Zoning Board of Appeals - 2/17/2009 - Mullett

The Newbury Township Board of Zoning Appeals public hearing was called to order by Mary Lee Brezina, Vice Chairman at 7:30 p.m. on February 17, 2009 with Tezeon Wong and Ken Blair (sitting for Dean Eppley) present.  Ms. Endres presented photos of the site for board review.

All who wished to speak at this hearing were duly sworn and asked when testifying to state their name and confirm being sworn in.  Ms. Brezina read the applicant's request.

The Mullett Company is requesting an area variance to construct a 3330 sq.ft. addition to an existing non-conforming structure that would be 122.6 ft. from the rear lot line (vs. Art. VII, Sec. 7.07C&E req’d 150 ft. setback from a residential district) & lot coverage of 47.1% (vs. Sec. 7.09 permitted 40%) at 15000 Cross Creek Pkwy in the M-1 Industrial district.  Expansion of a non-conforming building, structure & use requires BZA approval per Art.XIV, Sec. 14.04A&B & 14.05.

Ms. Brezina asked the applicant to state his case.

Mr. Mullett outlined the need for more manufacturing and storage space required by Hostar International, his building tenant, for the manufacture and assembly of service carts mostly used by maintenance personnel in hotels.  He said Hostar had outgrown their existing space and requested the maximum additional warehouse space permissible.  The 30 ft. extension to the north would be inline with the present building and would stay 26.68 ft. from the side lot line (25 ft. minimum).

Ms. Brezina said she had viewed the site, determining that the addition would extend the present rear building line without further rear lot line encroachment.

Mr. Wong asked about possible building addition on the south side and whether a dual variance should be considered. Mr. Mullett said that would wait for a future time.

Ms. Endres explained that the issue of lot coverage, increased to allow 50%, was being addressed in the upcoming Zoning Amendment so this 47% would then comply.

Ms. Brezina asked the board for additional comments or questions.  There being no more questions, Ms. Brezina called for a motion to grant the Variance Request stating that a yes vote would grant the variance.

Ken Blair moved to grant the variance as requested; Mr. Wong seconded the motion that passed by unanimous vote.

    Ken Blair                yes
    Tezeon Wong                yes
Mary Lee Brezina            yes

Ms. Brezina informed the applicant his variance request 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 required permit can be issued once all requirements regarding this application are satisfied, although if you plan construction it is recommended you wait the 30 days before proceeding.  The challenge could reverse or negate our decision.  At the time you receive your permit you must also comply with all other requirements of Newbury Township zoning”.  

Ms. Brezina 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.

The board members wished the applicant good luck with the project.

Ms. Brezina adjourned the BZA hearing at 7:50 p.m.

Based on the following FINDING OF FACTS, the Board has voted to grant the 3330 sq.ft. addition to the existing non-conforming industrial building.

1) The parcel could yield a reasonable return but the addition is an extension of the original building without further setback encroachments.

2) The 10% variance is not substantial and the lot coverage is reasonable.

3)   The essential character of the neighborhood would not be altered and the adjoining property owners would suffer no substantial detriment as a result of this variance.

4) The variance has no effect on delivery of governmental services.

5) The owner was aware of the zoning restrictions when the lot was purchased however zoning has changed since then.

6) The property owner’s predicament could not be obviated through some method other than a variance for this most logical in-line building expansion to accommodate the tenant’s growth needs.

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 neighbors in attendance to object.

Discussion continued regarding scheduled and future BZA hearings.

Ms. Brezina adjourned the BZA meeting at 8:20 p.m.

Marge Hrabak, Secretary

Signatures of the Newbury Board of Zoning Appeals:

_________________________    ____________________________
    Tezeon Wong

____________________________    ____________________________
Mary Lee Brezina, V. Chairman    Ken Blair (sitting for Dean Eppley

Attest:__________________    ____________________
Marge Hrabak  Sec’y BZA    Date: