BZA meeting Fenstermaker August 23, 2011

The Newbury Township Board of Zoning Appeals public hearing was called to order by Mary Lee Brezina, V. Chairman, at 7:30 p.m. on August 23, 2011 with Board members Bill Skomrock,Sr., Ken Blair and Chris Yaecker present.

All in attendance for this hearing were duly sworn and asked when testifying to state their name and confirm being sworn in. Mary Lee Brezina read the applicants request:

Gene Fenstermaker requests an area variance to construct a 360 sq.ft. open-sided addition to an existing 1250 sq.ft. accessory building 22 ft. from the south side lot line at 13909 Fairgate Blvd. in the Fairmount/Pekin Estates Subdivision in the R-1 district (vs. Art. V, Sec. 5.05 req’d 30 ft. side setback). The 1620 sq.ft. combined accessory building exceeds the allowed 500 sq.ft. per acre – 1550 sq.ft. for 3.1 acres excluding road-right-of-way vs. 1625 sq.ft. allowed including road-right-of-way (per Art. V, Sec. 5.02A5 & A3b).
Ms. Brezina asked Mr.Gene Fenstermaker to state his case.

Mr. Fenstermaker said he needs additional storage for a camper, tractor and misc. The cheapest way to obtain additional space is to build onto the side of the existing storage building; he has already built out the opposite side.

Mr. Yaecker asked whether this would be a pole barn construction. Mr. Fenstermaker said he would have a 12” block rear foundation with rebar filled concrete to ground (2nd floor) level; the ground slopes back to front. Mr. Skomrock Sr. agreed good stabilization was needed for the rear wall addition. He also said that the 70 sq.ft. overage of total square footage was not significant, > 5%. Mr. Fenstermaker said he will install footer drains and gravel to address the slope runoff.
Mr. Blair said he had visited the site and agreed the addition would look good.

Ms. Endres said she has suggested that the Zoning Commission allow different side yard setbacks, 30 ft. for primary and 15 ft. for auxiliary buildings – already included in other Geauga townships code.

Mr. Skomrock Sr. asked the location of the neighbor’s house to the south – close to the road, not near the auxiliary building side line. Discussion continued regarding the slope of the neighboring parcels; Mr. Fenstermaker pointed out the drainage swale location and culvert under the road on the site projection screen.

Mr. Yaecker explained that as in this case, older platted parcels included the road right-of-way in the parcel acreage but newer parcels did not. Ms. Endres said she will recommend that the Zoning Commission clarify the r-o-w in the code vs. the legal description.

Ms. Brezina asked the board for additional comments or questions. There being no more questions, Ms. Brezina called for a motion stating that a yes vote would grant the area variance for size and side setback as requested.
Ken Blair moved to accept area variance request for the 360 sq,ft. addition - 22 ft. from the south side line as requested; Bill Skomrock, Sr. seconded the motion.

Ken Blair yes
Mary Lee Brezina yes
Chris Yaecker yes
Bill Skomrock, Sr. yes

Ms. Brezina informed the applicant his area variance was granted.

Ms. Brezina read to the Appellant and audience, “Within 30 days after service of the minutes granting your request, if someone wishes to challenge this decision through the court, he or she may. The challenge could reverse or negate our decision. Mr. Fidel informed the Appellant and the audience that the 30-day period commences with the Appellants’ signing receipt of the signed minutes. They will be mailed registered return receipt to the Appellant. All persons receiving notice of the hearing will receive copies of the minutes. At the time you receive your permit you must also comply with all other requirements of Newbury Township zoning”.
Ms. Brezina adjourned the BZA hearing at 7:50 p.m. As the applicant left, Board members wished him good luck.
Board members resumed their meeting by establishing the conclusions of fact:
Based on the following FINDING OF FACTS for the area variance:

1) The parcel could yield a reasonable return without the area variance but the additional storage will add usefulness and value to the property.
2) The 26.7% side setback variance is reasonable due to the topography restrictions; the size area variance is >5%.
3) The essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially altered and the adjoining property owners would suffer no detriment as a result of this variance.
4) The area variance has no effect on delivery of governmental services.
5) The owner purchased the property with specific knowledge of these zoning restrictions.
6) The property owner’s predicament could not be obviated through some method other than the required area variances; the addition to the existing structure is the best site.
7) The spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would be observed and substantial justice done by granting the variance. Such other criteria, which the Board believes relates to determining whether the zoning regulation is equitable; there were no objections as there were no adjacent property owners in attendance.

Ms. Endres informed the board of the next BZA hearing for H&M Landscaping who have been operating for 15 years without a permit. Originally there were two lots; the west lot has permit information on file but for the wrong address – no information exists for the east lot split for 10389 Kinsman Rd. Banks are now requiring statement of zoning compliance – hence this BZA hearing.

The board adjourned at 8:20 p.m.

Marge Hrabak

Signatures of the Newbury Board of Zoning Appeals:

_________________________ ____________________________
Mary Lee Brezina, V. Chairman Ken Blair

_________________________ _________________________
Bill Skomrock, Sr. Chris Yaecker

Marge Hrabak, Sec’y BZA