Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division 1 Public Hearing - September 7, 2021
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division 1 Public Hearing - September 7, 2021
The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) Division 1 convened on September 7, 2021, at 6:15 PM (local time) under the chairmanship of Joanna Taft. Board members present included Beth Brandon, Roderick Brahannon, and Clint McKay. Legal counsel Chris Steinmetz and planning staff members Matt Pleasant, Robert Yulenhaek, and Heather Stefan were also in attendance. The meeting addressed multiple special requests for continuances, a block of expedited petitions, and one contested non-expedited case involving a request for use and development variances.
Special Requests & Continuances
- Case 2021 DV1049 (2112/2126 East 54th Street): Petitioner requested a two-day waiver of notice requirements. A remonstrator opposed, stating insufficient time to prepare. After discussion, the board declined to grant the waiver, and the petitioner then requested a continuance. The board continued the case to October 5, 2021.
- Case 2021 UV1021 (929 Sanders Street): Petitioner requested a one-month continuance to gather more information from the neighborhood association. No opposition; staff had no objection. Continued to the October 2021 meeting.
- Case 2021 DB2036: Petitioner requested a continuance to November 2, 2021, due to a scheduling conflict. No opposition; staff no objection. Continued.
- Case 2021 UV1023 (1950 North Rural Street): Petitioner requested the case be moved to the expedited docket, noting no remonstrators were present. Staff had no objection. The board approved adding it to the expedited docket.
- Case 2021 DV1046: Petitioner requested a continuance and transfer to Board 3 for the October 19, 2021 hearing. Staff had no objection. Continued and transferred with notice if needed.
- Case 2021 DV1051 (3014/3018/3039 Alice Avenue): Petitioner requested a 30-day continuance to revise plans. A remonstrator initially opposed but later agreed after discussion. The board continued the case to October 5, 2021.
- Case 2021 DV1049 (revisited): After a break, the remonstrator agreed to a 30-day continuance. The case was continued to the October 2021 meeting.
Consent Calendar (Expedited Petitions)
The board approved a block of expedited petitions by a single 4-0 roll call vote (McKay, Bohannon, Brandon, Taft all in favor). The following cases were approved:
- 2021 SE1002 – Special exception for a daycare center at 3621 Longview Lane / 3730 Yellow Poplar Court.
- 2021 DV1050 – Variance of development standards for a detached garage taller than the primary dwelling at 10888 Vandergriff Road.
- 2021 DV1052 – Variance for driveway access from Waldemar Avenue (alley access required) at 1122 Waldemar Avenue.
- 2021 DV1053 – Variance to allow single-family dwellings and detached garages on substandard lots at 901/907 South Randolph Street.
- 2021 UV1016 – Variance of use and development standards for a second-floor addition to a two-family dwelling at 1607 Yandy Street.
- 2021 UV1019 – Variance of use and development standards for a restoration contractor and fence at 8010 East 38th Street.
- 2021 UV1023 – Variance of use to expand a liquor store at 1950 North Rural Street.
Discussion Item: Case 2021 UV1022 (8630 East 38th Street)
This case involved a request for a variance of use and development standards to legally establish two single-family dwellings (one existing) and allow an expansion with 60% open space (85% required) on a parcel zoned for agriculture. The petitioner, represented by Mark Crouch, argued that the owner—a senior citizen, veteran, and neighbor of the daughter—needed the expansion for convalescent care and that the property had long contained two structures. Staff recommended denial, advocating for a lot split to create two legal parcels, which would cost an estimated $10,000–$15,500. The petitioner declined, citing cost and the owner’s age. Board members expressed sympathy but noted the complexity, including the agricultural zoning and the precedent of two primary structures on one lot. After discussion, the petitioner agreed to a continuance to explore options, including a possible rezoning. The board unanimously voted (4-0) to continue the case to the October 5, 2021 meeting.
Key Outcomes
- The board granted 7 continuances (6 individual cases, 1 with a transfer) and added one case to the expedited docket.
- All 7 expedited petitions were approved unanimously.
- Case 2021 UV1022 was continued to the October 5, 2021 meeting.
- The board adopted findings of fact from the August 2021 hearing for case 2021 DV1039 A and B (unanimous votes).
- The meeting adjourned after all business was concluded.
Meeting Transcript
I'm going to call this meeting to order. This is a public hearing of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, Division 1. I'm Joanna Taft, Chairperson of Division 1. Other board members present today are Beth Brandon to my left, Roderick Brahannon in the back, and Clint McKay behind me. Legal counsel for the board to get today is Chris Steinmetz. Staff members present today from the division of planning are Matt Pleasant, current planning administrator, Robert Yulenhaek, senior planner. Heather Stefan, senior specialist and secretary to the board. The board is copies of the zoning ordinances that will be incorporated by reference into the record of each case heard today. The proceedings of this hearing are governed by the board's rules of procedure. The expedited cases will be heard immediately after all requests for continuances or withdrawals. As each non-expedited case is called, petitioners and remonstrators interested in that particular case will please stand. Those who intend to testify will please remain standing and be sworn. Petitioners should be on your left and remonstrators on your right as you face the board. Those who testify will state their name and address for the record before beginning the testify. Petitioners and persons appearance in appearing in support of the case being heard shall have a maximum of 15 minutes for the presentation of evidence, statements, and arguments in support of the petition. Remonstrators and persons appearing in opposition to the petition shall have a maximum of 15 minutes for the presentation of evidence, statements, and arguments in opposition to the petition. Staff will then present the administrator's comments regarding the petition. The petitioner would then be allowed five minutes for rebuttal and a summation of the case. Rebuttal must be limited to the subject matter of the initial presentations. Remonstrators will then be allowed five minutes for rebuttal of the petitioner's rebuttal evidence and a brief closing statement. No further evidence, statements, or arguments will be heard unless it's at the discretion of the board. Please limit your testimony and evidence to the matters covered in the statutory requirements, which must be met in order for the board to grant a variance. If the petitioners have failed to comply with all notice requirements as stipulated by the board's rules of procedure, including posting of the notice signed on the subject property at least 23 days prior to the hearing, the board may continue the petition. Anyone at this hearing who thinks that complete and proper notice has not been given and would like the petition continued due to lack of proper notice, must bring this matter to the board's attention at the beginning of the hearing. The board may impose various conditions or commitments as amendments before reaching a decision on certain petitions. The installation of landscaping and screening, the paving and parking area, and the dedication of rights away are examples. These conditions and commitments are an integral part of the board's decision and must be met for a granted variance to be valid. Compliance with conditions imposed by the board must be approved by an affidavit of compliance submitted by the petitioner within 30 days of completion. Unless otherwise specified, an improvement improvement location permit must be obtained prior to the establishment of the authorized improvements. Failure to comply with any condition or commitment of a variance grant is a violation enforceable of the Department of Business and Neighborhood Services. A person may file a written request to receive notice of the filing of a petition for judicial review of a decision of the board. Forms are available and may be obtained from the board secretary. Please be advised that contacting members of the board regarding a matter pending before the board outside of this public hearing process is prohibited. The voting today will be done by roll call. I will individually read each board member's name and ask them to vote yes or no. Please be courteous and orderly at all times, and please be sure all cell phone ringers are turned off. Before we hear special requests, I'll ask for a waiver of our rules of procedure to allow the board to vote for all expedited petitions and adopt their findings of fact in a single vote rather than voting on each petition separately. So I need a motion. So move, Mohanna. I need a second. Second. I will now ask for a vote. McKay. McKay, aye. Bohannon. Vohannon, aye. Brandon. Brandon, aye. Taft, aye. Is there anyone in the audience who has any questions about our procedures?
openpublica.com