City of Lyndhurst, Ohio Board of Zoning Appeals
Agendas & Minutes
Print   Close
 
June 13, 2011: Board of Zoning Appeals
AGENDA:

 
To meet in Regular Session on Monday, June 13, 2011, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber of the Lyndhurst Municipal Center, 5301 Mayfield Road.
 
Members: Kimberly Colich, Chair; David Bader, Frank Koss, Frank Novak, Russell Warren
 
Others: Paul Murphy, Director of Law; Larry Puskas, Building Inspector; Joe Mandato, Housing Inspector; Clarice J. White, Acting Secretary
 
Minutes:
 
Approve minutes of the Regular Meeting held April 11, 2011.
 
Administer Oath of Office to David Bader, to renew his term of office as member of the Board of Zoning Appeals.
 
Case No. 2011-02:
 
Request of Joshua Wyatt, of 1254 Blanchester Road for a variance from Chapter 1160.04 (a) (2) A & B of the Planning and Zoning Code to permit parking and/or storing of a commercial vehicle outside at any time in plain view.
 
June 13, 2011: Board of Zoning Appeals
MINUTES:

 
The Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Lyndhurst met in Regular Session on Monday, June 13, 2011 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the Lyndhurst Municipal Center, 5301 Mayfield Road.
 
Members Present: Kimberly Colich, Chair; David Bader, Frank Koss, Russell Warren
 
Member Absent: Frank Novak
 
Others Present: Paul Murphy, Director of Law; Joe Mandato, Housing Inspector; Clarice J. White, Acting Secretary
 
It was moved by Mr. Bader, seconded by Mr. Koss that the reading of the minutes of the Regular Meeting held April 11, 2011, copies of which were mailed to all members, be dispensed with and said minutes stand approved as circulated.
 
The question was put to a voice vote and passed unanimously.
 
Motion carried.
 
At this time, the Oath of Office was administered to Mr. David Bader, by Mr. Paul Murphy, to renew his term on the Board of Zoning Appeals.
 
Case No. 2011-02
 
Request of Joshua Wyatt of 1254 Blanchester Road for a variance from Chapter 1160.04 (a)(2) A & B of the Planning and Zoning Code to permit parking and/or storing of a commercial vehicle outside at any time in plain view.
 
Grounds for appeal and Chapter 1160.04 (a)(2) A & B were read by Mr. Bader.
 
Letters of invitation were mailed to all pertinent property owners, a copy of which is made part of the permanent file.
 
A letter was submitted by the applicant, Joshua Wyatt, which was circulated to many of the neighbors who signed the letter stating they had no objection to the granting of the variance. A copy of these signatures is made part of the permanent file.
 
Mr. Mandato stated that three (3) letters were received, one stating no objection to the granting of the variance, and two stating objections to the variance. These letters are also part of the permanent file.
 
In answer to Mr. Warren's question asking when the ordinance was originally passed, Mr. Bader stated it was passed on June 7, 1999.
 
The following witnesses signed the register and were sworn in by Mr. Murphy:
 
Joshua A Wyatt, 1254 Blanchester Road
E Dale Inkley, 5126 E Farnhurst Road
Bob Wintersteller, 1250 Blanchester Road
Adele Berry, 1251 Blanchester Road
 
Mr. Simon Johnson, attorney for Mr. Joshua Wyatt, testified that the appellant, if not granted a variance will suffer unnecessary hardship because Mr. Wyatt would have to drive to Chardon to get his work truck then drive to the first appointment of the day, which would take close to two hours. He further testified that the uniqueness of the situation is that there are only a few contractors in the area, such as Mr. Wyatt. He then testified that allowing the commercial vehicle at Mr. Wyatt's residence would not alter the residential atmosphere of the neighborhood. He then testified that the hardship is not created by the applicant, but the ordinance. Mr. Johnson testified that by the signatures submitted, there is an overwhelming amount of support to allow Mr. Wyatt to keep his commercial vehicle at his home. He also testified that this commercial vehicle is clean, well maintained, and parked at the rear of the driveway, close to the house. He then testified that another alternative would be to request a size variance for the existing garage, making it larger to park the commercial vehicle inside. He also testified that the Wyatt's only have one vehicle, which Mrs. Wyatt drives; another vehicle would have to be purchased for Mr. Wyatt to drive to and from his work vehicle.
 
Mr. Wyatt, appellant, 1254 Blanchester Road, testified that he purchased the foreclosed home on Blanchester in December of 2007, and has since made many improvements, both interior and exterior. He further testified that the commercial vehicle is a closed box truck, is kept neat and clean, and is backed into the driveway. He then testified that this commercial vehicle is his main form of transportation.
 
Mr. Bob Wintersteller, 1250 Blanchester Road, testified that Mr. Wyatt is wonderful neighbor, and he would like to keep a person such as Mr. Wyatt in the neighborhood. He also testified that there are many commercial vehicles in the area, and questioned why this particular one is targeted. He testified that the vehicle in question is well maintained, and that he does not have any objections to the requested variance.
 
Mrs. Adele Barry, 1251 Blanchester Road, testified that Mr. Wyatt is a nice family man who is trying to make a living and the granting of the variance would not affect her in any way, so therefore, has no objection to the requested variance.
 
Mr. E Dale Inkley, 5126 East Farnhurst Road, testified that he is not visually affected by the commercial vehicle; however the laws and ordinances of the City should be followed. He also testified that the ordinance was passed somewhat recently, 1999, so it is not an antiquated law. He testified that although he commends Mr. Wyatt's efforts to improve his house, he feels there is another alternative to the parking of the commercial vehicle in a residential neighborhood; a large garage can be rented.
 
In answer to Mr. Inkley's question, Mr. Wyatt testified he does not have the truck's dimensions, however he knows it's too tall to fit into a standard garage; it is approximately nine (9) to nine and a half (9 ) feet tall. He testified that the overall length of the vehicle is approximately fifteen (15) feet.
 
Mr. Inkley testified that he agrees that it would be a waste of time and energy to drive to Chardon every day, and would again suggest that a large garage be rented at the cost of the company. He then asked Mr. Wyatt if he is an independent contractor.
 
Mr. Wyatt testified that his father owns the company, and he is not an independent contractor.
 
Mr. Inkley testified that it is not the City's burden to support the owners of commercial vehicles, and that the law should be followed. He then testified that most working people have to drive to and from work every day.
 
Mr. Wyatt testified that the company he works for offers emergency service; having the truck located in Chardon would add to the response time, especially if the job site were to be in Lyndhurst or further west.
 
Mrs. Adele Barry, 1251 Blanchester, testified that she sees the truck daily from her house, and it doesn't change her lifestyle one bit. She testified that she feels Mr. Wyatt is a good, hardworking American, and should be granted this request.
 
In answer to Mr. Koss's question, Mr. Wyatt testified that the vehicle in question is a Chevrolet 4500 and probably a one ton truck.
 
Mr. Koss stated he doesn't feel there is a hardship, because employees of utility companies and other private companies have to drive to a different location to get their vehicles, whether it's an emergency or not. He further stated that residential driveways don't have the reinforcement to uphold the weight of a one ton truck, and in time, the driveway will crack.
 
In answer to Mr. Warren's question, Mr. Mandato stated that the Building Department is not in favor of the variance being granted.
 
Mr. Warren referenced the grounds for appeal, which states in 2c: "The special condition does not result from my actions. Instead, it results from the existence of the ordinance and the location of Wyatt Works' business office." He stated that it is in fact a result from the appellant's action. He further stated what makes a neighborhood desirable is the appearance of that neighborhood, and the laws and ordinances which dictate that residential appearance. He then stated he feels there is no sufficient evidence in which to grant the requested variance.
 
F I N D I N G S
 
The Board finds that:
 
  • No special conditions exist peculiar to the land or building in question.
  • Most people have travel time to work.
  • The vehicle in question is too large.
  • A petition in favor of the granting of the requested variance was signed by numerous people in the immediate area.
  • Few people were against the granting of the requested variance.
  • Other options exist, such as parking the commercial vehicle in a rented garage, closer to home.
  • The ordinance was passed in 1999, nine years prior to Mr. Wyatt purchasing his home.

  •  
    It was moved by Mr. Koss, seconded by Ms. Colich that recommendation be made to Council to confirm the decision of the Board in Case No. 2011-2, to deny requested variance based on the above findings.
     
    Roll Call:
     
    Yeas: Colich, Bader, Koss, Warren
    Nays: None.
     
    Motion carried.
     
    It was moved by Mr. Koss, seconded by Mr. Warren that the meeting be adjourned.
     
    The question was put to a voice vote and passed unanimously.
     
    Motion carried, meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.


    Information provided by:
    The City of Lyndhurst, Ohio @ www.lyndhurst-oh.com

    on