Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Retaining Wall topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Peters Township denies variance for roughly 10-foot retaining wall at 320 Thomas Road
Summary
The Zoning Hearing Board denied a variance request that would have permitted a rear retaining wall to exceed the 6-foot limit after staff said the wall — already constructed — measures about 10 feet and was not shown on the original building permit; the applicant said the wall was installed during foundation work and occupants used a temporary occupancy permit.
The Peters Township Zoning Hearing Board denied a variance request on Wednesday for a rear retaining wall at 320 Thomas Road after staff said the wall, already constructed, measures about 10 feet and was not shown at that size on the original building permit.
Assistant Planning Director Garrett King told the board the retaining wall at the property “when measured, it's approximately 10 ft tall. We didn't measure exactly, but it's around that.” King said the wall was discovered during an inspection and no separate permit was applied for the wall to the extent it exists today.
Applicant Gerald Raymond told the board the walls were constructed during the foundation stage and that inspectors had visited the site throughout construction without raising the current issue until shortly before the homeowner moved in. Raymond said the wall primarily supports an upper-level patio and that the lower area now functions as outdoor living space. He told the board the temporary occupancy permit and a written agreement are in place while the variance request is processed.
Board members asked whether stamped engineer drawings for the wall had been submitted; staff said such engineering plans would be required if a variance were granted and that the applicant’s builder would normally furnish them. The board moved to deny the variance from section 440-512A1 (the 6-foot retaining-wall limit); the motion passed on a roll-call vote by the three voting members present. A written decision with findings and conclusions will be provided within 45 days, and appeal rights to Washington County Court of Common Pleas were explained at the hearing.
Because one member recused himself from the case, the alternate served as a voting member for this matter. The board’s denial leaves the applicant the option to seek remedial permitting, to submit engineered drawings and a building permit, or to pursue an appeal through the appropriate court process.
