The Press Newspaper

Toledo, Ohio & Lake Erie

The Press Newspaper

The Press Newspaper


       The Oregon Planning Commission recently voted down a request for a Conditional Use Permit that would have allowed a two family dwelling unit at 2831 Starr Avenue.

        The property had been approved in 1958 through the Planning Commission to have two living units there. But the units were to be used for family members. If the property were to be sold, it was to be as a single family residence. The only way to change it would be to ask the Planning Commission for a Conditional Use in an R-2 Zone, according to James Gilmore, commissioner of Building and Zoning.

        The zoning code states if the owner met certain provisions, a Conditional Use would be considered to allow a two family in a single family medium density area, explained Gilmore. Some of those provisions that must be met are minimum lot size, four car parking per building, two car garage indoor parking, and screening because it is next to a single family residential district.

        Gilmore said he did not know if there were plans to alter the property. He said it wasn’t a rental unit. If there were two different families living there, the city would have to make sure there was separation between the units according to the building code.

        He said if the building became a duplex, the city would conduct a full inspection. The first step, though, was to determine if the zoning was appropriate for that particular use. The applicant would then be required to ask for a Certificate of Occupancy for two families. The next step would be for the city to make an inspection to ensure it meets the minimum standards for separation and for the occupants to exit the building.

        James Duran, the applicant for the Conditional Use Permit, said he bought the property a few months ago.



        Planning Commission member Rick Orovitz said one stipulation for a duplex is to provide off street parking for four vehicles, excluding the garage and the driveway. Orovitz said it looked like the blacktop area facing the backyard would have to be expanded considerably to get four vehicles back there and to get in and out of the garage. Orovitz asked Duran if that was part of his plan. Duran said it was not and that he thought there was plenty of room for parking.

        Some residents who live in the area were opposed to granting the Conditional Use Permit.

        Attorney Mary Bollinger, who said she was representing a client who lives on property immediately to the east of the Starr Avenue site, said they were concerned about parking issues due to the fact their driveway is conjoined with the property’s driveway. They were also concerned about the turnover of residents.

        Pat Miller, Starr Avenue, expressed concerns that tenants tend to not take care of property as property owners do.

        The Planning Commission voted 5-0 to deny the Conditional Use Permit request.


Conditions not met

        Gilmore after the meeting told The Press that the house was built on property with a single family zoning designation. It was later altered to allow two living units as long as it was for a family member and was not rented out.

        “It was like a mother-in-law suite,” he said. “In an R-2 zone, it’s perfectly ok to have a two family unit with a conditional use permit. We allow it there and in R-3 multi-family zoning. But there are plenty of duplexes, or two family units, around. With conditional use, there must be so many parking spots and other conditions that should go along with that. The owner didn’t meet some of those conditions, That’s the reason it was turned down, I believe.”

        The conjoined driveway was also a potential source of conflict, he added.

        “It’s a very dense residential area, as far as Oregon goes. There were questions about the conjoined driveway, which can cause problems. When you have two different families sharing a driveway, it can create conflicts. Someone parks on the driveway and the other family can’t get through,” said Gilmore.




border wall

Do you think a wall along our Mexican border is needed?
1037136208 [{"id":"305","title":"No, it's too expensive.","votes":"6","pct":13.33,"type":"x","order":"1","resources":[]},{"id":"306","title":"No, it won't work.","votes":"13","pct":28.89,"type":"x","order":"2","resources":[]},{"id":"307","title":"Yes, only a wall will protect our border from illegal migration.","votes":"26","pct":57.78,"type":"x","order":"3","resources":[]}] ["#194e84","#3b6b9c","#1f242a","#37414a","#60bb22","#f2babb"] sbar 160 160 /component/communitypolls/vote/111-border-wall No answer selected. Please try again. Thank you for your vote. Answers Votes ...