07/06/1994 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Chairman Gomersall called all interested parties before the board. 1he oath was admuustered to Mrs. Rauser and her father, Mr. Chinna, who explained that they are on a corner lot and they have adopted a greyhound and need a fenced in back yard. Mr. Gomersall stated this abuts the back yard of the neighbor to the rear, but questioned why the fence had to be 6 feet on the corner. Mr. Maloney noted that the building inspector, Mr. Tennant, had presented a drawing showing the fence coming out 35 feet from the house and then going at a right angle to 10 foot off the right of way (drawing shows 5) from the property line on the side street which he could agree to because it unproved visibility. Mr. Gomersall would prefer a 5 foot fence to a solid 6 foot fence. Mrs. Rauser clarified that it was a solid fence, there would be no space between the boards. In response to the applicant's remark, that there was a 6 foot fence on the other corner, Mr. Gomersall repeated his remarks made at the beginniug of the meeting. It was agreed that the fence on the side street should be 5 feet high and should be 10 feet offthe line. After some discussion, it was clarified that one drawing shows 10 feet off the line and one drawing shows 5 feet offthe line, and it was determined that the fence should be 5 feet off the east property line, not 10 as stated earlier. Chairman Gomersall pointed out that the slats should have some space between them, to keep the fence from looking like a fortress, and since wood does expand and contract, a space between the boards would be better. R. Gomersall moved to grant to Richard and Donna Rauser, 29502 Wellington Drive, their request for a 40 foot fence in the rear yard, the fence where it is parallel to the east property line along Warrington Drive which will be a five foot maximum height aud will start on the southeast 35 feet from the home and proceed north along Warrington, which is approximately 20 to 25 feet from the Warrington right of way in accordance with Mr. R. Tennant's recommendations., seconded by J. Maloney, and unaniinously approved. Variance granted. 4. Dauiel Chereson, 22983 MacBeth Ave. Request for variance (1123.12). Request variance to delay constructing new garage for two years after the existing garage has been demolished. Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section 1161, 08 (a)(1). Chau-mau Gomersall called all interested parties before the board. The oath was administered to Mr. Chereson who explained that they had made extensive repairs inside the house, and the old cinder block garage which is deteriorating and has no foundation, it is just on gravel. Since he is unable to use the garage and it is a safety hazard, he would like to remove it , but he cannot afford a new one for about two years. Building Commissioner Conway agreed that the structure was unsafe and since he has been improving the properiy and has a finaucial hardship, he would have no problem with this for a specified period of time. T. Koberna moved to grant a request to Daniel Cheresou, 22983 MacBeth Avenue, to delay constructing a new garage for two years after the existing garage has been demolished, seconded by R. Gomersall, and unanimously approved. Variance granted. Kenneth J. Gribel, 4683 1Vlartin Dr. Request for variance (1123.12). Request 427 square foot variance to construct addition to existing non-conforming garage (two garages on property) ; also request 2 foot, 6 inch height variance; and variauce to omit paved drive. Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section 1135.02 and 1161.11 (a). Also request special permit to add to non-conforming building. Special permission requued Ord. 90-125, Section 1165.02 (b) (1). Request was withdrawn by the applicant, before the meeting. 2