January 6, 2010 - No meeting held.
February 3, 2010 - No meeting held.
March 3, 2010 - No meeting held.
April 7, 2010 - No meeting held.
May 19, 2009 Meeting Minutes -
The meeting was called to order by Robert Keogh at 7:30 p.m. Board
members present: Robert Keogh, Robert Werner, Leroy Ryerson, Michael
Williams, and Tom Spears. Members absent: None. Also present:
Mark Krift and Barbara Knisely-Building & Zoning Clerk.
Robert Keogh called for a Motion to approve the October 7, 2009 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes. Leroy Ryerson moved to approve the Minutes as written. Michael Williams seconded this Motion. By a vote of 5-0, the October 7, 2009 Minutes were approved.
Since this was the first meeting in the year 2010, the first item of business was election of officers for the calendar year 2010. Mr. Ryerson nominated Robert Keogh to serve as Chairman, Robert Werner seconded the Motion. Motion passed 4-0 (Keogh abstained). Leroy Ryerson nominated Robert Werner to serve as Vice-Chair. Mike Williams seconded the motion. Motion passed 4-0 (Werner abstaining). Leroy Ryerson nominated Mike Williams to serve as Secretary. Tom Spears seconded the Motion. Motion passed 4-0 (Williams abstaining).
Chairman Keogh then swore in Applicant, Mark Krift, concerning the testimony he was about to give.
The Chairman invited Mr. Krift to provide a summary of his variance request. Mr. Krift stated that he and his wife would like to build an addition onto their existing 2 car attached garage. Their family has grown and they would like the additional storage space that a 3rd bay would afford them for storing a utility trailer, bikes, wagons, etc. He added that the existing garage is not very deep and does not allow for much storage after vehicles are parked. He would like to put a 9 foot garage door on the addition so that it blends with the other 3 car garages in the subdivision. In order to accommodate the 9 foot door, the addition must be 12 feet, which necessitates the 2 foot variance into the side yard set back. He feels if he goes with a smaller door it will not fit with the other neighboring homes.
Chairman Keogh reviewed the Staff Report, pictures, letter from Nick Carle (neighbor), and the application. He explained that the Board of Zoning Appeal members must determine if each request for a variance meets the four conditions as set forth in Section 1242.03(B) of the Zoning Code. He then opened the floor for discussion by the BZA members.
Chairman Keogh started the discussion by questioning whether or not this was a hardship or a convenience, and would it infringe on any of the neighbors. Mr. Ryerson confirmed that the neighbor has a side yard set back of 15 feet, and that there would still be 23 feet between the residences if Mr. Krift was granted the 2 foot variance.
Mr. Williams asked if the same developer/builder was building homes in Plat II of this subdivision. Mr. Krift confirmed that no homes have been built in about two years. Mr. Williams questioned the overall design of the subdivision and would allowing this variance disrupt that design. He also asked if sheds were allowed, or was that part of the deed restrictions. Mr. Krift confirmed that sheds are not allowed and that is why he needs the extra garage storage. Tom Spears asked if Mr. Krift could extend the garage to the rear of the property for extra storage. Mr. Krift said that a portion of the living space extends across the back of the garage, so that would not be possible.
Mr. Ryerson stated that he feels this addition would fit in with the neighborhood and match the neighboring property as far as a 9 foot garage door. He feels that special circumstances do exist since the owners do not have the ability to construct a storage shed.
Mr. Williams stated that he is not sure special circumstances exist concerning this variance request, since the owners did have the opportunity to add the third garage bay when they originally designed the house and had it built. Mr. Krift confirmed that, but stated they were not thinking ahead about what would happen when their family grew and the additional storage space that would be needed. He added that he enjoys the neighborhood and the Village of Whitehouse and has been extremely happy with their relocation here. Bob Werner confirmed that if the owners had the foresight, they could have situated the house on the lot differently to allow for the addition.
Mr. Spears asked if it was for cosmetic reasons to not use a smaller garage door. Mr. Krift confirmed that he felt since the other residences in the neighborhood used the 9 foot door, it would fit in best if he did the same.
Mr. Werner pointed out that the adjoining property owner has given a written statement that he has no objections to the 2 foot variance, and confirmed 23 feet will still remain between the structures. Mr. Keogh confirmed that the Krifts will be using the same roof line as the neighboring property. The answer was yes, that they will be identical, but flip-flopped with the garages next to each other and the living quarters at opposite ends.
Mr. Spears questioned the second condition that BZA must consider when granting a variance (necessary for the preservation and enjoyment… and not merely as a convenience…) and is not convinced that this circumstance fits that condition.
Leroy Ryerson moved to grant the 2 foot side-yard setback as requested by Mr. and Mrs. Krift for their residence located at 10712 Shayni Lane. Bob Werner seconded the motion. Motion passed 2-3 (Spears and Williams dissenting).
Mr. Krift stated that he would be building in the very near future and thanked the Board members for their consideration.
Ms. Knisely explained to Mr. Krift that his next step would be to submit building plans for review and approval prior to the building permit being issued. He acknowledged this and understands that the variance is good for six months.
Ms. Knisely also informed the BZA members that she would be on vacation during their next regularly scheduled meeting of June 2, and asked if they would like to postpone the June meeting by one week so that she would be in attendance to take minutes. After checking their calendars, all members confirmed that June 9 would be acceptable for them to meet.
With no further business to come before the Board, Bob Werner moved to adjourn the meeting. Leroy Ryerson seconded the motion. Motion to adjourn passed 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 7:55 pm.
June 9, 2010 Meeting Minutes -
Board members present: Robert Keogh, Robert Werner, Leroy Ryerson,
Michael Williams, and Tom Spears. Also present: Dennis and Rose
Butler, Kevin Breidenbach, Mr. and Mrs. Richard Naves, and Barbara
Knisely-Building & Zoning Clerk.
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Robert Keogh at 7:30 p.m.
Robert Keogh called for a Motion to approve the May 19, 2010 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes. Michael Williams stated that there was one correction to the Minutes on the second page, 7th paragraph. He stated that he also dissented on the vote to grant the 2 foot side yard set-back variance for Mr. and Mrs. Krift. Therefore, the Minutes should reflect “Motion passed 3-2 (Spears and Williams dissenting)”. Leroy Ryerson moved to approve the Minutes with the correction. Tom Spears seconded the Motion. By a vote of 5-0, the May 15, 2010 Minutes were approved with one correction as noted.
Chairman Keogh swore in all members of the audience who were about to give testimony.
The Chairman then invited Mr. and Mrs. Butler to provide any additional information they felt necessary concerning their request for a variance to the side yard setback for the residence they would like to build at 6521 S. Berkey Southern Road in the Savanna Lake subdivision.
Mrs. Butler stated that they bought this property four years ago but had been unable to sell their current home so had not pursued building on this lot. They recently listed their home and it sold within a week, so they are now in a position to build on the Savanna Lake lot. They were not aware of the set back requirement for a driveway to be located 3 feet off the lot line. The residence that they would like to build is 2,100 square feet. Due to Mrs. Butler’s medical conditions, a ranch home is necessary. They are considering this their retirement home and do not want to move again. In the Savanna Lake subdivision, all homes must be built with side load garages, which creates the problem since the driveway must be built along the side of the house and be wide enough for the turn radius.
Tom Spears asked if they were working with a builder when they bought the lot. Mrs. Butler answered that they were not. She stated that they had listed their existing home, but it did not sell, so they had removed it from the market, until recently when it sold within a week. They were then forced to immediately begin looking at plans for the new residence.
Mr. Ryerson asked if the neighboring lots have been sold. Mr. Butler stated that they have not been sold and are currently in the hands of 5/3 Bank. Mr. Ryerson asked if they were aware of the zoning regulations. Mrs. Butler stated that they were not originally aware, but now that the construction is on the fast-track, her builder suggested that they contact Mr. Bucher, the developer. At that point they discovered that he was no longer involved with the subdivision and she then contacted the Village.
Chairman Keogh explained that the Board of Zoning Appeals doesn’t just make arbitrary decisions. They must decide if the request for a variance meets the 4 criteria as outlined in the Zoning Code: 1) special conditions of the lot, 2) preservation and enjoyment of property rights, 3) not a result of action by the owner, and 4) public safety.
Mr. Spears stated that a five foot variance is a big stretch for him on a side yard. Mrs. Butler stated that she feels a narrower driveway would not look right and fit with the house, and they need the space for the turn radius.
Mr. Ryerson asked if the other existing homes are two story. Mr. Brieidenbach, who currently owns a home in the subdivision, stated that there are currently two single story homes and one under construction. He added that as an owner in the development he does not have a problem with the granting of this variance. This development has been sitting idle for 3-4 years and he is in favor of jump starting some activity. The tall weeds and grasses on the vacant lots are an eyesore and he feels that development of homes will eliminate the problem. He knows that 5/3 Bank has recently had much more interest in the lots and hopes that things will turn around soon. He thinks that the side load garage stipulation is a good one and would rather see the side yard variance than a front load garage. He also feels that the lots along Berkey Southern Road will be the last ones sold. He’s certain that the lots around the lake are all very close to being sold. He has been taking care of the pond and has complained to the Village for the past several years about the empty lots not being cared for.
Mr. Ryerson agreed that we want to see more development in that area, but is afraid we are starting a bad precedent by allowing side yard variances this early in the game. Mr. Williams asked if the house could be redesigned to make it deeper and not as wide. Mrs. Butler stated that she doesn’t think anyone would really notice the difference between a 15 and 10 foot side yard. Mr. Spears disagreed with that statement.
The matter of granting two variances was then discussed. This would allow the shifting of the residence to the south. A 3 foot variance (allowing the driveway to be built on the property line) would be necessary on the south side and a 2 foot variance on the north side yard.
The BZA members were concerned that this would create problems when Lot 4 is purchased and developed, due to the set back requirements. Much discussion followed concerning Lot 4, and the BZA members all felt that this lot is not user-friendly and perhaps would not ever sell due to the limited amount of space on that corner lot.
Chairman Keogh asked Mr. and Mrs. Butler if they would consider shifting the house to the south and building the driveway at the lot line. They both agreed and stated that was their original plan, until they discovered the 3 foot set-back requirement for driveways.
Mr. Spears moved to grant two variances as follows: a 3’ variance to the south side yard to allow the driveway to be built at the property line, and a 2’ variance to the north side yard to allow the residence to be constructed 13’ from the property line. Robert Werner seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0 granting the two variances.
Mr. Spears stated that the only reason he agreed to these variances was because he feels that Lot 4 is unbuildable. Chairman Keogh agreed with this statement.
The Butlers were advised that the variances must be implemented within six months or they shall be null and void after that time.
With no further business to come before the Board, Tom Spears moved to adjourn the meeting. Mike Williams seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0 and meeting adjourned at 8:25 pm.
July 7, 2010 Meeting Minutes -
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Robert Keogh at 7:30 p.m.
Board members present: Robert Keogh, Tom Spears, Robert Werner, and Leroy
Ryerson. Members absent: Michael Williams. Also present:
William Gernheuser and Barbara Knisely-Community Development Coordinator.
Chairman Keogh called for a Motion to approve the June 9, 2010 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes. Leroy Ryerson moved to approve the Minutes as written. Robert Werner seconded this Motion. By a vote of 4-0, the June 9, 2010 Minutes were approved.
Chairman Keogh swore in Applicant, William Gernheuser, concerning the testimony he was about to give.
The Chairman asked Mr. Gernheuser if anything had changed since he originally appeared before the BZA in October of 2009 for this same variance request. He also introduced Mr. Tom Spears, a new member to the BZA who was not at the prior meeting. Mr. Gernheuser explained that he and the tenant could not agree on some of the features in the addition, and that he had trouble finding a contractor since the fall and winter months were upon him when the variance was granted last year. He was also under the impression that if he had the stakes in the ground that he was in compliance with the six month requirement for proceeding with the project. Mr. Keogh explained that he also needed to obtain the building permit prior to the six month time expiration.
Chairman Keogh confirmed that the applicant was asking for two variances for this property. The first variance was for an eight (8) foot variance to the side yard set back, which would allow the addition to be built two (2) feet from the property line, following the same footprint of the existing residence. The second variance was to allow an expansion of an existing non-conforming structure.
Tom Spears moved to grant the eight (8) foot variance to the side yard set back to allow the construction of the addition, in line with the existing north side of the residence. Robert Werner seconded the Motion. Motion passed 3-0 (Ryerson abstaining).
Robert Werner made a Motion to grant a variance to allow enlarging an existing nonconforming structure. Robert Keogh seconded the Motion. Motion passed 3-0 (Ryerson abstaining).
Mr. Ryerson explained that he was abstaining from the vote since he owns neighboring property.
Mr. Werner asked when the construction would begin. Mr. Gernheuser assured the BZA members that it would begin no later than August, 2010.
With no further business to come before the Board, Leroy Ryerson made a Motion to adjourn, Tom Spears seconded the Motion. Motion passed 4-0. Meeting adjourned at 7:45 pm.
August 4, 2010 Meeting Minutes -
Board members present: Robert Keogh, Robert Werner, Mike Williams, and
Leroy Ryerson. Members absent: Tom Spears. Also present:
Todd Roberts, Stacy Slicker and Barbara Knisely-Community Development
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Robert Keogh at 7:35 p.m. Chairman Keogh called for a Motion to approve the July 7, 2010 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes. Leroy Ryerson moved to approve the Minutes as written. Robert Werner seconded this Motion. By a vote of 4-0, the July 7, 2010 Minutes were approved.
Chairman Keogh swore in Applicants, Todd Roberts and Stacy Slicker, concerning the testimony they were about to give.
The Chairman stated the Applicants were here to ask for two variances concerning the placement of a ground-mounted sign in front of the building located at 10075 Waterville Street, known as Black Swamp Choppers and Skeeters Bar & Grill. Mr. Ryerson asked if they felt it was really necessary to place such a large sign. Mr. Roberts stated that they currently have a 4 x 7 sign in front of the building and they are asking to double this sign. One half will identify the restaurant and one half will identify the drive-thru carry-out. Mr. Roberts stated that his building is so large that the sign seems dwarfed sitting in the front yard, and since he is located at the very edge of town, motorists are still traveling at 55 miles per hour and he is surrounded by corn fields. He feels that a larger sign would be more visible due to these circumstances. Mr. Roberts also indicated that he has been attempting to get the ditch bank cleaned but has not found the right party to do it. He has contacted the Village, Lucas County, and the State of Ohio, but all claim it is not their responsibility. He agrees that if the trees and brush were cleaned from the ditch bank that it would make his building and sign more visible.
Mr. Slicker added that the existing Sign Code makes sense and he understands the reasoning behind it for the downtown businesses. However, this building sits at the very eastern edge of the Village limits, on a 55 mph highway, surrounded by farm fields. He feels that a larger sign would fit in and look appropriate at this location.
Mr. Keogh asked if the sign would be back-lit. Applicants answered yes. They briefly discussed colors and brightness of the light. Applicants stated that they would be replacing the signage in the existing two signs located on the building to match the lettering, style, and colors of the new sign to be located at the corner of the property.
Mr. Roberts questioned how the total square foot calculations were arrived at in the Staff Report provided. Ms. Knisely explained that Section 1259.03 (5) indicates that “… the area shall be summed and totaled to determine total area. The measurable area shall include embellishments such as pole covers, framing, decorative roofing, and support structures…” After some discussion, it was determined that the total square footage of the proposed sign was 96 square feet. Therefore, the variance requests are as follows: A 51 sf variance for the proposed sign, and 54 sq variance for the total amount of signage, including the two signs located on the front of the building.
Chairman Keogh explained the 4 conditions that must exist in order for the BZA to grant a variance. Mr. Werner stated that he does feel special circumstances exist and it would create a hardship because of the location of the building and the speed at which motorists travel by if the sign variance request was denied. They also agreed that no health or safety issues would be created if this sign was erected.
Leroy Ryerson moved to approve a 51 square foot variance to allow the construction of a ground-mounted, freestanding sign (96 sf) in front of the building located at 10075 Waterville Street. Bob Werner seconded the Motion. Motion passed 4-0.
Bob Werner moved to approve a 54 square foot variance to allow the combined total signage (two wall-mounted signs and one freestanding sign) of 150 square feet. Mike Williams seconded the Motion. Motion passed 4-0.
Chairman Keogh reminded Applicants that they have six months to complete the project, or the variances become null and void. Ms. Knisely reminded Applicants that they must first obtain a sign permit before constructing the new sign.
With no further business to come before the Board, Leroy Ryerson moved to adjourn the meeting. Bob Werner seconded the Motion. Motion passed 4-0 and the meeting adjourned at 8:00 pm.
September 15, 2010 Meeting Minutes -
Board members present: Robert Keogh, Robert Werner, Tom Spears, and
Leroy Ryerson. Members absent: Mike Williams. Also present:
Bea Ludwig and Barbara Knisely-Community Development Coordinator.
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Robert Keogh at 7:30 p.m. Chairman Keogh called for a Motion to approve the August 4, 2010 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes. Leroy Ryerson moved to approve the Minutes as written. Robert Werner seconded this Motion. By a vote of 4-0, the August 4, 2010 Minutes were approved.
Chairman Keogh swore in Applicant, Bea Ludwig appearing on behalf of the Whitehouse Library, concerning the testimony she was about to give.
The Chairman stated the Whitehouse Library would like to replace the freestanding, ground-mounted sign in front of the Library and was requesting a variance of 15 square feet to construct a 60 sf sign. It was noted that the proposed sign was designed to match the façade at Village Hall and is similar to what the Village is considering for the new entrance signs at the Village limits. All members felt that the new sign blends well with the overall look the Village is striving for and felt that it would be an attractive addition to the Village.
Mrs. Ludwig stated that the sign will not be lit, but will have interchangeable letters so that the Library volunteers can place information on the Board. It will be located in the same location as the existing sign and will not pose any traffic hazards for vehicles exiting the Library parking lot. The smaller sign that is currently located next to the existing sign (Library Parking), will be removed to cut down on the sign “clutter”. It can be replaced if residents have difficulty locating the driveway into the Library.
Leroy Ryerson moved to grant a 15’ variance to allow the construction of a ground-mounted, freestanding sign (60 sf) in front of the building located at 10651 Waterville Street (Whitehouse Library). Tom Spears seconded the Motion. Motion passed 4-0.
With no further business to come before the Board, Leroy Ryerson moved to adjourn the meeting. Bob Werner seconded the Motion. Motion passed 4-0 and the meeting adjourned at 7:40 pm.
October 6, 2010 - No meeting held.
November 3, 2010 - No meeting held
December 1, 2010 -.No meeting held.