Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Zoning Board of Appeals Denies Variance for Garage Setback at 304 North College Parkway - May 27, 2014

Zoning Board of Appeals — Tuesday, May 27, 2014

BodyFrederick, Maryland

SessionZoning Board of Appeals

DateTuesday, May 27, 2014

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 47:37

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

0:20

Good evening, everybody.

0:22

All right.

0:23

Welcome to the May 27th 2014 meeting of the City of Frederick Zoning Board of Appeals.

0:31

I'll uh for uh everyone's information.

0:34

I'll go over uh a little bit of background about the zoning board and how our processes and procedures work uh for tonight.

0:41

Um then we've got a couple standing items on the agenda to go through, and then after that, we'll get on to tonight's cases, which uh we only have one on the agenda for this evening.

0:51

Uh the members of the zoning board of appeals, uh we are all volunteers, we're all residents of the city of Frederick.

0:58

Uh we are appointed by the mayor, and those appointments are confirmed by the Board of Aldermen.

1:04

Uh in addition to the members of the zoning board of appeal, we also have staff with us tonight who support us in uh our activities for the evening.

1:15

And uh just to introduce them for uh everyone's edification to my far right and your far left, Ms.

1:22

Jeff Love.

1:22

He is a planner with the City of Frederick.

1:25

Uh next to Mr.

1:26

Love is Ms.

1:26

Rachel DePo.

1:27

She is an assistant uh attorney with the City of Frederick.

1:31

Uh next to Ms.

1:32

DePoe is Ms.

1:33

Gabrielle Dunn.

1:34

She is the uh division manager of current planning with the planning department.

1:39

And then to my far left and your far right, it's Ms.

1:42

Leo Ortiz.

1:43

She is the office manager with the planning department, and among her numerous duties is also to support the zoning board of appeals.

1:50

Um little bit on tonight's process.

1:53

Uh we'll uh I'll call your case and uh I can see that you're here.

1:58

Normally I'd say give a wave to let me know that uh uh the applicant is with us tonight.

2:03

Um we will first ask for the staff to read the staff report into the record.

2:08

Uh at the end of the staff report, the staff will give a recommendation regarding the case.

2:13

Uh that is one element that we will use in our decision making, but it is not the only element.

2:18

Um following the staff report, we will ask the applicant if they have any comments that they'd like to add or anything that they'd like to clarify.

2:25

Um the members of the board may ask questions during that.

2:29

Uh it's very uh casual and back and forth.

2:33

Um, we will see if anyone from the general public would like to speak regarding the case, either uh in favor or against, or just to add some information.

2:43

Uh following public comment, we'll see if the applicant has any closing remarks.

2:48

Uh that will close the uh public comment section of testimony, uh, and I will then call for a motion from the board.

2:56

Um just so that everyone's aware uh by our bylaws for the zoning board of appeals.

3:02

A uh motion requires four votes in the affirmative to pass.

3:07

Uh so a simple majority does not pass a motion, it takes four out of five votes uh to pass a motion uh of the board.

3:16

Um also if you are speaking at any time uh tonight, if we could have your name and your address uh for the record when you first come to the microphone, and if you happen to leave and come back if we could have your name again.

3:27

Uh the reason for that is that all of tonight's proceedings are recorded, and anyone who is aggrieved by a decision of the zoning board of appeals has a right to appeal that decision on to circuit court.

3:38

And when the judge is listening in back through the tapes, that helps them uh sort out who might happen to be speaking at any one time.

3:46

So any questions about tonight's proceedings?

3:50

No?

3:51

Okay, seeing none, like I mentioned, we've got a couple of short housekeeping uh items on the agenda, and then we'll get on to tonight's case.

4:00

Members of the board, uh first item on our agenda tonight under board business is review and approval of the April 22nd, 2014 minutes of the zoning board of appeals, and I will entertain a motion.

4:11

Move to approve.

4:16

Second.

4:17

Second from Mr.

4:18

Patchin.

4:18

Is there any discussion of the motion?

4:21

Seeing none, uh, we can do a vote voice vote for this.

4:26

All those in favor signify by saying aye.

4:28

Aye.

4:29

Any opposed?

4:30

None opposed, and the minutes are approved as written.

4:36

Item number two on tonight's agenda is my favorite.

4:40

General public comments regarding zoning in the city that has nothing to do with any of the cases tonight.

4:45

Uh so unless you all want to give some zon general zoning comments.

4:51

Seeing none, uh, we will go.

4:54

I think we've had twice the time that I've been here, so it does happen every once in a while.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Zoning And Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████69%

Community Engagement█████████14%

Procedural███████11%

Urban Design██3%

Legal Matters██3%

Summary of Proceedings

Zoning Board of Appeals Denies Variance for Garage Setback at 304 North College Parkway - May 27, 2014

The City of Frederick Zoning Board of Appeals met on May 27, 2014, at 7:00 PM to consider a single variance request for a garage at 304 North College Parkway. The board also approved the minutes from the April 22, 2014 meeting. No general public comments were made on other zoning matters. After hearing staff testimony, applicant remarks, and public comment, the board voted unanimously to deny the requested three-foot variance from the required six-foot rear setback for an accessory structure.

Consent Calendar

Approval of April 22, 2014 Minutes: The board approved the minutes of the previous meeting by voice vote with no opposition.

Public Comments & Testimony

Kathy Faye (302 North College Parkway) spoke in support of the applicant, emphasizing the desire for aesthetic cohesiveness in the alley and noting that the alley has very low traffic, with only one incident in 22 years of backing out.
Neil Faye (302 North College Parkway) also supported the applicant, stating that alignment of the garage with neighboring structures is important and that the appeals process is appropriate for such variances.

Discussion Items

Staff Report (Jeff Love, Planner): The applicant requested a three-foot variance to Section 803(a)(4) to build a 24x14 one-car garage three feet from the rear property line (alley right-of-way) instead of the required six feet. Staff found that the lot is flat, exceeds minimum dimensions, and has no physical peculiarities. The staff recommended denial, concluding that the variance would not meet the seven tests in Section 313(c), particularly the lack of exceptional or extraordinary circumstances. The garage could be built with a six-foot setback while still allowing adequate yard space.
Applicant (Tina Moyer, owner; George Harn, representative): The applicant argued that the variance is needed to align the garage with existing non-conforming garages at 306 and 308 North College Parkway, which are set back approximately three to three-and-a-half feet. They emphasized community uniformity, improved turning access with a wider door, and the desire to maintain the alley's character as a neighborhood gathering space. They acknowledged the property lacked unusual topography or shape.
Board Deliberation: Members discussed the strict legal criteria for variances, including the requirement that the property must have a unique hardship. Board member Brian Patchin noted that granting a variance could set a precedent that undermines future enforcement of setbacks. The board also considered that the existing non-conforming garages are not protected and would need to be rebuilt in compliance if damaged. Staff attorney Rachel DePo reminded the board that the threshold question is the presence of a unique property characteristic, which was absent here.

Key Outcomes

Motion to Deny (moved by member Colby, seconded by Patchin): The board voted 4–0 to deny the variance request for ZBA14-299V. The motion found that the applicant failed to meet condition two of Section 313(c) because the property is flat, square, and has no exceptional narrowness, shallowness, shape, or topographical conditions. The board concluded that the literal interpretation of the code does not deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties, and that granting the variance would confer a special privilege. The garage can be constructed with the required six-foot setback.

Meeting Transcript

Good evening, everybody. All right. Welcome to the May 27th 2014 meeting of the City of Frederick Zoning Board of Appeals. I'll uh for uh everyone's information. I'll go over uh a little bit of background about the zoning board and how our processes and procedures work uh for tonight. Um then we've got a couple standing items on the agenda to go through, and then after that, we'll get on to tonight's cases, which uh we only have one on the agenda for this evening. Uh the members of the zoning board of appeals, uh we are all volunteers, we're all residents of the city of Frederick. Uh we are appointed by the mayor, and those appointments are confirmed by the Board of Aldermen. Uh in addition to the members of the zoning board of appeal, we also have staff with us tonight who support us in uh our activities for the evening. And uh just to introduce them for uh everyone's edification to my far right and your far left, Ms. Jeff Love. He is a planner with the City of Frederick. Uh next to Mr. Love is Ms. Rachel DePo. She is an assistant uh attorney with the City of Frederick. Uh next to Ms. DePoe is Ms. Gabrielle Dunn. She is the uh division manager of current planning with the planning department. And then to my far left and your far right, it's Ms. Leo Ortiz. She is the office manager with the planning department, and among her numerous duties is also to support the zoning board of appeals. Um little bit on tonight's process. Uh we'll uh I'll call your case and uh I can see that you're here. Normally I'd say give a wave to let me know that uh uh the applicant is with us tonight. Um we will first ask for the staff to read the staff report into the record. Uh at the end of the staff report, the staff will give a recommendation regarding the case. Uh that is one element that we will use in our decision making, but it is not the only element. Um following the staff report, we will ask the applicant if they have any comments that they'd like to add or anything that they'd like to clarify. Um the members of the board may ask questions during that. Uh it's very uh casual and back and forth. Um, we will see if anyone from the general public would like to speak regarding the case, either uh in favor or against, or just to add some information. Uh following public comment, we'll see if the applicant has any closing remarks. Uh that will close the uh public comment section of testimony, uh, and I will then call for a motion from the board. Um just so that everyone's aware uh by our bylaws for the zoning board of appeals. A uh motion requires four votes in the affirmative to pass. Uh so a simple majority does not pass a motion, it takes four out of five votes uh to pass a motion uh of the board. Um also if you are speaking at any time uh tonight, if we could have your name and your address uh for the record when you first come to the microphone, and if you happen to leave and come back if we could have your name again. Uh the reason for that is that all of tonight's proceedings are recorded, and anyone who is aggrieved by a decision of the zoning board of appeals has a right to appeal that decision on to circuit court. And when the judge is listening in back through the tapes, that helps them uh sort out who might happen to be speaking at any one time. So any questions about tonight's proceedings? No? Okay, seeing none, like I mentioned, we've got a couple of short housekeeping uh items on the agenda, and then we'll get on to tonight's case. Members of the board, uh first item on our agenda tonight under board business is review and approval of the April 22nd, 2014 minutes of the zoning board of appeals, and I will entertain a motion. Move to approve. Second. Second from Mr. Patchin. Is there any discussion of the motion?

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com