MINUTES OFTHE 6:001 PM-1 February 19, 2024  HANOVER BOROUGH ZONING HEARING BOARD MEETING  Hanover Municipal Building, 44 Frederick Street, Hanover, PA  The meeting of the Hanover Borough Zoning Board convened at 6:00 PM on Monday November 20, 2023 in the Hanover Municipal Building, 44 Frederick St, Hanover, PA, as Attendance: In attendance were Zoning Hearing Board Members Bond, Shirk and Zartman; Zoning Solicitor Senft; Staff Members Secretary Felix, Administrative Assistant Graham-Herrick and Zoning Officer Miller; and Stenographer Deb Zepp. Approval of Minutes: It was: moved by Mr. Bond, seconded by Mr. Shirk toapprove the minutes of the Zoning Hearing Board Meeting held November 20, 2023. Motion  advertised.  carried.  2024 Reorganization: seconded by Mr. Shirk. was seconded by Mr. Shirk.  Mr. Bond nominated Mr. Zartman to serve as Chairman for the year 2024, which was Mr. Zartman nominated Mr. Bond to serve as Vice-Chairman for the year 2024, which Chairman Zartman asked all citizens wishing to testify this evening to please stand and  were sworn in.  41 McAllister Street - Special Exception for Multi-Family Dwelling Secretary Felix read the following Statement of the Secretary:  "A Special Exception and Variance application were. submitted on January 25, 2024 by Jordan Ilyes and Ilyes Holdings, 9, LLG,5Codorun Lane, York, PA 17408 for the property located at 41 McAllister Street, Hanover, PA. The applicant is proposing a special exception for a multi-family dvelling per. Article III, Section 140-302(B), and a variance forrelieffrom maximum density per Article III, Section 140-302(D) of the Hanover Borough Zoning Ordinance. The property is located in A public hearing was scheduled for Monday, February 19, 2024 at 6:00 PM and wuas properly advertised on February 4, 2024 and February 11, 2024.  R-5. High Density Residential Zoning District.    Minutes ofthe Hanover. Borough Zoning. Hearing Board  February: 19, 2024 Page 2  Property owuners within 200 feet of the subject property have also received notification by mail forwarded from this office on January 29, 2024. Proper posting  oft the property giving notification ofhearing has been certified.  Dorothy C. Felix, Secretary Zoning Hearing Board"  Thea applicant, Mr. Jordan Ilyes, 5CodorunLane, York, PA was present to give testimony. He stated that he is under contract to purchase this property located at 41 McAllister He displayed a current photograph of the property which was the former site of the Utz Mr. Ilyes displayed a concept drawing for his project to construct 12 high-end one bedroom loft apartments with garages, which includes 13 additional on-site parking He referenced his recent successful projects in the community: The McAlister Inn, and 108 Chestnut Street which are very upscale and a great addition to the community. He assured the Board that his current request would match the quality of these 2 projects. In order to facilitate his project, he comes before the Board this evening to request a special exception for a multi-family dwelling and a variance for maximum density. Zoning Solicitor Senft ask Mr. Ilyes how he meets the following criteria for a special exception for the multi-family dwelling as listed Article IX Section 140-907(C) of the Other Laws. The proposed project shall not be in conflict with other Borough ordinances or state or federal laws or regulations that the Zoning Hearing Board has clear knowledge of Comprehensive Plan. The proposed project shall be generally consistent with the adopted  Street (rear), depending on the outcome of tonight's public hearing.  Potato Chip facility.  spaces on the property for a total of 25 total parking spots.  Hanover Borough Zoning Ordinance:  - Mr. Ilyes stated that he is in compliance will all other laws.  Comprehensive Plan.  Mr. Ilyes stated that his proposed plan is consistent with the adopted  Comprehensive Plan.  Traffic. The proposed project shall not result in or significantly add to a serious traffic hazard or serious traffic congestion, and shall organize vehicular access and parking to minimize  traffic congestion in the vicinity oft the proposed special exception.    Minutes ofthe. Hanover. Borough Zoning Hearing Board  February 19, 2024 Page3  Mr. Ilyes stated that his project meets the requirement for on-site parking to Safety. It shall not create a significant public safety hazard, including. fires, toxic or explosive  minimize parking issues and traffic congestion.  hazards.  Mr. Ilyes stated that the proposed project will be fully sprinklered and code- compliant and will not cause any other public safety issues. Neighborhood. The proposed project will not significantly impact the surrounding neighborhood with detrimental noise, dust, odor, vibration, light, hours of operation, or other  disturbance or interruption.  Mr. Ilyes stated that the proposed project would not produce any noise, dust,  odor, vibration, light or other disturbances.  Design. It will involve adequate site design methods and shall be sited, oriented and landscaped to produce a harmonious relationship ofbuildings and grounds to adjacent buildings and properties and be consistent with the environment of the neighborhood.  Mr. Ilyes noted that the proposed project will be a welcome addition to the  neighborhood, in relation to the existing warehouse use.  In addition, Mr. Ilyes noted that he included a 10 foot buffer between the garages and Railroad Street to better accommodate traffic flow. AII of the units are one bedroom apartments that will have two parking spaces for each unit, as specified in the Zoning Ordinance. He pointed out that he is not requesting a variance for relief from parking Solicitor Senft questioned Mr. Ilyes on the following criteria relative to the variance for Mr. Senft questioned Mr. Ilyes about the unique physical circumstances or conditions, including irregularity, narrowness or shallowness of lot size or shape, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions peculiar to the particular property, and that the unnecessary hardship is due to such conditions and not the circumstances or conditions generally created by the provisions of this chapter in the neighborhoodo or  requirements.  relief of maximum density:  district in which the property is located.  Mr. Ilyes responded that the property needs relief from maximum density in  order to accommodate 12 units.  Mr. Senft asked Mr. Ilyes if there is any possibility that the property can be developed in strict conformity with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, and authorization ofa variance is therefore unnecessary to enable the reasonable use of the property.    Minutes ofthe Hanover, Borough Zoning. Hearing Board  February 19, 2024 Page4  Mr. Ilyes responded that according to his concept plan, the variance is necessary for the property to be able to accommodate 12 units in order to  make the most efficient use of the property.  Mr. Senft asked Mr. Ilyes if he felt his request for a variance was self-created?  Mr. Ilyes stated that in order for the property to accommodate 12 units, the  variance is necessary.  Mr. Senft asked Mr. Ilyes, if the variance is authorized, that it will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or district in which the property is located, nor substantially or permanently impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent  property, nor be detrimental to the public welfare.  Mr. Ilyes stated that his project if approved, will be a welcome addition tot the neighborhood and provide the maximum safety with the building becoming  totally code-compliant.  Mr. Senft asked Mr. Ilyes if the variance is authorized, will it represent the minimum variance that will afford relief and will represent the least modification possible of the  regulation in issue.  Mr. Ilyes responded that the project will have minimal impact on the  neighborhood.  Mr. Senft reminded Mr. Ilyes that if the Board would grant this variance, that they may attach such reasonable conditions and safeguards as it may deem necessary to  implement the purposes of this chapter. the reason for requesting the variance.  Mr. Senft questioned Mr. Ilyes why if he is allowed to construct 8 units by right, what is  Mr. Ilyes replied that his vision for thej property is to construct12 one-bedroom units with a maximum of 2 occupants and that 8 units would not be sufficient to allow for the best economic outcome for the endeavor. Mr. Ilyes explained that if there were 8 units, they would need to be 3 bedroom units and this would not fit his plan. Three (3) bedroom apartments accommodate families and increase activity and traffic and that is not something he envisions for this property. Mr. Ilyes added that the 12 units with a maximum of 2 occupants  would have less impact on the neighborhood.  When asked by Mr. Senft, Mr. Ilyes responded that no tenant lease has been developed  at this time.    Minutes ofthe Hanover. Borough. Zoning. Hearing Board  February 19, 2024 Pages  Mr. Senft asked Mr. Ilyes if there would be limitations on unit occupancy designated in the lease. Mr. Ilyes noted that only the people that sign the lease would be able to: reside Mr. Senft asked about the proposed unit rental rate. Mr. Ilyes stated that units should Zoning Officer Senft asked what the plans are for the basement. Mr. Ilyes stated the Mr. Shirk asked for the square footage of each apartment. Mr. Ilyes responded that the square footages for each unit would vary, but typically one bedroom apartments range Mr. Shirk asked what the largest of the lofts would be. Mr. Ilyes stated that 900 SF is an Mr. Shirk asked about the current dumpster that serves the former school. Hes stated that itl looked a little tight and could cause traffic issues. Mr. Ilyes stated that he would speak Zoning Officer Miller asked where Mr. Ilyes will place his dumpster for the proposed project. Mr. Ilyes responded that he will place it in the parking lot, but he is open to whatever the Zoning Board or the Borough officials would recommend. Mr. Bond asked if the dumpster would take away proposed parking. Mr. Ilyes noted that there is room on the corner of the lot to accommodate the dumpster without taking away Darlene Funk, 232 Locust Street: Mrs. Funk asked if there will be changes on the plan or Mr. Ilyes responded that this concept is not the final plan and he expects the project to go through the Planning Commission with recommended changes before the project can Mrs. Funk asked if Mr. Ilyes would be willing to change the proposed project to accommodate 8 units instead of12. Mr. Ilyes answered negatively to this question. Mrs. Funk noted the proximity to the school, and the likelihood of parking in the alley, which is not allowed. She questioned the proposed dumpster location and asked where  at the property.  bring $1400 or $1500 a month on average.  basement use would be to accommodate hot water heaters only.  from 700 feet to 1000 square feet.  average for the lofts.  with the school about relocation of their dumpster.  parking spaces.  ifi is this the final plan.  moved forward.  guests would park.    Minutes ofthe Hanover. Borough Zoning. Hearing Board  February: 19, 2024 Page 6  Mr. Ilyes stated that he is not required to accommodate parking for guests, and thatifhis parking was full, that visitors could utilize on-street parking if necessary. Mrs. Funk noted that parking is already tightalongl McAlisterStreet. Mr. Ilyes noted hei isnotasking  for a variance on parking this evening.  Mrs. Funk expressed concern about emergency vehicle access and fires.  Mr. Ilyes pointed out that the building is currently unsprinklered, but that he will install sprinklers in thel building to make the building safer than its current condition. Mr. Shirk asked Chairman Zartman to formally declare a public comment period. Eugene Lockard, 27 McAllister St: Mr. Lockard noted that here is speeding through the one way alley and he felt it was too small of an area to accommodate the 12 unit project. Darlene Funk, 232 Locust St: Mrs. Funk stated her previous concerns, and asked Mr. Ilyes tol keep her apprised of his progress on the project. She is concerned that there will be an Mr. Ilyes noted that he owns a real estate company that manages the properties, and he is not planning to flip the property. He has a hand in controlling the property management and that he will be very involved every step of the way to assure that his Matt Dietrich, property owner, 41 McAllister Street: Mr. Dietrich pointed out that there are: many vehicles that currently come and go at the property. Thel building is currently being utilized. The parking is already existing. The building will be used regardless if Mr. Ilyes purchases it or not. The parking on a public street should not be Mr. Ilyes' concern. Mr. Ilyes' improvements would be a substantial improvement and benefit to the neighborhood. There was discussion about current vehicular traffic to the property. Shirl Warner, 35 McAllister Street: Ms. Warner showed Mr. Ilyes a picture of her backyard to show that she has no available parking at her residence other than on-street parking. Her family has 4 vehicles that are trying to find parking places. She is thankful that the school and the church allow them toj park on their property when not in use. She noted that there is frequent speeding in the neighborhood and a lot of visitors to the neighborhood, and many buildings with more than one unit. There is nowhere to go when it snows, no place to put the snow and no room for snow equipment. School buses and vani traffic also impact the area. Ms. Warner stated it is already a very congested area,  increase in traffic and parking.  finished project is an improvement to the area.  and voiced her opposition to the project.    Minutes ofthe Hanover, Borough. Zoning. Hearing Board  February 19, 2024 Pagez  Andrea Hutton, 232 Baltimore Street: Mrs. Hutton noted that the 24 parking spaces will create more traffic to a very busy alley. She has had many near misses with collisions in the alley, and wondered whether stormwater would be addressed. She noted that water already backs up in her driveway. She asked how the neighbors are going to be guaranteed that this project will not become low income housing in the future. Mr. Ilyes noted that Mr. Mains had a traffic study done, and the study noted that there Steve Hutton, 2321 BaltimoreStreet Mr. Hutton asked ift this property was connected with 41McAllister: Street in the front? Mr. Ilyes replied thatitisnot,: and that hei is only seeking approval for the rear property. Mr. Hutton stated that he was not in favor of the project Mrs. Funk emphasized the difficulty of emergency response in the tight alleyway. She Gary Laird, Hanover Area Chamber of Commerce: Mr. Laird stated that he was in attendance to show support for the project. He stated that if the 12 units are taken into consideration, it has a strong economic impact of about $1.2 million on the community. He: further noted that Mr. Ilyes has done a wonderful project at the McAllister Inn and at Chestnut Street, and that he feels that this proposal is a good reuse of this building. He emphasized that Mr. Ilyes and his organization do very fine work and that when there is investment in our community, especially from someone residing outside the community Matthew Hutton, 232 Baltimore Street: Mr. Hutton noted that he feels that the proposed Robert Holt, 513 High Street: Mr. Holt stated that he takes exception with the concept drawing, he does not believe it is accurate. He asked thel Board to table the decision due toi information that is not presented in the plan. He has not shown his hardship to gain the variance. He asked where dogs will relieve themselves ift the tenants have pets, since there is no yard. He stated his disapproval of apartments that do not have windows 7:25PM: The Board and Solicitor Senft temporarily recessed to an executive session. 7:40 PM: The Board and Solicitor Senft returned, and the meeting resumed.  are very few vehicular accidents occurring in this alley.  due to traffic impact.  invited all to walk the area to see. for themselves.  we enhance the value within our community. area is not the right place for this project.  which could be used as an escape route: in case of emergency.  Itwas moved by Mr. Bond, seconded by Mr. Shirk to approve the application: foras special exception for a multi-family dwelling at 41 McAllister Street (rear) as submitted under    Minutes ofthe Hanover". Borough. Zoning. Hearing Board  February 19, 2024 Page 8  Article III, Section 140-302(B); and to deny the application for a variance for maximum density at 411 McAllister Street (rear) to accommodate! 12units as submitted under Article III, Section 140-302(D) of the Hanover Borough Zoning Ordinance according to the  following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision:  HANOVER ZONING HEARING BOARD  INI RE: JORDANILYES  VARIANCI/SPECIAL EXCEPTION  ANDILYES! HOLDINGS 9, LLC  FINDINGS OF FACT  1.) Applicant is Jordan Ilyes and Ilyes Holdings, LLC.  2.) The property in question is located at 41 McAlister Street and is situated in an R-5Z Zoning District. Applicant is under contract to purchase thel Property from  the current owner.  3.) The application requests a special exception for a multi-family dwelling unit under Article III, Section 140-302(B) of the Hanover Borough Zoning  Ordinance ("the Ordinance").  4.) The application also requests a variance with respect to the maximum density requirements for a multi-family dwelling unit set forth in Article III, Section 140-302(D) of the Ordinance, which provides for a maximum density of 28  multi-family units per acre in an. R-5 District.  5.) The property was formerly used as a warehouse. Applicant proposes to 6.) Under Section 140-302(B), a Multi-Family Dwelling in an R-5 District is  convert the building to 12 one-bedroom apartments.  permitted only by Special Exception.  7.) A hearing on the application was. held on February 19, 2024.  8.) Mr. Ilyes testified on behalf of the Applicant. He presented exhibits to the Board,including: a site plan. He explained thei intention to convert the building to a 12-unit apartment multi-family dwelling, with each apartment containing  one bedroom.    Minutes ofthe Hanover. Borough. Zoning Hearing Board  February 19, 2024 Pages 9  9.) The application confirmed that the property is 0.29 acres in area, which would allow for 8.12 units on the Property based on the Boroughsmaximum density  requirement of 28 units per acre.  10.) Mr. Ilyes was questioned about each of the Borough's criteria for granting a Special Exception, and he expressed his opinion that he met each of the criteria. 11.) Mr. Ilyes was questioned why he would not be able to develop the Property with eight units, sO as to be in compliance with the Borough's maximum density requirements. He testified that the property "lays out really well" for one-bedroom apartments. He stated that if he reduced the number of units, some of them would be two or three bedroom units, which "doesn't fiti inmy  recipe the way I do them."  12.) Mr. Ilyes presented no financial analysis which would have allowed the Board to conclude that the property could not be developed in a manner which complied with the Borouglhsmaximum density requirements.  13.) Several neighboring property owners and 5th Ward Councilperson Darlene Funk spoke during the public comment portion oft thel hearing. They expressed a variety of concerns, including parking congestion, traffic safety, and the  ability for emergency personnel to access the Property.  14.) Matt Dietrich (current owner of the Property) and Gary Laird (President of the Hanover Chamber of Commerce) spoke in favor of the. Application. 15.) Mr. Ilyes testified that there would be two off-street parking spaces for each unit, which meets the Borough's parking requirements. He also testified that fire safety would be improved due to the installation of sprinkler systems. He noted that there would be no change to the geographic footprint of the building, SO that the renovation would not create any new impediments for  emergency personnel.  CONCLUSIONS OFLAW  1.) Article IX, Section 140-905(D) discusses the criteria for approval of a Special  Exception and states as follows:  D. Criteria for Approval. To approve a Special Exception, the Zoning Hearing  Board shall find the proposal meets all of the following criteria:    Minutes ofthe Hanover", Borough. Zoning Hearing Board  February, 19, 2024 Page 10  1. 2.  The proposal conforms to all oft the applicable Zoning District regulations and Specific Use regulations. The proposal conforms toa all the applicable standards for site improvements and performance, and other regulations oft this The proposal also conforms to the following Special Exception  Chapter. criteria: a.  3.  Other Laws. It shall not be in conflict with other Borough ordinances or state or federal lawus or regulations that the Zoning Hearing Board has clear Comprehensive Plan. It shall be generally consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Traffic. It shall not result in or significantly add toa serious traffic hazard or serious traffic congestion, and shall organize vehicular access and parking to minimize traffic congestion in the vicinity of the Safety. It shall: not create a significant public safety hazard, including fires, toxic or explosive Neighborhood. It will not significantly impact the surrounding neighborhood with detrimental noise, dust, odor, vibration, light, hours ofoperation, or other disturbance or interruption. Design. It will involve adequate site design methods and shall be sited, oriented and. landscaped to produce a harmonious relationship of buildings and grounds to adjacent buildings and properties and be consistent with the environment of the neighborhood.  knowledge of.  b. C.  proposed Special Exception.  d.  hazards.  e.  f  2.) Applicant has met its burden of proof for a special exception. The testimony presented att thel hearing led thel Board: to conclude that the proposed use would not create or add to significant traffic or safety issues or result in a significant    Minutes ofthe Hanover. Borough. Zoning Hearing Board  February. 19, 2024 Pageil  disturbance or interruption to the neighborhood. Mr. Ilyes' testimony with respect to the other special exception criteria (Nos.1,2,30a),3b) and 3(f) listed  above) was not disputed.  3.) Article IX, Section 140-907(C) Grant of Variances, states as follows:  The Zoning Hearing Board may grant a variance only if it makes the following (1) That there are unique physical circumstances or conditions, including irregularity, narrowness, or shallowness of lot size or shape, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions peculiar to the particular property, and that the unnecessary hardship is due to such conditions, and not the circumstances or conditions generally created by the provisions of the zoning ordinance in the neighborhood or district in which the property is located. (2) That because of such physical circumstances or conditions there is no possibility that the property can be developed in strict conformity with the provisions ofthe Zoning Ordinance, and authorization ofav variance is therefore  findings, where relevant:  necessary to enable the reasonable use ofp property.  (3) That such unnecessary hardship has not been created by the appellant. (4) That the variance, if authorized, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or district in which the property is located, nor substantially or permanently impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent property, (5) That the variance, ifauthorized, will represent the minimum variance that will afford relief and will represent the least modification possible of the regulation (6) In granting any variance, the Board may attach such reasonable conditions and safeguards as it may deem necessary toi implement the purposes of this chapter." "  nor be detrimental to the public welfare.  in issue.  4.) Applicant has failed to carry its burden for a variance to Section 140-907(C),as it did not establish that the Property cannot be developed in conformity with the Ordinance. The Board notes that Mr. Ilyes was presented with several opportunities to explain why the Property could not be developed with eight units, such that it would be in compliance with Section 140-302(D) of the Ordinance. Mr. Ilyes was only able to respond that one bedroom apartments laid out well and met his recipe or vision for development. While the Board appreciates that 12 units might present a more economically profitable result    Minutes ofthe Hanover Borough. Zoning. Hearing Board  February 19, 2024 Page 12  for the Applicant, there was no financial analysis or other evidence presented that would have allowed the Board to conclude that the Property could not be developed in a manner which complied with the Boroughsmaximum density  requirements.  DECISION  For the reasons set forth above, the Hanover Borough Zoning Hearing Board, by a vote of 3-0, grants the Applicant's request for a special exception permitting the development of multi-family dwelling and denies the Applicant's request for a variance as to the maximum density requirements at 41 McAlister Street, Hanover,  Pennsylvania. ATTEST:  ZONING HEARING BOARD /s/James Zartman JAMES ZARTMAN, CHAIRMAN /s/G Gary Bond GARY BOND /s/ Spencer Shirk SPENCER SHIRK  /s/1 Dorothy C. Felix ZONING BOARD SECRETARY  Date  Motion carried.  Adjournment: It was moved by Mr. Shirk, seconded by Mr. Bond to adjourn thei meeting  at 7:43 PM. Motion carried.  Respectfully submitted, PLA Zoning Hearing Board  Secretary