Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commissioners approve variance to allow shed in utility easement
Summary
The Hampshire Planning & Zoning Commission approved PCC2-2408, granting a variance to Section 759a of the Hampshire subdivision ordinance to allow a homeowner to place a shed on an existing slab in a utility easement after staff said the slab had been permitted in error; staff required a signed liability waiver.
The Hampshire Planning & Zoning Commission voted to recommend approval of PCC2-2408, a variance to Section 759a of the Hampshire subdivision ordinance to permit a shed on an existing slab within a utility easement.
Staff told the commission the owners, Mr. and Mrs. Misner, are proposing to place a shed on an existing slab and that the slab had been permitted previously without a required zoning/subdivision review. A staff presenter said the village had made an administrative error in the earlier permit review and recommended approval of the variance on the condition that the petitioners sign a liability/entitlement acknowledgment so utility companies retain the right to access the easement.
The variance was described by staff as narrowly tailored: the slab meets the five-foot setback and other zoning standards applicable to the rear yard, and no other variances are requested. The presenter said Safe Build (the village permitting agent) was not previously directed to perform zoning reviews but that, since January, staff have required zoning review of permits and have begun an audit of earlier permits.
The petitioner described the proposed shed location as the northeast corner of the lot, and confirmed there are three utility boxes in the backyard near the 30-foot easement line. "We have three boxes in our backyard," the petitioner said, noting they were not the original owners and only discovered the easement on a survey after being notified by staff.
A commissioner who reviewed the history said the commission has been historically reluctant to permit structures in easements but said they would support approval in this case because the hardship was created by the village's prior administrative error. A motion to accept staff's findings of fact and recommend approval of PCC2-2408 carried; the public hearing was then closed.
The commission's action forwards the recommendation per the village process; staff noted that utility companies retain the right to remove the structure and that the signed waiver clarifies liability and access. The commission moved next to adopt its 2025 meeting schedule and other agenda items.
