[3a.. APP-2026-100534 Tuckahoe APP-2026-100534 Cortland Putbrese for SSR, Inc.: appeal of an administrative decision regarding the property at 1500 Eastridge Road, Tuckahoe. Parcel 754-744-4231. Zoning: B-2, Business District. Code Section: 24-2320. Withdrrawn]

THAT IS APPEAL 2026 100534 COURTLAND PUTT BREEZY FOR SSR INCORPORATED AN APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION REGARDING THE REGENCY INN AT 1500 EAST RIDGE ROAD IN THE TUCKAHOE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT.

THAT APPEAL HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN, SO IT WILL NOT BE HEARD THIS MORNING.

BUT THERE ARE TWO OTHER APPEALS ON THE CASE ON THE AGENDA.

THANK YOU, MR. BLANKENSHIP. AND CAN YOU PLEASE NOW CALL OUR FIRST REQUEST? ALL RIGHT. OUR FIRST CASE THIS MORNING IS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2026, NUMBER 100662.

[1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS]

[1a. CUP-2026-100662 Fairfield CUP-2026-100662 Jennifer Whilden: conditional use permit to allow hosted short-term rental of one bedroom at 201 Danray Drive, Chamberlayne Farms, Fairfield. Parcel 790-754-1300. Zoning: R-2A, One-Family Residence District. Code Section: 24-4431.A. ]

JENNIFER WELDON. A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW HOSTED SHORT TERM RENTAL OF ONE BEDROOM AT 201 DAN RAY DRIVE IN THE CHAMBERLAIN FARMS SUBDIVISION IN THE FAIRFIELD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. WOULD EVERYONE WHO INTENDS TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE PLEASE STAND AND BE SWORN IN? RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE. DO YOU SWEAR THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? I DO. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE. YOU AS WELL. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT, MR. GIDLEY. AND THEN YOU WILL BE NEXT.

THANK YOU, MR. SECRETARY. GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, GIVEN OUR CASELOAD THIS MORNING, I AM GOING TO BE AS BRIEF AS I CAN WITH THESE CASES TODAY, SO BEAR WITH ME ON THE SUBJECT.

PROPERTY IS LOCATED JUST SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF CHAMBERLAIN AND WILKINSON ROADS.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO OFFER ONE BEDROOM FOR SHORT TERM RENTAL FOR AS MANY AS FOUR GUESTS.

[00:05:06]

SHE IS REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, BUT SHE WANTS TO HAVE RENTALS FOR UP TO 300 DAYS A YEAR.

THIS IS AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD. THE BOARD HAD PREVIOUSLY APPROVED A SHORT TERM RENTAL ROUGHLY A HALF A MILE SOUTH OF HERE.

STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY COMPLAINTS REGARDING THAT SHORT TERM RENTAL.

THIS WILL BE HOSTED STAYS WHERE THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT DURING THE STAYS.

THOSE TYPICALLY RESULT IN FAR FEWER COMPLAINTS BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS THERE TO ADDRESS ANY ISSUES THAT COME UP.

I'M SORRY, THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE HOME HERE.

SO AS YOU CAN SEE IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S A SIZABLE HOME AND A NICE YARD IN THE BACK.

THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE A LARGE DRIVEWAY THAT CAN ACCOMMODATE 5 OR 6 VEHICLES, SO THERE'S NO NEED TO BE PARKING ON THE STREET.

GIVEN THIS STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS CASE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. GOODLEY. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. GOODLEY? OKAY. HEARING NONE AT THIS POINT, WE WILL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.

PLEASE.

HI. YEP. THANKS. YEAH, I'M HOPING TO. TELL US YOUR NAME, PLEASE.

SORRY. JENNIFER WELDON. THANK YOU. AND I'M WANTING TO RENT OUT THE.

THERE'S A BEDROOM ON THE BOTTOM FLOOR THAT HAS A SEPARATE, SEPARATE ENTRANCE.

AND THAT'S FROM THE BACK. YOU WOULD ENTER FROM THE BACK, BUT IT'S LOCKED OFF FROM THE HOUSE HAS A SEPARATE ENTRANCE AND IT IS A ONE BEDROOM, ONE LIVING ROOM AND THEN A BATHROOM. SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'M HOPING TO RENT OUT.

OKAY. THANK YOU MA'AM. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF MISS WALDEN? OKAY. HEARING NO QUESTIONS THEN. THANK YOU, MA'AM.

WE WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE OR ON WEBEX WHO WISHES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST? YES, SIR. CAN YOU GO TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE? MY NAME IS SAM RUGG, AND WE ARE NEIGHBORS. WE ACTUALLY LIVE DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM MISS WALDEN, AND WE ARE WHOLEHEARTEDLY IN SUPPORT OF THIS AND JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT ON THE RECORD.

THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME. COULD YOU SPELL YOUR LAST NAME FOR ME, PLEASE? IT'S RUGG.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. ROARKE. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE OR ON WEBEX THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS CASE? THERE IS NO ONE ON WEBEX. OKAY. I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD ON THIS, MR. GOODLEY. WHILE YOU'RE STANDING THERE, I NOTICED THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS STATE THAT THE APPLICANT CAN HAVE NO MORE THAN THREE PETS ON THE PREMISES. DOES THAT INCLUDE THE MAIN RESIDENCE OR IS THAT JUST ONLY APPLYING TO THE SHORT TERM RENTAL? IT DOES INCLUDE THE MAIN RESIDENCE, MR. LAWRENCE.

AND THAT WAS ADDED BECAUSE AS YOU KNOW, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS REQUIRED TO HAVE MORE THAN THREE PETS ON THE PROPERTY.

AND IT WAS JUST ONE OF THOSE ISSUES WHERE IF PEOPLE WERE BRINGING MULTIPLE PETS TO A PROPERTY WHERE THERE WERE ALREADY MULTIPLE PETS, THERE COULD BE ALL KINDS OF CONFLICT GOING ON AND TROUBLING THE NEIGHBORS.

FOR SOME REASON I WAS THINKING THE TRIGGER WAS FOR. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT AS WELL.

I THOUGHT NORMALLY, YOU KNOW WHAT? THAT I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT.

I DON'T SEE THAT CONDITION. WHERE IS THAT IN THE STAFF REPORT. IT'S NOT IN THE IT'S IN THE CONDITIONS. IT'S ONE OF THE CONDITIONS.

THE CASE UNDER NUMBER TWO. NUMBER TWO. NEXT TO THE LAST BULLET. OH IN THE ANALYSIS YOU'RE RIGHT.

YEAH. THAT SHOULD BE FOR THAT WAS CHANGED. IT USED TO BE THREE.

BUT IT WAS CHANGED THAT WHAT IT WAS. YEAH I JUST HADN'T.

YEAH. I SAW THE THREE IN THAT KIND OF JUMPED OUT AT ME.

CAN I ADD. YES. I HAVE NO PETS IF THAT HELPS.

I HAVE ZERO PETS. NOT AN ISSUE FOR YOU. NOT AN ISSUE.

OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. BUT PROBABLY OUGHT TO CLARIFY THAT, I GUESS.

YES. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. GIDLEY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, MR. MAYOR? ARE YOU READY FOR A MOTION ON THE CASE? YES, SIR. IT'S CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS TO HAVE MINIMAL IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. MASSIE TO APPROVE THIS CASE.

[00:10:02]

DO I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND BY MR. GREEN. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.

AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED? NO. AND, OF COURSE, MR. JOHNSON WILL BE ABSENT FOR THIS VOTE.

AND THE FOLLOWING VOTES TODAY. SO THIS CASE IS APPROVED.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT CASE IS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2026 NUMBER 100809 JARED IRELAND.

[1b. CUP-2026-100809 Tuckahoe CUP-2026-100809 Jared Ireland: conditional use permit to keep up to six hens in the rear yard at 1807 Locust Hill Road, Whitaker Woods, Tuckahoe. Parcel 740-747-5280. Zoning: R-2, One-Family Residence District. Code Section: 24-4420.G.]

A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO KEEP UP TO SIX HENS IN THE REAR YARD AT 1807 LOCUST HILL ROAD IN WHITAKER WOODS IN THE TUCKAHOE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT.

WITH EVERYONE WHO INTENDS TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE, PLEASE STAND AND BE SWORN IN. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE. DO YOU SWEAR THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD. THANK YOU. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, I'LL CALL TO YOUR ATTENTION THREE EMAILS THAT WERE RECEIVED AFTER YOUR PACKETS WENT OUT.

THERE ARE EMAILS OF SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBOR ON THE LEFT, THE NEIGHBOR ON THE RIGHT, AND THE NEIGHBOR ACROSS THE STREET.

THAT'S HOW YOU DO IT. MR. GIDLEY THANK YOU, MR. SECRETARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE WHITAKER WOOD SUBDIVISION, JUST WEST OF THE GATE AND LIBRARY OFF OF GAYTON ROAD.

THIS IS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREA. THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY IS JUST UNDER ONE HALF OF AN ACRE, AN AREA THAT IS SIMILAR TO THE OTHER LOTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SHE IS PROPOSING TO KEEP UP TO LET ME GET A PICTURE OF THAT HOUSE HERE.

IT'S JUST PROPOSING TO KEEP UP TO SIX HENS IN THE REAR YARD.

THE PROPOSED CHICKEN COOP, WHICH IS ACTUALLY RIGHT HERE.

THE PROPOSED CHICKEN COOP IS 25FT FROM THE SIDE LOT LINE, 45FT FROM THE REAR AND 25 TO 30FT FROM THE PRINCIPAL DWELLING, WHICH COMPLIES WITH THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.

AS NOTED A NUMBER OF NEIGHBORS SUBMITTED LETTERS OF SUPPORT FOR THIS REQUEST.

STAFF BELIEVES THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, IF APPROVED, WOULD ADDRESS ANY ISSUES AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, PESTS AND ANYTHING LIKE THAT. SO AS A RESULT, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS CASE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. GOODLEY. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD FOR MR. GOODLEY? OKAY. HEARING NONE, WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, PLEASE.

GOOD MORNING, BOARD AND CHAIR. MY NAME IS JARED IRELAND.

IRELAND LIKE THE COUNTRY. IRELAND. AND WE'RE HERE TO REQUEST THE ABILITY TO HAVE SIX HENS ON OUR PROPERTY.

MY SON LEARNED ABOUT RAISING CHICKENS AT HIS SCHOOL.

HE GOT VERY INTERESTED AND EXCITED ABOUT BEING ABLE TO RAISE CHICKENS, AND HE ASKED FOR IT FOR HIS BIRTHDAY.

AND SO AFTER ASKING FOR HIS BIRTHDAY, WE GOT EXCITED AND WANTED TO ENCOURAGE HIM TO BE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF ANIMALS.

AND WE HAVE BUILT A COOP AND PREPARED FOR IT, BUT WANTED TO COME FOR APPROVAL.

MY SON WOULD LIKE TO READ HIS LETTER THAT HE HAS GIVEN TO ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORS AND REQUEST FOR HAVING CHICKENS.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. CAN YOU PULL THE MICROPHONE DOWN FOR HIM? SORRY WE COULDN'T GET IT UP HIGH ENOUGH FOR YOU. MY NAME IS BLAKE.

IRELAND. IRELAND. LIKE THE COUNTRY. IRELLAND.

SO MY LETTER IS DEAR COUNTY. I WOULD LIKE TO GET CHICKENS BECAUSE THEY ARE FRIENDLY, CUTE AND PROVIDE EGGS.

I WILL TAKE GOOD CARE OF THEM. I WILL BUILD A CHICKEN COOP THAT IS SAFE AND HAS RUN SPACE FOR GOOD EXERCISE.

I WILL KEEP THE COOP CLEAN. I RESEARCHED THAT CHICKENS ARE NOT LOUD OR HARMFUL BEFORE I GO THROUGH THE COUNTY PERMIT PROCESS. I WANT TO KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS.

THANKS. JAMES BLAKE, IRELAND. P.S. I WANT TO NAME MY CHICKENS COMET COOKIE, KIWI MUFFIN WAFFLES AND BUTTER WAFFLES AND BUTTER COMET DOESN'T SEEM TO FIT WITH THAT THEME.

THANK YOU, MR. IRELAND AND MR. IRELAND. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD FOR THE APPLICANTS.

OKAY. HEARING NO QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD. WE'LL NOW OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.

WE DO HAVE THREE LETTERS OF SUPPORT. IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE FROM WEBEX? ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE CASE? AND I WILL NOTE THAT ONE OF THE LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM A NEIGHBOR IS ALSO FORMER PLANNING DIRECTOR FOR HENRICO COUNTY AND RETIRED DEPUTY COUNTY MANAGER FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.

[00:15:02]

SO THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD REFERENCE. ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE OR ON WEBEX THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE CASE? THERE'S NO ONE ON WEBEX. OKAY. HEARING NONE, MR. BROADWAY. ARE YOU READY TO MAKE A MOTION? I AM, AND AND BASED MAINLY ON THE TESTIMONY OF THE SECOND SPEAKER.

I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF.

IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE ZONING ORDINANCES.

AS YOU INDICATED, MR. CHAIRMAN, THE NEIGHBORS HAVE EXPRESSED SUPPORT AND THE CONDITIONS ADDRESS FOOD STORAGE AND PEST CONTROL.

THERE'S A MOTION BY MR. BROADWAY TO APPROVE THIS CASE.

DO I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY MR. MASSEY.

ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, THE CASE IS APPROVED. THANK YOU, LORD.

THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. BLAKE. ALL RIGHT. OUR NEXT CASE IS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2026,

[1c. CUP-2026-100844 Brookland CUP-2026-100844 Roya Saddat: conditional use permit to provide daycare for up to 12 children in the home at 11446 Old Mountain Road, Holladay Hill, Brookland. Parcel 762-772-4033. Zoning: R-3C, One-Family Residence District (Conditional). Code Section: 24-4402.]

NUMBER 100844. ROYA SADAT. THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PROVIDE DAYCARE FOR UP TO 12 CHILDREN IN THE HOME AT 11446 OLD MOUNTAIN ROAD IN HOLLIDAY HILL IN THE BROOKLYN MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT.

WHAT EVERYONE WHO INTENDS TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE. PLEASE STAND AND BE SWORN IN. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE. DO YOU SWEAR THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD. THANK YOU, MR. KINGSLEY.

THANK YOU, MR. SECRETARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS AS LOCATED, IS LOCATED OFF OF MOUNTAIN ROAD.

THIS IS A ROUGHLY ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE PROPERTY AND IT CONTAINS AN EXISTING DWELLING.

3250FT² IN AREA. IT'S A PICTURE OF THE HOME HERE.

THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN OPERATING IN A SMALL FAMILY DAY HOME FOR UP TO FIVE CHILDREN FOR AT LEAST THE LAST FEW YEARS.

SHE IS SEEKING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO INCREASE THIS NUMBER UP TO 12 CHILDREN.

LET'S SEE HERE. THE. I WOULD NOTE THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INITIALLY EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE APPLICATION THAT IT MIGHT BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.

HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT IN THE HOA EVIDENTLY MET AND PROVIDED A WRITTEN STATEMENT THAT IT IS NO LONGER OPPOSED TO THE APPLICATION.

THAT DOES RESERVE THE RIGHT TO ENFORCE NEIGHBORHOOD COVENANTS.

BUT BECAUSE THESE WERE WORKED OUT, AND I'D ALSO POINT OUT THAT IN THE REAR YARD, YOU SEE SOME OF THE PLAY EQUIPMENT RIGHT HERE. I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SORRY. ANYWAY, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE.

THANK YOU, MR. GOODLEY. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, MR. GOODLEY? I HAVE A FEW.

AFTER WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU. MR. DOWD, IF YOU'D LIKE TO ELABORATE ON YOUR CASE FOR US.

GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE AND AUDIENCE. I'M ROY THAT I AM RUNNING THIS AS A SMALL BUSINESS FOR THE PAST 13 YEARS.

THE ONLY REASON WHEN I APPLY FOR THE CONDITIONAL PERMIT BECAUSE MY BACKUP PERSON, MY ASSISTANT, WHEN SHE COMES, SHE HAS THREE KIDS. AND AT THIS POINT, I DON'T WANT TO LOSE MY LICENSE BECAUSE HER KIDS ALSO COME BECAUSE TWO KIDS IS GOING TO SCHOOL AND ONE IS NOT GOING TO SCHOOL FROM 3 TO 5:00 WHEN SHE IS HER KIDS ARE ALL COMING TO MY HOME.

IT'S GOING TO BE COUNTED AS MY POINT OF MY DAYCARE.

THE ONLY REASON WHEN I APPLY FOR THE PERMIT 12 KIDS IN THIS REASON, BUT I.

AND WHEN I RUN THIS SMALL BUSINESS FOR THE PAST 13 YEARS, I HAVE NO COMPLAINTS OR CONCERNS REGARDING MY NEIGHBORS.

THEY ARE HAPPY I HAD THIS. I DON'T HAVE ANY COMPLAINTS FROM MY NEIGHBORS SO FAR.

THANK YOU MA'AM. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MRS. SADAT? I WILL SAY SO. 13 YEARS YOU'VE BEEN OPERATING? YES. YES, SIR. YOU MUST HAVE BEEN DOING IT PRETTY QUIETLY, BECAUSE APPARENTLY THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WASN'T EVEN AWARE THAT YOU WERE KEEPING WATCHING KIDS IN THE HOME. SO YOU MUST HAVE BEEN PRETTY.

PRETTY QUIET AND DISCREET. YES. NO COMPLAINTS FROM NEIGHBORS.

AND ALSO, I RAISED A LOT OF MY NEIGHBORS AROUND MY HOMES.

THEIR KIDS. OKAY. THANK YOU, MA'AM. APPRECIATE THE SERVICE YOU'RE PROVIDING.

OF COURSE. IT'S MY PLEASURE. YES. OKAY. AT THIS TIME, THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS OF.

THE APPLICANT WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST OR ON WEBEX? IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE ON WEBEX THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS CASE? THERE WAS NO ONE ON WEBEX. OKAY. HEARING NONE, I DID HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

MR. GIDLEY, FOR YOU, I THINK. SO THE APPLICANT MISS SADAT OR SHE CAN ANSWER THIS QUESTION TOO,

[00:20:05]

BUT THEY'LL HAVE TO APPLY FOR AN AMENDMENT, I ASSUME, TO THEIR STATE LICENSE TO ALLOW THE ADDITIONAL CHILDREN, AS WELL AS GETTING OUR. I ALREADY HAVE A STATE LICENSE.

YOU ALREADY HAVE THAT? YES. I HAVE A STATE LICENSE FOR UP TO 12 CHILDREN.

BEFORE 2013, I HAD 12 KIDS, BUT SINCE MY DAUGHTER IS SICK FOR ONE YEAR, I DIDN'T WORK.

THEN I CHANGED TO FIVE KIDS. THE RULE IS FOR A STATE LICENSE CHANGE.

THEN I NEED TO GET THE PERMIT. CONDITIONAL PERMIT.

LICENSE. I THINK SHE NEEDS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

AND THEN THE STATE WILL GO AHEAD AND REISSUE IT.

REISSUE HER LICENSE? YEAH. I THINK WE SAID WE'RE NOT AWARE OF ANY ANY CONCERNS OR VIOLATIONS IN THE PAST FOR YOUR OPERATION.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES. I DON'T HAVE NO VIOLATION.

CONGRATULATIONS ON THAT. THANK YOU. THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I HAD IS YOUR PROPERTY IS VERY WELL MAINTAINED TOO.

I HAD A CHANCE TO INSPECT IT AND IT'S IN A GOOD LOCATION.

I THINK IT'S ON A CORNER. IT LOOKS LIKE A PRETTY QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD.

PLENTIFUL PARKING. THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD, AND I THINK THIS MIGHT HAVE BEEN ALLUDED TO IN THE STAFF REPORT, IS I NOTICED YOUR YARD IS ON A CORNER. IT'S NOT FENCED.

IT IS UP ON KIND OF A BLUFF, I GUESS, BUT IS THERE ANY CONCERN IS THERE ANY CONCERN BEING EXPRESSED FROM A PUBLIC SAFETY STANDPOINT ABOUT HAVING, YOU KNOW, 12 CHILDREN, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY MORE THAN FIVE CHILDREN? I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO STAGGER PLAY TIMES AND THAT SORT OF STUFF, BUT IS THERE ANY CONCERN FROM THE COUNTY STANDPOINT OR ANY CONCERNS YOU HEARD FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ABOUT THERE BEING ANY CONCERN ABOUT ABOUT CHILDREN'S SAFETY? YEAH, A LOT OF TIMES WHERE WE ARE, IT'S A FAMILY DAY.

HOMES ARE A FENCE. THAT'S PRETTY COMMON. IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT AS SUCH, AT LEAST, AT LEAST NOT FROM THE ZONING ORDINANCE PERSPECTIVE.

PERSPECTIVE. I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK FOR THE COMMONWEALTH ON THAT.

WE DID NOTE IT IN THE STAFF REPORT. WE DIDN'T MAKE IT A CONDITION.

WE JUST NOTED IT. SO IF THE BOARD FEELS IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE REASONS YOU MENTIONED, THEN YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND MAKE THAT A CONDITION OF APPROVAL.

YOU KNOW, FROM A PUBLIC SAFETY STANDPOINT. BUT IF YOU DON'T FEEL THAT WAY, THEN YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CONDITIONS AS THEY ARE CURRENTLY WRITTEN.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS COVENANTS ARE.

THEY MAY HAVE RESTRICTIONS ON FENCING. THEY MAY ALLOW THEM. THEY MAY NOT ALLOW THEM. THEY MAY HAVE CERTAIN CONDITIONS ON IT. SO OBVIOUSLY THAT'S SOMETHING THEY'D HAVE TO DISCUSS.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE ON THE BOARD HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT ABOUT THE FENCING ISSUE OR.

NO. I WOULD ONLY ASSUME THAT SINCE SHE'S BEEN DOING IT FOR 13 YEARS, IT HAS NOT BEEN AN ISSUE.

SO WHY SHOULD WE MAKE IT AN ISSUE WHEN SHE CLEARLY ARTICULATED THAT THE ONLY REASON SHE'S EXPANDING IS BECAUSE HER HEALTH IS BRINGING IN TWO ADDITIONAL CHILDREN FOR A SPECIFIC PERIOD OF TIME. AND YOU KNOW, THEN YOU WOULD GET INTO WHAT, WHAT, WHAT THE NEIGHBORS WOULD LIKE A FENCE. SO THAT'S A WHOLE NOTHER ISSUE.

AND THEN WHAT TYPE OF FENCING? I JUST SAID, BUT LET IT REST.

OKAY. YEAH. I AGREE WITH MR. GREENE ON THAT. OKAY.

VERY GOOD. I AGREE AS WELL. SO IF THERE'S NO OTHER DISCUSSION FROM THE BOARD I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF. IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

THE LOCATION IS CONVENIENT FOR DROP OFF AND PICK UP.

AND FAMILY DAY CARE HOMES DO PROVIDE AN IMPORTANT SERVICE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND TO MY MOTION? SECOND. THERE'S A MOTION BY BY THE CHAIRMAN, MR. LAWRENCE. SECOND BY MR. BROADWAY. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED? SAY NO. HEARING NONE, THE CASE IS APPROVED.

THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT CASE IS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2026 NUMBER 100955 HIRAM PAUL HUERTA MORALES.

[1d. CUP-2026-100955 Tuckahoe CUP-2026-100955 Hiram Paul Huerta Morales: conditional use permit to keep up to six hens in the rear yard at 2410 Lauderdale Drive, Tuckahoe Village West, Tuckahoe. Parcel 730-750-7247. Zoning: R- 2A, One-Family Residence District. Code Section: 24-4420.G. ]

A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO KEEP UP TO SIX HENS IN THE REAR YARD AT 2410 LAUDERDALE DRIVE IN THE TUCKAHOE VILLAGE WEST SUBDIVISION IN THE TUCKAHOE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT.

BUT EVERYONE WHO INTENDS TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE, PLEASE STAND AND BE SWORN IN. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE. DO YOU SWEAR THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? THANK YOU. MR..

THANK YOU, MR. SECRETARY. THIS IS A REQUEST TO KEEP UP TO SIX HENS IN THE REAR YARD ON A PROPERTY LOCATED OFF OF LAUDERDALE DRIVE.

IT'S A PICTURE OF THE PROPERTY HERE. AND THE CONCEPT PLAN WAS PRETTY BASIC, BUT IT DOES SHOW IT LOCATED IN THE REAR YARD.

[00:25:01]

THIS IS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREA. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING TO KEEP UP TO SIX HENS.

THIS CAME TO THE COUNTY'S ATTENTION BECAUSE THERE WAS A COMPLAINT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION.

AND THE COMPLAINT WAS THAT THE CHICKEN COOP WAS LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY LINE.

THE APPLICANT HAS SINCE RELOCATED THE CHICKEN COOP.

BUT THEY DO NEED A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AS WELL.

THE LOCATION DOES APPEAR TO MEET SETBACKS AS REQUIRED BY THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE PROPERTY HERE.

HERE'S A PICTURE OF THE CHICKEN COOP. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROPERTY ITSELF DOES APPEAR TO BE WELL MAINTAINED.

STAFF BELIEVES THE REQUEST IS REASONABLE NOW THAT THE COOP MEETS SETBACKS AND THAT THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WOULD ADDRESS CONCERNS LIKE PEST CONTROL, FOOD STORAGE, ETC.. AS A RESULT, WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN YOUR STAFF REPORTS.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. GOODLEY. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. GOODLEY? HEARING NONE, WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT NOW.

GOOD MORNING EVERYBODY. SO. MY NAME IS AARON PAUL MORALES.

AND THE REASON I JUST TRIED TO APPLY TO HAVE SOME CHICKENS.

SO THE ECONOMY NOW IS SO HARD TO TO FEED FAMILIES.

SO I'M JUST START MY BUSINESS LIKE TWO YEARS AGO.

SO I JUST TRIED TO HELP AND SHOW MY KIDS HOW EVERYTHING WE CAN EAT, WE CAN MAKE SOME HEALTHY.

AND I KNOW BEFORE I HAVE MY CHICKEN COOP RIGHT BACK TO TO THE FENCE, BUT I GET SOMEBODY FROM ACCOUNTING, SO THEY WAS WORRIED SO ABOUT MY CHICKEN COOP.

SO THEY SAID SO I HAD TO MOVE IT. SO I JUST MOVE EVERYTHING MORE IN THE CENTER OF MY YEAR, AND I NEVER HAVE ANY COMPLAINTS OR ANY PROBLEM WITH MY NEIGHBOR.

SO SO I DON'T WANT TO MAKE ANY BOTHER. SO WHAT I HAVE TO WITH MY FAMILY, WE'RE GOING TO PLAN TO PUT A FENCE, A PRIVATE FENCE TO TRY TO KEEP MORE PRIVACY AND NOBODY HAVE ANY ISSUES ABOUT THE CHICKENS. EVEN I HAVE ANOTHER PROPERTY. SO WHAT, I'M GOING TO CLEAN THE CHICKEN COOP.

I'M GOING TO TAKE TO ALL THE PROPERTY ON ON THE COUNTRY.

SO I BELIEVE EVEN MY KIDS, THEY ARE SO HAPPY BECAUSE NOW THE CHICKENS.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE I CAN SAY, BUT WE TRY TO FOLLOW THE RULES OF THE COUNTY AND THIS IS THE REASON WE TRY TO APPLY EVEN BEFORE WHEN I DECIDED TO HAVE A CHICKEN. SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF FRIENDS OR SOME HAVE ANY PERMITS IT AND THEY NEVER REPLIED.

THEY SAID, NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO. YOU HAVE TO SPECIFIC THINGS.

OKAY, SO WE'RE COOL. SO THIS IS THE REASON WE HAVE THE CHICKEN COOPS.

AND AFTER I THINK TWO MONTHS WHEN I FINISHED TUBULE, I HAD THE COUNTY SAY, NO, YOU HAVE TO APPLY FOR THE PERMIT.

OKAY, SO SO NOW THE CHICKEN IS GOING TO BE SO MUCH EXPENSIVE BECAUSE OF WHAT I PUT THE PERMITS AND EVERYTHING.

BUT THE THING IS, WE TRY TO TEACH THE KIDS. SO HOW TO RAISE ANIMALS AND HAVE A FEEDING.

SO THEY HAVE THAT EXPERIENCE. I THINK THAT'S IT.

THANK YOU, MR. MORALES. DOES ANYONE FROM THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. MORALES? HEARING NONE, WE WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE ON WEBEX THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS CASE? IS THERE ANYONE ON WEBEX OR IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS CASE? THERE'S NO ONE ON WEBEX FOR THIS CASE. IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BY THE BOARD? AND IF NOT, MR. BROADWAY, I WOULD JUST SAY IT SEEMS THAT CHICKENS ARE INCREASINGLY POPULAR IN TUCKAHOE DISTRICT.

IT WAS RESIDENTS OF TUCKAHOE THAT FIRST APPROACHED THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO HAVE THIS ADDED TO THE ZONING.

WERE THEY REALLY. WELL, MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE.

THE OWNER HAS MOVED THE COOP TO MEET THE SETBACKS AND THE CONDITIONS ADDRESSED FOOD STORAGE AND PEST CONTROL.

OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. BROADWAY TO APPROVE THIS CASE WITH THE CONDITIONS.

DO I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY MR. GREEN.

ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE. AYE. AYE.

IS THERE ANYONE OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. THE MOTION IS CARRIES AND THIS CASE IS APPROVED.

[00:30:02]

THANK YOU SIR. MR. CHAIR, THE NEXT CASE IS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2026, NUMBER 10971.

BRIA SMITH, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PROVIDE DAYCARE FOR UP TO 12 CHILDREN IN THE HOME AT 8101 ASHEVILLE COURT IN THE FOUR MILE RUN SUBDIVISION IN THE VARINA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. BUT EVERYONE WHO INTENDS TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE PLEASE STAND AND BE SWORN IN.

WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE ON WEBEX FOR THIS CASE.

IS THAT CORRECT? WEBEX STAFF. APPLICANT IS NOT HERE.

BRIA SMITH. NONE OF THE OPPONENTS ARE HERE. WE ACTUALLY DID HAVE ONE EMAIL THAT WAS LEFT ON THE TABLE FOR YOU.

TWO MORE THAT WERE RECEIVED LATE LAST NIGHT IN OPPOSITION.

SO I WAS WONDERING IF WE WOULD HAVE ANY HERE IN OPPOSITION.

I'M SEEING NOBODY, MR. CHAIR. SO DO YOU WANT TO CARRY THIS OVER, SEE IF THEY SHOW UP? WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD? I GUESS WE SHOULD DEFER THIS FOR ANOTHER MONTH AND GET A SENSE FROM MR..

MR. JOHNSON'S NOT HERE. WE COULD SEE IF THE APPLICANT SHOWS UP BEFORE THE END OF THE MEETING.

DO YOU WANT TO WAIT TILL THE END? OKAY, WE'LL DO IT OTHERWISE THEN DEFER.

OKAY. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD THEN AND WE'LL COME BACK TO THIS CASE AT THE END, MR. BLANKENSHIP. ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT TWO CASES ARE COMPANIONS. THERE'S A CONDITIONAL USE

[1f. CUP-2026-100988 Fairfield CUP-2026-100988 Joshua Allen: conditional use permit to allow a carport in the front yard at 3506 Harris Avenue, Pemberton Place, Fairfield. Parcel 802-734-3000. Zoning: R-4, One-Family Residence District. Code Section: 24-4404.A.1.]

[2a. VAR-2026-101011 Fairfield VAR-2026-101011 Joshua Allen: variance from the front yard setback and accessory structure setback to allow a carport in the front yard at 3506 Harris Avenue, Pemberton Place, Fairfield. The applicant has a carport 8 feet from the front lot line and 3 feet from the dwelling where the Zoning Ordinance requires 35 feet from the front lot line and 10 feet from the dwelling. The applicant requests a variance of 27 feet front yard setback and 7 feet accessory structure setback. Parcel 802- 734-3000. Zoning: R-4, One-Family Residence District. Code Section: 24-3105.E.1 and 24-4404.A.6.]

PERMIT AND A VARIANCE THAT ARE ON ESSENTIALLY THE SAME MATTER.

SO YOUR PERMISSION, MR. CHAIR. I'LL CALL THEM BOTH TOGETHER.

WE'LL HOLD ONE PUBLIC HEARING, BUT WE WILL NEED TWO SEPARATE MOTIONS AND TWO SEPARATE VOTES.

THE FIRST IS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2026, NUMBER 100988, AND THE OTHER IS VARIANCE 2026.

NUMBER 101011. IN BOTH CASES, THE APPLICANT IS JOSHUA ALLEN, APPLYING FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND A VARIANCE FROM THE FRONT YARD SETBACK AND A VARIANCE FROM THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SETBACK TO ALLOW A CARPORT IN THE FRONT YARD AT 3506 HARRIS AVENUE IN THE PEMBERTON PLACE SUBDIVISION IN THE FAIRFIELD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. WOULD EVERYONE WHO INTENDS TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE PLEASE STAND AND BE SWORN IN? SIR, IF YOU WOULD RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? YES, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. GIDLEY. DO YOU WANT ME TO STATE MY NAME? WE'LL BE WITH YOU IN JUST A SECOND. WE'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM THE STAFF AND THEN FROM YOU. THANK YOU, MR. SECRETARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IS LOCATED JUST EAST OF MECHANICSVILLE TURNPIKE AND SOUTH OF LABURNUM.

THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE PROPERTY HERE. THE APPLICANT HAS A CARPORT IN THE FRONT YARD.

AS YOU CAN SEE, HE ALSO HAS A TOTAL OF 14 CARS PARKED ON OR IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.

THIS CASE CAME TO THE COUNTY'S ATTENTION BY WAY OF COMPLAINTS TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION.

LET'S SEE HERE IF I CAN. SO THE CONCEPT PLAN THIS IS APPROXIMATE.

THE AS YOU KNOW, A CARPORT OR OTHER ACCESSORY BUILDING NEEDS TO BE LOCATED IN THE REAR YARD OF THE PROPERTY IF IT'S LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD, IN ADDITION TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, IT NEEDS TO BE AT LEAST 35FT OFF THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND TEN FEET FROM THE HOUSE.

THE HOUSE ITSELF IS NOT 35FT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, SO THERE'S NO WAY FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO MEET THAT 35 FOOT SETBACK.

AND THE TEN FEET FROM THE HOUSE THE APPLICANT COULD PUT IT IN THE BACKYARD, BUT THE BACKYARD IS.

LET'S SEE HERE. AERIAL. THE BACKYARD IS YOU CAN SEE HERE HAS A NUMBER OF VEHICLES AND IT ALREADY HAS THREE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE REAR YARD.

THE APPLICANT ALSO OWNS THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR, WHICH HAS MANY OF THE SAME ISSUES AS YOU SEE HERE TODAY.

AS FAR AS THE VARIANCE IS CONCERNED, HE STATED THE REASON HE NEEDED IT IS BECAUSE HE HAS TROUBLE WITH MIGRAINES.

AND THIS PROVIDES AN EASIER ACCESS TO THE VEHICLES WITHOUT BEING OUT IN THE SUNLIGHT FOR AS LONG.

HE HAD A DOCTOR'S NOTE, BUT THE DOCTOR'S NOTE NOTED A SEPARATE ISSUE RATHER THAN THE MIGRAINE.

SO STAFF'S NOT SURE WHAT TO MAKE OF THAT. THE REALITY IS, EVEN IF A THRESHOLD TEST IS MET, THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO MEET ALL FIVE SUBTESTS UNDER STATE LAW, STAFF DOES NOT BELIEVE THE FIRST THREE ARE MET.

THIS IS A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP PUTTING THIS UP WITHOUT THE REQUIRED PERMITS.

[00:35:04]

THE APPLICANT INDICATED HE WAS TOLD BY A LADY WITH THE COUNTY HE DID NOT NEED PERMITS.

WHEN I TOLD HIM HE NEEDED A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, HE TOLD ME, OH, THAT'S WHAT SHE TOLD ME.

HE NEEDED A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. BUT OBVIOUSLY ONE WAS NOT OBTAINED AND THE SHED WENT UP IN THE FRONT YARD ANYWAY.

SO STAFF BELIEVES IT'S A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP.

THE SECOND THRESHOLD TEST. WHERE DO WE GO HERE.

A SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENTAL TO NEARBY PROPERTY AS NOTED.

STAFF DID RECEIVE COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS. IF YOU LOOK AT IT FROM THE STREET YOU KNOW IT, IT IS WHAT IT IS, I GUESS. THAT IS DETRIMENTAL. YOU ACTUALLY HAVE A NICE HOME ACROSS THE STREET.

SO STAFF DOES BELIEVE IT'S A SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENTAL IMPACT TO NEARBY PROPERTY.

AND STAFF ALSO BELIEVES THE THIRD SUBTEST IS NOT MET AS WELL.

SO FOR THESE REASONS, SINCE YOU HAVE TO MEET ALL FIVE SUBTESTS, AND STAFF DOESN'T BELIEVE THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE, AND FOR MUCH THE SAME REASONS, THE DETRIMENTAL IMPACT TO THE NEARBY PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE COMPLAINT STAFF BELIEVES THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SHOULD ALSO NOT BE APPROVED.

SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THESE TWO CASES.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU MISTER. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. GOODLEY? MR. KELLY? HOW MANY COMPLAINTS DID YOU RECEIVE? DO YOU HAVE THAT NUMBER IS A DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION.

OKAY. YEAH, BUT WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY IT WAS.

NO, SIR, I DON'T. MORE THAN THREE, FOR SOME REASON, I DON'T KNOW.

FOR SOME REASON, THREE IS IN MY MIND, BUT I DON'T KNOW FIRSTHAND.

I CAN'T SWEAR TO THAT. AND ALL OF THE CALLS REGISTERED AND UP TO DATE, OR ARE THEY JUST SITTING SOME, WELL, SOME HAVE HAD THESE ANTIQUE TAGS PUT ON THEM, WHICH EXEMPTS THEM FROM BEING INSPECTED.

BUT SOME OF THOSE LOOKED INOPERATIVE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THEIR TIRES BEING FLAT OR BURIED IN THE SOIL.

THEY'RE INOPERATIVE VEHICLES IN THE REAR YARD THAT ARE NOT LICENSED, PERIOD.

AT LEAST WHEN I WAS OUT THERE ON THE SITE. SO SOME ARE LEGAL AND SOME ARE INOPERATIVE.

WELL, JUST LOOKING AT THIS ONE WHITE CAR, IN FACT, THAT BRANCH IS GOING NEXT TO IT.

LOOKS LIKE IT'S BEEN SITTING THERE FOR A WHILE.

YES, SIR. AS I SAID, SOME WERE DO NOT APPEAR TO BE PHYSICALLY OPERABLE.

WHAT IS I MEAN, IS THE APPLICANT AND I GUESS HE CAN ANSWER THAT JUST COLLECT CALLS.

OR IS IT A REPAIR PLACE OR WHAT IS IT? I MEAN, ARE YOU WOULD YOU ASCERTAIN? YEAH. INSPECTOR. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. GOODLEY, I DID HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS, MR. GILLEY. CAN YOU PUT UP THE SCHEMATIC YOU HAD UP EARLIER THAT SHOWS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY OR THE AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY? NOT THAT ONE. YEAH. THAT ONE. YES, SIR. DIRECTLY BEHIND THE PROPERTY.

IS THAT AN ALLEY THAT GOES BEHIND IT? YES. YES, SIR.

OKAY. AND BEHIND THE ALLEY. IS THAT A TIRE DISPOSAL FACILITY? IT'S NOT A DISPOSAL FACILITY. I'LL ANSWER FOR MR. GOODLEY. THAT IS, MECHANICSVILLE TURNPIKE IS THE NEXT BLOCK THERE.

AND THAT IS AN AUTO REPAIR BUSINESS. ARE THEY ALLOWED TO KEEP TIRES OUT IN THE OPEN LIKE THAT? COLLECTING WATER? THERE ARE REGULATIONS OF WHAT THEY CAN AND CANNOT DO.

THEY HAVE TO BE SCREENED. THERE HAS TO BE LIMITED TO A CERTAIN NUMBER.

THEY CAN ONLY STACK THEM TO A CERTAIN HEIGHT.

I WILL ALSO SAY THAT IF WE DON'T HAVE A COMPLAINT, WE CANNOT TAKE ENFORCEMENT ACTION BASED SOLELY ON AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH THAT'S CONSIDERED AN UNREASONABLE SEARCH IN COURT. SO UNLESS WE CAN SEE IT FROM THE ROAD OR FROM SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY, OR WE RECEIVE A COMPLAINT FROM SOMEBODY WHO CAN SEE IT, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR ZONING STAFF TO TAKE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ON THESE.

NOW, THE FIRE MARSHAL STAFF HAS A DIFFERENT SET OF REGULATIONS, AND THEY MAY BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING IF IT GETS TO THE POINT WHERE IT BECOMES A FIRE SAFETY CONCERN. BUT THERE'S IN MANY CASES, THERE'S VERY LITTLE OR NOTHING THAT WE, FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE, CAN DO WHEN WE SEE A VIOLATION ON AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH.

AND THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE KNOW ABOUT IT. EXCUSE ME.

POINT OF CLARIFICATION. FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES, I DON'T WANT TO GET CONFUSED.

COULD WE JUST STICK SPECIFICALLY TO THIS GUY'S PROPERTY? YOU'RE GETTING INTO THAT. THAT COULD LEAD PEOPLE TO BELIEVE THAT THERE'S CONFUSION AND GOING ON WITH THIS GUY'S PROPERTY RELATED TO THOSE TIRES, AND THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT I JUST WANT TO STAY.

I JUST WANTED THAT FOR MY OWN CLARIFICATION, MR. GREEN, BECAUSE WE HAD WE HAD THIS UP ON THE SCREEN AND IT JUST RAISED A QUESTION.

I GUESS WE'RE WE'RE RAISING A COMPLAINT ABOUT THIS PROPERTY.

[00:40:03]

AND I'M I'VE GOT MAYBE MORE CONCERNS ABOUT THE ONE BEHIND IT, BUT I SHOULDN'T HAVE RUN ON SO LONG, I APOLOGIZE. WELL, WE'LL RAISE THAT QUESTION ANOTHER TIME.

I DID HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION, MR. GIDLEY. DO WE KNOW IF THERE'S OTHER STRUCTURES ON THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY? IT LOOKS LIKE WE'VE GOT, WHAT, MAYBE THREE OTHER STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY.

YES, SIR. OKAY. ARE THOSE ALL IN COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE? IT LOOKS BORDERLINE AS FAR AS THE ONE THIRD COVERAGE REQUIREMENT IN THE REAR YARD.

I'M NOT GOING TO GO WITH THE AERIAL. AS FAR AS SETBACKS, I DID NOT ENTER HIS REAR YARD.

I WENT BACK TO THE FENCE THERE TO WHERE I COULD SEE THERE WERE VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT TAGGED IN THE REAR YARD AND WERE INOPERATIVE VEHICLES THERE.

BUT THE COMPLAINTS WE RECEIVED WERE WERE JUST PERTAINING TO THE CARPORT, NOT TO THE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE REST OF THE PROPERTY.

IS THAT CORRECT? I BELIEVE IT WAS REGARDING THE PROPERTY AS A WHOLE.

I CAN LET THE INSPECTOR CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. SO THE INSPECTOR JUST CONFIRMED IT WAS THE PROPERTY AS A WHOLE.

OKAY. THE ONLY ISSUE BEFORE THIS BOARD IS THE CARPORT.

GOTCHA. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. GIDLEY? HEARING NONE. WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT NOW, SIR. IF YOU COULD ELABORATE ON THE CASE FOR US.

STATE MY NAME. YES, SIR. MY NAME IS JOSHUA MACDONALD.

ALLEN. CAN YOU TELL US WHAT YOU'RE APPLYING FOR, SIR? I'M APPLYING FOR A PERMIT FOR MY CARPORT THAT'S ALREADY THERE.

I'D LIKE TO READ A LETTER FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.

I'M A UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS VETERAN ON DISABILITY.

I'M WRITING ON BEHALF OF MR. ALLEN, WHO IS A PATIENT IN THE NEUROLOGY CLINIC AT THE HAMILTON HOLMES MCGUIRE MEDICAL CLINIC.

HE HAS BEEN UNDER THE CARE OF THE CLINIC SINCE 2019.

I WAS MOST RECENTLY SEEN ON MARCH 24TH. I'M CONTACTING YOU TO REQUEST THAT MR. ALLEN'S CARPORT REMAIN IN THE CURRENT REGIONAL LOCAL DUTY DUE TO HIS MEDICAL CONDITION, MAKING HIM A HIGH RISK FOR RECURRENT FALLS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING. DOCTOR OZ, MD.

THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU SIR. DOES ANYONE FROM THE BOARD HAVE QUESTIONS? I HAVE A QUESTION. I'M TRYING TO RELATE THE CARPORT TO YOUR HEALTH.

EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE. I USE THE CARPORT TO HOUSE THE CAR THAT I USED TO GO TO CHURCH.

I'M A MAKER OF ANCIENT BIBLICAL INSTRUMENTS. I SUNG FOR THE GOVERNOR GILMORE'S INAUGURATION AND HIS REQUEST FOR.

FOR ME TO PLAY A HORN AND SING. AND TO MAKE A LONG STORY SHORT, I NEED THE CARPORT THERE SO THAT I WILL BE ABLE TO GO TO CHURCH AND NOT BE HAVE A RISK FOR FALLS.

ARE YOU SAYING BECAUSE IT'S CLOSE TO THE HOUSE CLOSER TO THE.

YES, SIR. THEY ASKED ME ABOUT PUTTING IT IN THE BACK, BUT THE BACK IS AN ISLAND IN THE BACK AND THE BUSINESS IS IN THE BACK.

KEEP THE. THE OUTLET BLOCKED UP. WOULDN'T BE NO WAY TO ACCESS IT ANYWAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. PUT IT TO THE SIDE.

YEAH. MR. ALLEN, WHY DO YOU HAVE SO MANY CARS ON YOUR PROPERTIES.

THE OLD ANTIQUES ARE. ALL THE ONES IN FRONT ARE TAGGED LEGAL.

WE HAD A TREMENDOUS ICE STORM OVER THE WINTER.

THERE WAS NO WAY TO GO OUT AND STORE THEM. BUT I'M IN THE PROCESS OF MAKING SURE THAT THEY THEY ALL START AND RUN.

BUT BECAUSE OF THE ICE STORM, ALL THE BATTERIES ARE DEAD.

BATTERIES ARE DEAD, MR. ALLEN, BUT THEY ARE ALL LEGALLY TAGGED, AND I PAY INSURANCE ON ALL OF THEM.

MR. ALLEN. IT LOOKS LIKE TO ME IT LOOKS LIKE IN ORDER TO GET TO THE CAR THAT'S UNDERNEATH THE CARPORT, YOU'VE GOT TO MOVE 3 OR 4 OTHER CARS TO GET TO THEM.

AND IT SEEMS LIKE. BUT AND IT ALSO LOOKS LIKE THOSE CARS THAT'S THOSE TWO RED TRUCKS LOOKED LIKE ARE PARKED ON YOUR YARD.

IS THAT OR IS THAT A DRIVEWAY THAT PARKED IN THE YARD? BUT THEY ARE NOT PARKED THERE ALL THE TIME, SIR.

JUST SO HAPPENED WHOEVER CAME AND INSPECTED IT, THEY WERE THERE.

SO WERE THEY PARKED ON THE STREET. SO IN ORDER TO GET YOUR CAR OUT OF THE CARPORT, YOU HAVE TO DRIVE ACROSS YOUR YARD TO PULL A CAR OUT.

THE CARPORT. NOT A DRIVEWAY. NOT A PAVED DRIVEWAY.

THAT'S CORRECT. I SEE NO DIFFERENCE IN A PAVED DRIVEWAY IN THE YARD.

[00:45:09]

WELL, I GUESS MY CONCERN IS HOW MANY PEOPLE REALLY PARK PARKING IT, DRIVING THEIR CARS ACROSS THE YARD TO GET TO A CARPORT. TYPICALLY, WHAT I'VE SEEN IS THAT THERE'S A CARPORT, A DRIVEWAY, A PAVED DRIVEWAY, OR A ROCK DRIVEWAY. JUST THIS.

THE FIRST TIME I'VE JUST SEEN SOMEONE PUT A A STRUCTURE IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE, AND YOU'RE DRIVING ACROSS THE YARD TO GET TO THE STRUCTURE. THAT'S JUST. I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.

DOES THE DRIVEWAY. DIRECTLY BEHIND THAT RED TRUCK THERE.

THERE'S A DRIVEWAY RIGHT THERE. THAT'S THAT'S USUALLY NO.

CAUSE THE TRUCK, THOSE TWO TRUCKS ARE USUALLY NOT THERE.

AND PEOPLE ALL UP AND DOWN THE STREET, PARKED ON THE STREET.

IT'S NOT JUST ME, MR. GIDLEY, I GUESS. HOW WAS IN ORDER TO PUT A PUT THAT UNIT THERE, DID HE NEED TO HAVE GOTTEN A BUILDING PERMIT TO PUT IT THERE? OR YOU CAN JUST PUT JUST PUT A CARPORT UP LIKE THAT.

IF IT'S OVER, WHAT IS IT? 250FT². BEN, YOU DO NEED A BUILDING PERMIT.

OBVIOUSLY, YOU NEED A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PUT IT IN THE FRONT YARD, WHICH THE APPLICANT TOLD ME HE HAD BEEN TOLD.

THE LADY WHOSE NAME WAS AMY. AND SHE TOLD ME THERE WAS SOME TYPE OF PROBLEM WITH THE BUILDER AND THE BUILDER WAS THERE, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND AT THE SAME DAY. AND SHE SAID, WELL, WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED? THE BUILDER PUT IT DOWN IN THE WRONG PLACE AND HE WOULDN'T MOVE IT.

AND SO THAT'S WHEN I FOUND OUT THAT YOU HAD TO HAVE A BUILDING PERMIT.

I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT I NEEDED A PERMIT WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY PUT UP, BUT I CONTACTED THE PROPER AUTHORITIES ABOUT IT.

AND, AND THEY SAID THAT. I WOULD NEED A PERMIT IF IF IT WAS NOT COMPLIANT.

SO I CALLED UP AND I NAMED AMY, AND SHE ASKED ME HOW FAR IT WAS FROM FROM THE HOUSE.

AND I TOLD HER, AND SHE ASKED ME HOW FAR I WAS FROM THE ROAD.

AND I TOLD HER. SHE SAID, WELL, IF YOU WERE IN THE BUILDER CAN WORK IT OUT, YOU WON'T NEED A PERMIT.

MY NAME WAS AMY. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, AMY MAY HAVE SAID THAT, BUT WE'VE GOT TO GO BY ORDINANCES, RULES AND LAWS. SO SHE MAY HAVE BEEN INCORRECT, BUT NOW WE'RE TRYING TO GET THIS MATTER CORRECTED, SO, YOU KNOW. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD FOR MR. ALLEN? BEFORE WE HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. ALLEN. AT THIS TIME, WE WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE ON WEBEX THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS CASE.

AND HEARING NONE WILL ASK IF THERE IS ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE OR ON WEBEX THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS CASE.

THERE IS ONE PERSON ON WEBEX, AND I DO NOT KNOW WHETHER THEY'RE IN OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT.

OKAY. HEAR FROM THEM NOW. ALL RIGHT, STAFF, CAN WE CONNECT? IS IT NIKITA LANGHORNE? AND I'LL ALSO NOTE, WHILE WE HAVE A PAUSE, THAT MISS SMITH, THE APPLICANT FOR THE PREVIOUS CASE, IS NOW JOINED ON WEBEX.

SO WE CAN GO BACK TO THAT AFTER CASE. STAFF, CAN WE HEAR FROM MISS LANGHORNE? GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. GOOD MORNING. YES I AM AN A NEIGHBOR OF MR. ALLEN, AND I AM IN SUPPORT OF THE CARPORT. I'VE LIVED NEAR MR. ALLEN FOR MANY YEARS, GOING ON ABOUT FOUR YEARS NOW.

AND HE HAS DEFINITELY BEEN A GOOD NEIGHBOR. IT NEVER CAUSED ANY ISSUES OR DISTURBANCES WITH ME OR ANY THAT I AM AWARE OF.

I AM THE NICE HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET, AS THE GENTLEMAN STATED.

AND THANK YOU. I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES. AS I STATED IT HAS I FEEL IT HASN'T NEGATIVELY IMPACTED MY PROPERTY.

AND MR. ALLEN, AS, AS HE STATED, HE DOES USE THE CARPORT, YOU KNOW, FOR HIS CARS OR IF HE MAY NEED TO GO OUT THERE AND DO ANYTHING TO THE CAR HE'S UP UNDER THERE. AND A GENTLEMAN OF MR. ALLEN'S AGE, I DON'T BELIEVE SHOULD BE OUT IN THE SUN WORKING ON CARS.

SO IF HE HAS TO GO UNDER THERE AND DO ANYTHING OR GET TO ANY OF HIS CARS, THAT'S FINE BY ME.

[00:50:05]

WE DO LIVE ON A DEAD END, SO A LOT OF PEOPLE PARK THEIR CARS ON THE STREET.

IT'S NOT UNCOMMON ON OUR STREET. SO IF YOU DON'T LIVE ON THIS STREET OR IF YOU DON'T WORK AT STRANGERS, YOU WOULDN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO COME DOWN THE STREET. SO LIKE I SAID, IT DOESN'T BOTHER ME.

I'M DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM HIM. YOU KNOW, I SEE HIM, WE SPEAK, YOU KNOW, TALK TO ME, TALK ABOUT THE DAY OR THE WEATHER OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE.

BUT I FEEL, YOU KNOW, WITH IT BEING HIS PROPERTY, WE DON'T LIVE IN AN HOA.

HE CAN DO WHATEVER HE WOULD LIKE TO DO TO HIS PROPERTY.

THE ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN WAS SPEAKING TO SAY ABOUT HIS DRIVEWAY.

A LOT OF US ON THE STREET DON'T HAVE PAVED DRIVEWAYS.

IT'S JUST GRASS AND GRAVEL, BASICALLY. SO I TEND TO DRIVE ACROSS MY GRASS FROM TIME TO TIME.

IF I NEED TO GO THROUGH THE BACK OR GET SOMETHING FROM MY SHED.

SO IT'S NOT UNCOMMON TO SEE A CAR PARKED ON THE LAWN, IN THE DRIVEWAY, ON THE STREET, BY THE MAILBOX, WHAT HAVE YOU. SO THAT'S JUST COMMON AROUND HERE.

I DON'T ME PERSONALLY, I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE WITH HIM HAVING IT IN HIS YARD WHERE IT IS.

LIKE I SAID, IT WOULD MOST LIKELY DIRECTLY AFFECT ME BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT ACROSS FROM ME.

OR HIS CARS MAY DIRECTLY AFFECT ME IF I'M COMING IN MY DRIVEWAY OR LEAVING OUT MY DRIVEWAY, BUT IT DOES NOT. SO I ACTUALLY AM IN SUPPORT OF HIM KEEPING HIS CARPORT WHERE IT EXACTLY IT IS.

THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO JOIN US THIS MORNING.

NO PROBLEM. YOU'RE WELCOME. HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? WELL, YEAH, NO QUESTIONS, BUT COMMENT. IT IS NOT UNCOMMON FOR PEOPLE TO PARK THEIR CARS ON STREETS.

THAT'S JUST THE WAY LIFE IS. BUT IT IS SOMEWHAT UNIQUE TO SEE A CARPORT IN FRONT OF A HOUSE, NOT ON THE SIDE OR ON THE BACK. SO AND I KNOW THAT THE LAST SPEAKER SAID THAT IT IS HIS PROPERTY AND HE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO WHAT HE WANTS TO DO, BUT THAT'S THE SOLE PURPOSE OF US BEING HERE.

THAT IS, YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO WITHIN THE GUIDELINES THAT THE COUNTY AND STATE FEDERAL ENTITIES HAVE, HAVE, HAVE APPROVED. AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS.

I RESPECT HIS SERVICE. I RESPECT WHAT HE'S DONE WHAT HE CONTINUES TO DO.

BUT, YOU KNOW, AND THE MERE FACT THAT IT HAS A, IT'S ON A CUL DE SAC OR DEAD END, YOU KNOW, IT'S THAT'S THAT'S NOTED, BUT IT'S JUST A CARPORT IN FRONT OF A HOUSE IS SOMEWHAT UNUSUAL.

AND FOR THAT, I'M NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS.

THANK YOU, MR. GREEN. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BY THE BOARD? I MAY BE LESS CONCERNED ABOUT THE CARPORT THAN THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES IN THE YARDS, BUT I GUESS THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE BEFORE US. OUT OF OUR JURISDICTION FOR THE MOMENT.

YEAH, WE'RE STRICTLY THE CARPORT. YES, SIR. CARPORT.

ALL RIGHT, WELL, HOW DOES THIS CASE RELATE TO THE NEXT ONE? THE VARIANCE IN THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ARE COMPANIONS IN THE SENSE THAT HE HAS TO HAVE THE VARIANCE TO HAVE THE CARPORT IN WITHIN 35FT OF THE STREET OR WITHIN TEN FEET OF THE HOUSE, AND IT IS BOTH.

HE ALSO NEEDS THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PUT IT IN THE FRONT YARD.

SO IF IF EITHER CASE IS DENIED, THE OTHER BECOMES MOOT.

I SEE. OKAY. I DON'T THINK REASON I THINK I, I JUST DON'T WANT THIS TO SET A PRECEDENCE THAT PEOPLE CAN THINK THAT ONCE WE GRANT APPROVAL FOR THIS, THEN EVERYBODY ELSE CAN SAY, I CAN DO THE SAME THING.

THEN I JUST HAVE TO TAKE A STAND ON THAT ONE.

CAN I SAY SOMETHING? NO, SIR. THEY CLOSED QUESTIONS.

DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? DO YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AGAIN OR. NO? OH, SURE. I THINK WE OUGHT TO LET HIM IF HE HAS A COMMENT TO MAKE.

SO YOU CAN GO UP, SIR. GO AHEAD.

I'D LIKE TO SAY IF YOU PATROL OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THERE'S BUILDINGS AND CARPORTS ALL AROUND IN VARIOUS PLACES, SOME IN FRONT, SOME ON THE SIDE.

I DON'T SEE WHY MY PROPERTY WAS TARGETED WHEN IT'S EVERYWHERE.

THIS IS NOT A COMMUNITY THAT'S GOT, I GUESS YOU CALL IT SOME SORT OF RURAL ASSOCIATION THAT CARPORTS AND THINGS EVERYWHERE. I CAN SPEAK TO THAT, SIR.

THE REASON WHY YOU WERE, AS YOU SAY, TARGETED IS BECAUSE WE RECEIVED SPECIFIC COMPLAINTS ABOUT YOUR PROPERTY.

[00:55:07]

SO WHEN WE RECEIVE A COMPLAINT, WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO FOLLOW UP ON IT.

AND WE DID REVIEW THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THERE ARE NO CARPORTS IN THE FRONT YARD IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD EXCEPT YOUR TWO.

THAT YOUR HOUSE AND THE ONE NEXT DOOR. WELL, WHAT DO YOU CONSIDER MY NEIGHBORHOOD? JUST MY STREET. THE SUBDIVISION IS WHAT I WENT BY, THE PEMBERTON PLACE SUBDIVISION.

WELL, THAT'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I MEAN, ALL AROUND.

THERE ARE OTHERS IN THE COUNTY. YES, SIR. BUT THERE ARE NONE IN PEMBERTON PLACE IN THE FRONT YARD.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS? ANY QUESTIONS? MR..

THANK YOU, MR. ALLEN. IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION FROM THE BOARD OR ARE WE READY FOR A MOTION ON THIS CASE? YEAH. READY FOR MOTION? YES, SIR. I MOVE THAT WE DENY THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

THE CARPORT IS TOO CLOSE TO THE STREET IN THE HOUSE AND IS OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. MASSEY TO DENY THE CASE. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? SECOND BY MR. GREEN. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.

AYE AYE. IS THERE ANYONE OPPOSED? HEARING NONE.

THE MOTION CARRIES, AND IN THIS CASE IS DENIED.

IS THAT THE SECOND ONE? RIGHT. I HAVE A SECOND ONE THERE WITH ANOTHER VARIANCE.

THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IS REASONABLE AS APPLIED TO THIS LOT.

THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SETBACK IS REASONABLE AND NECESSARY FOR SAFETY.

THE CARPORT HAS A DETRIMENTAL IMPACT ON NEARBY PROPERTY AND IS LIKELY TO AFFECT PROPERTY VALUES.

MR. MASSEY, BEFORE WE GO FORWARD, MR. BLANKENSHIP, WE REQUIRED TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC BEFORE WE TAKE ACTION ON THE VARIANCE.

NO, I CLEARLY STATE WE WERE GOING TO HOLD ONE PUBLIC HEARING. OKAY, SO THAT COVERS BOTH CASES. I'M SORRY I MISSED THAT. THANK YOU. MR. MASSEY. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY MR. GREEN. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO DENY THE VARIANCE, SAY AYE.

AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED HEARING NONE. THE VARIANCE IS DENIED.

ALL RIGHT, MR. CHAIR. AS I MENTIONED, WE DO HAVE MISS BRIA SMITH ON THE ON WEBEX NOW.

[1e. CUP-2026-100971 Varina CUP-2026-100971 Bria Smith: conditional use permit to provide daycare for up to 12 children in the home at 8101 Asheville Court, Four Mile Run, Varina. Parcel 820-687-8166. Zoning: R-2AC, One- Family Residence District (Conditional). Code Section: 24-4402.]

SO WE'LL RETURN TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 2026 NUMBER 100971 BRIA SMITH.

A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PROVIDE DAYCARE FOR UP TO 12 CHILDREN IN THE HOME AT 8101 ASHEVILLE COURT, FOUR MILE RUN IN THE VARINA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT.

I ALSO MENTIONED THAT WE LEFT ONE EMAIL ON THE TABLE FOR YOU THAT WAS RECEIVED AFTER THE PACKAGES WERE MAILED.

WE ALSO RECEIVED TWO LAST NIGHT AFTER 9 P.M., SO APOLOGIZE.

THOSE HAVE NOT BEEN PRINTED FOR YOU, BUT THERE WERE TWO OTHER STATEMENTS IN OPPOSITION.

ALL RIGHT. WEBEX STAFF, CAN WE OH, LET'S HEAR FROM MR. GIDLEY FIRST. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, MR. SECRETARY.

ON THE SUBJECT, PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE FOUR MILE RUN SUBDIVISION, WHICH IS NEAR INTERSTATE 295 AND NEWMARKET ROAD.

OF THE APPLICANT CURRENTLY CARES FOR UP TO FIVE CHILDREN SIMILAR TO THE PREVIOUS DAYCARE CASE.

SHE WOULD LIKE TO BUMP THAT UP TO 12 CHILDREN AND FOR THAT REASON SHE DOES NEED A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

THIS IS A PICTURE OF HER HOME HERE. AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S A LARGE HOME WITH A SIZABLE FRONT YARD.

FAMILY DAY HOMES DO PROVIDE CHILD CARE OPTIONS FOR PEOPLE IN THEIR OWN NEIGHBORHOOD, AND AS SUCH, THEY CAN BE AN ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY. IF YOU LOOK AT THE REAR YARD OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, IT IS FENCED AND THERE IS A PRIVACY SCREEN ALONG THE REAR YARD.

SO FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, STAFF BELIEVES IT'S A SAFE AND APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR YOUNG CHILDREN TO PLAY.

AS A RESULT, BASED ON THESE FINDINGS AS LONG AS SHE HAS THE CHILDREN PICKED UP AND DROPPED OFF IN HER OWN DRIVEWAY, WE CAN RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. GURLEY. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD OF MR. GIDLEY? HEARING NONE. THEN WE WILL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT WHO IS ON WEBEX.

IS THAT CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT, MISS SMITH. SHE BEEN SWORN IN.

MR. BLINKEN, WE DON'T REALLY SWEAR HIM IN ONLINE.

IT'S JUST TOO WEIRD. STAFF, CAN WE HEAR FROM MISS SMITH? SMITH, WE'RE NOT HEARING YOU. ARE YOU ON MUTE, BY ANY CHANCE? HELLO? I'M HERE. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU.

YEAH. SO OF COURSE, IT'S MY PASSION TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE CARE FOR THE COMMUNITY.

NOT NOT JUST QUALITY, BUT AFFORDABLE AS WELL.

AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO JUST BE ABLE TO PROVIDE CARE FOR MORE CHILDREN.

I ACTUALLY HAVE SOME CLIENTS THAT ARE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ARE LOOKING FOR CARE.

ONE NEIGHBOR LIVES LIKE DIAGONALLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME.

SO I DO THINK THAT BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE CARE FOR MORE CHILDREN WILL BE AN ASSET TO MY COMMUNITY.

[01:00:07]

I DO KEEP THE KIDS. YOU KNOW, I RARELY TAKE THEM.

LIKE WE ALWAYS WHEN WE PLAY, WE PLAY IN THE BACKYARD.

I NEVER TAKE THE MIC ON THE STREETS OR ANYTHING.

SO THEY'RE ALWAYS PRETTY SAFE WITHIN THE BACKYARD.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MISS SMITH. ANYONE FROM THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS SMITH? OKAY. HEARING NONE, WE WILL THEN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE ON WEBEX THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS CASE? HEARING NONE, IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE ON WEBEX THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS CASE? THERE IS NO ONE ELSE ON WEBEX FOR THIS CASE. DID YOU MENTION, MR. BLANKENSHIP, THAT WE RECEIVED SOME EMAILS IN OPPOSITION? YES, SIR. THERE'S ONE THAT WAS LEFT ON THE TABLE FOR YOU THIS MORNING.

AND THE TWO THAT WERE RECEIVED LAST NIGHT THAT I APOLOGIZE.

WE HAVE NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRINT. SPEAKING.

THEY'RE NOT THAT DIFFERENT. IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN MY VIEW, THEY RAISE SOME GREAT CONCERNS.

THESE ARE ALL ISSUES THAT A PERSON WHO OPERATES A FAMILY DAY HOME HAS TO BE AWARE OF.

MISS SMITH HAS BEEN OPERATING HER HOME FOR YEARS WITH FEWER CHILDREN, AND I'M SURE IS AWARE OF THEM.

AND MANY OF THESE ARE ISSUES FOR THE LICENSING AGENCY, WHICH IS THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

AND, YOU KNOW, THEY INSPECT THESE FAMILY DAY HOMES ON A REGULAR BASIS AND THEY MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE FOLLOWING ALL THOSE REGULATIONS.

SO WE APPRECIATE PEOPLE POINTING OUT THAT THERE ARE YOU KNOW, COMPLEX REGULATIONS ON THESE MATTERS.

BUT OF COURSE, WE'VE TAKEN THAT INTO ACCOUNT. WE KNOW IF THERE'S BEEN ANY ANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE, ABOUT THE DAYCARE CENTER FROM RESIDENTS. NO, SIR.

THE ONLY RESPONSE WE GOT WAS WHEN WE NOTIFIED PEOPLE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.

HOW LONG HAS SHE BEEN OPERATING AT THAT? MISS SMITH, HOW LONG HAVE YOU OPERATED AT THAT LOCATION? SO I'VE I'VE OPERATED FOR A YEAR ON MAY 19TH OF THIS YEAR.

BUT OF COURSE I ONLY HAD FOR KIDS INCLUDING MY OWN, WHICH MAKES THAT FIVE.

RIGHT. YEAH. OKAY. QUESTIONS FROM OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.

ANY DISCUSSION BY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? ARE WE READY FOR A MOTION ON THE CASE? MR. JOHNSON IS NOT HERE TODAY, SO SOMEONE ELSE ON THE BOARD WISH TO MAKE A MOTION.

YEAH. WELL, ONE OF US. I, I WOULD MOVE THAT WE THAT WE APPROVE. THANK YOU.

HELP ME A BIT. I WOULD MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

FAMILY DAY HOMES PROVIDE AN IMPORTANT SERVICE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THE LICENSING AGENCY WILL ADDRESS THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE NEIGHBOR.

OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. BROADWAY TO APPROVE THIS REQUEST.

IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION? SECOND. SECOND BY MR. MASSEY. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. IS ANYONE OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES, AND THIS REQUEST IS APPROVED.

ALL RIGHT, MR. CHAIR, WE'RE GOING TO JUMP BACK INTO THE VARIANCES NOW.

[2. VARIANCES]

THE NEXT CASE IS VARIANCE 2026. NUMBER 10752.

[2b. VAR-2026-100752 Tuckahoe VAR-2026-100752 Jung Moon: variance from the lot area requirement and lot width requirement to build a single-family dwelling at 1707 Pump Road, Tuckahoe. The applicant has 0.77 acre lot area and 138 feet lot width where the Zoning Ordinance requires 1 acre lot area and 150 feet lot width. The applicant requests a variance of 0.23 acre lot area and 12 feet lot width. Parcel 741-746-8324. Zoning: A-1, Agricultural District. Code Section: 24-3204.D.]

YOUNG MOON A VARIANCE FROM THE LOT AREA REQUIREMENT AND LOT WIDTH REQUIREMENT TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AT 1707 PUMP ROAD IN THE TUCKAHOE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. WOULD EVERYONE WHO INTENDS TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE PLEASE STAND AND BE SWORN IN? RAISE YOUR RIGHT HANDS, PLEASE. DO YOU SWEAR THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD. THANK YOU. MR. GIDLEY.

MR. BRODERICK, YOU'RE POPULAR TODAY. IN THERE? YES. THANK YOU, MR. SECRETARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST LINE OF PUMP ROAD, JUST NORTH OF GAYTON OR NORTHEAST OF THE GAYTON LIBRARY.

THIS WAS ORIGINALLY A 12.7 ACRE PARCEL THAT WAS DIVIDED IN 1972.

IN NOVEMBER OF 1990, THE BOARD APPROVED A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A DWELLING ON THE PROPERTY.

THE CURRENT OWNERS WERE THE CONTRACT PURCHASERS AT THE TIME AND BROUGHT THE PROPERTY AS TWO LOTS.

AND THAT INCLUDES THE LOT DOWN HERE AT THE CORNER OF GAYTON AND PUMP AND THEN THIS LOT UP HERE.

THAT'S A SUBJECT OF TODAY'S REQUEST. WHILE THEY MOVED INTO THE HOUSE ON THE CORNER, THEY DID NOT BUILD THE SECOND DWELLING ON THIS LOT AND THE

[01:05:04]

VARIANCE SUBSEQUENTLY EXPIRED. THEY HAVE INDICATED AS STAFF, THEY WOULD LIKE TO LOCATE TO THE NEW LOT IN A NEW DWELLING THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO AGE IN PLACE BETTER THAN THE CURRENT DWELLING WOULD.

AND LOOKING AT THE. STAFF BELIEVES THE FIRST TEST CAN BE MET.

WHILE IT DID NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE A-1 DISTRICT AT THE TIME IT HAS BEEN VACANT FOR OVER 50 YEARS, AND THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL BY THIS BOARD INDICATED THAT THIS BOARD FELT IT, OR THE BOARD AT THE TIME FELT IT, FELT IT WAS UNREASONABLY RESTRICTED. AS NOTED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT, STAFF BELIEVES THE FIVE SUBTESTS ARE ARE MET BY THE APPLICANT AS WELL.

AS A RESULT, WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE.

THANK YOU, MR. GOODLEY. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION, MR. GIDLEY. YES, SIR. IT APPEARS THAT ALL THE ZONING ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY IS R TWO.

SO YOU'VE GOT THIS A1 PROPERTY THAT'S KIND OF IN AN AREA THAT'S BEEN DEVELOPED OVER TIME.

WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER ABOUT ASKING OR REQUESTING A REZONING OF THE PROPERTY OR TWO.

YES, SIR. THAT THAT CAME UP ACTUALLY OFTENTIMES WE WOULD RATHER HAVE PROPERTY REZONED WHEN THE APPLICANT TOUCH BASE ABOUT DOING THAT.

THERE WAS CONCERN EXPRESSED ABOUT JUST TAKING ONE SMALL LOT AND REZONING JUST THAT RATHER THAN A COMPREHENSIVE REZONING.

SO THE DECISION WAS MADE. THE VARIANCE, PARTICULARLY GIVEN THE PRIOR APPROVAL, WAS PROBABLY THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO GO FOR VARIANCE REQUESTS.

YES, SIR. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. GIDLEY. OKAY, HEARING NONE, THEN WE WILL HEAR FROM IS IT MR. MOON OR MISS MOON? THANK YOU.

GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. JASON. MECHANIC BEKANICH.

THESE ARE MY COUSINS HERE. EVERYTHING THAT I HAD PREPARED TO SAY.

YOU GUYS PRETTY MUCH COVERED IT, RIGHT. SO WE ALREADY HAD A PRECEDENT SET IN 1990.

WE LOOKED AT THE ZONING AS WELL. THERE'S FIVE PROPERTIES THAT ARE A, A ONE IN THAT AREA AND THEY HAVE TWO OF THEM.

THE OTHER ONES, THE LIBRARY AND THE OTHER THREE OF THEM ARE ALL UNDER THE ONE ACRE REQUIREMENT EXCEPT FOR THE ONE.

SO THERE'S ONE THAT'S ACTUALLY MEETING THE A-1 REQUIREMENTS AS THEY STAND.

SO YEAH, SO R-2, YOU KNOW, IF WE DID GO TO REZONE IT, IT WOULD BE THAT ONE PROBLEM THAT YOU'RE REZONING THE ONE, IT WOULD MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS. AT THAT POINT, ONLY A HALF ACRE IS REQUIRED.

SO DID HAVE MORE TO SAY, BUT IT SOUNDED LIKE MR. GIDLEY AND THE BOARD HAVE ALREADY KIND OF COVERED MOST OF THE POINTS AT THE SAME POINTS THAT I HAD.

SO I DO APPRECIATE THAT IT MAKES MY JOB A LITTLE BIT EASIER.

THANK YOU SIR. CAN YOU JUST RESTATE YOUR NAME AGAIN? JASON BICANIC. BEKANICH. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU SIR.

ANYONE ELSE FROM THE BOARD HAVE QUESTIONS? WE GET ANOTHER CHANCE.

WELL, THE ONLY THING I HAVE TO SAY IS THAT I.

I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE MOONS. I'M A CUSTOMER OF THEIRS BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN EXCELLENT LEATHER SHOP.

I'VE GONE IN MULTIPLE REPAIRS. THEY'VE NEVER DISCUSSED ANY OF THIS WITH ME.

BECAUSE OF THE WAY I LIVE. I SEE THEM DRIVE BY MY HOUSE EVERY DAY.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT THIS, BUT I WANT TO DISCLOSE THAT I AM A CUSTOMER THERE, SO I HOPE THAT DOESN'T POSE A CONFLICT.

I'M PUTTING IT OUT THERE. FULL DISCLOSURE. APPRECIATE THAT.

THANK YOU SIR. WELL, I WOULD SAY THAT THIS IS IN MY EXTENDED NEIGHBORHOOD AND I HAVE DRIVEN DOWN THIS PART OF ROAD LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF TIMES. AND I'VE OFTEN WONDERED WHY THERE ARE ALL THOSE TREES THERE.

AND THERE WAS THERE WAS NOT A HOUSE ON THE PROPERTY.

AND NOW, OF COURSE, NOW I THINK I HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF THAT.

AND BASED ON THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND THE TESTIMONY I WOULD MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS VARIANCE, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF.

THE LOT WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD IN 1990. THERE'S NO OTHER REASONABLE USE FOR THE LOT.

THE PROPERTY IS OTHERWISE SUITABLE FOR A DWELLING, AND THE PROPOSED DWELLING WILL CERTAINLY FIT INTO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.

[01:10:06]

WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. BROADWAY TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE.

IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION? IF I COULD, I DON'T THINK YOU OPEN IT UP.

I'M SORRY. FOR THE RECORD, NOBODY ELSE RAISED THEIR HAND EARLIER.

SORRY. I'M SORRY. I FORGOT TO ASK FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENT.

IS THERE ANYONE IN THE IN THE AUDIENCE ON WEBEX THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE CASE? THERE IS NO ONE ON WEBEX. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE ON WEBEX THAT WISHES TO VOICE OPPOSITION TO THE CASE? MY APOLOGIES FOR JUMPING THE GUN. THANKS TO MR. GOODLEY FOR KEEPING US IN LINE. THANK YOU, MR. GOODLEY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? YES, WE HAVE A SECOND. SECOND? SECOND BY MR. MASSEY.

SO CAN I VOTE ON THAT? YES, SIR. YES. YOU'VE DISCLOSED YOUR YOUR ONLY RELATIONSHIP, WHICH IS NOT.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. BROADWAY, SECOND BY MR. MASSEY. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. IS THERE ANYONE OPPOSED? NO. THE VARIANCE IS APPROVED. THANK YOU. ONE COMMENT, IF I MAY.

THIS IS NOT A CONDITION OF THE APPROVAL, BUT WHEN YOU DO BUILD, IT WOULD CERTAINLY BE NICE IF YOU COULD LEAVE SOME OF THE TREES.

IF YOU'VE SEEN THE FRONT YARD OF THEIR PREVIOUS OR THE OTHER HOME, THEY HAVE PLENTY OF TREES. SO.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THE LAST VARIANCE BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE APPEALS.

YES. SORRY TO INTERRUPT. CAN I GET MINE DEFERRED? BECAUSE I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE. I'M NOT DOING GOOD.

I'VE BEEN SICK FOR A COUPLE OF DAYS NOW. YOU'RE MR. MCPHERSON? YEAH. ALL RIGHT. I GUESS WE CAN PAUSE.

MR. CHAIR, THERE'S BEEN A REQUEST TO DEFER APPEAL.

2026 NUMBER 100767. APPEAL OF DUNCAN H. MCPHERSON.

NOTICE TWO NOTICES OF VIOLATION ACTUALLY REGARDING PROPERTY AT 1074810798 GREENWOOD ROAD IN THE FAIRFIELD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THIS MORNING WHO ATTENDED IN ORDER TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE? ANYONE WITH AN INTEREST IN THE GREENWOOD ROAD CASE.

THERE IS NO ONE ON WEBEX. SO I GUESS IT'S AT THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD.

MR. MASSEY, WHAT'S YOUR. WELL, MR.. MR. GAGNON MAY HAVE.

OKAY. ABRAHAM. GARIN FOR THE FOR THE DIRECTOR.

WE HAVE NO OPPOSITION. YES, I MOVE THAT WE DEFER THIS CASE.

WHAT IS 100767 TO THE NEXT MONTH'S MEETING? WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR..

MR. MASSEY TO DEFER THIS CASE. SECOND BY MR. GREEN.

AND WHAT WAS THAT DATE AGAIN, MR. BLANKENSHIP.

JUNE THE 25TH. JUNE 25TH, 2026. MEETING. ALL IN FAVOR? SAY AYE. AYE. IS THERE ANYONE OPPOSED? NO. THE MOTION CARRIES AND THE CASE IS DEFERRED.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO THE LAST VARIANCE IS 10096 FOR GINGER RUTHERFORD.

[2c. VAR-2026-100964 Brookland VAR-2026-100964 Ginger Rutherford: variance from the rear yard setback to build a screened porch and roof at 3708 Meadow Run Court, Meadow Farms, Brookland. The applicant has 33 feet rear yard setback where the Zoning Ordinance requires 45 feet rear yard setback. The applicant requests a variance of 12 feet rear yard setback. Parcel 764-768-4878. Zoning: R-2C, One-Family Residence District (Conditional). Code Section: 24-3307.D.]

VARIANCE FROM THE REAR YARD SETBACK TO BUILD A SCREENED PORCH AND ROOF AT 3708 MEADOW RUN COURT IN MEADOW FARMS IN THE BROOKLYN MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT.

WHAT? EVERYONE WHO INTENDS TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE. PLEASE STAND AND BE SWORN. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE. DO YOU SWEAR THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I'LL CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO TWO EMAILS IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION THAT WERE LEFT ON THE TABLE THIS MORNING.

THAT IS IN ADDITION TO THE FIVE EMAILS IN SUPPORT THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA PACKET.

MR. GOODLEY THANK YOU, MR. SECRETARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED JUST SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF MOUNTAIN AND STAPLES MILL ROADS.

LET'S SEE HERE. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THE APPLICANT RECENTLY BUILT A SCREEN PORCH OVER A PORTION OF THEIR DECK AND ADDED A ROOF OVER ANOTHER PORTION OF THAT SAME DECK.

FINALLY, THEY DID ADD A PERGOLA THAT'S PARTIALLY IN THE SIDE YARD.

THIS WORK WAS DONE WITHOUT A BUILDING PERMIT AND THAT DID RESULT IN A COMPLAINT.

THE REAR YARD SETBACK ON THIS PROPERTY IS REQUIRED TO BE 45FT.

THE SCREENED PORCH EXTENDS TO WITHIN 34FT OF THE REAR LOT LINE.

THE UNCOVERED PORTION OF THE DECK, WHICH MAY EXTEND TEN FEET INTO THE SETBACK TO 35FT, ACTUALLY EXTENDS TO WITHIN 24FT.

AS A RESULT, THE APPLICANT HAS APPLIED FOR A VARIANCE.

I WOULD NOTE THE PROFFERS DO REQUIRE BRICK FOUNDATIONS FOR THE HOME AND SO FORTH.

SCREEN PORCH THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE PIERS TO BE CLAD IN BRICK AS.

ALTHOUGH NOT PART OF THIS REQUEST. AS I MENTIONED EARLIER THERE IS A PERGOLA IN THE SIDE YARD.

THE BUILDING CODE REQUIRES A STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.

THE ZONING VIOLATION COULD BE CORRECTED BY MEETING THE SETBACK AND OBTAINING A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THAT.

[01:15:03]

LET'S GET BACK TO HERE. IN REVIEWING THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT IS MENTIONING A MEDICAL ISSUE THAT REQUIRED HER TO GO AHEAD AND SCREEN THE PORCH IN AND PROVIDE SHADE OVER A PORTION OF THE DECK.

IN THE PAST, THE BOARD HAS APPROVED VARIANCES WITH THE IDEA THAT SOMEONE WITH A DISABILITY SHOULD HAVE THE SAME ACCESS TO THEIR DECK OR TO THE OUTDOORS AS SOMEONE WHO IS NOT DISABLED.

AND SO BY GOING AHEAD AND APPROVING A VARIANCE TO KEEP THE PERSON OUT OF THE SUN THAT COULD BE VIEWED AS ACCOMMODATING A VARIANCE.

SO THERE IS SOME HISTORY OF THIS BOARD MAKING THAT EXCEPTION FOR SOMEBODY.

IF THE BOARD CONCURS THEN YOU LOOK AT THE FIVE SUBTESTS OF STAFF BELIEVES THESE ARE BASICALLY MET WHILE THE APPLICANT DID NOT GET A BUILDING PERMIT, WHICH HE'S RESPONSIBLE FOR, SHE'S OBVIOUSLY NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR HER MEDICAL CONDITION, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE REASONABLE MODIFICATION. STAFF BELIEVES THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE TO GO AHEAD AND GET A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE PERGOLA, WOULD ADDRESS THAT ISSUE. THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF LETTERS FROM THE NEIGHBORS AND THEY'VE BEEN IN SUPPORT OF MY UNDERSTANDING WAS A COMPLAINT CENTER MAINLY UPON NOT HAVING THE REQUIRED PERMITS RATHER THAN THE ACTUAL IMPACT.

AS A RESULT, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN AND YOUR STAFF REPORT.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE. THANK YOU, MR. GOODLEY. I HAD A FEW QUESTIONS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? MR. GOODLEY QUESTIONS? MR. GOODLEY SO THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS THAT FOR THE PORCH OR FOR THE DECK OR FOR BOTH? IT WOULD NEED TO BE FOR BOTH. OKAY. THE STAFF REPORT SAYS THE DECK EXTENDS TO 24FT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO ME.

MAYBE I'M EYEBALLING IT WRONG. TO ME, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A DECK. IT LOOKS LIKE A PATIO.

AM I AM I LOOKING AT THAT? AND I DID GO BY THE PROPERTY TOO.

AND IF IT'S A DECK, IT MUST BE A PRETTY LOW LYING DECK BECAUSE IT IS IT'S THE OLD STORY.

IF YOU GOING BACK AND BACK TO WHEN WE BOTH HAD DARKER HAIR AND WORKED FOR THE COUNTY THE OLD STORY WAS IF YOU STEP UP ONTO IT, THEN IT'S NOT VIEWED AS A PATIO. SO YOU CAN HAVE ONE FOOT STEP UP AND THAT'S TECHNICALLY CONSIDERED A DECK OR NOT.

YES, SIR. YES, SIR. THAT'S INTERESTING. OKAY.

AND THERE'S A SWIMMING POOL IN THE REAR YARD TOO.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S PROBABLY CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY LINE THAN THE DECK OR THE PORCH WOULD BE.

I'M ASSUMING THAT MEETS WENT THROUGH THE PROPER COUNTY CHANNELS.

THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED AND LOCATED. I BELIEVE IT DID.

I DIDN'T CHECK ON. YES. THERE WERE BUILDING PERMITS IN 2021.

OKAY. AND HOW FAR IS THE PERGOLA FROM THE PROPERTY LINE IN LOOKING AT IT AND LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY, THAT PERGOLA IS PRETTY. YEAH, IT KIND OF STANDS OUT, HONESTLY, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S PRETTY CLOSE TO THE LINE.

YEAH. IF THE NEIGHBOR'S FENCE IS ACCURATE ON ONE CORNER WAS 2.1FT OFF THE PROPERTY LINE.

THE OTHER CORNER WAS 1.6FT OFF THE PROPERTY LINE.

OKAY. HAVE YOU HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT ABOUT MOVING THAT TO COMPLY WITH THE CODE? NOT OTHER THAN WHAT'S IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT WAS SENT TO THE APPLICANT.

OKAY. AND THE PORCH AND DECK. I KNOW INITIALLY WERE BUILT WITHOUT A BUILDING PERMIT, BUT THEY NOW COMPLY. THEY'VE NOW GOTTEN THE PROPER PERMITS.

SHE HAS APPLIED FOR A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THOSE.

BUT OBVIOUSLY SHE NEEDS VARIANCE APPROVAL BEFORE THE BUILDING PERMIT CAN BE FORWARD.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS TO THE BOARD? MR. GIDLEY, WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT NOW. AND YOU ARE? MISS RUTHERFORD? YES. MY NAME IS GINGER RUTHERFORD.

AND I GUESS ONE THING TO CLARIFY. I'M ACTUALLY NOT ASKING FOR A VARIANCE FOR THE DECK.

IT WAS THERE WHEN I BOUGHT THE HOME, SO THE WHOLE DECK WAS ALREADY THERE.

I JUST REDID THE BOARDS WHEN I DID THIS, BUT THAT WHOLE PORTION WAS THERE, AND I SENT THE IMAGE OF THAT.

SO, MR. GIDLEY, THAT RAISES AN INTERESTING QUESTION. SO HOW HOW DO WE HANDLE THAT? IT'S OUR NORMAL PRACTICE IF WE'RE DOING A VARIANCE, AND WE REALIZE THAT OTHER VARIANCES ON THE SAME PROPERTY ARE NECESSARY.

THEN WE ADD THEM ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT SO WE CAN TAKE CARE OF THAT.

SHE WILL NOT BE OFFENDED IF YOU GRANT A VARIANCE FOR THE DEBT AS WELL.

NOT AT ALL. IT IS IN VIOLATION. SO THEORETICALLY, ONE OF OUR FINE INSPECTORS COULD COME OUT TOMORROW AND MAKE YOU CUT OFF THE PART THAT OVERHANGS, AND NOBODY WANTS THAT TO HAPPEN. THEY PROBABLY THOUGHT WHAT I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT, AND THAT WAS CONSIDERED A PATIO AND NOT A DECK. SO MAYBE THAT'S HOW THAT OCCURRED.

WELL, AND PART OF IT IS HIGHER, I GUESS, JUST TO BE CLEAR.

SO ON THE BACK PART OF THE HOUSE TO THE LEFT, THAT THAT IS RAISED OFF.

[01:20:01]

OKAY. YEAH. SO PART OF OUR EXCELLENT CUSTOMER SERVICE IS THAT WE ADDED THAT TO THAT.

OKAY. THAT MAKES SENSE. I DIDN'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF, MA'AM. IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND FINISH YOUR YOUR COMMENTS.

NO, THAT HELPS FOR SURE. I GUESS THE FIRST THING I WANT TO SAY IS THAT I, I AM 100% IN VIOLATION.

I DIDN'T, I THOUGHT BECAUSE I WASN'T CHANGING THE FOOTPRINT OF THE DECK AND I WAS SIMPLY ADDING A ROOF AND SCREENING IT AND I DIDN'T NEED A PERMIT.

SO I JUST ADMIT NOW THAT THAT WAS MY FAULT FOR MAKING THAT ASSUMPTION.

AND IT, IT DOES NOT LOOK AMAZING RIGHT NOW BECAUSE AS SOON AS WE FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS, WE HALTED ALL WORK.

SO NONE OF THIS IS IN ITS INTENDED PHYSICAL STATE.

BUT I SURELY DIDN'T WANT TO ADD ANY MORE MONEY OR COST TO IT TO HAVE TO REMOVE IT.

SO I GUESS THE POINT OF ALL OF IT IS THAT I DO HAVE EXTENSIVE SKIN CANCER AND I HAVE TO GO EVERY THREE MONTHS.

MY DOCTOR SENT IN A LETTER FOR THAT. AND SO THE ATTEMPT WAS, WE DID GET THIS POOL PUT IN.

I HAVE THREE KIDS. I WOULD LOVE TO SPEND TIME WITH THEM, BUT I, I CAN'T BE IN THE SUN FOR ANY PERIOD OF TIME.

AND SO THE ATTEMPT FOR BOTH OF THESE WAS TO PROVIDE THAT GUIDANCE.

AND WE DID HAVE A SIMILAR LIKE PERGOLA IN THE SIDE YARD BEFORE WE ALSO PAUSED ON THAT PERGOLA TO UNDERSTAND THE REQUIREMENTS.

IS IT BECAUSE IT'S CONCRETED IN THE GROUND THAT IT NEEDS A BUILDING PERMIT? IF WE JUST WENT BACK TO A FREESTANDING STRUCTURE, WOULD THAT REQUIRE A BUILDING? WE JUST KIND OF PAUSED, WANTING TO KIND OF GET THAT GUIDANCE FROM THE BOARD.

WE'RE NOT REALLY DEALING WITH THE GOAL IN THIS CASE, THOUGH. MR.. IS THAT RIGHT? NO, SIR. SO WE WE CAN DEAL WITH THAT. WE CAN LEAVE THAT UP TO STAFF TO TO WORK WITH THE OWNER ON THAT.

OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO ADD TO THAT? I DON'T THINK SO. I, I GUESS THE ONLY OTHER THING IS EVERY ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS THAT I'VE TALKED TO IS IN SUPPORT OF IT.

I DO UNDERSTAND PROBABLY WHY WE GOT A COMPLAINT BECAUSE I AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE HOA FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND SO I MIGHT HAVE PROVIDED LETTERS TO CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR VIOLATIONS.

SO NORMALLY WHEN WE GET A COMPLAINT, WE HAVE OPPONENTS AT THE HEARING.

IN THIS CASE, THE COMPLAINT WAS THAT SHE BEGAN THE WORK WITHOUT PERMITS.

AND SEVEN PEOPLE ARE IN SUPPORT AND NOBODY IS IN OPPOSITION THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM.

IT'S A LITTLE IT'S A LITTLE BIT WEIRD. IT WAS ALSO WEIRD THAT THEY FILED THE COMPLAINT A YEAR AFTER I STARTED THIS.

BUT YEAH, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL TO HAVE KNOWN THE COMPLAINT WAS COMING IN EARLY BEFORE I PUT ALL THIS MONEY INTO IT.

THANK YOU, MISS RUTHERFORD. ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? MISS RUTHERFORD? OKAY. HEARING NONE, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING, THEN.

IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE OR ON WEBEX THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE CASE? YES. YES, SIR. SHE CAN SPEAK TO. SHE LIKES. YEAH.

YES. HI. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS NICK LAPINE AND I'M A NEIGHBOR OF GINGER.

AND CHRIS, I THINK WHAT IT ADDS VALUE TO THE PROPERTY.

I DON'T SEE ANY, YOU KNOW, PROBLEM WITH IT AT ALL.

AND SO HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS APPROVE IT. WHAT WAS YOUR NAME AGAIN, SIR? IT'S NICK. LAST NAME IS LAPINE. LUPINI. OKAY.

THANK YOU SIR. I BELIEVE ONE OF THE EMAILS IN THE PACKAGE WAS FROM.

YES. YES, SIR. MY NAME IS CARL YANKOWSKI. IT'S JANKOWSKI.

I'M IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT. SO THAT PROPERTY? NO ISSUES.

SHE TAKES CARE OF THE YARD. YOU KNOW, WE'RE NEIGHBORS, SO.

OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD. PRESIDENT. IS SHE A GOOD PRESIDENT? OH, NO. NO, NO. SINCE THAT'S ON RECORD. YES, ABSOLUTELY.

OKAY. THANK YOU SIR. AND SO WE'VE HEARD FROM FOLKS IN SUPPORT.

IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE ON WEBEX THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE CASE? THERE IS NO ONE ON WEBEX. NO ONE. OKAY. HEARING NONE.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BY THE BOARD? OKAY. I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT, TOO.

I DID EYEBALL THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THERE'S SOME KIND OF INTERESTING CONFIGURATIONS OF HOUSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND I DON'T KNOW HOW THE SETBACKS WERE APPLIED THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE ADDITIONS AND PORCHES THAT APPEAR TO ME TO ACTUALLY BE PROBABLY CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY LINE THAN THE APPLICANTS.

BUT HAVING SAID THAT THE PROPERTY IS VERY WELL MAINTAINED.

IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE HAD THE SITUATION WITH THE BUILDING PERMITS.

THAT'S FRUSTRATING FOR YOU, I KNOW, FOR THE COMMUNITY AND ENCOURAGE AN EXPENSE, BUT WE DO HAVE TO FOLLOW THE CODE, AS YOU KNOW. AND I'VE BEEN A LITTLE BIT MORE RESTRICTIVE, I GUESS, THAN MY COLLEAGUES ON THE BOARD IN TERMS OF GRANTING VARIANCES.

BUT WE DO HAVE A MEDICAL HARDSHIP HERE THAT WE CAN CERTAINLY USE TO JUSTIFY THE VARIANCE.

AND THERE'S BEEN OTHER INFORMATION HERE THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED.

[01:25:01]

AND WE OBVIOUSLY THERE'S NO OPPOSITION, THE KIND OF UNUSUAL WAY TO GET THIS LEVEL OF SUPPORT, I THINK, FOR, FOR A PROJECT LIKE THIS IN THE COMMUNITY.

SO WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND PATIENCE THROUGH THE PROCESS.

AND HAVING SAID THAT, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THIS VARIANCE, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF.

SCREEN PORCH IS A REASONABLE MODIFICATION FOR A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY.

SEVEN OF THE NEIGHBORS HAVE WRITTEN TO EXPRESS SUPPORT, AND WE HAD A COUPLE THAT SPOKE HERE TODAY AS WELL.

AND THE OTHER TESTS ARE MET AS STATED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

SO THAT'S MY MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND THAT MOTION SECOND? BUT, MR. LAWRENCE, ARE YOU IMPLYING THAT YOU'VE BEEN MORE DIFFICULT THAN WE HAVE BEEN OR WE HAVE BEEN MORE DIFFICULT? WELL, IT'S ALL A MATTER OF POINT OF VIEW. THAT'S A MATTER OF POINT OF VIEW.

SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. LAWRENCE.

THANK YOU, SIR. SECOND BY MR. GREEN. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE AYE. IS THERE ANYONE OPPOSED? HEARING NONE.

THE MOTION CARRIES. THE VARIANCE IS APPROVED.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE NOW MOVE ON TO THE APPEALS.

[3. APPEALS]

NUMBER 10534 WAS WITHDRAWN THIS MORNING. SO I CERTAINLY HOPE NO ONE'S BEEN WAITING FOR THAT.

AS YOU JUST HEARD, NUMBER 100767 HAS BEEN DEFERRED TO THE JUNE MEETING.

[3b. APP-2026-100767 Fairfield APP-2026-100767 Duncan H. MacPherson: appeal a notice of violation regarding the property at 10748 and 10798 Greenwood Road, Fairfield. Parcels 777-768-9356 and 778-768-2615. Zoning: A- 1, Agricultural District. Code Section: 24-2320.]

BEFORE WE GET STARTED, THERE WAS A DIRECTOR ASSISTANT, MR. SEAL. IT WAS JUST A CONFUSION. I GOT UP AND DRESSED.

SOMEONE. TURN THE MUTE OFF. THERE WE GO. APOLOGIES.

HOW OFTEN I USE THAT, MR. GREEN. THANK YOU. YES, I APPRECIATE YOU SPEAKING TO THE RESIDENT.

SHE WAS OVER THE CUTOFF FOR THE BOARD'S MAY MEETING.

THERE WERE MORE THAN 12 CASES, SO SHE HAD FILED IN TIME FOR TODAY'S MEETING.

BUT BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF CASES THAT WERE FILED, SHE WAS MOVED TO THE JUNE MEETING. SHE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO MAKE THE JUNE MEETING.

SO I'VE JUST ACTUALLY SENT AN EMAIL TO STAFF ASKING THEM TO REACH OUT TO HER AFTER THIS MEETING ABOUT DISCUSSING HER CASE AND WHEN IT WOULD BE.

WHICH CASE WAS THIS? IT WAS A YEAH, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IT WOULD HAVE BE ON NEXT MONTH'S AGENDA.

MR. CHAIR, IS THIS A VARIANCE CASE? IT WAS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, I BELIEVE, FOR A SHORT TERM RENTAL. I WENT OUT, SHE PULLED ME ASIDE BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T SEE. YEAH.

SOMEONE I THINK WE SAID IT WAS THE LAST VARIANCE SHE HEARD.

SHE HEARD MR. BLANKENSHIP CALL THE LAST VARIANCE AND WAS CONCERNED BECAUSE SHE HADN'T SEEN HER CASE ON THE AGENDA.

SO I EXPLAINED THAT AND HAVE ASKED STAFF TO REACH OUT.

SHE THOUGHT I WAS ON THE AGENDA. SHE DID? YES, SIR.

YEAH. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE COMMUNICATE WITH FOLKS SO WE DON'T WASTE THEIR TIME AND OUR TIME AS WELL.

THAT'S WHEN I GOT UP AND SAID SOMETHING. ALL RIGHT, SO 534 HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN.

767 HAS BEEN DEFERRED. THIS IS APPEAL 2026, NUMBER 100776KGLI PROPERTIES LLC APPEAL AND NOTICE APPEAL

[3c. APP-2026-100776 Fairfield APP-2026-100776 KGLI Properties, LLC: appeal notices of violation regarding the property at 3401 Vawter Avenue, East Highland Park, Fairfield. Parcels 798-734-3180, 798-734-3498 and 798-734-4146. Zoning: M-1, Light Industrial District. Code Section: 24-2320. ]

NOTICES OF VIOLATION REGARDING THE PROPERTY AT 3401 VAWTER AVENUE.

1400 HIGHLAND AND 3340 WAVERLY. THEY ARE ALL IN EAST HIGHLAND PARK IN THE FAIRFIELD MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT.

WOULD EVERYONE WHO INTENDS TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE PLEASE STAND AND BE SWORN IN? RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE. DO YOU SWEAR THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT, MR. GANNON, YOU WILL HAVE TEN MINUTES.

AND, MR. ANDERSON, YOU WILL ALSO HAVE TEN MINUTES.

THANK YOU, MR. SECRETARY. GOOD MORNING. MAY IT PLEASE THE BOARD. MY NAME IS ABRAHAM DOUGAN, ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY FOR THE DIRECTOR TODAY. THIS CASE DOES INVOLVE THREE PARCELS OF PROPERTY. TOGETHER. I'LL TALK ABOUT THEM AS THE PROPERTY.

BUT EACH KNOB REFERS TO EACH PIECE OF PROPERTY.

IT'S 341 WATER AVENUE, 1400 HIGHLAND STREET AND 3320 WAVERLY BOULEVARD.

YOU CAN SEE THE THREE PARCELS LOCATED THERE. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED M ONE WHICH IS A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT.

AND IF YOU RECALL FROM THE CASE THAT WE HAD ACROSS THE STREET A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, THIS IS A LARGELY RESIDENTIAL AREA RIGHT UP AGAINST THE RICHMOND LINE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS. APPELLANT APPEARS TO HAVE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY IN OCTOBER OF 2024 AND APPEARS TO BE OPERATING IT AS A COMMERCIAL RENTAL SPACE, BUT HE HASN'T DONE SO IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW TO USE THIS PROPERTY AS HE INTENDS, HE'S REQUIRED TO FIRST OBTAIN APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN.

HE'S BEEN AWARE OF THAT AT LEAST SINCE JULY 2025, WHERE WE HAD A PRIOR NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT WAS NOT APPEALED BASED ON HIM BEING REQUIRED TO OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN. THE DIRECTOR IS ASKING THE BOARD TO AFFIRM TWO DETERMINATIONS HERE.

I THINK THERE ARE TWO MAIN ISSUES IN THESE NOTICES OF VIOLATIONS.