The Mahoning Zoning Board had to revisit a variance decision Tuesday night during a hearing regarding the proposed Kia dealership on Route 443.

The lot located next to Lowe's and across from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Driver License Center has been purchased by William Rosado, owner of the Lehighton Kia dealership, for the purpose of expanding his business after outgrowing the current location at the opposite end of 443.The lot in question borders a residential area, leaving the zoning board to decide whether a variance for screening is required.The matter at hand Tuesday evening was whether an interpretation or variance was needed for the ordinance.The board decided after 45 minutes of back and forth between Rosado's attorney William Schwab and attorney Keith Pavlack. The board's answer was that a variance is not required, nor is screening since the code book makes no mention of car dealerships.During a previous hearing held in July, the board had decided a variance could be granted, allowing for screening to only be required on three sides of the property."The zoning ordinance does not allow for display of cars on 443. You've excluded any type of car dealership if you will require screening; you have to be able to see the cars," Schwab said.He used several area businesses located along the commercial strip from Lowe's to Lehighton Ford as examples, pointing out the lack of screening in the area."Zoning officer Carl Faust wrote in his letter that it doesn't make sense for full screening for a car dealership," Schwab said."I don't have a problem with no screening in a display lot on 443. But they do service work; they store those cars till work is done and until they are picked up. That's storage. I have a problem with cars being in various states of disrepair across from my professional lot," said Pavlack, whose office is attached to the PennDOT building across the street from the proposed dealership.Rosado said that would not be an issue."We do not leave cars that way. You cannot have disassembled vehicles outside, our shops do not do that."Pavlack further pushed the point of the need for screening around the loading and unloading area of the property."You agree the display lot shouldn't have to be screened?" Schwab asked."The loading and unloading and storage should be screened in.""Where's the screening for your building?""It's an old building, there's a fence.""Is there screening in loading/unloading at McDonald's?""No.""So only loading/unloading cars need screening but not your office or McDonald's?" Schwab asked. "Screening should only be for car dealerships?"Zoning board Chairman Charles Pollock interrupted the back and forth, "with two lawyers we could be here until 10 p.m.," he said before the board consisting of Pollock, Sandra Palinchak and LeRoy Liebenguth called a recess to discuss their decision."We made an error last time because we put too many things together. We tried to accommodate too many people," Pollock said when they returned."The board is going to disagree with zoning officer's decision and say screen does not apply. The decision is to not grant the variance, but override the zoning officer's decision and say screening does not apply," said board solicitor Angela Stehle."Faust did his job, but there is no definition in the book for dealerships. We can only deal with what's in here," Pollock said.Anyone wishing to appeal the decision will have 45 days to do so in writing.