04/09/1969 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i- Y CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED - BOARD OI' ZONII+TG APPEALS Regular Meeting held at Gity Ha7.Z April 9., 1969 The meeting was callecl: to .order at 7:30 b3r Vice-Chairman Lindy Forcelli.ni. Those Present: Mrs. Eian, Mssrs. Forcellini, Greene, Lancashire A1so Present; Mr. Gundy, Building Cwmissioner ]. Appellant: RAger Leckhart, 5519 Decker EtAad. Request for special permi.t to add to non-canfarniiMg house. Additioa Kauld.conform with the zoning ordinance. .Request ntade as per Orci.inance #62 33, Section 2231.02 and Section 1133.12. Present:. Mr. and Mrs. LACkharty Mr. H. Patton, Mrs. E. Patton It was explained, that....the..house. was. bui.].t.in..I9.58 according to the ordinance in effect at that .t3me. It is non-cenfot3ning in .tMat it wa.s built 151 from the sideline on a carner lot. Present ordinance ca11s for.$ 251 aetback. It -%ms determined that the proposed. addition would nmt_ be eTase to -the sideline......Ms.,-H. Pa.tton and Mrs.. E,. Patt.on stated that they had no objectionr, to-the request. Mr. and Mrs. Lmekhart explained that theyRre in need of additional space.and do not wish to move. Mr. Greette moved to grant a special permit; seemnded by Mr. Lancashire and unanimeuslg passed. 2, Appellant: Kenneth Jarolimek, 4617 Nlichael Driee. Request to erect a 4.1 fence on a corner Iot. Request is i.n violation of Ordinance #62-33, 5ectivn 1151.04 which states that a fence along a street line may not exceed 30". present: . Mr.-,..and Mrs. Jarolimek Mr. Jaralimek explained tha.t he feels that his request would in no--way create a safetp hazard.. They wish te -hage the fence. because af a smaZl child s.rid. alsm. a dog. The fence would encZose their rear yard-wY33.ch is adjacent to the side street.. Mr. Greene stated that he feZt there is a definite hardship where sma11 children are involved on a corner lot. Mrs. Eian maved to gxant a variance of 1$" in height for tMe proposed famtage 3n dispute along sideline; seconded by Mr. Lat3cashire and unanimously passed.. , 3. Appellant: James Izvine, 4585 Carsten I;ane. Request to erect a 51 fence along. reaT 10t Iine. Request is in v3olation af Orclinance #62-33, Sectimn 1251.04.. fence not to exceed 41 i.n height. Present: Mr. Ixvise, Mr. Freed Mr. Irvine.sfi,ated.that he wishes_ta cover an existing wire fence at the rear of his lot with a 51 basketwea.ve fence. It.wiau7d afford his family nore-pr3.vaey and would alao serve to better contain an acti.ve 21 year old son whom he feels evulcl clirnb aver a 41 fence. He stated that there sre twc, other 51 fences in the neighbmrhoed. Mr. Freed asked wh,p he wa.s notified since he Iives quite a distance fram the lat in question. Due to a discrepancy. regaxding notification of homeowners., Mr. Greene moved to conti.nue the case to the next meeting; seconded by Mr. Laneashire and unanimmusly passed.. 4. Appellant: Ken Zinameister., 6500 McKenzie Resad. Request to erect a4t fence on a cerner 1ot. Request ia in violation mf Ord3narice #62-33, Section 1151.04 Khi;eh states that a fence aleng a street line may not exceed 30". Present: Mr. Zinanteister., Representative of Sears Roebuck & Ca, xho will i.nsta].l fence; Mr. b`peedling: