of the swale with less than four feet, I would want to do that. I too want to protect the amount of grassed area.

Mr. Whitaker commented I can appreciate the deck, but I would like to see something in line with the addition. I have to agree with Mr. Wilson; it becomes a variance on top of a variance. Obviously you are spending quite a bit of money on this, and everything you have done so far is very nice. What happens is then we have everybody else wants to get closer and closer saying you allowed him to do this and I canít.

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

17 MARCH 1998

PAGE FOUR

VIII A APPROVAL OF DECK AT 611 MAPLE TRACE 15í FROM PROPERTY LINE

Mr. Whitaker said I would like to see something different done with the walkway. I would be comfortable with something coming off to the edge of the addition. Mr. Hedgren suggested pavers along there. Mr. Whitaker answered I donít think pavers would be a problem because you might be able to rework that swale. If you went by your 10 x 12 or 10 x 11, I would be comfortable with something like that. I think the design is a very nice one. Iím looking out for Mr. Grant but I also am looking out for the others in the community.

Mr. Wilson asked if Mr. Grant had considered another unit more in line with your needs today as opposed to what they were when you initially moved in? Mr. Grant responded actually this unit is one of the better units to do what I want to do. Any of the other ones that would even remotely approach it are gone. This is exactly what I want. I came in there with the understanding that if I could find something that I wanted to do, and if it were acceptable to Maple Knoll, they would permit me to do it. I am now at a place where I can enjoy what I am getting at Maple Knoll, which is a wonderful place to live.

Mr. Wilson responded no question; I would be comfortable if you would have a four foot path up to the top of the swale which would allow you to plant around the trees. You have the four seasons room with the same features without bugs and rain. I donít feel comfortable with the patio and privacy fence. Did your neighbor at 612 look at this; did they have a problem with this blocking their view? Mr. Grant answered this is not really a privacy fence; it is six feet tall and lattice work. Mr. Hedgren added it is something to grow things on and hang things from.

Mrs. McNear commented I think if we had the squared off patio outside the room that would be more acceptable than having the deck walkway in front of the building. Besides that, I would hate to see the beautiful stonework covered up by a deck.

Mr. Grant commented a 12í x 10í patio would be fine. All I would be doing is cutting off the walkway in front; we can work around that I am sure.

Mr. Squires said so Mr. Grant you would be agreeable to a redesign and reconsideration of the variance? Mr. Grant answered yes. The only problem is I would like to get working on it; I would rather not put it off for another month. If you could give us the approval on the basis that we will make these adjustments, I would be more than happy to make whatever adjustments you would like to see me make.

Mr. Whitaker commented I think with the adjustments we would like to see him make, he would not need a variance, because it would fall under the prior variance. Is that right Mr. McErlane? Mr. McErlane reported the only clarification I need is the height of the deck; is it fairly close to grade? Mr. Hedgren responded it will be real close to grade. Mr. McErlane continued so there is not an instance where you would have a couple of steps that project out. Then I would say it would fit within the existing variance.

Mr. Squires asked the applicant if he were agreeable to that, and Mr. Grant responded very definitely. Mr. Squires stated then the variance request is withdrawn and the owner is proceeding under the previously granted variance.

 

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

17 MARCH 1998

PAGE FIVE

B. Petsmart, 11741 Princeton Pike requests variance to allow the display of "PETsMART" and "Coming Soon" banners until the store opens to the public. Said variance is requested from Section 153.160(C)(3)(d) "..shall in no event exceed 2 consecutive weeks in duration..and..4 occasions of usage during any calendar yearÖ"

John Bernardo Construction Manager for Construction Consultants Inc. on behalf of PETsMART said we are asking for a variance to the temporary sign ordinance. The application spells out the standard procedures for PETsMART. Once the building progresses to the point of having masonry walls up in the front façade, we quickly erect a PETsMART and Coming Soon banner on the left front façade. That is displayed during the entire construction process so that people who come onto the project know that it is under construction, and it identified the site as a PETsMART store.

It is obvious during the construction period that you will have times when there is much going on. The problems arise once the parking lot is paved and the front façade is completed; there is still construction work going on and the site is not open to the public. Many times we have potential customers and applicants coming up to the front door and trying to access the property. We find it is very helpful from a legal and liability standpoint to have these signs erected.

Mrs. McNear asked how long it would take to build the facility. Mr. Bernardo answered for this particular location, approximately five months. It can be shorter or longer, but I donít anticipate it will extend any more than five months.

Mrs. McNear stated I believe in being up front and honest with you so I will tell you right now that no way will I vote for this. Precedence is the issue here. We have a lot of retail in our city. Everybody wants to put banners up all the time. If we allowed you to put a sign up for five months, we would fill every seat in this place with people backed up into the lobby. There is no way five months would ever happen in my book.

Mr. Bernardo answered I am talking five months for the entire construction process. The point of putting a banner up to the time when the store opens will be less than that. Mrs. McNear asked how much time the banner would be up, and Mr. Bernardo said approximately 90 days. It is a very legitimate concern that every existing open retail business will want a banner. The difference is that ours is a construction banner. It simply states that this is the PETsMART store that is coming soon.

When we get to the Now Open sign, at the grand opening, those would fall under your existing rules, and I wouldnít ask that those be waived. I think there is a difference there to be considered. It is a construction sign, not an operations sign.

Mrs. McNear said so you would want the Coming Soon and PETsMART signs up for 90 days, and then your other banner would go up, or your permanent sign go up? Mr. Bernardo answered we have a permanent sign which is erected on the façade and that already has been approved. The Grand Opening signs would be displayed at different times. That would fall under your existing parameters, and that is very typical across the country.

Mrs. McNear said so you would want three months for the Coming Soon sign, and a couple of weeks for the Grand Opening sign. What is the size of the banner? Mr. Bernardo answered these are standard banners that we have printed up and they are 4í x 20í.

 

 

 

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

17 MARCH 1998

PAGE SIX

VIII B PETsMART & Coming Soon Banners Ė 11741 Princeton Pike

Mr. Bernardo showed a drawing of the building area, indicating where the banners would be displayed (upper left hand corner), adding that it only takes up a small portion of the front façade.

Mr. Wilson said I am going to read from your letter, Section 2 Part C where it says "More importantly, the banners infer to the general public that the store is still under construction and potential hazards exist on the site that could cause injury." My question is where does it say on the banner do not come in Ė under construction? Mr. Bernardo responded my interpretation is that coming soon means it is not yet here. Mr. Wilson continued I suspect you would be running ads for employment, and that would keep them from coming to that facility. Mr. Bernardo answered advertising happens about two weeks prior to the store opening and that can happen either on site or off site.

Mr. Wilson continued my gut feeling is that you have two possibly three businesses going in and possibly opening up at the same time. You may have an off site employment trailer to eliminate this. I feel very uncomfortable about a 4í x 20í or any sign being up for more than two weeks at a time. I agree with Mrs. McNear in that I feel uncomfortable with having a temporary sign up beyond two weeks, not to mention 90 days for any kind of temporary sign. The banners identify to the general public; as you put up your building, you are already earmarking a space, and Iím sure you are not going to wait to the day you open to put up PETsMART; it will be there along with the façade. I feel that would eliminate the banner for that purpose. The second point you made about the store being under construction, clearly they can see that and they wonít be coming in because youíll have all kinds of vehicles going onto that site. I donít buy these two purposes; Iím afraid it wonít fly.

Mr. Bernardo responded I respect your thoughts on that, and I do agree you have an ordinance for a reason and that is why I am here to ask that you consider this. I would like to ask for a two week period for a temporary sign during the construction process, which is 90 days. Iím only allowed to do it four times a year. If I put up a construction sign for two weeks, thatís one time. That limits the balance of our operations crew being able to utilize the sign banner. Ninety days may be too long for a construction period sign.

Is there any reasonable time that we may be able to agree upon that would be more in line with what you are looking for, to limit the time but give me the latitude of being able to identify it as long as possible?

Mr. McErlane reported I wanted to clarify that typically a project sign for a development is a plywood type sign with the contractor, architect and name of the project. Normally those are what are used for this. Initially they may say coming soon and then they may change it to indicate the date. These banners arenít used for project signs.

Mrs. McNear said perhaps we can combine some of these to help out, maybe use a maximum of a month for the construction period, and then if you needed two weeks for your grand opening, we could string something like that together, four to six weeks maximum. Keep in mind that would still use up six of your eight weeks l you can use for the year. Would that be something that might be of interest to you?

Mr. Bernardo answered I would have to speak to my operations group to understand their needs and their plans for the year.

 

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

17 MARCH 1998

PAGE SEVEN

VIII B PETsMART & Coming Soon Banners Ė 11741 Princeton Pike

Mr. Bernardo continued I would like to address Mr. McErlaneís comments; he was very kind to point out the option of the construction sign. Fifty square feet are allowed and that would allow some sort of coming soon or other type of sign. That is a very good idea, but the problem is we are not the only tenant on this property. There are two others, Cost Plus and Comp USA who also are in need of being able to identify that their stores are open. I canít say if they are going to open before or after us, but Iím not sure itís reasonable to ask me to get the coming soon sign and leave it up there until Iím open, and if they happen to open before me, the public may see the coming soon and not recognize that they are open. That is a difficult one for me to call, so I am asking for this tonight.

Mr. Squires wondered if we are at the point where the board will consider the banners as you requested them, 4í x 20í, or are we going to work out something you can use for two weeks and two weeks and two weeks? What would you like? Obviously we are going to have some difficulty with the banners as we see them. Mr. Whitaker confirmed that each banner is 4í x 20í, so it is a total of 40 feet in length. Mr. Bernardo said actually they are stacked on top of each other, so they are 20 feet wide and eight feet high. This is the standard size that we have printed up, and Iím not sure it is available to reduce the size if that is a concern.

Mrs. McNear commented I donít really have a problem with the size of this banner considering it is so far off the street. Granted it is a huge banner, but considering where it is, it wouldnít stand out as much as it would in the middle of a field when you are putting up a new building. I think you can understand that if you are looking at two to three months of signage, itís just not going to happen.

Mr. Bernardo commented going back to Mr. Wilsonís point that during the busy months of construction when equipment is going across the property, I probably donít need a sign for that period, I would ask that we consider the last 30 days prior to opening as opposed to the full 90 days. At a time when the asphalt is down and the striping is done and the lot lights are up, it appears that something is there that the public can access. I would ask that you consider that here tonight.

Mr. Wilson said you are saying 30 days prior to the opening and using that as part of your temporary signage allotment. Would you agree with that, and then if you need a two week time frame for your Grand Opening and Now Open, you would have a total of six weeks. If everyone feels comfortable with that, would you feel comfortable with it? If we voted for 90 days now, I donít think it would be in your favor. Would you rather ask for the six weeks?

Mr. Bernardo responded I want to make sure that I understand this banner requirement. Would both PETsMART and Coming Soon be allowed as one banner display during that period? Mr. McErlane responded typically the number of banners is not an issue. There is a maximum square footage per building, and I donít believe you are exceeding that.

Mrs. McNear asked the estimated opening date of the store and Mr. Bernardo answered August 24th. Mrs. McNear continued so if we voted for that, you would put the sign up in July and you would have two weeks after the opening in August and that gets us into September, and you would only have a couple of months left in the calendar year and you would be able to put up a banner one more time since you are allowed eight weeks.

 

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

17 MARCH 1998

PAGE EIGHT

VIII B PETsMART & Coming Soon Banners Ė 11741 Princeton Pike

Mr. Bernardo commented I would like to have that up for as long a period as possible prior to the opening. What I would like you to consider is four weeks prior to opening the store could display these signs, and that would use up part of the allotment for the remainder of the year. Mrs. McNear asked if he wanted to put the other sign up for two weeks right after the grand opening. Mr. Bernardo continued the Now Open and Grand Opening signs would be displayed during the remaining two two-week periods for the calendar year ending December 31st.

Mr. Squires said so I understand it, you would have the Coming Soon and PETsMART banners would be up four weeks prior to opening. After opening, those would come down and Now Opening and Grand Opening would go up for 2 two-week periods. Mr. Bernardo answered most likely; it has been a varied thing, depend in which operations group is operating that store. It can be that the PETsMART sign would remain up there and they would take down the Coming Soon banner and put up the Now Open. Once they reach the Grand Opening period, they would take down the Now Open Sign and put up the Grand Opening sign, and once the period is over, they would all come down. Mr. Squires said so you would not be exceeding the eight-week limit. Mr. Bernardo said no. The only exception I am requesting is to have a continuous four week period as opposed to breaking it up into two separate two week periods. The way I interpreted this is that the requirement was to have a two week period between banners, is that correct?

Mr. McErlane responded you said Opening Soon would be up for four weeks continuously. Mr. Bernardo answered PETsMART and Coming Soon would be up four weeks continuously. Mr. McErlane continued then the real question is concerning Now Open and Grand Opening. Would they be consecutive to that? Mr. Bernardo responded the name PETsMART would remain the primary sign that would need to be identified with any of these combinations of signs.

Mr. Wilson said so we understand what you want, you would have PETsMART and Coming Soon from August 1-30th, and from August 31st to September 12th you could have your Now Open and Grand Opening signs with the PETsMART. So, all signs would be removed on September 12th; is that the request? I am not trying to put words into your mouth; I am trying to get some clarity. Mr. Bernardo answered I understand; we donít know yet that August 24th will be the official date, because we donít know if anything will affect that, but I can tell you that is my intent. I am only asking for that four week period for the PETsMART and Coming Soon signs to be displayed prior to the opening. If that four week period expires before the opening actually happens, then I need to pull those down and by that time, I probably will have the permanent sign erected, so I donít see that as a major problem.

Mr. Wilson continued things donít always happen the way we want them to, and I wouldnít want you to make another trip to us asking for an extension when we might way no. Mr. Bernardo answered I am the construction manager for the project, and I am responsible for it. I will certainly enforce that if granted. Mr. Wilson said so what you may have to do is if you get past the 30th and you are not ready to open you take the signs down and the next series to go up would be PETsMART Now Opening and that would be for a two week period.

Mrs. McNear said I donít think we want to tie him down to a date, because with construction you never know what will happen. To summarize, he has the ability to put up two signs in any combination for a total of four weeks. When he wants to change those to Now Opening or Grand Opening PETsMART, he can for two weeks for a total of six weeks.

 

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

17 MARCH 1998

PAGE NINE

VIII B PETsMART & Coming Soon Banners Ė 11741 Princeton Pike


Mrs. McNear continued if he puts them up and thinks he will open in exactly 30 days and it goes 35, thatís tough; he takes the signs down. Or he leaves PETsMART and Coming Soon up there, but that will reduce the amount of time he can put Grand Opening. The bottom line is he has six weeks consecutively to put these banners up. Is that the way you understand it?

Mr. Bernardo answered that is the way I would appreciate the board consider it. I want to make sure I understand that if the four week period expires, six days go by and itís still not ready to open, I take down the signs for those six days, and once the store opens I have the opportunity to display that Now Open and PETsMART sign for two weeks.

Mr. McErlane said what Mrs. McNear was stating was if you chose to leave the Coming Soon for the additional six days, you would have to take that off the two week time period you have for the Grand Opening. Mrs. McNear added correct, it is a maximum amount of time of six weeks. You can have a break in there if you want, but you can only display your signs for six weeks total during that time frame. Mr. Bernardo said so if I have it up for four weeks, and there is a six day period that I donít have the store open and I pull those signs down, do I still have two more weeks? Mrs. McNear said yes. Mr. Bernardo commented that is acceptable.

Mrs. McNear said then I will move to grant a variance to allow PETsMART to display two 4í high by 20í long banners for a maximum of six weeks, four weeks prior to the estimated opening date and two weeks after the opening. Mr. Wilson seconded the motion.

Mr. McErlane stated typically a business is allowed two weeks four times a year. Is there still remaining a two week period that they could use? Mrs. McNear answered yes, we are just compressing the three uses into one.

Mr. Bernardo said I want to make sure that I completely understand this. What you are saying when you say consecutive, if there is a lull in between and I take the signs down, I still have two weeks. Mrs. McNear answered it can be consecutive, or it could be a total of seven weeks, but you can only display for six.

The motion was reread. Mrs. McNear moved to grant a variance to allow PETsMART to display two 4í x 20í banners for a period of six total consecutive weeks, four weeks prior to the estimated opening and two weeks after for a maximum of six weeks. He may have it consecutively, but it may only be displayed for a maximum of six weeks.

Voting aye were Mrs. McNear, Mr. Wilson, Mr. Whitaker, Mrs. Ewing and Mr. Squires. Variance was granted with five affirmative votes.

C. Revocation of Variances Granted and Not Acted Upon Within Six Months

Mr. Squires stated there are six names on this list; only one, Mr. Birkenshaw has requested a continuation of the variance. Under the terms of our agreement with these people, I think it is necessary to vote on each one by one to properly notify these people that the variance has been dropped.

Mr. Squires stated the first is James Stander, 537 Grandin Avenue, garage expansion. By voice vote, all present voted aye, and the variance was withdrawn.

Duke Realty, Executive Center I & II Parking Space Widths, all present voted aye and the variance was withdrawn.

Randall Carter, 358 Cameron Road, Pool 6í from Lot Line, all present voted aye, and the variance was withdrawn.

Bings Bar & Grill, 11649 Springfield Pike 19í x 40íDeck, all present voted aye, and the variance was withdrawn.

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

17 MARCH 1998

PAGE TEN

 

Krista Henrich, 11660 Van Cleve Avenue, 8í x 18í Deck, all present voted aye and the variance was withdrawn.

Mr. Squires stated there is a letter from Mr. Birkenshaw of 357 Cameron Road indicting that he wishes to continue the construction of his 768 square foot garage. There have been personal problems. I think we should allow him that extension.

Mrs. McNear moved to grant him an extension of three months. If he needs longer than that, he should contact us. I wouldnít want this to be hanging out there indefinitely. Mr. Whitaker seconded the motion. Voting aye were Mrs. McNear, Mr. Whitaker, Mr. Wilson, Mrs. Ewing and Mr. Squires.

Mrs. McNear commented I think if people have not responded after we sent this letter, we should withdraw the approval for the variance and send them a note telling them that it has been done and if they wish to continue it again, they would have to reapply.

  1. IX. DISCUSSION

Mr. Wilson commented on Maple Knoll, Iím glad we worked that out. I feel very uncomfortable about it, but it shows that the Board is human, and sometimes being human is more important than denying variances and making life miserable for our residents. The discussion was good and positive and in the end we showed we have compassion. I think it is important for a board to have flexibility but still maintain some guidelines, and I commend us for that. Mr. Squires said I would second that. I am happy with the compromise we were able to work out. I think the owner will be happy with it and the developer and Maple Knoll.

Relative to Mr. Bernardo who is still here and the PETsMART sign situation, I am glad we were able to meet your needs.

Mr. McErlane reported to give you an idea of where we are on the new Zoning Code, we will probably have the first complete draft put together for a meeting next Monday. Shortly after that, hopefully we will be able to work out some kind of work session between Board of Zoning Appeals and Planning Commission to review it and go over the changes. At some point of time, Planning Commission will need to act on it and refer to Council.

X. ADJOURNMENT

Mrs. McNear moved to adjourn and Mr. Wilson seconded the motion. By voice vote all present voted aye, and the Board of Zoning Appeals adjourned at 8:20 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

 

____________________,1998 _______________________

James Squires, Chairman

 

____________________,1998 ________________________

Barbara Ewing, Secretary