Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-17-2023 Board of Adjustments Agenda PacketDecember 19, 2022 Board of Adjustments Minutes 1 The Board of Adjustments met Monday, December 19, 2022, at 5:00 PM at the City Municipal Complex, 161 N. Section Street in the Council Chambers. Present: Anil Vira, Chairman; Cathy Slagle, Vice-Chair; Frank Lamia; Ryan Baker; David Martin, Alternate I; Mike Jeffries, Development Services Manager; Michelle Melton, City Planner; and Allie Knutson, Secretary. Chairman Vira called the meeting to order at 5:02 PM. Approval of Minutes Ryan Baker made a motion to approve the minutes from the November 21, 2022, meeting. David Martin seconded the motion and the motion carried with the following vote: Aye: Chairman Vira, Cathy Slagle, Frank Lamia, Ryan Baker, and David Martin. Nay: None. BOA 22.15 Public hearing to consider the request of the Owner, Winston Smith, for a 5’ variance to the driveway side setback requirements as well as a variance for the 3’ separation to the side lot line, to allow for the construction of a shared driveway on the adjoining lots, Lot 12 and Lot 14 on School Street. The properties are zoned R-2, Medium Density Single-Family Residential District and are approximately 0.48 acres. PPIN #: 2472 Michelle Melton, City Planner, presented the case summary, showed an aerial of the property, and the site plan. The Applicant, R. Winston Smith, is requesting a 5’ variance to the driveway side setback requirements as well as a variance for the 3’ separation to the side lot line, to allow for a shared driveway on the adjoining lots. The approval of the variance would result in a 10’ side setback instead of 15’ as is called for when a driveway extends past the front line of the principle structure. The proposed shared driveway will be designed to be pervious geoweb or concrete. The Applicant makes the request due to the smaller than average lot size for R-2 zoning and steep topography. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Case BOA 22.15 with the following conditions: 1. Driveway shall be made from pervious material and approved by the Planning Department. 2. Driveway shall be split along the common lot line 5’ on each side. 3. Driveway shall be a maximum of 10’ wide. 4. Provide a 20’ Ingress/Egress easement between lots 12 and 14. Chairman Vira asked what the sizes of the lots were, Michelle Melton stated that the site plan reflects one lot being approximately 51’ wide and one lot being approximately 76’ wide. December 19, 2022 Board of Adjustments Minutes 2 Ryan Baker asked where the 20’ easement would be located. Ms. Melton stated that there is an existing easement off of School Street and will be extended to the subject lots. Mike Jeffries, Development Services Manager, added that there is an existing easement, but there would an additional easement where the shared driveway would be to give the owners of lot 12 and lot 14 permission to use the shared driveway. Cathy Slagle asked if the lots were flag lots. Mr. Jeffries replied that they were not. They are historical lots that were platted in the 50’s or 60’s designed and intended to front on Fels Avenue. Due to the topography and drainage area of the backside of Fels Avenue, it was ever extended. The only way to access the subject lots, is through an easement. Ryan Baker asked if there would be any issues with the easement regarding fire access. Mr. Jeffries replied that it would be looked at during the building permit. Winston Smith, the Applicant, stated that he had spoken with Erik Cortinas, the Building Official, about fire access as well. Mr. Smith stated that the lots are narrow that technically front Fels Avenue. There are two existing homes and two more will be added. The lots are squeezed on all sides and there is a difficult slope and a drainage ditch. He is planning on building two homes that have drive-under garages. Chairman Vira opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Ryan Baker made a motion to approve Case BOA 22.15, subject to staff’s recommendations. David Martin seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: Aye: Anil Vira, Cathy Slagle, Frank Lamia, Ryan Baker, and David Martin. Nay: None. Old/New Business Mr. Jeffries stated that the Planning Department did not receive any applications for the January meeting so there would not be a meeting next month. Adjournment Cathy Slagle made a motion to adjourn, and the motion carried with the following vote: Aye: Chairman Vira, Cathy Slagle, Frank Lamia, Ryan Baker, and David Martin. Nay: None. Adjourned at 5:11 p.m. December 19, 2022 Board of Adjustments Minutes 3 ____________________________ ________________________ Anil Vira, Chairman Allie Knutson, Secretary N MOBILESTP E NS ACOL A A V E City of FairhopeBoard of Adjustment April 17, 2023 ¯ BOA 23.01 - 610 North Mobile Street Legend RoadParcelR-2 - Medium Density Single-FamilyR-4 - Low Density Multi-FamilyCOF Corp. Limits : ^ Project Name:610 N. Mobile StreetSite Data: 8,500 SFProject Type:10.5' Front Setback VarianceJurisdiction:Fairhope Zoning District:R-2PPIN Number:32193General Location:Intersection of N. Mobile Street & Pensacola Ave.Surveyor of Record: Engineer of Record: Owner / Developer:Virginia Davis ParrSchool District:Fairhope Elementary School Fairhope Middle and High Schools Recommendation: Prepared by: :Approve Mike Jeffries □ • • D 1 BOA 23.01 610 N. Mobile St. April 17, 2023 Summary of Request: The applicant, Virginia Davis Parr, is requesting a 10.5’ variance to the front setback (property line along Pensacola Avenue) requirement for property zoned R-2, Medium Density Single-Family Residential District. The property is approximately 8,500 SF and is located at 610 N. Mobile St. The request is for Lot 1 of the Volanta Subdivision MISC BK1 PG341. The recorded plat from the early 1900’s does not reflect setbacks. The result would be a setback of 24.5’ setback off Pensacola Avenue. Recorded Plat Survey Note the survey reflects an incorrect 20’ side street setback. 2 BOA 23.01 610 N. Mobile St. April 17, 2023 The Zoning Ordinance has dimension standards for each Zoning District within the municipal limits. The subject property is zoned R-2, which has the following dimensional standards: Analysis and Recommendation: Variance Criteria (a) There are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property in question because of its size, shape, or topography. Response: The lot is substandard in size and is a triangle with two 35’ setbacks and one 10’ setback. (b) The application of the ordinance to this particular piece of property would create an unnecessary hardship. Personal financial hardship is not a justification for a variance. Response: The required setbacks do not allow for a house to be built of comparable size to the surrounding neighborhood. (c) Such conditions are peculiar to the particular piece of property involved; and Response: The subject property is triangular and about half the size of the surrounding properties. (d) Relief, if granted, would not cause substantial detriment to the public good and impair the purpose and intent of this ordinance; provided however, that no variance may be granted for a use of land or building or structure that is prohibited by this ordinance. Response: Relief would not cause substantial detriment to the public good Table 3-2: Dimen sion Table -Lots and Principle Structure Dimension Min . Lot Area/ Min . Setbacks Max. total lot Max. District or Allowed Units Per Lot Width Fron t Rear Side Skeet covera2e by all height use Acre (UPA) sid e structure s RI A 3 acres/ -198 ' 75 ' 75 ' 25 ' 50 ' none 30 ' R-1 15,000 s .f./ -100 ' 40 ' 35 ' 10 ' b 20 ' 4 0% 30 ' a R-la 40,000 s.f./ -120 ' 30 ' 30 ' 10 ' b 20 ' 25 % 35 ' R-lb 30,000 s.f./ -100 ' 30 ' 30 ' 10 ' b 20 ' 25 % 35 ' R-lc 20 ,000 s.f./ -80 ' 30 ' 30 ' 10 ' b 20 ' 25% 35 ' R-2 I 0.500 s.f. -~::;· 3~· 35· 1 o· b ~o· 3 7o 0 30· ' 3 BOA 23.01 610 N. Mobile St. April 17, 2023 Comments: The property being a triangular three-sided lot results in a 35’ setback along N. Mobile St. a 35’ setback along Pensacola Ave., and a side lot line setback of 10’. The proposed request is to allow for a 24.5’ setback along Pensacola Ave. which is more than a standard street side setback of 20’. The applicant is requesting the minimum deviation to build a home on the lot. Currently a home is built across two lots of record, Lot-1 and Lot-2. Before anything could be built on Lot-1 and the variance acted upon all structures would have to be removed from both lots. Below is a proposed site plan. Recommendation: Staff recommends Approval of the 10.5’ setback variance on the Pensacola Avenue lot line. ---- I I I I //. o/ R ---- -------- -------- 4 BOA 23.01 610 N. Mobile St. April 17, 2023 Zoning Ordinance Requirements: The City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance defines a variance as follows: Variances: A modification of the strict terms of the relevant regulations in a district with regard to placement of structures, developmental criteria or provision facilities. Examples would be: allowing smaller yard dimensions because an existing lot of record is of substandard size; waiving a portion of required parking and/or loading space due to some unusual circumstances; allowing fencing and/or plant material buffering different from that required due to some unusual circumstances. Variances are available only on appeal to the Board of Adjustment and subject to satisfaction of the standards specified in this ordinance. The Board of Adjustments is authorized to grant variances through Article II.A.d(3) which says the following: d. Duties and Powers: The Board shall have the following duties and powers: (3) Variances - To authorize upon appeal in specific cases variance from the terms of this ordinance not contrary to the public interest where, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of this ordinance will, in an individual case, result in unnecessary hardship, so that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed, public safety and welfare secured, and substantial justice done. Prior to granting a variance, the Board shall find that: (a) There are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property in question because of its size, shape, or topography; (b) The application of this ordinance to the particular piece of property would create an unnecessary hardship; (c) Such conditions are peculiar to the particular piece of property involved; and, (d) Relief, if granted, would not cause substantial detriment to the public good or impair the purpose and intent of this ordinance; provided however, that no variance may be granted for a use of land or building or structure that is prohibited by this ordinance. The Ordinance provides guidance for variance requests through the following criteria: Article II.C.3.e. Criteria – (1) An application for a variance shall be granted only on the concurring vote of four Board members finding that: (a) There are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property in question because of its size, shape, or topography; (b) The application of the ordinance to this particular piece of property would create an unnecessary hardship. Personal financial hardship is not a justification for a variance. (c) Such conditions are peculiar to the particular piece of property involved; and (d) Relief, if granted, would not cause substantial detriment to the public good and impair the purpose and intent of this ordinance; provided however, that no variance may be granted for a use of land or building or structure that is prohibited by this ordinance. When a variance is granted by the Zoning Board of Adjustment it has the following effect: Article II.C.3.g. 5 BOA 23.01 610 N. Mobile St. April 17, 2023 Effect of Variance - Any variance granted according to this section and which is not challenged on appeal shall run with the land provided that: (1) The variance is acted upon according to the application and subject to any conditions of approval within 365 days of the granting of the variance or final decision of appeal, whichever is later; and (2) The variance is recorded with the Judge of Probate. N CHURCH STNSECTIONSTNSECTIONSTMAGNOLIA AVE NCHURCHSTMAGNOLIA AVE City of FairhopeBoard of Adjustment April 17, 2023 ¯ MAGNOLIA AVE NCHURCH STMAGNOLI A AV E BOA 23.02 - 301 Magnolia Avenue Legend RoadParcelB-2 - General Business DistrictB-3b - Tourist Resort Commercial Service DistrictP-1 - ParkingR-2 - Medium Density Single-FamilyR-4 - Low Density Multi-FamilyCOF Corp. Limits : ^ Project Name:301 Magnolia AvenueSite Data:0.52 AcresProject Type:Special ExceptionJurisdiction:Fairhope Zoning District:B-2PPIN Number:15164General Location:Northeast corner of the intersection of N. Church St & Magnolia Ave.Surveyor of Record: Engineer of Record: Owner / Developer:FST Magnolia Church LLCSchool District:Fairhope Elementary School Fairhope Middle and High Schools Recommendation: Prepared by: :Approval Michelle Melton -□ ----D n 1 BOA 23.02 301 Magnolia Ave. – April 17, 2023 Summary of Request: The Applicant is RW LLC/David Ryan on behalf of the Owners, FST and Magnolia Church, LLC. The subject property is located at 301 Magnolia Avenue on the corner of Magnolia Avenue and Church Street and is comprised of 0.52 acres. It is zoned B-2 “General Business District” and is located within the Central Business District (“CBD”). The proposed project is a mixed-use development with seven (7) separate structures. The buildings will be 40 ft tall pursuant to the dimension standards of the CBD. However, the subject property fluctuates in elevation from 97 ft to 111 ft above sea level. The Applicant is developing the subject property using the existing natural topography. Applicants are to use the average elevation of each condominium lot, which will result in the structures following the existing grade. “Building Height” is defined in the Zoning Ordinance as “the vertical distance measured from the average natural elevation of the lot to the mean point of the roof of the building.” Thus, the structures may appear to be different heights, but, in fact, they all will be 40 ft tall or less. It is the intent of the Applicant to have a dedicated 1,200ft² retail/commercial component in each first floor of the two (2) structures facing Magnolia Avenue with one (1) residential unit occupying the second and third floor of each structure. The remaining five (5) structures will be single family dwelling units. In total, seven (7) residential units and two (2) commercial units are proposed on one lot with shared areas under common ownership. This case comes to the Board of Adjustments because this type of combined use is unique. Table 3-1: Use Table allows for single family dwellings and mixed use in B-2 zones. More specifically, general and professional offices, general professional services, as well as retail (grocery and general merchandise) are allowed by right. Although mixed use, residential, and retail/commercial are allowed by right to some degree in B-2, having all of the uses on one (1) lot with not every structure being “mixed use” per se is a different concept that translates to a “Uses Not Provided For” review pursuant to Art. II(A)(4)(d)(4). Analysis and Recommendation: There is not a specific application for “Uses Not Provided For.” However, Art. II(C)(3)(e)(2) sets forth the criteria for “Any other application to the Board shall be reviewed under the following criteria and relief granted only upon the concurring vote of four Board members: -. , (4) Uses Not Provided Fo r: Whenever, in an y district established under this ordinance, a use is neither specifically permitted or denied and an application is made by a property owner to the Direct or of Pl anning and Building for use , the Director sha ll refer the app licati on to the board of adjustment which shall have the au th ority to permit the use or de ny the u se . The use ma y be permitted if it is similar to and compatible with pennitted use s in the di strict and in no way is in conflict with the genera l pmpose and intent of thi s ordinance . 2 BOA 23.02 301 Magnolia Ave. – April 17, 2023 Since the property is within the CBD there are more options and/or interpretations available to the project. Moreover, the Applicant has taken calculated measures to preserve, encourage, and implement a plan for the project that satisfies several important facets to the community. Going through the criteria, the project satisfies subsections (a) – (c) as designed. Subsection (d) is also satisfied. The seven (7) structures are architecturally alike and also favor existing and future approved buildings along Church and Magnolia. Subsection (e) is met. Applicant has already met with Fairhope Utilities and all utilities are available. Two (2) transformers may be added. The Applicant has taken great strides to preserve the heritage oaks on the property and in the Church Street and Magnolia Avenue ROWs. Applicant is also providing a small green space and possibly installing a flower bed on the corner to be maintained by the City; thus, meeting the requirements of subsection (f). Subsections (g) and (h) are met as designed. Subsections (i) and (j) are satisfied because the project lies within with Central Business District (CBD), which has reduced setbacks and buffers. With the density expected in the CBD, along with build-to lines, buffers are less important. Residents living within the CBD should expect more noise than typically single-family neighborhoods. The project encourages less vehicular traffic with a single entry/exit and further encourages bicycle and pedestrian traffic; thus, reducing noise and potential physical impacts. Unlike previous iterations, this project does not include multiple driveways fronting Church St. The project satisfies subsection (k) because it will provide mixed use options in the CBD, provides for motor vehicle alternatives (low speed vehicles, pedestrian, and bicycle), and further provides ample parking that is twice the minimum for the project within the CBD. By using the property to the best it can possibly be used and by preserving trees and slopes the project as designed meets the planning principles of subsection (l). (a) Compliance \\~tb tile Comprehensive Plan; (b) Compliance \\~tb any other approved planning document; (c) Compliance with the standard~, goals , and intent of this ordinance; (d) The character of tile surrounding property, incl uding any pending de velopment activ ity. (e) Adequacy of public infrastmcrure to support the proposed deve lopment ; (f) Impacts on natural resources, including existing conditions and ongoing post-development conditions; (g) Compliance with other laws and regula tions of the City; (h) Compliance \\~tb other applicable laws and regulations of other jurisdictions ; (i) Impacts on adjacent property including noise, traffic, visible intmsions , po tential physical impacts, and property values ; (j) Impacts on tile surrounding neighborhood including noise, traffic, visible intrusions , potential physical in1pacts , and property val ues. (k) Overall benefit t o the community; (I) Compliance \\~tb so und plamting principles; (m) Compliance v..ith the terms and conditions of any zoning approval; and (n) Any other matter relating to the health, safety, and welfare of the collllllunity. 3 BOA 23.02 301 Magnolia Ave. – April 17, 2023 Subsection (m) is met as the project as designed falls in line with the Zoning Ordinance as it relates to what can be done within the CBD (and B-2) and the Applicant is not requesting any waivers or variances. By preserving trees and adding vegetation, encouraging alternative forms of transportation, and a single ingress/egress point, the project as designed meets subsection (n). Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Approval of case BOA 23.02 to allow for a mixed mixed-use development on the lot located at 301 Magnolia Avenue. ATTACHMENT TO APPLICATION FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS (FOR PROPERTY PIN_#15164) LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF MAGNOLIA AVENUE AND CHURCH STREET IN FAIRHOPE, ALABAMA (3-15-23) The proposed Project for the Property is depicted on the attached Site Plan with Proposed Conditions. This Project is a mixed-use development comprised of 7 architecturally compatible and separate structures. The dedicated retail/commercial component consists of first floor space in the two structures fronting Magnolia Avenue, with each retail/commercial space being approximately 1,200 square feet and being intended to serve small scale retail/commercial tenants. Substantial planning has been undertaken to ensure that the Project, while it constitutes a Use Not Accounted For, is consistent with the zoning and applicable regulations within the zoning for the Property and the Central Business District of Fairhope. Project attributes include: a. a single entry/exit to and from the Property for vehicular traffic, promoting traffic safety; b. on-site parking that is twice the minimum number of spaces required in the CBD; c. dedicated golf cart parking for each structure located on the Property; d. a site plan and design that makes every effort to preserve the trees located both on the Property and in the Magnolia Avenue and Church Street right-of-ways; e. the Project is complimentary of the residential, commercial and mixed-use developments in the immediate vicinity of the Property; and f. the Project is supportive of and promotes multiple of the objectives specifically applicable to the CBD in the Fairhope Zoning Ordinance, including:  generating high levels of pedestrian and bicycle traffic;  providing a mix of uses;  strengthening non-automotive connections to adjacent neighborhoods;  buffering surrounding neighborhoods from any adverse impacts of activities in the CBD; and  providing a small park/green space for Property occupants The Site Plan with Proposed Conditions and the arrangement of structures on the Property compliment the natural topography of the Property, which ranges from 111 feet above sea level to 97 feet above sea level. The Site Plan with Proposed Conditions, Project design and Project configuration are all intended to promote the highest and best use of the Property and to also further enhance the CBD and general downtown area of Fairhope. 02.28.23 10C2023 VATAN A Downtown Fairhope Central Business District Mixed-Use Development SITE PLAN (1:20 SCALE) UUNNIITT 55 UUNNIITT 44 UUNNIITT 33 UUNNIITT 22 UUNNIITT 11 UUNNIITT 77 UUNNIITT 66 washer hill lipscomb cabaniss architecture, llc copyright 2020 1744 oakdale dr t. 225.767.1530 baton rouge, la f. 225.767.0018 not for construction w w w . w h l c a r c h i t e c t u r e . c o m WHLC 22-214 02.28.23CHURCH AND MAGNOLIAFairhope, ALA2.02 SD LEVEL 2---SCALE: 1" = 20'-0"1 U345 LEVEL 1 .. .. .. .. ( : J CJ ( : J CJ --. ----------------.... .. --. : D I I __ .J 00'00 C : ) c=J -----------, I , , , • , • • -.... .... .. .. .. .. .. • • • • • • D , I , , , 02.28.23 1C2023 V$7$1 $'RZQWRZQ)DLUKRSH&HQWUDO%XVLQHVV'LVWULFW0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW Corner Detail (looking Northeast toward Greenspace) 02.28.23 2C2023 V$7$1 $'RZQWRZQ)DLUKRSH&HQWUDO%XVLQHVV'LVWULFW0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW Elevations along Church St. 02.28.23 3C2023 V$7$1 $'RZQWRZQ)DLUKRSH&HQWUDO%XVLQHVV'LVWULFW0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW Elevations along Magnolia (Two Mixed-Use Buildings) 02.28.23 4C2023 V$7$1 $'RZQWRZQ)DLUKRSH&HQWUDO%XVLQHVV'LVWULFW0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW Another view from Magnolia 02.28.23 5C2023 V$7$1 $'RZQWRZQ)DLUKRSH&HQWUDO%XVLQHVV'LVWULFW0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW Detail of internal drive (looking north) 02.28.23 6C2023 V$7$1 $'RZQWRZQ)DLUKRSH&HQWUDO%XVLQHVV'LVWULFW0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW 02.28.23 7C2023 V$7$1 $'RZQWRZQ)DLUKRSH&HQWUDO%XVLQHVV'LVWULFW0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW Detail of internal drive (looking south) 02.28.23 8C2023 V$7$1 $'RZQWRZQ)DLUKRSH&HQWUDO%XVLQHVV'LVWULFW0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW View of greenspace and residential unit from NE corner of Church and Magnolia 02.28.23 9C2023 V$7$1 $'RZQWRZQ)DLUKRSH&HQWUDO%XVLQHVV'LVWULFW0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW View of greenspace (looking SE toward Mixed-Use Building).