BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

21 SEPTEMBER 1999

7:00 P.M.

 

 

 

  1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman James Squires.

II. ROLL CALL

Members Present: Frederick Borden, David Okum, James Squires and Tom Schecker

Members Absent: Councilwoman Kathy McNear

Councilman Robert Wilson (arrived at 7:22 p.m.)

Others Present: Richard Lohbeck, Inspection Supervisor

III. MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF 17 AUGUST 1999

Mr. Okum moved for adoption and Mr. Borden seconded the motion. All

present voted aye, and the Minutes were ad opted with five affirmative votes.

IV. CORRESPONDENCE

    1. Zoning Bulletin Ė August 10, 1999
    2. Zoning Bulletin Ė August 25, 1999
    3. 10/16/95 Memo from Marty Kenworthy re variances
    4. Planning Commission Minutes Ė August 10, 1999

V. REPORTS

    1. Report on Council Activities Ė Kathy McNear Ė no report
    2. Report on Planning Commission Ė David Okum

Mr. Okum stated that the largest project reviewed by Planning was the Costco Development on Kemper Road. This is the project that includes all the property on McClellans Lane. With quite a bit of prework that had been done, the project was brought before Planing for final review. It was approved with a number of conditions, including additional landscaping and to allow street tree planting along Kemper Road. There were a number of issues regarding the height of the building and height of the canopy. There will be an unattended gas facility for the members, which has a large canopy with a Costco sign on it. That is the only pole sign on the site; the rest are attached to the building.

There was a submission for the Bahama Breeze Restaurant to be built on the Pictoria Island site, and will be located where the umbrella is now along I-275 and the exit ramp of Route 4. There was quite a bit of discussion concerning the rear of the property facing North Commerce Way. This was changed from a final plan review to preliminary plan review, and they will be back next month for final approval. It is a very lively restaurant in South Florida and Atlanta and this will be the key location in the Cincinnati area.

Mr. Squires wondered what the criteria would be to be a member of Costco. Mr. Okum said I donít know; they donít even have guest memberships. I believe it is business operators only. The parking lot is designed with oversized parking stalls to accommodate the larger carts and larger vehicles.

 

 

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

21 SEPTEMBER 1999

PAGE TWO

  1. STATEMENTS CONCERNING VARIANCES
    1. A variance once granted would be referred back to the Board of Zoning Appeals if after the expiration of six months no construction is done in accordance with the terms and conditions of the variance.

If a variance appeal is denied, the applicant may resubmit the appeal six months after the denial.

B. Chairmanís Statement

Ladies and gentlemen, this is a Public Hearing, and all testimony given in cases pending before this board are to be made part of the public record. As such, each citizen testifying before this board is directed to sign in, take his places at the podium, and state his name, address and the nature of the variance. Be advised that all testimony and discussion relative to said variance is recorded. It is from this recording that our minutes are taken.

  1. OLD BUSINESS
  2. NEW BUSINESS
    1. Gary & Phillis Birkhofer, 1254 Wainwright Drive requests variance to allow the conversion of a 9í x 89í storage spaces in the garage area to a living area. Said variance is requested from Section 153.025(F) ". shall have a one or more car garage."
    2. Mrs. Birkhofer said we would like to take our garage door and replaces it with a window. When we moved there 75% of the garage was a bedroom, so there was an eight-foot storage area in the front. We want to convert that storage area into a living space and put a window on it to make it more attractive.

      Mr. Schecker asked if the trellis on the outside is an issue Mr. Lohbeck answered that the trellis is okay.

      Mr. Squires asked how many vehicles are in the family. Mrs. Birkhofer answered two. Mr. Squires wondered if one would be parked on the driveway and the other on the street, and Mrs. Birkhofer confirmed this.

      Addressing the applicant, Mr. Okum said you basically had begun the changes already. Mrs. Birkhofer indicated that they had, with the kitchen area. Mr. Okum asked the depth and length of the driveway. Mr. Birkhofer answered it is 35 feet to the front door. Mr. Okum said so you could get two cars in your driveway. Mr. Birkhofer answered if you put them all the way up to the window we would like to put in, yes. Mr. Okum asked if they plan to put a masonry base across this opening that would tie the brick in across the front? Mr. Birkhofer answered I have cinder box buildup on the bottom of it where the window would set, and it is filled up with two 2 x 8ís. It is built up about 13 inches from the base. The reason I framed that in is that it would save me a couple of hundred dollars from Champion to do it.

      Mr. Okum said you still have a garage door opening, is that correct? When you are finished, what will that look like? I know youíll have a bay window; what will be below it? Mr. Birkhofer answered on the side of it, 26 inches will be sided, and below it will be siding just like the house.

      BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

      21 SEPTEMBER 1999

      PAGE THREE

      VIII GARY & PHILLIS BIRKHOFER, 1254 WAINWRIGHT Ė GARAGE CONVERSION

      Mr. Okum commented there are two issues before the board, one is your expansion, and the other is what was there in 1983 before you moved there. I donít know if that would be grandfathered but the variance if given would be on your entire garage area being living space. Mr. Lohbeck added we have no record of a variance being granted for that property.

      Mr. Birkhofer said we understand that it would be for the total garage, but when we purchased the house that was a living area that we used as a toy room for our children. Mr. Okum said typically this board has tried to eliminate the look of a garage converted into a living space. Many times they leave the garage door on the house so it appears to have a garage and later on can be converted back if they wish to. You will be eliminating the opening and will be giving the appearance of a garage converted into a living space.

      What you are doing is not unattractive, but if you were to make those changes, I feel it would need to look like itís not a converted garage into a living space. By putting siding around your bay window, basically boxing your window, it is different from the rest of the front of your house. Have you considered the possibility of bricking it similar to the rest of your house?

      Mrs. Birkhofer answered we already had the siding so we figured we would use it to match what was already there. Mr. Okum responded it would match only the sides; if you look at the face of your house, you have siding on the upper story. Mrs. Birkhofer said thatís no problem; we can do brick. Mr. Okum continued the only problem is matching a brick that is 37 years old. Mrs. Birkhofer said they have those that are a combination of red and black, and our brick is red. Mr. Okum added I would feel more comfortable if it were treated as a regular part of your home instead of a box with a bay window in it.

      Mr. Birkhofer added the house is quite old, and to match the brick would be hard. Would that appearance look worse than the window? Mr. Okum responded I think the window would be an asset to the house. Mr. Birkhofer added rather than build it in and not being able to match it. Mrs. Birkhofer said the black and red would offset it enough because the brick is red.

      Mr. Birkhofer added we are trying to enlarge our living space because of our family and grandchildren. Mrs. Birkhofer added we donít plan on moving anywhere to have anybody move in and convert the space back to a garage. Mr. Birkhofer said I think we are enhancing our home and it is not taking away from the value of the home in the Heritage Hills subdivision.

      Mr. Borden asked if he were going to do the masonry work himself and Mr. Birkhofer answered if we have to go that route, I would have to contract that out. Mr. Borden asked if it is presently a brick veneer, and Mr. Birkhofer answered it is a regular full size brick on the lower level; it is a bi-level home.

      Mr. Squires said in addition to your window being aesthetically pleasing, is it also functional in terms of letting light in? Is that the only light you will get there? Mrs. Birkhofer answered no; we have another window in the front. Mr. Birkhofer added between our front door and the garage there is a 60í x 48í window.

       

      BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

      21 SEPTEMBER 1999

      PAGE FOUR

      VIII GARY & PHILLIS BIRKHOFER, 1254 WAINWRIGHT Ė GARAGE CONVERSION

      Mr. Okum asked if they intended to leave this as a separate room or will the wall connect between the living room and this area? Mrs. Birkhofer answered it would connect, and Mr. Okum said so you basically are enlarging your living room. Mrs. Birkhofer said it would be a great room that we want to put a large table in so everybody can sit down to dinner. Mr. Birkhofer added it would be a 24í x 27í room with new hardwood flooring. Instead of moving to a larger place, we want to stay; it is a good neighborhood, and we would rather invest the money here.

      Mr. Wilson arrived at 7:22 p.m.

      Mr. Schecker said first I want to compliment you on the appearance of your house; it is very very nice. I do have a concern with the appearance of the vinyl in the middle. Mr. Birkhofer responded the window is vinyl also. Mrs. Birkhofer added we could do the brick; it is no problem. Mr. Birkhofer said we want to make our home a little bit nicer for us and still be within the variance of the board.

      Mr. Borden asked if this would be heated, and Mrs. Birkhofer responded it already had heat and air conditioning in it.

      Mr. Squires asked if they had acquired the proper building permit, and Mr. Birkhofer answered we talked to Mr. King and let him know our intentions. We had a permit when we took the kitchenette wall out. We thought by speaking to him and his coming and seeing the stages that we have done we didnít need a written permit. Mr. Squires responded the building permits donít cost anything but for your safety and to make sure everything is up to code, I would get one.

      Mr. Birkhofer responded Mr. King has seen the project as we have been working on it and has told us what we needed to do or what should be done, and we figured from his conversation, and his seeing things at different stages, it was acceptable to the Building Department. Mrs. Birkhofer added we have had him check everything along the way. Mr. Squires responded I will go on record that you should get a permit. Mr. Birkhofer responded there is no problem with that.

      Mr. Squires asked if anyone present wished to speak on this request. From the audience, a lady said you called the privacy fence on the side of their home a trellis. That is not a trellis and I would like to see the Code on a privacy fence. Mr. Squires answered that is not relevant to their variances, but we can refer your question to Mr. Lohbeck and you can consult with him about that.

      Mr. Schecker moved to grant the variance with the stipulation that the applicant locates masonry of similar color and finish to surround the bay window and to eliminate the appearance of a garage door opening. Mr. Okum seconded the motion, addling that masonry is often quite difficult to match color and finish. There are a number of people who dye the brick to match existing brick faces. If you canít match it, it is an alternative.

      Voting aye were Mr. Schecker, Mr. Okum, Mr. Borden, Mrs. Ewing and Mr. Squires. Mr. Wilson abstained, and the variance was granted with five affirmative votes.

       

      BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

      21 SEPTEMBER 1999

      PAGE FIVE

      VIII GARY & PHILLIS BIRKHOFER, 1254 WAINWRIGHT Ė GARAGE CONVERSION

      Mr. Birkhofer said since we have to go with the brick rather than the vinyl, what period of time do I have to get this done? II have to do all the brick work as the panel requested, and then they come out and take a true measurement, and it is 10 weeks before I can have the window installed. Mr. Squires answered you have six months to do this. Mr. Birkhofer added all that time, there were no objections to paneling it and putting plastic and everything else to keep the cold air in because the way it is now, it will be the middle of December before I can put the window in. Mr. Squires said you have six months to get it started, and frankly if you need an extension, I donít see any problem with your getting it.

      B. David E. Houston, 11917 Lawnview Avenue requests variance to allow him to place a shed 3í-6" from the property line. Said variance is requested from Section 153.025(C) "..must not be less than 5 feet from any rear or side lot lines."

      Mr. Squires announced that Mr. Houston has asked that this be tabled since he is out of town. Mr. Okum moved to table and Mr. Schecker seconded the motion. By voice vote, all present voted aye, and the matter was tabled to October 19th.

      C. Holly Todd, 366 Peach Street requests variance to allow her to not rebuild the garage on the property. Said variance is requested from Section 153.025(F) "..shall have a one or more car garage."

      Ms. Todd stated we purchased the property with a work order standing against it to have the garage taken down or repaired. It could not be repaired, and it was not a functional garage anyway, it was more of a shed. We went ahead and took it down and cleared the lot. That particular garage only stood four feet from the road, so it was too close to the road anyway. On the second page of the diagram, there was only one of the six houses immediately surrounding that house in that section of the Peach and Walnut area that has a garage. It is actually closed out and they are using it as a playroom, but there is still a garage. Everyone else either has no garage or has converted the garage to additional living space.

      We are proposing to rehab the house, totally fixing it up for resale. We would like to keep the garage down; it is too close to the road where it was, and if we move it to where it is required to be, it would take up the whole back yard.

      Mr. Squires asked if they were going to remove the existing brick wall and Ms. Todd answered actually that wall is not on our property. We would like to take it down, but it is not ours to take down.

      Mr. Okum asked if they intended to provide a group parking area there, and Ms. Todd answered yes, we are going to put a 16í x 20í pad in, the same size as the garage. Mr. Okum continued if the board would consider a variance, would you be inclined to increase that size to be appropriate to handle two vehicles? Ms. Todd answered yes, we could do that; there is space.

      Addressing the applicant, Mr. Wilson asked if she werenít concerned about the resale value without a garage or carport. Ms. Todd responded the comparable market values in that area would not carry the cost of the garage. It would overprice the area, except for the one house that is under construction.

      BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

      21 SEPTEMBER 1999

      PAGE SIX

      VIII C HOLLY TODD 366 PEACH ST. Ė APPROVAL NOT TO REBUILD GARAGE

      Mr. Squires asked for comments from those present.

      Mr. William Jansen, 11560 Hickory Street said I have a statement signed by 28 people.

      "Ours is a unique community, and we object to any variance to the building code with regard to the request not to replace a single garage on the referenced property. Our community has made great progress in recent years, with more and more owners enhancing the value of the overall neighborhood. We believe that if this variance is allowed, it will open the door to others who do not want to make the necessary repairs and replacements, thereby causing a reversal in the trend to improve our neighborhood and thereby devaluating our homes."

      I submit this to you with 28 signatures which equals 20 households and I believe there are 38 households in the community. All the neighbors except one who I approached today, signed this. The only person who did not sign was the person next to this home who has some intimate relationship, and he was reluctant to sign this request to not grant the variance.

      More than 50% of the residents in our community do not want any variances. Everyone I spoke to tonight, 100% of the people who were home agreed. Everyone in the neighborhood is living up to the codes, and we would expect and request that all neighbors in our community respect and live up to the building codes.

      Mr. Squires said as chair, I am going to move to strike the comment about intimate relationship. Mr. Jansen responded letís replace it with a working business relationship, because that was what was implied to me.

      Mr. Jansen added there also were comments by some of the neighbors that there is new construction in the area and there is likely to be more. There are other people in the area who want to improve their residences. Several people asked me to mention that. Also, this is strictly hearsay, but this was purchased by a developer for resale and they donít have the same relationship with our neighborhood as we do.

      Mr. Wilson said in your neighborhood of 38 houses, how many have garages? Mr. Jansen answered I am not sure; mine does. I would say half. Mr. Wilson continued so your concern is if we grant this variance to not allow a replacement of the garage, others will come forth and request the same type of variance? Mr. Jansen answered I am here representing all these folks, and that was one of the concerns. Mr. Wilson commented a variance is on an individual basis. We could deny a variance to Mrs. Todd and grant a variance to her neighbor. I understand what you are saying I appreciate your coming, and I will take that into consideration, but I look at variances on an individual basis in terms of the best interest of the city, and also the hardship that it might have on the individual requesting it.

      Mr. Okum said where Walnut Street is on the drawing, the right of way line is actually back some 15 or 20 feet from there, and was the garage on the public right of way and therefore did not meet the setback requirements? Mr. Lohbeck confirmed this. Mr. Okum continued so if the applicant would rebuild the garage, she would have to meet all zoning requirements.

      BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

      21 SEPTEMBER 1999

      PAGE SEVEN

      VIII C HOLLY TODD 366 PEACH ST. Ė APPROVAL NOT TO REBUILD GARAGE

      Mr. Lohbeck stated it would have to be 35 feet from Walnut Street and 5 feet from the rear property line. Mr. Okum commented so that would put it in the middle of the back yard. Ms. Todd added there would be no yard, if we could even fit one in.

      Mr. Okum commented typically I donít like to eliminate items and I also like to go with the residentsí wishes. In this particular case, the elimination of the garage was the elimination of urban blight. The garage was nothing better than blight, which lowered the value of the entire neighborhood. Additionally I feel that the placement of the garage in the middle of the back yard would be a hardship on the applicant, as well as a situation of not enhancing or improving the property. They would literally lose their back yard by placing the garage 35 feet from Walnut Street. Therefore, considering the applicant has shown intent to replace the garage area with an improved surface that will conform to code to accommodate two parking spaces, I will be voting in favor of the variance.

      Mr. Schecker commented I agree with Mr. Okumís assessment. If in fact this variance were granted, nothing would preclude any owner from putting in a garage if they so choose. I think if you put a garage in the required area, you would make that neighborhood look quite congested, much more than it does without it there and I would support the variance.

      Mr. Squires asked if anyone else present wished to speak?

      From the audience, Hazel Hendrix, 344 Peach Street said I have no objection to her leaving the garage off the property, as long as she is not going to sell it for commercial purposes.

      Mr. Wilson responded that neighborhood is zoned R-1-D, single family residential. Mrs. Hendrix said I would like to see it kept that way. Mr. Wilson continued if she tries to sell it to a commercial venture, they would have to come to us for a zoning change, and we would not allow it. There will be no commercial exposures in a residential area unless the whole area is zoned commercial. Weíre not going to do that, because there are too many of our residents there that donít plan to leave any time soon. Mrs. Hendrix said I am one of them. Mr. Wilson responded when you decide to move to someplace else, you probably will sell the house to one of your children, or to a relative, keeping the Baldwin Subdivision residential, no commercial. Do you now feel comfortable about the lady not replacing the garage, and Mrs. Hendrix answered yes, that was my only concern.

      Diane Billingsley, 11520 Walnut said I live right across the street, and that would be an eyesore if she put another garage up. I donít object to the variance. A garage would be an eyesore to me; I would be looking at it from my living room. Mr. Squires asked her what she thought about the parking area, and Ms. Billingsley answered that I like; there are no parking spaces in that neighborhood whatsoever.

      Mr. Okum moved to grant the variance with the following condition, that an improved parking surface be provided to accommodate two cars with adequate area for the doors to swing open. Mr. Wilson seconded the motion.

       

       

      BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

      21 SEPTEMBER 1999

      PAGE EIGHT

      VIII C HOLLY TODD 366 PEACH ST. Ė APPROVAL NOT TO REBUILD GARAGE

      Voting aye were Mr. Okum, Mr. Wilson, Mr. Schecker, Mr. Borden, Mrs. Ewing and Mr. Squires. Variance was granted with six affirmative votes

    3. Charles Schetter, 11807 Neuss Avenue requests variance to allow the construction of a sunroom to extend 26 feet from the rear property line. Said variance is requested from Section 153.024(D)(4)(c) "Rear yards must be at least 40 feet deep."

Mr. Squires stated due to the fact that the chairman knows Mr. Schetter very well, and due to the fact that it was on my suggestion that Mr. Schetter write this letter to the board indicating that they were the owners and this gentleman from Gilkey can represent them, I will ask the Vice Chairman to take over.

Emil Derminio of Gilkey Enclosures stated the enclosure would be on the back of their house. They currently have a concrete pad with an awning on top. We are going to remove the existing awning, bust up the concrete, pour new concrete with footers and enclose it with three walls, and all proper permits will be taken care of by Gilkey Enclosures.

Mr. Schecker said would this be the same dimension as the existing patio? Mr. Derminio answered yes, it will be approximately 12í x 14í.

Mr. Wilson said so all you are doing is enclosing what is already there with improvements. Mr. Derminio answered basically. WE have to start from scratch, remove what he has there, and replace the concrete with new concrete since he has cracks in the present concrete. We will do a monolithic core with footers around the perimeter of the room. Mr. Wilson asked if it would be heated and Mr. Derminio answered no. This is a three-season room of aluminum and glass construction, and it would not be heated. There will be a sliding door out to the back yard.

Mr. Okum asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one responded.

Mr. Schecker said with the fact that this is a very short back yard, it is a little scary to see something encroaching further and further, On the other hand, there seems to be sufficient privacy back there. The adjacent neighbor has a similar room closed in and given those circumstances, I do not have any objection to this.

Mr. Borden wondered if the enclosure would have tempered and insulated glass. Mr. Derminio answered it is tempered and insulated glass, which is two panes of clear glass to get the air between them.

Mr. Schecker moved to grant the variances and Mr. Borden seconded the motion.

Voting aye were Mr. Schecker, Mr. Borden, Mr. Wilson, Mrs. Ewing, and Mr. Okum. Variance was granted with five affirmative votes.

Mr. Squires returned to the dais and the chairmanship.

 

 

 

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

21 SEPTEMBER 1999

PAGE NINE

    1. Dawn Seltzer, 255 Harter Avenue requests variance to allow the placement of a shed 3 feet from the property line. Said variance is requested from Section 153.025(C) "must be not less than 5 feet from any rear or side lot lines."

Ms. Seltzer stated the original shed was right up against the fence and we moved it out two feet seven inches from the property line. We started constructing the shed without a permit because I didnít realize I needed one. I had an existing shed there that was falling apart. It was right up against the fence and we moved it out. Her contractor added it is on top of patio stones and treated landscape timbers.

Mr. Squires asked if it could be moved any more and the contractor responded the problem is that the ground is very unlevel all through there. One of the reasons we moved it away from the fence was to try to find a level spot. Also, to move it I would have to tear it all the way down. Mr. Squires responded we are talking a hardship to move it.

Mr. Okum wondered if there was any location in the rear of the property that would be better. Currently it is close to your neighbor. The contractor answered not at all. The back property runs up a hill. Mr. Okum asked if there is a variance on the property, and Mr. Lohbeck reported that there was not. Ms. Seltzer added I was told by Gordon King that the dimensions changed over the years; at one time it probably was okay to have it on the fence line. The contractor added the sheds are all in the same place up and down the road, right up against the fences, and they are all metal sheds, so they probably were put in when the houses were built.

Mr. Okum said you have a tree in front of it. The contractor added there is a tree on either side, and we tried to center it up with the trees and moved it off the fence line. There is not much room to play with in those yards; theyíre awfully small.

Mr. Okum wondered if they had three feet behind it, which could be difficult to maintain. Would you be averse to putting vertical hedges there to eliminate that problem? The contractor responded we could pub something on either side of it.

Mr. Schecker said the rear property line abuts to a deep lot off Kemper Road. The contractor responded to put the shed in the back we would have had to build it into the hillside. The only level spot in the yard is right in front of her back door. Everything else is running up hills.

Mr. Wilson said when you purchased the house, the old shed was already there, and so all you are doing is replacing something that had deteriorated. And you are willing to do some kind of camouflage in the way of hedges. Ms. Seltzer answered absolutely; I will be doing some landscaping next spring anyway.

Mr. Squires asked if anyone present wished to speak.

Glen Bauman, 260 West Kemper said I live behind her, and have no objection at all. I was glad to see her tear down the old metal one, which looked like it, was put in about the time the house was built. It was falling apart; it was a mess. I donít see anywhere she could put the new construction and have it level. It blends in; it is a huge improvement. If she moves it five feet from the property line, she will lose almost all the back yard, and there wonít be any place for the kids and the dog. I see it almost daily and itís going to be a great improvement.

Gene OíBrien, 249 Harter said Iím her other neighbor. The lawn is built up so she cannot put it anywhere else. I have no objection.

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

21 SEPTEMBER 1999

PAGE TEN

VIII E DAWN SELTZER 255 HARTER AVENEUE Ė SHED 3 FEET FROM LINE

Mr. Schecker moved to grant the variance and Mr. Borden seconded the motion.

Mr. Wilson wondered what the materials of the shed are. Ms. Seltzer showed a picture of it; it will match the house. I wanted it to look like a little house, not a barn.

Voting aye were Mr.Schecker, Mr. Borden, Mr. Okum, Mr. Wilson, Mrs. Ewing and Mr. Squires. Variance was granted with six affirmative votes.

F. Glen Bauman, Jr. 260 West Kemper Road requests variance to allow the construction of a 384 square foot pole barn. Said variance is requested from Section153.036 "..shall not exceed 120 square feet in area."

Mr. Bauman said I am requesting a 24í x 16í pole barn for my back lot. I need one big enough for a small flshing boat, a riding lawn mower, trailer and 8í x 4í trailer. I would rather have all that in the barn instead of setting out where the neighbors can see it and where the weather gets to it and where the kids who cut through cannot have access. It will blend in with the surroundings.

Mr. Squires asked if his yard went 398 feet from West Kemper and Mr. Bauman indicated that it does. The back property line goes to Dawn Seltzerís property, and there is a privacy fence along there so she is not looking into the pole barn.

Mr. Squires wondered why he chose a pole barn and not a structure. Mr. Bauman responded cost and something that is not as permanent as well. If I put in a permanent structure, I might have to lay cement. I donít plan to live there for the rest of my life, so if the new owner wanted to take it down, there wouldnít be a permanent cement foundation there. It would give me room to put everything that is in my garage back there. And it would free up the garage to use for a car.

Mr. Wilson said so you are asking for a variance between the 120 s.f. required and 384 s.f. That is 264 feet, and I donít feel comfortable with that. All up and down Kemper Road, residents are asking for as much as a three-car garage and humongous pole barns that are almost the size of the house. None have been approved, and I feel very uncomfortable about a variance of this size. I would rather work with you in toning this down a bit and doing landscaping around it. True, you have a very deep lot, and you would have to look real hard to see the pole barn that far back. But for us to approve this as is would be to open Pandoraís Box, and everyone who had a pole barn of this size would come back and ask why did you allow this?

Mr. Bauman responded I believe the precedent has already been set up the street on the other side with that three-car garage. Mr. Wilson answered I donít know how long that three-car garage has been there; it has been for a long time. Mr. Bauman commented it looks like new construction; maybe we are talking about two properties. Mr. Wilson said you are right; the precedent was set. Whether it was set prior to or after the zoning code, I canít say. Iíve only been on BZA for two years. I do have a concern about the size.

In fact, others in the last two years have come in and requested pole barn of this size and larger, and we have been able to work with them in terms of toning it down. My question to you is would you feel comfortable with downsizing this a bit and working with us?

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

21 SEPTEMBER 1999

PAGE ELEVEN

VIII F GLEN R. BAUMAN 260 W. KEMPER Ė 384 S.F. POLE BARN

Mr. Bauman responded obviously I would be, because some structure there to house some of what I need to put in there is definitely preferred against nothing. From a neighborhood standpoint, I think it would be much preferable to have a larger nicely constructed blending in building. If I tone it down in terms of size, construction and landscaping, if I have a 10í x 12í shed, I still would have a fishing boat and an 8í x 4í trailer setting out in the open in my back yard. I would think none of my neighbors would care to look at that.

Addressing the applicant, Mr. Squires said you referred to a three-car garage on Kemper Road. I believe that was originally proposed as a pole barn, and he worked with the Building Department, BZA and Planning Commission and came up with that garage. Mr. Bauman responded I was referring to the size of the structure.

Mr. Okum asked the size of his present garage and Mr. Bauman answered I do not know the square dimensions. I have a Ford ranger pick up truck with extended cab and in order to close the garage door, I need to fold up the fog lights on the front of the truck. So, it is very restricted.

Mr. Okum asked how much of the barn is already built, and Mr. Bauman answered I have not the corners done and the center beam but have put up the OSB board on the back and one side. Mr. Okum asked the material on the outside for siding. Mr. Bauman answered I am not sure, depending on the decision here. I had OSB board and checked with the Building Department and I cannot use that as an actual finish. I am not sure if I will do a wood finish and stain it, which would be preferable, or the OSB board with the vinyl siding to match the house. I would prefer to do the wood stain and use that OSB board for the roof. Mr. Okum asked if the roof would be shingled and Mr. Bauman indicated that it would.

Mr. Okum said I noticed you had started on the garage. Mr. Bauman responded I am a new homeowner and this is my first experience, and I wasnít sure what I needed to do. I started working on it and the building inspector told me to stop and get a permit and I havenít worked on it since, and that was May.

Mr. Squires wondered the cost of a garage versus a pole barn. Mr. Bauman responded the cost prohibitive thing is poured cement and poured foundation. If it is an actual garage, I am going to need cement footers, which means a cement truck driving 390 feet through my back yard. I have already seen what the truck would do to my property because before I bought it the previous owners had trucks come in, dig up foundation and repair water leaks in the basement. There are two huge ruts in my back yard and one in the front. I would rather not have the mess. Also in order for the truck to get to that spot, he would have to drive down the middle of my lot because of the existing trees.

Mr. Squires said I ask because it has been my experience that this panel is reluctant to approve pole barns. Mr. Bauman responded that is something I got from talking to Bill McErlane. Originally I had it set up as a shed, and he suggested this with the type of construction and what I was using it for. It would be a little easier to go the pole barn route than an actual kit shed.

Mr. Borden commented you have a fishing boat and trailer, lawn tractor and lawn trailer and you need to get all those inside this structure. Mr. Bauman answered I would like to. Mr. Borden asked the dimensions of the fishing boat.

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

21 SEPTEMBER 1999

PAGE TWELVE

VIII F GLEN R. BAUMAN 260 W. KEMPER Ė 384 S.F. POLE BARN

Mr. Bauman answered the fishing boat is 15 feet with a four foot tongue on the trailer. It is currently at my parents. The utility trailer is 13 feet long with 13 feet long and 6 feet wide. The riding lawnmower is 6 feet long and 4 Ĺ feet wide and the trailer that goes with that is 6í 1" long and 3 feet wide. The lawn roller is 4 feed wide and 4 feet long.

Mr. Okum commented based on our code, a 400 s.f. garage is standard, and a 120 s.f. shed is standard. If the property were built with a two-car garage (400 s.f.) and a shed (120 s.f.) the property would be allowed 520 s.f. The applicant is requesting 576 square feet, which is 56 s.f. over if we were to do it that way.

I donít feel that a pole barn is appropriate; certainly the garage transition for the neighbor down the street is much better and much more appealing. On the other hand if you put it 300 feet back on your property, it will be hard to drive a car back there.

Mr. Bauman commented with my current landscaping, it is really not visible, especially during the summer. Mr. Okum said I could see it today from the west side and from the front. I have some problems with a pole barn of this dimension, but I have to be sympathetic to the fact that you have a single car garage. There are a lot of people in the community that have a one-car garage. Fortunately you have a very large lot.

You have 192 s.f. of improved garage, and you want to build a 384 s.f. shed. The shed we consider as a temporary building. Mr. Bauman commented that is the impression I got that he was making the suggestion of the pole barn because it is a little more permanent and secure fixture, but also temporary as opposed to a poured foundation garage.

Mr. Okum commented the only thing that concerns me is that there are other people that will have to look at it, and have to look at it 10 years from now. I donít know what your requirements would be. Mr. Borden said I total 192 s.f. Mr. Okum said so 200 s.f. would be needed. If we went 200 s.f. of shed with that depth of the lot and some screening, I think I could feel comfortable with that.

Mr. Bauman commented what worries me about something that small is accessibility to everything in that shed. Mr. Okum responded you do have to realize that there are other people in our community that park their boats and trailers and so forth elsewhere. Mr. Bauman responded it is all stacked up in my garage, except for the boat, and I donít have a problem leaving the boat where it is. My next door neighbor has a patio that is littered with all that garbage; I have to look at it every day, and it looks horrible; but I do understand what you are saying.

Mr. Wilson said Mr. Lohbeck suggested that you consider a garage without a cement floor rather than a pole barn. Mr. Bauman responded I would be more than happy to look at that; I didnít know that was an option. I thought the definition of a garage was a solid foundation underneath.

Mr. Lohbeck reported not necessarily a garage per se, but a structure that looks like a garage, a pole barn. Mr. Bauman answered that is what I was shooting for with a pole barn. I donít want a pole barn with metal sides that looks like it belongs out in Harrison. I was aiming at something that looked like a garage but doesnít have a cement foundation.

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

21 SEPTEMBER 1999

PAGE THIRTEEN

VIII F GLEN R. BAUMAN 260 W. KEMPER Ė 384 S.F. POLE BARN

Mr. Lohbeck reported according to what we are asking for to issue the permit, if you saw the letter from Bill McErlane, you need to indicate the height of the building, and the OSB board cannot be used for siding. So basically with using a post & beam construction, you can still put the vinyl or wood siding on. You could make it look like a garage and you wouldnít know that it was a pole barn.

Members concurred with that.

Addressing the applicant, Mr. Wilson asked the minimum number of square footage that he could get by with. Mr. Bauman answered I would have to run the numbers and measure. The largest thing I would need to take out of the equation would be the boat. I can leave that where it is now. According to t heir calculations, it sounds like I can have 200 square feet, which would fit everything I need, except the boat. I had some problems with the letter that was sent to me. It said indicate the height of the building, and if you look at my plans on the new one, I had done that. On the old plans, it was a three-foot roof and eight-foot wall, which is 11 feet. There were a lot of things on here that they said I couldnít use, and being new at this and a new homeowner, I would like to know what the code is. What is viable; what can I use instead? To have some of that on there would have been helpful. I went on line the other day and looked for some plans; I think that is something that would be beneficial for all the residents of Springdale. We need a web site for the Building Department and have the code on line. Mr. Lohbeck said we do have a web site, it is springdale.org. Mr. Bauman commented that would make things a lot easier for me with my work schedule.

Mr. Okum said since the applicant has shown an indication that he has to do some recalculations and put some things together, it appears that he doesnít want us to have a vote this evening. He asked the applicant if he wished the matter to be tabled, and Mr. Bauman indicated that he did. Mr. Okum moved to table and Mr. Wilson seconded the motion. By voice vote, all present voted aye, and the mater was tabled to the October 19th meeting.

  1. DISCUSSION

Mr. Okum said there was a variance granted on a property at Ledro and Tivoli, a trailer that was allowed to be parked in the side front yard pr0ovided they landscaped and planted trees. It has been there two years, and I donít see a tree there. They were supposed to work out an arrangement with the neighbor to be able to plant trees there. That unit has not been screened since the day it was placed there, and I donít think it is fair to the other residents who come before this beard and make commitments to do screening. I know you have the answer in your office; will you bring it to the next meeting? Mrs. Webb said I believe it was in the discussion, but it was not in the motion. Mr. Lohbeck said I will bring it to the next meeting.

Mr. Okum reported that Planning Commission submitted the new Zoning Code to Council. Mr. Wilson said Council is waiting for the most recent updates from Pflum Klausmeier.

Mr. Squires said I appreciate the phone calls, cards and prayers. For the benefit of the audience, I had bypass surgery four weeks ago yesterday. My situation turned out to be much simpler than a lot of them; it wasnít as complex as it could have been. Things are looking up, and I really appreciate all you did.

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES

21 SEPTEMBER 1999

PAGE FOURTEEN

X. ADJOURNMENT

Mr. Wilson moved to adjourn the meeting and Mr. Schecker seconded the motion. By voice vote, all present voted aye, and the Board of Zoning Appeals adjourned at 8:50 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

___________________,1999 __________________________

James Squires, Chairman

 

 

____________________,1999 ___________________________

Barbara Ewing, Secretary