BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES
JUNE 11, 2007
The meeting was called to
order by Chairman Taylor at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Alex Kessler, Barbara Timmons, Kelly
Thornton, Nevin Taylor, Greg Faulkner, Harry McMannis, Dick Mickley
OTHERS PRESENT: Zoning Inspector McCoy, City Planner DeLong, Russ Fischer, JoAnn
Fischer, Todd Heuser, John & Cathy Bender
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: There being no additions or corrections, the
minutes for the meeting on May 14, 2007 were approved
as distributed.
NEW BUSINESS:
1)
Requesting a
variance for a lot line adjustment (lot split) for two nonconforming lots
resulting in lots being 6,162 sq. ft. and 7, 107 sq. ft. (existing lots 7,020
sq. ft. each and 6,250 sq. ft.) vs. minimum of 91,00 sq. ft. lots required; 128
Chestnut Street and 512 E. 6th Street; R-2 zoning district; filed by
Russell Fisher, 512 E. 6th Street, Marysville, OH 43040
COMMENTS OF ZONING INSPECTOR
AND/OR DESIGNEE: City Planner DeLong cited Section 1129.13. There are Findings of Fact that need to be
met. Based on the conclusion that all
the findings of fact have been met, staff recommends Board approval.
COMMENTS OF REQUESTER: Mr. Russ Fischer addressed the Board. He wants to purchase 15’ of the property just
east of them so they can park their RV on it.
They own the property to the south.
Mr. Thornton confirmed that
the 15’ was being added to 512 and not 510 and asked why 512. Applicant lives in 512. By adding the additional land to 512, he can
move his RV back further. 510 would now
allow him to do that. He is currently
using 510 for parking his RV.
COMMENTS OF CITIZENS: None
DISCUSSION BY BZA MEMBERS: Mr. Thornton moved to accept the
recommendations and approve this variance as requested, seconded by Mrs.
Timmons and the question put, stood:
Mr. Kessler YES
Mrs. Timmons YES Mr. Thornton
YES Mr. Taylor YES
Mr. Faulkner YES Mr. McMannis YES
Mr. Mickley
YES
Variance granted.
2)
Requesting
variance for 23.8’ front setback for 4’ x 18’ room addition vs. 25’ minimum
front setback required in the Woods at Mill Valley Subdivision; R-2 zoning
district. Filed by Bill Laurenson for Todd &
Shelly Heuser,
COMMENTS OF ZONING INSPECTOR
AND/OR DESIGNEE: City Planner DeLong cited Section 1129.13. There are Findings of Fact that need to be
met. Based on the conclusion that all
the findings of fact have been met, staff recommends Board approval.
COMMENTS OF REQUESTER: Mr. Todd Heuser
addressed the Board. He lost his
previous house to a fire in February. He
purchased a new house on Mill Wood and would like to put a secondary egress
coming up from the basement. Wants to
make it stairs rather than just a window so it will blend in with the property,
make it look good and be functional. Will make the staircase parallel to the house to encroach on the
corner as minimal as possible. There will be a door going to the
outside. It will go from the basement
out. Will not be able
to enter from the inside.
Mr. DeLong
noted the applicant has a gravel sidewalk.
Mr. Heuser said it was from the previous
owners. Mr. Heuser
plans to put a stamped concrete sidewalk up to the new door pending the Board’s
approval. He has asked the contractor
for a quote on replacing the gravel sidewalks.
No quote received yet.
COMMENTS OF CITIZENS: None
DISCUSSION BY BZA MEMBERS: Mr. Mickley moved
to accept the recommendations as presented and approve this variance as
requested, seconded by Mr. McMannis and the question
put, stood:
Mrs. Timmons YES
Mr. Thornton YES Mr. Taylor
YES Mr. Faulkner YES
Mr. McMannis
YES Mr. Mickley YES
Mr. Kessler YES
Variance granted.
3)
Requesting
variance for 22’ front setback for a fence vs. minimum of 25’ front setback
required in the Mill Valley Subdivision; R-2 zoning district. Filed by John and Cathy Bender,
COMMENTS OF ZONING INSPECTOR
AND/OR DESIGNEE: City Planner Delong
said based on the Findings of Fact that are listed in the Code, A, B and C
could not be met, so denial is recommended.
He detailed the Findings of Fact:
A)
That special
conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure or
building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or
building in the same district.
There is nothing unique about the applicant’s
property compared to
other ones in
B)
That a literal
interpretation of the provisions of this Zoning Ordinance would deprive the
applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district
under the terms of this Zoning Ordinance.
It
does not appear that a literal interpretation of the provisions of this
Zoning
Ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other
properties in the same district under the terms of this Zoning Ordinance. The home is located on a corner lot and is
required to meet two front yard setbacks.
The hardship caused by this variance appears to be applied by the
actions of the applicant and not the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant can meet the zoning setback
requirements as stated in the Zoning Ordinance.
C)
That special
conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant:
It
appears special conditions and circumstances do result from the action of the
applicant and not the Zoning Ordinance.
The applicant is stating that they do not want to meet the Ordinance
requirements so they can preserve landscaping and tree foliage, which are the
result of the applicant and not the ordinance.
Based on a drive-by site visit, there are no trees in the vicinity of
the proposed fence, just landscape bushes and shrubs.
COMMENTS OF REQUESTER: Mr. John Bender addressed the Board. A permit
has been issued that allows him 5’ from the corner of the house out. He’s asking for an additional 3’. Pictures presented shows a small tree,shrubs and bushes. He would have to lose the tree at the corner
of the deck if he were to go with the 5’ variance. He wants to put up a 6’ high privacy
fence. Mrs. Timmons suggested moving the
tree in a little, which would have to be done in the fall. Applicant wants to proceed with the fence as
soon as possible and not wait until fall.
All landscaping was there when they moved in about 1-1/2 months
ago. The 5’ would come right where the
tree is. His fence will butt right up
against his neighbor’s fence, and then he’s going to angle the back side of it
for the storm drainage. Fence will be
coming from the corner of the back of the house to the back property line. Deck sits up 2-1/2’ off the ground. Fence will be made of wood and will be
dog-eared.
Mrs. Timmons cautioned Mr.
Bender about putting the fence over the 10’ easement and what would happen if
the City or utility company had to get in with equipment. Fence would be torn down and would not be
replaced.
Mr. Taylor said he would be willing
to propose the approval of allowing 210 sq. ft. to have that easement nice and
clean across the back. He asked if the
applicant would be interested in his proposal? After discussion with Mrs. Bender,
applicant requested to withdraw the variance request and they’ll sacrifice the
landscaping.
COMMENTS OF CITIZENS: None
DISCUSSION BY BZA MEMBERS:
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come
before the Board of Zoning Appeals, the meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m.