Public Hearing on Variance Application
Submitted by Gary Harris (on behalf of Elizabeth Schwab= )
November 5, 2009, at 7= :00 p.m.
Chair Andrea Kacinari called the meeting to order at 7= :05 p.m. Roll call indicated five members of the Board of Zoning Appeals were present: Andrea Kacinari, Dave Parker, Lisa Takach, Mark Riffle and Athena McAfee (alternate). David Jenkins was absent. Also present were Zoning Inspector Alliss Strogin, Gary Harris (Chippewa Lake), Lisa Schwab, Sandra and Matt Schwab (Chagrin Falls), Betty (Elizabeth) Schwab (Independence), Mark Ford = (91 Euclid, Chippewa Lake), Val Cotman and Sandra Cotman (95 Euclid, Chippewa Lake), Nicole and Bill Lee (105 Euclid, Chippewa Lake), Ed and Leslie Schus= ter (100 Euclid, Chippewa Lake).
Approval of the minutes of the July 2, 2009, and Octob= er 1, 2009, meetings will take place at the next meeting.
The secretary distributed the following items:
= - = &nb= sp; October and November 2009 Grassroots Clippings newsletter
= - = &nb= sp; Memo announcing Drug Free Workplace Training (mandatory) scheduled for either November 10 or 11, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. at t= he township hall
Chair Kacinari opened the public hearing relative to t= he Application for Zoning Variance submitted by Gary Harris (on behalf of Elizabeth Schwab, property owner) requesting a variance from Section 301.4 = A-1 (Lot Requirements), Section 301.5 A-B-C-D (Yard Requirements) and Section 2= 14 A-1-2 (Minimum Floor Area of Dwelling), for property located at 107 Euclid Avenue, Chippewa Lake, Ohio (parcel #020-10D-45-016).
The zoning secretary read into the record the Certific= ate of Mailing indicating that the letter notifying the adjacent property owners of tonight’s meeting was mailed on
October 21, 2009.
The Chair ascertained that the Board members had the complete application and that it had been received and reviewed by each of = them and that the file was accurate, complete and meets the legal requirements.<= /p>
The zoning secretary read into the record the Applicat= ion for Zoning Variance.
Those persons sworn in by Chair Kacinari for purposes = of this public hearing included:
Gary Harris (applicant), Elizabeth Schwab (property ow= ner), Lisa Schwab, Sandra Schwab, Bill Lee, Nicole Lee, Leslie Schuster, Mark For= d, Sandra Cotman and Zoning Inspector Alliss Strogin.
Applicant (Gary Harris) – As it says, I’m = here for an Application for Zoning Variance on behalf of the Elizabeth Schwab family. Your code currently d= oes not allow for suburban type zoning, it’s all under RR and your lot si= zes are two acres and the setbacks are farther back than the lot itself so we a= re here asking for a variance to build a house on the lot.
Chair Andrea Kacinari – What kind of house are y= ou looking to build?
Applicant – It will be 1 ½ story with fir= st floor square footage – your code calls for 1400 square feet in a 1 ½ story with no basement and we would need a variance of 368 square feet. The house size would be 24’x32’ first floor and the second floor loft would make up the difference. I don’t hav= e them broken down right now. The to= tal would be 1,032 square feet.
Chair – What made you decide to build now?
Applicant – The family decided they would like to build the house now.
Chair (to Elizabeth Schwab) – Just to clarify th= ings, Mr. Harris is qualified to speak on your behalf?
Elizabeth Schwab – Yes. Why did we decide to build now?
Chair – Has anybody been using the property at t= his time since there has been no house on it?
Elizabeth Schwab – Not that I’m aware of.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> I do know it is in a desirable spo= t and possibly people have been walking across it but there has been to my knowle= dge no structure on it.
Lisa Schwab – Up to a couple of years ago I didn’t have a car and I wasn’t driving around and I had no way = to get out here. Now I have a ca= r and now I’m driving around so it’s easier for me to get out here and while they are doing the building and things like that I’m going to h= ave to be out here to supervise part of it and it’s easier for me to get = out now. And the reason we couldn’t build before was I couldn’t get out here until a couple years ago.
Chair – When did the storm take down the house?<= /p>
Lisa Schwab – I believe it was in July 1999.
Lisa Takach – When was it razed?
Elizabeth Schwab – Almost im= mediately after the storm. The t= ree fell and cut through the building right in half. So what we did is consult with the insurer and I consulted with the building inspector and their recommendation was that it was very iffy as far as the safety of rebuilding the structure. So he gave me a pe= rmit to demolish it and I would say that it was demolished within two-three weeks because right in that spot there is a lot of traffic and it was a safety ha= zard as far as I personally was concerned so it was quite soon that we took it down. We were afraid to leave= it over the winter. We know that people pass through, sometimes they use the empty cottages, there’s a lot of things that caused me to believe that it would be better to take it down.
Applicant – I have some pictures of the house af= ter the storm that I can show you. (The pictures were shown to the board).
Lisa Takach – If you didn’t build a dwelli= ng on it what other purposes do you think you would use the property for?
Lisa Schwab – I can comment on that. I think that really the only thing = we can do on it is build a dwelling. I really don’t see any other thing that we can do about it. There is no other viable economic = use.
Chair – Does anybody else have any questions?
Applicant – I have a floor plan here that I will= show to you. It’s not a fina= lized floor plan at this time but this is kind of what they are looking at. There are different plans for the = loft area. There would be an open = cathedral type ceiling so the loft would have a railing around it and you could look = down to the lower level.
Chair – Is the intent to occupy the home once it= is built?
Applicant – Yes
Elizabeth Schwab – Yes, we intent to.
Chair – I wanted to know if it was going to be r= ental property or if it was going to be owner occupied.
Gary Harris – It will have two bedrooms and a lo= ft which could be a third bedroom.
Chair – It won’t be the biggest house on t= he street but it won’t be the smallest house on the street. I looked at the sizes of the other houses on the street.
Chair – Opposition, is there anybody who would l= ike to speak, if anyone?
Bill Lee – Prior to our purchasing our home
approximately three years ago I had gone to get a set of zoning plans just =
to
see what could be done on that lot because of where our lot is positioned w=
ith
the lake and the changes that I was going to make to our property. I wanted to know what could be done
there because it was vacant. =
So I
got a copy of the zoning restrictions and after reading that realized that =
it
did not meet them in any way, shape or form. So my second step was to go to the
zoning department and talk to them to find out if it is possible for someon=
e to
put a house on this lot. Acco=
rding
to them at the time, the house was taken down and they knew the date the ho=
use
was taken down because of the tree falling on it. They said the current owners had a
certain period of time in which to rebuild that house and that time had pas=
sed
so there was no way that another house could be built on that lot. So we went ahead with the sale of =
our
property at 105
Chair (and other board members) – Acknowledged t= hey were familiar with the property and the floodplain issues in that area.
Bill Lee – Okay, I think that would be part of t= he issues going on here but the main thing is that the information that I was given prior to us purchasing our home and the changes that I made to our ho= me and what this would do.
Lisa Schwab – Yeah, I would like to see that.
Chair – Was that to the county or?
Bill Lee – The zoning department for the townshi= p.
Elizabeth Schwab – Are there minutes or whatever – it really should be documented in some way.
Bill Lee – The other part of it is that I’m familiar with variances. I do= build homes for a living and to ask for a one-foot or two-foot variance is one th= ing but to ask for a variance of this magnitude and the square footage that you= are asking for on the floor plan, I don’t know how this could be granted,= to be honest with you. So that&#= 8217;s just another concern that I’m looking at as you guys make your decisi= on.
Gary Harris – Could you ask = that gentleman if he had a zoning permit for the addition that he put on his hou= se since he bought it?
Bill Lee – Does that have anything to do with wh= at is going on here?
Chair – It’s not relevant.
Gary Harris – Well, he’s saying that they can’t build because of the zoning and he puts an addition on and doesn’t get a permit.
Bill Lee – I will answer that question. I put no addition on my property t= hat increased my square footage. = My footprint is exactly the same as it was when we purchased that home.
Lisa Schwab – I have a picture of that property = on the Internet from the recorder’s office and if you look at it in the year 2000 you will see that there is less footage but if you look at it after 20= 07 you will see that it’s been added on.
Chair – I understand what you are saying, but th= at property is not the property we are discussing today. We have to stick to what we are do= ing today. An= ybody else?
The reasons that I feel justified in asking for the wa= iver is because the day after that was leveled I got sick. I was extremely seriously ill for = about four years. During that time = that was the last thing on my plate. Therefore now that I’m doing better and the family is getting along better here, I feel that I really would like to consider that particularly in terms of the fact that our family has been there on that property since 1934. They bui= lt the building about a year later and that means that between 1935 and 1999 the family occupied that land, it had a building, took care of it, recreated and did all of the things that we would expect would happen there. Based on that longevity I would th= ink that you would consider that in my request. I know that just because someone g= ot sick you can’t grant a variance but this is different. We have a lot invested in that com= munity for a very long period of time. My husband was one of the founders of the Yacht Club and I’m still a alu= mni of the Yacht Club so what I’m saying is, yes, I know that regulation = is there but I would ask that in view of my personal situation and secondly in view of the family involvement with that piece of property and its steady c= are taking – and this was not a blighted area – and there are pictu= res here. I would ask that these = are mitigating things that you might want to think over.
Sandra Schwab – I just wanted to say that there = is a long family history with this property especially before the disaster, which was very saddening. We had our wedding at The Oaks Lodge. We= had a gathering out there in 2000 (or 2001) after the wedding reception; the lot = was empty because it was shortly after the cottage was destroyed. We had a little gathering, a little reception on that piece of property – it was a beautiful day and it w= as right by the lake. We just wa= nt to pass those memories on down to our daughter who would like to have a piece = of something in her future. She = is our only child and we would like her to grow up with the same memories that they grew up with out in Chippewa as well.
Lisa Schwab – I would like to remind you that un= der law there is a thing called regulatory taking and that basically says that regulatory or rules deny a person of all economic viable use of their prope= rty that whoever makes the rules have to compensate that person under the fair market value.
Nicole Lee – Since we have occupied our property=
our
front yard has flooded with fish.
In the spring we had fish all the way up to our flowerbed, which is
literally two feet from my house.
At any given time after a very strong rain my kids can’t go ou=
t at
all to the front by the lake because of the water level. So at one point I was shocked R=
11;
the first time it happened I was really freaked out by it so I took a pictu=
re
and this is from September 2007. Since
then I’ve become very accustomed to it but as you can see their entire
lot is actually submerged under water and I was actually scared that my
children might drown out there, you just don’t expect to see that kin=
d of
water when you wake up in the morning.&nbs=
p;
So my question is, what do you do to build a house on a lake –
literally you would be building on a lake.=
It’s like that several times a year. A picture says a thousand words.
Lisa Schwab – I can comment on that. For many years we’ve had our
cottage there. The flood has =
been
there. It’s no worse th=
an it
was when we bought it and basically it’s just like its been and it
hasn’t changed and building it won’t change it and our cottage =
has
been there for many, many years since the 1930’s and its has existed =
by a
lake, like exactly what you said and things have gone very well for over 50
years. Bill Lee – Well, that’s not true because t=
he
more asphalt and concrete you put in increases the water levels. It will make the lake level worse =
every
year that there is development done. Lisa Schwab – But we were there before the
development. They should have
thought about that before voting on the zoning amendment. Dave Parker - Is this the property across from that?
Bill Lee – That’s their lot; it’s to=
tally
under water. (Note: B=
oard
members were looking at the picture that Nicole Lee showed.) Gary Harris – I would like to say that there are
houses as close as the Schwab’s house to Elizabeth Schwab – I’ve been out there reg=
ularly
since the 1960’s and some years it didn’t flood at all and every
once in awhile it would do it and in a couple of days it would go down. At the time my husband explained t=
o me
that
Chair – Okay, now I would like to hear from any = of the other people who are here.
Leslie Schuster – I am curious about the parking situation. Will they park on = their property?
Chair – I was curious about that also. Where would the driveway be?
Elizabeth Schwab – Traditionally the car was par= ked between the two cottages – between the Lee’s cottage and the Sc= hwab cottage. It was possible to s= wing in there. As time went on the= trees between the two cottages got larger and they took maybe six inches of that = up. We were considering taking those t= rees down so that we would have ample room to swing around. The second thing is that I am a me= mber of the Yacht Club and I do have the privilege if we have guests or if we ha= ve a second family car, I do have the privilege of parking in the Yacht Club par= king lot just above the railing out there. So basically that’s how we talked about it with the members of= the family.
Leslie Schuster – Are you saying then that you a= re going to park between the two cottages?
Elizabeth Schwab – If there is room on our lot to park, yes.
Leslie Schuster – And if there isn’t, you = will do what?
Mark Ford – I just wanted to point out that the = Yacht Club is not supposed to be there indefinitely so they will be moving.
Lisa Takach – I would like to ask a few questions. Mrs. Schwab, I see= that there was a transfer date of your property in 1997. Prior to that was it owned jointly= by you and your husband?
Elizabeth Schwab – Prior to that - the property = was quit-claimed to my husband and she owned it in his name.
Lisa Takach – When was the first time that your husband had owned it?
Lisa Takach – Was that by a different family mem= ber then?
Lisa Takach – Mr. Lee, you said you had purchase= d your home in what year?
Bill Lee – Three years ago, I believe October 20= 06.
Lisa Takach – There was some mention that you ha= d done some renovations or an addition or something.
Bill Lee – I did, I made some renovations on the= lake side. I put in some larger wi= ndows to take advantage of the view.
Lisa Takach – When you were looking at the prope= rty did you ever contact the owner of the adjacent lot that we’re talking about with the application.
Bill Lee – My wife had been in contact with her because once we found out it was not a buildable lot, we considered purchas= ing it.
Lisa Takach – Is that your principal place of residence year around?
Bill Lee – That is our cottage. We spend probably eight months a y= ear there.
Nicole Lee – We actually put our other home on t= he market because we wanted to live out at the lake permanently but due to the economic conditions we are unable to sell it. At this point we are still hi= ghly considering living there permanently.
Lisa Takach – Have you had it on the market at a= ll?
Bill Lee – Not the cottage, our other home, but = we decided to take it off the market.
Lisa Takach – But you live at the cottage around= eight months out of the year, is that what you said?
Bill Lee – We’re there about eight months.= We’re part of the ski team t= oo so we are there quite a bit.
Lisa Takach – Mrs. Schwab, how often do you think – or in the past how often do you think the cottage was occupied?
Lisa Schwab – One of the reasons we are doing th= is is because people are coming on our property and being there and trespassing w= hen they shouldn’t be and if we don’t get this variance we are goin= g to have to put up a fence around our property to keep people out.
Leslie Schuster – I just wanted to say that I= 217;ve lived out there eight years and I have never seen anybody take care of that property but the people that are there and it’s not this family. There was a sailboat that had been= left there that was a hazard and we cleaned that up. Only the residents that live there= have taken care of that property and no one has done anything on that property to abuse it at all. There would = be no reason to put up a fence.
Lisa Schwab – That’s trespassing right the= re.
Lisa Takach (to Zoning Inspector) = – Section 710, the termination of nonconforming uses.
Zoning Inspector Alliss Strogin – This is not a
nonconforming use because it’s residential and it’s still
residential. It is a nonconfo=
rming
lot of record, which is Section 706 and I think if you read it –
“In any district in which single family dwellings are permitted, a si=
ngle
family dwelling and customary accessory buildings may be erected on any leg=
al
lot of record at the effective date of adoption or amendment of the Resolut=
ion,
not withstanding limitation imposed by other provisions of this Resolution,
provided all such lots are approved by the Medina County Health Department =
for
on-site sewer and water facilities, if applicable. This provision shall apply even th=
ough
such lot fails to meet the requirements for area or width, or both, that are
generally applicable in the district provided that yard dimensions and
requirements other than those applying to area or width, or both, of the lot
shall conform to the current regulations for the district in which such lot=
is
located.” This is the s=
entence
that I think is critical here – “Variances of requirements list=
ed
in Article III (which is Rural Residential) of this Resolution other than l=
ot
area or lot width shall be obtained only through action of the Board of Zon=
ing
Appeals as provided in Article X.”&n=
bsp;
So basically what it is saying is it is a lot of record and it’=
;s a
current lot of record and technically it’s a buildable lot. The fact that you can’t put a
house on there that you would like to put, it’s still a viable lot
– it’s not a taking. But
it’s saying that if they can’t meet the lot requirements as far=
as
setbacks and all those good things, then it shall be obtained only through =
the
action of the Board of Zoning Appeals.&nbs=
p;
So the Board of Appeals can, if it wants to, grant variances to the =
side
yards and setbacks so that a house can be put on it. A nonconforming use where it is,
let’s say it wasn’t a residence but a restaurant or a hot dog s=
tand
and the zoning changed, that would be a nonconforming use and if that use w=
as
gone for more than two years, it goes back to what the zoning of that distr=
ict
is today, which is residential – was residential – still
residential – it is a nonconforming lot. In terms of the Yacht Club I think=
you
are familiar and had copies of the plan for Chippewa Landing that is going =
out
there and making the assumption that such project is still going through as
they say it is, the Yacht Club will be relocated from where it is presently=
at
so parking might be an issue so I guess that’s where I’m at.
Chair – Does anyone else have any questions for = our zoning inspector?
Lisa Schwab – About the parking, a lot of people= park between cottages. If they do,= we can too. And what I’ve = heard too from the lady at the Yacht Club that it will be there from five to ten years.
Sandra Schwab – I just wanted to show a picture – we had discussed parking. Where our property is this gives us room to park at least one car between two trees. (The Board looked at the picture relative to parking between the trees.)
Chair – The time frame that they are speaking of because they didn’t build right away, how = does that come into play?
Zoning Inspector – As I said earlier, terminatio= n of nonconforming use is where the two year limit comes into play.
Chair – But it’s not a nonconforming use &= #8211;
Zoning Inspector – Right, it was residential and= it is still residential. The proble= m with it is that it can no longer conform to our current setbacks, sideyards, are= as and all that.
Chair – But neither can any property in
Zoning Inspector – Exactly and I think I’ve mentioned to you on numerous occasions that there are issues out there. In fact, I’m surprised that = they even have a clear title but I can see what they have done is that it has st= ayed in the family by quit-claim and nobody has ever had to go out and survey it= .
Chair – This is part of the area that they are t= alking about redoing with the new owners, correct?
Zoning Inspector – Yes, Gary Sills said he spent= two months having all that resurveyed because the lots, some of those lines are running through buildings, and some of the houses are not completely on the= lot they are supposed to be which has caused title companies trouble down there= and part of his agreement, Mr. Sills was supposed to resurvey all this and try = to make these lots more whole, but this particular lot looks like it is not encumbered with another building on top of it, which is a good thing. The two-year restriction is on a nonconforming use – this is not a conforming use but it would be a nonconforming structure unless the Board of Zoning Appeals desires to grant sufficient variances in order for them to construct another residential hou= se there.
Chair – There was a house there before.
Zoning Inspector – Right.
Chair – There’s a fire hydrant right in fr= ont too. Does that inhibit gettin= g to that property and parking and things like that besides the trees?
Sandra Schwab – It’s not directly in front, there’s a little space between the two trees.
Chair – How would fire trucks get back there?
Sandra Cotman – I would like to know how much th= ey have contributed since 2000 and they are saying they did all this but it’s been nine years. I= s it going to be a cottage or a year around home?
Zoning Inspector – It doesn’t matter. In terms of the Fire Department th=
at
area as a whole, there are two clumps of cottage-type units (some are
permanent) and they have been a problem for the township for many, many yea=
rs
because of the size and weight of the equipment. The bridge that has to be gone ove=
r,
they will not take their equipment over it because of the weight. To my knowledge they have not take=
n the
equipment back there for many years.
But they do have, as part of the
Chair – Does anyone else have any questions for = the Zoning Inspector?
Lisa Takach – Yes, the Rural Residential, in that area, has it always been that way. When that property was originally built, do you know what the zoning= was?
Zoning Inspector – In 1930, I haven’t a cl= ue.
Dave Parker – No zoning.
Lisa Takach – When did the Rural Residential com= e into play?
Dave Parker - In the 1950’s.
Zoning Inspector – I don’t know. This book took effect in 1996 so i= n 1996 it was Rural Residential. Wha= t it was prior to that I wouldn’t know without looking. From my knowledge of zoning in the county as a whole, most townships didn’t have zoning of much of anyth= ing until the 1960’s, some had some basic zoning in the 1950’s and = some started doing it in the 1960’s and most didn’t get really serio= us until the 1970’s. Witho= ut having the availability of an old zoning book back to the 1930’s, I don’t know but since there was a lot of things built back in that are= a, especially on Eastlake, those lots (you’ve had variances on those) so those were all done in the 1920’s and 1930’s too and at the tim= e I don’t know if any zoning was around but that’s what was being built.
Chair – Has everybody been to see the property t= hat we are talking about?
(All board members acknowledged that they had seen the property.)
Chair – Does any of the board members have any o= ther questions?
Chair – So the regulatory taking that you were t= alking about, do you have anything to say about that?
Zoning Inspector – As I said, it’s not a
taking. A house can go on the=
re but
it’s up to them to meet the requirements of getting the house to fit =
on
there. Many times its unbuildable because they want a 3000 square foot h=
ome
and you could only get maybe a 1500 square foot home on a lot. But to substantiate what she’=
;s
saying, if you look at the drawing or the tax map, looking at this it looks
like a lovely subdivision laid out perfectly but=
see
Elizabeth Schwab – That’s just the situati= on.
Zoning Inspector – Anyway, the records show
that’s it is an extremely old subdivision with private streets with L=
ake
Drive Extension because
Gary Harris – Can I ask Allis a question? Didn’t Gary Sills also say t= hat when he’s done and the roads are completed that he will turn them ove= r to the people there to form a Homeowners’ Association to take care of the road?
Zoning Inspector – In answer to that, most priva= te subdivisions (by that I mean those with private roads) there is always a Homeowners’ Association whose obligation is to maintain the roads, any easements for sewers or drainage easements – those things all need to= be taken care of by a Homeowners’ Association where each lot, each owner, pays an assessment into a general fund, there’s a board of trustees f= or the Homeowners’ Association and they take care of that money. Back in the 1930’s I’m= not quite sure how well they did that but those Homeowners’ Associations = are supposed to be recorded and in place before things really get too far out of hand. Back in the 1930’s obviously the property was never deeded over to any kind of an association. Like I said, technically the road they drive on is not owned by them and they could be t= old they couldn’t use it. In negotiations with Gary Sills, he said he would get the roads up to the best they could recognizing they will never be perfect but they will be substantially better than what they have now. Then they will turn that over to t= he people there but the people there will have to form a Homeowners’ Association and all agree to that so that the roads can continue to be maintained and they will have the protection of never having to wonder if somebody is going to tell them they can’t drive on the road to their = home.
Chair – What if they don’t want to agree to that?
Zoning Inspector – That’s a legal issue th= at I’m not going to get into. I don’t know if everyone has to do it or the majority have to do it but frankly it would be very uneconomically sound or foolish for them not to because who else is going to take care of them.
Sandra Cotman – For the Homeowners’ Associ= ation primarily we have been doing it on our own ever since. We go around to collect money to maintain our street. We do not get all, we get 50% dona= tions is what it amounts to so that could be a problem.
Chair – Okay, that’s neither here nor ther= e in this issue.
Lisa Takach –
=
- =
Will the property yield a reasonable return or can
there be a beneficial use of the property without the variance? Given the size of the property and=
the
unique nature of that area, I honestly can’t think of another use.
= - = Is the variance substantial? Absolutely, I think that goes with= out saying not only from the dwelling size, the lot size, the setbacks and the acreage, I would say that it is extremely substantial variance that they are requesting.
= - = Would it change the essential character of the neighborhood? I would say, no, because they are building pretty much a cottage that was in that area anyway. But does it cause adj= oining properties to suffer a substantial detriment? I definitely take into the conside= ration the Lee’s property, the fact that they did make improvements to their home to enjoy the lakefront, especially considering that the property owners that were here before today have sat on their rights for ten years not buil= ding another dwelling there and in the interim having a property owner come in a= nd purchase an adjacent property, I think that is a substantial detriment to t= he neighbor.
= - = Will granting the variance adversely affect the delivery of government services? I see that they can get back there. I do think with what they are saying with the Homeowners’ Association a= nd whether the roads are going to be able to be maintained, I think it is some= what relevant because as it is it is difficult for them to get back there now, especially this one being at the very end of the non-dedicated road. I do see some concerns there but I don’t think it is fatal.
= - = Did the applicant purchase the property without knowledge of the zoning restrictions? No, obviously it has been in the family many years and the zoning, if there was any back when that property was initially owned by this family - there was no Rural Residential. Maybe when the property was subsequently deeded but I wouldn’t= say that technically that was a purchase because there are some quit-claims and joint and survivorship type of thing.
= - = Can the problem be solved by some other manner other than granting a variance? No,= that one was simple and straight forwarded.
= - = Finally, would granting the variance preserve the spirit and intent of the zoning requirements providing substantial justice? That’s kind of difficult because then we’re talking about the zoning being Rural Resident and that is completely different than a cottage community so I do = look at it in more of a cottage community kind of context and I think what they = are doing it looks like a lovely dwelling that they want to place and we are encouraging in that area some revitalization and it would certainly go towa= rds that spirit and intent considering that there are some run down cottages in that area and this would be something shiny new and would be very nice.
Those are my comments.
Chair – Any questions or discussion by the Board= ?
Mark Riffle – Based upon the property being in a= Rural Residential district and that there was once a house there and there is a h= ouse going back to where it was, I don’t see any problem. You got it right the= re in Section 706.
Zoning Inspector – If I may just make a comment =
that
was alluded to very briefly over here, any new structure built today has to
comply with the EPA and the
Chair – So they have a long road ahead of them.<= /p>
Zoning Inspector – You can approve it but it
doesn’t mean that it’s going to get built because the county mi=
ght
say you have to build it on stilts (and I’m being factitious when I s=
ay
that) but that’s what they do in Florida – they build those thi=
ngs
on stilts and the water goes under and the house sits there. That is something for the record t=
hat it
can’t be built without complying to the new
tougher building standards under the floodplain by the EPA and the
Dave Parker – This is kind of a small house, isn’t it – the cottage going in is kind of small?
Gary Harris – The new one is 1,032 square feet.<= /p>
Zoning Inspector – The variance he would need is= 368 square feet.
Dave Parker – I just wonder if you couldn’= t have some peace and set the house back towards the back of the property and let = your neighbor look at the lake, if possible.
Gary Harris – It could be moved back a little bu= t then it would limit their back yard.
Chair – But they would have a front yard.
Dave Parker – You would just have more front yar= d.
Gary Harris – They are putting the house in line= with everyone else on the street.
Chair – Right.
Lisa Takach – Are there sewers and water in that= area?
Gary Harris – Yes, it’s still there.
Zoning Inspector – It’s an old adage in re= al estate, if you like the view, you buy it.&= nbsp; There’s no law that says somebody can’t build a house and cut off what someone else feels is their view. Because I’ve lived for 30 ye= ars with that field and that’s wonderful but by gosh the farmer sells it = and puts up houses and all of a sudden he took away my view, well there is no l= egal status to that.
Chair – To be honest, the timeline does not matt= er for what we are discussing – that’s between the neighbors but it re= ally has no bearing on this variance we are discussing.
Elizabeth Schwab – Alright.<= /span>
Chair – Anybody, questions? Does anybody have anything else to= say?
Chair – We are closing the public participation = of the public hearing. I think we are ready for the vote. For the r= ecord, the vote is bearing on fact. = We can’t take into consideration feelings. We can’t take into considera= tion your views – we have to take into consideration facts. So the property is a buildable lot= the way it was deemed from the beginning. Anybody have anything they want to say?
Lisa Takach – Regarding the =
property
at
Mark Riffle – I’ll second the motion.
Chair – Ready to Vote?
Roll Call Vote: = Mark Riffle &= nbsp; - aye/yes
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Dave Parker &= nbsp; - no
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Lisa Takach &= nbsp; - no
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Andrea Kacinari = ; - yes
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Athena McAfee &= nbsp; - yes
MOTION PASSED by a majority vote.
For procedure purposes we will set a date to sign and approve the minutes. Once the minutes are approved/signed and a copy is hand-delivered to the applicant and he acknowledges receipt of them, it sta= rts the thirty-day time frame of appeal.
The Board agreed that the meeting to sign minutes will= be Thursday, November 12, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. at the township hall – it i= s a public meeting open to anyone who desires to attend.
(Note: T= hose submitting pictures for review wanted them back and they were returned to t= he appropriate individuals.)
= - = &nb= sp; Special meeting for General Business and To Sign Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals is Thursday, November 12, 2009, at 7 p.m. at the township hall.
Upon motion by Lisa Takach, seconded by Mark Riffle, i= t was unanimously approved that the meeting be adjourned. Meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
Marlene L. Oiler, Certified PP, PLS
(Note: M= inutes approved on 11/12/09.)