7:30 P.M.




The meeting was called to order at 7:32 p.m. by Chairman William Mitchell.

Mr. Mitchell welcomed Mr. Okum to the Board of Zoning Appeals. He will be

acting as liaison from the Planning Commission.

Mr. Mitchell stated at the last meeting, we understood that with the chairmanís job vacant as vice chairman, I automatically stepped up to become chairman.

The proper procedure was that the position of chairman should have been elected. Mrs. Boice moved to elect Mr. Mitchell chairman and Mrs. McNear seconded the motion. By voice vote, all voted aye, and Mr. Mitchell was elected unanimously


Members Present: James Squires, Barbara Ewing, Councilwomen Marge

Boice and Kathy McNear, David Okum, Thomas Schecker

and William Mitchell.

Others Present: Doyle H. Webster, Mayor

William K. McErlane, Building Official


Mr. Squires moved for adoption and Mrs. Boice seconded the motion. By voice

vote, all voted aye except Mr. Okum who abstained, and the Minutes were

adopted with six affirmative votes.



A. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - 13 August 1996


A. Report on Council Activities - Marge Boice

Mrs. Boice stated I was not at the last meeting; Mrs. McNear might

have something to report. Mrs. McNear said nothing at this time.

B. Report on Planning Commission - David Okum

Mr. Okum reported that White Castle, with their revised drive thru will stay as close as they can to the Zoning Code, so that should keep them from coming to this board for any variances. The rezoning of the property at 11320 Springfield Pike from OB to PF-2 was recommended to Council. This would allow the construction of The Sterling House, a special care facility, assisted living. The circulation around the perimeter of the property is very limited, which was a concern, and they only allow for 34 parking spaces. A landscaping plan was not submitted, but they show 10 trees in front, and 38 are needed. They had photos of other sites; they are very attractive and will blend in with the Route 4 Corridor very well.


Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 September 1996

Page Two


Mr. Okum stated that the Charing Cross Estates Phase 1 has been into Planning over and over again. The applicant came in with another plan and Planning encouraged him to start the process over. Both Council members on Planning concurred that this would be a major change and would require going back to Council. At the applicantís request, the matter was tabled. Air Tite Windows development of the site west of Avon (Renaissance Property) is currently under the PUD zoning for the Pictoria Island development. The developer for Pictoria Island did not renew his lease, and this plan was very well done and was approved by Planning 7-0 and referred to Council with the exception of the trees, landscaping and signage.

Commenting about the Eades property (Charing Cross), Mrs. Boice said I just got through reading those minutes, and it seemed like he wanted the City to plan the project for him. When that goes into the final stages, I am sure that Planning will recommend that Bill should watch what is going on down there; the changing of the mind will be troublesome. Mr. Okum responded it is very difficult and has been quite a challenge dealing with it because each time he came in, it was a different project. In fact, the meeting prior to the last meeting I was acting chairman and Mr.Eades had an entirely new plan. When he presented it, he said that basically he did not like it either. The basic concept is not bad; I do not think he has finalized and tied t down, but itís unfair to ask the board to be making a decision and plan it for the developer.



A. Katherine OíBryan, 511 Smiley Avenue requests variance to allow RV to

be parked close to the property line. Said variance is requested from Section 153.044(C)(2) "..not closer than 5 feet to the nearest lot line..."

Referring to the letter from Mr. McErlane indicating that they have a lawful non-conforming use, Mrs. Boice moved to drop the item from the agenda and Mrs. McNear seconded the motion. By voice vote all voted aye, and the matter was dropped from the agenda.

B. David Jones, 795 Tivoli Lane requests variance to allow his camping trailer to be parked on concrete pad adjacent to driveway for the summer months. Said variance is requested from Section 153.044(C)(2) "..may be stored in an unenclosed area of the front, rear or side yard, but not closer than 5 feet to the nearest lot line, or any right-of-way line."

Mr. Jones stated that the trailer has been over there all these years, since 1976. I have always stored them in the winter, and still do. Mrs. Boice wondered approximately how many months you are requesting for this variance, and Mr. Jones answered four or five, it depends on how good the spring is. Mr. Squires added we are talking seven months, arenít we, from March through September? Mr. Jones responded April through October. I do not have access to my back or side yards at all. Mr. Squires wondered if he were aware that a variance goes with your property when you sell it. The reason I bring that up is in the event one of the neighbors sells their property, it is possible that someone may come in who may not like your camper. Mr.Jones said that already has happened; next door has been sold three times, and the present owner does not mind it at all. She says she misses it when it is gone.


Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 September 1996

Page Three


Mr. Okum wondered how close the unit was to the property line, and Mr. Jones stated that it is on it, adding it is five and one-half feet from the sidewalk. Mr. Okum continued so your neighborís fence is one and one-half feet back from your property line, and Mr. Jones added and the next house is 45 feet or more from the property line.

Mr. McErlane reported Mrs. Jones mentioned there were some other circumstances regarding the pad itself. Originally, Mr. Jones had parked on the driveway and Herman Grant made contact about building the pad to park the camper. He may have made an error in telling them to build it that close to the property line. Mr. Jones commented the trailer is not unsightly; the grass is cut around it.

Mr. Squires stated we have come across similar situations before asking for full time parking. I might ask the board if they want to look at the Minutes of June 18. On page 9 is a similar situation.

Mr. Mitchell added we try to be consistent with all the other appeals that have appeared before the Board. You are saying you have been doing this since 1976, but that does not make it right, and I would not feel right permitting you to do so after voting against the applicant in June.

Mr. Jones stated I could comply with the Code if I could get access to my side yard. In that respect, the law discriminates against me as a property owner. Mr. Mitchell responded the law really canít cover and catch all instances and circumstances.

Mrs. McNear said I am very much for keeping everything equal and fair for everyone. The one difference I see from the other ones is this property butts up to someone elseís back yard. That makes the difference. It is different from having it in your neighborís front yard.

Mrs. Boice said this is not a case where the neighbor most adjacent is walking out their front door or sitting in their area and having to look at a trailer. That is their back yard and I think that must be considered. My main concern is the length of time. We figured out it is closer to six or seven months. That concerns me, but I think this is a unique circumstance.

Mr. Schecker added the other point is the fact that he was permitted to put an expanded pad, perhaps at the cityís direction, and probably they made him think he was in pretty good shape. What about the time frame? I question what difference it makes if it is six or seven months. How does that matter to us?

Mr. Okum commented one thing that concerns me is the first thing someone would see is your trailer in the front yard. Putting some type of screening along the property line would soften the impact of the trailer. I understand the hardship; you have a unique situation, and the narrowness is a consideration. We cannot say put trees or shrubs in, but would you cooperate if the board approves this request for a period during the summer? Mr. Jones responded I would be in agreement with that.

Mrs. McNear stated I have not made up my mind, but if we grant this, we should go with a temporary variance of two or three years.


Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 September 1996

Page Four


Mrs. McNear continued I take exception to the comment about why we care if the time period is six or seven months. That is what we are here for. We do not want to get in a situation where it is there all the time. That is our job tonight.

Mr. Squires asked Mr. Jones to define the actual number of months that you want to have it parked there. Mr. Jones answered April through October.

Mrs. Boice asked when that pad was put in, and Mr. Jones responded either 1980 or 1981. Mr. Okum commented that was before the r.v. ordinance went into effect.

Mrs. Boice commented temporary variances are not a favorite of mine and can be problematic, but Mrs. McNear has made a good point. In the event that the property is sold or a new neighbor would move in, there might be a change in attitude, so perhaps we should look at this as a temporary measure. That might be the route we should look at.

Mr. Mitchell stated Mrs. McNear was looking at two or three years. l Mrs. Boice responded I think I would be more inclined to two years. Mr. Squires asked if they were talking about two years, April through October, and this was confirmed. Mrs. Boice added I would have the variance starting in 1997 and 1998. Mr. Squires asked the applicant how he felt about this. Mr. Jones answered if something could be written into the variance concerning the possibility of my property or the adjacent property selling.

Mr. McErlane reported typically you cannot do it based on a particular owner, not to mention the fact that we do not always know when a property sells, which is why it works out well to do it as a temporary variance.

Mr. Okum said I know those neighbors, and that area doesnít change. I would be more inclined to give them more latitude on it, but on the other hand, I do not necessarily agree that April is a necessity on a permanent storage of unit on the site. Mid-April or closer to May would be better. I would be more inclined to give you more time in years, but narrow your annual time to May 1st.

Mr. Squires added I hope you understand what we are trying to do here. We have had numerous requests similar to this. Your situation is unique, but the problem is that we have turned some of these people down, and we try to be fair to all citizens.

Mrs. McNear wondered how often they took the camper out and Mr. Jones responded I retired in June, so I will be taking it out pretty often. Mr. Squires continued so the trailer isnít there that much, and Mr. Jones indicated that it wasnít.

Mr. Schecker moved to grant the variance on the contingency that it be temporary for three years, and that he be permitted to park the trailer from May 1 through September 30th, commencing in 1997. Mr. Okum seconded the motion.

Mr. Okum commented we cannot put into the motion that he agreed to landscaping the property line? Mr. Schecker answered that is not in our prerogative. All we can do is encourage him to do it.


Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 September 1996

Page Five


On the motion to grant the variance, Mr. Schecker, Mr. Okum, Mr. Squires, Mrs. McNear, Mrs. Boice and Mrs. Ewing voted aye. Mr. Mitchell voted no, and the variance was granted with six affirmative and one negative votes.


A. Workshop for Board of Zoning Appeals and Planning Members

Mr. McErlane stated I raised the question last month to Planning concerning a planning and zoning workshop for the end of the year. We found that if we wanted to get the speakers we wanted, more than likely the workshop would be in January of 1997. In speaking with the Planning members, they are favorable to holding this on a Saturday morning. We plan to have speakers talking about holding public hearings, zoning issues and the legal aspects of zoning, and we are looking at a session of three to four hours.

Members of the BZA concurred with Saturday morning. Mr. Okum added I suggested 8 a.m. and someone said 9 a.m. Mrs. Boice commented for me, it would have to be early in January, the 5th or the 12th. Mr. Schecker added earlier in the month would be better for me also. Mr. Okum said Planning suggested a luncheon between the two boards. Mr. McErlane reported initially we talked about December because of the light agendas, but peopleís vacations would interfere, plus the local planning body holds a workshop that month, so we will shoot for January 5th or 12th.


Mr. Okum moved for adjournment and Mrs. McNear seconded the motion. By voice vote, all voted aye, and the Board of Zoning Appeals adjourned at 8:15 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,



_______________________,1996 __________________________

William Mitchell, Chairman



_______________________,1996 ____________________________

Barbara Ewing, Secretary