KETTERING RESIDENT’S BID FOR 50-FOOT TOWER DENIED

Kettering resident wants to put 50-foot tower in his back yard.

A city board rejected KETTERING— a man’s request to build a 50-foot radio tower in his back yard, a request his Kettering neighbors opposed.

The Board of Zoning Appeals this week denied the variance request from Wynn Rollert, 77, on his property in the 4800 block of Mad River Road.

Kettering’s Zoning Code allows for amateur radio towers to be 25 feet without a variance, and Rollert sought approval for the extra 25 feet.

The appeals board, without comment, voted 3-1 against Rollert’s request.

“The applicant has the right to appeal the decision,” Community information Manager Stacy Schweikhart said.

Rollert said he’s unsure if he will go through with an appeal but said nothing changed from his original intent to use commercial-grade equipment including the UHF/VHF frequency tower for two to three hours a day to communicate with other HAM radio operators at remote sites, especially during emergency situations.

Several residents in the neighborhood opposed the variance request and submitted a signed petition in an attempt to have it denied.

Ken Salmons’ residence is located about 240 feet from where the proposed tower would have been located, and he said there are no trees to block the view. He opposed the variance.

“I’ve got a clear shot of where the antenna is going to be,” he stated to board members during their first hearing on the matter. “I’m extremely concerned about the aesthetics of it, and I’m extremely concerned about if we allow one person to put in a tower that exceeds the variance requirements in our neighborhood, then what is to stop the next person from doing it as well?”

The board decided not to vote on Rollert’s request at the time, but granted a continuance in order to look at other similar

continued from B1 50-foot towers in the area to help review safety standards and aesthetics.

Zoning Board Administrator Ron Hundt said his report indicated to the board that the request should be approved.

“Now, what this comes down to is that the zoning code establishes standards, and those standards have to be looked at, and that is what I attempted to do in my report,” he said, explaining the details of his report to the board in November. “I fully understood that most people were going to come here this evening and oppose something they don’t believe in in terms of what they need or they see. Cities have to look at it from the standpoint of what is a reasonable accommodation.”

He added that the FCC and the state of Ohio lay out what is a reasonable accommodation with this type of variance request.