HomeMy WebLinkAbout6 ZBA October 18, 1983 Frank CInek Hearing redenial of reg variance to rear setbackZBA-FC
~-if City o~~~!~~,!tation
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 7 7840
Randal Wayne Stuart, ETUX
.J.i 207 Cheyei:1R e 6 i re 1 e
Bryan, TX 77801 . .L .J CJJ .
/Ell~~
(!_. s. 110
/
,I
ZO~ING BOARD OF ADJUST ~lENT FILE NO.
Name of Applicant ~~~~~~~Y~4~n~r/(~~~{2__,t~~~e_._J;___-=--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mailing Address ,•~Cf
Phone /-'JO I -7t¥ -:J&.?J
:2 ¥ Block ___,d._'""'-=--
/7A4se
Stibdivisiou-Location: Lot
!'-.
Action requested: Va v-1 'e;-n c e
NAHE ADDRESS
(From current tax rolls, College Station Tax Assessor)
• f
~ ,. . ZONING BOARD OF AD.IUST?·!ENT FILE NO.
Section of o=dinance from ~hich variance is sou g~t ~~__.,{o.....__-_G;'-'-~~'-=~~~~~~~~-
(
The following specific variation from the ordinance is requested: I ~SU "f t/~ Y 1 'c. nc...e
~QV' ':{_e a.. Y s~±-b~, k \ Is_ £~an:i. 2n Sf t:.12 L,IJ 9-t lv £1 c_ L._ rerd 1yel?'1en
l.1.2~~ ld Cl lLtJw q.Q., tQ alli1e ±te Y Yl!J 1'an£:tVv,L.J,. .... Q S: ~a yo...le f1.s.e
of I() 1-a_rid_ fvee_s_ ·1o i er--
This variance is necessary due to the followin g uniqt!e 2nd special conditions of
the ~and not found in like districts:
a/lo.,.;_ (favo.y t-Q t~ t ... ,'{f ,.,, h~ Hey loc ... 1.-.,,. ,,, /,,.~ 1-..._
w,'// 1~exm.' f-f ,fbe . Sg v/)'\_'\ of Seven1 / ,/a rep• fvees a.nJ -
~-br:tf~x t<.Se oi /of dnf (\ j!Y-ovi'J e £0,,,-)avier k °'"-L j@cr J. .
The followin g alternatives to the request e d varianc e are possible:
alfeYna
wh, 'e-1__
h~e Wou/j be_
tutJu/cl co'ue..,,-all •
w o « /L oa 1 a .~
6ff d£
ftte-Jc .
6ac k_ fore-l_
of hou.sr...
This variance will not be contrary to the public interest by virtue
f~ct~: he_, C& /l
bec_g, u.s e th~
th#b\_ 0 V-0 f e> Se J ,
I '/. Sttn1a r
corr e ct.
Da tc
City of College S t a tion
Post Off'ice Box 9 960
1101. Texas Avenue
College St a tion, Texas 77B40
Attention:
Ms . Jame Kee,. Zoning Official
De a r Ms •. Kee,.
136 Yoo d1.awn Av enue
Up p er Mont c l a ir, N.J.
September 29 , l983
We have been informed th a t our Variance Re q uest to all ow cons t ruction
of' a gar ag e a t the re s idence a t 8700 Greenleaf (Lot 24 Block 2 Emerald
Forest Phase IV) has. be en denied.
1'fe p:lan to be in Co:ll.ege St a tion the week of the l.6th of' October 211d
with the permi s sion of the Zonong Board , a re requesting a hearing
regarding the denial of v a riance to the rear setb a ck re quir emen t s (Table
A, Zoning Ordinance No. 850).
'fo would appreci a te very much your noti.fying us if a he a ring h a s be en
gran ted. Ve may be reached (Afte r October 16, 1983) a t 8 7 00 Greenl e a f
Colleg e S tation or by p hone,t409)7'64-7294. Our New Jersey p hone ( 2)1)
746-3671: -Addresa: 1-36 ofoodlawn Avenue~ Up .p er Montcl a ir, N • .J. 07043.
Thank you for your time and con sideration.
-~r ~~~-k_
./ Mr .. and :Mrs. Frank Cin ek
City of College Station
POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840-2 499
October 10, 1983
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
Zoning Board of Adjustment /\/>-./
Jane R. Kee, Zoning Off icia~
Variance in the name of Frank Cinek
As you recall on September 20, 1983 the Board denied the rear setback variance
request for construction of a garage at 8700 Greenleaf.
Mr. and Mrs. Cinek are from New Jersey and were not at the previous meeting.
They will be in town during the October meeting of the Board and they contacted
me concerning another hearing. I explained to them that the Board's Rules
and Procedures require that any applicant wishing to come before the Board
again with the same request must receive permission first from the Board.
Rather than ask permission at the October meeting and, if granted, appear at
the November meeting, the Cinek's elected to pay the application and mailing
fees to be heard at the October meeting if the Board so desires. I have
advised them of the Board's previous action on their property and the reasons
for the denial and that they are taking a risk in resubmitting an application
without knowing if the Board will consent to a re-hearing.
STAFF REPORT
TO: Zoning Board of Adjustment DATE: September 13, 1983
FROM: Jane R. Kee, Zoning Official
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant: Mr. & Mrs. Frank H. Cinek
Status of Applicant: Owner
Location: _Lot 24, Block 2 Emerald Forest Phase IV (8700 Greenleaf)
Existing Zoning: R-1 Single Family
Requested Action: Variance to rear setback
Purpose: To construct a garage up to 15 ft. from the rear property line.
Applicable Ordinance Section: Table A -District Use Schedule
SPECIAL INFORMATION:
Variance
Setbacks Required: Rear -25 ft.
Adjacent Structures: Existing adjacent garage approximately 10 ft. from property
l ine; adjacent house approximately 15 ft. from property 1 ine.
Existing Parking: N/A
Parking Required: N/A
Utilities: 10 ft. utility easement along rear.
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS:
Lot Dimensions: See site plan
Access: From Bent Tree Drive
Existing Vegetation: Few large trees in rear
Flood Plain: N/A
ANALYSIS:
Alternatives: Lose some existing trees and take up a larger portion of the backyard
or propose one car garage.
Hardship: The approved site plan was for a Tilson home. Because Tilson does not
involve themselves in constructing driveways the City permitted the house
with the note that the driveway had to be in prior to the C.O. If the
applicant wanted a garage a permit would have to be applied for and the
driveway could be shown as a part of that permit. If there was to be
STAFF REPORT
page 2
9-13-83
no garage then a driveway permit would have to be applied for.
As the site plan was approved and as the house is located on the
lot the r e is 40 ft. from the rear of the house to the rear property
Tin e which would allow a single car garage or a garage approximately
15 ft. wide unless some trees are removed . If trees are removed
-and more of the backyard i s taken
up a"t:wo-car garage could probabl y fit within the setbacks.
Apparently the mistake referred to in the application involves a
measurement that was dimensioned correctl y (40.18 -see building
permit site plan) but does not scale correctly. All other dimensions
are correct to scale, I always use dimensions to check plans because
scaling on Xerox copies is not accurate. According to the dimensions
the house fits on the lot and it does in reality. Apparently the
lot is just not large enough to accommodate this size house, a two
,car-g arage and the size backyard with existing trees that the appli-
cant desires to keep,
Previous Action on this property: None
ATTACHMENTS:
Appl i cation
List of Property Owners within 200 ft.
2 Site Plans
Area Map
l '
K CINEK
'
['-_. IT_E_M_N_O_. __ ) [ CASE NO. ] ( SC A LE, 1 " '6 0 0 ' ) .
TYPE OF CASE:
Varience To Rear Setback
(
Frank Cinek
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
FORMAT FOR NEGATIVE MOTIONS
Variances: From Section 11-B.5
I move to deny a variance to the
yard (6-G) ------
lot width (Table A) ------
------lot depth (Table A)
xxx sign regulations (Section 8)
minimum setback (Table A) ------
parking requirements (Section 7)
-----~
from the te.rms of this ordinance as it will be contrary to the public interest,
due to the lack of uniq~e and special conditions of the land not normally found
in like districts:
l.
---------------------------------------~
2.
---------------------------------------~
3. --~------------------------------------~
4.
---------------------------------------~
and because a strict enforcement of the prov1s1ons of the Ordinance would not
result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant, and such that the spirit of
this Ordinance shall be observed ,and substantial justice done.
was made by
Ch
· ..
'' ; ' ''
Upham
---..
,;~
by the following vote: 5-0 (unanimously)
Date Nov1lhlil~ 1983 ...
•.,.. .. 11
(PHONE CALL)
-WILL CALL AGAIN
CAME
TOSEEYdU
WANTS
TO SEE YOU
TOPS • FORM 4003
(
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
MINUTES
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
Zoning Board of Adjustment
October 18, 1983
7:00 P.M.
Acting Chairman MacGilvray, Members Wendt, Wagner, Upham & Alternate
Member Meyer
Chairman Cook and Alternate Member McGuirk
Zoning Official Kee, Ass't Zoning Official Dupies, Ass't. Director of
Planning Callaway and Planning Technician Volk
Mr. MacGllvray opened the public hearing and explained the duties and obligations of the
Board.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of Minutes of September 20, 1983 meeting
Mr. Wagner made a motion to approve the minutes as presented with Mr. Upham seconding.
Motion carried 4-0-l (Meyer abstained).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consideration of a request for variance to the side setback require-
ment for construction of a carport at 2809 Brothers in the name of Chalan Jones.
Mrs. Kee explained the request, pointing out it is for a variance to the side setback to
allow construction of a 3 car carport. She further Informed the Board that there is a 10
foot easement between Lots 5 & 6, so the limit of the variance could be for no closer than
to 5 ft. from the property line. She explained that an electric line for a street light
is in this easement; however, the appl leant could go to the City Council to request abandon-
ment of the easement. She further explained that a variance may be required concerning
the regulation of maintaining 15 feet between structures, should the easement be abandoned
as the adjacent structure ls approximately 11 feet from the side line.
Chalan Jones came forward, was sworn in and asked to make a presentation to the Board.
He handed out photos to the Board members, stating that he does not know where the electric
llne is but if It runs In a straight line from the pole, ft appears to be on the neighbor's
property. Mr. MacGllvray asked about ;the storage building shown on the site plan and
Hr. Jones said that ·ts a proposed b~lldlng. Mr. Upham pointed out that building has no
bearing on this ·request. Mrs. Meyer asked several questions a_nd Mr. Jones approached ber
seat and explained the answers privately, Mr. Upham asked Mr :Jones ·to address the req~ire
ment that in granting a variance, unique and special conditions of the land must be shown.
Mr. Jones said there are 33 ft. between the house and the fence, and if this was completely
built up, ft would look better than if a building was constructed on only i3 part of it.
Mr. MacGllvray and Mr. Upham explained that unique might mean a gully or t+ie shape of the
-lot, If ft was unlike others In the area, but that the explanation !offered does not.
Mr. Jones stated that there ls no unique matter of geography that he know of, and he had
nothing further to ·offer. No one else spoke. Mr. Wagner made a motion to deny a variance
to the minimum setback (Table A) from the terms of this ordinance as it will be contrary
to the publ le Interest due to the lack of unique and special conditions of the land not
normally found in like districts and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of the
Ordinance would not result In unnecessary hardship to this applicant, and such that the
spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Mrs. Meyer
sec:_on~ed the motlon which carried unanimously (5-0), '
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration by the Board to rehear ·a re~uest for variance to the
·rear setback requirement for the construction of a garage at700 Greenleaf in the name
of Frank Clnek.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
MINUTES
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
Zoning Board of Adjustment
October 18, 1983
T;OO P.M.
Acting Chairman MacGilvray, Members Wendt, Wagner, Upham and Alternate
Member Meyer
Chairman Cook and Alternate Member McGuirk
Zoning Official, Ass't Zoning Official Duples, Ass't. Director of
Planning Callaway and Planning Technician Volk
Mr. MacGilvray opened the public hearing and explained the duties and obligations of
the Board.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Approval of Minutes of the September 20, 1983 meeting
Mr. Wagner made a motion to approve the minutes and presented with Mr. Upham seconding.
Motion carried 4-0-1 (Meyer 9bstained).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consideration of a request for variance to the side setback require-
ment for construction of a carport at 2809 Brothers in the name of Chalon Jones.
Mrs. Kee explained the request, pointing out it is for a variance to the side setback
to allow construction of a 3 car carport. She further informed the Board that there is
a 10 ft. easement between Lots 5 & 6, so the limit of the variance could be for no
closer than to 5 ft. from the property 1 lne. She explained that an electric 1 ine for
a street light ls in this easement, and if this line could be located and then re-located,
the applicant could go to the City Council to request abandonment of the easement.
She further explained that a variance may be required concerning the regulation of
.. maintaining 15 ft. between structures, should the easement be abandoned.
Chalon Jones came forward, was sworn in and asked to make a presentation to the Board.
He handed out photos to the board members, ·stating that -he does not know 'where the electric
line ls but ff ft runs In a straight IJne ~rpm the pole, ·It appe~~s to be on the neigh-·
bor's property. Mr. MacGllv.r.ay asked ~bout the storage building 'shown on the 'site plan
and Mr. Jones said that ls a proposed building. Mr. Upham pointed ·out that building
has no bearing on this request.· Mrs. ·Meyer asked several questions _and Mr .. Jones
approached her seat and explained the answers privately. Mr. Upham asked Mr. Jones
to address the requirement ~hat ·in ·granting a variance, unique and special conditions
of the land must be shown. Mr. Jones said there are 33 ft. between the house and the
fence, and If this was completely built up, It would look better than if a building
was constructed on only a part of It. Mr. MacGilvray and Mr. Upham explained that unique
might mean a gully or · the shape .of the lot, if it was uni Ike others in the area, but that
the explanation offered does not. Mr. Jones stated that there Is no unique matter 6f
geography that he knows of, and he had nothing further to offer. ·No one else spoke.
Mr. Wagner made a motion to deny a variance to the minimum ~etback (Table A) from the terms
of this ordinance as It will be contrary · to the public Interest due to the lack of unique
·and special conditions of the land not normally found In 1 Ike d1stricts and because a
strict enforcement · of the provisions of the Ordinance would not result in unnecessary
hardship to this appl leant, and such that the spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed
and substa'ntlal justice done, Mrs. Meyer seconded the motion which carried unanimously
(5-0).
.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration by the Board to rehear a request for variance to the
rear setback requirement for the construction of a · garage at 8700 Greenleaf in the name
of Frank Clnek. b-r~,J,V
Mr. MacGllvray reminded the Board that this reques~Dhad been denied at the last meeting
ZBA Minutes
10-18-83
page 2
but also that the appl leant had not been present at that time, and is present at this
meeting, indicating further, that In order to rehear this request, the Board will have
to have a motion to that effect. Mr. Upham made a motion to rehear this request for
variance with Mr. Wendt seconding. Motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Mrs. Kee explained that this Is a request for variance to the rear setback requirements
for construction of a garage addition to a Tilson home, and that this builder does not
ordinarily build garages or driveways. Mr. MacGilvray cited a surveyor's error as
being part of the reason for this request as pointed out in the last hearing. Mrs.
Kee explained that the lot width dimension was distorted on the Xeroxed copy, making
accurate measurement of the site plan impossible, and then mentioned the trees in the
yard which would have to be destroyed if the garage was located within the guidelines
of the ordinance.
Frank Clnek, applicant who resides currently in New Jersey came forward and was sworn
in and explained that he had requested a garage at the time his building was ordered,
and had been advised to bring that up at a later date. Now the prices have climbed
too high, and a local builder has offered to help out. He explained the request, the
hardship on them~xaft« caused by the loss of lot through the setback requirements and
the loss of the trees. Mr. MacGllvray explained again that in order to grant a variance
It must be shown there are unique and special condition~ of the land not normally found
In like districts. Mr. Clnek asked if these rules were enforced throughout the City
and spoke of 16t line construction in some areas. It was pointed out that different
zoning districts have different requriements, and also how older, existing structures
were "grandfathered" Into the City at the time the ordiance was accepted. Mr. Cinek
said that he had "no pu 11 11 in the City, and knows no one to he 1 p him, and Mr. Upham
spoke up and said this entire Board work for him and quoted from the minutes concerning
this request at the last meeting. He went on to speak of the opinion given that there
was too much house on too little a lot, and Mr. Cinek said he had changed the plans
once already. Mr. MacGllvray asked Mr. Clnek if he had considered any alternatives,
and pointed out It is possible to put a garage on this site, although it might interfer
with some windows; he also pointed out the 25 ft. setback which is required at _the
rear.
/
Lill Ian Cinek, 8700 Greenleaf, Drive was sworn in and stated the one main reason for placing
the garage In the location l~~icated i~ bedause of the 6 trees whtch would have to be
destroyed, and further that she ls on the Cohservation Garden Committee of th~ Federation
of Women's Clubs In New Jersey, and has a particular interest in saving any existing
trees. Mr. MacGllvray said that several of the Board members '·have v)sited the site and
are aware of the trees, and they, too agonize over the loss, but repeated this Board is
governed by certain rules. Mr. Wendt asked Mrs. Kee If a 15 ft. setback would be o.k.,
and Mrs. Kee said If It ls a side setback, it is only required to be 7t ft. from the
property line, and the adjacent structure does meet Its setback. Mr. Upham asked if
a front door designation can be changed, and Mr. MacGllvray pointed out that· the 25 ft.
setbacks have to be met on opposite sides of the structure. Mr. Wendt said it is an
example of unfortunate platting of a lot. Mr. Upham made a motion to deny a variance
to the minimum setback {Table A) from the terms of this ordinance as it will be contrary
to the public Interest, du~ to the lack of unique and special conditions of the land not
normally found in like districts and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of
the Ordinance would not result In unnecessary hardship to this applicant, and such that the
spirit of this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Mr. Wagner
seconded the motion which carried unanimously (5-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a request for variance to the sign regulations for
the Ashford Square Subdivision In the name of MHBR-Jolnt Venture,
GO TO TRANSCRIPTION
" •
BK 2, LT 25
BK 2, LT 26
-BK 2, LT 27
BK 2, LT 28
EMERALD FOREST IV
David Foster Construction
1512 Texas Avenue South
Bryan, Texas 77801
BK 2, LT 9
EMERALD FOREST IV
Charles A. Scull
1815 Rosebut Ct
College Station, Texas 77840
BK 2, LT 10
EMERALD FOREST IV
Keiser, David M.
1813 Rosebut Ct.
College Station, Texas 77840
BK 2, LT 11
EMERALD .. FOREST IV
Randal Wayne Stuart, ETUX
4207 Cheyenne Circle
Bryan, Texas 77801
BK 2, LT 21
BK 2, LT 22
BK 3, LT 9
EMERALD FOREST IV
Anthony Home Builders
P.O. Box NN
College Station, Texas
BK 2, LT 23
EMERALD FOREST IV
BPC, INC .
. 2911 Villa Maria Rd.
Bryan, Texas 77801
BK 3, LT 14
EMERALD FOREST IV
Danny J. Earl
Inc.
77840 •
5210 Tower Drive Apt, 135
Wichita Falls, Texas 76310
BK 3, LT 16
EMERALD FOREST IV
James R. ·Larue Jr.
8702 Bent Tree
College Station, Texas 77840
. .&. .
. ·,•.
' :
·~··
BK 3, LT 13 EMERALD FOREST
BK 3.1. I/~' 11 EMERALD FOREST ... · ..
EMERALD ~f\ ~-.,·. LT 10· FOREST
..; ·. i , :. B~-1 .. , I;.T: EMERALD FOREST
Bi<-i; LT 3 EMERALD FOREST
BK .l, LT 4 EMERALD FOREST
BK 2, LT 1 EMERALD FOREST
Haldec Inc.
1607 Emerald PKWY
College Station, Texas 77840
BK 3, LT 12
EMERALD FOREST IV
P6nzio-"tt6mes,~ ·rnc.
P.O. Box 1163
Bry~n, T~xas 71806
BK 4·,· LT l ..
BK ~4,. LT 2
BK 4, LT 3
BK 4, LT 4
EMERALD FOREST IV
Tony Jones Construction Co.
P.O. Box AT
College Station, Texas 77840
IV
IV
IV
v
v
v
v
BK 1, LT 2
BK 1, LT 6
Ranco Homes
EMERALD FOREST V
EMERALD FOREST VI
1128 Villa Maria
Bryari, ~exas 77801
1 _ ...... -· , I • ~ l !
. ·, ....... --~-·~ . : .-..
-••• • 1 ...... : •••
:;._.-_... . ... -: ]'_'
"I .--~
'·
··--j-· -·· ·-•. -
i
; '• ; { ~ r1 '0 ... -. r-... j : .. •• :: r . ~
:, ..
.·r
· .... ,.
.. ·-
-" ~--· -~
~ (~ ;;-t~
LEGAL NOTICE
DATE(s) TO BE PUBLISHED:ULWc.s.oA'~ ame.Ge /.;?);9,6'.3
BILL TO: THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
P. 0. BOX 9960
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77840
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
ONLY
~
The Zoning Board of Adjustment for ihe City of College Station will consider a request for
a variance in the name of:
Frank Cinek
. ..
8700 Greenleaf
~College Stat1on ~ TX 77840
Said case will be heard by the Board at their regular meeting in the Council Room, College
Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue at 7:00 P.M. on Tuesday, October 18, 1983
The nature of the case is as follows:
Request varianc~ to ~ear setb~ck requirements as required by Tabl~ A, ?istrict Use
Schedule of the Zoning Ordinance, Ordinance No. 850 to allow construction of a garage
at the residence at 8700 Greenleaf,
..
. .. . ' : .-'· .
Further information is available ~t ·the offic~'6f the Zoning Offi~lal of the Cjty of ColJege
Station, 1409)696-8868. ,:
·, ' ... ~. ::.· .
Jane Kee
Zoning Official
·~·-. .
-~-:-;·~, . ~
·~1~\ }· ~
.... ~.:
-~.,. . • c'i~;~:~ .. ~
\, / , ...
City of College Station
POST OFFICE BOX 9960 I I 0 I TEXAS AVENUE
COLLEGE STATION, T EXAS 77840
Octo be r 10 , 1983
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
The Zoning Board of Adjustment for the City of College Station will consider
a request for a variance in the name of:
Fran k Cin ek
8700 Greenleaf
College Station, TX 77840
Said case will be heard by the Board at their regular meeting in the Council
Roo m, College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue on Tuesday, Oc t ober 18, 1983
at 7 :00 P.M ,
The nature of the case · is as follows:
Reque s t varlanc ~ to rear setback requirements as required by Table A,
Dist ri ct Use Sched~le of th~ Zoning Ordinance , Ordinince No. 850, t o
allow construction ,of a garage at th e residence at 8700 Gre e nleaf .
Further information is available at the office of the Zoning Official of the
City of College Station, (409)696-8868.
Jane Kee
Zoning Official
c
(
ZBA Minutes
10-18-83
page 2
Mr. MacGilvray reminded the Board that this request for variance had been denied at the
last meeting but also that the applicant had not been present at that time, and is present
at this meeting, Indicating further, that in order to rehear this request, the Board
will have to have a motion to that effect. Mr. Upham made a motion to rehear this request
for variance with Mr. Wendt seconding. Motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Mrs. Kee explained that this Is a request for variance to the rear setback requirements
for construction of a garage addition to a Tilson home, and that this builder does not
ordinarily build garages or driveways. Mr. MacGilvray cited a surveyor's error as being
part of the reason for this request as pointed out in the last hearing. Mrs. Kee explained
that the front · lot width dimension was distorted on the Xeroxed copy, and then mentioned
the trees in the yard which would have to be destroyed If the garage was located within the
guide! ines of the ordinance.
Frank Cinek, applicant who resides currently in New Jersey came forward and was sworn in
and explained that he had requested a garage at the time his building was ordered, and had
been advised to bring that up at a later date. Now the prices have climbed too high, and
a local builder has offered to help out. He explained the request, the hardship on them
caused by the loss of lot through the setback requirements and the loss of the trees.
Mr. MacGllvray explained again that in order to grant a variance it must be shown there
are unique and special conditions of the land · not normally found in like districts. Mr.
Clnek asked If these rules were enforced throughout the City and spoke of lot line construct-
ion In some areas. It was pointed out that different zoning districts have different re~
qulrements, and a1so how older, existing structures were "grandfathered" into the City at
the time the ordinance was accepted. Mr. Cinek said that ·he had "no pull" in the City,
and knows no one to help him, and Mr. Upham spoke up and said thi~ entire Board works for
him and quoted from the minutes concerning this request at the last meeting. He went on
to speak of the opinion given that there was too much house on too little a lot, and Mr.
· Clnek said he had changed the plans once already. Mr. MacGilvray asked Mr. Cinek if he had
considered any alternatives, and pointed out it is possible to put a garage on this site,
although it might lnterfer with some windows; he also pointed out the 25 ft. setback which
ls required at the rear.
Lllllan Cinek, 8700 Greenleaf Drive was sworn in and stated the one main reason for placing
the garage ln the location Indicated is because of the 6 trees which would have to be
·destroyed, and further that she I~ on the Conservation Garden Com~ittee of the Federation
of Women's Clubs In New Jersey, and has a particular Interest in saving any existing
trees. Mr.·MacGllvray said that several of the Boa r d members have visited the site and
.are aware of the trees, and they, too agonize over the loss, but repeated this Board is
governed by certain rules. Mr. Wendt asked Mrs. Kee ·if a 15 ft. setback would be o.k.,
and Mrs. Kee said If It ls a side setback, it is only required to -be 7t ft. from the pro-
perty line, and the adjacent structure does meet its setback. Mr. Upham asked If a
front door designation can be changed, and Mr. MacGllvray pointed out that-the 25 ft. setback
have to be met on opposite sides of the structure. ·Mr. Wendt said it is an example of
unfortunate platting of a lot. Mr. Upham made a motion ·to deny a variance to the minimum
setback (Table A) from the terms of this ordinance as It w1 ·11 be contrary to the public
Interest, due to the lack of unique and special conditions of the land not normally found
:-rn like districts and because a strict enforcement of the p~ovislons of the Ordinance
woufd not result In unnecessary hardship to this applicant, and such that the spirit of
this Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Mr. Wagner seconded the
motion which carried unanlmsouly (5-0).
AGEND A"ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a request for variance to the sign regulations for
the Ashford Square Subdivision In the name of MHBR-Jolnt Venture.
THE FOLLOWING REPRESENTS NOT AN EXACT TRANSCRIPTION OF THE TAPE OF THE ZONING BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 1983, AGENDA ITEM NO. 4, BUT RATHER A MINIMAL AMOUNT
OR PARAPHRASING HAS BEEN DONE, AND UNIMPORTANT, IRRELEVANT INFORMATION HAS