Beavercreek zoning board denies variance for detached garage at 859 Amy Lynn Drive

The Beavercreek Board of Zoning Appeals voted to deny a variance request for a detached garage at 859 Amy Lynn Drive during a public hearing on case B25-5.

City planning staff told the board the applicant sought to place a detached garage 8 feet into the required 40-foot front-yard setback on Patsy Drive and recommended disapproval after evaluating the zoning criteria. "We feel the criteria are not met sufficiently to grant the variance and recommend disapproving the variance request," staff said.

The recommendation reflected staff findings on the seven statutory criteria. Staff said the lot is roughly 1,200 square feet larger than some nearby interior lots and that a reasonable return could be achieved without the requested encroachment; it identified the 8-foot request as about a 20% reduction in the front-yard requirement and said a garage would have a greater visual impact than the existing open, ornamental fence. Staff also pointed to several feasible alternatives, including moving the garage back 8 feet, reducing its depth, or rotating the building footprint.

Applicant Mark Greithouse, who gave his address as 859 Amy Lynn Drive, said the proposal is driven by family needs, including care for his nearly 90-year-old mother, and by site constraints such as existing drainage, utility easements and the lot's irregular geometry. "My mother is almost 90 years old, and we started talking about converting our garage into a mother-in-law suite and then building a garage," Greithouse said. He described prior drainage repairs he estimated at over $20,000 and said moving a compliant garage position closer to the house would reduce usable yard and affect an accessible deck.

A neighbor, Steve Diorio of 3024 Patsy Drive, did not object to the applicant personally but raised safety and parking concerns tied to additional curb cuts. "The only problem I see happening is where is the curb cut gonna go?" Diorio said, adding that multiple closely spaced curb cuts could create traffic and visibility problems.

Board members questioned the applicant about drainage tile locations, distances to the deck and alternatives presented by staff. Staff told the panel that moving the proposed garage to a compliant location would likely leave roughly two feet less separation to the deck than the applicant's preferred location and that a rotated or reduced-depth garage remained feasible.

After discussion and acknowledgement that three written letters were received and entered into the record, a motion to deny the variance was made and seconded. The board conducted a roll-call vote and recorded affirmative votes to deny from members identified in the record as Raider, Roche and Estman; the chair announced the variance denied.

The board then adjourned. The record includes staff exhibits, photos and three written letters from neighbors that were entered into evidence.