Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division III Hearing - January 15, 2019
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division III Hearing - January 15, 2019
The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division III met on January 15, 2019, at 6:15 PM to hear variance requests, grant continuances, and conduct board business. Chairperson Craig E. Von Dalen presided over the hearing, with board members Tony Antoli Bochenko, Kim Boyd, Marisol Govea, and Matthew Draving present. Legal counsel Chris Steinmetz and planning staff were also in attendance. The board heard three expedited variance petitions, unanimously approving the first two and approving the third by a 4-1 vote. The board also continued one petition, acknowledged a withdrawal, and elected officers.
Consent Calendar
- Withdrawal: 2018 UV 1042 – Petition withdrawn by the petitioner, acknowledged by the board.
- Automatic continuances: 2018 DV 3-057 and 2018 DV 3-061 were continued to the February 19, 2019 hearing after timely automatic continuances were filed by registered neighborhood associations.
- Officer elections: Craig Von Dalen re-elected Chairperson, Marisol Govea elected Vice Chair, and Matthew Draving elected Secretary (all by voice vote).
Public Comments & Testimony
- 2018 UV 3-030 (1306 North Pennsylvania Street): Dan Mullendore, chairman of the Old North Side Land Use Committee, representing the Old North Side Neighborhood Association, opposed the parking lot variance. He argued that a parking lot would make Pennsylvania Street an “alley for Meridian Street” and urged the board to require a 40-foot green buffer with landscaping to preserve future development potential. He cited a recent SPEA study indicating downtown parking is oversupplied by about 30 percent. Tim Gray, owner of a commercial building across the street, also opposed the variance, requesting a condition for landscaping along Pennsylvania Street to restore trees and a green strip. He noted recent renovations in the area and suggested the property could support higher uses.
Discussion Items
- 2018 DV 3-060 (6251 East Southport Road): Petitioner Ryan Brymeyer requested a variance to build a 17.5-foot-tall detached garage with a 10-foot rear setback, exceeding the primary dwelling height and the required 15-foot rear setback. No remonstrators appeared, and staff had no additional comments. The board voted unanimously to approve.
- 2018 UV 3-031 (6345 Rockville Road): Petitioner Hamish Brims requested a variance of use to allow a security, courier, and delivery business with up to five company vehicles on the property, which is zoned C4 and does not permit fleet terminals. Staff recommended approval subject to a plan of operation dated December 10, 2018, and with support from the Rockville High School Girls School Roads Neighborhood Association. The following three commitments were imposed: (1) outdoor lighting must be deflected away from residences to the south, (2) no hotel, motel, or apartments may be constructed on the property, and (3) the commitments may be enforced by the neighborhood association. The petitioner agreed, and the board approved unanimously.
- 2018 UV 3-030 (1306 North Pennsylvania Street): Petitioner Michael Rabinowich, representing LOA Properties LLC, requested a variance to expand an existing L-shaped parking lot into an adjacent vacant lot, adding 17 parking spaces for two apartment buildings (the Winter House at 1321 N Meridian and the Raleigh at 108 E 13th St). The expansion area has been vacant since the early 1970s. The petitioner argued the lot would provide 118 spaces for 206 units, still short of the 155 required by ordinance, but a significant improvement. Staff explained that the regional center approval previously granted was erroneous and that the variance would correct the oversight, allowing for improved landscaping, fencing, lighting, and a safer lot layout. Remonstrators opposed the surface parking use, preferring a larger setback or future redevelopment. During discussion, board members questioned ADA parking adequacy and the impact on future development. Staff responded that ADA spaces are located elsewhere in the existing lot and that the variance does not preclude future redevelopment. The board vote was 4-1 in favor, with Kim Boyd voting no.
Key Outcomes
- 2018 DV 3-060: Approved unanimously (5-0).
- 2018 UV 3-031: Approved unanimously (5-0) with three commitments.
- 2018 UV 3-030: Approved 4-1 (Boyd dissenting).
- Continuance: 2018 DV 3-056 continued to February 19, 2019 due to need for additional property owner consent.
- Findings of fact: The board adopted revised findings for 2018 UV 3026 and negative findings for 2018 DV 3049, noting that one of the required deciding votes came from board member Lethig, who resigned after the prior hearing where the petition was denied.
- Officers elected: Von Dalen (Chair), Govea (Vice Chair), Draving (Secretary). The board welcomed new member Tony Antoli Bochenko.
The hearing adjourned after all business was completed.
Meeting Transcript
This call to order. This is a public hearing of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, Division III. I am Craig E. Von Dalen, Chairperson of Division III. The other board members present are to my left, Tony Antoli Bochenko, our new member, and Kim Boyd. And to my right, Marisol Govea and Matthew Draving. Legal Counsel for the Board today is Chris Steinmetz. Recording these proceedings today is Ron Hampton. Staffers members present today from the Division of Planning are Heather Staphen, our senior board specialist and secretary to the board. Larry Callaway, Principal Planner 2. Robert Eulin Hake, Senior Planner, Paige Story, Senior Planner. Keith Holdsworth is the current planning administrator. The board has copies of the zoning ordinance 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 to testify. Petitioners and persons 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 administrators' comments regarding the petition. The petitioner will 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 is 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 petitions have failed petitioners have failed to comply with all notice requirements as stipulated by the board's rules of procedure, including the posting of notice signs on the subject property at least 23 days prior to the hearing, the board may continue the petition. Anyone at this hearing who thinks complete and proper notice has not been given and would like the petition continued due to lack of proper notice must bring that 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 of parking area, the dedication of right of way 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 proved by an affidavit of compliance submitted by the petitioner within 30 days of completion. Unless otherwise specified, an improvement location permit must be obtained prior to the establishment of the authorized improvements. Failure to comply with any conditions or commitments of a variance grant is a violation enforceable by 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. The written request must be filed within five days of the board's decision and must include the person's full name and correct mailing address and a reference to the board's petition number. 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 the public hearing process is prohibited. Please be courteous and orderly at all times, and please be sure all cell phone ringers are turned off. Is there any anyone in the audience who has any questions about our procedures? None being seen, we will consider special requests and continuances at this time. Chairperson Von Dalen, members of the board, staff will draw your attention to petition number two thousand eighteen, DV three-056, located at 3615 White Cedar Court. Petitioners planning on amending this uh notice, this request. However, the new amended variance request requires an additional consent from a property owner, which requires the petition to be continued until that consent is provided, which it has not. Therefore, the petitioner is requesting that this petition be continued to the February 19th, 2019 hearing with new notice to provide time to amend the petition. Very well. Is there anyone else in the audience with an interest in petition number 2018 DB 3-056 at 3615 White Cedar Court? None being seen, we'll go to comments from staff.
openpublica.com