Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Birmingham BZA approves variance to replace driveway at 495 Vinewood
Summary
The Birmingham Board of Zoning Appeals on Thursday approved a variance allowing the owner of 495 Vinewood to replace an existing driveway within its current footprint, tied to the plans presented at the hearing.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Birmingham Board of Zoning Appeals on Thursday approved a variance allowing the owner of 495 Vinewood to replace an existing driveway within its current footprint, tied to the plans presented at the hearing.
Assistant Building Official Mike Morad told the board that Chapter 126, Article 2 of the zoning ordinance requires a minimum open space of 40 percent for the lot and calculated the existing and proposed figures. "The minimum open space required is 5,665.6 square feet or 40%. Proposed space is 4,352 square feet or 32%. Therefore, a variance of 1,142.6 square feet or 8% is being requested," Morad said during his presentation.
Applicant representative Matthew Borkowski of Dallas Building Company said the request is to replace the driveway “as it sits in the current footprint” and that the applicants would mitigate by converting additional impervious areas to pervious surface. Borkowski said replacing the existing stamped-concrete driveway is necessary because it is degrading and has large potholes.
A board member moved to approve the variance, tying any approval to the plans submitted to the BZA. The motion carried on a roll-call vote that recorded seven affirmative votes and no negatives; the chair announced, “Congratulations. You have your variance.”
The approval allows the property owner to replace the driveway consistent with the plans shown to the board and to implement the pervious-surface mitigation described in the presentation. The ordinance reference cited at the hearing for the open-space requirement was Chapter 126, Article 2, Section 2.080.1 of the city zoning ordinance.
No additional conditions or deadlines were announced at the meeting. The board noted that the variance was being granted to address an existing nonconforming condition and limited the approval to the plans shown to the panel.

