Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Residential Design Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board tables MI Homes variance request on garage projection after debate over precedent

Reynoldsburg Planning and Zoning Board · April 16, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

MI Homes sought a variance to allow garage projections of 20.5 feet for certain townhome units in a large subdivision; staff recommended denial citing alternatives and precedent risks. The applicant asked to keep the public hearing open and the board voted to table the item until no later than June 4 to allow additional materials and attendance.

The Reynoldsburg Planning & Zoning Board on April 16 tabled a request from MI Homes of Central Ohio to allow garage projections of 20 feet 6 inches for 27 townhome lots in a proposed development after extended discussion about hardship, alternatives and precedent.

Staff (application 20260161) recommended denial of the variance from section 110.506 DII — which limits garage projections to no more than 8 feet beyond the front façade — arguing the applicant had shown an alternative 4-unit design that complies with the standard and that granting the variance on a broad greenfield site could set an undesirable precedent. Staff said 27 lots would be affected if the variance were granted and that the garage type in question (the Ainsley unit) was the only design shown exceeding the permitted projection.

Applicant Steve Peck said the Ainsley is a two-bedroom unit intended to add product variety and argued the townhome configuration and floodplain constraints made the proposed layout reasonable; he asked the board for time to provide color renderings and further information. Board members pressed the applicant to demonstrate special circumstances and practical difficulty under the variance standards; several members said they were not convinced the factors were met, while others raised ways to limit potential precedent.

The city attorney advised the board that a variance could be drafted to limit applicability (for example, to attached fee-simple townhomes rather than detached single-family homes), but several board members expressed concern that granting a variance on a large greenfield site could still set broad precedent. Given two absent board members and the need for additional materials, the applicant requested and the board voted to table the hearing and keep the public hearing and evidence record open until no later than June 4, 2026. The board noted packet deadlines for supplemental materials.