Columbia City board approves landscaping variance for Parker's gas station at 7609 Garners Ferry Road
Loading...
Summary
The Columbia City Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance allowing Parker's to reduce interior parking trees and alter detention‑pond screening at a proposed gas station, citing operations and safety sightlines; the vote was unanimous at the January meeting.
Columbia City — The Columbia City Board of Zoning Appeals on [January meeting date not specified] voted unanimously to approve variances for a proposed Parker's gas station and convenience store at 7609 Garners Ferry Road, allowing departures from several landscaping standards to preserve operational sightlines and security.
The applicant, Patrick Monahan of Foresight Group, told the board the requests include removing two shade trees (one in front and one in the rear) to maintain a clear line of vision to fuel pumps and a stormwater detention pond; a request not to plant screening shrubs in front of a chain‑link fence around the pond; and modifications to perimeter shade‑tree spacing to avoid root impacts on fuel tanks. "All we're asking to do is eliminate a tree in there ... so that we have clear view to the gas pumps," Monahan said during his presentation.
Staff zoning administrator Andrew Livingood said one of the originally listed landscaping items — trees along the street frontage — will be met through the city's alternative compliance process and therefore does not require a variance. He explained that eliminating the two interior trees would leave parking spaces unserved by required canopy coverage: "That requirement states that 25% of every parking space be within 40 feet of a tree," he said, noting that removing the middle trees creates the coverage shortfall.
On the detention pond screening, Livingood said the applicant's choice of chain‑link fencing is intended for security to prevent access to the pond. The applicant asked that shrubs not be planted directly in front of the fence so staff and operations personnel can see into the pond area for safety checks.
Board members said the applicant had worked cooperatively with staff. One board member praised staff assistance and another characterized the variance as reasonable and not harmful to neighboring properties. After brief discussion, an unnamed board member moved to approve the variance "subject to staff comments," the motion was seconded and the board voted in favor. The chair announced, "Motion carries."
The approval applies to the specific variances presented for the site plan and was conditioned by the board's direction to incorporate staff comments. No changes to other code requirements or approvals outside this variance were reported at the meeting.
The case was the single substantive item on the regular agenda; representatives of the applicant were present and the board completed its decision during the January session.
