Good evening. The Board of Zoning and Building Appeals meeting for August
24th, 2026 is called order at 5:30. Glenn, please call roll.
» Mr. Allen. >> Here.
» Mr. Patz. >> Here.
» Mr. Brown. >> Here.
» Mr. Griffith. >> Here.
» Mr. Cansler. >> Here.
» Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.
» I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all.
» At this time, anyone that will be speaking this evening is asked to stand
and raise your right hand.
Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth under the penalty of perjury,
so help you God? >> I do.
» Yes.
» And I believe we have no unfinished business tonight.
So, we will move on to new business.
We have three items on the agenda today. The first item is
development variance 260009.
Uh development variances are requested at 9801
Chamberlain Road for construction of a residential accessory structure.
Will the applicant please come to the podium? Please state your name and
address for the record and describe the nature of your request.
» Nathan Duke, uh 9801 Chamberlain Road, Westerville, 44087.
Uh we're looking to build an accessory structure
to to park uh
larger vehicles in, uh, that require door height, uh, greater than 4
13 ft. So, 14-ft door.
» I'll now open this case to public comment. Is there anyone present that
would like to speak for or against this request?
Come on up to the podium.
And, uh, state your name and address for the record.
» Is this your microphone?
» Hi. Oh, it is. Yeah. It is. Yeah.
Thank you.
Mhm. Yeah, okay.
Good evening. My name is Shannon Smith. I live at 9789 Chamberlain Road in
Twinsburg, and this is my husband, Dan. Thank you for giving us the opportunity
to speak tonight. We live directly beside the property in question and the
proposed detached garage that will be positioned parallel to our
property line, meaning that we will be looking at the long side of the
structure from our property. We are here to respectfully, sorry,
oppose all three variances being requested for this proposed structure.
We are not opposed to our neighbors having a garage, and we understand that
they want to use their property. Our concern is the size, scale, and
placement of this particular structure and the impact it will have on our home
and property. I think it is especially important the
board consider this from our perspective because the rendering we were shown when
I um contacted someone and they sent us the plans and the picture
um it does not show what we will see from our property.
We have provided a picture of the proposed plan that I was given and our
part of the driveway and a small portion of our house is at the bottom of the
plan labeled Smith and the proposed structure will be on
the other side of our property line. The side of the proposed detached garage
facing our property is approximately 62 ft wide and 24 ft high
with only 30 ft between the structure and our property line.
We have provided AI renderings showing the view from the backyard of our home.
In those images, the top half shows our current view and the bottom half shows
what that view could possibly or will look like with the proposed structure
and you can see there is a vast difference.
The view of our front yard will also be affected.
30 ft may sound like a substantial setback until you consider what is being
placed 30 ft away, a 24-ft tall building with a 62-ft wide side facing our home
and the structure continues with additional sections making the overall
footprint extremely large. So our view will not be of the front of
a typical residential garage. We will primarily be looking at the side of a
very large building. It will become a dominant part of the scenery from our
property and from multiple rooms and bedrooms in our home.
» [snorts] >> There is also no other residence on
Chamberlain Road with a garage comparable to this size and scale.
Living on Chamberlain Road, we do not have an HOA, so there are no private
neighborhood restrictions that provide additional protection for our
neighboring homeowners. We rely on the city's zoning regulations and this board
to maintain reasonable standards between properties. That makes it especially
important to us that the zoning requirements of our upheld.
We are also concerned about more than just the proposed use today. A structure
this large will remain on the property for many years.
Potentially through change ins and changes in ownership or use. We cannot
know what that building may eventually be used for and we are particularly
particularly concerned about the potential for increased noise and
activity in the future. We contacted the realtor who sold us our
home in 2023. I gave her the plans. She looked at the proposed plans and said
that's not a garage, that's a factory, that's huge. She also said it's an
eyesore, sorry. I know those are strong words, but they help put our concerns
into perspective cuz we are very concerned.
We asked if the proposed detached garage will affect our property value. She said
it will have an impact on those values given the change of scenery from
residential wooded to commercial industrial look. This isn't simply about
us not liking the appearance of a neighbor's garage. It is about the
extraordinary scale of the structure in relation to the residential properties
surrounding it. We respect our neighbors and their right
to use their property, of course. But we also believe that our property and our
property and our reasonable enjoyment of our home deserve consideration.
We are asking the board to look beyond the front rendering and consider what
this will actually look like from our home. The scale of the structure being
placed 30 ft from our property line and the long-term impact of granting these
variances. For those reasons, we respectfully ask that you deny all three
variances and thank you for hearing our concerns.
» Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to
speak?
If none, we'll move on to a board discussion.
One of any questions or thoughts for the applicant?
» I have I have a question. For the applicant,
my name is Rick Patz. Um
You You have a a camper, correct, that you want to store inside?
» Correct. >> But I see you've got two doors in this
this drawing that I've got here. Is there
Am I missing something there? >> So, there's a
» I can't You're going to have to come up to the microphone. I'm sorry.
» The left or the right side door is for camper storage, and then the left side
door is for other vehicles, but just for ease of access having
» Both 14-ft high? >> Correct. Both 14-ft high.
» And then um How big is your camper?
» Uh mine is 36 ft. >> 9 by 36?
» It's Yeah, 9 by 36. >> Okay.
» With plans for a larger >> of space left in that in that building,
then. >> Well, with plans for larger and a the
tow vehicle >> I You're going to have to speak into the
microphone. >> With plans for larger RV with the tow
vehicle parked in front for storage.
» I just kind of feel it's it's overkill right now. That's all.
But um That doesn't You haven't got that listed
in any of your documentation that you're going to upgrade.
» Oh, okay.
» Okay, that's my question for now. >> Okay.
» Just two The two garage doors are a little bit concerning to me.
» So, how high are those garage doors? >> 14 ft.
» 14 ft tall.
» Is there another man door or another uh overhead door that's going to be in
there anywhere? >> There's a man door on the left side of
the building. >> Those are the only two overhead doors
you have? >> Correct.
» Okay. And this this is bigger than what your
house is. And I I read your documentation that you've got
documentation that you could be 19 You could show us documentation where your
house is 1,900 sq feet. >> Correct.
» But this is 2450 square feet. >> Roughly, yeah. It's finished square
square footage on the inside is just under 2400.
Of finished concrete floor space. >> Or is there going to be an upstairs in
there? >> No.
» That's why I'm done with it. Thank you.
» Okay, so then just as far as the height is concerned. So you said there's no
upstairs. So the interior height, I think you said about 16 ft.
» Just, yeah, 16 ft 6 in. >> Then is the height of the building is it
necessary for it to be as tall as it is? Like can that be brought down?
» Uh with the garage door going up, you need
that the space for the openers and it would need to be that high to for
clearance. >> Okay, then as far as the the depth of
the building [snorts] being about 60 62 ft. You said your RV is 36 ft.
» Roughly 36 and the veto vehicle in front roughly about 15 to 20.
» Okay, so it's a vehicle that would be towed by
» Towed. The vehicle would be towing the RV, yes.
» Okay, that's why you're the 60 ft is how it's both RV and the
attached vehicle. >> Correct.
» I have another question. Do you have any plans on landscaping on the the side
towards your neighbors? >> Yes.
» That's not listed in here. >> No, that I didn't get that far with the
the planning, but the plan is to run down the side um where it's going to be
exposed is run down the side with uh either a mulch bed or gravel bed with
arborvitae or some sort of foundation coverage uh
low level plant down the side.
» Got quite a thicket between the two of you right now anyways.
» Correct. Yeah. >> Except in the fall.
» Yeah, except there fall. Right now it's pretty grown up, but
Okay. >> I have another question.
Um, it's Tom Brown. Uh Is there another location on your lot?
I I see I know you have a pole barn back there.
However, if you moved it back, you know, behind
Okay, yeah, I would constitute putting in a uh an another driveway, but that's
a heck of a lot better to look at than than
Okay. This is a building. >> Problem with going in the back is the
way the elevation goes. It drops real far, and that is wet back there
from as soon as it thaws to
middle of July. I can't mow sections of the the ditch back there.
So, having access back there with a vehicle of that size and weight, you
wouldn't be able to get back to it.
» Have you considered the effect of the value on your neighbor's property
with these two high doors and building? >> I have. I figured it would be a
would bring the value up considering what's across the street and next door
to me on the other side. With a building that's
» with anybody in that regard that that has the expertise to value things?
» I haven't gone I haven't evaluated anything, but the house across street
you can't see from the road cuz it's all overgrown, and there's a barn next door
to me with a hole in the roof. >> Yeah, I'm talking about the effect upon
your neighbor's property. >> I haven't.
» across the street. >> Across the street?
» Not I'm not talking about what's across the street. I'm talking about the effect
of the value of these doors, that building on your neighbor's property.
» I have not gone that far with with the
the stone front facade and the uh vinyl siding, it would look
residential. And the doors are have windows in them and
it's not a commercial building.
» I have a question, Mr. Chair. Um, you've said that the tow vehicle you'd
like to park it in the same bay as the RV.
» Correct. >> But do you have to? Can't Can't the
truck or whatever you'll tow with be in the other bay? I mean, does it Does Is
that length the depth of the building? >> would be other storage in the other bay
and other vehicles as well. We have a I have a couple classic cars
that I would park over there just to keep
out of the weather and >> It's sounding to me like the
the height's an issue, but the larger issue for your neighbor is the
um, very deep length of the building. And
so, when you request a variance, you're
asked to request the minimum that allows you
to to do what you need to do. And it sounds like your primary concern is for
parking the RV. And that's the reason for the the tall
um, overhead door and the height of the building.
» Correct. >> an attached garage. Um, you have a pole
barn to store things. Um, another observation here is
that this is a 4-acre lot, so this is a really big residential lot. But what I
also hear him saying is most of the lot isn't available for use for an accessory
building of this nature. So, while he has a 4-acre lot, he doesn't really have
a configuration that, um, supports
um, minimizing the scale of the building. Does that make sense?
Um, because it has to be up front. He's saying the garage really needs to be
located at the at the setback distance of the house
which is the setback distance of the neighboring house. So while there's a
whole big lot to
theoretically support the building, it doesn't really because of the topography
of the site. So um
With that in mind, you're kind of getting the best of the
lot area in terms of supporting this size, but you're not getting any kind of
mitigation of it because it has to be up front by the house.
» I guess I my my question would be why detached? Why not attach it to the
house? >> I thought that would look a lot worse,
honestly. But I almost think that takes away one variance. But like you again
like It does take away a variance, but the aesthetics of it, the for your house
» you think aesthetically putting a 24 high building 60 ft long looks bad on
your house. But how does You know what I mean? By putting it closer to their
house, that's what I think where we're coming at from. So I think I'll just say
it straight up like we got to get it shorter and we got to get it moved
closer to the to the building. That's kind of where I stand.
» Mr. Gruber, that's exactly how I feel about it. I at this particular point in
time, there's so many questions. >> Yeah.
» Uh okay, moving it moving it around to the back closer to the house
and performing that, would that do anything topographically
as far as the softness of the ground and things of that nature?
We need We need more information on this and as I see it right now, I'm not
willing to >> I I'm not either. I think it's an
aesthetic disaster to the adjoining house.
» I agree with you. I agree with you guys. I
I mean I visited I visited it today. Uh
spent a lot of time looking at it uh from the road.
Uh I and I can't see any way that that your
neighbor's would be protected from a building that size.
» Mr. Chairman, if if if I could, I'd like to
uh make a motion that
» You may need just 1 second. >> So, you can kind of see where the board
is heading on this. So, what I want to give you Yeah.
Is there a way to come back with something
that's minimal to the variances that you need?
So, location, like size. Is there a way that you can
rework this plan and bring us something that we could consider
» I think I could shrink it down lengthwise by about 10 ft.
Maybe a little bit more. Um width-wise, I would still
need for storage access for storage purposes.
Um height-wise, anything shorter, I wouldn't be able to get into and use it
for what I need. Um
but if joining it to the house if that's a
on the board, I can have those plans drawn up, too.
» My major concern is the aesthetic effect that it's going to have on the adjoining
neighbor's home. And that home was there first.
Uh these two high doors
uh the height of of it as compared to the existing house next door.
Um it it's too much of a an intrusion to
me.
» This So, if you if you went with one garage
door one entranceway there and put it in the
center, you could lower the height a little bit,
right?
» Maybe a little bit, just in the truss height, but the wall height would still
be the same at about 16 ft from it'll be about 18 ft from
ground to try the eaves.
» I'm trying to look for a solution for you. That's what I'm trying to
» I know. I'm I've thought about many solutions and how to make this work and
» Yeah, for for me looking at, you know, you have a brand new house built across
the street, correct? >> Correct.
» Three-story house I would assume >> It's beautiful.
» Yeah. >> I put it on um
» [snorts] >> Trying to see that they you know, they
just have a double garage, but to me and again, I'm not saying that I'm 100%
agreement that attaching it to your house is the solution either. Um but I
think to me seeing some different variations of how that attaches, how
that looks um you know, I see what you gave us. You
gave us gave us another covered porch. Um
Is there a man So, the man door is on the front and is there a man door on the
side? >> Just on the side. There's a window on
the front. >> windows on the front. Okay.
» Yeah. >> I guess in your drawing to me it looked
like that was a man door. That's why I was asking.
» the rendering done by Chad GPT >> Okay.
» It was very hard to do and it took a lot to get it to there.
» Yeah. And again, I think you know, again, the cost of this
building I'm sure is is substantial. And again, attaching it to your house I
would assume, but to me like I think I need to see something similar to that.
Um Yeah, and again, we're asking for three
variances to me when we can decrease the variances is always the best for us.
» There's substantial variances, and I'm I'm look I'm still hung up on back
behind the house. >> Yeah.
» Okay, you can leave it detached if you want.
But how far back does that gradient drop off behind the
house? >> I walked it today and
at from the back side of that building if I were to push it back behind the
house, it drops almost 10 to 15 ft. >> Yeah.
» In the length of that building. It does drop relatively quick.
» sideways? >> Uh s-
Sideways? I think there's no other sideways to go towards the to put the
building sideways or >> Yeah, so you'd be looking at the side of
the building when you looked out of your house.
» You're turning it around. >> The The shorter side would be parallel
to their wall line. >> towards their
» I don't think it would fit. I wouldn't think I'd
be able to get into it with a vehicle of that size.
» Yeah, that'd be my
Well, I'll I'll come back to my original comment if
that's okay, Mr. Mr. Chairman. >> They're doing
» I'd like to make a motion that we table uh this particular these particular
requests for variances until we get complete plans
um uh of a structure that uh
can reduce the amount of variances and uh aesthetically help uh your
neighbors. >> I'll second the motion.
» Um I'm I'm just catching up here. Sorry. >> [laughter]
» You need a second on that? >> We had seconded uh Mr. Brown.
» Yes. >> Mr. Cancellor?
» Yes. >> Mr. Allen?
» Yes. >> Mr. Patz?
» Yes. >> Mr. Griffith?
» Yes.
» I make a motion we approve. >> I'd like to table this until you're able
to come back with uh more uh robust plans that hopefully
minimize the variances. >> Okay.
» Now we will move on to our second case for today. This is case number 260008.
For development variance request at 9278 Liberty Road. For a 50-ft setback due to
an 8-ft wide gas transmission. Will the applicant please come to the
podium? >> I I got an email late in the day today
with this applicant asked for this request to be postponed. I I didn't hear
back from her, but looks like they're not going to make it to the
hearing. >> Okay.
» So. Um.
Yeah, I would. Yeah, let's make a motion to table it so
they're available. Yeah. >> I move to table this case until our next
meeting. >> Second.
» Mr. Allen? >> Yes.
» Mr. Cansler? >> Yes.
» Mr. Petz? >> Yes.
» Mr. Brown? >> Yes.
» Mr. Griffith? >> Yes.
» Okay, the motion is approved.
» Now we will move on to our third case for tonight.
That is case number 260010 for development variance request at 2368
and 2398 Enterprise. Will the applicant please come to the podium?
Please state your name and address for the record and describe the nature of
your request. >> Uh thank you members of the board. My
name is Chad Rothschild. I'm here today on behalf of Metallic Resources. Uh and
the property owner CSC Realty. Um. We own the property at 2368. It's an
existing industrial structure. Um.
We own to the west that's a vacant parcel that may or
may not be listed on the agenda. To the east, we purchased the property
that's 2398 East Enterprise back in May of 2025 out of auction.
Um at this time, we're looking to expand our operation off of 2368
and uh as we were going through the process
with our contractor, with our architect, in reviewing the zoning code, we
realized there's a 100-ft setback from building up against a residential um you
know, adjacent property. And then likewise for parking, it is a uh
50-ft setback. What's unique about the location of the
property is if you look to the east of 2398,
that's uh Great Day Improvement, that's also zoned industrial.
Um you know, innovation manufacturing.
And then to the west of the vacant lot is the building formerly owned by
Caltech. Uh that's also, you know, in the IM zone. Those carry with it a
different setback. Those are the traditional, I believe, 50-ft for
building and uh I think
Well, whatever it is. All we're requesting is that the setbacks be
commensurate with the properties to the east and west of us, and we do not
believe We believe it would be aesthetically pleasing.
Uh there's a lot of woodland in the back. Uh
you know, to the rear of the residential property, same as there is with the
Great Day Improvement. From the street, you would not be able to notice.
Um I have some other notes here. Um so, it wouldn't change the essential
character of the area. Uh there'd be no adverse effect to governmental services,
such as fire access, sewer, water, trash service. We made sure to take into
account that you you would have an access road that can go all the way
around the the parcel, so there'd be good ingress egress for emergency
vehicles. Um Um you know, we believe that's, you know,
the spirit and intent of the zoning code would be upheld
through the request. So, with that, we respectfully request um issuance of the
variance as requested. Happy to answer any questions.
» Uh first, I will open this case up to public comment. Do anyone present like
to speak for or against this request?
Any correspondence? >> Um no, I got no correspondence from
anyone regarding this project. >> Okay, thank you.
» I can't I can say though um
in addition to what the applicant has presented, the the city adopted that
additional setback in 2024 when we adopted the zoning code. The reason the
other properties are at 50 ft is because we
changed the the setback dimension 2 years ago.
» Okay. Seeing none, we'll move on to the board
discussion. >> I have no I have no questions.
» No.
No questions here. >> I move that we approve the appeal as
requested. Do I have a second? >> Second.
» Roll call, please. >> Who Who beat there there's
» I just >> I'm going to give that to Tom, okay?
Mr. Allen? >> Yes.
» Mr. Brown? >> Yes.
» Mr. Patz? >> Yes.
» Mr. Griffith? >> Yes.
» Mr. Cancellor? >> Yes.
» The motion is approved. >> Thank you, members of board and
planning. >> You're welcome.
» Council member, we really appreciate it. Thank you.
» Can I just say something real >> Sure.
» I had an opportunity to tour the facility and
last week, so thank you very much for for showing me around.
But it's um it's really a staple of our community, our business community of
what's happening. And uh I appreciate the environmental concerns that you guys
take an effort with what you're doing. And uh just taking the time to walk me
around and give me a tour of um the new layout and and what you'll be
expanding. It's It's pretty cool in there uh to see the the items being
melted down and to be able to hold a Jody Lynn Hall is like holding a gold
bar. So
» [laughter] >> but
but it was uh very fun. Thank you very much for that.
» Now we will move on to the regular meeting. Are there any certifications to
be minutes?
» Mhm, none. I move to approve our meeting minutes
from June 29th, 2026. >> I'll second.
» I'll second. >> Roll call, please.
» Mr. Allen? >> Yes.
» Mr. Griffith? >> Yes.
» Mr. Patz? >> Yes.
» Mr. Brown? >> Yes.
» Mr. Cansler? >> Yes.
» And then they're approved. Do we have any other communications or
other business to discuss? >> No, um it's looking like we probably
will have a meeting next month. I have a couple applicants that are
are working on projects and I'm going to guess that the ones that we tabled will
or could be back. So, I we'll just say we should plan on having our meeting in
September. >> I'm good.
» Do you have to have that in by when, the 11th or so?
» Y- Yes, that sounds right. The second week of September.
» Mhm. >> Okay.
» So, yeah, he may not make it, but um I think there's
um somebody on Jody Lynn Lane had a minor
variance request. I suggested they they could just
take foot off the building. I don't know whether they'll do that. So, but there's
a couple other applicants floating around out there. We'll see.
» Any other communication, Council? >> No, everything's good.
» Is there a motion to adjourn? >> So moved.
» The meeting is adjourned. >> At
» 6:00. >> Thank you, everyone.