209

would require a variance that would change the corner side yard setback by approximately 8 feet, reducing it from 26’.8” feet to approximately 18 feet.

Mr. Kroger displayed renderings of a property location map and a site plan showing the proposed porch addition.

Mr. Kroger closed his presentation by stating that if the Board of Zoning Appeals is inclined to grant this setback variance, staff requests that the property owner/contractor comply with the following conditions:

  1. The property owner must obtain appropriate permits through the city of Kettering;
  2. Any drainage pattern disruption resulting from the installation of the covered patio must be addressed by the applicants so that there is no resulting negative affect on neighboring or city-owned property.

Mr. Bohachek opened the public hearing.

Mrs. Lillie Walsh, Applicant at 205 Kramer Road, shared that they currently have a brick “stoop” that is falling apart. The proposed porch will be a nice addition and will be consistent with other homes in the neighborhood.

Mr. O’Connor commented that the request is straight forward and the proposed porch will fit perfectly in the neighborhood.

Mr. Endsley stated that he does not have any concerns. He noted that the proposed porch will be consistent with other porches in the neighborhood.

Mr. Hill shared that he does not have any concerns.

Mr. Bohachek noted that he does not have any concerns. He believes that the proposed porch will blend in with the neighborhood just fine.

Therefore, it was moved by Mr. Hill and seconded by Mr. Endsley that the preliminary staff findings be adopted, and application #23-1 to vary the corner side yard setback for a proposed covered porch on the corner lot at 205 Kramer Road be approved, with the following conditions:

  1. The property owner must obtain appropriate permits through the city of Kettering.
  2. Any drainage pattern disruption resulting from the installation of the covered patio must be addressed by the applicants so that there is no resulting negative affect on neighboring or city-owned property.

For purposes of the minutes, the preliminary staff findings as stated in the staff report were as follows:

VARIANCE FACTORS
A. Whether the property in question will yield reasonable return or whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance;
PRELIMINARY STAFF FINDINGS:
➢ The property can yield a reasonable return with or without the variance.
B. Whether the variance is substantial;
PRELIMINARY STAFF FINDINGS: