TOWN OF REDDING
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MEETING MINUTES
JANUARY 16, 2018 – 7:30 P.M.
TOWN HALL CONFERENCE ROOM
Present:
Beth Williams, Chairman
Noel Cooke
Bruce Given
Jill Cilo
Daniel Barrett, Alternate
Chuck Cilo, Alternate
Absent: Scott Smith
The meeting was called to order at 7:34 p.m.
The members seated to hear the application this evening are Jill Cilo, Noel Cooke, Beth Williams, Bruce Given and Daniel Barrett.
APPROVAL OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES:
Upon the Motion of Mr. Barrett and second of Mr. Cooke, the December 19, 2017 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes were approved (5-0) by the Board.
REGULAR APPLICATIONS:
Application #18-01-01- 98 Picketts Ridge Road (Map #11 & Lots # 12, 13, 17, 82, 83, 98) – Owner: Frederick V. Miller Sr. – Condominium Unit 5-B-5 (Map #11 & Lot 13) – Owner: Adam Lanehart. Request the following variances:
1. Section 4.2.1 (a) for permitted principal uses in the R-2 Zone of “A detached single-family dwelling one (1) per lot.” A variance is requested to allow one additional dwelling unit at the location of unit (parcel 5-B-5 as shown on recorded Map #3630 of the Honey Ridge Estate Condominium, hereby increasing the number of dwelling units from 4 to 5 on the 16.419 acre parcel 5-B.
2. Section 4.6 for the frontage requirement of 25 feet for a rear lot in the R-2 Zone if that applies to unit 5-B-5.
Attorney Robert Fuller presented the Application to the Board on behalf of Mr. Frederick Miller. Mr. Miller was not present due to illness but members from the Miller family were present in support of the Application, including Adam Lanehart. Mr. Fuller gave a brief overview and historical timeline of events of the development of lot 5-B-5 of the Honey Ridge Condominium Association as previously discussed in the ZBA meeting of November 21, 2017. Mr. Fuller noted that while the Board previously denied the request to appeal the Zoning Enforcement Officer’s cease and desist order it is now presented as an application for variance to allow an additional, fifth, dwelling on the property. He noted it was Mr. Miller’s sole intent and good faith belief the lot would be for family use only.
Mr. Fuller noted that for a variance to be approved there are two requirements to be met: first, the variance cannot substantially affect the comprehensive zoning plan, and secondly, adherence to the strict letter of the zoning ordinance should be shown to cause unusual hardship necessary for carrying out the general purpose of the Zoning plan. Mr. Fuller indicated that the first part of the variance criteria is met as the property is in a 2-acre residential zone and all units have been laid out on the 2-acre lots with easement of access with no adverse effect from other residences on 2-acre lots. He noted that for the second test of hardship the property must be unique or unusual and indicated there is an exceptional situation with this lot as the property is 16 acres with two dwellings on the lot prior to 1986 and in July 1986 a variance for two additional dwellings was granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals, grandfathering the rights for four units. The parcel was not divided by subdivision and as such the maps were able to be recorded without planning approval since it is a condominium designated property in R-2 zone and are assessed and taxed separately. There is no adverse impact by adding one more unit on a 16 acre parcel and noted there would not be any further units added in the future.
Mr. Fuller mentioned that should the request for variance be approved for the fifth unit he asked that the Board consider the request for variance for access although there is sufficient access currently with two means of access. Maps #3413 and 3630 show 60 feet of frontage which should be adequate. Each of the units own a fractional share of the common area and do not need separate frontage on a main road. Mr. Fuller noted that an additional access was obtained in October 2014 from an adjacent neighbor which is detailed on maps provided to the Board members. This additional access provides for three means of access for the five units which should be sufficient without a variance.
Mr. Fuller clarified issues raised at the November 21, 2017 meeting. He noted that no additional units can be added without written approval from the other unit holders, which occurred in 1991 with unit 5-B-5 when the amendment was recorded. Mr. Fuller also noted that the condominium units could not be “severed off” and sold separately. There is no intent to convey the lots for development as the intent is for family use. With the question raised regarding the legal requirement for a condominium to file annual statements with the State, Mr. Fuller noted that while an LLC is required to do so a condominium is not.
Ms. Williams noted for clarification that the Board upheld the Zoning Enforcement Officer’s decision and did not deny an application for variance at the November 21, 2017 meeting.
Ms. Cilo inquired as to why the request for the fifth family dwelling was not added or planned out at the time when the variance for the two additional dwellings were approved in 1986 and Mr. Fuller did not know. Mr. Miller’s granddaughter noted that it was in 1991 when it was agreed it would be permissible as a condominium association but was unclear of the details.
Mr. Cooke asked if the unit owners voted unanimously to add a fifth unit would it be possible for them to vote unanimously to add a sixth unit and Mr. Fuller said it was possible but there is no expected intention to ask for additional units in the future.
Mr. Given asked why the condominium association was formed originally and Mr. Fuller believes it was due to the ease for separating the parcel into units under the condominium law versus the process of subdivision of the property through planning per legal counsel given at the time. Mr. Miller’s granddaughter noted it was her recollection that at the time it was planned as a PUD (planned unit development). Ms. Williams noted at the November meeting counsel explained the establishment of the condo association was to avoid the process of subdivision.
Family members spoke in support of the Application and wished to see Adam Lanehart, who is active in the community, living within the condominium association alongside family.
Upon motion of Mr. Cooke and second of Mr. Given, the Board voted to enter deliberative session at 7:57 p.m.
DELIBERATIVE SESSION #1:
The Board members discussed the points presented by Mr. Fuller regarding no adverse impact but also raised concerns about future requests of additional dwellings, the uniqueness of the owner-created condominium association in relation to the Zoning regulations of lots versus parcels, and lack of demonstrated hardship. The Board decided to leave deliberative session to clarify these issues with Mr. Fuller.
Upon motion of Mr. Cooke and second of Mr. Given, the Board voted to exit deliberative session at 8:01 p.m.
Mr. Fuller indicated that there was no intention to add additional units beyond this request and if variance was to be granted it be made with that condition and he believes his client would be agreeable to that condition. With regards to hardship, Mr. Fuller noted that the change in the Zoning Regulations in 1986 by the Zoning Commission creates a hardship in that the regulations do not apply to condominiums.
Upon motion of Mr. Given and second of Ms. Cilo, the Board voted to enter deliberative session at 8:04 p.m.
DELIBERATIVE SESSION #2:
Application #18-01-01- 98 Picketts Ridge Road (Map #11 & Lots # 12, 13, 17, 82, 83, 98) – Owner: Frederick V. Miller Sr. – Condominium Unit 5-B-5 (Map #11 & Lot 13) – Owner: Adam Lanehart. – Upon motion of Mr. Cooke and the second of Ms. Cilo, the Board voted 5-0 to deny Application 18-01-01 variance #1 to increase the number of dwelling units from four to five on the 16.419 acre parcel 5-B for lack of hardship and that no action be taken on variance #2 as it not needed due to the denial of variance #1.
Election of Chairman and Secretary:
Upon Motion of Mr. Barrett and the second of Ms. Cilo, the Board unanimously nominated Beth Williams as Chairman.
Upon Motion of Ms. Williams and the second of Mr. Given, the Board unanimously nominated Noel Cooke as Secretary.
Upon motion of Mr. Cooke and second of Ms. Cilo, the Board voted to exit deliberative session at 8:11 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
The Board voted unanimously to adjourn at 8:12 p.m.
These minutes have not been approved by the ZBA.
Submitted by klg 1/18/18
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TOWN OF REDDING
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MEETING MOTIONS – (received Jan 18 2018 @3:39pm)
JANUARY 16, 2018 – 7:30 P.M.
TOWN HALL CONFERENCE ROOM
MOTIONS ONLY:
APPROVAL OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES:
Upon the Motion of Mr. Barrett and second of Mr. Cooke, the December 19, 2017 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes were approved (5-0) by the Board.
DELIBERATIVE SESSION:
Application #18-01-01- 98 Picketts Ridge Road (Map #11 & Lots # 12, 13, 17, 82, 83, 98) – Owner: Frederick V. Miller Sr. – Condominium Unit 5-B-5 (Map #11 & Lot 13) – Owner: Adam Lanehart. – Upon motion of Mr. Cooke and the second of Ms. Cilo, the Board voted 5-0 to deny Application 18-01-01 variance #1 to increase the number of dwelling units from four to five on the 16.419 acre parcel 5-B for lack of hardship and that no action be taken on variance #2 as it is not needed due to the denial of variance #1.
Election of Chairman and Secretary:
Upon Motion of Mr. Barrett and the second of Ms. Cilo, the Board unanimously nominated Beth Williams as Chairman.
Upon Motion of Ms. Williams and the second of Mr. Given, the Board unanimously nominated Noel Cooke as Secretary.
Upon motion of Mr. Cooke and second of Ms. Cilo, the Board voted to exit deliberative session at 8:11 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
The Board voted unanimously to adjourn at 8:12 p.m.