HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.9.22 BOA Minutes Approved 1.11.23
1 MINUTES
2 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
3 REGULAR MEETING
4 May 9, 2022
5
6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Leon Meyers, Chair
7 Beth Bronson
8 Nathan Robinson
9 Jeff Scott
10
11 MEMBERS EXCUSED: Susan Halkiotis, Vice Chair
12
13 MEMBERS UNEXCUSED: Scott Taylor
14
15 STAFF PRESENT: Patrick Mallett, Erosion Control and Stormwater Supervisor
16 Elaina Cheek, Secretary to the Board
17 James Bryan, Staff Attorney
18
19 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER
20
21 Chair Leon Meyers called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
22
23 AGENDA ITEM 2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
24
25 Leon Meyers: asked if there were any changes to the agenda. Pat stated the only change was the withdrawal of the
26 application.
27
28 AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES—October 11, 2021
29
30 Leon Meyers: asked the board if there were any questions regarding the minutes and corrections to the minutes. Leon
31 asked for a motion to approve the minutes.
32
33 MOTION made by Nathan Robinson to approve the minutes. Seconded by Beth Bronson.
34 VOTE: Unanimous
35
36 AGENDA ITEM 4: PUBLIC CHARGE
37
38 Leon Meyers: reads the public charge for those attending the meeting.
39
40 The Board of Adjustment pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks its citizens to conduct
41 themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and with fellow citizens. At any time should any
42 member of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this public charge, the Chair will ask the offending person to leave
43 the meeting until that individual regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the Chair will recess the
44 meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed. All electronic devices such as cell
45 phones, pagers, and computers should please be turned off or set to silent/vibrate.
46
47 The Board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial administrative body established in accordance with the provisions of local
48 regulations and State law to perform specified functions essential to the County's planning program. Action(s) taken by
1
Approved 1.11.23
1 the board are based solely on competent, substantial, and material evidence presented during a scheduled evidentiary
2 hearing on a specific item. As detailed within Section 2.12.2 of the UDO the Board chair reserves the right to exclude
3 evidence and testimony that is deemed: `incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious' and therefore fails to
4 reasonably address the issues before the Board of Adjustment. While it should be noted there is no time limit on the
5 presentation of evidence, the Chair asks that the presentation of evidence be consistent with established policies, rules
6 of procedure, and acceptable levels of decorum to ensure a fair and equitable hearing for all parties.
7
8
9 AGENDA ITEM 5: CASES
10
11 A. SUP22-0002 Special Use Permit application proposing to erect a nem.f
12 telecommunmeation facility at 3606 EdmundLatta G�Tllsborough (PIN 9877-82=
13 39W ITEM WAS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSIDERATION AT THE REQUEST OF THE
14 APPLICANT ON APRIL 27, 2022.
15
16 B. BA22-0001 — Variance application requesting a 8.4 foot reduction to the required site
17 yard setback at 429 Gaines Chapel Road, Efland (PIN 9844-66-6445)
18
19 In accordance with UDO Sections 2.10 Variances and 3.3 Residential Districts, the
20 property owners have submitted this variance request for their parcel of property, which is
21 further described as follows:
22 • Orange County Parcel Identification Number: 9844-66-6445
23 • Acreage: 0.5 acres
24 • Zoning District: Rural Residential
25 • Watershed Designation: Upper Eno Protected
26
27 The applicants are requesting an 8.4 foot variance from the normally required 20 foot side
28 yard setback. If approved, a structure will be allowed to be 11.6 feet from the side property
29 line versus the typically required 20 foot side yard setback per Section 3.3 of the UDO.
30
31 The applicants argue the due to the existing power line easement, septic, and well areas,
32 the proposed new home cannot be located and constructed to meet the easement setback
33 and the side yard setback. In addition, the existing home located onsite does not meet the
34 existing side yard setback.
35
36 Leon Meyers: asks Patrick Mallett to present a summary of the case.
37
38 Patrick Mallett: explains his role in the Orange County planning department as the Erosion Control Supervisor and
39 previously in the Current planning role. He explains the variance application for the setback requirements. In the
40 abstract you will see the applicant is Beverly Stokes, who is in attendance. She is seeking a variance for this parcel.
41 She is seeking a reduction in the minimum of 20 foot side setbacks. If granted the variance, you would be allowing her
42 to rebuild up to the 11.6 feet away from the property line. This is parallel to an existing structure. This is the staff
43 determination that this is consistent with what is required in terms of the application. We will go over the finding of facts
44 at the end. This is the zoning report and site assessment giving an overview of the property. This is the existing home
45 here. This is the accessory structure here. The condition of this building, it's in ill-repair. It is just not cost effective to
46 refurbish that structure. Here is the notification letter inviting residents to this meeting. This is the site plan, this is the
47 most relevant piece to talk from. Going through here is the transmission easement. You have also got septic systems
2
Approved 1.11.23
1 that need to be reworked and or abandoned. You can see the foot print of the existing house. We can go to what is
2 there today, it is slightly in a different configuration. As you can see here, there is no wiggle room left. Once you add all
3 the easements and all the other variables at play. This is the encroachment agreement. Ms. Stokes may want to talk
4 about this. It sounds like to me that part of the case was that I don't know if her family members were fully cogitative of
5 what that implied in terms of giving a power easement and the purpose of the addition on the property and it would run
6 through your grandmother's house. This is the sign that was posted on the property. This is the house that is in ill
7 repair. Picture of the side yard and between the dwelling and the adjacent property. This is the power line, you can see
8 it is literally running on top of the existing house and accessory structure. This is the side yard and where the septic
9 system is that needs to be reworked. This is the transmission line and as you can see this is a large line. So we can
10 handle this any way you would like. If you have any questions.
11
12 Patrick Mallett and Beverly Stokes are sworn in.
13
14 Leon Meyers: Does anyone have questions for Patrick?
15
16 Nathan Robinson: asked about the yellow box and is there a reason why it can't be pushed more towards Gaines
17 Chapel Road.
18
19 Patrick Mallett: Part of it is they are going to try to utilize the sidewalk and the portion of the porch on the front of the
20 house. Not necessarily the entire house would be demolished.
21
22 Leon Meyers: stated the red line is a 40 foot setback from the street so if you move closer to the street add another
23 variance.
24
25 Patrick Mallett: yes you can't move it but so far.
26
27 Nathan Robinson: so if you slide it to Gaines Chapel road it would give it 20 feet.
28
29 Patrick Mallett: No, not without a variance.
30
31 Beth Bronson: Where the house is? The proposed house?
32
33 Patrick Mallett: The Stokes house is yellow, the existing house follows this footprint
34
35 Beth Bronson: So it was already encroaching?
36
37 Patrick Mallett: They want to put a new house and tear down the house that is already 11 feet away from the property
38 line and put a comparable house in the same relative configuration.
39
40 Beth Bronson: I just want to clarify, if the parcel is already granted an easement because the house was encroached
41 when the line was placed, why would that easement not carry through to any new construction?
42
43 Patrick Mallett: This house is so old that it predates the ordinance
44
45 Beverly Stokes: The house is 100 years old.
46
47 Beth Bronson: So I would say the lines were placed afterwards
3
Approved 1.11.23
1 Beverly Stokes: The way I saw and research, the property was purchased before the power lines came in. The power
2 lines came in in 1910. And the house and all the land was purchased in 1907.
3
4 Beth Bronson: So it has been there since 1910.
5
6 Patrick Mallett: Yes, a long time.
7
8 Leon Meyers: Any other questions for Patrick
9
10 Jeff Scott: Is the hatch door on this plan, is that the leach proposed for this or is that just the outline of the setbacks with
11 the easement in it?
12
13 Patrick Mallett: I believe that is the drainage area for the septic system if I am not mistaken. The area in blue.
14
15 Leon Meyers: This map is from Environmental Health so it may have some significance for Environmental Health
16 purposes.
17
18 Patrick Mallett: So this area all of this colored area, is needed in terms of abandoning and reconfiguring the septic
19 system with the exception, this colored area. Generally represents either a well or a septic or reconfiguration of the old
20 septic system to make it work.
21
22 Leon Meyer: Are there any questions? My question has to do with the easement on this map. The easement is called
23 out at 68 foot width and the easement itself refers to a 60 foot width. Do you happen to know how that discrepancy
24 happened?
25
26 Patrick Mallett: I do not.
27
28 Leon Meyers: I said easement but I meant the encroachment agreement.
29
30 Beth Bronson: yeah. You said easement but it was the encroachment agreement. It was from 2020.
31
32 Leon Meyers: 2021
33
34 Patrick Mallett: That might have been an error on their part in terms of referring to the width.
35
36 Leon Meyers: I can ask Ms. Stokes about that as well. At this moment, if there are no other questions for Patrick. Ms.
37 Stokes if you would come forward please.
38
39 Nathan Robinson: Where did you see the 60 foot easement?
40
41 Leon Meyers: In the first paragraph in the encroachment agreement.
42
43 Patrick Mallett: Speaks with Ms. Stokes about his reference in the encroachment agreement stating it says 68 feet. But
44 in the agreement I just had up it refers to 60 feet.
45
46 Nathan Robinson: Which would get you 8 more feet, 4 feet on each side.
47
48 Beth Bronson: Yeah 60 feet was the total width.
49
4
Approved 1.11.23
1 Leon Meyers: I am not sure if that makes a difference because if the center of the easement is in the right place then
2 they really just need 4 feet of space on either side you care about and you would still be here for a variance even if the
3 easement were 60 feet. I am just curious as to why the surveyor would show the easement one width and the attorneys
4 who drew the encroachment agreement would draw another one. It is really a curiosity at this point. Ms. Stokes before
5 you make your presentation tonight, I am going to make you aware of the fact that there are 4 members of a 5 member
6 board here tonight. I hope someone has seen to that already. The significance to that is that the state statue and the
7 zoning ordinance require 4 votes for an approval of a variance to a zoning ordinance and there are 4 of us here tonight.
8 And in other circumstances there would be 5 members, so what that means is that if you would like to proceed with the
9 case a unanimous vote would be required for approval of a variance. And I have no way of knowing what every board
10 member are thinking. It would be an option for you to request for the board to delay hearing this matter if that is what
11 you prefer.
12
13 Beverly Stokes: I would not like to delay anymore. I have been in this process for over 3 years trying to redo a house
14 that needs some repairs. It is better for me to rebuild.
15
16 Leon Meyers: I certainly understand. I am going to apologize for not being in full force as a board. We had a resignation
17 as of today which was the 5t" person otherwise would have been here tonight.
18
19 Beverly Stokes: We are in question about it shouldn't effect anyone because of that wooded area and then ask the
20 people who are on that strip, I keep it cleaned off so I don't think it would affect anybody. That's the reason I'm asking
21 for this permit. It doesn't affect the environment or anything like that. The encroachment with the power company has
22 caused me to have to be here. They've taken the majority of that land and only allowed me 1,201 square feet out of
23 half an acre of land. I am asking because I don't think it would be an imposition on anybody's plat.
24
25 Leon Meyers: Just to be clear, you said no others have contacted you since it was posted?
26
27 Pat Mallett: I think there have been a few, I'm not sure if the folks here are the same neighbors who called with general
28 questions but nothing negative. I'll note on this, I think this may be a mistake, the reference to 60 feet. You go back to
29 the legal description, it says 68 feet. It's odd to see a 68 foot easement as opposed to the standard 60.
30
31 Leon Meyers: Ms. Stokes, do you have anything else you'd like to tell the Board members or have any questions. 1
32 want to be sure you have a chance to say what you want to say.
33
34 Beverly Stokes: I really don't because I am just worried. My business complaint and argument is with the power
35 company for taking so much and if you go and look at it, they did it along their wires and as far as I'm concerned, they
36 can go and straighten them up and I could have what I need to do. Doing my research, I didn't see when grounds
37 found for encroachment and that angers me just to have to come here and ask for 8'/2 feet is a little much. It's wooded
38 area and I don't think it would be a problem and I think that when they moved the divide, years ago, it just didn't come
39 out the straight way and according to where I live, the lot that's beside me, my grandfather owned that and it they split
40 the acre and the house is right there on the line and back then they just didn't know what they were doing. I think that's
41 the big issue here and as a child, I remember they used all of that property back there, they had outhouses, pig pens
42 and things of that nature but I was so young, I don't even remember my grandfather but I do remember them using all
43 of the property and even on the side where the side property is, that was garden area. That I do remember, I just want
44 8'/2 feet. The reason I have this property, I was the grandchild that stayed there the most with my grandmother, aunt
45 and cousin and they took care of the property and my oldest uncle took care of them but they always took care of the
46 property and I stayed with my grandmother the most. I hate to tear the house down because I so many memories,
47 good memories of being in this house but I have put so much money in it trying to refurbish and every time I turn
48 around, it's something else that's wrong. I've tried to, the last ditch effort was to jack the house up and have the floors
49 repaired, just for the floors and jacking it up was going to costs more than $1,000. That's a lot of money, that's not to
5
Approved 1.11.23
1 do any of the electricity the plumbing or any of those things. I am the grandchild that wants to keep this property in the
2 family.
3
4 Leon Meyers: Members of the Board do you have any questions for Ms. Stokes?
5
6 Beth Bronson: Where there any other site plans that may have encroached on the encroachment, another direction, is
7 the only plan given impacts the power utility.
8
9 Beverly Stokes: Basically, this is the only way I can go because that's 'Y2 acre and I'm only allowed 1,201 square feet to
10 use so therefore the setbacks and all that is included. It's a tiny house now because I can't get even, Duke Energy
11 wouldn't let me get the same footprint that the house is on now. They didn't allow that because the wires come
12 basically the tip of the house so I think you have to be 62 feet from the wires, so 32 on the side or something of that
13 nature of the wires.
14
15 Beth Bronson: So they are basically saying you cannot encroach on the new development on this encroachment
16 agreement.
17
18 Pat Mallett: They don't want any structures
19
20 Beverly Stokes: They don't want any structures, if I leave that, I can refurbish it but if I tear it down, I can't go back on
21 them. So I want to refurbish this if I can. That's my hope to refurbish but I am not going to live in that small structure
22 but I'm going to live the bigger house. This is going to be like a shelter structure maybe a garage or something of that
23 nature. Because I don't have any other place to park my car so I need to think about parking my car so if I leave that
24 structure and just rebuild the line that to take the
25
26 Beth Bronson: Yeah, right, to fix it up right. I just didn't understand. I didn't know if you had approached Duke Energy
27 about a site plan that might encroach or might go over the same footprint of the house and that was approved or
28 denied.
29
30 Beverly Stokes: They wouldn't let me do anything, I did approach them, when I first started, I asked the County, the
31 County had no problems, this was years ago. I don't know if the changes or somebody else, they said they had no
32 problems because the footprint would stay the same just in the same area. Duke Energy said no. They did allow and
33 then I brought to them the fact that the house had been there many years, it has to have some type of maintenance to
34 be able to live in the house and at the time my mother was still living with me and she was 90 years and people can't
35 live in what the house is like now. They have taken all this land on the side where we could have at least moved over
36 some but they wouldn't allow that but they have allowed me to use that that blue area where the septic goes, I can put a
37 new septic tank there. That is the only thing that they are letting.
38
39 Pat Mallett: I just want to add 2 things, 1, utility power companies are generally obsessive about not having any
40 structures or obstructions so that they can go through and maintain their transmission easements. This is also done
41 and recorded at a time when, this lot predates zoning, predates everything, subdivision. There was going back to the
42 70s, 80s I believe you could do a 'Y2 acre lot and that opportunity doesn't exist so you couldn't create lot of this size and
43 configuration today. It's what we call a non-conforming lot but what she's seeking relief from is not that, it's the side set-
44 back one variance.
45
46 Leon Meyers: Any further questions.
47
48 Beth Bronson: No, thank you for answering the questions.
49
6
Approved 1.11.23
1 Nathan Robinson: Patrick, I see that there's a road, are we concerned about the road? Is the proposed location of a
2 traffic barrier is it related to us or are we concerned about anything other than 6 ft.?
3
4 Pat Mallett: I think that is something that Reliant is working through for
5
6 Overlapping conversations
7
8 Leon Meyers: I believe that traffic barriers need to protect the green field area so you can't drive onto the green field.
9
10 Pat Mallett: And crush the lines.
11
12 Beverly Stokes: It's a little fence, you can just stay off of it and not drive across it.
13
14 Pat Mallett: That's an Environmental Health thing. In addition to this, there are other layers that have to be dealt with
15 building permits, demolition permit for the existing house, and then completing the process with the finalization of the
16 rework for the well and septic.
17
18 Beth Bronson: It's a very small area to work with.
19
20 Leon Meyers: Before this comes back to the Board for a decision and the steps, do you have anything more or is there
21 anything you'd like to tell the Board?
22
23 Beverly Stokes: I don't think I have anything else that is pertinent right now. What they are asking for in order for the
24 builders to be in compliance is that you allow that 8 '/2 feet of space and it's wooded area and nobody is using that
25 particular piece of property.
26
27 Leon Meyers: I'm going to say a little bit out of school here that I was in home building business, I would encourage
28 your builder to be very careful about where he wants the house because there is little space to spare.
29
30 Beverly Stokes: They do understand that. The builders have been very good about checking things out walking the
31 property and having it surveyed. I've had the property surveyed 3 times myself and they've had it again I think twice.
32
33 Leon Meyers: That's great. Before we close the public hearing, are there any other questions for Patrick or Ms.
34 Stokes?
35
36 Nathan Robinson: I just want to clarify the neighbors have not submitted any opposition to this request, I want to make
37 sure.
38
39 Pat Mallett: There have be inquiries but not in opposition or in favor just inquiries about what the nature of the request
40 is and that is pretty common.
41
42 Leon Meyers: If you would like to testify could you come forward and be sworn.
43
44 Eric Thompson was sworn in
45
46 Eric Thompson: I live in Mebane but the property there is on the backside of Mrs. Stoke's house, my family owns. I just
47 want to ask a question for my clarity. Approving this variance, how does that affect the property, does it subtract from
48 our property or I'm wondering exactly if it's approved how it affects my property.
49
7
Approved 1.11.23
1 Pat Mallett: What is being considered is that location of the house on Mrs. Stoke's property. There is no modification to
2 the property line, there's no gain on her end or loss on your end or any adjacent property owners. There is no change
3 in the property boundary line. That's the whole point of this request, keep the property line intact but allow for building
4 setback which normally would go all the way down to there (demonstrated). There is no change to your property line,
5 it's comparatively speaking what you see with the house and property is the same.
6
7 Eric Thompson: Our property line actually goes all the way down to the end of her property line.
8
9 Pat Mallett: There is no change to that property line. This is the configuration of the lot lines today and configuration it
10 would be tomorrow and so on and so forth.
11
12 Eric Thompson: So no property around it will be down.
13
14 Pat Mallett: No, this is only dealing with the setback requirement for the house.
15
16 Leon Meyers: Arguably the improvement that Ms. Stokes plans to make on this parcel would have a positive impact on
17 your adjacent property.
18
19 Eric Thompson: My interest was not to prevent her, I just wanted, my interest was our property and knowing exactly
20 what is going on.
21
22 Leon Meyers: I understand thank you for coming. Are there any other questions? We will close the public hearing and
23 the matter is before the Board. Thoughts?
24
25 Beth Bronson: No, I have no questions.
26
27 Nathan Robinson: I am just looking, in Section 2.10.4, where it identifies approved variances, as I move through a, b, c,
28 d it seems this request fits the reason for approval in it. That's about it for me.
29
30 Jeff Scott: I think it was maybe a year ago but we had something, it wasn't a new construction house but it was a
31 variance for an existing, the setbacks where the wetlands area and it is pretty minor and so it's not that president that
32 we would grant something like this.
33
34 Leon Meyers: I would say the motion would be in order. James guide me here? It would need to refer to those four
35 findings in 2.2? Is that right?
36
37 James Bryan: Yeah, that's right so this would be just like any other case where you need Findings of Fact and then
38 conclusions of law. What you have here is two people testified, or really three people testified but only Pat gave
39 substantive evidence. You don't have any conflicting facts so I don't want you to, you could just that put that into the
40 motion for the record that the Board has received no conflicting evidence.
41
42 Leon Meyers: So Board, the two motions we recognize, Findings. The 4 findings related to in the UDO they're going to
43 require for a variance first and the second motion we will grant a variance, do I understand correctly?
44
45 James Bryan: First is Findings of Fact and that is just all the facts which is basically you are relying on the reports and
46 stuff like that. You don't have, there's no conflict, you don't have to go into great detail. I think the motion would be
47 something to the effect of the Board makes the Finding of Fact that there is competent substantial material evidence to
48 support its conclusions and that there is no evidence in controversy.
49
50 Leon Meyers: Anybody here to make that motion.
8
Approved 1.11.23
1
2 MOTION made by Nathan Robinson that there evidence to support our conclusions and there is no evidence to the
3 contrary. Seconded by Beth Bronson.
4 VOTE: Unanimous
5
6 James Bryan: Second we can make conclusion based on these four, if they were to be different you could handle them
7 separately if they are all the same you can make one motion that as a conclusion that all four of there are met/not met.
8
9 Leon Meyers: Do I hear a motion to that?
10
11 MOTION made by Beth Bronson that all points of hardship have been provided and the burden of proof for all four
12 points for the reason to authorize a variance with no conflicting evidence and therefore the Board should grant the
13 variance. Seconded by Jeff Scott.
14 VOTE: Unanimous
15
16 Leon Meyers: Ms. Stokes, congratulations you're ready to build.
17
18 Beverly Stokes: Thank you.
19
20 Leon Meyers: Any other business before the Board? I want to talk about a couple of things with you James.
21
22 Pat Mallett: I think we have some training anticipated at some point and that includes books and packets and on-line
23 things.
24
25 Leon Meyers: I would say, given where we are with Board appointments maybe we want to postpone that until we have
26 something close to a full board. At Patrick's suggestion, I approached Travis Myren today about the importance of
27 taking some appointments before the Board of County Commissioners so that we don't end up with four members
28 sitting of a case that should have five. I also have an issue that on our website, at least, no one I've talked to seems to
29 actually know about this but on the website, a couple of these current seats have expired and my seat expires in a
30 couple of months and we are short on three positions because of Susan's resignation, Kent's resignation and Mr.
31 Taylor's non-participation. I would like is to ask the County Commissioners to appoint the alternates to a regular seat
32 and ask also that you have agreed to a second, three year term.
33
34 Beth Bronson: Does that change the clock for accepting a permanent position?
35
36 Leon Meyers: I don't know the answer to that but I am sure James will figure it out.
37
38 James Bryan: We can work with the Clerk's Office to figure that out.
39
40 Beth Bronson: I have no objections.
41
42 AGENDA ITEM 6: ADJOURNMENT
43
44 The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
45
46
47
48
49
50 LEON MEYERS,CHAIR
9