Case#1 - Finding and Decision (full text)

Case \ USE VARIANCE FINDINGS OFFICE USE ONLY Application No. UV-_|~.202 & DECISION Date of Application: JA IIb las (Postmarked or Hand Deliveréd) Date of Public Hearing: BIS IAL Applicant DAVid Sahauh = Twin wood Forest Date Notice Published: : Date of County Referral: ; LLG Date of Final Action: — Appeal Concerns Bred at the following address: Date of Filing of Decision with the Ca rpente C Koa Municipal Clerk: 3 | 19 [QI, County Tax Map Section: __ Block Lot __ Zoning District Classifi ication: \ Use for which Variance is Requested: ZO6, 2d & 206 Ay Applicable Section of Zoning Code: 2OO»2S © 260,44 Permitted Uses of Property: TEST: No use variance will be granted without a showing by the applicant that applicable zoning regulations and restrictions have caused unnecessary hardship. The following tests must be met for each and every use allowed by zoning on the property, including uses allowed by special use permit. ILLUSTRATIONS OF 1.The Applicant cannot realize a reasonable return, as shown by FINANCIAL EVIDENCE competent financial evidence. The lack of return must be * Bill of sale for the yz SR substantial: Yes___No>~ property, present value of property, expenses for iit Proof,__7\ ke opp co) LAN Suuttoly we) : maintenance * Leases, rental ‘pa able Sa Sanw ew | ospepnts agreements ° Tax bills anad< Mods f dcoue AW oashiug shod * Conversion costs (for a permitted use) ‘ae o\s ye ons eoow * Realtor’s statement of inability to rent/sell 2. The alleged hardship relating to the property is unique. (The ILLUSTRATIONS OF hardship may not apply to a substantial portion of the zoning district UNIQUENESS or neighborhood.): Yes___ No_2— * Topographic or physical features preventing development for a Proofs: The AOD Wael ess Soe Opswros permitted use * Why would it be possible aeKoa Wd a2 Pan Mek a peak WOe5 to construct the applicant's proposal and not any of the Reo To) hea loaslowus SOO rouely, permitted uses? ¢ Board member observations of the - property and surrounding area.

PAGE 2 OF 4: acS eye 3.neighborhood.: The requested use variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the Yes x2 Noy Ee ILLUSTRATIVE = | Proot: ; \ Jes \m mod che Deihburs \Weue COP SS NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER FACTORS Je ho balnivg Xthe sleds o ¢ Board members’ observations of neighborhood. * Expected effect of proposal on neighborhood, for example, change in parking patterns, noise levels, lighting, traffic. 4. The alleged hardship has been self-created. : Yes Gi__ No ye Nate C4 Da 22 fs SELF-CREATED i\\ Proot: The Spp\icust Gy GS Wek * What were the iS SU-R co \\ wa Qjadsi permitted uses at the X SAA) OSLAWRUA time the property was v v7] purchased by the As. p poppy 4 applicant? * Were substantial sums spent on remodeling for a use not permitted by zoning? ¢ Was the property received through inheritance, court order, divorce? DETERMINATION OF ZBA BASED ON THE ABOVE FACTORS: The ZBA, after reviewing the above four proofs, finds: bea That the applicant has failed to prove unnecessary hardship through the application of the four tests required by the state statutes. L] That the applicant has proven unnecessary hardship through the application of the four tests required by the state statutes. In finding such hardship, the ZBA shall grants a variance to allow use of the property in the manner detailed below, which is the minimum variance that should be granted in order to preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community: (USE)

Page 3 of 4: CONDITIONS: The ZBA finds that the following conditions are necessary in order to minimize adverse impacts upon the neighborhood or community, for the reasons following: Condition No. 1: Adverse impact to be minimized: Condition No. 2: Adverse impact to be minimized: Condition No .3: Adverse impact to be minimized: Condition No. 4: Adverse impact to be minimized: Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals Date

Page 4 of 4: RECORD OF VOTE MEMBER NAME AYE NAY Co Wala Vacabavate Chi} hy- Chair Member Mae Geto Bh“1s = Member A ys nd a ba tbh Member Voges Cl ea QD 2977 A LY pf) enero Member Wh Wd Lo

USE VARIANCE FINDINGS OFFICE USE ONLY a Application No. UV- _j - 20] & DECISION Date of Application: }A]/G/ Ae (Postmarked or Hand Deli rg d) Date of Public Hearing Applicant: aS ; rest, 4 Date Notice Published: Date of County Referral: — ‘ LLC Date of Final Action: Appeal Concerns Rood at the following address: Date of Filing of Decisionwith the facpentec Koa Municipal Clerk: eNILIETD County Tax Map Section: Block Lot Zoning District Classification: Use for which Variance is Requested: Ise YNVY No acceseny Reus ld nc Sheu lg be OS nN Dewy Las, 2 (Vo? C.€C.S¢-, 5 Reur re wi 4Loiw Ih “he. (ney oft Analn Cxi, FUAWSFO ¥ a 3 \o cole PAS Applicable Section of Zoning Code: Loe .£) | Y Wao - 2X Permitted Uses of Property: TEST: No use variance will be granted without a showing by the applicant that applicable zoning regulations and restrictions have caused unnecessary hardship. The following tests must be met for each and every use allowed by zoning on the property, including uses allowed by special use permit. ILLUSTRATIONS OF 1.The Applicant cannot realize a reasonable return, as shown by FINANCIAL EVIDENCE competent financial evidence. The lack of return must be * Bill of sale for the substantial.: Yes No X_ property, present value of property, expenses for Proof: his Brueeny] Gel hos Va dye maintenance * Leases, rental hes ain un es PRC ud (n Sv S Gn d Caw) a b tL agreements ° Tax bills * Conversion costs (for a Lien A permitted use) * Realtor’s statement of inability to rent/sell 2. The alleged hardship relating to the property is unique. (The ILLUSTRATIONS OF hardship may not apply to a ae portion of the zoning district UNIQUENESS or neighborhood.): Yes___ No * Topographic or physical features preventing development for a Proofs:_| 1:5 frcoPec sy Sweden Fhe permitted use ¢ Why would it be possible Sine Hepwe \ ahr § QS th e Gin to construct the applicant's proposal and not any of the Erwec-Mi 4 PA Fe Sonne Reore. permitted uses? ¢ Board member observations of the - property and surrounding area.

PAGE 2 OF 4: 3. The requested use variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.: Yes__ No =X ILLUSTRATIVE Proof: yuis Vac anty Wow \d aWow/ 4or- NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER FACTORS Val? Sa\ rons +0. & 44 F MN en * Board members’ observations of @BNAG AAArnor Noy eye Are Et44 oF neighborhood. ¢ Expected effect of yn, ca Ne? bee Lvl proposal on neighborhood, for example, change in parking patterns, noise levels, lighting, traffic. 4. The alleged hardship has been self-created. : YesX No __ Proof Th.S \and 1% Aor GAT FOR SELF-CREATED * What were the permitted uses at the AR We HS Byaxed tnx Rt Code time the property was purchased by the applicant? ¢ Were substantial sums spent on remodeling for a use not permitted by zoning? * Was the property received through inheritance, court order, divorce? DETERMINATION OF ZBA BASED ON THE ABOVE FACTORS: The ZBA, after reviewing the above four proofs, finds: That the applicant has failed to prove unnecessary hardship through the application of the four tests required by the state statutes. L] That the applicant has proven unnecessary hardship through the application of the four tests required by the state statutes. In finding such hardship, the ZBA shall grants a variance to allow use of the property in the manner detailed below, which is the minimum variance that should be granted in order to preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community: (USE)

Page 3 of 4: CONDITIONS: The ZBA finds that the following conditions are necessary in order to minimize adverse impacts upon the neighborhood or community, for the reasons following: Condition No. 1: Adverse impact to be minimized: Condition No. 2: Adverse impact to be minimized: Condition No .3: Adverse impact to be minimized: Condition No. 4: Adverse impact to be minimized: Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals Date

Page 4 of 4: RECORD OF VOTE MEMBER NAME AYE NAY Chair ie (ptr 7 Member 12 eVin Tac CARO. Member Member Member

USE VARIANCE FINDINGS OFFICE USE ONLY Application No. UV- | ~AO. & DECISION Date of Application: (Postmarked or Hand Delivéred) Date of Public Hearing: “3 | Date Notice Published: 3/3/; Applicant: S GV id Sthauh~ [win wood Fo rest, Date of County Referral: ; ALC Date of Final Action: = Appeal Concerns pen at the following address: Date of Filing of Decision with the Cacpentec Koa Municipal Clerk: 3 IVA County Tax Map Section: Block Lot Zoning District Classification:. Use for which Variance is Requested: Applicable Section of Zoning Code: Permitted Uses of Property: TEST: No use variance will be granted without a showing by the applicant that applicable zoning regulations and restrictions have caused unnecessary hardship. The following tests must be met for each and every use allowed by zoning on the property, including uses allowed by special use permit. ILLUSTRATIONS OF 1.The Applicant cannot realize a reasonable return, as shown by FINANCIAL EVIDENCE competent financial evidence. The lack of return must be * Bill of sale for the substantial. Yes___No X_ property, present value of property, expenses for Proof, THE PRoPEeTy COM BE USED KEAN AR maintenance ° Leases, rental agreements AS-1$. SY FINaMowe sues ACE SELE * Tax bills * Conversion costs (for a MA0E permitted use) * Realtor’s statement of inability to rent/sell 2. The alleged hardship relating to the property is unique. (The ILLUSTRATIONS OF hardship may not apply to a substantial portion of the zoning district UNIQUENESS * Topographic or physical or neighborhood.): Yes3 No features preventing BEWG6 YSeo AS LiviING development for a Proofs) No® Main BulLoiwG, permitted use ¢ Why would it be possible Qu ARTES to construct the applicant's proposal and not any of the permitted uses? ¢ Board member observations of the - property and surrounding area.

PAGE 2 OF 4: 3. The requested use variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.: Yes X No__ ILLUSTRATIVE Proof: AREA WAS MULTIPLE RECREATIONAL TYPE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER FACTORS RESIDENTS (VEgmMany ILE cee) ALSs HAS ExXtsrine * Board members’ observations of BulegweS neighborhood. * Expected effect of proposal on neighborhood, for example, change in parking patterns, noise levels, lighting, traffic. 4. The alleged hardship has been self-created. : YesX No __ Proof: ALL VARIANCES ARE SELF CREATES, SELF-CREATED * What were the permitted uses at the time the property was purchased by the applicant? ¢ Were substantial sums spent on remodeling for a use not permitted by zoning? * Was the property received through inheritance, court order, divorce? DETERMINATION OF ZBA BASED ON THE ABOVE FACTORS: The ZBA, after reviewing the above four proofs, finds: ] That the applicant has failed to prove unnecessary hardship through the application of the four tests required by the state statutes. [] That the applicant has proven unnecessary hardship through the application of the four tests required by the state statutes. In finding such hardship, the ZBA shall grants a variance to allow use of the property in the manner detailed below, which is the minimum variance that should be granted in order to preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community: (USE)

Page 3 of 4: CONDITIONS: The ZBA finds that the following conditions are necessary in order to minimize adverse impacts upon the neighborhood or community, for the reasons following: Condition No. 1: Adverse impact to be minimized: Condition No. 2: Adverse impact to be minimized: Condition No .3: Adverse impact to be minimized: Condition No. 4: Adverse impact to be minimized: Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals Date

Page 4 of 4: RECORD OF VOTE MEMBER NAME AYE NAY Chair Member Koss Cle THI E/e_ P| Member | Member | Member

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AREA VARIANCE FINDINGS & DECISION _ | Sogcuosno av =203 _ Date of Application: appticant: David Sehau b ~Twinw re ood faarst Src LLC , | Date Notice Published: SU 2// A IC ppeal Property at the foll Concerns Property a e€ TO owing aaaress: Date of County Referral: Cacpentec Road SBA#2Ip-00-1-30 Date of Final Action: — County Tax Map Section: Block Lot Date of Filing of Decision with the Zoning District Classification: . . Municipal Clerk: ATTEN Requirement for which Variance is Requested: Ma. Caan -Wd LO- Applicable Section(s) of Zoning Code: “LCD « 3 Vee TEST: No area variance will be granted without a consideration by the board of the following factors: 1. Whether undesirable change would be produced in character of neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties: Yes __No2< Reasons: 2ZCh>o-\S Wey, LCOS -S2. Yes Us 2. Whether benefit sought by applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the variance: Yes?*<_No___ Reasons:__[{Y\g ee \. eons SEN <\od§ VS A aang doo 3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes = No2” Reasons: 26-13 Wo 226 -S2_ Xess No Tw +e out est A &i ina Velo tabio shad ~ SMa carsc eat 4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood: Yes___ No _=5_ Reasons: LAL A. Ay & Lnoset os nS N 2igbe o5 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes 2SNo_ Reasons: Alo Ay Ss 4 \n2 osS$e

Page 2 of 2 DETERMINATION OF ZBA BASED ON THE ABOVE FACTORS: The ZBA, after taking into consideration the above five factors, finds that: C1] the Benefit to the Applicant DOES NOT Outweigh the Detriment to the Neighborhood or Community and therefore the variance request is denied. & the Benefit to the Applicant DOES outweigh the Detriment to the Neighborhood or Community. Reasons; de Nat SoS O15 sprodve ‘SS ues | COV SLO ww) +thige ApeA vert sas The ZBA further finds that a variance of from Section of the Zoning Code is the minimum variance that should be granted in order to preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community because: CONDITIONS: The ZBA finds that the following conditions are necessary in order to minimize adverse impacts upon the neighborhood or community, for the reasons following: Condition No. 1: Pepdnoas Adverse impact to be minimized: Condition No. 2: Adverse impact to be minimized: RECORD OF VOTE oc Le MEMBER NAME AYE NAY : Chair Sowers Pe JO Member Vedi Dog t ihr —. i Member Bass CleHyor a Member Maa Grartdsp_ os Member VY on

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OFFICE USE ONLY AREA VARIANCE FINDINGS & DECISION | Application No. AV- Alef & Date of Application: Applicant: QV d Sahauh Twin di (Postmarked or Hand Delivered pp pWO® aneST; Date of Public Hearing ihe Date Notice Published: . Appeal Concerns Property at the following address: Date of County Referral: Cacpentec Kao fe S BAF 2 ly: 00-1-30 Date of Final Action: County Tax Map Section: —S——— Block Lot Date of Filing of Decision with the Zoning District Classification: Muninipal Clerk: Bhidjae Requirement for which Variance is Requested: labttable Dewlirs SS peuss e (orSgmmted On NA Gatos Fil UE loSeed faundoten y) Nex Ea onan Le way nS~ Applicable Section(s) of Zoning Code: 2.69 — 13 y 2.00) - 5. TEST: No area variance will be granted without a consideration by the board of the following factors: 1. Whether undesirable change would be produced in character of neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties: Yes Nox _ Reasons: Ther. ert ke proopert yo with Gharvale $3204 BAwrWAvne ’ 2. Whether benefit sought by applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the variance: YesX No___ Reasons:| <S2 Sy onetartS Conta be Qrowgh+ hp 4G Cor, Ww MOAT LAAY On$ ' 3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: YesX Nose Reasons:_\ey AS Cs Sy ohmee Qe d bint a4 GQ AWeVvine Ya Non tp 7 4 4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood: Yes__ No __ Reasons: NOs AS ce Storenge Ched G+ lod 2S a dos. WG R Cvow V3. 5, Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes/\ No_ Reasons: WS Camla hain ‘Oedien ber aviorded by Ger{ ors 4 Prony * ' 2

Page 2 of 2 DETERMINATION OF ZBA BASED ON THE ABOVE FACTORS: The ZBA, after taking into consideration the above five factors, finds that: the Benefit to the Applicant DOES NOT Outweigh the Detriment to the Neighborhood or Community and therefore the variance request is denied. L] the Benefit to the Applicant DOES outweigh the Detriment to the Neighborhood or Community. Reasons:_ Re SonS \A3S Lorn\d have berm OViedled by QeSN rg eco het 7—Eas AWS Chre ng7z5 Cowl | bh. | The ZBA further finds that a variance of from Section of the Zoning Code is the minimum variance that should be granted in order to preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community because: CONDITIONS: The ZBA finds that the following conditions are necessary in order to minimize adverse impacts upon the neighborhood or community, for the reasons following: Condition No. 1: Adverse impact to be minimized: Condition No. 2: Adverse impact to be minimized: RECORD OF VOTE MEMBER NAME AYE NAY Chair fer V—>— Member Kew 7 ae rayann A Member A Member Member

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OFFICE USE ONLY AREA VARIANCE FINDINGS & DECISION Application No. AV-_[-—2G3 Date of Application: as (Postmarked or Hand Pelivered) Applicant: bavi fe! Scheuh —Tutlowoud forest, Date of Public Hearing: 3]/8 LLC, Date Notice Published: ‘ Appeal Concerns eee at the byte address: Date of County Referral: Cacpentec Koad SBA#F2)p-00-1-30 Date of Final Action: County Tax Map Section: Block Lot Date of Filing of Decision with the Zoning District Classification: Municipal Clerk: 3 Ii fale Requirement for which Variance is Requested: Applicable Section(s) of Zoning Code: TEST: No area variance will be granted without a consideration by the board of the following factors: 1. Whether undesirable change would be produced in character of neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties: Yes__ No_X Reasons: No Contant o?@ ORSFcTUN Fame NEON BES 2. Whether benefit sought by applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the variance: Yes & No Reasons: MAKE (CeAar DW Exiemne Crlui£RC 3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes xX No__ Reasons: ALL VARIANCES Aree SuBsSmATAL 4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood: Yes___ No >< Reasons:__VSE Opes Not VALY Feem RECT OF AREA 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: | Yes*No_ Reasons: ALL VACIAUCES AE SvBSTANUALASELF cCREATEO

Page 2 of 2 DETERMINATION OF ZBA BASED ON THE ABOVE FACTORS: The ZBA, after taking into consideration the above five factors, finds that: gi the Benefit to the Applicant DOES NOT Outweigh the Detriment to the Neighborhood or Community and therefore the variance request is denied. LI the Benefit to the Applicant DOES outweigh the Detriment to the Neighborhood or Community. Reasons: The ZBA further finds that a variance of from Section of the Zoning Code is the minimum variance that should be granted in order to preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community because: CONDITIONS: The ZBA finds that the following conditions are necessary in order to minimize adverse impacts upon the neighborhood or community, for the reasons following: Condition No. 1: Adverse impact to be minimized: Condition No. 2: Adverse impact to be minimized: Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals Date RECORD OF VOTE MEMBER NAME AYE NAY Chair _— Member Luss Chyhiez Pad Member _ Member _ Member