About half a dozen residents gathered at Monday night's Meeting of the Whole to question why a large structure was approved for construction at 631 South Thirteenth Street. One of the residents told council that [due to the structure's size] the owner should have applied for a variance before the start of construction and that this was not done. The structure is a large, four-bay garage.
Borough Manager Sam Sulkosky characterized the decision to allow construction as an oversight and said the matter will be addressed with the person responsible. He said the proper procedure would have been to seek approval from the zoning board and the planning commission.
Reportedly, a "stop work" order is in effect to halt further construction (although notification had not been posted on the property as of today).
Officials said that if the owner applies to the zoning hearing board by October 8, neighbors may testify at the October 29 meeting and become a party to the issue, allowing them the right to appeal the board's decision, if they so choose. Sulkosky said that if the owner does not apply for a variance by the deadline, the borough could have the structure taken down. Residents at the meeting were urged to call the borough office after October 8 to find out if a hearing will take place. Notification of a hearing would also be posted on the front lawn of the 13th Street property.
Sulkosky said the structure meets part of the zoning requirements in terms of square footage of the entire property. He added that the structure will be used for the property owner's personal vehicles. (A resident at the meeting told this reporter that the property owner intends to use the structure for storing heavy construction vehicles and equipment.)
Another resident told council that the owner does not plan on living at the property but instead intends to rent it out as a multi-family dwelling.
Below are the two zoning permits that appear in the front window of the house on the property. There is no notification of a "stop work" order posted.
Zoning permit from August 7 to "Demo Existing Garage - Construct New Garage"
Note that the dimensions are 72' x 40' which is 2880 square feet.
Zoning permit from July 16 to "Install Fence - 6' - Rear [hidden] - 2' from Prop. Line"
Here is some additional information on the property:
From "Deeds Recorded May 12 to May 15" LancasterOnline:
The mayor made an attempt to shoot down citizen questions about this zoning issue by suggesting that some questions may not be answered due to the possibility of a hearing. Thankfully the tax paying neighbors were permitted to voice their opinions and ask questions. At times, however, it appeared as if council did not understand what they were asking, albeit basic. I hope this issue is addressed properly this time around. These neighbors deserve better. This man buys in Columbia to put a burden on the neighborhood, my guess is that HE would not want it in his backyard....if he did why isn't it THERE?
ReplyDeleteI wonder how many times issues like this have sneaked through the system unnoticed. The neighbors are to be commended for speaking up.
DeleteRegarding the "At times, however, it appeared as if council did not understand what they were asking, albeit basic." comment:
DeleteNot sure what you mean by this since council did not speak about this issue at the meeting. It is unfortunate that due to laws in this state that they could not speak about this since it would give the appearance of providing an opinion before this is even reviewed by Zoning. I would have enjoyed heaing their opinions on this. I would not want to be in there shoes on this mess - codes really created a disaster here. I'd expect a lawsuit from one of the affected persons no matter what the outcome of the Zoniong decison is.
Probably couldn't get a permit to do it in his township...no oversights there.
ReplyDeleteThey could find weeds in an alley on Perry Street, but couldn't see this coming!
ReplyDeleteI was disappointed in council when they belittled the efforts of historian Randolph Harris in making the bridge piers a historic designation.
ReplyDeleteThey bragged about knowing that pier was there for many decades, yet did they make the application for historic designation...no. This is an excellent asset in marketing Columbia Borough.
The person responsible for making this happen should be thanked for his efforts. If someone in this borough didn't think of the idea then it is invalid. Proves what I have always heard this is a good old boy town, which they prefer to phrase tight knit community.
"Success has many fathers, but failure is an orphan." Now that the piers have been designated, others want credit for having known they were there, even though they did nothing.
DeletePeople from out of town come here and think they can do anything they want. I would not want that in my back yard. I think Columbia people know the rules here.
ReplyDeleteThank you for adding "black and white" clarity to this situation. As indicated in your pictures, it is clearly indicated the size of the garage to be built on the permit signed by the codes officer. It is equally transparent that the same said codes enforcement officer signed the permit to allow the six foot high fence.
ReplyDeleteThere is no case of an error. This was a choice to allow the demolition and the new structure to be built according to the size on the permit. It is signed. The owner of the property did nothing wrong. He played by the rules. It is the responsibility of the codes office to agree to such a build, and they did. There should be no going backwards.
I might not agree personally with this monstrosity, but the man clearly owns the property and did what he had to do.
Right. Allowing this was intentional.
DeleteHe should be fired! Then the building down sized to 1000 square foot! Then the owner should not be allowed to rent this home out under section 8!!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteNOR turn it into a 2 UNIT APARTMENT HOUSE. go away.
ReplyDeleteLOL, how about you go away, far away!!
ReplyDeletewhats up with the joke of a codes dept...why is it allowed to continue year after year? council is NOT doing their job.
ReplyDeleteWHY ISN'T THE STOP WORK ORDER BEING ENFORCED???? THE PERMIT READS 6 FT FENCE REAR.....NOT SIDE AND NOT FRONT OF PROPERTY.
ReplyDeletePLUS THE WHOLE ENTIRE GARAGE MUST COME DOWN.
PERIOD.