BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES

 

APRIL 9, 2007

 

The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chairman Faulkner at 7:00 p.m.

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:  Alex Kessler, Kelly Thornton, Dick Mickley, Greg Faulkner, Nevin Taylor (arrived 7:10 p.m.)

 

OTHERS PRESENT:  Zoning Inspector McCoy, City Planner DeLong, Clerk Patterson, Phyllis Gaskins, Clare King, Margaret Ridge, Charlotte Draudt, Mary Barnette, Joan Willbarger, Judy Vallery, Elsie Kandel, Martha Moore, Clara Conley, Lucille Ramsey, Ralph Ramsey, Jim & Michelle Kirchner, Roger & Susan Lewis, Edgar Hay, Mike Powers, Julie and Bill Vargo, David Burke, Dave Ballmann

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:  There being no additions or corrections, the minutes for the meeting on March 12, 2007 were approved as distributed.

 

AGENDA ITEMS:

 

OLD BUSINESS:

 

1.     Requesting a conditional use to permit a veterinary clinic in the A-R zoning district; to be located at 1131 Milford Avenue.  Filed by Dr. Julie Vargo, 17380 Waldo Road., Marysville, Ohio

 

COMMENTS OF ZONING INSPECTOR AND/OR DESIGNEE:  Ms. McCoy stated a veterinary animal hospital and/or animal clinics are conditional uses in the A-R zoning district according to ordinance 1137.10(b).

 

According to 1129.22, the Board of Zoning Appeals shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed use in the terms of the following standards and shall find adequate evidence showing that such use at the proposed locations do the following, including [1129.22(b)] which states that the development will be harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives, or with any specific objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan and/or Zoning Ordinance.  It should be noted that according to the 1999 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, the subject property is located in an area identified for Single-Family development. 

 

Mr. Mickley asked if there are any specifics when it states single-family development?  Mr. DeLong stated the code just specifies uses; it doesn’t specify zoning.

 

Mr. Taylor asked if this conditional use is granted, would it be limited to this particular business only and for this one individual.  Ms. McCoy responded that the owner could sell it to another vet clinic, then if that should close down and someone wants to open a different type of business, they would have to come in ask for a variance from what was approved before.  Mr. Taylor asked if the next owner could come in and put kennels outside.  Mr. Delong said the restrictions would stay the same, but to be sure, make it a condition of approval.

 

COMMENTS OF REQUESTER:  Dr. Julie Vargo addressed the Board.  She asked neighbors to keep an open mind when listening to her presentation.  She received a letter from Mr. John Bland when she arrived at the meeting saying that he had tried to contact her.  She never got his message.  Furthermore, she did not think it was ethical to approach the neighbors;  she thought that would be coercing the neighbors.   She’s not trying to do anything negative; she’s trying to make this a positive change for Marysville. 

 

Her business was established in 1993.  This is her 14th year in practice in Marysville, 9th year in the current building.  Her practice philosophy is to provide affordable veterinary care for only small animals in a friendly, family atmosphere. 

 

If approved, she plans to improve and renovate the property into a small animal veterinary clinic. She and her husband plan to remodel the property into a facility that will meet their practice needs and will be pleasing to the community.  She emphasized that this will be a positive change for Marysville.  They will address any fears of change, as well as any concerns anyone has in the community.   She introduced her husband, Bill Vargo, who presented the plans for the property.

 

He showed photos to the Board of the current condition of the proposed building.  They want to put vinyl siding on the entire exterior of the house and garage, put a new roof on the house and garage, put new windows in the house and garage, put on new gutters and downspouts, put in landscaping around the house and garage, make repairs to the basement for drainage and repair or demolish current outbuilding.  Changes to the facility to make it into a veterinary clinic include installation of parking lot in between circular drive at the front of the building, installation of a clinic sign at the front of the facility.  The total cost of improvements is $60,000.

 

Regarding traffic and parking issues, Mr. Vargo took some pictures in sequence as a car was going over the hill to the right of the building.  The photos clearly demonstrate there is plenty of visibility to pull in and out of the facility, despite the slight incline. 

 

Office hours are 5:00 to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon on Saturday.  They will average 4 clients an hour.  They don’t feel this will create a major traffic pattern change to the area. 

 

There was a concern about insects.  Mr. Vargo stated they don’t anticipate that being a problem because of the handling of only small animals.  There will be no outside kennels.  Animals will be hand walked on a leash.  Few patients will be housed at the clinic at any given time.  They have never had a complaint about noise or anything else at their current location. 

 

There are very limited areas zoned for veterinary clinics in Marysville.  They have been looking for a very long time.  They don’t have extremely deep pockets.  They want to be able to continue to offer affordable veterinary services in this community.  They have a loyal and established client base that depends on their services. 

 

The changes being proposed are a benefit to the neighbors and community.  They have always been a good neighbor and will continue to be.  “This is a family business who cares about your family too.  Please allow us to grow with our family.”

 

Mr. Thornton asked how they monitor the property overnight from a pet perspective?  Mr. Vargo said they have never had a problem at their current location.   Mr. Thornton asked why they were looking to move?  Mr. Vargo said the practice has outgrown the current location.  They have 900 sq. ft. in their current building and the new building will have 1,500 sq. ft.   She is currently leasing the building she is in now.  The owner does not want to sell it to her.  Also, she wants to own her own business.

 

COMMENTS OF CITIZENS:  Mr. Mike Powers addressed the Board.  He owns the property directly behind the proposed business.  He holds nothing against Dr. Vargo for wanting to own her own business.  His concern is that he purchased his home in 1990 in a residential atmosphere.  Current value of his home is $400,000 and for someone to put a business in his front yard is unacceptable.  There is also an issue with the driveway because part of it is on his property.  The biggest issue is that the house could probably be purchased for $105,000/$110,000.  It is in shambles.  He was supposed to have gotten the first phone call on the purchase of it before it was put on the market.  Mr. Powers was going to tear it down because of the mold inside the home.  He was not in favor of the condominiums being built across the road, but now admits they are nice.  Regarding the traffic issue, that is a dangerous section.  The closer you get to the hill, the more dangerous it is.   Mr. Mickley asked Mr. Powers if his property was in the City when he purchased it.  Response was no, but was later annexed and zoned residential.  Mr. Mickley pointed out that Mr. Powers had a chance to attend Planning Commission meetings when the property was rezoned.  He said this is a conditional use; it doesn’t have to be approved, but it could be, so that opportunity has been there since it was in the city. 

 

Mrs. Amy Powers does not feel comfortable with people walking dogs in case they would happen to get loose.  She has grandchildren who visit. They are not opposed to anyone having their own business, but not in a residential area.  Also, she doesn’t want to have to look out at commercial signs in her front yard.

 

Mrs. Phyllis Gaskins addressed the Board.  She lives in the condominiums across the street from the proposed vet clinic.  She commented to Mr. Powers that she was at the meeting when he didn’t want the condominiums built and she tried to convince him that the condos would be beautiful and feels he can attest that they are a very nice community.   She and most of the people in attendance have a concern for noise, barking dogs.  Her condo is in a residential area and feels people who purchase condos in the future will be dismayed knowing that part of the area is a business area.  She has nothing against Dr. Vargo.  She hopes that she is successful in whatever she is trying to do, other than possibly disrupting the Timberview condominiums. 

 

Mr. Dave Ballmann addressed the Board.    He lives in the condominiums across the street.  He objects to any business moving in, not only a vet clinic.  He wants the area to remain residential.  He fears one business will open the door for a strip mall, etc.  He objects to any commercial establishment on Milford Avenue.  He wants the neighborhood to remain the type of area it is now.  The OSU Vet Clinic is an example of what happens when something causes a business to leave or shut down. 

 

Ms. Susan Lewis addressed the Board.  She lives in the condominium complex as well.  Any commercial development that goes in this residential area is more than likely going to bring down property values, either immediately around it or further out.  She feels once one person gets an exception to the rule, they’ll use that exception for the next time they want to break the rules, then there will be more commercial development in the area.  There is plenty of commercial real estate in this city that is currently vacant.  There is no need for this business to come to a residential area when there are commercial vacancies all over Marysville. 

 

Ms. Charlotte Draudt addressed the Board.  She bought her home because of the surroundings. She has lived there a year and a half and already all her surroundings want to be changed.  She doesn’t want it in her back yard. 

 

Ms. Lucille Ramsey addressed the Board.  She lives in the condominiums.  They live very close to the road where all the traffic would be, plus they would hear the noise from the barking dogs.  Their home is their retirement home, and they don’t want to see commercial buildings in the area.

 

Mr. Roger Lewis addressed the Board.  He lives in the condominiums.  His concern is the future of Milford Avenue.  It has always been residential and fears allowing this commercial property will allow change to the other vacant property in the area.  He wants the area to remain residential. 

 

Mr. Taylor asked if pets are allowed at the condominiums.  Response was yes, pets are allowed but must be on a leash. 

 

Mr. Thornton asked what other districts permit vet clinics.  Response was B1, TOC and SD-1. 

 

Mr. Taylor read a letter submitted from Mr. John Rudiger.  “Since we will be unable to attend your meeting on April 9, 2007, we are writing to make our feelings known.  On Item 1. (1131 Milford Ave.), we are opposed to any changing of zoning.  It is almost unbelievable the amount of flies and insects we had in this neighborhood when the other veterinary facility was here.  We were certainly glad to see them leave.”

 

Mr. Taylor read a letter submitted by Mr. John Bland, President of John Bland, Inc.  “I own the adjoining property to the south of the site in question.  I have attempted to contact the Applicant by phone to find out what would be done to the site.  My call was never returned, and I am left wondering why.  It is my intention to develop the 17 plus acres to the south of this site as a residential community, in which I have made a considerable investment.  The City has a 50 foot setback in place that would place a residential unit only 50 feet from the back garage.  If this is intended to be a shelter for numerous animals, this would create a nightmare for a potential residence.  I am somewhat surprised that the Applicant did not approach the adjoining property owners to establish a dialogue prior to this Request for Variance.  I do not support the Variance as it would diminish the quality of life for the surrounding property owners.  The fact the Applicant had so little regard for the surrounding neighbors that they did not solicit any input on how to make the Variance work is also a major concern.  I am unable to make tonight’s meeting due to other business commitments.  I am very hopeful that this Board will recognize the impact to surrounding neighbors and vote no to the Variance.”

 

Mr. Powers added that a new school is coming in down the street which will create increased traffic.

 

Mr. Mickley said it didn’t sound to him like the doctor indicated there would be a tremendous amount of traffic and if she is scheduling four clients an hour, that’s ambitious, but it’s not excessive traffic.  He doesn’t think there is any specific objective of the City’s Comprehensive Plan that would be abrogated by what the Board is doing.  He doesn’t see any objections other than they don’t want business.  He doesn’t feel that’s one of the Board’s choices in making a decision. 

 

Mr. Taylor said his research indicates that legally he questions whether this conditional use can be denied.  He understands the neighbors concerns.  He would rather give Dr. Vargo the opportunity to meet with the neighbors and try to work this out before the decision is rendered. The Board can act on it tonight or give the doctor and neighbors a chance to talk.  If he were to act on it tonight, he sees no reason why this conditional use should be denied legally.  He has been out to look at the proposed area for the clinic, and the major concern would be the traffic, but the doctor’s hours are not during school hours.   Mr. Mickley said the Board can turn it down. 

 

Mrs. Powers said by putting a commercial business in the area, means that she needs to put her house up for sale because she’s going to lose money.  The residential values are going to come down. 

 

Mr. Thornton asked Mr. & Mrs. Powers if the property were to come available because the sale didn’t go through, would they pursue purchasing it?  Mrs. Powers said yes.   She would much rather see a resident up there if she can’t buy it. 

 

Dr. Vargo said they want to improve the property.  It will look like a house.  There will be no barking dogs.  She’s never had one complaint about barking dogs in the nine years she been in her current building.  The hours will not conflict with school or residents’ hours. 

 

Mr. Thornton asked about the OSU veterinary property.  Dr. Vargo said she inquired about it but they will not sell the property.

 

Mrs. Gaskins asked Dr. Vargo what assurance the residents have that the property will stay the way she says it’s going to stay.  When Dr. Vargo states she’s had no complaints, it could be that the people just didn’t want to call and complain to her.  Mrs. Gaskins said the residents need to know that everything Dr. Vargo is promising is going to be just as she says.  She asked what recourse the residents have if they have a complaint?  Dr. Vargo said they should come to her.  She wants to make the neighbors happy. 

 

Mr. Thornton asked if Dr. Vargo’s full-time employee keeps regular business hours or are they there from 5:00-8:00 p.m.  Response was 5:00-8:00 and 9:00-12:00 noon on Saturday.  There are no day-time hours. 

 

Mr. Faulkner asked what assurance can Dr. Vargo give that she won’t change her hours to day-time hours.  Dr. Vargo said she is not planning any changes are far as her actual business goes.  She encouraged everyone to come to her with any concerns they may have. 

 

Mrs. Gaskins feels the conditions of approving this conditional use should be put in writing.  Mr. Taylor said he has noted four items that would be put into the conditional use approval.

 

Mrs. Gaskins asked why this piece of property is more attractive than some of the places that already zoned for business.  Dr. Vargo said she has been looking for over a year and a half and cannot find anything that is affordable to her that would enable her to keep her prices affordable for her clients. 

 

Mr. Taylor asked if Dr. Vargo had considered a possible buffer from surrounding properties around her property, such as evergreens, to compliment the surroundings.  He asked if the Powers wished to have this addressed?  Mrs. Powers said if this is going to be approved, they would definitely request buffering. 

 

Mr. Taylor confirmed that the parking lot would be between the two parts of the circular drive.  Response was yes. The out building currently on the property is coming down.  Response was yes.  He asked if there were plans for another building to replace that one.  Response was at this point, no.    Mr. Taylor confirmed that the hours would not change and that there will be no external kennels whatsoever.  No animals will be released outside that are not restricted by a leash and controlled by a human being. 

 

Ms. McCoy stated according to the sign ordinance, they can have a free-standing sign 5’ in height, 12 sq. ft., and suggested discussing whether applicant should have a free-standing sign or whether they want a sign on the building.  Mr. Taylor said the sign issue should be addressed in the restrictions.

 

 Also, Ms. McCoy stated according to Codified Ordinance 1141, the parking lot is required to be paved.  Dr. Vargo said they would pave it if it’s required. 

 

Dr. Vargo stated that if she is extremely busy, sometimes she will be there later than the regular hours, sometimes 10:00 p.m. or later. 

 

Mr. Taylor asked Dr. Vargo what she had in mind for signage.  Response was a free-standing sign and a building sign.  Mr. Taylor said it’s either or.  Dr. Vargo said she’d have one by the road.  Ms. McCoy said Dr. Vargo could have a little directional sign by her driveway. 

 

An unidentified person asked how an appeal would be handled.  Mr. Mickley stated an appeal would be handled through Common Pleas Court.  You have ten days in which to file an appeal. 

 

Mr. Taylor said he is not inclined as one of the voting members to make a decision tonight.  He has six conditions that he wants to write up and present to the Board.  He asked if Dr. Vargo would allow this item to be tabled until the May 14th meeting.  His six issues are signage and where it would be, the parking lot issue along with a lot size to the parking lot, the buffering, restrictions on the hours, restrictions on outside exercize area with no external kennels, placement of refuge and outside buildings. 

 

An unidentified person asked if residents would be notified of the next meeting.  Mr. Taylor said they would. 

 

Ms. Gaskins said once your decision has been made, how many days do they have to appeal it to the court.  Mr. Taylor said ten days from the decision. 

 

Dr. Vargo said she is willing to wait another month and talk to anyone who has concerns.

 

DISCUSSION BY BZA MEMBERS:  Mr. Mickley moved to table the Conditional Use until May 14, 2007, seconded by Mr. Faulkner and the question put, stood:

 

Mr. Taylor  YES   Mr. Faulkner  YES  Mr. Mickley  YES  Mr. Kessler  YES  Mr. Thornton  YES

 

Motion passed. 

 

NEW BUSINESS:

 

2.     To hear a request for a variance to permit 16.7’ front setback vs. 30’ minimum front setback required; R-2 zoning district; filed by Edgar L. Hay, 418 W. 5th St., Marysville, Ohio  43040

 

COMMENTS OF ZONING INSPECTOR AND/OR DESIGNEE: Ms. McCoy cited Codified Ordinance 1137.13, the front setback in the R-2 zoning district is 30’ from the City right-of-way.  The existing house currently sits 24.7’ from the right-of-way.  When the front porch was on the house previously, it was the exact size the applicant is requesting now.

 

COMMENTS OF REQUESTER:  Mr. Edgar Hay addressed the Board.  He presented photos of the house with the porch as it was before.  The old porch was on two stone slabs which were gradually sinking into the ground.  The actual porch was falling away from the house, which created a safety issue.  He had to do an underpinning on half of the house, so in order to gain access to do that, the front porch had to come off.  Mr. Taylor asked if it would have railings and response was yes. 

 

COMMENTS OF CITIZENS:  Mr. David Burke of Dave’s Pharmacy addressed the Board.  He supports the request by Mr. Hays.  He’s been working on his home for some time.  It will add value to his home and improve the situation. 

 

DISCUSSION BY BZA MEMBERS:  Mr. Mickley moved to approve the variance, seconded by Mr. Thornton and the question put, stood:

 

Mr. Faulkner  YES  Mr. Mickley  YES  Mr. Kessler  YES  Mr. Thornton  YES  Mr. Taylor  YES

 

Variance granted.

 

3)    To hear a request for a variance to permit 25.3% lot coverage for construction of a patio room vs. maximum of 25% permitted; R-2 zoning district; filed by Jim Kirchner, 617 Stallion Way, Marysville, OH 43040.

 

COMMENTS OF ZONING INSPECTOR AND/OR DESIGNEE:  Ms. McCoy cited Codified Ordinance 1137.13, the maximum lot coverage in the R-2 zoning district is 25%.  The applicant is requesting 25.3%.  This is not much, but it does exceed the maximum permitted.

 

COMMENTS OF REQUESTER:  Mr. Jim Kirchner addressed the Board.  He is requesting to build a patio room with a deck off of it.  Custom Patio Rooms will be constructing the room.  Mr. Taylor asked if Ms. McCoy had heard of any problems with this company building in Marysville.  Mr. Kirchner said they had never built anything in Marysville.  Ms. McCoy said the company has to get a building permit from the County and they will make sure it meets the code. 

 

COMMENTS OF CITIZENS: No comments.

 

DISCUSSION BY BZA MEMBERS:  Mr. Thornton moved to grant the variance, seconded by Mr. Mickley and the question put, stood:

 

Mr. Mickley  YES  Mr. Kessler  YES  Mr. Thornton  YES  Mr. Taylor  YES  Mr. Faulkner  YES

 

Variance granted.

 

Mr. DeLong said at the next meeting for the tabled item, the Board should make sure that the motion is very clear and that they are meeting the Findings of Fact.  Mr. Taylor will draft the conditions ahead of time.

 

Mr. Thornton noted that BZA Rules of Procedure states that no information should be accepted at the last minute, but felt this evening this could be qualified only from the fact that those were letters from neighbors that could not attend.  He cautioned the Board going forward that the Board not accept all sorts of information from a variety of people because it sets one side or the other off guard. 

 

Mr. Mickley also cautioned the Board about taking phone calls for fear of prejudicing the application before the Board.  He feels if someone has something to say or something to present, they should come to the meeting and present it to the entire Board, not just one person. 

 

ADJOURNMENT:  There being no further business to come before the Board of Zoning Appeals, the meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.