CITY OF PICKERINGTON
BOARD OF ZONING
APPEALS
CITY HALL, 100
LOCKVILLE ROAD
THURSDAY, January 27, 2004
PUBLIC HEARING
7:00 P.M.
A. Review and request for a motion to approve a variance to allow a single- family residential use in a “C2” District (Central Business/Mixed Use) at 42 West Columbus Street.
Mr. Schultz stated zoning history: In the early 1990’s the residential house was converted to a commercial use (Richter House). Prior to the conversion, it was a residential house since it was constructed in 1922. Proposed Use: The owner is proposing to convert the commercial use back into a single-family residence, which requires approval from the Board of Zoning Appeals. Also, the owner is proposing an addition to the building that would need Certificate of Appropriateness approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission. The building addition would meet all zoning setback requirements. Zoning Issue (Variance Required) Chapter 1278.07 Use Limitations and Standards: Single-family residences are permitted in C-2 district as nonconforming, pre-existing uses. Therefore, a variance is required to convert any property in a C-2 District from commercial to a single-family residence. Analysis: Olde Pickerington Village Plan (not officially adopted by City Council but the Pickerington Comprehensive Land Use and Development Plan refers to this study for future uses in the Olde Downtown area) – maintains it is important to have a mix of residential and commercial uses along Columbus Street. 2. It appears the site and building has been used for residential uses for the majority time since it was constructed in 1922. From the early 1990’s to early 2000’s it was used for commercial.
Conclusion: Staff believes it is important to have a mix of
residential and commercial uses to maintain a vibrant Olde Pickerington Village
area. Also, it appears this site has been used for a residence, except for about
10 years since it was constructed. Therefore, the request seems to be
appropriate and practical. Staff Recommendation: Staff supports the variance.
Michael G. Kraft, residing at 55 West Columbus Street, 837-1724, after being duly sworn, stated that he had a couple of questions that were all answered by Mr. Schultz: 1. What are the notification requirements for this type of pending action? Every property owner next to, adjacent to or across the street from the parcel is notified. 2. This property is within the Olde Pickerington Downtown Village Historical district, Correct? Yes. 3. How is the applicant in compliance with the provisions of the Olde Pickerington Downtown Historical district ordinance? Upon your review? The applicant is requesting a use variance; Olde Pickerington Village District is more for the aesthetics of the building and the site. 4. Does the Olde Village ordinance not encompass the use and occupancy of the structures within it district? No, the zoning district determines the uses permitted. In this case the site is zoned C2. There are various zoning districts in the Olde Pickerington Village area. 5. Does the Olde Village Downtown ordinance indicate when a use of a structure changes, that also subject to a certificate of appropriateness? Only if they expand or change exterior features. 6. What does the Pickerington Comprehensive Land Use Plan say about this section? It is special district and in the land use plan it says to refer to the Olde Pickerington Village Development Plan. The Olde Pickerington Village Development Plan, which was prepared in the early 90’s, states that there should be a mix of commercial and residential uses along Columbus Street. 7. And is that mix not achieved by virtue of a mixed use? Yes. 8. What is the definition of spot zoning? When a site is surrounded by something that is not current with the surrounding zonings. 9. So do you consider this to be spot zoning? No.
It is already zoned C2. If a commercial site didn’t exist here previously than you could have a single-family use in this zone. 10. What is the zoning to all the adjunct structures? West – C2, South – C2, East – C2, and North – R4. 11. Do you consider this spot zoning? No. 13. What benefit to the downtown community will this bring? It will allow a mix use of commercial and residential uses. 14. Does the current zoning allow for that? Not for a single-family use once it has been changed to a commercial use. A variance is required to allow a single-family use. 15. Are any of the following documents available for my review? I am formally requesting the variance application for 42 West Columbus Street, all zoning variance applications; including but not limited to 80 West Church Street, within the Olde Downtown Village District since the ordinance has been adopted by council and all corresponding hearing testimony of record and board decisions. Mr. Schultz indicated such information would be provided.
Paul Thompson, after being duly sworn, stated that he is acting as the attorney for the applicant. His business is located at 60 West Columbus Street. Mr. Thompson stated that there are other residences and other properties that have mixed uses. The owner had originally lived here before selling this property. Now he bought the property back to return it back to their final residence. We have also presented a letter of intent stating the original history of the home. The property had only been commercial for 10 years out of the 100 plus years that the home has been in existence.
Denise Griffith, after being duly sworn, stated why does the C2 district allow for it to be a residence. Mr. Schultz stated, that once a structure has gone commercial it needs to have a variance to be returned to single family, but if it were used as multi family there would be no need for this variance. So that is why there is a need for this variance. Mrs. Griffith stated that she owns the business to the east and is a member of the Olde Pickerington Village Business Association and asked how is this going to affect the downtown street functions? Mr. Schultz stated that there should really be no effect on the downtown street functions.
Jennifer Reader, Schottenstein Zox & Dunn, stated that the zoning is not changing. That it is staying C2 – Central Business / Mixed Uses which provides for a mixed use of commercial and residential uses, but because they are going back to single-family residential they have to get a variance. The dissension of the board will only affect this property and it is not a zoning change.
Mr. Kraft again stated that having been a part of Planning and Zoning Commission and worked on drafting the Olde Downtown Village District Development Plan, believes that this board needs to fully understand that the intent of the downtown corridor is to be a commercial corridor. Mr. Kraft opposes this variance.
Sharon Kraft after being duly sworn, stated that she feels that there is good mix at this time and that by putting in another residential use will affect this. There is not enough time, money, and effort into revitalizing this area.
Gail Oaks after being duly sworn, stated that she owns the property to the west. Mrs. Oaks provided the committee with a history of the Olde Pickerington Village area and of this particular property. She supports this variance due to the history of the property and the owners, who at one time were willed the property and now are returning to it to carry out the rest of their lives.
Bob Noddin after being duly sworn, stated his concern was that the property did not turn into a rental and how will things affect parking? Mr. Thompson stated that it would be their personal residence.
Mrs. Griffith asked could this be a rental unit. Mr. Schultz stated there are no restrictions whether a house can be owner-occupied or renter-occupied. Mrs. Griffith also stated the concern on parking. Mr. Schultz stated that there are no parking requirements in place for any business in the Olde Downtown Pickerington Village area. Mr. Thompson asked if it was a bed and breakfast would that be allowed in this zoning? Mr. Schultz stated that such use would be permitted. Mr. Thompson stated speaking as a business owner in the area that parking will not affect other businesses with this being a residence as it would being another business.
Mr. Wells moved to approve: Mr. Cline seconded the motion. Roll was taken: Mr. Linek, Mr. Cline, Mr. Wells, Mr. Boruszewski, and Mr. Wright voted “Aye”. Motion carried 5-0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
___________________________________________
Dawn-Elizabeth M. Romine, Administrative Assistant
ATTEST
_______________________________________
Lance A. Schultz, Director of Planning and Zoning