Letter: New Towing Location Presents 'Myriad Problems'

Dear Elizabeth Howard (Chair of the Kent Board of Zoning Appeals):

On June 18, 2012, your board will meet to consider an application for a zoning variance by Mr. Aubrey Baker, owner of [apparently] several different automotive-related companies for a property owned by Mr. Tim Crock. The application will relate to certain changes at a business he proposes to relocate to 634 Lake Street, Kent, Ohio 44240-2647. That address is in near proximity to a house my wife and I own on Harvey Street.

I am sure that you and the other members of the board appreciate our anxiety at this point. While his business was previously located for a couple of years on the old Gougler-Furukawa property just diagonally across the street, the new location (originally zoned R-3) presents a myriad of problems. I have many concerns about the variance that Mr. Baker seeks, and I request to be placed on the list of speakers at the June 18 meeting. I would guess that my time request would be in the neighborhood of 5-10 minutes. In addition to those concerns, I have additional questions that I hope the Board will address to Mr. Baker.

As examples (and I likely will submit additional ones prior to the meeting):

1. Will his business attract an undesirable element to our neighborhood?
2. Will the business be fenced, as it was with his business on the old Gougler property site?
3. What other locations within Kent has he sought for his business?
4. Why is the Fukukara company asking him to leave their premises?
5. What will he do with the waste products from the business and how long will they remain on the property?
6. What is the maximum number of vehicles that will be on the property?
7. How many vehicles will be outside the building at all times?
8. Will all work be done inside the building?
9. How many gallons of fuel or other flammable materials will be stored at the site and what precautions will be in place to handle emergencies.
10. What kinds of noises will his operation produce and what will be the level of those noises?
11. Will there be any operations outside of normal business hours? I expect that normal business hours would be 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM, daily, excepting Saturday and Sunday. Would his company be involved in emergency towing or similar jobs at any time outside of regular hours?
12. What kinds of machinery will be used in the building and is the flooring safe enough to accommodate the weight of such machinery?
13. Where has the operation previously been located and why did they move?
14. What is the reason for the current move? If the current move has been occasioned by a breach of contract with the current landowners, i.e., the Fukuwara company, then their first resource should be litigation with that company and not to seek a variance elsewhere (based on hearsay, but the facts can be determined by asking the question).

Even though I have read Chapter 11 of the Kent Zoning Code, I still do not know all the processes through which a request for a variance must pass. However, I do think that many other city agencies should be involved and contribute to your board's understanding of the application. It seems that reviews should be submitted by other agencies in order for you to consider your decision; how about the Planning Commission, Health Department, Engineering Department, Community Development, the safety forces, the Architectural Review Committee, and the Building Department and its inspectors? Are there state or federal agencies that should be involved, e.g., Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)? Hopefully, your board will have an opportunity to visit the proposed variance site before your meeting. I appreciate your work on behalf of the residents of Kent.

Sincerely,

David Reith
Kent resident