REGULAR MEETING OF THE EATON PLANNING
ZONING AND BUILDING BOARD ON FEBRUARY 10, 2004
AT 7:30 P.M., IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The Eaton Planning, Zoning and Building Board met in regular session in Council Chambers on Tuesday, February 10, 2004, at 7:30 p.m.
The roll was called and the following was found to be:
Present: Chris Atkins
Tim Lane
Harold Geeting, Vice Chairman
Steve Deffner
Tom Jordan, Chairman
Absent: Ron Coleman
Gary Wagner
Also in attendance were City Manager Dave Daily, City Engineer Doug Spitler and Law Director Donnette Fisher.
MINUTES:
The minutes of the January 13, 2004 meeting were read and approved with one correction
changing Chris Atkins to Tim Lane. Steve Deffner made a motion to accept the minutes and
Tim Lane seconded. Roll was called and passed as follows:
Ayes: Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Jordan (4)
Nays: None
Abstain: Atkins (1)
SWEARING IN:
All members of the audience anticipating to testify before the Board were asked to stand and be sworn in. The Secretary administered the oath or affirmation to the audience.
PROPOSED ZONING AMENDMENT - PUBLIC HEARING:
Jordan: The next thing on the agenda is a proposed zoning amendment. An amendment to the
City of Eaton Planning and Zoning Code by enacting Chapter 1173. At this time I will open the
Public Hearing on it and if there is anyone that wishes to address this issue they may.
Fisher: This is what we presented to you last month. This is an addition to current zoning code
as it is written and will be included in the new zoning code. At the last Council meeting, Council
enacted a licensing ordinance to be added to Business Regulations
that enacts very strict licensing standards for Sexually Oriented Businesses. That was done as an emergency and it went into effect immediately so it is currently in effect. This is the zoning part of that and it limits where Sexually Oriented Businesses can be placed. What we are asking you to do tonight is to make a recommendation either approval or denial of that to Council.
Jordan: Basically we are just adding to our current zoning code until we get our new zoning code
into effect, on the placement of Sexually Oriented Businesses. If anyone would like to speak to
this matter you are more than welcome to. If not I will close the Public Hearing and we will turn
it over to the Board for discussion and a vote. I think it looks like a fit for us. If there are no questions or discussions I will entertain a motion.
Geeting: I move that we recommend approval to Council for the proposed change in the zoning
amendment for Sexually Oriented Businesses and it was seconded by Steve Deffner. Roll was
called and passed as follows:
Ayes: Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Jordan (5)
Nays: None
AB-04-01 - Conditional Use - Home Occupation - 100 Lutheran Drive
Ronnie Wooton:
Jordan: The applicant is seeking a home occupation permit for his residence located at 100
Lutheran Drive, zoned 'R1-B. The applicant wishes to start a home business of selling firearms
from this residence. Mr. Wooton is here to represent his request.
Wooton: My name is Ronnie Wooton and I plan to get my firearms license and sell firearms
through catalogue at my home and the Internet. This will be on a part time basis. There will be
no signs around the premises that would indicate any type of business.
Jordan: You mentioned storage barn, is that just because it is on the premise?
Wooton: Yes, just because it was there.
Jordan: You are going to have the actual business inside of your residence?
Wooton: There won't be any inventory there at all, unless there is a gun left there overnight for
some reason that someone didn't pick it up. I have been looking into some different ways to
handle that.
Jordan: At this time you don't have your license yet.
Wooton: No, I need to get this approved first before I do that. That is one of the conditions of
getting licensed.
Jordan: I guess I am not very familiar with the guns laws. What does it take to get a Federal
License?
Wooton: I have to file an application and register through the local sheriff's department and it
takes several months. They do a background check, all your medical records, they do a real
extensive check. They make sure you don't have a criminal record or any felonies and that sort.
Deffner: I have a question. If I am ordering through the catalogue, this is a catalogue that you
would mail to me?
Wooton: No.
Deffner: I guess I am just trying to get an explanation on how this is going to work.
Wooton: I didn't exactly state. This would be by appointment only, it won't be open to the
public. You would call me and I would set up a appointment and you would come to my house
and I would do a background check if you decided you wanted to buy a firearm and then if the
ATF okayed it, I would go to a retailer or order it from the internet and pick it up and deliver it to
you.
Deffner: It would be possible to that you would pick that firearm up and bring it back to the
house and then I could come and pick it up at your residence?
Wooton: That would be possible.
Jordan: There will be a timeframe there where there will be firearms on the premise?
Wooton: Yes, there might be.
Atkins: How do you advertise? Is it something you are doing for friends and if so how do I
know?
Wooton: I would probably get some business cards and distribute them. I work in a factory and
word gets around fast.
Atkins: If I wanted to buy a gun I would just call you and come to your house and you would
have catalogues?
Wooton: Yes. Most people know what they want to start with, but if they didn't, I could help
them with that if they passed the background check.
Lane: Would you sell ammunition there?
Wooton: No, I don't plan to do that.
Lane: Could you with license?
Wooton: Yes I could, but I wouldn't do that for safety reasons.
Geeting: Does part of that Federal license give you the authority to do background checks on
other people or is there an extra part of that?
Wooton: The license gives me the authority to do that. They fill out a form and I call it in and
ATF does a check on them and calls me back whether they accept it or not.
Deffner: Do most people buy guns without testing that gun or using that gun? If I am buying a
car I am going to test-drive it and if I were buying a gun I would think I would want to do the
same thing. If I wanted to do that how can you arrange that?
Wooton: (inaudible)
Atkins: Is there anybody else in the City that has a firearms license?
Fisher: There is no other Federal Firearm License dealer that I am aware of. We did have one
other person in Eaton that has applied for their firearms license through the police but that person
hasn't applied for a home occupation permit and the Chief sent that back. Part of the reason I
think Mr. Wooton has done it in this order is because that application is $500 or $600 dollars to
apply for, so it makes more sense to get this first and then apply for the license after that. The
background checks is one of the conditions of the dealers license; he has to run background
checks on any applicant. I did speak with Chief about this and his recommendation is that there
is no inventory of ammunition or firearms on the premise at any time. There aren't any that I am
aware of.
Atkins: How long have you lived on Lutheran?
Wooton: Three years.
Deffner: If somebody ordered a firearm are you going to have to go and pick that up at a retail
outlet?
Wooton: It will be a retailer in Dayton or I would order it from the Internet.
Deffner: Could it be mailed to your residence?
Wooton: Yes.
Deffner: It could be mailed.
Jordan: Do any of the Board members have any more questions?
Geeting: Is this mailing a standard procedure?
Wooton: No, not really. I would probably be dealing with a retailer in Dayton and I would be picking them up.
Jordan: Although this isn't a Public Hearing I will entertain any thoughts or comments from
anyone in the audience about this matter if they would like to address the Board.
Marschhauser: My name is John Marschhauser and I am President of the Church Council of
Grace Lutheran Church which is located adjacent across the street from Mr. Wooton's property.
I would like to read a prepared statement that was passed unanimously by Council last Thursday.
Letter:
It has been brought to the attention of the Church Council of Grace Lutheran Church that Mr. Ronnie Wooton of 100 Lutheran Drive has applied for a home occupation application for the purpose of selling firearms from his home. The prospect of firearm sales taking place in such close proximity to the church property and in a residential neighborhood is a major concern for us as a congregation. In a letter to the congregation Mr. Wooton stated he would not sell firearms on Sundays. While this is a kind thought, our activities are not limited to one day a week. The church and the property surrounding the building itself are utilized all the time. As a congregation, programming is held on nearly every night of the week. In addition, the church property is used on nearly a nightly basis during the spring, summer, and fall as a practice area for many community youth athletic teams. It is not unusual to see two or three tee-ball or soccer teams practicing at the same time on our fields. Secondly, as a neighbor in a residential area we have concern for both the children which live in the area and the families that take advantage of the community pool. 100 Lutheran Drive is located directly across from the entrance to the pool and along a busy community road. It is not a remote location away from activity. While we understand the many safeguards which are in place to protect the public, and which are designed to insure only law-abiding citizens are able to purchase firearms, we do not feel a home in a residential area is an appropriate location for such a business. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms has an extensive background check process and takes many precautions with the sale of guns, but it is not a perfect system. Allowing the sale of firearms in a residential location, adjacent to a church and pool, would unnecessarily place families at risk. We ask that you take our concerns into consideration when making your decision. There are places that are appropriate for such business activity and areas that are set aside for recreational activities, worship, and family life - we believe the Lutheran Drive area to be zoned for residential, worship, and recreational activities.
End of Letter
Jordan: Does anyone else like to speak about this matter?
Sahaurer: I am Susan Schaurer. As a resident of the subdivision that lays on Lutheran Drive and it two joined circles, I would like to express my concern about the proposed change. There are a number of reasons I would hope the Board would not consider this request. First and foremost is because the area of which we are speaking is a residential area and has since its conception been known as one of the nicest residential areas in the community. Its layout accommodates families seeking a safe and quiet environment in which to raise their families. With the exception of the monument business which lies appropriately across from the Cemetery, there are no other businesses or commercial properties in this area. I am sure I speak for other residents in our neighborhood when I say I would like for it to stay that way. Allowing this particular permit to be put into place would only jeopardize the other residents in this particular area with the threat of future zoning changes within the neighborhood. The second area of concern deals with the lack of parking and increase of traffic. Because the property in question sits on the corner of 122 and Lutheran Drive and because of the turning lane on 122 and the residence driveway being situated on Lutheran Drive, that would not allow for ample parking space if the customer should happen to come to the residence to pick up the firearm. Instead that customer would have to park further up Lutheran Drive in front of someone else's property or even across the street on the church's property. Furthermore, I am concerned that these customers would use the circles in our neighborhood to turn around and exit in the way in which they came, and because of the number of children, grandchildren, nieces and nephews who reside in or frequently visit our neighborhood, I am afraid that this increase in traffic would only comprise their safety. My last area of concern is that the passing of this zoning change could lead to a greater risk of robbery and theft in our neighborhood. Although Mr. Wooton has stated that he will not be storing an inventory of firearms there could still be a possibility that firearms could be in his home overnight. I believe it was a couple of summers ago when there was a theft ring in Eaton that centered around stealing firearms. They are not the only thieves of their type that exist in our community. As stated earlier word does get around fast and I am concerned that people know he sells these firearms and sometimes stores them in his home could lead to an increase in this kind of crime in our neighborhood. I am afraid that this is a risk that I as a mother of an 18-month-old child am not willing to take. It is nothing personal against Mr. Wooton, it is just as a concerned parent and a concerned resident that I hope you take these matters into thought when making your decision.
Jordan: Anyone else?
Kirsch: I would like to say something on behalf of Mr. Wooten. Ronnie comes with impeccable
integrity and I do understand and appreciate the church's thoughts as well as the neighbor's in
that area. I was once a Lutheran Drive resident myself. If Ron would come to me, I know Ron, I
know his integrity, I know where his heart lies, and he would do the right thing. In other words I
know if it was the Board's wish for him to look into possibly having a safe in his home, to help
protect those guns that may be coming through the system until they can be picked up, I know he
would do so if the Board would wish. Again, I appreciate everyone's concerns about this. This
is something new that we will probably see more of in the very near future since the State Of
Ohio has passed the new concealed gun law. This is just food for thought and again I do
appreciate your thoughts behind this, I just felt I did need to share something about Ronnie
Wooton.
Jordan: We have to look at the application based on the regulations in our zoning code. The
person before us could be the best there is but we have to look at the regulations is where I am
standing at right now. My thoughts are, there are seven criteria to grant a home occupation and
he does not meet all seven of those criteria. The major one, only goods produced on the premise
may be sold on the premise. It is very apparent that he is not going to be building the guns on the
premises. He will be buying them, shipping them to his house or going to pick them up and that
is not what the criteria say. My thoughts on it are, I don't think residential area is a good place for
a gun store. Whether it is going to be by catalogue or not there is that chance that there will be a
firearm there and we have no way to control that.
Geeting: I would agree with you Tom, and I would like to add that since it is not a home ownership deal, a rented property, that there are others ways to go about it.
Atkins: I agree with you and the comments from Mr. Kirsch that we have to look at it not based
on not whom the individual but by the regulations and what is being presented to you. If you
allow one person to do it how do you keep other people from doing the same thing? Speaking as
a citizen in my community I wouldn't want someone around the corner from me or a neighbor
from me selling firearms. I think that can be more appropriately done in a commercial setting
such as a mall and not a residential area. Also, the fact that it doesn't meet number five in the
regulations.
Deffner: As a resident of Lutheran Drive and also as a neighbor of the Wootons I feel this is a business I would rather not have in the neighborhood. Nothing against the Wootons but it does present a level of risk that I would rather not be in the neighborhood. Maybe in a business section but not in the neighborhood. With that and also with regulation five that it doesn't meet I am not in favor of it and I make a motion to that effect.
Jordan: Okay, you are making a motion for unfavorable recommendation to the Appeals Board
based on the fact that only goods produced on premises may be sold on premises and it is not a
good location for gun store, is that correct?
Deffner: Yes.
Jordan: May I have a second?
The recommendation was seconded by Harold Geeting and passed as follows:
Ayes: Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Jordan (5)
Nays: None
Jordan: We will make an unfavorable recommendation to the Appeals Board and they will hear this at a Public Hearing the 23rd of this month and everyone is welcome to attend at that time.
AB-03-15 - Variance - Sign in 'R-4' Multi Family Residential - 221 E. Decatur St.
Christ Apostolic Church
Jordan: The applicant has applied for variance from the City's sign regulations for its building
located at 221 E. Decatur. This lot is zoned 'R-4' residential, and the use of it for a church is
pre-existing, lawful nonconforming use. Who is representing this application tonight?
Hamm: My name is Gregory Hamm and I am pastor of Christ Apostolic Church. As I am sure you are aware we are in desperate need of a sign. I inherited what little sign they have and in fact it is an eyesore. I have submitted a drawing of the new sign we want and I have tried to match what is at Freedom First Credit Union on Barron Street. I chose that because this is the old Grace Lutheran building and it is an older style architectural building.
Jordan: I noticed from your permit that it would be on a timer and go off each night?
Hamm: I don't recall putting that on there but I probably would put it on a timer because I don't
want to pay the energy bill.
Jordan: Will this be lit from self-enclosed or have lights shining up on it?
Hamm: Our intent is to landscape around this sign. We would probably put something in the
ground, just one light in the ground shining up on it.
Jordan: Do any of the Board members have any questions at this time?
Deffner: He is able to put a sign in front of the Church and he is going from 15 ft. to
18 ft. so we are talking that difference?
Hamm: There is 18 ft. of grass from the public walkway to the front of the building.
Fisher: He does want 18 sq. ft. instead of 15 sq. ft. As far as setbacks Doug may want to address
that.
Spitler: It is 3 ft. from the back of the wall, which is the right of way, to the sign and the sign is
about 7 ft. from the Church.
They are asking for a variance for two things one being the larger sign area of 18 sq. feet versa 15
sq. feet and the 3 ft. setback instead of the 10 ft. setback.
Jordan: They are showing the 3 ft. setback from the sidewalk yes?
Spitler: Yes.
Jordan: It is not a corner lot so there shouldn't be a problem there.
Any of the Board members have any questions for the applicant? Doug, is there anything on
Staff review that we haven't covered yet?
Spitler: Illumination is permitted for this use type, bulletin board, and I think that is where that
came from. Illumination shall be turned off not later than 11:00 p.m.
Geeting: I move that we make a favorable recommendation to the Appeals Board on this case because it does meet all the standards. Motion was seconded by Tim Lane and passed as follows:
Ayes: Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Jordan (5)
Nays: None
AB-04-02 - Variance - Height & Side Setbacks - 722 E. Somers Street
Bill Hicks
Jordan: The applicant has applied for a variance to be permitted to erect a garage that is 21 feet
in height, instead of the permitted 15 feet in height, on the property that is located at 722 East
Somers Street, zoned 'R-1B'.
Hicks: I am Bill Hicks and I own the property at 720 E. Somers, I have a commercial building
there and I purchased the property at 722 E. Somers. I want to build a garage to put my motor
home in to get it out of the yard. I have a blueprint over here to show how it will be built. Chris
Miley, Miley Construction, is going to work with me on the construction of it. We had to go
with the extra height because we had to have a 14 ft. door to get the motor home in and that is
why I need the 21 ft. height.
Jordan: Just for a point of reference, the 21 ft. is going to be what compared to your building
next door?
Hicks: It will be shorter. The building that I have is quite a bit taller.
Jordan: You will have it so everything is off of the alley?
Hicks: Yes, the back of the garage will be in line with my existing building. There will be 24 ft.
from the back of the house that Carl lives in and the back of the building. There will be 8 ft.
between the existing building and the garage and on the east side there will be 3 feet between the
building and the garage.
Jordan: Any of the Board members have any questions for Mr. Hicks?
Atkins: Is Carl's house staying there then?
Hicks: I bought it with the understanding that he could stay there as long as he wants.
Hicks: I am going to, if anyone is familiar with my buildings and sees what I have done, I am
going to fix it up the same way.
Jordan: Anyone else with anything? Doug do you have staff review?
Spitler: Just to point out again that the applicant is asking for a variance on the 15 ft.
requirement to 21 ft. Also, that the 3 ft. side setback is allowed. Chapter 1171.13 (b) allows
accessory buildings to be constructed not less than 3 ft. from the side lot line when it is located at
lease sixty feet from the front property line and completely to the rear of the main dwelling.
Jordan: Any other questions.
Deffner: I make a motion for favorable recommendation to the Appeals Board for this variance. The motion was seconded by Chris Atkins and passed as follows:
Ayes: Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Jordan (5)
Nays: None
AB-04-03 - Variance - Rear Setbacks - 1641 Louden Drive
Robert & Joyce Young
Jordan: The applicants are seeking a variance from rear yard setbacks for their residence located
at 1641 Louden Drive, zoned 'R-1B', to allow them to build a sunroom on the rear of this
residence. Who is representing this application?
Anderson: My name is Chris Anderson and I am representing Robert and Joyce as well as Erie
Construction. The house is built on a street that circles and they are on an odd lot. I believe the
rear is 40 ft. and the house now sits at 41.1 ft. with a 12 ft. projection on the back of the home for
the sunroom. That would put it at 29 ft. to the rear of the property.
Jordan: This is going to be a glass-enclosed room?
Anderson: It is going to be vinyl.
Jordan: It is the one right there on the curve, correct? I couldn't find an address.
Anderson: That is correct it is the one on the curve.
Jordan: Does any of the Board members have any questions for the applicant at this time?
Doug do you have staff review on this?
Spitler: The applicant is seeking a variance from the required setback of 40 ft. to 29 ft. It must
meet conditions (1) through (6) of Chapter 1133.07 for approval.
Jordan: We are just looking at the rear setback?
Spitler: Correct.
Jordan: Any of the Board members have any questions or comments on this case?
Geeting: I move for favorable recommendation of AB-04-03 variance in that it meets all six of
the requirements. This motion was seconded by Tim Lane and passed as follows:
Ayes: Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Jordan (5)
Nays: None
OLD BUSINESS:
PBR-03-06 - Board of Preble Co. Commissioners/Health Department
615 Hillcrest Drive
Deffner: I move that we remove this application from the table and have further discussion.
This motion was seconded by Harold Geeting and passed as follows:
Ayes: Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Jordan (5)
Nays: None
Jordan: This application has been removed from the table and who is representing it?
Green: I am Chris Green with Brandstetter Carroll Architects representing Preble County
Commissioners office for the Health Department conversion from the Children's Home. Last
month when we left we were talking about lighting. We have discovered several pole lights and
also several halogen lights on the poles facing the parking lots. When we went over there it was
dark and the lights were not on. Some of them were on and some of them were not due to being
turned off for lack of activity. All the breakers were turned back on and some of the bulbs were
out. All of the bulbs will be replaced prior to any construction going on or occupancy.
Jordan: I think the last time our basic concern was the lighting.
Spitler: Becky and I took a look at it. Some of the bulbs have been replaced and the rest will be
replaced as soon as the bucket truck is available. We got a new plan from the architect that
highlighted all the pole lights. There are 10 lights at the courts and we didn't see them all on but
they are there.
Jordan: Any of the Board members have any more questions on this matter?
Geeting: I move that we recommend approval for PBR-03-06. This motion was seconded by
Tim and passed as follows:
Ayes: Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Jordan (5)
Nays: None
AB-03-10 - Conditional Use - Eric Deeter - 1428 E. Main Street:
Jordan: Do I have a motion to untable this matter?
Steve Deffner made a motion to untable this and it was seconded by Harold Geeting. Motion
passed as follows:
Ayes: Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Jordan (5)
Nays: None
Jordan: This matter is untabled and back for discussion before this Board. Donnette would you
catch us up to speed as to what this entails.
Fisher: When the applicant originally filed this he filed two applications at once. One, he filed
for the rezoning from'C-3' to 'C-1', at the same time he applied for this as a Conditional Use in a
'C-1' district. This Board made an unfavorable recommendation on the rezoning and tabled the
Conditional Use to wait and see what Council was going to do with the rezoning. City Council
has since denied that rezoning. Technically, the only thing you can do with this is application is
to dismiss it. You cannot hear it because it isn't something you can apply for in a 'C-3' district.
This was an application for a Conditional Use in 'C-1' and it isn't 'C-1'.
Jordan: We will have to dismiss this and I need a motion to do so.
Tim Lane made a motion to dismiss and it was seconded by Harold Geeting. The motion to
dismiss passed as follows:
Ayes: Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Jordan (5)
Nays: None
AB-03-11 - Variance - Eric Deeter - 1428 E. Main Street:
Jordan: I need a motion to remove this from the table.
Harold Geeting made the motion to remove this application from the table and Chris Atkins
seconded it. This motion passed as follows:
Ayes: Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Jordan (5)
Nays: None
Fisher: I am just going to remind you before you get into this too much this variance application is separate from the rezoning and the conditional use. It stands on its own merits and doesn't have anything to do with the other two.
Earley D.: The request was for a variance of the height requirement and the front yard setback.
While enclosing the property with fence, Mr. Deeter made contact with Eagle Fence to fence off
the property. Eagle came out and I don't know if he was assuming wrongly that he was in the
county or what but somehow on the front yard setback he checked to make sure that it was okay
with the State of Ohio, his distance off of Rt. 35 and didn't bother to make sure that we were
within the front yard setback for a 6 ft. chain link fence in the front. Afterwards we came to find
out that the fence is approximately
18 feet off of the front line in the 'C-3' zoning that he has and the 35 ft. front yard setback. We have the problem that his fence is either 3 ft. too high or it is 17 ft. too close to the road. He requests a variance of the height of the fence in the front yard because it is too close to the setback. It does meet the State's requirement as far as it is outside of the setbacks they required from 35. I have photos taken from the parking lot, behind where the fence is so you can see it does not obstruct the view coming out of the lot. The fence sits about 18 ft. off of the road and is about 150 ft. from where you actually enter or leave the parking lot. There is a farm fence line along the edge of the road that in the summer it is grown up as tall as the fence so Mr. Deeter's fence is not blocking the view when getting in and out of there. The contractor put it somewhere that he thought was right and it turns out that it is 2 ft. too tall. You will notice that it is located along the edge of the parking lot and by putting it there they thought it was far enough away to satisfy the State but come to find out they should have put it in the middle of the parking lot. It is a bit ridiculous to put the fence down the middle of the parking lot so we have requested a variance on the front yard height of the fence.
Jordan: Are you still asking for the three strands of barbwire?
Earley: Yes. There is on the side three strand of barbwire and we want to continue it all around
the fence.
Jordan: To make ourselves clear on this, the part of the fence in the front yard has to be four foot
so he is asking for a variance of two feet that is in the front yard?
Fisher: No fence shall raise more than 4 ft. in height in any required front yard.
Spitler: We are talking setbacks and it says required front yard, isn't the front yard defined as
where the front main building line is to? In other words he can have this fence in the front yard
wherever at four feet or he can have it at six feet but it has to be at the main building line or
behind it. I don't think he wants to move the fence back so I think they are here for the variance
of height. He could keep a six-foot height as long as the fence is parallel with the front of the
building but he couldn't go any further towards the road than the front of the building. If he
wants to keep it where it is at it can only be four feet according to the code unless the variance is
granted. There is an option. He can move the fence back and keep it at six feet if he is dead set
on having a six-foot fence.
Earley: We are still asking for two (2) more feet since it is in the front yard.
Atkins: Does the barb wire count?
Earley: The fence height is six (6) feet and as far as I know the barbwire doesn't count.
Jordan: If he would decide to fence the rest of that front yard he would have to come back for an
additional variance.
Earley: There are no plans to do any more of it we just want the okay on what we already have
there.
Jordan: Do the Board members have any more questions for Mr. Earley? My thoughts are is that
if it were in the middle of Main Street downtown Eaton I wouldn't go for it but this is on the
edge and outskirts of the City.
Earley: It is the last lot in the City.
Jordan: I don't see where it is hurting any vision line because there is plenty view from the road
to the back of the fence. I have no problem adding the two-foot variance to this.
Steve Deffner made a motion for approval of AB-03-11 and Chris Atkins seconded it. Roll was
called and the motion was approved as follows:
Ayes: Atkins, Geeting, Deffner, Jordan (4)
Nays: Lane (1)
Jordan: Is there any other old business before the Board tonight.
NEW BUSINESS:
Geeting: I have a comment. Up on Louden Avenue that is the second application we have had concerning setbacks in the last few months. Are we going to make that adjustment in our new regulations?
Fisher: Yes, the setbacks will be adjusted in the new zoning rewrite.
Jordan: On that same matter you might want to make a note to require addresses on all buildings
in the City.
Spitler: There is an ordinance in effect right now.
Jordan: If you go up to Louden right now over half of them don't have addresses on the building.
Tim Lane made a motion to adjourn and Harold Geeting seconded the motion. Roll was called and meeting adjourned.
______________________________________ _________________________________
Secretary Chairman