CITY OF PICKERINGTON
BOARD OF ZONING
APPEALS
CITY HALL, 100
LOCKVILLE ROAD
TUESDAY, DECEMBER
18, 2003
PUBLIC HEARING
7:00 P.M.
A. Review and request for a motion to approve side yard setback variance for a driveway at 44 Fanchers Street.
Mr. Schultz stated the zoning history: None. Proposed Use: The owner constructed a driveway along the eastern portion of the property. The driveway measures approximately 16-ft wide and 39-ft long. The driveway is located approximately one foot from the eastern property line. The primary purpose of the driveway is to have an all weather surface that is in close proximity to the house entrances for people who visit and for the owner to safely access vehicles. Zoning Variance: Distance form Property Line to Driveway – The City requires an 8-ft setback from a driveway to the nearest property line for residential properties on uncurbed streets. The setback is 3-ft for lots on curbed streets. The driveway is approximately one foot from the property line. Analysis: The grade in this area is relatively flat. Therefore, slopes and water run-off should not be a problem. Several years ago, there apparently was a gravel driveway at this location. In the Olde Pickerington Village Area there are several driveways that are located closer than 8-ft to the property line. Some driveways are located on or very close to the property line. Most of the lots in Olde Pickerington Village Area are relatively small in size (60-80-ft of frontage) and it is difficult to have a house and driveway fit within the zoning setbacks for lots that have a limited amount of frontage. The existing zoning standards were likely written for larger lots in new subdivisions and not for the smaller lots in the Olde Pickerington Village Area. Therefore, staff supports the reduced eastern driveway variance for the above stated reasons. Staff Recommendation: Staff supports the eastern side yard setback variance for the driveway.
Mr. Glen Miller, after being duly sworn, stated that he represented the Grange property, west of the property in question. Mr. Miller stated that he has been friends with the landowner for many years and that she has done many things for the City, but feels that she should have gone through the right process and that the drive should have been poured better than it was. The grade and width are not of the best construction and there may be drainage to the neighboring property to the east in his opinion. Most other driveways are black top versus concrete. But as for the Grange Hall they did not have any objections, just that things should have been done right to begin with.
Mr. Cline verified which property Mr. Miller was representing. Mr. Schultz verified that Mr. Miller was representing the Grange Hall to the west. The property owner that complained was to the east. This property apparently had a gravel driveway 10-20 years ago. If the gravel driveway existed today, the paving of the gravel driveway would be considered an improvement and would be permitted. This is not the best of situations with the application for a variance after the fact but this is how things have happened. The property to the east has the same circumstance that they either share a driveway or it is right on the property line. This issue is relatively common throughout the Olde Downtown area.
Mr. Sells moved to approve: Mr. Wells seconded the motion. Mr. Sells, Mr. Cline, and Mr. Wells voted “Aye”. Motion carried 3-0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
___________________________________________
Dawn-Elizabeth M. Romine, Administrative Assistant
ATTEST
_______________________________________
Lance A. Schultz, Director of Planning and Zoning Commission