Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

At this time, I would approve the motion, accept the motion to approve as presented. So moved. I have a motion. Second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Thank you very much. Next item from business. Anybody plan on speaking at tonight's meeting? If you swear the testimony you hear this evening will be the whole truth, so help me God. Thank you.

Thank you very much. No old business to take care of, so we have two items, as I mentioned, tonight.

And the first one is a public hearing of development standard-bearing fill-out signings on the north and east elevations of Building UDO 84.9, commended permanent sign area in the Commercial Business District, CBP.

They're at 1 South Washington Street. It used to be the law office of Kessinger and a couple of other attorneys that live there. They have recently undergone construction remodeling. They have approval to sign on the frontage of the building. but they also want it on the north side of the building they want a projecting sign on the east end where there's an entrance and then they also want a wall sign on the east side of the building which is the rear side for oncoming traffic to to show you know to make sure that it's visible where they're located this is two signs and it's all under one petition but if you can certainly one that you don't want or one you do want you can separate those separate those out and that would just be a part of the condition just part of conditions yes thank you all right you're welcome and the petitioner is here um would you like to come up and answer any questions they may have we can bring the sign up on the screen for those that are not aware of what they're doing as I said it's one projecting sign on the north side of the building and a wall sign on the east

in there right now it won't go up until you get a correct correct it is a future sign and then the sign on the east elevation is just a wall mounted sign again looks similar to that so the design is consistent across the building There's a projecting sign that's been approved through the normal sign permitting process. And it looks like that projecting sign except it says the form, which is the name of it.

So will the sign that's been approved have multiple businesses on it?

Thank you very much. Anyone else have any questions or anything?

I move that we approve the variance sought by John Finlay, I hope I'm saying that right, oil construction management need petitioner and VCA petitioner 2026-2286 to allow signage on the north and east elevations of the building UDO table 4.9 permitted permanent sign area in the commercial business primary CVP zoning district and corridor projection cover the district located at 1 South Washington Street. This petition has satisfied the requirements for variances under state law for the following reasons. The approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, world, and general welfare of the community. For reasons stated in the petitioner's proposed findings of fact, the use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. For reasons stated in the petitioner's proposed findings of fact, and the strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property for reasons stated in commissioner proposed findings of that.

That was it.

Okay.

At this time, I have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. Do we have a roll call, please?

Aye.

Similar to a couple that we've had in the past, this is a relatively small home that the petitioner is wishing to put his law office in. He is the only employee. And as I stated in the letter, he has stated that at some point, if his business grows, he will move out, return it back to a residential piece of property. but Mr. Knaver, do you want to come up to the podium and present your case?

Hello. My name is Scott Knaver. I'm trying to turn 181 into a law office. I head a law office here at Danville. or retire and move into it to move into it. So this isn't a longer spring chicken. I'm not gonna be, hopefully, practicing law in the next 35 years or anything like that. So while this is not necessarily a one or two year deal, it's not a forever change that I'm asking. I'm just asking just for the law office that it stops, turn back into residential, and I can use it for nothing else, or whatever, for however I want. I don't really see in what I do, I don't have a lot of people coming to my office. The nature of the law now, especially just how technology has grown, a lot of people just want to call, they want to email, they want to text. So I might have three or four people come to my office a week. So I'm not going to have a bunch of people parked out in front. I'm not going to have people going in and out all the time. It's just the nature of my business. Like I said, I'm not even there five days a week. And I'm not going to be bringing in 100 people. a week to a business. It's not going to be like one big business in the square or anything like that. Much of mine is done by telephone, text, or email, unless I walk a block away and go to court. So I'm hoping the impact on the area isn't substantial at all in regards to what the businesses are bringing in. It would just really be me there practicing that on myself. So you're not going to have any downtime? Are you planning on any signage? I'd like a small sign that just says the law has stopped there on the boat line. I don't need big signage. This is not an advertising type situation. We don't advertise. It's just mainly so people, if they would be looking forward to going in, people would go in. That's it.

Sir, could you please stand closer to the microphone? Thank you. One of the comments I'd like to make on the parking is that's something that I took into consideration after speaking with him, him being the only attorney in that building. I feel like the on-street parking along with the parking lot that is just to the east is adequate.

Is there any other questions?

I wanted to just, I have something to say.

I just want to tell you what I think. Because I know you and I know Brandon and I know people that are involved. I'm worried that would affect my decision, my thought process, but ultimately it's consistent with what I thought the last time. I don't have concern about traffic and I don't have concern about parking, but I do have concern about taking residential property and converting it to to commercial property, even if it's temporary. And I'm sympathetic that office space is going up and maybe becoming a bit unreasonable, and that you're losing your space. And I'm sympathetic to that. But I'm also sympathetic to the fact that housing is also really unavoidable and difficult for people to find, and that this is a low-cost home that could be a home. And I just feel like, like I said last month, setting a precedent. to keep doing this because you're not going to be the only one. I don't think that it's going to have this idea. And then if we say yes, then the next person might want to have a pretty innocuous office space in a residential property. And then there goes another one. And that's what I feel really passionate about. And that's what is really affecting my vote. And I just want you to know that.

Thank you, Chris.

Did you say you're already in Danville working?

Yeah, I've been practicing law in Danville since 2007.

So you already have a business located in Danville somewhere?

I did until last week, and I was at 76 South Jefferson Street, which is the building in front of Crossfield Post Office. The landlord told me, thanks, you're done. They gave me 30 days, and I was out of the last, that was last week.

But you also mentioned, in reading this one, it was a fact. Number three, it's a peculiar condition of the property.

I also don't really think that it meets. There's a peculiar...

The parking area is probably gravel or concrete with paint.

Is it easement? It's easement of the property. The drive is owned by the property owner.

I agree with Tracy.

other ones that couldn't prove and i feel like we've carried off the systems can i just make a clarification on that um the drive in the rear of the building is not going to be used for customers it's for his own private access i just want to make sure you understood that

He's sort of a testimony to get this even through the whole truth. So I hope you got it. I do. Thank you. Thanks.

Appreciate it. I'm Brandon Lawson, Lawson & Company and Wiker Realtors. And I'm representing both the sellers and the buyers in this transaction. The area around this property, this is the only single family residence on that farm. Everything else is duplexes, apartments, and across the street is the AT&T. It used to be the AT&T control, whatever that building is, behind the post office. It's a very commercial, mixed use. And I just wanted to make sure that everybody understood that. The access behind the house is an alley that the town has. Okay, it stops. up on the screen you can point out where there's a point sort of right here on the podium so that you can point out where the alley is you can really see it all right this is this is broadway this is jefferson this is the subject property to gain access to park as the residents of this Come up the alley right here. This gravel stops about right there at that southeast corner. Okay, can you step closer? Sorry. The alley stops right there at that southeast corner. There's also a vacated alley.

Is that not a single-family residence just to the east?

Here?

No, to the east. To the east of this corner?

That's a duplex. That's a duplex, and I believe that I think Mr. Dorsey's wanting to do something with some of this vacated land here.

That's a single-family residence.

departments, like I said, commercial, the alleys, it's not like going down to the

Thank you.

This board has a duty to take action on matters before me.

So we need a motion. That's why we're here. I appreciate that.

Well, I mean, I understand that that's fine.

But that's occasion. So we have a motion to make a decision on this case. And the motion would be how we would

I move that we deny the use variance sought by Petitioner Scott W. Kamiram in BZA Petition 2026-2287 to allow professional law office permitted UEO Table 2.1 permitted in special exception land uses in the residential urban zoning district. The property is located at 181 West Broadway Street. The petition has not satisfied the requirements for variance under the state law for the following reasons. I have a question. If it meets some but not all of the criteria, how do you read that? I don't think it's going to be injurious to public safety, but I also don't think that the need arises from some condition that's peculiar to the property involved. So how do I read that?

I think you can offer your thoughts on needs to be prepared and approved at a subsequent meeting on that.

So I can read them differently, each one, according to what I think? Yes. Okay. Number one, the approval will not be adjourned in fact number two the use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner number three the need for the variance does not arise from some condition peculiar to the property involved for reasons stated in the petitioner's proposal in fact will not constitute an unnecessary hardship that applies to the property for which the variance is offered. This is stated in the petitioner's proposed finding in fact. The approval is not my interference extension, but the town's comprehensive plan for the reasons stated in the petitioner's proposed findings in fact.

Thank you, Tracy. At this time, we have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. If we could do a roll call, please. Aye. Kevin? Aye. Tracy?

Aye.

Frank? Aye. Is there for this decision, despite the parents' petition, is denied subject to the condition to make part of the adoption of the group building of conditions, motion to carry it forward to vote? And through that.

I put in front of you tonight the negative findings of fact or findings effective decision for the spur lock use variance and you'd like to look those over we will add that to the agenda for next month for acceptance I guess of those findings we did get an application for a variance

but we will be meeting next time.