12/03/1997 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

40 foot rear yard. At this point, Mr. Deichmann told her he thought that the 40 foot rear yards had been approved, then Mr. Block advised that he had been told to wait until everything else was completed and then apply to the board of zoning appeals for each ind.ividual lot. Had she known this she would not have bought the property, but she intends to go forward with the building. She has sold seven homes in the development already and one of the buyers is here tonight. Assistant Building Commissioner Rymarczyk advised that Mr. Deichmann denied that he had told her that a 40 foot was the required rear yard setback. Mrs. Latina stated that he told her that also when she confronted him. The residents spoke at this time. Mr. Tighe believed that she should have gotten her facts straight before she started building. Mrs. Smally pointed out that the sewers ran between the two lots. Mr. Block stated that they put back yard drains on all their lots and this is on there property. It was clarified that the house would be 40 away from their back property line. She questioned who would maintain the sewers. Mr. Block stated that the homeowners would have to maintain the property, it is not city property. Mr. Maloney showed the residents exactly what was being requested as it was shown on the site plan. Mrs. Smally objected because this was never discussed at planning commission and questioned why there was a difference between what Mr. Block -had proposed then, and what she was proposing now. She noted that she had never seen any information on what was to be built at planning commission. She believed that the builder should reconfigure the houses to meet the codes. Law Director Gareau asked if they shortened the lots to conform to the square foot area requirements. Mr. Block stated that all the lots conformed to the ordinance of the city. Mrs. Smalley stated that no one told them that this was going to be sold to a third builder. It was clarified that the size of the lots are the same as what was presented to plauuing commission. Mr. Gomersall believed that the footprint of the house should be shortened. Mrs. Latina suggested that there could be a 5 foot front set variance and a 5 foot rear yard variance. She clarified that only four houses would be on a slab, the rest were just bigger houses. Some house have been sold. It was clarified that the rrfinimum lot size is 8,700 square feet. Mr. Baddour, one of the buyer who now lives on Woodview Drive, advised that he has been looking for a larger home for two years and he wanted to stay in North Olmsted. He stated that people his age are looking for a house with a little character. This house will cost $270,000.00, which will bring more taxes into the city and will increase the values of the houses in the neighborhood. Mr. Czarnecki pointed out if 10 feet is taken away from the back yards, and later they want to put on a deck, other variances will be required and they will be closer to his back yard. Mrs. Latina stated that these houses will be varied, they will not be lined up, and all the back yards will not be 40 feet. They just want the blanket variance so they will not have to come back if they need to reduce it to 40 feet. The neighbors believed that they should conform to the code and to what the original developer had promised. Mr. Gomersall suggested that the variance be split with 5 foot in the front and 5 foot in the back. Mrs. Latina would agreed to that. Mr. Miller believed it would be reasonable; but he pointed out that the m;n;mu.m lot depth was 135 feet and most of these were 137 feet, so this was a classic case of putting too much building on the smallest lot possible. He was concerned that this was being over built. Mr. Koberna would agreed with splitting the variance, but he believed that the builders should have known the setbacks. Mr. Block stated that this was purchased from Whitlatch and the subdivision had been approved. The members believed the house could be downsized. Mrs. Latina stated she could, if she wanted to build a box, but she could not do that with the varying designs. Mr. Miller stated the varying designs are vertical architectu.re, not horizontal. Mr. Miller also has a problem with a blanket variance, since they are not certain how many lots will need the variance. Mrs. Smally noted that possibly one third of the lots will be changed, and she could come back for more variances. The residents objected to the variance and Mrs. Smally is concerned about the water retention with the additional land coverage. Mr. Block stated that the three acres retention system that they built has eliminated flooding in the whole area. Mr. Koberna stated that he lives on the other side of Clague Road and the houses still flood there. Mr. Block stated that the flooding problems will be solved for the homes that back up to this development. Mr. Maloney wondered how, with a 50 foot front and rear 9