MINUTES OF THE CATAWBA ISLAND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
JUNE 10, 2026
Attendees
Rodney Spatafore Alison Croft Perlaky
Scott Jeckering Paul Perlaky
Philip Enderle Lee Short
Debbie Lehner Charles Whitaker
Brian Lehner Craig McCoy
William Steele Joyce Raymond
John Burton Mary Whitaker
Rick Runge Marty Harayda
Laura Enderle Gary (last name not legible)
Amy Runge
Chairman Brian Caldwell called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Board members in attendance included: Brian Caldwell, Doug Blackburn, Rebecca Dubber, Bill Baker, Mike Schenk, Rick Smetzer and Flint Heidlebaugh. Jean Hartline, Zoning Inspector/Secretary was also in attendance.
Chairman Caldwell read through the meeting process.
New Business
Case #233059 Mr. & Mrs. John Burton
Ms. Hartline read the Case Facts: The applicants propose a new single-family home. The applicant is requesting an area variance for the right and left side yard setbacks reduction from 6 feet to 5 feet. (Channel side is the Front Yard). The property is located at 1550 North Starboard Avenue and is known as Lot 117 of Harbor Park Marina. The property is zoned R4.
No Conflicts of interest by any Board Member.
Mr. William Steele, as architect for the project, presented the project. The project removed the modular home and replace with a “stick built” home. Review of the request indicated that only the right side had a variance of 5’ (6’ required). The left side has the required 5’ setback. Discussion occurred on the AC unit on a concrete pad. The pad is not a structure (under 8”) and the AC unit is considered an appliance and neither is subject to zoning setbacks.
Ms. Dubbert suggested the house be moved 1’ to eliminate the variance. Mr. Steele said this could be feasible. Mr. Caldwell asked if the HOA has approved this. Mr. Steele said the HOA has not but he will coordinate with them.
No one from the audience offered comments or questions. Chairman Caldwell, therefore, closed the discussion from the floor.
The finding of facts was review with the following results:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Yes/Agree 5 0 0 0 5 5 5
No/Disagree 0 5 5 5 0 0 0
Mr. Caldwell requested a motion for a vote be made. Ms. Dubber motioned to Deny the request with the argument that the variance can be eliminated if the house is moved 1’. Mr. Blackburn seconded the motion. The vote was taken with four (4) to deny the applicant’s request. Chairman Caldwell did not vote as there was not a tied vote. The applicant can reapply for a Zoning Certificate without a variance with a 1’ shift in the house so that both 6’ setbacks are permitted.
Case #233065 Rick and Amy Runge
Ms. Hartline read the Case Facts: The applicants propose a deck addition with a pool. The deck addition is 1278 SF (not including the pool). The pool is 12 feet by 24 feet for a total of 288 SF. The applicant is requesting area variances for the Lot Coverage of 46% with 36% the allowable by code. The property is located at 1276 North Orchard Drive and is known as Lots 75 and north half of Lot 76 of Catawba Orchard Beach. The property is zoned R-3.
No Conflicts of interest by any Board Member.
Mr. Runge presented the case and also noted that the fencing shown on the exhibits (metal rail fence) will glass panels. The rendering software did not have a glass panel template option. The fencing is labeled glass panel on the exhibits.
Ms. Dubber noted that there was a large add to the existing lot coverage. Currently at 33%. Proposed is 46%. Ms. Dubber asked if the area coverage could be reduced to meet 36% code. Mr. Runge indicated that this would be a very small deck. Mr. Runge indicated the deck connects to an existing walk on the side of the house. Mr. Baker noted that the deck comes close to the rocks along the water. Mr. Runge indicated that the area adjacent to the deck is planting beds and under 8” and thus not part of the area coverage calculations.
Chairman Caldwell opened the floor to comments.
HOA provided a letter in favor of the project. The HOA representative was unable to attend the meeting in person.
Ms. Perlaky spoke to the case and expressed a concern on the calculations for the area coverage. Ms. Perlaky indicated she lives in the adjacent neighborhood.
Chairman Caldwell closed the discussion from the floor.
The finding of facts was review with the following results:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Yes/Agree 5 0 0 0 5 2 4
No/Disagree 0 5 5 5 0 3 1
Mr. Caldwell requested a motion for a vote be made. Mr. Baker motioned for a vote to approve the case. This motion was seconded. The was approved by a vote of 3 – 1. Chairman Caldwell did not vote as there was not a tied vote.
Case # 233068 Martin Harayda
Ms. Hartline read the Case Facts: The applicant proposes a new single family home. The home is two (2) story with a 32’ x 48’ footprint and includes a two bay garage. The applicant is requesting an area variance for the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 21 feet. The front yard setback of 31’ for the R-3 is permitted through the Supplemental Regulations. The property is located 4089 North Crogan Street and is known as Lot 3 Volume 12 of the Maplewood Subdivision. The property is zone R-3.
No Conflicts of interest by any Board Member.
Martin Harayda presented the case as the owner, however, clarified that there are renters that will be moving out as this new home will be his residence. Mr. Caldwell indicated that there appears to be a near zero setback on the rear yard and this plan will improve that. Ms. Dubber asked if the only access the exterior steps. Mr. Harayda indicated there is also a ground level entrance through the garage which has also a ground level entrance. Entire first floor is a garage. There are two means of accessing the second floor via an exterior staircase and interior staircase. Garage doors are 10’ high doors. Mr. Baker discussed emergency access with Mr. Harayda and suggested a second entrance on ground level be provided. Mr. Harayda said he would consider this and may be required by the County to supply such. Mr. Baker asked if a business would be run out of the lower level as the first level will be all garage. Mr. Harayda indicated that a business will not be operated from the home.
Chairman Caldwell opened the floor to comments.
Ms. Perlaky had a general question on side setbacks that should be 10’. Ms. Hartline indicated that Section 7 of the Resolution allows for 5’ when lots are only 52’ wide.
Chairman Caldwell closed the discussion from the floor.
The finding of facts was review with the following results:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Yes/Agree 5 0 0 0 5 5 5
No/Disagree 0 5 5 5 0 0 0
Mr. Caldwell requested a motion for a vote be made. Ms. Dubber motioned to approve the case. This was seconded by Mr. Schenk. The case was approved by a 4 – 0 vote. Chairman Caldwell did not vote as there was not a tied vote.
Case # 233071 Philip and Laurie Enderle
Ms. Hartline read the Case Facts: The applicants propose a Pergola (8’ 8” x 14’ 4” for 124 SF) on the right side yard. The applicant is requesting area variances to the right side yard setback from 10 feet to 1 foot 6 inches. The property is located at 5855 Lakeview Drive and is known as lot 63 of White City Beach. The property is zoned R-3.
No Conflicts of interest by any Board Member.
Mr. Ederle spoke to the case as the property owner and also owns a home in Marshes Edge when they became permanent residents. Mr. Ederle discussed the need for the pergola primarily for family gathering (4 generations including grandchildren) with a brother owning the cottage next door. This pergola will replace the use of a temporary canvass (erected every summer) on the driveway. The canvass is often destroyed by storms. This project offers a location that allows for the family to gather. The structure is closer to the kitchen in the east side of the cottage and benefits from a breeze off the lake. This location will make it easier to contain the grandchildren in the yard (versus a canopy over the driveway near the street). The design of the pergola was discussed and with artificial turf over gravel base to aid is drainage (as a pervious surface). The pergola posts are bolted to a timber frame set on the ground. This creates a gray area as potentially this pergola might be considered a temporary (not permanent) structure and potentially not subject to zoning. Ms. Dubber indicated that the intention is that the structure is more or less permanent but not attached to the house. Ms. Dubber noted that although members of the applicant’s family live next door that may not be always the case.
Chairman Caldwell opened the floor to comments.
Charles Whitacre, next door neighbor, spoke in favor of the project as the pergola will be an aesthetic improvement over the temporary driveway canopy.
Ms. Perlaky provided a general discussion on fire service access.
Mrs. Whitaker also spoke to the safety and indicated that the structure being aluminum is not a fire concern and noted that this is not a permanent structure as it is attached to beams. Mr. Enderle indicated the structure would be up year-round.
Chairman Caldwell closed the discussion from the floor.
The finding of facts was review with the following results:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Yes/Agree 5 2 0 1 5 2 2
No/Disagree 0 3 5 4 0 3 3
Chairman Caldwell requested a motion for a vote be made. Mr. Schenk made a motion to approve. This was seconded by Mr. Blackburn. The case was approved by a 3-1 vote. Chairman Caldwell did not vote as there was not a tied vote.
Case# 233075 Scott Jeckering
Ms. Hartline read the Case Facts: The applicant proposes an addition to the single family home. Expansion includes additional living space on the front of the house as well as a third garage bay on the rear/side of the house. The applicant is requesting an area variance for the front yard setback reduction from 40 feet to 38 feet and right side yard setback from 10 feet to 7.52 feet (which is an existing setback of the existing house). The property is located at 2185 North Carriage Lane and is known as Lot 59 of the Colony Club Subdivision. The property is zone R-1.
No Conflicts of interest by any Board Member.
Mr. Jeckering presented the project and provided some elevation views of the house showing the 10’ extension toward the front (lake side). The house is in need of repairs and updating. The intent is to make repairs and expand the house more of a “lake house” feel by improving views of the lake. The existing left side setback is 7.52 “grandfathered”. The expansion follows this existing house wall alignment.
Mr. Jeckering was asked about the house height. He indicated it was 27’ (35’ is code). Mr. Baker asked if the HOA has reviewed this. Mr. Jeckering indicated that the HOA architectural review committee has approved to the plan.
Chairman Caldwell opened the floor to comments.
Ms. Perlaky asked of the height of the main house and addition. Mr. Jeckering is going up 5 more feet. Ms. Dubert indicated that the height is not under review of a variance as it is within code. The garage is a 3rd bay addition. Ms. Perlaky also expressed concern of the corner lot setbacks. Ms. Hartline noted that side yard setback is within code for the garage addition.
Chairman Caldwell closed the discussion from the floor.
The finding of facts was review with the following results:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Yes/Agree 5 0 0 0 0 5 5
No/Disagree 0 5 5 5 5 0 0
Mr. Caldwell requested a motion for a vote be made. Ms. Dubber made a motion to approve. This was seconded by Mr. Baker. The case was approved by a 4 – 0 vote. Chairman Caldwell did not vote as there was not a tied vote.
Case# 233077 Brian Lehner (Lee Short)
Ms. Hartline read the Case Facts: The applicant proposes an addition to the single family home. Expansion includes additional living space on the side of the house as well as a front patio. The applicant is requesting an area variance for the front yard setback reduction from 35 feet (14.29 feet currently existing) to 8.26 feet. The property is located at 2969 North Chickadee Drive and is known as Section 3 Lot 7 of the Harbor Estate Subdivision. The property is zone R-3.
No Conflicts of interest by any Board Member.
Mr. Lee Short presented the case. The front porch is a small part of a larger house addition (of which the addition does not have any variances. The 8.26’ is for a front porch. A smaller 3’ porch was considered but was not a usable real estate for chairs and gathering of people. The addition (not under variance review) was presented also. Porch would not be enclosed. The porch is an option to add on to the larger project. Roof lines were discussed. The porch is covered with a roof extension (reverse gable). Ms. Dubber commented on the existing structure that is close to the road but supplemental specifications (in Section 7) allow for front setback averaging. Ms. Dubber asked for clarification on the house addition and the porch addition. Mr. Short said the porch is an add to the house expansion. Mr. Brian Lehner indicated that the home was built in 1959. A shed was added in 1989. There were not any previous variances.
Chairman Caldwell closed the discussion from the floor.
The finding of facts was review with the following results:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Yes/Agree 5 5 1 0 2 5 5
No/Disagree 0 0 4 5 3 0 0
Mr. Caldwell requested a motion for a vote be made. Mr. Schenk made a motion to approve. This was seconded by Ms. Dubber. The case was approved by a 4 – 0 vote. Chairman Caldwell did not vote as there was not a tied vote.
Old Business
Case # 233017 Rodney Spatafore & Katrina Reed
Ms. Hartline read the Case Facts: The applicants propose the installation of an accessory building (60’ x 80’) and they are requesting an area variance to exceed the accessory building height requirement from fifteen feet (15’) to twenty-two feet (22’) and exceed the cumulative square footage of accessory buildings from 750 square feet to 4,800 square feet. The property location is Section 26 of Catawba Island Township at 3595 E. Highland Drive. The property is zoned “R-3” Residential District.
No conflict of interest. Case was moved off the table by motion and unanimous vote.
Mr. Spatafore requested to withdraw the case and will return with a new plan. Ms. Dubber motioned to vote to withdraw the application. This was seconded by Mr. Schenk. The vote to withdraw was accepted with a yes vote by three Board members with 1 abstain.
Other Business
No other business to conduct.
Approval of Minutes – May 13, 2026
The minutes for the May 13, 2026 meeting was mailed to each member. Rebecca Dubber moved to approve the May 13, 2026 meeting minutes. The motion was seconded by Mike Schenk. Motion passed.
Adjournment
Ms. Dubber moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Schenk. Motion passed and the meeting was adjourned at 8:00 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________________ _________________________________
Brian Caldwell, Chairman Jean Hartline, Secretary