A large wall that’s been a bone of content between two next-door neighbors will be the center of a Robinson Township Zoning Hearing Board meeting Wednesday.
At issue is a wall erected by Dimitrios Pantzoulas, who lives at 223 Waterford Drive. The barrier, which has been described as something you might see on the Pennsylvania Turnpike – or in a prison – was brought to the township’s attention by neighbor John Richnavsky, who lives next door at 225 Waterford Drive.
Richnavsky first asked about the wall at township Board of Commissioners’ May meeting and again asked the board about it earlier this month. His inquiries prompted township officials to look into the matter, and eventually they issued Pantzoulas a notice of violation.
This resulted in Pantzoulas’ request for a variance, and that’s what the Zoning Hearing Board will consider at its 7 p.m. meeting Wednesday at the township Municipal Complex, 5440 Campbells Run Road.
The township code limits walls to a certain height, depending on the zoning district and the type of wall in question. But complicating matters is that Pantzoulas brought large quantities of dirt into his backyard, so the ground level is different in Pantzoulas’ backyard than it is in Richnavsky’s yard. Adding to the issue is that Richnavsky’s property sits lower because of the natural grade of the neighborhood.
Richnavsky told commissioners at the May meeting that the wall affects the amount of sunlight reaching his property and also is damaging a tree that’s adjacent to the wall.
When Richnavsky spoke at the May meeting, he wanted to know who approved the wall.
“How could you approve a turnpike wall between two residences,” he said. “These are the same stones used on the turnpike for retaining walls.
“I want to know what’s up with that. The only thing missing are spotlights and barbed wire.”
Richanvasky said the next day that the barrier between his home and Pantzoulas’ home “looks like a prison wall in my backyard.
“I have guests coming over and they ask, ‘What the hell is that wall doing there?’ That’s what I have to contend with.”
Dennis Smith, the township planning director, said that when he asked Pantzoulas about the wall, Pantzoulas told him he obtained verbal approval to build it but never obtained the proper permit in writing.
Pantzoulas did not respond to requests for comment, but Melissa Cekus, Pantzoulas’ fiancé, maintains that the wall was built according to code and that it doesn’t infringe at all on Richnavsky’s property – or any vegetation on that property.
Cekus said the wall was constructed to meet the township’s requirement for swimming pool enclosures. Pantzoulas has a built-in pool in his backyard.
“Really what it domes down to is we have a pool that requires a 6-foot enclosure and (Richnavsky’s) property sits much lower,” Cekus said. “When you see it from our side vs. his side, it looks dramatically different. But it doesn’t obstruct any views and it definitely doesn’t come close to any of his landscaping. It’s not harming anything of his.”
Cekus said that the wall isn’t finished yet and that when it is, “esthetically it will look really nice.”
Cekus said Pantzoulas also took potential noise issues into consideration when building his wall. “It was done to block out the sound,” said Cekus, who has a young daughter with Pantzoulas. “A lot of the choices we made were actually made in consideration of our neighbors.
“We wanted to create a serene space when we want quiet but also don’t want to disturb people if we have a party and music.”
Be First to Comment