Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Lancaster County BZA denies variance for backyard pool that would encroach on drainage easement
Loading...
Summary
The Lancaster County Board of Zoning Appeals denied a variance request from Johnny and Courtney Abale to construct a pool that would encroach several feet into a 20‑foot stormwater/drainage easement, after the board concluded two of the four required variance criteria were not met following staff concerns about drainage impacts.
The Lancaster County Board of Zoning Appeals denied a variance request from Johnny and Courtney Abale to build a swimming pool that would encroach into a recorded stormwater/drainage easement at 6512 Ancient Way in the Overlook at Barberock subdivision.
Staff (Lisonbee Harden, Development Services Director) told the board the subdivision preliminary plat and subsequent documents show many lots in the development are subject to drainage easements; staff cited concerns that placing fill or structures in an easement can alter flow, slow conveyance or push water elsewhere and could potentially cause downstream or neighbor impacts. Staff said it could not recommend approval without further engineering verification and a plan that ensures the easement's conveyance function would be maintained.
What the applicants said: Johnny and Courtney Abale testified they obtained HOA approval and a liability waiver, described the encroachment as modest (a couple of feet) and said their contractor believes the work will not affect drainage. The applicants told the board they are willing to accept liability and to pursue engineering review if the board prefers. They asked the board to approve the variance to accommodate their family's backyard needs.
Board action and rationale: The board conducted a roll-call vote on the four statutory/UDO variance criteria. The chair announced that the board found criteria 2 and 4 were not satisfied by a majority, while criterion 3 carried 3–2; as a result, because two required criteria failed, the variance was denied. Staff will prepare a formal order documenting the denial and issue it to the parties within 30 days.
What to watch for: The board and staff encouraged the applicants to obtain an engineer’s report and site drawings showing the exact location of the drainage pipe and the swale, to explore whether the swale/easement could be rerouted or re‑platted and to provide documentation from the HOA/developer/site plans. Staff noted the county now has stormwater jurisdiction in the area and that flood‑plain constraints must also be checked before any work could proceed.
Evidence on the record: Applicants provided an HOA approval letter and a liability waiver; staff referenced Attachment 7 in the packet (stormwater/pipe plan) and preliminary plats that show easements. The applicant’s contractor provided a claim that the work would not affect flow, but the board emphasized that an engineer’s certification or site plan would be the appropriate next step.
