MINUTES

DEFIANCE TOWNSHIP ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

08-29-2006 MEETING

 

DATE:            Tuesday, August 29,  2006

 

LOCATION:  VFW Post 3360 – Defiance, Ohio

                       

TIME:             6:30 P.M.

 

Meeting was called to order by Mr.  Lynn Keller,  Chairman of the Defiance Township Zoning Bd of Appeals.   Mr.  Keller asked the clerk to call the roll.   

 

The Clerk then called the roll for attendance.  Board of Appeals members present were:  Lynn Keller,  Bruce Hahn,  Ruth Ann Schofield & alternate Jon Davis.   There being three of five members & one alternate participating in the session a quorum was declared.

 

Other Township representatives present were:  Mr.  James Schlegel – Township Zoning Inspector, Mr. Robert Layne,  Mr. Dan Peck,  Mr. Richard Ankney – Township Trustees,  Twp Zoning Commission members Randy Wilde14726 St Rte 111,  Paul Zipfel 21090 Bowman Rd. and Mr.  Russell Herman, ESQ.  of the County Prosecutor’s Office. 

 

Visitors present:   James Ehlinger – 14074 Power Dam Rd,  Joe & Deb Arreguin 14587 Williams Rd, Virginia Hill 14529 Williams Rd,  Ann Limber 14811 Power Dam Rd,  Richard Matney III & Kathy Matney 14375 Williams Rd,  Dave Kaufman 14463 Williams Rd, Neal Fleming 14415 Williams Rd,  Mike Simons 20408 Kiser Rd,  Mark Warncke,  Jerry Baden 21234 Powers Rd, Sheila Gallagher 14637 Williams Rd,  Denise Lange 1600 S. Clinton St.  – arrived late & JoEllen Houck of 8 Deville Drive,  Defiance,  Ohio.   

 

Chairman Keller then read item 1 of the agenda: 

 

Item 1:             Request of Denise Lange 1600 South Clinton, St.  Defiance,  Ohio,  43512  for a  variance to Twp Zoning property road frontage requirements & for a “conditional use” permit.  A request has been made to erect/construct a new home on this property which has a 50’ road frontage.  Twp rules require 150’ for said construction request.  The parcel is seven (7) acres more or less and is located on the west side of Williams Road in the southeast quarter of  Section 10 in Defiance Township.  Said parcel of land being in parcel ID B110010001502 in Defiance Township, Defiance County, Ohio.

 

a.      The clerked was acknowledged and noted that a packet of information which contained a copy of the application for a “conditional use” & a variance to the Township’s property frontage requirements for drive access were attached to the agendas provided to the Board members.  Also provided was a property review performed by the Defiance County Soil & Water group.  This review included an aerial photo of the property.  The packet of information included a letter from Mrs. Lange explaining her need for the requests.

 

b.      Mr.  Keller then asked Mrs. Lange to review her request for the Board.

 

c.       Mrs.  Lange stated she simply wished to acquire the “conditional use” permit in order to construct a new home on the parcel in question.  She said that she is the sole owner of this parcel.  Lange also noted that this parcel has only a 57’ road frontage but is adjacent to 35+ acres owned jointly by she & her husband. 

 

d.       Mr.  Keller stated that the variance request possess a problem for this Board.  The Twp is trying to eliminate “flag shape lots”.  This is per the County’s land use plan.  All Twps are working towards this.  The Twp Appeals Bd has recently turned down another such request. (baden)

 

e.      Mike Simons was recognized.  He asked why the 150’ requirement and where did this rule come from.  He was of the opinion that a landowner should be able to build on his/her property.  A landowner rights issue.

 

i. The Chair asked for an explanation of the rule by Mr. Herman – County Prosecutor’s office representing the Township.

 

ii. Mr.  Herman said that the frontage rule was adopted generally by the Townships of Defiance County in the early 90’s.  It was his understanding that most Townships in the State also have adopted such restrictions.  The rule is intended to promote safer roads (more space between drives to observe egress + ingress when traveling at the higher rates of speed allowed on rural roads.  It is also a land management issue to manage growth in our rural areas.

 

iii.      Mrs.  Lange stated that this property has been sectioned as is for years – long before the 1990’s rules were adopted.  Therefore, her request should fall under the old rules.

 

iv.      Mrs.  Schofield stated that this request falls under our existing rules as it is a new request.

 

v.      Mr. Herman concurred that this request falls under the current rules.

 

f.        Several neighbors present were given the floor and all objected to the proposed requests based on their concerns that the property owned by the Langes' which is adjacent to the parcel in question was a mess and not , in their opinion property  cared for.  This causes a nuisance and lowers their property vales.

vi.      It was noted that a nuisance issue is separate from this request and the proper method to deal with that issue is to lodge a complaint with the Zoning Inspector as he handles nuisance complaints for the Township.

 

g.      Ruth Ann Schofield was given the floor.  She asked for an executive session to discuss possible legal issues.

vii.     Mr. Keller seconded the motion.

 

The clerk called the roll.

 

Lynn Keller, Chair         yea                            Jon Davis                      yea

 

Ruth Ann Schofield      yea                             Bruce Hahn                   yea   

 

The Board & Mr. Herman entered into executive session.

 

Upon returning from executive session Mrs.  Schofield moved to re-enter regular session. 

 

Mr.  Hahn seconded.

 

 The clerk called the roll.

 

Lynn Keller, Chair         yea                            Jon Davis                      yea

 

Ruth Ann Schofield      yea                             Bruce Hahn                   yea   

 

The Board returned to regular session.

h.      The Chair called Mrs. Lange forward and indicated the Ariel photo.  The Board and Mrs. Lange reviewed the aerial.  Mr.  Keller said that as she was co-owner of the adjoining property if she were will to have the parcel in question enlarged to meet the 150’ frontage rule this would eliminate the need for a variance. 

viii.    Mrs.  Lange asked how was she to do this.

ix.      Mr.  Herman was given the floor and stated that she would need to contact her attorney and have the deed changed.

i.         Mr.  Keller said he would be willing to move on the “conditional use permit” only if the lot met the frontage requirements.  Mr.  Keller then asked if there was a motion on the variance request.

 

Mr. Hahn moved to approve the variance request.

 

Mrs.  Schofield seconded.

 

The clerk called the roll.

 

Lynn Keller, Chair         nea                            Jon Davis                      nea

 

Ruth Ann Schofield      nea                             Bruce Hahn                   nea   

 

The motion to approve the variance request was denied.

 

Mr.  Herman was recognized and stated that with this action Mrs.  Lange will need to acquire the proper road frontage on the parcel in question before a home could be constructed on that parcel.

 

Again, Mrs. Lange asked what steps she would need to take. 

 

Mr.  Herman stated he could only advise that she seek legal counsel.

 

Mr.  Keller asked Mrs. Lange if she wanted the “conditional use permit” with the condition that the parcel meets the Township road frontage requirements. 

 

Mrs. Lange indicated she did .

 

Mr.  Keller asked if there was a motion.

 

It was moved by Mr. Davis to approve the “conditional use permit” request providing the parcel was expanded to meet the 150’ frontage requirement and a copy of the new deed be provided to the Township.

 

The clerk called the roll.

 

Lynn Keller, Chair         yea                            Jon Davis                      yea

 

Ruth Ann Schofield      yea                             Bruce Hahn                   yea   

 

The motion to approve the “conditional use permit” with the caveat was approved.

 

The Chair asked if there was any other business to come before the Board. 

There being no further business to come before the Board of Appeals Mr.  Keller requested a motion to adjourn the meeting. 

            Motion:             Mrs.  Schofield

           

            Second:            Mr.  Keller                                       

 

YEA(s)      4                 NAY(s)        0               Passed      X                Failed

 

The meeting adjourned.