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

The City of Beavercreek Board of Zoning Appeals on Monday denied variance case B25-5, rejecting an applicant’s request to place a detached garage 8 feet into the required 40-foot front-yard setback at 859 Amy Lynn Drive.

Staff told the board the proposal would reduce the front-yard depth by roughly 20% and produce a greater visual impact than the property’s existing open ornamental fence, which had been approved previously for mobility reasons. After reviewing the seven statutory variance criteria, staff recommended denial, saying the applicant had feasible alternatives that would comply with the code.

The recommendation and the board’s decision turned on the zoning criteria and neighborhood character. Staff noted that other corner-lot detached garages in the neighborhood are sited in compliant locations and that moving the proposed building back 8 feet, rotating it, or reducing its depth would keep the accessory structure legal. “After summarizing the seven statutory criteria, staff … recommend disapproving the variance request,” staff told the board.

Applicant Mark Brighthouse said the proposed location was chosen to accommodate his nearly 90-year-old mother and to store multiple vehicles and a camper. “My mother is almost 90 years old,” he told the board, and said drainage constraints and underground utilities on the lot limited feasible options. He described prior drainage repairs and said contractors had recommended the proposed location to avoid destabilizing existing drainage infrastructure. Brighthouse said moving the structure would leave little usable backyard for grandchildren and would force removal of an existing handicap-accessible deck built to serve his mother.

Neighbor Steve Diorio, who lives on Patsy Drive, said he did not object to Brighthouse as a neighbor but raised concerns about the location of a new curb cut and the concentration of driveways on that segment of the street. “The only problem I see happening is where is the curb cut gonna go?” Diorio said, noting potential safety and on-street parking issues.

During extended questioning, board members probed the exact placement of drain tile and easements and pressed the applicant on cost and feasibility of alternative designs. Staff said the lot’s odd angle contributed to the difficulty but reiterated there were options to keep the garage compliant while preserving yard and deck access.

A motion to deny the variance (case B25-5) was made and seconded; the board conducted a roll-call vote and the motion carried, denying the application. Miss Barhorst was excused from the meeting; the board recorded affirmative votes to deny the application and then adjourned.

The board’s action ends the current application; the applicant may revise the plans to conform to the code and resubmit or pursue other permitted alternatives.