Board of Zoning Appeals

City of Dayton Board of Zoning Appeals Minute Record Overview March 26, 2024 4:30 P.M. Planning Resource Conference Room, City Hall 101 W. Third Street, Dayton, Ohio Members Present: Ms. Jacquelyne Patterson, Mr. Patrick Martin, Ms. Diana Graham, Mr. Tim Bement, and Mr. Joe Craig. Members Absent: Mr. Joe Shaw Mr. Martin called the meeting to order at 4:30 P.M. A motion was made and seconded to approve the minutes from the February 27, 2024 BZA meeting. _______________________________________________________________________________________ 1. PLN2024-00045 – A request for Variances to 1.) increase the maximum allowable height of a garage from 15 feet to 22 feet and 2.) increase the maximum allowable square footage for the same garage from 900 square feet to 968 square feet. The garage is located in the rear yard of the home at 1634 Garwood Dr. in the SR-2 suburban single-family residential zoning district. Applicant: John Vescovi 1634 Garwood Dr Dayton, OH 45432 Priority Land Use Board: Southeast Planning District: Eastmont Decision: Approved with Conditions 2. PLN2024-00058– A Variance request to exceed the maximum allowable square footage for an accessory structure from 900 square feet to 3340 square feet and to exceed the maximum allowable area of an accessory structure compared to the principal structure from 66% to 70%. The property is located at 5526 Brantford Rd and is located within the SR-1 suburban single-family zoning district. Applicant: Gary Schmaltz 5526 Brantford Rd Dayton, OH 45414 Priority Land Use Board: Northeast Planning District: Northridge Estates Decision: Approved with Conditions 3. PLN2024-00051– A Conditional Use application for a utility substation at 1250 N. Union Road which is related to a solar array installation in the Little Richmond Planning District. The zoning for the site is Business Park (BP). The substation area is proposed to be setback 140 feet from N. Union Road, and is proposed to be approximately 40 feet tall at its highest point Applicant: Gem City PV ! LLC 7500 College Boulevard, Suite 400 Overland Park, KS 66210 Priority Land Use Board: West Planning District: Little Richmond Decision: Approved with Conditions BZA Minute Record Summary Page 2 March 26, 2024 4. PLN2024-00057– A conditional use application to permit the renovation of an existing medical office building and conversion to multi-family dwelling (three-units proposed) located at 23 Jasper Street. The property is located within the MR-5 (Mature Single- Family Residential Zoning) district. Applicant: Sunny Associates Inc. 1224 S. Main Street Dayton, OH 45409 Priority Land Use Board: Downtown Planning District: University Park Decision: Approved 5. PLN2024-00048– A request for Variances to 1.) decrease the minimum allowable lot width for a drive thru facility from 150 feet to 112 feet and 2.) increase the maximum allowable height for an existing free-standing sign from 6 feet to 20 feet. The subject property is located at 1331 Wilmington Ave. in an EGC Eclectic General Commercial zoning district. Applicant: Joshua Konicki 615 Woodside Dr. Englewood, OH 45322 Priority Land Use Board: Southeast Planning District: Patterson Park Decision: Approved 6. PLN2024-00061– A request for Variances to 1.) reduce the number of required parking spaces from 135 to 75, 2.) exemption from the bicycle parking requirement, and 3.) exemption from the minimum 5% landscaped island requirements. The proposed project is for a 170,000 square foot warehouse addition onto an existing 140,000 square foot manufacturing plant located at 4744 Wolf Creek Pike in the Business Park (BP) zoning district. Applicant: Mark Redmond 10816 Millington Court Suite 110 Cincinnati, OH 45242 Priority Land Use Board: West Planning District: Little Richmond Decision: Approved with Conditions The Board of Zoning Appeals meeting was adjourned at 7:38 P.M. Minutes approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals on April 23, 2024. Jeff Green, Secretary Board of Zoning Appeals  City of Dayton Board of Zoning Appeals Minute Record March 26, 2024 1. BZA CASE# PLN2024-00045 – 1634 Garwood Dr. A request for Variances to 1.) increase the maximum allowable height of a garage from 15 feet to 22 feet and 2.) increase the maximum allowable square footage for the same garage from 900 square feet to 968 square feet. The garage is located in the rear yard of the home at 1634 Garwood Dr. (parcel ID: R72 16505 0038) in an SR-2 suburban single-family residential zoning district. Applicant John Vescovi 1634 Garwood Dr. Dayton, OH 45432 Owner Same as Applicant Existing Land Use and Zoning: Residential; SR-2 Suburban Single-family Residential Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Residential; SR-2 Suburban Single-family Residential Land Use Board: Southeast Planning District: Eastmont Planning Staff Contact: Jen Hanauer Ms. Hanauer presented the case, a request for variances to allow for a residential garage to exceed the maximums for height and square footage. The 22-foot by 44-foot pad from the previous garage is still there, and the Applicant would like to re-use it to build his new garage, which would make it 968 square feet when the maximum allowable per code is 900 square feet. The Applicant’s home, the primary structure on the property, is 15 feet in height, and the code stipulates that an accessory structure cannot be taller than the primary structure. To that end, the Applicant is seeking a variance that would allow him to increase his garage height to 22 feet, thus enabling to store and work on his collection of classic vehicles. The property is in the Eastmont neighborhood, and the majority of the homes are similar to the Applicant’s in terms of size and footprint. Ms. Hanauer stated that there is wide variety in the type and size of accessory structures in the neighborhood, with as many as 20 percent being larger than the code would typically allow and at least a handful taller than the code allows. Ms. Hanauer stated that the siding of the proposed garage would match the primary structure. The Applicant also brought a rendering to the meeting (Exhibit 1) that shows windows on the west façade of the proposed garage, facing the street. These details will help the proposed garage match the primary structure as well as the rhythm and character of the neighborhood. Board of Zoning Appeals Page 2 March 26, 2024 Ms. Hanauer stated that the public comments she received from several of the Applicant’s neighbors were all in support. The Southeast Land Use Board also voted unanimously to recommend approval, with conditions that the external surface material match the primary structure, no commercial activity take place on the property, and the sidewalk at the front property line be evened out or replaced. Ms. Hanauer stated that there was some concern that the proposed garage would be used for commercial vehicle repair. The Board asked if that was a question to be addressed, and Mr. Green replied that commercial vehicle repair is not requested at this time. Ms. French added that commercial vehicle repair is not permitted in SR-2 zoning. Ms. Hanauer stated that while the requested height increase is significant at 46.6 percent, the primary structure is small, and this variance will allow the Applicant to add value to his property while creating a space to work on his hobby. Public Testimony Mr. John Vescovi, the Applicant and Owner of the subject property, stated that he has five classic cars and four motorcycles. Currently he must store them and would like to be able to move them to his property. Mr. Vescovi is currently re-siding his home and installing new windows, and the siding and windows on the garage would match. The Board asked what the use of the second story will be on the proposed garage. Mr. Vescovi explained that the back of the garage will be lofted so that he can put in a lift to work on the cars. The second story in the front of the garage would be used for storage. Robert Hilliard of 1628 Garwood Dr. spoke in support of Mr. Vescovi’s application. Board Discussion The board discussed the proposal and stated that the garage would not be the only one that does not conform to the code. Board Decision A motion was made by Ms. Graham and seconded by Ms. Patterson and carried to determine that that there is a preponderance of reliable, probative and substantial evidence to make the specified findings required under R.C.G.O. §150.120.10(D)(1) and approve the application as submitted for Variances with the following conditions: 1. The exterior surface materials of the garage shall match that of the primary structure. 2. No commercial auto repair shall take place on the premises. Mr. Bement Yes Mr. Shaw Absent Ms. Graham Yes Ms. Patterson Yes Mr. Martin Yes Mr. Craig Yes Approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals on April 23, 2024. Jeff Green, Secretary Board of Zoning Appeals  City of Dayton Board of Zoning Appeals Minute Record March 26, 2024 2. BZA CASE# PLN2024-00058 – 5526 Brantford Rd A request to construct additional accessory building area which requires the following variances: 1) increase the maximum area for an accessory structure from 900 sq ft to 3340 sq ft and 2) increase the maximum area of an accessory structure compared to the principal structure from 66% to 70%. Applicant Gary L Schmaltz 5526 Brantford Rd Dayton OH 45414 Owner Gary L Schmaltz 5526 Brantford Rd Dayton OH 45414 Existing Land Use and Zoning: Single-Family Residential; SR-1 (Suburban Residential) Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: East – Woodland; SR-1 (Suburban Residential) North – Woodland; SR-1 (Suburban Residential) South – Woodland; SR-1 (Suburban Residential) West – Single-Family Residential; SR-1 (Suburban Residential) Land Use Committee: Northeast Planning District: Northridge Estates Planning Staff Contact: Aaron Earlywine Mr. Earlywine presented the case. A request to construct additional accessory building area which requires the following variances: 1) increase the maximum area for an accessory structure from 900 sq ft to 3340 sq ft and 2) increase the maximum area of an accessory structure compared to the principal structure from 66% to 70%. The property is located at 5526 Brantford Rd and is located within the SR-1 suburban single-family zoning district and the Northridge Estates Planning District. Mr. Earlywine presented an overview of the proposal and the site. Mr. Earlywine provided context on the location, zoning, and character of the surrounding area and street. He shared images of the site plan, site conditions, and subject property. He shared the Northeast Land Use Board’s unanimous recommendation of approval. Board of Zoning Appeals Page 2 March 26, 2024 Mr. Earlywine detailed the primary considerations to the case. He noted that due to the property being quite large and very well screened, anything built on the property would be very hard to see from the street. Mr. Earlywine stated that the limits the total accessory building size to 900 square feet, no matter the size of the property. He noted that staff believed the request made sense given that the property is so much larger then the typical Dayton property size and was very well screened from three sides. Mr. Earlywine stated that staff is recommending the application be approved as submitted. This recommendation was based on, in staff’s opinion, the proposal meeting the required standards for approval and was appropriate due to the size of the property. Public Testimony Gary L Schmaltz at 5526 Brantford Rd identified himself as the owner and applicant of the proposal. He stated his desire to increase the size of the accessory structure to store his mowing equipment and vehicles. Board Discussion The board discussed the proposal and believed the application to be clean and able to meet the standards for approval. The board had a discussion with the applicant about the height of the structure. Board Decision A motion was made by Mr. Bement and seconded by Mr. Creig and carried to determine that there is a preponderance of reliable, probative and substantial evidence to make the specified findings required under R.C.G.O. § 150.120.10(D)(1) and approve the application as submitted for a Variance with the following condition: 1. The height of the accessory structure does not exceed that of the principal building. Mr. Bement Yes Mr. Shaw Absent Ms. Graham Yes Ms. Patterson Yes Mr. Martin Yes Mr. Craig Yes Approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals on April 23, 2024. Jeff Green, Secretary Board of Zoning Appeals  City of Dayton Board of Zoning Appeals Minute Record March 26, 2024 3. BZA CASE# PLN2024-00051 – 1250 N. Union Road A Conditional Use application for a utility substation at 1250 N. Union Road (Parcel R72317407 0001), which is related to a solar array installation in the Little Richmond Planning District. The zoning for the site is Business Park (BP). The substation area is proposed to be setback 140 feet from N. Union Road and is proposed to be approximately 40 feet tall at its highest point. Vegetative screening will be retained. This is an alternate location for a substation previously approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals for the same solar array project. Existing Land Use and Zoning: Wooded area; Business Park (BP) Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North – Wooded area/Agricultural; Business Park (BP) South – Agricultural and wooded area; BP in the City of Dayton, with RSF-M (Residential Single Family- Medium Density) in the City of Trotwood south of that East – Wooded area; Business Park (BP) West – Agricultural and residential; Agricultural (City of Trotwood zoning) Land Use Committee: West Planning District: Little Richmond Planning Staff Contact: Tony Kroeger Mr. Martin recused himself from the case. Tony Kroeger presented the case, sharing the site plan and site photos. The subject property at 1250 N. Union Road is proposed to contain a substation for the project and a switching station, also referred to in the submitted plans as “AES Ohio utility substation.” These facilities are associated with a proposed solar electricity project, which includes an area of approximately 260 acres enclosed by a fence that will contain solar panels. The highest point of the substation facilities will be approximately 40 feet. The operator is to be TED Renewables. The solar panels are a permitted use in the Business Park (BP) zoning district; therefore, they are not directly part of the Conditional Use request. The substation is the subject of this request. Prior to 2009, solar electricity was not mentioned in the City of Dayton Zoning Code. In 2009, “solar electricity structures” (along with other solar installation types) were defined in the zoning code, and zoning districts where they could be permitted were established. It was determined that solar electricity structures Board of Zoning Appeals Page 2 March 26, 2024 would be permitted with regulations in the BP zoning district. Utility substations, in contrast, have been a conditional use since the adoption of our current zoning code. The overall project has the following history of support and approvals for the City: • A substation along Olive Road, associated with this solar project, was supported by West Land Use Board on January 19, 2023 and approved by Board of Zoning Appeals on January 24, 2023 • A rezoning for a parcel to the east of this location along Little Richmond Road was supported by West Land Use Board on May 4, 2023, approved by City Plan Board on May 9, 2023 and approved by Dayton City Commission on July 5, 2023 • However, input from AES has required this proposed location. This is an alternate location. The current land use for the substation is that of a wooded area. This location (like the prior location) has proximity and access to a 69 kV transmission line, which is essential for the substation. In addition to BZA approval of the substation, permits and oversight will occur through AES as well as being governed by National Electrical Code. Regulatory oversight of the solar array project includes agencies such as Ohio EPA, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, the US Army Corps of Engineers, both the state and federal Offices of Historic Preservation, US Fish and Wildlife Services, and the Ohio Department of Transportation. The plan for the substation and other site elements appears to meet zoning code standards. The associated panels must meet code as well or seek a variance. The substation facilities will each be surrounded by a chain link fence and barbed wire, which are requirements typical for major utility facilities, due to National Energy Code regulations. In this instance, the fence will be over 200 feet from the nearest structure, which will reduce the visual impact along with the vegetative screening. Note that the fence will tightly surround the facilities – there is not fence proposed around the entire perimeter of this parcel, including along N. Union Road. The proposed substation is necessary for the rest of the project—the panels—to serve any purpose. While the substation facilities may be partially visible from the right-of-way from some vantage points, the impact is mitigated by the significant setback and the vegetation. The nearest residential structure is located over 200 feet from the proposed substation. Much of the surrounding land use is agricultural. The applicant proposes the ground cover at the base of the panels be a wildflower/perennial mix, which some studies show provides benefit to adjacent agricultural use. While the applicant has demonstrated that the site is densely vegetated, and such vegetation will be preserved where possible, it is not completely certain what will have to be removed for the installation and AES approval of the substation. Therefore, staff recommends BZA approval with the following condition: --Prior to construction of the substation, a vegetation preservation and, if necessary, replacement plan shall be submitted to City of Dayton Planning Division staff, upon which staff shall review and approve the plan if it can be determined that the existing and/or proposed vegetation maximizes feasible screening of the substation. Mr. Kroeger reviewed the required standards for Conditional Use (150.535 of the zoning code). While all of the standards are relevant and addressed in the staff report, Mr. Kroeger specifically cited Standards A, B, D noting that the substation should not be incongruent with the surrounding area and would be Board of Zoning Appeals Page 3 March 26, 2024 developed with oversight of several local, state, and national agencies. Based on the required standards staff recommended approval. Public Testimony Ian Edwards of TED Renewables at 7500 College Blvd., Suite 400, Overland Park, Kansas, spoke on behalf of the application. He provided an overview of the solar project, indicating the presence of the transmission line and described the scale of the project. Over 15,000 homes and businesses can be powered by this project. Construction could start in the second half of 2025, taking 12 to 16 months to construct. It was noted that the prior substation location had received Conditional Use approval, and there was also a rezoning approval for part of the project land. However, AES has required a shift in location, despite their prior approval of the initial location. Mr. Edwards explained why the relocation is being sought. He shared the site plan for the new location and explained that it in fact may be a better site, long term. There is more vegetation at this site that the previous location. He shared the visual simulations of what the substation would look like from N. Union Road. He further highlighted community engagement efforts, and support received in the process. Mr. Bement asked if growth of the project is incorporated into the design. Mr. Edwards said, no, not currently – the substation is only sized for this project. Mr. Bement asked how is power transferred, is it overhead? Mr. Edwards said that it can be both – panels feed into inverters generally underground into the substation, which has a transformer that steps up the voltage. Then it is distributed to the grid. Marion Brown of 7571 Old Dayton Rd. in Trotwood, OH spoke next. He is a contiguous landowner. He was notified of the project three weeks prior. He expressed surprise about a lack of transparency regarding environmental studies. He noted that the project size is 49.9 MW, not 50 MW, stating that this is because it doesn’t have to go to the Ohio Power Siting Board. He discussed the scale of the project. In the southwest corner, solar panels are proposed contiguous with his land, which is used for corn production. There is a wetland area noted on the map, and he wondered about the impact. He spoke about the use tables in the zoning code, wondering why the panels are not a Conditional Use, but the Substation is. There was a request to table for further environmental and conditional use clarification. What happens when these run their course? Who is responsible? Who owns the land and what is the plan in the future, at the termination of the project? Mr. Edwards concluded the order of speakers. He noted previous correspondence via email with Mr. Brown, and also clarified the acreage of the project. The purchase option for 600 acres – staff only described the fenced area – there is a difference between the purchase area and the fenced area. In terms of environmental impacts, review is the same as project that go to Ohio Power Siting Board. He noted all of the review and certifications required such as those by the US Army Corps of Engineers, ODNR, US Fish and Wildlife, wetland delineation, threatened and endangered species, and a historical artifact survey. There are wetlands on site, which will not be impacted. A decommissioning plan has been drafted, which will be finalized as construction approaches. It does contemplate a bond if necessary, with either the County or City. Mr. Bement asked about the lifespan of the project. Mr. Edwards said 35 years is typically used, but more recently 40 or 45 years as been used. At that time, the project can be “repowered” or brought back to its previous state. There was a discussion regarding how AES and the project interact on the construction of the substation. Mr. Craig asked if the project is responsible for ultimate cleanup, which was answered affirmatively. There was a discussion about necessary approvals should the project expand. Board of Zoning Appeals Page 4 March 26, 2024 Board Discussion Mr. Bement agreed with the staff analysis and supported the proposed condition. Mr. Bement, Ms. Patterson, and Mr. Craig all noted the array of regulatory agencies that must oversee such a project, and were satisfied by that degree of oversight. Board Decision A motion was made by Mr. Bement and seconded by Ms. Graham and carried to determine that there is a preponderance of reliable, probative and substantial evidence to make the specified findings required under R.C.G.O. §150.535 and approve the application as submitted for Conditional Use with the following condition: • Prior to construction of the substation, a vegetation preservation and, if necessary, replacement plan shall be submitted to City of Dayton Planning Division staff, upon which staff shall review and approve the plan if it can be determined that the existing and/or proposed vegetation maximizes feasible screening of the substation from North Union Road. Mr. Bement Yes Mr. Shaw Absent Ms. Graham Yes Ms. Patterson Yes Mr. Martin Recused Mr. Craig Yes Approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals on March 26, 2024. Jeff Green, Secretary Board of Zoning Appeals  City of Dayton Board of Zoning Appeals Minute Record March 26, 2024 4. BZA CASE# PLN2024-00057– 23 Jasper Street The applicant, Sunny Associates, requests Conditional Use approval to allow a new multi-family residential dwelling use within a building constructed prior to the passage of the 2006 Zoning Code where review and approval of the Board of Zoning Appeals is required located at 23 Jasper Street in the Mature Residential District (MR-5) within the Fairground Neighborhood. No variances are requested. Applicant Sunny Associates Inc 1224 S. Main St Dayton, Ohio 45409 Owner Sunny Associates Inc 1224 S. Main St Dayton, Ohio 45409 Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant land; T Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North – Commercial; MR-5 South – Vacant land; ER-4 East – Residential structures; T West –Vacant land; T Land Use Committee: Greater Downtown Planning District: University Park Planning Staff Contact: Susan Vincent Ms. Vincent presented the case. Ms. Vincent presented an overview of the proposal and the site. Ms. Vincent provided context on the location, zoning, and character of the surrounding area and street. She shared images of the site plan, site conditions, and subject property. She shared the public comments received on the case. Ms. Vincent detailed the primary considerations regarding the proposed site improvements and nuance of the code which requires the BZA review and approval of the proposal. She shared an overview of the existing conditions and planned improvements to the site including the addition of a landscaped buffer between the improved parking lot and the pedestrian sidewalk. Board of Zoning Appeals Page 2 March 26, 2024 Ms. Vincent explained the fact that there are two separate parcels included in the property and application. The parking lot and building are on separate parcels. Planning staff determined to defer to the Building Division regarding any requirements for future consolidation. Ms. Vincent shared the recommendation that the application be approved submitted. Ms. Vincent’s recommendation was based on her analysis of the Standards for Variances Based on Practical Difficulty. She highlighted 150.535 (a) and (c) in her presentation to the board. Mr. Bement asked for clarification regarding the nature of the street labeled “Access Drive” on the site plan. Ms. Kyrsten French confirmed that the alleys to the north and west are public rights-of-way. Mr. Tony Kroeger acknowledged that utilizing an alley as an access drive for backing out of parking spaces is not ideal but is simply a condition of the property at this time. Mr. Martin asked if the parking area would be repaved. Ms. Vincent deferred to the applicant. Public Testimony The applicant, Sunny Associates, represented by Sunny Sidhu, 1224 S. Main Street, Dayton, Ohio, shared that they would be repaving the parking area and repairing the sidewalk. Mr. Martin asked for clarification regarding the layout of the apartment units. Mr. Sidhu shared the configuration for the three units. Board Discussion The board discussed the case. Mr. Bement shared his opinion that this was a good reuse of the building and sees no issues. Mr. Martin shared his opinion that it seemed unlikely that the parking lot would be sold off and so did not believe a condition was necessary. Board Decision A motion was made by Ms. Patterson and seconded by Mr. Bement and carried to determine that there is preponderance of reliable, probative, and substantial evidence to make the specified findings required under R.C.G.O. §150.535 and approve the application for conditional use as submitted. Mr. Bement Yes Mr. Shaw Excused Ms. Graham Yes Ms. Patterson Yes Mr. Martin Yes Mr. Craig Yes Approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals on April 23, 2024. Jeff Green, Secretary Board of Zoning Appeals  City of Dayton Board of Zoning Appeals Minute Record March 26, 2024 5. BZA CASE# PLN2024-00048 – 1331 Wilmington Ave. A request for Variances to 1.) decrease the minimum allowable lot width for a drive thru facility from 150 feet to 112 feet and 2.) increase the maximum allowable height for an existing free-standing sign from 6 feet to 20 feet. The subject property is located at 1331 Wilmington Ave. (parcel ID: R72 14101 0030) in an EGC Eclectic General Commercial zoning district. Applicant Joshua Konicki App Architecture 615 Woodside Dr. Englewood, OH 45322 Owner Tony Clark Gionino’s Pizzeria 1528 E. Third St. Dayton, OH 45403 Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant commercial structure, parking lot, wooded area; EGC Eclectic General Commercial Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North – Budget Rental Car, Ace Hardware; EGC, ENC East – Breitenstrater Square Shopping Center, Storage Inns of America; ENC, PD-168 South – Poelking Lanes; ENC West – Residential; ER-4 Land Use Board: Southeast Planning District: Patterson Park Planning Staff Contact: Jen Hanauer Ms. Hanauer presented the case, a request for Variances to decrease the minimum allowable lot width for a drive thru facility from 150 feet to 112 feet and to increase the maximum allowable height for an existing free-standing sign from 6 feet to 20 feet. The subject property is located at 1331 Wilmington Ave. and formerly operated as a Long John Silvers drive thru. The subject property sits on an arterial commercial corridor just east of the residential area of the Patterson Park neighborhood. The Applicant intends to open a drive thru and carry-out concept for a franchise of Gionino’s Pizzeria, of which there are several other locations in the City of Dayton, all well-maintained properties. Board of Zoning Appeals Page 2 March 26, 2024 The requested variance for lot frontage does not concern staff as the Applicant has demonstrated that the depth of the lot will allow for adequate vehicular circulation on the subject property. The requested variance for sign height is significant. New development in the area has been required to adhere to the City’s sign regulations, as is demonstrated at Storage Inns of America at 1450 Wilmington Ave. and Waffle House at 1210 Wilmington Ave. However, the existing sign on the property is structurally sound and is not unusual for the area, which also has two billboards and several nonconforming signs, such as at Breitenstrater Square Shopping Center at the southeast corner of Wilmington and Patterson, Rocky’s Ace Hardware at 1229 Wilmington Ave., and Poelking Lanes at 1403 Wilmington Ave. It was asked if the ingress/egress is wide enough. Ms. French replied that the requirement is 24 feet and that the City does not have maximum driveway widths. Ms. French added that Civil Engineering will have the opportunity to review the plans as well. The Southeast Land Use Board met on March 19, 2024, and voted unanimously to recommend approval of the application as submitted with conditions that a dumpster be properly located and screened on the property, the sign be shortened, the parking lot be improved, and appropriate screening be added between the subject property and the adjacent residential properties to the west. Two neighbors from the adjacent residential portion of the Patterson Park neighborhood to the west of the subject property came to speak at the meeting and ask questions of the Applicant and the City but neither were opposed to the land use or the requested variances. A letter was sent from Thomas E. Smith, President and CEO of Storage Inns of America located at 1450 Wilmington Ave. across the street from the subject property, who had no issue with the request for a variance for the minimum frontage but thought that the existing sign is more appropriate for an interstate and that it would look much better if it matched the other signs in the area. Staff received a call from a resident on Broadmoor Drive who was not opposed to the application for variances but is concerned about the effect on traffic on her street that an additional business in the area will have. In her analysis, Ms. Hanauer called out standards from Section 150.120.10(D)(1) of the Zoning Code, specifically (b) stating that replacing the existing sign would be cost prohibitive to the Applicant and (d) stating that the variances would not substantially alter the essential character of the corridor. Ms. Hanauer recommended the application be approved as submitted. It was asked if there will be an issue with the light from the sign for the adjacent residential. Ms. Hanauer stated that she believes the sign will not be visible from the residential area of Patterson Park due to the existing trees and the distance, which is about 200 feet. Public Testimony The Applicant, Mr. Tony Clark of 21 Huffman Ave., said he would prefer to keep the existing sign because a monument sign would obstruct the view north up Wilmington for vehicles leaving the property due to the angle of the road. Mr. Clark added that there will not be a “squawk box” or intercom speaker for the drive thru. There will be a properly screened dumpster located on the existing pad. It was asked what it would be screened with, and Ms. French replied that it could be either a fence or masonry wall. The architect, Ms. Maria Schertler of 324 Box Elder Dr., gave some history of the property including the most recent use, which was as parking for Amazon vehicles. Ms. Schertler stated that this would be the second Gionino’s location in Dayton and the fifth in the Dayton area. She added that the design for the Board of Zoning Appeals Page 3 March 26, 2024 property will increase the green space along the street by 200 percent and decreases the number of parking spaces from 32 to 24. Board Discussion The board discussed the sign height and the benefits of leaving the existing sign as is. Ms. French commented on what the Zoning Code has to say about signs in this situation. While it is a little vague, if you’re changing uses and doing site re-design, you’re supposed to come into conformance. There are provisions for non-conforming signs, and in this case, the Applicant never really gave up use of the sign and did use the sign continuously. The board questioned whether the sign was in use when Amazon trucks were parked on the property. Ms. Patterson stated she would have liked to have seen what it would like with a conforming sign. Board Decision A motion was made by Mr. Craig and seconded by Ms. Patterson and carried to determine that that there is a preponderance of reliable, probative and substantial evidence to make the specified findings required under R.C.G.O. §150.120.10(D)(1) and approve the application as submitted for Variances. Mr. Bement Recused Mr. Shaw Absent Ms. Graham Yes Ms. Patterson Yes Mr. Martin Yes Mr. Craig Yes Approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals on April 23, 2024. Jeff Green, Secretary Board of Zoning Appeals  City of Dayton Board of Zoning Appeals Minute Record March 26, 2024 6. BZA CASE# PLN2024-00061; 4744 Wolf Creek Pike A request for Variances to 1.) reduce the number of required parking spaces from 135 to 75, 2.) exemption from the bicycle parking requirement, and 3.) exemption from the minimum 5% landscaped island requirements. The proposed project is for a 170,000 square foot warehouse addition onto an existing 140,000 square foot manufacturing plant located at 4744 Wolf Creek Pike in the Business Park (BP) zoning district. Applicant Mark Redmond 10816 Millington Ct, Suite 110 Cincinnati, OH 45242 Owner Malt Products Corporation PO Box 898 Saddle Brook NJ 07663 Existing Land Use and Zoning: Manufacturing; BP Business Park Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North – Residential and commercial structures; Trotwood South – Single Family Residential structures; Trotwood East –Single Family Residential Structures and Commercial; Trotwood and T Transitional West – Manufacturing/Warehousing; BP Business Park Land Use Board: West Planning District: Little Richmond Planning Staff Contact: Elizabeth Dakin Ms. Dakin presented the case. Ms. Dakin presented an overview of the proposal and the site. Ms. Dakin provided context on the location, zoning, and character of the surrounding area. She shared images of the site plan, site conditions, and subject property. She shared the public comments received on the case and corroborated that there had been immense vegetation on the site according to recent aerial photography and that when she inspected the site, it was largely removed. She stated that the applicant had said that they removed six or seven large trees but it was mostly the removal of invasives such as honeysuckle. Ms. Dakin detailed the primary considerations regarding the proposed site improvements and the requested variances to reduce the amount of parking, bike parking, and vegetation required. Board of Zoning Appeals Page 2 March 26, 2024 Ms. Dakin shared the recommendation that the application be approved with the condition that the applicant shall install the minimum amount of trees required within the parking lot as specified in section 150.800 of the zoning code. Using native species will attract the least amount of pests. Also that the applicant shall install one bike rack with six bike parking spots outdoors or provide indoor secured bike parking. Ms. Dakin recommendation was based on her analysis of the Standards for Variances Based on Practical Difficulty. Public Testimony The applicant, Mark Redmond with Food Plant Engineering, represented Malt Products, 4744 Wolf Creek Pike, provided some supplemental information about the preliminary earth moving they had received a permit to do so. Mr. Redmond went on to say that the business operations were changing in response to COVID-19 as companies and stores needed them to have more product on hand ready to be shipped out rather than to wait on the supply chain. He addressed the bike parking variance stating that they are concerned with truck traffic going in and out and that the road and gate are not equipped for bicyclists. Also stated that the plant was surveyed and nobody expressed interest in biking. He then addressed the screening issue. He stated that they had removed a lot of brush but have begun to implement earth mounding along the edges of the property to screen and that they would add a fence on top of that if they are not able to get up to the height required to screen. Kyrsten French, Zoning Administrator, stated that the mounding could not be more than a 3:1 slope. Diego Guevarra, Owner of Malt Products Corporation, 4744 Wolf Creek Pike, clarified to the BZA that they were not seeking a variance for screening and that they fully intend to comply with the zoning code as written. He stated that all work that has been done is done to the plans that had been approved. He noted that the future warehouse is speculative and they have no intention of under sizing their parking. They had moved there 30 years ago and grew incrementally. Mr. Guevarra also expanded on the COVID- 19 change – their customers are no longer willing to use “just in time” inventory. Dr Shirley Stallworth (Ivory), 4869 Little Richmond Rd, in relation to the significant removal of vegetation she stated that it was clear to her that they did not take the neighborhood into consideration about rodents or erosion. Micheal Stafford, 4722 Hollister Ave, stated that they had lived there for 47 years and that they had pictures of what the area behind their properties had been prior to the removal of vegetation. He stated that the company had logged it and that they would now need a 30-foot-tall wall to not see the plant or the light from the plant now. He also pointed out the concern that his mother’s well is next to the retention pond. Mr. Martin stated that they are here to talk about the variances as it is proposed by the applicant. Angie Hudson, 4875 Little Richmond Rd, corroborated that the vegetation was not there anymore and shared her concern that it had become a field. She indicated her concern for erosion and having to deal with holding water on their properties. She noted they are worried about their safety in regard to water and chemicals used. Stated that they would have liked to be included in discussions prior to it getting to BZA. They want respect and proper separation between their residences and this use. Board of Zoning Appeals Page 3 March 26, 2024 Mr. Bement asked if they had OEPA approvals and Mr. Redmond and Mr. Guevarra responded that they had sent in their Notice of Intent and completed stormwater controls. Board Discussion Mr. Martin stated that the task is the variances requested but given the dramatic change, is the site plan complete? Ms. French stated that they seem amenable to meeting the code. Mr. Craig said it was similar to Bonbright for their parking reduction ask. Mr. Martin agreed. Mr. Bement asked about the bike rack. Mr. Martin stated that the company knows their employees and that this is not open to the public. Ms. Patterson considered using native species for the parking lot. Mr. Martin stated that they have bigger issues than landscaping the interior. Mr. Craig inquired about adding a condition that the owner/applicant works with city staff for the barrier/landscaping. Tony Kroeger, Planning Division Manager, and Ms. French agreed that if the plan met the code then Ms. French would be compelled to approve it. The code does give Ms. French some flexibility she can give in some circumstances. Mr. Bement stated that the applicant may have to size up for landscaping to meet the intent of the code. Board Decision A motion was made by Mr. Bement and seconded by Ms. Patterson and carried to determine that there is preponderance of reliable, probative, and substantial evidence to make the specified findings required under R.C.G.O. §150.535 and approve the application for conditional use with the condition: • The remainder of the development plan be submitted for staff review and approval for the screening requirements around the residential zoning district areas. Mr. Bement Yes Mr. Shaw Excused Ms. Graham Yes Ms. Patterson Yes Mr. Martin Yes Mr. Craig Yes Approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals on April 23, 2024. Jeff Green, Secretary Board of Zoning Appeals