CITY OF PICKERINGTON

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2005

 

PUBLIC HEARING

7:00 P.M.

 

 

  1. ROLL CALL: Mr. Linek called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M., with roll call as follows: Mr. Linek, Mr. Cline, Mr. Boruszewski, and Mr. Wright were present. Others present were Lance Schultz, Dawn Romine, David Donley, Matt Baker, Frank Weirick, Renee Thomas, Greg Stephan, Bob Mason, Kadi Storms, Aaron Douglas, and others. Mr. Wells was absent.

 

  1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF July 21, 2005: Mr. Cline moved to approve: Mr. Boruszewski seconded the motion. Roll was taken: Mr. Linek, Mr. Cline, Mr. Boruszewski, and Mr. Wright voted “Aye”. Motion carried 4-0.

 

  1. SCHEDULED MATTERS

 

A.     Review and request for a motion to approve a landscape buffer variance for Donley Concrete Drilling and Cutting Company at 150 Borland Street.

 

Mr. Schultz stated: Zoning History: 1. City Council approved zone change request from C3 Community Commercial to P-M Planned General Industrial in June 2003. 2. Board of Zoning Appeals approved building and parking setback variances in May of 2003. Proposed Use: The owner constructed a garage/office building that encompasses approximately 6,880. The building accommodates up to 8 vehicles and 2-3 offices. The owner is requesting a variance to allow evergreen trees instead of a wood fence for buffering to the south and west adjacent to the residential properties. Site Analyses/Variance Request: The Board of Zoning Appeals approved building and parking setback variances based on the following conditions: 1. That a minimum 6-ft high wood opaque fence shall be constructed adjacent to the residential properties to the south and west. 2. That landscaping which includes trees and shrubs shall be installed on the side of the fence that faces the residential properties. 3. Staff maintains that screening should be installed adjacent to the residential properties per the zoning code, which requires a Type A buffer. 4. Type A buffer requires complete opaqueness from the ground to six feet above the ground. Buffering shall be an opaque wood fence, an earth berm and plant material. Plant material include staggered planting of evergreen trees, at least five feet in height at the time of planting, at intervals to achieve opacity. 5. The variance request for evergreen trees instead of a wood fence can be supported by staff if the following requirements are met: a. The adjacent residents do not have an objection with the removal of the wood fence condition and support evergreen trees instead (see attached letters from two residents). b. The evergreen trees should form a continuous buffer and minimum height shall be 5-ft high at installation. c. The evergreen trees should be installed along the south and west property lines where the wood fence was to be located. Staff Recommendation:      Staff supports the variance request with the following conditions: 1. That the evergreen trees shall be a minimum 5-ft high at installation and shall be staggered 10-ft on center along the south and west property lines. 2. That the dedication and legal description for the property just west of the site fronting Hill Road shall be forwarded to the City for recording prior to final occupancy permit. The owner is required to dedicate this property per a condition of the zone change approval in 2003.

 

David Donley, after being duly sworn, stated that he was the owner, and would work with the City in any way.

 

Mr. Cline moved to approve: 1. That tree line being 10-ft on center along the adjacent City Park property and City staff to recommend along residential side. 2. That the dedication and legal description for the property just west of the site fronting Hill Road shall be forwarded to the City for recording prior to final occupancy permit. The owner is required to dedicate this property per a condition of the zone change approval in 2003. Mr. Linek seconded the motion. Roll was taken: Mr. Linek, Mr. Cline, Mr. Boruszewski, and Mr. Wright voted “Aye”. Motion carried 4-0.

 

B.     Review and request for a motion to approve a rear yard setback variance for a deck at 262 Olde Mound Lane.

 

Mr. Schultz stated: Zoning History: None. Proposed Use: The homeowner is proposing to construct an approximately 300 square feet deck in the rear yard of the existing house. The owner has partially constructed the deck when he was informed a variance would be required. The house has frontage on two streets. Variance Request: Chapter 1282.10 – Required Site and Building Dimensions – In a R-4 district the rear yard setback is 35-ft. The proposed deck would be located approximately 26-ft from the rear property line to the east. It protrudes approximately 9-ft into the rear yard setback. The variance would likely impact the lot to the east the most, which has a single-family house. In the past year, similar variances for decks have been approved that protrude into the rear yard setback less than 50% of the required setback (17.5-ft) and does not adversely impacts the adjacent residents. Staff Recommendation: Staff supports the rear yard setback variance request for a deck with the following condition: 1. That the rear setback for the deck shall be reduced from 35-ft to 25-ft. Additional Comments:         An approved zoning certificate is required prior to submission for building permits.

 

David Naegele, after being duly sworn, stated that he was the homeowner and that he would like to be able to build this deck if at all possible.

 

Frank Weirick, after being duly sworn, stated that he was a neighbor. That he was in support of this project and had helped draw the plans for it.

 

Mr. Wright moved to approve: Mr. Cline seconded the motion. Roll was taken: Mr. Linek, Mr. Cline, Mr. Boruszewski, and Mr. Wright voted “Aye”. Motion carried 4-0.

 

  1. OTHER BUSINESS: Next meeting will be October 27, 2005.

 

  1. ADJOURNMENT: There being nothing further. Mr. Cline moved to adjourn; Mr. Boruszewski seconded the motion. Roll was taken: Mr. Linek, Mr. Cline, Mr. Boruszewski, and Mr. Wright voted “Aye”. Motion carried 4-0. The Board of Zoning Appeals meeting adjourned at 7:20 P.M., September 22, 2005.

 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

___________________________________________

Dawn-Elizabeth M. Romine, Administrative Assistant

 

ATTEST

 

 

_________________________________________

Lance A. Schultz, Director of Planning and Zoning