Www.huntsvilleal.gov



Administration BuildingCouncil Chambers308 Fountain CircleApril 18, 20176:00 p.m.BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTMembers Present:Mr. Martin Sisson – ChairmanMr. Bert Peake – Vice ChairmanMr. Fred CoffeyMr. Harry GarberMr. Johnny Ozier – Supernumerary Ms. Kimberly Ford-SupernumeraryOthers Present:Mr. Jim McGuffey, City of Huntsville Planning ServicesMr. Travis Cummings, City of Huntsville Zoning AdministrationMr. Allan Priest, City of Huntsville Zoning AdministrationMrs. Jon Johnson, City of Huntsville Zoning AdministrationMrs. Sheila Malone, City of Huntsville Zoning Administration, Recording SecretarySergeant Jonathan Ware, Huntsville Police DepartmentThe regular meeting of the Board of Zoning Adjustment was called to order by Chairman Sisson at the time and place noted above. Chairman Sisson explained the procedures of the Board of Zoning Adjustment to those present, advising that any decision made by the Board may be appealed to Circuit Court within 15 days from this date and that any variance or special exception requires four affirmative votes as set by State law. Any variance or special exception granted must be exercised within six months by obtaining the proper permit. Also, if the Board denies a request, the appellant would have to wait six months before reapplying for a variance unless there was a significant change in the appellant’s request.Chairman Sisson then called the extension items.Case No. 8037-56610 Old Madison Pike NW Suite 109; A special exception to allow alcoholic beverage sales between the hours of midnight and 2:00 a.m. and a special exception for entertainment, Brain Ham of West End Holdings, LLC appellant. Mr. Priest stated the location of the property and said the request will require a special exception to allow expanded hours of service for on-premise alcohol sales until 2:00 a.m. and a special exception for entertainment located in Neighborhood Business C1 Zoning District. Chairman Sisson stated he will recall this case at the end of the meeting because no one appeared to present this case.Case No. 8660-12012 Pulaski Pike NW; A use variance to allow auto detailing, William Jones, appellant. Mr. Priest stated the location of the property and said the request will require a use variance to allow auto detailing in a Neighborhood Business C1 Zoning District. Mr. Cummings stated the Board approved this variance request last year for one year only. Mr. William Jones appeared before the Board. Chairman Sisson asked Mr. Jones if there had been any changes. Mr. Jones stated no there have not been any changes. Chairman Sisson asked the City if they had received any complaints. Mr. Cummings stated no complaints have been received. Chairman Sisson asked Sgt. Ware if they had received any complaints. Sgt. Ware stated no. Mr. Tom Huskey appeared before the Board in support of this variance. Chairman Sisson asked the Board for any questions or comments. No comments were given.A motion was made by Mr. Coffey and seconded by Mr. Garber to approve a use variance to allow auto detailing in a Neighborhood Business C1 Zoning District to operate on Monday-Saturday with hours of operation being 7:00 a.m. – 7:00 p.m. for this appellant only and for one year only. Approved unanimously.Chairman Sisson then called the regular agenda items.Case No. 88001401 Four Mile Post Road SE; John Blue for Carolyn Jones Blue, appellant. Mr. Priest stated the location of the property and said the request will require a use variance to allow an Indoor Self Storage Facility in a Neighborhood Business C-1 Zoning District. According to Article 20.1 of the Zoning Ordinance, indoor Self Storage Facilities are not permitted in a Neighborhood Business C-1 Zoning District.Mr. John Blue and Mr. Val Sapra appeared before the Board. Mr. Blue explained the location of this property which is 11 acres and is zoned Neighborhood Business C-1. Mr. Blue stated he is trying to put a mixed use development with a 3 story storage building that will be as an anchor building on the west side of property that will screen Aldridge Creek. Mr. Blue stated he mailed letters out and did not receive anything from neighbors. Mr. Blue stated there is not a lot of parking or traffic so there is not a lot of impact from pedestrians. Vice-Chairman Peake asked Mr. Blue what kind of research was made to land on this particular property. Mr. Blue stated really no research was made but Mr. Sapra is building the same building elsewhere and they are successful. Vice-Chairman Peake asked Mr. Sapra what type of things will be stored in this climate controlled storage place. Mr. Sapra stated things doctors, attorneys, pharmaceuticals, retailers and any antique furniture that needs to be stored. Vice-Chairman Peake asked if one had very large items to store, how they will get it in. Mr. Sapra stated there are all different sizes of storage containers, such as 5x5, 5x10, 5x12 ?, 5x15 or 10x30 and they will have carts available. Mr. Blue stated the storage place is an asset to the community, will have minimal invasion as far as parking and less pedestrian traffic. Mr. Coffey asked the City what was the rationale that is not permitted in this area. Mr. McGuffey stated the City does not regulate architectural designs and in Neighborhood Business C-1 the City has stayed away from storage facilities. The storage facilities are located in Highway Business C-4, Light Industry, and Heavy Industry Zoning Districts and along bigger roads. This particular Neighborhood Business C-1 Zoning District is larger by size in geography and is the largest Neighborhood C-1 Zoning District in Huntsville. Mr. Coffey asked if the original intent of this aspect of the Zoning Ordinance was for the 1story metal facilities or was it any distinction for indoor or outdoor facilities. Mr. McGuffey stated no it is not, in a Neighborhood Business C-1 Zoning District metal structures over 1,000 square feet are not allowed. Mr. Sapra stated the exterior architect of building will be bricks and synthetic stucco (EIFS). Chairman Sisson asked Mr. McGuffey what was his thoughts on this area. Mr. McGuffey stated you will probably not see another Neighborhood C-1 Zoning District of this size again. Mr. Coffey asked if warehouse facilities were allowed in a Neighborhood Business C-1 Zoning District. Mr. McGuffey stated no. Vice-Chairman Peake asked exactly where people will load the things that need to be stored. Mr. Blue and Mr. Sapra stated on the far rear side by the creek. Mr. Garber asked what was the hardship on the property. Mr. Blue stated the hardship of the building goes with the neighborhood, with the existing architectural styles already there, and the ability to look and function differently. Mr. Garber asked Mr. Blue why he cannot put another business center that is compliant on the property. Mr. Blue stated there will be a mixed-use development on the rest of the property. Vice-Chairman Peake asked Mr. McGuffey if the fact that storage facilities are not included in this Zoning District is because of its function or how it looks. Mr. McGuffey stated it is because of the function, it is a warehouse, and in a Neighborhood Business C-1 Zoning District, there are not any uses similar to warehouses. Chairman Sisson asked Mr. Blue what were the plans for the remainder of the development. Mr. Blue stated it will be a retail/office space. Chairman Sisson asked the Board for any comments or questions. Ms. Ford asked the question if the reason why storage facilities were not allowed in a Neighborhood Business C-1 Zoning District was because the traditional C-1 district was smaller. Mr. McGuffey stated the City added the size of Neighborhood C-1 Zoning District, and the original C-1 district is much older than the size requirement for the district. Chairman Sisson asked the City for any comments, none was given.Chairman Sisson asked for a motion to approve a use variance to allow an indoor self-storage facility in a Neighborhood Business C-1 Zoning District. None was given; therefore, the request was denied. Case No. 8801901 Kennamer Drive SE; A special exception to allow a special event retailer; Marie Bostick of The Huntsville Land Trust of North Alabama, appellant. Mr. Priest stated the location of the property and said the request will require a special exception to allow a special exception for a special event retailer in a Residence 1A Zoning District. According to Article 75.5 of the Zoning Ordinance, special events retailers shall be permitted as a special exception in all residential districts.Ms. Bostick appeared before the Board. Ms. Bostick stated this is their annual request. They have 4 events, 2 concerts in the summer, the moon dance in the fall and the Haunt at Halloween. Ms. Bostick stated the events will operate on June 17, 2017, August 12, 2017, September 16, 2017 and October 27, 2017 with the hours of operation being 6:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. for all events. The people are shuttled in from Huntsville Hospital. Chairman Sisson asked if there were any changes from previous years, Ms. Bostick stated no changes. Sergeant Ware stated the Police Department has not received any complaints. Mr. McGuffey stated he has received no complaints. Chairman Sisson asked the Board for any other comments, no comments were made.A motion was made by Vice-Chairman Peake and seconded by Mr. Ozier to approve a special exception to allow a special event retailer in a Residence 1A Zoning District to operate on June 17, 2017, August 12, 2017, September 16, 2017, and October 27, 2017 with the hours of operation being 6:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. for all events. Approved unanimously.Case No. 8802109 Marsheutz Ave SW; A use variance to allow a professional office; Chris Comperda, appellant. Mr. Priest stated the location of the property and said the request will require a use variance to allow a professional office in a Residence 2 Zoning District. According to Article 13.1 professional offices are not allowed in a Residence 2 Zoning District.Mr. Cummings stated this property had a variance in Feb. 2014 for an interior design business. Mr. Chris Comperda appeared before the Board. Mr. Comperda stated his business is basically home medical equipment that specializes in compression devices. Mr. Comperda also stated 90% of their business is done outside of the office and so it has a very low impact to this community. Mr. Comperda further explained he has to have an office space for their accreditation as a company in order to bill insurance, etc. and actually have a physical office if a patient needed to come to them. Chairman Sisson asked exactly where this professional office would be allowed. Mr. McGuffey stated it would be allowed in Residence 2B, Residential Office 2, or Neighborhood Business C-1 Zoning Districts. Mr. Cummings stated it was categorized as a professional office because they are not serving as a retail store. Chairman Sisson asked the City for any comments or concerns. Mr. McGuffey stated with the climate of the neighborhood a variance is not a bad thing, because it allows everyone to know what’s going on. Vice-Chairman Peake asked Mr. Comperda how many employees he will have. Mr. Comperda stated only 2. Vice-Chairman Peake also asked what the parking capacity was at this property. Mr. Comperda stated the parking in the rear allows for about 3-4 vehicles. Chairman Sisson asked Mr. Comperda again what exactly was he selling and how are the products shipped out. Mr. Comperda stated his company specializes with vascular pumps to help with swelling in the leg and the products are shipped directly to the customer. Mr. Coffey asked if they will share the office with anyone else. Mr. Comperda stated he had thought of renting 2 offices but this was only an option. Chairman Sisson asked Mr. Comperda if they will have signage. Mr. Comperda stated the sign will be the exact same size, basically a reface. Mr. Coffey asked Mr. Comperda how many letters were mailed out and if he received any responses. Mr. Comperda stated he mailed 52 letters out and did not receive any responses or phone calls. A motion was made by Mr. Coffey and seconded by Mr. Garber to approve a use variance to allow a professional office for medical equipment in a Residence 2 Zoning District for this appellant only. Approved unanimously.Case No. 8803110 Southside Square SE; Distance separation variance between a Class I Lounge Liquor Retailer with entertainment and a residential zoning district, Lance Smith of Off The Eaten Path, Inc. D/B/A Voodoo Lounge Bar and Grill, appellant. Mr. Priest stated the location of the property and said the request will require a 500 foot distance separation between a Class I Lounge Liquor Retailer with entertainment and a residential zoning district. According to Article 75.3.5 of the Zoning Ordinance, a Class I Lounge Liquor Retailer shall not be located within 500 feet of a residential district. Mr. Smith appeared before the Board stating he will need a Class I Liquor Retailer with Entertainment License because his food sales are lower than 50%. Mr. McGuffey stated Mr. Smith is before the Board also because he is abutting a Residential 2B Zoning District. Mr. McGuffey stated there is 1 house at most within 500 feet and most of the offices are professional offices, primarily attorney offices. Mr. Coffey asked Mr. Smith if he will stop selling food. Mr. Smith stated no. Mr. Garber asked Mr. Smith if he sent letters out and if received any calls or complaints. Mr. Smith stated he did send letters out and did not receive any complaints. A motion was made by Mr. Coffey and seconded by Vice-Chairman Peake to approve a 500 foot distance separation between a Class I Lounge Liquor Retailer with entertainment and a residential zoning district. Approved unanimously.Case No. 88044835 Sparkman Drive NW; A use variance to allow a childcare center; Emilia I. Obiekea and Emilia N. Obiekea appellant. Mr. Priest stated the location of the property and said the request will require a use variance to allow a Child Care Center in a Residence 1A Zoning District. According to Article 11.1 Child Care Centers are not allowed in a Residence 1A Zoning District. Ms. Obiekea appeared before the Board. Ms. Obiekea explained they would like to open a child care center in this building. Ms. Obiekea stated the center would be close to Triple A Magnet School and Highland Elementary School. Ms. Obiekea also stated she mailed out 40 letters and only received 2 calls concerned with when the building will open and exactly what type of business was going there. Vice-Chairman Peake asked what makes this request a use variance. Mr. Cummings stated because it is in a residential zoning district. Mr. McGuffey further explained several of the commercial buildings have had to have use variances throughout the years. Vice-Chairman Peake asked Ms. Obiekea who was her governing agency. Ms. Obiekea stated the Department of Human Resources will actually come in and review the property. Also, Ms. Obiekea stated they have to get approval from the Fire Marshal, City Inspections, Health Department and the Department of Human Resources. Chairman Sisson asked Ms. Obiekea if she previously works at a childcare facility. Ms. Obiekea stated she has worked at one several years. Mr. Coffey asked what were the hours of operation. Ms. Obiekea stated Monday through Friday, from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and on Saturdays 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Ms. Obiekea stated the age range will be from 6 weeks old to 6 years old and they will also have an after school program for children up to the eighth grade. Vice-Chairman Peake asked Ms. Obiekea if there was a current limit for the amount of children they can have at this facility. Ms. Obiekea stated you are allowed 1 parking space per every 5 children, 1 parking space per every 500 sq. ft, and the Department of Human Resources will set the limit on how many children they can have in the building. Chairman Sisson asked what the square footage of the building was and how much of the building will be used for the children. Ms. Obiekea stated the building is 3,082 sq. ft. and they will use majority of the building for the children. Mr. Garber asked Ms. Obiekea if there was any type of privacy fence on the property. Ms. Obiekea stated they will be erecting a privacy fence on the property. Vice-Chairman Peake asked Ms. Obiekea what are the requirements for employees to children. Ms. Obiekea stated the ratio of employees will be determined once they know how many kid’s they will have. Chairman Sisson asked when the facility will open. Ms. Obiekea stated they plan to open in August of 2017 with possibly 20 children and possibly have 60 children by the end of the year. Ms. Obiekea stated hopefully by year 2 the facility will grow and fill up. Chairman Sisson asked if they were buying the property. Ms. Obiekea explained they are buying the property contingent upon receiving this variance request. Mr. Coffey asked what is the name of the business. Ms. Obiekea stated the name of the business is Emi Childcare Center. Ms. Obiekea explained that the Department of Human Resources regulates the hiring process. Mr. Garber asked Ms. Obiekea how often the Department of Human Resources will come in to inspect. Ms. Obiekea stated they will come in randomly but you are guaranteed 2 visits. Chairman Sisson asked the City for any comments or concerns. No comments were given. A motion was made by Vice-Chairman Peake and seconded by Mr. Coffey to approve a use variance to allow a child care center in a Residence 1A Zoning District for this appellant only and this use only, with the stipulation a privacy fence is erected in the east rear yard. Approved unanimously.Case No. 88053900 Cooper Street SE; The location of a structure; Melissa Goebel, appellant. Mr. Priest stated the location of the property and said the request will require a 20 foot front yard setback variance. According to Article 10.2 of the Zoning Ordinance, a 40 foot front yard setback is required. Mr. Coffey recused from this case.Ms. Goebel appeared before the Board explaining they would like to build a house on this property. Ms. Goebel stated she learned there was a huge swale on this property also and needs more time to research this issue. Mr. Curt Moore appeared before the Board speaking against this variance. Mr. Moore stated there is a creek and main sewer drain that causes flooding. Mr. Moore stated the storm drain swells 10,000 gallons of water during a storm. Chairman Sisson asked the City for any questions or thoughts. Mr. McGuffey stated if Ms. Goebel would like to get an opinion from the City Engineer on the water concentration levels, she was welcomed to do that. Ms. Goebel stated there were other neighbors present that were against this variance also. Chairman Sisson asked the Board for any questions or thoughts. No comments were made. Chairman Sisson asked for a motion to approve a 20 foot front yard setback variance. None was given; therefore, the request was denied. Case No. 8806930 Old Monrovia Road NW; A special exception to allow a carnival; Willy Purdy of Amusement Attraction for Charles Swain of RCG Ventures, LLC, appellant. Mr. Priest stated the location of the property and said the request will require a special exception to allow a carnival in a Highway Business C4 Zoning District. According to Article 92.5.3 (8) of the Zoning Ordinance, a special exception is required for carnivals in a Highway Business C4 Zoning District. Mr. Willie Purdy appeared before the Board. Mr. Purdy explained the carnival will be located in the front part of the shopping center. Chairman Sisson asked what were the dates for the carnival. Mr. Purdy stated they will operate on May 18, 2017 and May 19, 2017, from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., on May 20, 2017, from 12:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m., on May 21, 2017, from 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Mr. Cummings explained the carnival has previously been held at the Madison Square Mall location but due to the construction going on, they moved across the street at this location. Mr. McGuffey explained this is a new user than what was approved in the past. Mr. Purdy stated whatever the City requirements were for taxation, permits and as far as safety, they are willing to meet the requirements and the equipment is inspected by a third party inspector. Mr. Coffey asked if they had a written agreement with the property owner. Mr. Purdy stated yes they do have an agreement with the property owner through KevaWorks, an agent.Mr. Don Beck appeared before the Board and was in support of this request. Chairman Sisson asked the City for any concerns. Sgt. Ware asked Mr. Purdy if they would have any security at the carnival. Mr. Purdy stated he doesn’t have a problem hiring security. Chairman Sisson asked the Board for any other questions. A motion was made by Vice-Chairman Peake and seconded by Mr. Coffey to approve a special exception to allow a carnival in a Highway Business C4 Zoning District to operate on May 18, 2017 and May 19, 2017, from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., on May 20, 2017, from 12:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m., on May 21, 2017, from 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., and with the stipulation security services are provided. Approved unanimously.Case No. 88074935 University Drive NW; PVA perimeter landscaping; Thomas Abernathy of Whitehall Ventures, LLC, appellant. Mr. Priest stated the location of the property and said the request will require a 5 foot PVA landscape variance on the east and west side property lines. According to Article 71.4.2(1) of the Zoning Ordinance, Perimeter landscaping areas shall be at least 5 feet continuous feet in depth, excluding walkways, measured perpendicularly form the adjacent property line or right-of-way to the back of curb or pavement edge.Mr. Don Beck of the shopping center appeared before the Board. Mr. Beck explained this the old TGI Friday’s building. Mr. Beck stated they want to keep the parking and restaurant pad the same as it is. Mr. McGuffey further stated this is an existing restaurant that has closed down, a new user will be coming in that wants to demolish the restaurant and would like to basically keep everything the same, parking, restaurant pad, etc. However, the issue is they cannot provide perimeter landscaping due to the configuration of the existing parking lot. Chairman Sisson asked Mr. Beck if they are wanting to keep the parking and remaining landscaping to remain as is. Mr. Beck stated yes. Chairman Sisson asked the City for any questions or concerns. Mr. McGuffey stated the City reviewed this with the engineer and felt like this was the best option to come before the Board. Mr. David Hall with ForSite Engineering stated they are meeting the PVA landscaping but they could not meet the 5 foot on the side yards. Chairman Sisson asked the Board for any other questions or concerns. No comments were given. A motion was made by Chairman Sisson and seconded by Vice-Chairman Peake to approve a 5 foot PVA landscape variance on the east and west side property lines, with the stipulation that the required amount of plant material is provided elsewhere on the site. Approved unanimously. Chairman Sisson recalled Case 8037-5; 6610 Old Madison Pike NW Suite 109; A special exception to allow alcoholic beverage sales between the hours of midnight and 2:00 a.m. and a special exception for entertainment, Brain Ham of West End Holdings, LLC appellant. Mr. Priest stated the location of the property and said the request will require a special exception to allow expanded hours of service for on-premise alcohol sales until 2:00 a.m. and a special exception for entertainment located in Neighborhood Business C1 Zoning District. Mr. Brian Ham appeared before the Board. Chairman Sisson asked Mr. Ham if there had been any changes with the operation of the business. Mr. Ham stated nothing has changed. Chairman Sisson asked Sgt. Ware if there had been any issues at this location. Sgt. Ware stated no. Chairman Sisson asked if the City has received any complaints. Mr. Cummings stated that no complaints have been received. Chairman Sisson asked for any comments. None was given.A motion was made by Mr. Garber and seconded by Mr. Coffey to approve a special exception for expanded hours for on-premises retail sale, service, dispensing, or consumption of alcoholic beverages until 2:00 a.m. and a special exception for entertainment located in Neighborhood Business C1 Zoning District for this appellant only and for one year only. Approved unanimously.There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download