(Return to Minutes)

 

REGULAR MEETING OF THE EATON PLANNING

ZONING AND BUILDING BOARD ON JUNE 8, 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, June 8, 2004, at 7:30 p.m.

 

The roll was called ant the following was found to be:

           

            Present:            Ron Coleman

                                    Chris Atkins

                                    Tim Lane

                                    Harold Geeting

                                    Steve Deffner

                                    Gary Wagner

                                    Tom Jordan

Also in attendance were City Engineer Doug Spitler and Law Director Donnette Fisher.

 

MINUTES:

 

The minutes of the May 11, 2004 meeting were presented.  Ron Coleman made a motion to accept the minutes as written.  Gary Wagner seconded the motion and it passed as follows: 

            Ayes:    Coleman, Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Wagner, Jordan (7)

            Nays:   None

 

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.

 

AB-04-06 – Variance – Juanita Cottingim – 201 E. Spring Street:

 

Jordan:  The first item on the agenda is AB-04-06 Variance, 201 E. Spring.  Is there anyone here representing that request tonight? 

 

Fisher:  I am not sure if you are aware of this or not, but the shed is gone. 

 

Coleman:  I move that we un-table this application.

 

Geeting:  I second the motion.

 

Jordan:  Call the roll, please.

            Ayes:  Coleman, Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Wagner, Jordan (7)

            Nays:  None

 

Jordan:  The variance is un-tabled at this time and being that the shed has been moved, I will ask for a motion to dismiss this application.

 

Defner:  I make the motion to dismiss this application.  The motion was seconded by Ron Coleman and passed as follows:

            Ayes:    Coleman, Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Wagner, Jordan (7)

            Nays:   None

 

 

MR-04-02 – Minor Subdivision – Leyes – 1813 Washington Landing Drive:

 

Jordan:  The next item on the agenda is MR-04-02, minor subdivision, 1813 Washington Landing Drive.  Brad, are you representing this application?

 

Kramer B.:  I am Brad Kramer from Kramer Associates here tonight to represent Darryl and Teresa Leyes with this application.  The history of this is that the house is built a little too close to the existing lot line and we are now asking you to allow us to shift the lot line by 10 feet.  It will be a parallel shit of 10 feet.  This will allow a little side yard.  The house is in a ‘R-1B’ zoning district, in fact both lots, they are in two different sections of Washington Landing, one is Section Two where the house is and the empty lot is in Section Five.  They are both in ‘R-1B’ with the minimum of 10,000 sq. feet lots so with this shift of lot line we are going to stay within those parameters.  There is a minimum 6-foot side yard and we are asking for 10 feet.  It is almost 10 ¾ feet if you measure to the foundation.  If you have any questions I would be happy to entertain them. 

 

Coleman:  How did it get built there?

 

Kramer B.: I really don’t know.  I am going to guess that there was a line strung, I have heard the concrete sidewalk come up a time or two.  I think it would be fair to say that the builder assumed that the concrete sidewalk terminated at that lot or near the lot line and maybe strung the string to the sidewalk.  I really don’t know.  That is a wild guess on my part but once in awhile that happens.  When we do a preliminary plan we lay out a certain amount of lots in an area and then fit them in and then the developer will come in later and say, “Lets stop section two right here.”   We will draw a line down the side of the lot line, maybe extend it across the road and then jog up to the nearest lot line across the street.  That is what happens in all residential sub divisions and this is where we chose to end section two of this phase so there is a little jog.  The lot line across the road doesn’t line up with this Lot 2958.  However, the curbs are going to be extended to the end of the phase and the sidewalks will be extended up towards the end of the phase so you don’t have to get back into an old phase to go forward.  I assume the concrete walk was built beyond the property line and for that reason the concrete crews are not following the

survey they are just building their sidewalks off of existing curbs.  That is probably the scenario there.

 

Fisher:  This was a PUD when it went through, wasn’t it?

 

Jordan:  No.

 

Fisher:  Almost every one we have seen where they are doing this, PUD or Major Sub, Bob has seen recently.  We did ask Bob Wehrley about it because Bob would like to require when they start building the houses that they stake them.  They used to have to do that.  They would start at one house and then they would measure from that house to the next house.  If you don’t, and one house is off even a foot, by the time you get to the end all houses are off.  That has happened, you saw it out at Deer Trail, Whisper Way, it has happened all over the City.  That is probably what happened here. 

 

Jordan:  I can see that is what probably happened here.  It is not the homeowner’s problem.  There was a problem with having point A and point B, draw a string and measure 6-foot. 

 

Fisher:  Mr. Wehrley now requires that when they are going to build anything, we now have Pheasant Run, they have to come out and stake it out.  Where is that building going to be, where is the next one going to be so Bob can go out and measure. It is a lot easier on him now.  It is actually going to put more burden on the builders but he can go out and be able to determine if it is built in the right spot. 

 

Spitler:  The property pins are not set at this time.  When you go out to do a set-back verification the property pins are not necessarily there, typically are not there.  The only thing you have out there is the contractor’s excavation for the foundation and the back of the curb.  The walk is typically not there either.  You have to go out there and hope the curb is in the right spot, measure off of the back of the curb to get to the right-of-way and then from the right-of-way to the set-back of 25 feet or whatever it happens to be.  That is very difficult to do.  Especially when they have dirt piled up in front so high you can’t see around or over it.  That is typically what happens.  We discussed that problem with Council or one of the Boards to try and make them put in pins first or at least stake the pins where the stakes would be with a lath or something.  It was discussed that that would be an additional cost that was not warranted, but they would just try to do a better job trying to stake it out in the field.  It seems like it has worked better but still when you go out there, there is not a lot of monumentation out there. 

 

Jordan:  I guess I just have a problem with that.  You don’t have definite lot lines to go by when you are building the home.  If it is an extra burden on the contractor, then so be it. 

 

Kramer B.: If I may add, a lot of contractors will just ask us to come out and stake the lot lines with a lath.  The pins will often follow the lot grading so there is not reason to set a pin in the ground and then with the grading you will have to come back and set it again. 

A lot of times after the sidewalk and the lot grading is done we will come back and set the front pins, or sometimes all the pins.  Some times they call us up and say they are not real clear about this can you come back out and set these lines.  I don’t think that happened in this case. 

 

Jordan:  Why was the mistake discovered?

 

Kramer B.: Financing, a mortgage location report that was needed.  For financing they ask for a sketch of where the house is on the property.  It is a way for lenders to make sure they are lending on the proper legal description.  It is also used, just like this, to discover any surprises.  Once in a while you will find a tennis court over the line or a shed sitting here or there. 

 

Jordan:  Doug do you have any other staff review?

 

Spitler:  The application follows the regulations in Chapter 1103.03.  For the lot split to be recorded, the deeds must have a statement of approval signed by the Planning Board chairman as approved by the Planning Board. 

 

The minor subdivision must be in conformance with the subdivision regulations, zoning code, and master plan of the City.

 

The Comprehensive Development Plan shows this subdivision in the “Washington Landing” Planning Area with a “suburban residential” future land use designation. 

 

Both of the lots, Lot 2958 and Lot 3114 have the required frontage, lot width and lot size.  Even the lot that they are removing it from still has 22,479 sq. feet. 

 

Jordan:  Any other questions?

 

Atkins:  If that house was build correctly how far do they have to be?

 

Spitler:  Minimum 6 feet on one side with a total of 15 feet between the two sides.

 

Atkins:  So with the new property lines they will be in compliance with the setbacks?

 

Spitler:  Right.

 

Wagner:  According to staff review and the requirements for a minor sub-division, I make a motion that we approve application MR-04-02. 

 

The motion was seconded by Ron Coleman and passed as follows:

            Ayes:  Coleman, Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Defner, Wagner, Jordan (7)

            Nays:   None

 

 

OLD BUSINESS:

 

Spitler:  The meetings for the review continue at Station 2.  The next one will be a week from today. 

 

Fisher:  We will go until 9:00 p.m. next time.

 

Jordan:  Speaking of old business, subdivisions.  We had this one tonight, the Deer Trail incident out there that was very costly.  Why should the City worry about costing the contractor a few hundred dollars to set pins.

 

Fisher:  I wish Dave was here.  As I recall, wasn’t that brought up to Council? 

 

Stonecash:  Yes we did discuss that because of the new inspector.  It should cost the contractor.

 

Fisher:  Didn’t Bob Wehrley send a memo to Dave to bring up with you guys about requiring the developers to stake everything out?

 

Spitler:  I think it may have been before them.  I know it was brought up.  It may have been before Bob and Gary were involved. 

 

Fisher:  We will have to bring that up again.

 

Jordan:  I think we should because there is no excuse for this.

 

Fisher:  It has happened all over the City.

 

Jordan:  It has happened way too much.

 

Fisher:  The developers are being a lot better now.  They have been really great about it in Pheasant Run.  They have staked it out and called Bob to measure before they start pouring anything.  A lot of the builders will start pouring slabs and they haven’t had Bob measure first. 

 

Jordan:  Now is the time to do it when we are going through all the subdivision regulations. 

 

Stonecash:  I think it will help with Ward Johnson, he has started in inspection.

 

Fisher: That is what happened when Planning Board did that blanket variance on Deer Trail.  They built, built, built and got down to the end and magically they had an extra lot. 

 

Jordan:  Yes, and that was a PUD.  This was not a PUD up there.  I know when we plotted this we had a lot of problems with the surveyor wanting to do variances on lots and we finally said, no. 

 

Fisher:  It should help with the construction inspector.  We will have somebody out there while they are actually doing it.

 

Spitler:  I don’t think Ward will be doing that.  It will still be Bob measuring the setbacks.  I don’t want the Board to think that will be Ward.  Bob just need a pin or something set for his use.  I have gone with him and we just start measuring from things we have and hope they are set right. 

 

Jordan:  That is the time you back off and call them and say you can’t determine where you are at and have them call back when it is staked properly. 

 

Spitler:  I think we need to address it again with Council to make sure it is still their desire, as we have discussed it before, and then write in into our Zoning Code if that is a requirement.  Right now we don’t have anything to fall back on other than we don’t have anything to measure.

 

Jordan:  Gary, why don’t you make sure Council is noted of this. 

 

Any other Old Business? 

 

NEW BUSINESS;

 

Jordan:  Any new business?

 

Motion to adjourn was made by Ron Coleman and seconded by Tim Lane and passed as follows:

            Ayes:  Coleman, Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Deffner, Wagner, Jordan (7)

            Nays:   None

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

___________________________________      __________________________________

                        Secretary                                                          Chairman