BOA - March 15th 2016

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MEETING MINUTES
Mayfield Village
March 15, 2016

The Board of Appeals met in regular session on Tues, March 15, 2016 at 7:30 p.m. at the Mayfield Village Civic Center Conference Room. Chairman Prcela presided.

ROLL CALL

Present: Mr. Joseph Prcela (Chairman), Mr. Vetus Syracuse (Chairman Pro-Tem), Mr. Stivo DiFranco, Mrs. Alexandra Jeanblanc, and Mr. John Michalko

Also Present: Mr. John Marrelli (Building Commissioner), Ms. Deborah Garbo (Secretary), and Councilman Jerome

Absent: Mr. Mark Guidetti (Law Department)

CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTESJuly 21, 2015

Mr. Syracuse, seconded by Mr. DiFranco made a motion to approve the Minutes of July 21, 2015.     

ROLL CALL

Ayes: Mr. Prcela, Mr. Syracuse, Mr. DiFranco

Nays: None                                      

Motion Carried. Minutes Approved as Written.

CONSIDERATION OF CASE #2016-01:

Applicant:

Salvatore & Mary Jo Laurie
6621 SOM Court (S/L # 1)
Parkledge Development

  1. A request for a 2.5 foot west side yard variance from Section 1159.05 (d) (3) (A) to allow for construction of a New Single Family Ranch home.
  2. A request for a 7.6 foot garage to street setback variance from Section 1159.05 (d) (4) to allow for construction of a New Single Family Ranch home.
  3. A request for a 3.81 foot building to street setback from Section 1159.05 (d) (4) to allow for construction of a New Single Family Ranch home.

Abutting Property Owners:

C.E.I. 681 Beta / Rockwell 6680 Beta / Mt. Vernon 6690 Beta / Fisher’s Tavern 718 SOM Ctr

cc:

Salvatore & Mary Jo Laurie
356 A East Legend Ct.
Highland Hts. 44143

Parkledge Construction
2802 Shaker Crest Blvd
Beachwood 44122

Bob Schaefer, President Parkledge Homeowners’ Assoc.
6585 SOM Ct.
Mayfield Village 44143

OPEN PORTION:

Chairman Prcela states, I’d like to go on record and express our thanks to Mrs. Shatten and Mr. Russ for all their years of service on this Board. They were very instrumental in helping me learn a lot of the history prior to my coming on board.

Welcome New Board Members

  • Alexandra Bohne Jeanblanc
  • John Michalko

Chairman Prcela said, we have two new Board Members, Alexandra Jeanblanc and John Michalko who both have been asked to serve by Mayor Bodnar and have been sworn in. Welcome aboard.

ORGANIZATIONAL:

  • Election of Chairman
  • Election of Chairman Pro-Tem
  • Election of Secretary
  • Election of Planning & Zoning Representative to the B.O.A.

ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN:

Chairman Prcela opened the floor to a motion for Chairman of the Board of Appeals 2016 nominations.  

Mr. DiFranco, seconded by Mr. Syracuse made the motion to nominate Joseph Prcela.

Chairman asked if there was any discussion. There was none. The nominations were closed.

Chairman asked for a Roll Call on the nomination for Joseph Prcela.   

ROLL CALL:

Ayes: Mr. Prcela, Mr. Syracuse, Mr. DiFranco, Mrs. Jeanblanc, Mr. Michalko    

Nays: None               

Motion Carried. Joseph Prcela to serve as 2016 Chairman.

ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN PRO-TEM:

Chairman Prcela opened the floor to a motion for Chairman Pro–Tem of the Board of Appeals 2016 nominations.  

Mr. DiFranco, seconded by Mrs. Jeanblanc made the motion to nominate Vetus Syracuse.   

Chairman asked if there was any discussion. There was none. The nominations were closed.

Chairman asked for a Roll Call on the nomination for Vetus Syracuse.    

ROLL CALL:

Ayes: Mr. Prcela, Mr. Syracuse, Mr. DiFranco, Mrs. Jeanblanc, Mr. Michalko     

Nays: None               

Motion Carried. Vetus Syracuse to serve as 2016 Chairman Pro-Tem.

ELECTION OF SECRETARY:

Chairman Prcela opened the floor to a motion for Secretary of the Board of Appeals 2016 nominations.  

Mr. DiFranco, seconded by Mr. Michalko made the motion to nominate Deborah Garbo.   

Chairman asked if there was any discussion. There was none. The nominations were closed.

Chairman asked for a Roll Call on the nomination for Deborah Garbo.    

ROLL CALL:

Ayes: Mr. Prcela, Mr. Syracuse, Mr. DiFranco, Mrs. Jeanblanc, Mr. Michalko      

Nays: None               

Motion Carried. Deborah Garbo to serve as 2016 Secretary.

PLANNING & ZONING REPRESENTATIVE

Chairman Prcela opened the floor to a motion for the Planning & Zoning Representative to the Board of Appeals 2016 nominations.  

Mrs. Jeanblanc, seconded by Mr. Michalko made the motion to nominate Vetus Syracuse.     

Chairman asked if there was any discussion. There was none. The nominations were closed.

Chairman asked for a Roll Call on the nomination for Vetus Syracuse.      

ROLL CALL:

Ayes: Mr. Prcela, Mr. Syracuse, Mr. DiFranco, Mrs. Jeanblanc, Mr. Michalko   

Nays: None               

Motion Carried. Vetus Syracuse to serve as 2016 P & Z Rep to the BOA.   

Chairman Prcela concludes the Organizational portion of the meeting.

CONSIDERATION OF CASE #2016-01
Salvatore & Mary Jo Laurie
6621 SOM Court (S/L # 1)
Parkledge Development

Chairman Prcela states, the applicant is looking for three variances to allow for construction of a new single family ranch home.

OATH

Chairman Prcela stated that anyone wishing to speak must be sworn in, administering the oath to the Board Members, Applicants, & Appellants and asked anyone wishing to speak to state their name and address for the record.

Joe Marra from MJ Builders introduced himself. Sam’s Architect Joe Calderwood couldn’t be here tonight, he’s at an A.R.B. meeting in Orange Village. Because of the lot and how it’s situated, and having to conform to it and meet the minimum 1800 sq. ft. house size, in order to do that and get the homeowner what he wants, we’d have to make the house a little bigger which will go beyond the side yard & setback requirements.    

Mr. DiFranco asked, do the neighbors have any objections?

Sam Laurie replied, I used to be a resident here 7 years ago. I talked to the homeowners. They agreed to go ahead with whatever you guys come together with. They have no objection to setbacks or variances as long as the house conforms. They sent a letter to Mr. Marrelli.

Mr. Marrelli confirmed a letter was received from the President of Parkledge Homeowners’ Association and circulated to the Board Members which stated as long as the materials are proper, they don’t care about the setbacks.

Mr. DiFranco asked Mr. Marrelli about any concerns he has with the setbacks.

Mr. Marrelli replied, this is the last lot. When this development went in, they didn’t choose to build on this lot for a model because of the odd shape. They knew they were going to have a tough time, so they started on the lot next to it. My first inclination was this should be a 2-Story house so we don’t have this big footprint, but he doesn’t want a 2-Story house. The lot’s buildable, so now we’re trying to squeeze this house onto this lot. The street curves back towards the rear property line which makes it even worse. Variances could be worse with the way the street curves and cuts this lot almost in half. The only issue I would have any concern with personally, is that the driveway might not be that long. You’ll be able to get one car in the driveway before the garage.

Mrs. Jeanblanc asked if any of the variances would affect water or sewer access.

Mr. Marrelli replied, no. The building line setback is set at 25’. The garage is supposed to be 10’ back farther than that and that’s been the standard through this whole development. He’s going to encroach on the garage, it’s going to be 7 ½’ closer. But, because the street curves, it’ll still be in line with everything. It’ll follow the curve and the house next to it will be forward of it. You won’t notice it. It’s a technicality for the footage. If you drive down the street, I don’t know that you’d notice that it was 7 ½’ closer to the street line than anybody else. To get 1800 sq. ft. on this lot is a tough call. If our code would allow it to be smaller, then we wouldn’t have to talk about any variances. That would be another variance and that I think would cause more harm because now you’re going to have a lesser value home on this street and then people would get a little irate about that.

Chairman Prcela identifies the three variance requests on the Engineer’s site plan. I was around but not on the Board of Appeals when this development was platted, this high density zoning. This was our first and only PRDD (Planned Residential Development District) in the Village.

Mr. Marrelli said, it was voted in by the public about 13 years ago. It’s a buildable lot, carved out and given a sublot number to be built on.

Mr. Syracuse asked John, has any of the other homeowners at Parkledge requested any side yard or street setback variances?

Mr. Marrelli replied, this is the only one.

Chairman Prcela said, I did an aerial photo, wanted to bring to meeting but forgot. Everything is built-out.

Mr. Marrelli confirmed it’s built-out. There’s a couple singles, a couple doubles & some triples.

Chairman Prcela said, so this wouldn’t be the first single family going in. Chairman asked Sam, do you reside in the Village now?

Sam Laurie replied, I live in Highland Hts.

Chairman Prcela asked, we’ve sent out notices to all the neighbors?

Mr. Marrelli replied, yes.

Chairman Prcela said, we received a letter back from Bob Schaefer, President, Parkledge Homeowners’ Association. The letter states they are fine with the drawings. They note four or five exceptions that appear to be more under the jurisdiction of the A.R.B.

Mr. Marrelli said Architectural Review Board reviewed it on the 10th and passed it. They made a couple small changes. On the east end, the bay that sticks out, they want centered. There was only a couple things they asked for and the applicant is complying with that.

Chairman Prcela asked, have we heard back from anybody else?

Mr. Marrelli replied, nobody’s weighed in in a negative manner. There’s nobody on the east side, there’s a commercial building in the back and then you have the next door neighbor. I don’t know who that is, but they haven’t called in to say they don’t like it. Sam said the neighbor next door is a 35 year old gentleman that just moved from Columbus.

Mr. DiFranco asked, are there any drainage concerns with the setbacks?

Mr. Marrelli replied, no. It shouldn’t have any effect on any drainage issues. There’s a drainage swale on the back rear line, a 10’ drainage easement and the Engineer has laid out his drainage lines so that it’ll come down the sides and go across the back like everybody else. Initially the driveway was going to be too steep, but they flattened it out.

Mr. DiFranco asked about the code in granting a variance.

Chairman Prcela recites Section 1105.2 Granting Variances (e);

“The Board may not grant a variance or exception to the zoning regulations or building codes, unless the applicant has shown that the literal application of the provisions of the zoning code or building code would result in unnecessary hardships or practical difficulties as a result of some peculiar or unique condition or circumstance pertaining only to the zoning lot in question.”

Mr. Marrelli said, this is almost a poster child in that situation, this pie shaped curving lot.

Mr. Syracuse said, it’s a unique shape of a lot and with the square footage having to be 1800 square feet, I agree.  

Mrs. Jeanblanc agreed. I wouldn’t want it smaller.

Chairman Prcela said, I read the A.R.B. minutes. What’s your position John?

Mr. Marrelli replied, the lot is buildable, so I think these variances are pretty minor. When you look at the percentage of what the encroachments are, they’re tiny.

Chairman Prcela said, they’re very small encroachments in my opinion. I think the Architect did a pretty good job of making the house flow on the curve.  

Mr. Marrelli said, this is the third time he tried to make this house fit on there. This is the best shot.

Joe Marra Sr. from MJ Builders states, this is going to be an attractive house.

Chairman Prcela said, this will be the most visible house.

Mr. Marrelli added that this house will be the front door to this whole development.

Mr. DiFranco asked, the common area will stay the common area that’s owned by the Association?

Mr. Marrelli replied, yes.

  • Additional Setback Request by Applicant

Sam Laurie asked, can the depth of my garage be two more feet if possible? Instead of 7.6’ setback, I’d need 9 ½’ setback. Right now it’s 23’, I’d like to go with 25’. Miller’s homes are 22 x 24 wide.

Mr. Marrelli asked, what’s the hardship to make it 2’ bigger?

Sam Laurie replied, I don’t have any side room. I like to store my stuff in the back.

Mr. Syracuse asked, has this additional 2’ request been asked of the Homeowner’s Association?

Sam Laurie replied, no. I don’t think they mind.

Chairman Prcela said, we tend to grant variances based on hardship and also on objections from neighbors. I think the formal request to the neighbors are the numbers set forth on the Notice & Agenda they received. I’d feel uncomfortable adding 2’ without having the neighbors opine on that. I think 2’ almost brings it out to the building setback line, 35’ for the garage & 25’ for the house.

Sam Laurie asked, how about maybe just 1 foot to make it 24’?

Mr. Marrelli replied, that’s up to the Board. It’s not fair to the neighbors to throw it out there now. Why did you go with 23’? That’s an odd dimension, i.e. your carpet comes in 12’ rolls, what would you do with an 11’ roll? You’d have to get permission from your Association for the extra 2’, get a letter and come back. You’d have to modify what’s on the board now.

Mr. Syracuse would like that to be a separate variance request.

Chairman Prcela states, that puts us in a difficult position without notifying the neighbors of this additional request.

Mr. Marrelli states, there’s a legality to that anyways. You can’t just make modifications without notification. This is a legal proceeding.

Chairman Prcela said, we could do this a couple different ways. We could take a vote on the matters we have in front of us. We could table it and you could revise the drawings and resubmit to the neighbors and come back again. As like Mr. Syracuse, I don’t feel comfortable voting on a substantial change to a setback variance that hasn’t been sent to the neighbors.

Sam Laurie replied, let’s just leave it alone. That’s going to be a big deal. We’d have to start this procedure all over.

Mr. Marrelli said, that 2’ could make a difference because it’ll put it at the building setback line of the house. The garage is supposed to be 10’ back from the house line. You’re going to be 6 inches different between the garage and the house.

Sam Laurie said, I’m cool. Let’s just leave it the way it is.  

Chairman Prcela asked Mr. Michalko and Mrs. Jeanblanc if they have any other questions.

Mr. Michalko replied, I can see why they decided not to go with the request change. That would put their construction back a whole month at least.

Mrs. Jeanblanc replied, I’m o.k. as long as there are no drainage issues. 

Chairman Prcela said, it appears the Engineers & our Building Commissioner have looked at that.

Mr. Marrelli said yes, the drainage issues have been ironed out. The lot falls towards the street. It’s a pretty good fall, a couple feet.

Chairman Prcela asked if any further questions or comments. There were none.

DECISION:

Mr. DiFranco, seconded by Mrs. Jeanblanc made a motion to approve the three variance requests for Salvatore & Mary Jo Laurie to allow for construction of a New Single Family Ranch at 6621 SOM Court as proposed.

ROLL CALL

Ayes: Mr. Prcela, Mr. Syracuse, Mr. DiFranco, Mrs. Jeanblanc, Mr. Michalko        

Nays: None                                        

Motion Carried. Variances Approved.

Right to Appeal

Chairman Prcela stated written notice will be mailed by the Building Department confirming the decision and any interested party has the right to appeal within 10 days.

ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, Mrs. Jeanblanc, seconded by Mr. Michalko made a motion for adjournment. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.