07/11/1996 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Coininissioner Rymarczyk uoted that there is approxinately 6 feet between the property and the adjoiiung home. Code requires 15 feet betweeu a garage aud any dwelling, tlus proposal would only come approximately 10 feet, which is the reason for the 4 foot, 6 inch variance. Chairmaai Gomersall felt that tlus garage is entirely too big for this property. The members explained they do not have a problem with the garage in itsel? however, it is too close to the adjacent hoine. Mr. Bates received a copy of the letter, per lus request. Mrs. Palowski was concerned about the future use of the garage, if perhaps the property is sold. She felt the dimensions were too large. Mr. Petrie, represeuting his mother who lives in the adjacent house, stated tlus proposal obstructs her view, air circulation, light, and walls offthe entire side of lus mothers home. He was concerned for lus mother's health, safety, and quality of life. He felt the garage could be a fue hazard. Mr. Gomersall explained whenever a garage is closer to an adjacent home theu required, tlus board requires the inside of the structure to have a fire proof wall. Mr. Petrie felt tlus proposal would devalue her home and possibly Mr. Bates house. Mr. Gomersall stated the size of the lot may prevent Mr. Bates from installing the garage auy place else, but it also precludes lum from voting for this proposal. The inemUers caine to a consensus that tlus lot canuot support tlus big of a garage. R. Gomersall made a motion to graut the request of Earl Bates, 2831 W. 230th Street, for a 14 square foot area variance to construct garage addition; to grant a 276 square foot variance for lot coverage exceeding 20% of the rear yard; and request 3 foot variance for side yard ou north side (existiug garage is 2 foot off side property line) and 1 foot variance for side yard on south side. Also to grant a 4 foot, 6 inch'variauce for distance between garage and adjaceut dwelling. Violation of Ord. 90-125, Sections 1135.02(c); 1135.05(U)(2); and 1135.02(c)(2). The motion was seconded by J. Malouey. Roll call ou motion Goinersall, Maloney, Boyle, Koberua, no. Variances deuied. 12. Gary Pease, 5151 Audrus Drive. Request for variance (1123.12). Request 78.5 square foot variance for lot coverage exceeding the 20% of the rear yard area to constiuct deck (existing detached garage included in lot coverage). Violation of Ord. 90- 125, Section 1135.02(d)2. Cliairman Gomersall called all 'uiterested parties before the board. The oath was adinivistered to N1r. Pease. The tnembers did uot have a proUlein with tlus deck. T. Koberna moved to grant the proposal of Gary Pease, 5151 Andius Drive, for a 78.5 square foot variance for lot coverage exceeding the 20% of the rear yard area to coustiuct deck (existing detached garage included in lot coverage). Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section 1135.02(d)2. The motion was seconded by M. Boyle avd unanimously approved. Variauce grauted. U. Ron Waguer, 4324 Root Road. Request for variance (1123.12). Request 37 square foot variauce to construct shed wliich exceeds the pei-tnitted 2% coverage of the rear yard. Also, request 3 foot side yard variance and 8 foot rear yard variance for location of shed. Violation of Ord. 90-125, Sectious 1135.02 (d-1) and (d-4). Chaii7nan Gomersall called all interested parties before the board. The oath was adinin.istered to Mr. Waguer. Due to the fact the property is small, 1VIr. Wagner wishes to install the shed 2 feet offthe side and rear property lines. N1r. Goinersall would like thein to install the shed the required 5 feet fioin the side property line, because there is an existing stiucture on the other side of the line. Iu addition to inoving the shed 5 feet offthe side the memUers requested the shed be at least 5 feet offthe rear. Mr. Waguer agreed to come 5 feet offthe rear aud side property lines. Tlus amended proposal will ouly require a 5 foot rear yard variance. 6