Board of Zoning Adjustments, Sept. 6, 2018

Water may stop or seriously delay a 28-unit condo proposed on Firefighter Lane.

• BZA’s Ty Cole: Does the city have an adequate stormwater system?
• Greg Cobb: No, it doesn’t. Walter Schoel Engineering is studying the system and will make a report.
• Ty Cole: Will the city fix it?
• Greg Cobb: When we get a report we may or may not fix it.

Proposed Firefighter Lane condo.

And so a long hearing on whether to award substantial variances to a 22-unit, 3-story condominium ended in a postponement. Residents of 10 households strenuously opposed the development planned on the corner of Firefighter Lane and Huntington Road, telling tales of repeated flooding on nearby Lancaster, wet basements, sinkholes and rainwater lapping at their doors. Attempts by the developer’s engineer to explain the workings of a water retention system fell on deaf ears, even to the board. By regulation, a development must insure that post-construction water runoff is no greater than before construction. But– if the city’s storm sewers are already not working, the condominium isn’t going to improve things, Cole said. And to residents: “This is where you have to push the city for answers.” See more, below

Members present: All- Beverly LeBoeuf, Matthew Foley (S), Brian Jarmon, vice chair, Lauren Gwaltney, chair, Ty Cole, and Stuart Roberts (S)

Absent: Andrew Marlin

Staff present: Donna Bridges, board clerk, Fred Goodwin, p-t planner, Zoning Supervisor Phil Turkett, and Greg Cobb, Building, Engineering and Zoning Department.

Audience attendance: 70

*Note on procedure: By state law, zoning variances granted by the 5-member board require a super majority of 4 members voting in the affirmative. To keep business moving in case of absences, the law provides two supernumerary members (S) to sit in and vote if needed. (The board clerk alternates their votes, which are not noted in the blog.) Variances expire in 180 days if a building permit isn’t obtained.

NEW BUSINESS:

Current house at 131 East Hawthorne Rd.

Carried over a request for 4 large variances for a new house and accessory structure on East Hawthorne: An architect hired to design a new 2-story house and 2-story rear garage at 131 East Hawthorne Road argued the triangular lot shape created a hardship in observing the 10-foot required side setbacks (for lots 55 feet and over). Lot width at the front building line will be 58 feet, and only 52 feet at the rear of the house. The width at the rear of the lot, where the garage is sited, is only 44 feet across. With nearly 2/3 of the lot falling under 55 feet, the architect said the 10 foot setbacks were a hardship. He asks to encroach 5 feet into the right setback and 1 foot into the left for the new house, and to build the garage 5 feet into the right setback and 1 foot into the left. Regulation setbacks for a two-story garage are 10 feet all around.

The structures are still in the concept stage and board members studied the site drawings for a long time in silence.

“This is a big ask,” Mr. Cole finally said before suggesting the architect return with a more developed plan and drawings. Given the choice between accepting a likely negative vote or postponing to next month, the architect decided to wait.

224 Crest Drive

Approved a significant front setback variance for an addition on Crest Drive: Landscape architect J. K. Terry is hired to re-design a new facade and add a front porch at 224 Crest Drive to improve its curb appeal. The front of the house is already sitting 3.2 feet into the 25-foot minimum setback at its closest point to the street, and the porch would put it over another 6 feet. (Although the minimum front setback is 25 feet, setbacks are determined by taking an average of houses in a 100-foot impact area.) Mr. Terry’s hardship is the current location of the house and the lack of other buildable space for a porch or deck because of the rear topography and woods. There were few questions about the project and the variance was approved.

1010 Highland Road

Approved a side variance for a small addition planned on Highland Road: The wife of the couple living at 1010 Highland Road said they’re tired of having the washer and dryer in the kitchen and want to build a mud room for a laundry off the back right side of the house. The room would extend 2.9 feet into the required 9 foot setback, about the same distance as the air conditioner. The request was approved.

Approved with one dissent a 1-foot variance for a chimney on a new Edgewood house:  The applicant building a new house on the corner lot at 221 Edgewood Boulevard asked for 1 foot variance to allow a chimney on the right side. Board members said the form wasn’t filled out completely. They also asked why the setbacks for the corner sides didn’t align with the houses on each street, as a new regulation requires. Mr. Cobb said the lot had been resurveyed prior to the new rule. The variance passed, with one dissent.

Voting no: Brian Jarmon

1821 Lake Ridge Road

Approved front and side setback variances for an addition planned on Lake Ridge: Drake Homes made a successful case for getting a 12.4-foot front setback variance and a 1.4-foot left side variance to build a garage in front of the house at 1821 Lake Ridge Road. The drive to the existing carport behind the house is narrow due to the position of the house. The builder proposes adding a master bedroom addition in that space and rebuilding a garage on the front left side. The right side isn’t suitable because of drainage off the hillside. Ms. Gwaltney was concerned about the garage protruding farther than adjacent houses. However, even with the variance, the front will be 65.4 feet from the road, and the measure passed.

Developer Murray Legg asked residents to accept the condominiums as a buffer to future commercial and mixed-use expected in the nearby downtown planning district. They said no thank you.

 

Allowed a developer to postpone variance requests on a 3-story condo proposal while substantial questions remain about future land use, stormwater capacity, traffic and eligible hardships for 30-foot setback variances: Murray Legg of Eyster/Legg development propose a 3-level, 28-unit condominium at 3019 and 3021 Firefighter Lane, zoned R-5, asking for 14-foot left and right side setback variances and 30-foot front setback variances on sides facing Firefighter Lane and Huntington Road. If granted, the variances would bring the building close to the street and lot lines. Mr. Legg’s presentation focused on the building as a “residential buffer” to the future commercial mixed-use projected for downtown, nearing Oxmoor Road. None of the 10 households objecting were concerned with commercial encroachment as much as stormwater issues, traffic, height/privacy, and loss of trees and green space.

Resident concerns: 

• A resident at 1802 Lancaster said she and two neighbors had experienced 5 flooding incidents since January 2017. The proposed site now is mostly green space with two small houses. Any more pavement would only worsen flooding, she said. “You’d need a boat.”
• Four residents said the corner cannot absorb any more traffic, with one estimating up to 30 car accidents per year occurring on Oxmoor side streets between Firefighter Lane and U.S. 31. Patients and customers to the dermatology office and Alabama Outdoors gatherings already cause parking problems on side streets, they said. The proposed condo would have 56 parking spaces (2 per unit), concentrated on one busy corner. No traffic study had been completed.
• Several residents objected to the building’s mass and height–35 feet average– which would be visible to surrounding houses after trees are removed for construction, they said. Condominium residents could look down into neighbors’ back yards.
• One resident asked what “hardship” justified the extensive setback variances requested.

Developers respond: Mr. Legg reiterated that “development will come” to the area, and residents would be wise to maintain the corner as completely residential.

Rebuttal: Two residents argued persuasively that the project was premature, given the city’s drainage study underway, the lack of a traffic study, and the unfinished downtown master plan. Those themes were picked up by the board, who asked many of the same questions.

Current site of planned condominium. Neighbors and board members are concerned about removing so much green space.

Board members respond: Mr. Cole was most concerned about staff acknowledging the city’s inadequate drainage system, with an engineering study of the problem still underway. He was also concerned that the project’s 56 parking spaces didn’t account for visitor parking, which would flow onto the side streets. He and others on the board wanted a traffic study. Finally, to the question of hardship, Mr. Legg said the expanded footprint satisfied the project’s financial requirements, namely, to follow the required setbacks would reduce the project from 30,000 square feet to 11,000 sf, he said. Financial concerns are not an eligible hardship for granting variances. There being so many questions and concerns, the board and Mr. Legg mutually agreed to a postponement to resolve them.

Planning Commission, Sept. 4, 2018

Phil Turkett, retired from Birmingham city several years ago, replaces former Homewood city engineer/zoning administrator Vanessa McGrath

A new zoning sheriff is in town, Phil Turkett, retired as Zoning Administrator for the city of Birmingham in 2014, who finished his first full day of work with Homewood with an almost full-house planning commission meeting, and discussion of nine zoning amendments. See below.

Members present: Britt Thames, Brady Wilson, Billy Higginbotham, chair, James Riddle, Jeffrey Foster, vice chair, John Krontiras, and Stuart Roberts

Absent: Mark Woods and Battalion chief Nickolas Hill

Staff present: Donna Bridges, board clerk and Greg Cobb, Building, Engineering and Zoning Department. Phil Turkett, new Homewood city Zoning Supervisor.

Audience attendance: 1

OLD BUSINESS:

Re-elected Billy Higginbotham and Jeffrey Foster chair and vice-chair of the commission, to serve through August 2019. The vote was unanimous.

Carried over for the second time a request by Walmart to change the internal traffic patterns, entrances and exits at Wildwood: There has been no explanation of the delays since the request was first listed on the July 1 agenda. 

NEW BUSINESS:

The map shows the lot (123), which is on vacant wooded land, in relation to Hall-Kent school, upper right, and Patriot Park, left. The Wells Fargo parking deck in North Wildwood is the shaded rectangle on the right.

Approved subject to a health department ruling a request to subdivide residential acreage in West Homewood from one lot to two lots: The property at 123 Hena Street was the subject of a failed 3-part residential  subdivision approved in January by the commission, but contingent on a traffic study and other street-related intersection improvements that required council approval. The city attorney then intervened to nix the project, citing the deep, nonconforming front setback of the center house on the submitted drawings. (The planning commission has since been unwilling to hear any resurvey cases until zoning variances or other waivers are decided by other boards. Tonight’s vote, however, is subject to a passing health department “perc”  test for soil drainage.) The applicant at the first resurvey was architect Ben Strout, who appears to be out of this latest request by owner Sam Renta, a Homewood-based commercial lender who purchased the parcel in 2016 and is selling to developer Mike Mosley, tonight’s applicant.

Mr. Mosley said after the meeting the proposed houses would be “cottage style” two-story, four bedroom/3.5 bath structures.

Errors were made calculating the front setback of the new house adjacent to the city’s Sims Ecoscape property. Amendments being considered to zoning regulations can help clarify how houses align, the distances between them, and how many hard surfaces are allowed per lot.

Discussed and agreed to reconsider the following proposed Zoning Ordinance changes: Still working from a rough draft of 9 zoning amendments discussed by a sub-committee in August–with new notes penciled in the margins and others crossed out–the commission voted to accept the following first draft, summarized below. The next draft will be recirculated to the full commission and Board of Zoning Adjustments, with final changes reviewed by the city attorney before presentation to the council. Link to the latest version http://www.homewoodal.net/assets/pc-zoning-book-subcommittee-8.21.18.pdf

1. Calculating NPD lot size: The Neighborhood Preservation District calculation of minimum lot size for redrawn lots will be at 100% of the impact area average, with the largest and the smallest lot in that area eliminated from calculation in all instances. The original draft called for eliminating “unusual” sized lots from the average. The change is clearer and more uniform.
2. Determining front setbacks: Front setbacks should not be further back than the average of existing dwellings within 100 feet on either side of the subject property, on the same side of the street. Mr. Cobb said the impact area was formerly 250 feet in a circular radius from the subject property, which included houses not even visible from the new house. The rule was then changed to 250 feet on either side of the same street. The latest change tries to focus on finding similarity to houses immediately visible to the subject property.
3. Questions persist about percentage of structures, and type, allowed on lots: Accessory structures can’t occur more than 30% of the rear yard and all structures shall not occupy more than 50% of the entire lot–with an extra 5% coverage allowed if the additional percentage is built with water permeable surfaces. Commissioners want to discourage building with hard surfaces and the growing problems with stormwater runoff. They are also concerned that regulations require off-street parking, while driveways are for the first time being calculated in the 50% limit of structures allowed per lot. There was also continued debate over which materials constitute permeable surfaces (as brick pavers, some wood decks and gravel can become compacted and as impermeable as concrete, members said.)  Mr. Foster had circulated definitions from a Drake University sustainability paper to consider; Mr. Turkett said the question should be better addressed in the definition of “structure,” #7.
4. Side yard structures: A garage or carport are the only accessory structures allowed in a side yard, and will have to meet the same setbacks as the main house.
5. Measuring height of accessory structures: Rear yard accessory structures of 15 feet or less require 5-foot side and rear setbacks. Taller structures require 10 foot setbacks. Commissioners revisited how to measure height to eliminate the appearance of tall structures on downhill slopes. Tonight’s discussion settled on measuring from the lowest usable surface to the highest roof apex. Earlier versions used the “top of the lowest footing” and the “lowest finished floor” as starting points. This definition was also applied to the maximum height allowed for accessory structures, #6.
6. Maximum accessory structure height. 25 feet.
7. Definition of “structure.” Structures are defined as anything constructed or erected on the ground or attached to something so constructed, including a list of items ranging from satellite dishes to outdoor fireplaces. Commissioners will decide whether to include wooden decks.
8. More on maximum ground coverage: This section reiterates the percentage of allowed ground coverage by structures in #3, granting an additional 5% for permeable structures. (Mr. Cobb noted that no one in the city is monitoring structure additions that aren’t permitted, such as patios.)
9. Siding and ornamental structures counted in setbacks. Measuring setbacks will include siding and other elements that project from the foundation more than 6 inches.

The meeting was adjourned.

Planning Commission, Aug. 7, 2018

This three story guest house towering at 505 Yorkshire Drive played a big part in the BZA’s decision to deny an accessory building at a neighboring house. New zoning proposals would limit height and require larger setbacks.

The commission deliberated at length on a 13-point list of zoning amendments destined for a council vote,–including several championed by resident groups–such as a return to computing resurveys on 100% of the average neighboring lot size rather than 85%, as used currently. The list represents double the number of amendments proposed in May by BEZ staff Greg Cobb and Scott Cook, most aimed at establishing wider setbacks, clearer or more consistent calculations, reducing the allowable percentage of built area on each lot to reduce drainage problems. A controversial proposal to increase setbacks for accessory structures (including detached garages and carriage houses) and measure height from the lowest point on the ground, was set aside for more review.

Members present: All-Britt Thames, Brady Wilson, Billy Higginbotham, chair, James Riddle, Jeffrey Foster, Mark Woods, John Krontiras, Stuart Roberts and Battalion Chief Nickolas Hill.

Absent: None

Staff present: Donna Bridges, board clerk; Fred Goodwin, planner, and Scott Cook and Greg Cobb, Building, Engineering and Zoning Department

Audience attendance: 17

*Rezoning and MXD development plans are advisory only and subject to final approval by the city council.

OLD BUSINESS:

Postponed a proposed change to the zoning ordinance to establish a minimum lot width of >55 feet to a sub-committee for further discussion: This amendment was questioned earlier by the city attorney, who called it arbitrary. However, Mr. Thames tonight said the goal was to keep lots in the width category that requires wider setbacks, of 10 feet on either side. In discussion later, Mr. Riddle suggested establishing 10-foot setbacks for all lots rather than setting a minimum width to achieve the same goal. It will likely be changed:

Request to Amend the Zoning Book Ordinance, Article IV, Sec. A, (3) a. to read as follows:

Property located in the NPD district may be developed if the lot area of the subject property is greater than or equal to eighty-five (85) percent of the average developed density and lot width and in all circumstances greater than 55 feet in width of the recorded residential lots within the impact area. Average developed density is defined as the number of dwellings within the impact area, divided into the square footage contained in the residential lots recorded in the Jefferson County Probate Office, within the impact area; subject to the following:

Postponed until September a request to change the Wildwood Development Plan:  This is the second carry-over of the case slated in July to change entrances and exits to the Wildwood Center at 201, 207 and 209 Lakeshore Parkway. 

NEW BUSINESS:

Rumore property division survey, showing incorrect lot widths

Carried over to September a decision whether to split two parcels into three on Rumson Road:  Applicant William Smith said he’d been assured the proposed re-division at 507 and 513 Rumson Road, on which sits one house, would create three lots that meet minimum size standards for Neighborhood Preservation District zoning. But widths of the resulting lots, as written on the survey in commission packets, fell short of the minimum allowed by the city’s averaging formula for that area, or 81 feet. Mr. Thames first questioned the discrepancy. The width of the northern lot, on the corner of Rumson an Windsor, is 110 feet, the adjacent lot 77.88 feet, and the width of the third is missing. Although Mr. Cobb said the actual measurements showed the second two lots each at 86 feet, the commission asked for a postponement until the discrepancy was resolved.

Speaking at the hearing was a neighbor on Devon, who said the three houses would add to congestion on Rumson. Mr. Cobb responded that the road was made one-way during sidewalk construction and residents preferred to keep it that way. Interestingly, the property is the estate of the late local radio broadcaster and personality Joe Rumore  https://www.bhamwiki.com/w/Joe_Rumore

Plan for 8 houses on approximately 2 acres on Carr and Saulter

Allowed KADCO LLC to redivide 5 lots into 8 lots for a residential redevelopment on Saulter and Carr: Developer Jason Kessler, KADCO, LLC, whose bid to rezone a 2-acre residential island at 808 Saulter Road and 809 Carr Avenue for a private 12-unit subdivision collapsed in the face of organized opposition last month, was back tonight asking to divide the same 5 parcels into 8 lots, consistent with current NPD zoning. Mr. Kessler said all the lots met NPD minimums for area and width; he would not ask for variances on house setbacks, height, etc., he said.

A resident on Lancaster was the only speaker, saying she was concerned about flooding, had been told by Mr. Cobb that the city’s storm sewers were all undersized, and asked commissioners if they considered the impact of multiplying the number of lots and houses on them. Mr. Kessler, asked if the storm sewer capacity was adequate, said a civil engineer had looked at it and thought so. The vote to approved the resurvey was unanimous.

From the Heart of Homewood downtown master plan draft

Heard an update of the Regional Planning Commission’s downtown master plan: The last commission update was Jan. 9, 2018 

Regional Planning Commission Principal Planner Lindsey Puckett reviewed the final draft of the downtown master plan that was launched in September 2017 that will hopefully guide development within the 161-acrea planning area. The plan will be available for comment at the website and in the council chamber until Aug. 31, she said. Comments can be directed to any of the three council liaisons, Britt Thames, Andy Gwaltney (Ward 1 representatives) and Jennifer Andress of Ward 5.

The plan, available here  was shown to the council on July 16. It will be adopted by the Planning Commission and ratified by the council at the end of the comment period, pending any changes. Ms. Puckett said the six chapter document is meant to be a relevant guide for the next decade; among its many improvements gathered from resident surveys are transitioning from exclusively commercial zoning to more mixed use/live-work urban center, with more diverse entertainment and shopping options, more greenspace–possibly required for developments of a certain size–and more attractive and pedestrian-friendly streetscape along 18th Street, already underway.

In Rosedale, the plan recommends infilling with affordable housing, a buffer to protect Rosedale from downtown commercial areas, and the restoration of Griffin Creek and urban greenway along its banks connecting Central Park to Spring Park, and potentially to Vulcan Trail. The plan recommends re-establishing a city Landscape Department.

In the implementation phase, a separate zoning and economic development consultant, PlaceMakers, will be brought on to advise on consolidating and re-thinking downtown district’s 11 separate commercial zoning districts.

Recommendations on zoning and future land use will be the areas of most interest to the planning commission, she said.  

New houses push the limits of Homewood’s smaller lots. New height limits will be measured at the front door to roof peak. 

Approved with one dissenting vote a dozen proposed changes to the Zoning Ordinance: The commission voted on 12 separate zoning amendments proposed by Scott Cook and Greg Cobb, or almost double the number proposed in June. 

Drawing the most attention were:

• #2 Corner lots will have setbacks that follow the front setbacks for the street that each side of the house faces. Mr. Hill objected to the change.
• #7, Removes the current rule allowing a redrawn lot to be as little as 85% of the average size of surrounding lots in a defined impact area. The amendment would take the percentage of average back to 100%, and allow BEZ to remove the one smallest lot and one largest lot before computing the average.
• #9 Accessory structures wouldn’t occupy more than 30% of a back yard and all structures together–including  driveways and anything attached to the ground–cannot take up more than 50% of the entire lot. As an incentive for responsible building, the rule will allow 55% coverage if the additional 5% uses water porous materials. (This rule is subject to further definition, as not all porous materials are suitable and some systems advertised as porouss, actually retain water, such as wooden decks.)

Removed from consideration, for now:

• #11 Rear yard accessory structures over 15 feet high measured from the “top of the lowest footing” to the highest roof peak, and will have 15-foot setbacks. Some commissioners took issue with the method of measurement, which starts at the ground rather than the front threshold, as in housing height. Mr. Cobb said on sloping terrain a 15-foot garage measured at the front threshold could be 23 feet from the ground in the rear, and still only have to be 5 feet from the property line. He said the rule would help protect neighbors forced to look at massive walls built close to their property.

Voting no to all because of questions about specific changes: Mr. Hill

Carried over to September the election of a commission chair: Mr. Riddle chairs the nominating committee.

Board of Zoning Adjustments, Aug. 2, 2018

Blue shaded area shows addition and parking deck planned at 400 Shades Creek Parkway

A new parking deck and addition for the odd shaped Robins & Morton building along Rumson got the most attention tonight. Getting the least–a request for a 2-inch variance for an addition on Ardsley, and a condominium  back deck, dismissed as not warranting a variance at all.

Members present: All- Beverly LeBoeuf, Matthew Foley (S), Brian Jarmon, vice chair, Lauren Gwaltney, chair, Ty Cole, and Stuart Roberts (S)

Absent: None

Staff present: Donna Bridges, board clerk, and Fred Goodwin, p-t planner, Building, Engineering and Zoning Department

Audience attendance: 13

*Note on procedure: By state law, zoning variances granted by the 5-member board require a super majority of 4 members voting in the affirmative. To keep business moving in case of absences, the law provides two supernumerary members (S) to sit in and vote if needed. (The board clerk alternates their votes, which are not noted in the blog.) Variances expire in 180 days if a building permit isn’t obtained.

NEW BUSINESS:

Dismissed a case on Woodfern:  To the applicants’ delight, their plan to add a deck across the back yard of a condominium unit at 2709 Woodfern Court was approved without need of a variance. The deck is to be two-tiered to accommodate a slope, but not rise above 5 feet from the ground, or be roofed or enclosed. Mr. Goodwin said staff wasn’t certain about setbacks for condominiums, whether they were measured from the edge of the whole parcel or inside the bounds of each separate unit. Out of an abundance of caution it was made into a case for the BZA to decide.

In response, BZA members said unenclosed decks under 5 feet could be built from property line to property line without a variance.

105 Acton Avenue

Approved a rear setback variance to allow an addition to a house on Acton: The homeowner couple at 105 Acton Avenue want to build a house addition 6 feet into the rear setback, saying the lot was unusually shallow and they wanted to preserve the Spanish-style curb appearance of the 1920s residence. The addition will extend straight back from the rear, approximately doubling the current footprint and using the sloping grade to create a basement level with a garage, additional bedroom, and a bath. One of the homeowners (who notably is the daughter of former Ward 2 councilman Steve Chambers, in attendance) said a previous owner had added a hip roof to combat leaks, which they planned to remove for the sake of authenticity. The couple also plans to restore the style of the original facade.

BZA members commented if the variance was requested in part to accommodate a two-car garage; and if a side deck would affect the appearance. The owners said the garage played into their request; they plan to enclose the yard in a 6- or 8-foot privacy fence. A neighbor spoke in support, and at some length.

There being no further questions, the variance was approved unanimously.

1417 Ardsley Place as it looks before a second story addition

Ardsley place 2-story plan

Approved two variances for a two-story addition on Ardsley: Architect Joe Ellis requested a 2-foot left setback variance for a main level addition and a 2-inch setback for an added second story planned at 1417 Ardsley Place. The house is already sitting 2 feet into the existing setback, so the requested variance would continue the non-conformity, not add to it. The second story will encroach a matter of inches due to a narrowing of the lot lines to the rear.

Upon discovering the case involved such a minuscule variance, a vote was called and the request was approved.

Robins and Morton building showing direction of expansion (toward Rumson) and general location of planned 2-story deck

Allowed a variance for a construction firm’s parking deck on Shades Creek Parkway: Robins and Morton is a 72-year-old Homewood firm whose quarter-round brick and glass building  at 400 Shades Creek Parkway is bounded by Rumson Road and Shades Valley Y. Company spokesman Adam Scott said the business had grown and was housing 30 employees in leased office space.  It plans to bring the staff under one roof by building a 2-story, 9,500 square foot addition on the east side, up to the 15-foot setback from Rumson Road. To accommodate the expansion, it will build a 2-story parking deck and access drive over the current surface lot, toward the Y. It is the deck and associated drive that will encroach 5 feet into the rear setback, requiring a variance. Mr. Scott and others explained that the city ordinance only requires 108 spaces (compared to the 97 available on the surface lot). However, their own estimated need is much higher, and the deck will contain 132 spaces.

In discussion, applicants said the deck would maintain a low profile because of topography–The top of the deck will be lower than the Y’s parking lot. Members had nothing but praise for the project. Before a motion, Mr. Jarmon asked about the fate of the wooded buffer. It will be reduced on the YMCA and Rumson side to make way for the new construction, but the company will probably add new landscaping.

Board of Zoning Adjustments, July 12, 2018

Two cases are decided in 12 minutes. Some news on a BZA appeal is discussed

Members present: Beverly LeBoeuf, Brian Jarmon, vice chair, Matthew Foley, and Lauren Gwaltney, chair.

Absent: Ty Cole and Stuart Roberts

Staff present: Donna Bridges, board clerk, and Greg Cobb, Building, Engineering and Zoning Department

Audience attendance: 5

169 Lucerne Boulevard
The work has been stopped pending a ruling on a front setback violation overlooked by the BEZ department

Approved May minutes but carried over minutes for February: Completing and approving the detailed May minutes took precedence tonight, in order to answer an appeal filed of the May BZA decision granting a 17.1-foot front variance for a house at 169 Lucerne Boulevard. Neighbors had successfully fought a 3-way lot division at the address, accepted a simple lot split, then complained that the house being built was too close to the street. The city agreed and stopped construction after finding it had granted the building permit based on mis-measurements in mapping software. The case went to the BZA, which granted the variance–on condition it not be used in future setback computations–to allow the house to stand. It was this decision that Lucerne resident Scott Williams appealed to Jefferson County Circuit Court– with the blessings of many neighborhood residents. Homewood’s city attorney has announced plans to ask for a “summary judgment” in the city’s favor because the resident has no standing, according to BZA reports. Mr. Cobb said tonight that work had resumed on the house.

NEW BUSINESS:

#1 Poinciana Drive

Approved a left setback variance for an addition on Poinciana:  The owners of #1 Poinciana Road plan to roof an existing concrete patio on the left side of the house, toward the rear, and adjacent to U.S. 280 on the affected side. Zoning setback regulations apply when an outdoor space is covered, and the patio already encroaches 3 feet into the required 10-foot setback. The hardship, though not stated, is the trapezoidal shape of the lot, in which one side angles toward the house in the rear. The variance was granted.

1009 Edgewood Boulevard

Approved with one dissent a 7.2-foot left setback for an addition on Edgewood Boulevard: Homeowners at 1009 Edgewood Boulevard want to screen in and cover the left half of a 12′ X 32′ rear deck, which already sits 7.2 feet into the required 10-foot side setback, and add an outdoor fireplace at the back of the deck. There was some discussion of expanding the covered area another 4 feet, which would be beyond the scope of the requested variance. Mr. Jarmon mentioned the proximity of the neighbor’s shed to the covered deck and fireplace, but didn’t object further. The vote passed 4-1 in favor. 

Voting against the variance: Foley

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

Planning Commission, July 10, 2018

The 9-acre Trinity campus in west Homewood lacked a development plan until tonight. That plan includes a proposed metal storage building — screened from neighbors by landscaping — behind the gym, seen on the far left.

A measure to recommend a minimum residential lot width gets postponed for more discussion. A church agrees with notable lack of enthusiasm to plant a landscape buffer to screen a metal building from neighbors.

Members present: Britt Thames, Billy Higginbotham, chair, Jeffrey Foster, vice chair, Battalion Chief Nickolas Hill, John Krontiras, James Riddle, and Brady Wilson.

Absent: Stuart Roberts and Mark Woods

Staff present: Donna Bridges, board clerk, Fred Goodwin, planner, part-time, and Greg Cobb, Building, Engineering and Zoning staff.

Audience attendance: 5

*Rezoning Mixed Use District (MXD) development plans are advisory only and subject to final approval by the city council.

OLD BUSINESS:

Postponed until next month an election of chairman for the year beginning Sept. 1, 2018: Mr. Riddle, chair of the nominating committee, asked for the postponement.

NEW BUSINESS:

Carried over to August requested changes to a development plan for Walmart and Sam’s Club on Lakeshore Parkway: The parcels involved are at 201, 207 and 209 Lakeshore Parkway, with requested changes affecting landscaping, entrances and exits to reconfigure traffic flow, proposed by the state transportation department.

Approved, with conditions, a “final development plan” to include a new storage building for a west Homewood church: Trinity United Methodist Church, which recently took over the 56-year-old former Oakmont UMC, requested a new metal storage building on the south end of the campus at 914 Oak Grove Road. The building would sit to the rear of a gymnasium built circa 2000, also metal, and 28 feet from the property line, but directly behind houses on on adjacent Edgemont Road. Two people spoke with concerns about the aesthetics, including a neighbor on Edgemont and a former member (reporting), who said the gym was never enclosed in brick veneer as promised at construction. The Edgemont neighbor added a complaint about noise from the gym, which sits 17.5 feet from the residential property line.

A Trinity representative — Mr. Killian — said the site near the line was ideal because of accessibility to parking and had previously been graded. He said land at the back of the property was soggy, bisected by a ditch, and inaccessible. He pointed out that the storage unit will be about 10 feet further from the line than the much larger gym, and met other legal requirements.

In discussion, commissioners discovered the 1962 church had never submitted a development plan, with landscaping and other requirements, despite the relatively recent gym construction. Trinity, therefore, had supplied a campus layout for the case record, which will serve as the final development plan.

Before approving the plan, Mr. Higginbotham and Mr. Riddle asked that the church install a 10-foot landscaping buffer between the property and houses, in keeping with current zoning regulations, which were not cited. The representative agreed, but only for the length of the storage building, not the whole property. That done, the commission voted to approve.

319 and 321 Gran Avenue

Allowed two lots to be merged into one on Gran: Addresses 319 and 321 Gran Avenue were approved to be combined as one, with little discussion and no objections from one neighbor who spoke at the hearing. The architect representing the owners said he had no information about further plans for the property.  

Old businesses, resumed: 

Postponed for now voting on zoning changes that would set a minimum lot width when resurveying residential property: The commission has been asked to consider methods of slowing or regulating the continued splitting of residential lots, and other zoning concerns, during a building boom sparked by rising land values. Tonight the commission postponed voting to recommend setting a minimum lot width after staff said members needed time to digest the impact of such a change. The current procedure uses as a starting point an average of lot widths (and areas) computed from all built lots within a defined “impact area” (250 feet on either side of the subject property, and both sides of the street). The regulations allow the resulting lot to be as little as 85% of that average, a percentage critics say has created ever shrinking lot sizes for ever larger houses. They have demanded a return to 100%. The proposed staff changes, however, leave the percentage at 85% but add a minimum width of greater than 55 feet, regardless of the formula.

In discussion, Mr. Goodwin said the commissioners needed more time, as at least 10 citizen comments were received that day. He said the staff recommended carrying over a vote until the sub-committee could meet again, with a decision possibly as early as the August meeting. Mr. Foster took the lead in arranging that meeting, the time and place TBA, and the carryover was approved. 

The meeting was adjourned.

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

Planning Commission special meeting, June 21, 2018

912 Highland Road

A rounding error is corrected and a developer wins a contested lot split on Highland Road. Proposed zoning changes are put off for another day.

Members present: Billy Higginbotham, chair, Jeffrey Foster, vice chair, Battalion Chief Nickolas Hill, John Krontiras, James Riddle, and Brady Wilson.

Absent: Britt Thames, Stuart Roberts, and Mark Woods

Staff present: Donna Bridges, board clerk, Fred Goodwin, planner, part-time, and Greg Cobb, Building, Engineering and Zoning staff.

Audience attendance: 7

*Rezoning and MXD final development plan cases are advisory pnly and subject to final approval by the city council.

OLD BUSINESS:

Approved a lot division on Highland Road following a June 5 delay to check exact measurements:  A rounding error contributed two weeks ago to a delay in approving a lot split at 912 Highland Road, zoning official Greg Cobb said tonight. That error was corrected to allow the resurvey for owner Daniel Feldman and developer Jason Kessler. Under city zoning regulations, minimum widths for new lots are calculated as 85% of the average lot widths in a defined “impact area” surrounding the property.  The error occurred because a zoning staff member’s tax map software had the “rounding function” turned on, showing the average area lot width at 59 feet, not the correct 58.46 feet, Mr. Cobb said. When Mr. Thames applied 85% to the rounded number, it resulted in a minimum width of  50.15 feet–slightly wider Mr. Kessler’s 50-foot lots, and requiring variances from the Board of Zoning Adjustments. The developer balked at the delay over such a slim difference, prompting the special meeting called tonight. In the meantime, the board clerk also obtained measurements for a property in the impact area that was missing on the tax map, according to Mr. Cobb.

Despite the corrected arithmetic, sseveral residents spoke against the lot split, citing the increased traffic, houses too big for the lots, the loss of trees for aesthetics and privacy, potential stormwater damage to the city-owned Sims Garden next door, and the loss of an historic house. One resident also outlined a series of zoning suggestions to ease the impact of new construction –changing the percentage calculation for new lot sizes to 100% of the impact area average, maintaining larger lots to preserve permeable surfaces to absorb stormwater, require lower-profile houses, and count driveways as “structures” in determining the 50% maximum lot area for building.  

Mr. Kessler spoke before the vote, saying he would make a donation to the neighboring Sims Garden to show his support for the property. 

NEW BUSINESS:

Elected a nominating committee to choose a chair and vice chair for the annual term beginning Sept. 1. Mr. Riddle will chair the committee, to include Mr. Krontiras and Mr. Wilson.

Discussed, then carried over a proposed change to the zoning ordinance affecting minimum lot width: Mr. Cobb proposed adding a minimum lot width of 55 feet to the regulations determining sizes for new lots, discussed above. After considerable discussion about other alternatives–including increasing the allowed percentage from 85% to 100%, Mr. Riddle asked for the matter to be carried over for further thought. The city attorney had already weighed in, saying the 55-foot minimum was “arbitrary” in his opinion. Asked why the city should consider a change, Mr. Cobb said the idea came from Ward 1 Councilman Andy Gwaltney at the Monday committee meetings. Mr. Gwaltney originally thought the minimum should be 56 feet in order to require wider side setbacks (setbacks for lots over 55 feet are 10 feet), he said.

The meeting concluded at 7:45

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

Midterm poll-Homewood campaign issues 2020, June 19, 2018

Homewood Campaign Issues 2020 Poll: To go along with the state primary elections this month, we asked residents what the issues are in Homewood, looking forward to the 2020 municipal elections. Of 222 respondents, most thought the chief issue was “Control of Zoning and Development,” possibly due to controversial subdivisions in neighborhood news. Coming in a distant second was “Better Bike- and Walkability,” which has been a common theme for years,  and vying for third were a full-time chief executive and architectural design review.

Approximately 20% of responders (45) filled in their own issues. The most votes for any single topic were 6 votes each for school improvements, combatting crime, and controlling housing density, followed by 3 votes each for street repairs/paving, and Green Springs Highway improvements. The remaining answers either combined topics from the list provided or various individual answers: banning  on-street parking, promoting public transit, increasing traffic flow, and decreasing traffic flow.

Dead last on the list of issues was green space and passive parks, a top issue in a similar survey about bond issue spending last summer; see below.

Bond Issue Spending poll for comparison:

Three capital projects financed by the 2016 bond issue are in motion now, with school expansions to begin this month.

A brief refresher course:

What was last year’s poll about? Back in October 2016, just after the August election but before new members were sworn in, the council passed a 1-cent sales tax to back a $110 million bond issue for three projects–ballfield renovation, police station relocation, and school building expansions. At the end of that meeting, the mayor thanked the council for its hard work for the preceding 21 months on behalf of the school system, noting the effort might have “escaped public notice.”

Mayor McBrayer makes a case for partitioning the school system from the city and parks projects, recommending the job go to Hoar Program Management instead of Harbert – April 2017

The reason hard work escaped notice was because select council, school system, and parks officials were meeting secretly with the Harbert construction firm during that time. Once the bond issue was passed, council president Limbaugh favored continued privacy during the bid award process, establishing a “task force” not subject to open meeting laws because  membership excluded majorities of the council or any of the other two boards. The task force unraveled months later, mainly due to Mike Lanier, president of rival bidder Hoar Program Management, who went public with his objections to improper maneuvering among a few Harbert advocates on that panel  [HPM letter]:

With that backdrop, we polled residents in August 2017 how they would have spent the bond money if they had been included in the planning process. The answer from nearly 200 respondents showed agreement with the city’s $55 million for schools, but taking $10 million away for police relocation and slicing another $20 million off the park & rec ballfield project of $35M. Respondents would have spent those funds improving walkability, passive parks, and neighborhood appearance instead.

Have zoning issues overshadowed interest in increasing green space, or do surveys just reflect the latest  issue in neighborhood news?

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

Board of Zoning Adjustments, June 7, 2018

Site work for a new hotel, restaurant and retail is ongoing off U.S. 280 near a Homewood neighborhood.

An extended stay hotel planned for the former Mt. Brook Inn site received a substantial parking variance, sending it back to the planning commission next month for final plan and a lot split decision. Two of three residential cases will be heard at the BZA next month also, to correct or change the original cases.

Members present: Beverly LeBoeuf, Brian Jarmon, vice chair, Matthew Foley, Ty Cole, and Lauren Gwaltney, chair.

Absent: Stuart Roberts

Staff present: Donna Bridges, board clerk, Fred Goodwin, planner, pt,

Audience attendance: 13

*Note on procedure: By state law, zoning variances granted by the 5-member board require a super majority of 4 members voting in the affirmative. To keep business moving in case of absences, the law provides two supernumerary members (S) to sit in and vote if needed. (The board clerk alternates their votes, which are not noted in the blog.) Variances expire in 180 days if a building permit isn’t obtained.

Approved January meeting minutes: Monthly minutes have fallen behind.

410 Sterrett

Approved variances for a porch addition on Sterrett: Under condition that a new porch would not be enclosed at 410 Sterrett, the board granted a 5-foot front setback variance to allow the porch, currently only 6 feet deep, to be extended to a more usable depth, but placing it 10 feet from the street. (The porch is already 5 feet beyond the required 20-foot setback.) Architect/applicant Jared Bussey said other renovations underway were on the interior and didn’t add to the footprint of the house. Before voting, Mr. Cole made certain the applicant understood a variance would apply only to the open porch addition, not any future addition to the house itself. That said, and with letters of support from neighbors and no objections at the hearing, the board voted to approve.

307 Poinciana Drive

Carried over a request for two variances for a covered deck in order to obtain a survey:  The homeowner of 307 Poinciana Drive and builder Blake Bash explained they wanted to replace an existing deck with a new structure partially covered by a pergola and corrugated metal roof to channel rain runoff, and extending into the right-side setback. The new deck would be no larger than the original, but because the setback distance is greater for covered porches/decks, that portion required a 7-foot variance while the uncovered portion would require a 5-foot variance. The homeowner, saying he couldn’t find his own survey, had supplied a neighbor’s survey with his property line and deck outline included. Mr. Cole asked why the city didn’t require the proper survey up front, then suggested a preliminary vote that, if approved, would be contingent on producing the required survey and matching measurements. That idea was scrapped when Mr. Foley said he wanted to see how the deck and house fit on the property before casting a vote. The case therefore will be continued to the July meeting (moved to July 12 due to the holiday).

Plans for a Marriott Residence Inn off U.S. 280

Approved a variance allowing a proposed hotel to operate with only half the required parking spaces: The Planning Commission on June 5 delayed a decision on the U.S. 280 lot division and hotel development plan until the BZA decided whether to grant the parking variance.  As on Tuesday, hotelier Rocky Patel and representatives of AUM Enterprises explained that the property sale was contingent on obtaining this variance. Mr. Patel owns several other properties in the metro area, including the new Homewood Suites at 5-Points South. For this project, he plans to open a 124-room Residence Inn by Marriott to provide an extended-stay option not available nearby, he said. The current C4-B zoning requires 2 parking spaces per room, which he argued was far above the average used in the Birmingham area, whose average is lower than other urban markets. For example, the Homewood Suites in Birmingham has 75 parking spaces for 105 rooms, he said.

To support the request, the hotel would add 8 offsite parking spaces shared with the restaurant and retail on adjacent parcels, but under same ownership. Also, the C4-B zoning was going to function more like a mixed use project, which also has a lower parking requirement. Retail parking spaces would become available after closing, when they would be needed most for hotel guests.

In discussion, before a vote to approve, Mr. Cole mentioned the need potentially to change the parking regulation.

220 La Prado

Must re-advertise and re-hear a variance request on La Prado to account for changes: The homeowner at 220 La Prado wants to renovate a 2-story carriage house on his corner lot but was advised to tear it down and rebuild on a new foundation for strength and cost savings. If rebuilding from scratch, the homeowner said he wanted to move the structure from the rear property line toward the house, requiring a 5-foot accessory structure setback variance to the rear, and a 2.4-foot variance on the left side, facing La Playa (the garage already sits this close to the street). The discussion to clarify the request revealed an error in discounting the space needed to accommodate the width of an outside stair. Under zoning rules, if an accessory structure is more than 5 feet high, the external stair must be counted in the setback (whereas the stairs to a low deck, for instance, would not be). Because the requested variance will be increased, the case must be re-advertised to the public. 

The homeowner, after a conference with his neighbor who spoke to his meticulous renovation and historical restoration of their 1920’s house,  asked if it was reasonable to go ahead and widen the garage by 2-3 feet to account for the expanded width of cars between 1920 and 2018. The board encouraged him to submit that in the next request. The new case will be re-submitted for the July meeting.

The meeting was adjourned.

Planning Commission, June 5, 2018

The clock ticks on the fate of the “Secret Garden” house, whose owner was granted a 5-lot resurvey but won’t move on redevelopment until the lease is up in January for former owners, now tenants.

 

 

 

All five cases tonight involved lot divisions as developers try to squeeze the most profit from rising property values. Despite overwhelming opposition from residents and 100 spectators who remained for most of the 3-hour meeting, the commission issued approval on three residential subdivisions, even as one commissioner apologized for doing so in advance. Mr. Thames, the council member, voted with Mr. Foster against one cases and dissented alone in two others. It was Mr. Thames who also delayed a final case on Highland Road by questioning lot measurements, a question that will be decided in a special meeting in two weeks. New rules seemed to be in play, with commissioners having to give reasons for any negative vote and refusing to issue decisions contingent on future approval by the BZA. Variances must be decided first, they said.

Members present: Billy Higginbotham, chair, Jeffrey Foster, vice chair, John Krontiras, Britt Thames, James Riddle, and Brady Wilson.

Absent: Mark Woods and Battalion Chief Nickolas Hill.

Staff present: Donna Bridges, board clerk, Fred Goodwin, planner, part-time, Greg Cobb and Scott Cook, Building, Engineering and Zoning staff.

Audience attendance: >100

*Rezoning and MXD development plans are advisory only and subject to final approval by the city council.

OLD BUSINESS:

Mr. Kessler’s presentation compared the PRD-1 zoning he prefers with a plan using traditional zoning.

Voted to approve a preliminary plan for a high-density subdivision hotly contested by residents within a neighborhood preservation district to build it:  “In the spirit of NPD,” two commissioners tonight coaxed developer Jason Kessler into accepting a few more Neighborhood Preservation District regulations in his 12-unit planned development at 800-808 Saulter Road and 809 Carr Avenue. Under those proffers, side setbacks will follow NPD rules (10 feet for lots 55 feet and over, 5 and 9 feet for smaller lots), with heights not to exceed 35 and 29 feet respectively, and — after the developer squinted at drawings with the engineer — having no lots narrower than NPD’s 50-foot minimum. The developer had already agreed not to gate the private drive or allow accessory structures, and to plant the development with large trees. With those concessions made, the panel voted unanimously to approve the preliminary plan, implicitly approving the necessary rezoning from NPD to Planned Residential District (PRD)-1. The rezoning question will go before the city council along with the final, detailed development plan containing the changes. 

Chairman Billy Higginbotham, braced for a long night with more than 100 spectators and four cases involving unpopular residential lot divisions and demolitions–had opened the public hearing by giving speakers a 2-minute time limit and warning against anyone “rambling on” with duplicate concerns. (Some 60 letters of protest were sent in; the city rejected a petition of 225 signatures as being unverifiable.) Mr. Higginbotham at one point threatened to shut down the hearing if residents continued to applaud each speaker at the podium.

In all there were 13 speakers opposing the project and two in favor, including a real estate agent and resident who owns of a lot in the development. Among the concerns were the aesthetics, density, drainage, comparative percent of impervious surfaces allowed in each zoning classification (there is no maximum), traffic, and intrusion on the NPD “feel” of surrounding neighborhood. The Planned Residential classification treats the development area as a single lot, with fewer restrictions on how structures are placed inside it. The format allows 12 houses, where an alternate NPD plan would allow only 8, according to Mr. Kessler’s drawing. Interestingly, Mr. Kessler, aided by Mr. Higginbotham, speculated that an NPD development would attract buyers interested in building even larger houses — as much as 4,500 sf compared to 2,600 sf in PRD–and who were likely to build 2-story garage apartments for their relatives in their backyards. An NPD development, they argued, could be even more dense than PRD.

Nevertheless, an NPD plan was not under consideration. After the proffers were made, a vote was taken allowing developers to move toward a final development plan.

NEW BUSINESS:

Layout and parking for an extended-stay hotel proposed on the former Mt. Brook Inn site.

Approved on two 5-2 split votes a lot division and a preliminary development plan for a hotel on U.S. 31: Hotel developer Rocky Patel, owner of the new Homewood Suites at 5-Points South and other properties, made a case for a 6-story, 124-room extended stay hotel at the former Mt. Brook Inn site at 2800 US 280. The owner is MX 2800 LLC/David Arrington, Arrington Engineering.

The site was purchased shortly before the recession, in 2006, with no redevelopment attempted until 2014, when owners proposed an ambitious plan to build a hotel, office building and parking deck that never materialized. Last summer owners divided the 5-acre parcel with plans for a restaurant on the smaller site. That case was given final approval in November.  With the restaurant set to open in August, they were back again tonight, this time with plans for an $18 million, 6-story, 124-room extended-stay hotel under the Marriott “Residence Inn” banner.

Owner Dan Lovell introduced Mr. Patel, of AUM Enterprises, who proposed a Marriott “flag,” said he expected a 75% occupancy, bringing the city $600,000 a year in lodging a sales taxes. There were no speakers, but the prospect of a hotel drew a surprising number of questions from Mr. Foster, who was concerned about the market, with “38 hotels in a 3-5 mile radius” of the subject property. He cited a glut of aging interstate motels in West Homewood and concerns about  the new project competing with other Homewood hotels.

Mr. Patel said extended stay hotels serve a special niche market of corporate and academic guests, who can stay for up to several months while training, relocating  offices, etc. He didn’t foresee any competition with boutique hotels, full-service, or Embassy Suites hotels, he said. Another extended stay on U.S. 280 recently lost its Residence Inn brand due to aging.

Mr. Foster then voted no to the preliminary development plan, saying the Board of Zoning Adjustments should rule on a related parking variance first. Mr. Foster’s reaction prompted the chairman to stop the voting in mid-roll call to ask if Mr. Patel wanted a postponement. He did not, and the vote continued, with Mr. Thames also voting no, and giving the the same reason.

A second vote called on resurveying (dividing) the lot brought the same result.

Voting against 1) a preliminary development plan and 2) a lot division: Thames and Foster

Five-lot division proposed at 214 Edgewood Blvd.

Approved with one dissent a lot division on the historic “Secret Garden” house on Edgewood Blvd.:  Real estate watchers claim to have seen this case in the making for years, but the plan to demolish and divide into 5 lots an historic residential landmark came as a shock to other long-time Homewood residents.  Added to public reaction was another lot division case heard (and approved) later tonight for the house at 214 Edgewood Boulevard, across the street. The emotional “Pink House” case unfolded late into a long meeting, with 10 speakers imploring commissioners to postpone a decision until something–they didn’t know what–could be decided to preserve the 1920s villa enclosed by a lush garden and trees, the site of legendary parties with writers Fitzgerald and Hemingway. The original owners in 1988 had sold the place to Diana and Eric Hansen, owners until recently of the White Flower boutique on 18th Street, who themselves sold it out of financial necessity in 2004. They are currently living as tenants and maintaining the grounds until their lease expires in January.

Following the speakers, Mr. Cobb spoke in defense of the current owner, Mr. O’Sullivan, saying he had held onto the declining property for 12 years and there was no legal reason to deny his request for a division. The house had been built on six lots originally, he said. Asked why the property wouldn’t be redivided into those original 6, he said current zoning didn’t allow such small lots without BZA approval, but dividing into 5 lots exceeded size requirements (Mr. O’Sullivan said earlier he had sacrificed the extra lot to lessen the density for the neighborhood). 

At this point, Ms. Hansen herself spoke, laying out the property’s history and asking if anyone had $5 million to rescue the house from demolition. 

In conclusion, before a vote, Mr. O’Sullivan said he would entertain any solution in the eight months before the Hansens’ lease expired. Otherwise, he planned to develop the lots himself or sell them to individual buyers. “There was never an agreement to lease it to the Hansens indefinitely,” he said. The vote was called, with Mr. Krontiras apologizing for having to vote yes, and Mr. Thames casting the only no vote. 

Corner property at 217 Edgewood Blvd. approved for a lot split and redevelopment.

Voting against a resurvey of the property at 214 Edgewood Boulevard: Thames

Approved with one dissent a division of one lot into two on Edgewood Boulevard: The corner property directly across the street from the previous case was decided quickly in favor, with one resident asking a question about traffic.

Voting against the division: Thames.

912 Highland Road

Carried over a resurvey request dividing a lot on Highland Road for two new houses: [Following the carryover to July, the commission decided instead to call a special meeting in two weeks to resolve problems with the request.] Once again Jason Kessler addressed the commission, this time representing Overton Investments, his own LLC, and a 100-foot lot at 912 Highland Road to be divided into two roughly 50-foot lots. The house sits adjacent and east of the Sims Ecoscape residence and opposite a 5-lot subdivision and controversial redevelopment on the west that was the subject of a stop-work order for setback questions.  

Immediately before a public hearing was opened, Mr. Thames observed that the divided sections would fall short of the city’s minimum width by .15 feet each, requiring a BZA variance before proceeding to a resurvey. There would be no more commission decisions issued contingent on BZA approval, he said.

That call meant a nearly two month delay, since the BZA’s July meeting falls after the PCs meeting the same month, with no guarantee of a favorable BZA decision at all.

Mr. Kessler objected to the maneuver and, as in the KADCO project, said the city employees had already given permission for the project–this time in writing. He asked why Mr. Thames’ measurements were carried to two decimal points when most lot widths were measured in round numbers.

“Why put this on the BZA’s shoulders?” he asked. “I’ve invested several hundred thousand dollars and I’d be left with one lot when told in writing I could have two.”

Mr. Kessler said he’d already sold one of the lots based on that decision, and stood to lose that deal as well with a 2-month delay. The commission didn’t answer the question, but offered to carry over the case while measurements were verified and discrepancies resolved. With that offer accepted, reluctantly, the matter was continued to July. The commission later agreed to call a special meeting in two weeks to resolve the matter.

Image of 7 proposed zoning changes

Agreed in principle to amending details of several vague zoning regulations for submission to the City Council: Before adjourning, Mr. Cobb suggested 7 changes to setback and other zoning regulations and definitions, as follows. The BEZ has been taken to court or threatened with legal action on recent cases involving mismeasurements, unclear wording, and permits issued in error or, as in this case, decisions made by staff that belonged to city boards.

The meeting adjourned close to 9 p.m.