Flushing Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes
A Regular Meeting of the Flushing Zoning Board of Appeals was called to order on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Patrick O'Callaghan, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
Present: John H. Daly
Kevin J. Keane
Carmon Liversedge
David R. Martus
Patrick O’Callaghan
Absent: None
Others Present: Dennis J. Bow, City Manager
Nancy G. Parks, City Clerk/Treasurer
Oath of Office - The Clerk administered the Oath of Office to Kevin Keane, Patrick O'Callaghan, and David Martus.
Election of Officers –
Chairperson - Motion by Martus, seconded by Liversedge, to appoint Patrick O'Callaghan as Chairperson.
Yea: Daly, Keane, Liversedge, Martus, O’Callaghan
Nay: None
Motion Carried.
Vice Chairperson - Motion by Daly, seconded by Martus, to appoint Carmon Liversedge as Vice Chairperson.
Yea: Daly, Keane, Liversedge, Martus, O’Callaghan
Nay: None
Motion Carried.
Abstention - Motion by Martus, seconded by Liversedge, to allow Keane to abstain from a vote on the minutes, as he was not present at the December 14, 2004 meeting.
Yea: Daly, Keane, Liversedge, Martus, O’Callaghan
Nay: None
Motion Carried.
Approval of Minutes - Motion by Daly, seconded by Liversedge, to approve the December 14, 2004 minutes of the Zoning Board of Appeals as written.
Yea: Daly, Liversedge, Martus, O’Callaghan
Abstain: Keane
Nay: None
Motion Carried.
Flushing Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes
September 27, 2005
Page Two
Agenda Approval - Motion by Daly, seconded by Keane, to approve the September 27, 2005 agenda.
Yea: Daly, Keane, Liversedge, Martus, O’Callaghan
Nay: None
Motion Carried.
MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC:
No public comments.
NEW BUSINESS:
Meeting Schedule - Motion by Daly, seconded by Liversedge, to set the following meeting schedule:
December 19, 2005
March 20, 2006
June 19, 2006
September 18, 2006
All meetings to begin at 7:30 p.m.
Yea: Daly, Keane, Liversedge, Martus, O’Callaghan
Nay: None
Motion Carried.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Variance - 202 Terrace Street - An application was submitted by Louis A. Stefanic of 202 Terrace Street, representing a request for variance from the requirements of Section 153.111(A) FENCES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.
153.111 FENCES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.
Fences are permitted, or required, subject to the following:
(A) Fences on all lots of record in all residential districts which enclose property or are within a required side or rear yard, shall not exceed six feet in height, measured from the surface of the ground, and shall not extend toward the road beyond the front of the house or the required minimum front yard, whichever is greater, unless permitted by the ZBA.
The application requests the Zoning Board of Appeals to allow a six (6) foot high fence in the front yard of the home.
Flushing Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes
September 27, 2005
Page Three
153.1108 VARIANCES.
Each case before the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be considered as an individual case and shall conform to the detailed application to the following standards in a manner appropriate to the particular circumstances of such case.
B. Non-use variances
In order to approve a variance in requirements of the ordinance other than permitted use of the land, the applicant must demonstrate practical difficulty. To demonstrate practical difficulty, the Zoning Board of Appeals must find that all of the following standards have been met:
1. Strict enforcement of the provisions of this ordinance would cause unnecessary hardship and deprive the owners of rights enjoyed by all other property owners within the same district
2. There are conditions and circumstances unique to the property, such as an exceptional narrowness, shallowness, shape or area or topographic conditions, which are not similarly applicable to other properties in the same zoning district
3. The conditions and circumstances unique to the property were not created by the owner or his predecessor in title, within the time following the effective date of the provisions alleged to adversely affect such property
4. The requested variance will not confer special privilege that is denied other properties similarly situated and in the same zoning district
5. In addition to meeting the standards listed above, the requested variance will not be contrary to the spirit and intent of this Zoning Ordinance and will not be detrimental to the public good.
The Chairperson opened the public hearing to the audience.
Louis Stefanic, owner of 202 Terrace, stated that he and his wife purchased this home, August of 2003. At the time, there was a chain link fence there, since the existing fence was dilapidated, they decided to have a new fence installed. They hired a fence installer who informed them that they did not need a permit, because he was replacing a fence, not erecting a new one. He stated that he was at fault for not doing due diligence and finding out what his responsibilities were under the ordinance. He feels the fence is an aesthetic improvement, and has received no complaints from his neighbors. He understands that the problem with the fence is the side that faces Terrace Street, where the fence extends approximately twelve feet into the front yard. He asked that the fence be allowed to stay the same and that, if not, he be allowed time to adjust the Terrace portion of the fence to comply with the City ordinance 153.111. He also presented letters from twenty (20) of his neighbors, stating that they have no problem with the fence, and would oppose having it taken down or moved.
Flushing Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes
September 27, 2005
Page Four
Mr. Stefanic stated that the fence was erected to contain their two dogs.
Larry Jacques, 208 Terrace, felt that the fence was not an aesthetic improvement, is very ugly, but he has no specific problems or complaints about the fence.
Jane Forbes, 608 Hut West Drive, stated that her feeling is that the ordinance is the ordinance, and that there should be no exceptions.
Elva Cook, 1459 Flushing Road, stated that she made the complaint about the fence in 2003, and it should not be allowed.
The Chairperson closed this portion of the public hearing.
Dennis Bow, City Manager, pointed out that there is a phrase in ordinance 153.111, which loosens the variance tests and how the Zoning Board of Appeals could apply them. It says, unless permitted by the ZBA. It is unclear if this is a relaxation, or means permitted by the ZBA subject to the variance requirements.
Liversedge stated that there are many homes in the City with fences in the front yard. The City Manager responded that, prior ordinances allowed front yard fences, but the current ordinance does not. Residents are allowed to replace, but not enlarge, fences. The nonconformity cannot be increased.
Variance - 202 Terrace Street - Motion by Daly, seconded by Keane, to approve the variance request for 202 Terrace Street to retain a six-foot fence in the front yard.
Yea: None
Nay: Daly, Keane, Liversedge, Martus, O’Callaghan
Motion Fails.
Adjournment – Motion by Martus, seconded by Liversedge, to adjourn.
Yea: Daly, Keane, Liversedge, Martus, O’Callaghan
Nay: None
Motion Carried.
Adjourn: 8:12 p.m.
______________________________
Nancy G. Parks, City Clerk/Treasurer