HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-19-2022 Board of Adjustments MinutesSeptember 19, 2022
Board of Adjustments Minutes
The Board of Adjustments met Monday, September 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; Hunter Simmons, Planning and Zoning Manager; Michelle
Melton, City Planner; and Allie Knutson, Secretary.
Absent: Donna Cook.
Anil Vira, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 5 :00 PM.
Approval of Minutes
Ryan Baker made a motion to approve the minutes from the August 15, 2022, meeting.
Frank Lamia seconded the motion and the motion carried with the following vote:
Aye: Anil Vira, Cathy Slagle, Frank Lamia, Ryan Baker, and David Martin.
Nay:None.
BOA 22.10 Public hearing to consider the request of the Owners, Sheila Hodges and
Michelle Hodges, 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 between Lot 4 and Lot 5 on Ettie Street. The properties are zoned R-2, Medium
Density Single-Family Residential District and both lots are approximately 0.17 acres.
PPIN #: 251503, 14015
Chairman Vira stated that he would be recusing himself from the duration of Case BOA 22.1 O
due to a conflict of interest.
Michelle Melton, City Planner, presented the case summary, and showed an aerial of the
properties as well as the plans for the proposed driveway.
The applicant is requesting a variance to the driveway side setback which would result in a 1 O'
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 is designed to be pervious geoweb. Table 3-2
in the City of Fairhope's Zoning Ordinance states that driveways shall not be within 3' of the
side lot line; hence, the variance from the required 3' separation from the side lot line. The
Applicants make the request due to safety reasons and due to the smaller than average lot size for
R-2 zoning.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of BOA 22.10, 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 1 O' wide.
The Applicant, Sheila Hodges was present. Cathy Slagle asked the Applicant if this request was
for a long-term plan. Ms. Hodges replied yes, she has been long-term resident of Baldwin
1
September 19, 2022
Board of Adjustments Minutes
County, but moved to Pensacola three years ago for business purposes. She is now retired and
would like to be a citizen of Fairhope. These lots are also across the street from her other
daughter.
Hunter Simmons, Planning and Zoning Manager, stated that regarding the long-term solution, an
easement agreement will be done as well. Ms. Hodges added that the easement agreement would
be done after this meeting if approval is received.
Cathy Slagle opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, the public hearing was
closed.
Motion:
David Martin made a motion to approve Case BOA 22.10, subject to staff
recommendations.
Frank Lamia seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following
vote:
Aye: Cathy Slagle, Frank Lamia, Ryan Baker, and David Martin.
Nay:None.
Abstain: Anil Vira.
BOA 22.11 Public hearing to consider the request of the Applicant, Ashleigh
McKenzie, acting on behalf of the Owner, AdvisorsMD, LLC, for a Special
Exception to allow for an Outdoor Sales Lot "Use" for property zoned B-2, General
Business District. The property is approximately 0.24 acres and is located at 140 S.
Section Street. PPIN #: 20224
Cathy Slagle announced that the meeting was being turned back over to Chairman Vira.
Casey Potts, City Planner, presented the case summary showing an aerial of the property
and proposed plans.
The building is owned by AdvisorsMD, who currently use the site for professional
healthcare technology services. The applicant is requesting Board of Adjustments
approval of outdoor sales (lot) as a second use on the property. The applicant describes
the outdoor plant sales business as an outdoor plant store, where seasonal, outdoor/indoor
plants, and high-end outdoor furniture, including landscape lighting, can be sold in an
outdoor garden environment.
The recorded subdivision plat indicates a 5' greenspace easement (Slide 2114-D) along
South Section Street, which was deeded to the City of Fairhope with Instrument 638362.
Based on staffs review, the proposed outdoor sales of plants will not impose on the
surrounding area, nor will it impose on the safety, health, or welfare of the general public.
Staff recommends that fertilizer or other odorous items be prohibited from sale on the
property.
2
September 19, 2022
Board of Adjustments Minutes
Recommendation:
Staff recommends the Board of Adjustment approve the proposed Special Exception for the
subject property to allow outdoor sales (lot) in a B-2, General Business Zoning District subject to
the following conditions:
1. Outdoor sales shall be restricted to Lot 2.
2. Fertilizer and other odorous items will not be sold on the property.
3. An ingress/egress easement across Lot 1 and a parking agreement with the owner of Lot 1
shall be provided to staff prior to issuance of a building permit.
4. The applicant is restricted from modifications of or sales within the 5' greenspace easement.
Chairman Vira asked for clarification on condition number 4. Mr. Simmons stated that over 20
years ago, a planting area was given to the City with the main intent being to screen parking lots
as required by the Tree Ordinance. The City reserves the right to maintain the easement,
although it is unusual to have a greenspace easement.
Ryan Baker clarified that there were different owners for Lot 1 and Lot 2. Mr. Simmons stated
that was correct and that if this property is allowed the Outdoor Sales Use for plants, it does not
mean that they can sell cars there, for example.
Cathy Slagle compared this request to the request they had received for the outdoor sale of golf
carts. Mr. Simmons stated that no complaints have been received regarding that approved
request.
Ashleigh McKenzie, Applicant, was present and stated that AdvisorsMD was present as well.
They want to replace the hedges and make the corner more appealing. According to their
Attorney, they have procured the lot next door and Lot 1 is in favorable conditions. They hope to
replace the hedges that are there, keeping the charm of the oak trees. Mrs. McKenzie asked if she
could put mulch and plants in the easement, Mr. Simmons stated that they can plant in the
easement.
Chairman Vira opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, the public hearing
was closed.
Mr. Simmons proposed an amendment to condition number 1, instead of reading, "Outdoor Sales
shall be restricted to Lot 2", it could read that, "Proof of agreement from Owner of Lot 2 shall be
provided prior to allowing sales on Lot 2." The Owners of Lot 1 and Lot 2 need to have a
contract between them, and the City will make sure the easement agreement is in place.
Motion:
Ryan Baker made a motion to approve BOA 22.11, subject to the amended staff
conditions:
1. Proof of agreement from Owner of Lot 2 shall be provided prior to allowing sales on
Lot 2.
2. Fertilizer and other odorous items will not be sold on the property.
3. An ingress/egress easement across Lot 1 and a parking agreement with the owner of
Lot 1 shall be provided to staff prior to issuance of a building permit.
3
September 19, 2022
Board of Adjustments Minutes
4. The applicant is restricted from modifications of or sales within the 5' greenspace
easement.
Cathy Slagle 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.
BOA 22.12 Public hearing to consider the request of the Owners, Edward and
Dana Hammele, for a 2' variance to the front setback requirements and a 14'
variance to the side street setback requirements for property zoned R-2, Medium
Density Single-Family Residential District. The property is approximately 0.14 acres
and is located at 107 Kiefer Avenue. PPIN #: 79056
Casey Potts, City Planner, presented the case summary.
In 2018, the applicant requested variances to the R-2 setbacks before the Board of
Adjustments. Staff interpreted that the existing home was oriented to the lot's rear. The
alleyway was interpreted as the front and Kiefer A venue was interpreted as the rear. The
applicant requested a 24' rear setback in lieu of 35' rear setback ( existing home is
oriented to the lot's rear), 6' side street setback in lieu of the 20' side street setback on the
west side of subject property, and 8' side setback in lieu of the 1 O' side setback on the
east side of subject property. The variances requested in BOA 18.06 were approved
unanimously.
At present, staff interprets the front of the lot and its corresponding setback to be along
Kiefer Avenue and the rear of the lot and its corresponding setback to be along the alley.
The applicant is currently requesting a 2' variance to the front setback requirement,
resulting in a 33' setback and a 14' side street variance to the side street setback on the
west side of subject property, resulting in a 6' setback. It should be noted that the trellis
in front of the home is not counted towards the principal structure footprint due to its lack
of roof. The resultant buildable area would be 1,905 square feet, which is well below the
maximum lot coverage of 2, 185 square feet. Ryan Baker asked if the garage counted,
Mrs. Potts replied that it was counted. The alleyway width will be unaffected. BOA 22.12
only affects private property. The home and its pergola will not be any closer to Kiefer
Avenue than the existing structure. Frank Lamia asked if the existing house was being
torn down. Mrs. Potts replied that they are tearing the existing home down and rebuilding
slightly bigger.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends conditional approval of BOA 22.12, subject to the following
condition:
1. Provide an updated survey at the time of building permit that details the location of the
fence and other structures adjacent to the right-of-way/alley.
Mr. Simmons clarified staffs previous interpretation stating that frontage of a lot reads
that it is the smallest dimension fronting a public street. A street requires a name and
there will not be a traditional street on this alley. It is a 20-foot unnamed easement. If the
4
September 19, 2022
Board of Adjustments Minutes
front is on Kiefer, the 20-foot side setback is not needed. Having the frontage on the alley
did not make sense with an existing building in place. The two-story garage is
nonconforming and is not part of the variance. The shape and topography of the lot is a
hardship. The open-air pergola is conforming. Frank Lamia asked what the hardship is,
Mr. Simmons replied that the existing home is not currently conforming.
Ryan Baker asked why the previously approved 8' side setback is not being requested.
David Martin asked if the home would fit if shifted and front setback was not granted.
Mr. Simmons replied that the previously approved variances had expired and is currently
a non-conformity as it reverted back to R-2 setbacks. He would also prefer to push closer
to an alley than another house if an alley is an option.
Chairman Vira asked what the distance was between the existing home and the property
to the east. Mr. Simmons stated that it was 10.6 feet. Cathy Slagle asked what the
difference was on the west side between the existing home and the new plans. Mr.
Simmons stated that it would be 2-feet, with no difference in the front or the rear, but that
the home does not touch the 6-foot setback line along the entire west side of the property
and reminded everyone that the variance is for the land, not the site plan.
Cathy Slagle stated that her concern was the homes to the east and clarified that the
home's distance from Kiefer Avenue would not change or block any other existing
homes. Mr. Simmons believed the new home would be two-stories, but with keeping the
pergola, it would have to remain open. Mr. Simmons showed the Board the elevations.
Chairman Vira asked if the Applicants could change their plans after the variance was
approved. Mr. Simmons stated that, that was not the intent of the Applicants as they have
a building permit submitted with a full set of plans.
Cathy Slagle clarified that this request does not affect the alley, Mr. Simmons agreed, but
said that they need a survey of the fence to ensure it is on the property line.
The Applicant, Ed Hammele, was present. He stated that the home was purchased 8-9
years ago. They did not move forward with the plan that was approved in 2018. The new
plan is a modest cottage theme and they have submitted the plans for the permit. Chris
Francis was hired to save the wisteria vine out front and Seth Moore is doing a new
survey for the fence.
Cathy Slagle asked what the square footage was of the current home. Mr. Hammele
answered that it is around 1,200 square feet, the new plan will be just under 2,000 square
feet, including the second floor. Dana Hammele added that the slab is leaking, and the
house is failing. The only difference is that they are adding two feet to the back for a
porch.
Chairman Vira opened the public hearing.
Pauline Anders, 256 N. Bayview Street, stated that the subject lot was a garden lot.
Garden lots were scattered in old districts and then zoning was imposed. She mentioned
5
September 19, 2022
Board of Adjustments Minutes
that she did not get a notification for the BOA 18.06 case and that the alleyway is
crowded. There is a tower encroaching the alleyway, making it dangerous, especially for
emergency vehicles and the people who having parking in the alley. She wants to make
sure the alleyway would not be further encroached upon.
Mr. Simmons asked for clarification on "garden lots," wanting to know where that
classification came from. Mrs. Anders stated that she was not sure where the term came
from, they have always been called that due to their size.
Carol Skidmore, 110 Powell Avenue, she wanted to know if the total lot coverage was
accounted for, specifically the garage. Mr. Simmons replied that the garage was counted
toward the lot coverage. She was also concerned with the alleyway being crowded.
Cathy Slagle reiterated that residents were concerned with buildings in the alleyway and
how crowded it is.
Ferrell Anders, 256 N. Bayview Street, questioned whether it should only be a one-foot
variance to the front setback. He was told that the site plan could change, but wants the
footprint to stay the same on the alleyway side. He has no objection if the site plan stays
the same.
Nikki Olson, 252 N. Bayview Street, stated that her carport backs up to the Hammele' s
fence, making it hard to get out of her driveway, and wanted to know if the fence would
be extended. Mrs. Hammele responded that they are not planning to extend the fence
unless it needs to be moved over. Mr. Hammele stated the survey is from 2020 and a new
survey is being done, they will make sure the fence is in the correct place. They put up a
new fence because people were driving on their lawn and their water meter box was
cracked. Ms. Olson asked how they would determine where the alleyway width is. Frank
Lamia stated that the surveyor would stake it. Mr. Simmons also stated that the City will
see the survey with the permit and need to make sure the fence is on the property line for
zoning compliance.
Mr. Anders asked why a 2-foot variance was being requested if the front of the house was
not changing. Mr. Simmons stated that the variance was to accommodate the front
fa9ade. If the home were tom down and the pergola was left, and the new home was built
to the pergola, a 2-foot variance would still be needed. The variance runs with the land
the setbacks are changed once acted upon. Casey Potts added that this will still be subject
to Building Department's review and the 37% coverage maximum. Mr. Simmons added
that it is not practical to build the whole house up to 6-feet.
Chairman Vira asked what the second story of the garage was for. Mr. Hammele replied
that it is used for an office and storage. Mr. Simmons added that it cannot be used as a
residential accessory structure. Cathy Slagle asked when the garage was built, Mr.
Hammele stated they built it in 2020.
Chairman Vira closed the public hearing and stated that according to the public's
comments, they do not want expansion past what the Hammele's currently have. Cathy
6
September 19, 2022
Board of Adjustments Minutes
Slagle agreed, they do not want they view of the bay to be interfered with and want as
little encroachment into the alley as possible.
Motion:
Ryan Baker made a motion to approval Case BOA 22.12, subject to staffs condition.
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
Chairman Vira asked if there would be any cases on the agenda for next month, Mr.
Simmons said there would be one case.
Adjournment
Ryan Baker made a motion to adjourn.
Cathy Slagle 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.
Adjourned at 6:18 p.m.
~ le VA/u2.-M £Jhi1tb
Anil Vira, Chairman Allie Knutson, Secretary
7