Laserfiche WebLink
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS <br />CITY OF Ir10RTH OLMSTED <br />1VIINUTES OF NOVEMBER 2, 2015 <br />ROLL CALL <br />Ms. Rudolph called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. in Council Chambers and led the Pledge of <br />Allegiance. <br />Present: Jennifer Rudolph, Laura Bellido, Bob Papotto, Eric Allain, Michael Raig <br />Staff: Law Director Michael Gareau, Jr., Assistant Building Commissioner Daniel Russell, <br />Clerk of Commissions Donna Rote <br />REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES <br />Mr. Raig moved, seconded by Mr. Allain, to approve the Board of Zoning Appeals minutes <br />of October 5, 2015, motion passed 5-0. <br />12ESIDENTIAL APPEALS AND REQUEST <br />15-4718; I)elborah Drossis: 23857 Mastick lZoad Rear <br />Proposal consists of a gate and the following variance is requested: <br />1. A 30 in. variance for the height of a gate in the front yard; code permits 30 in., applicant <br />shows 60 in., Section 1135.02(f)(1). <br />The oath was administrated to Attorney John Lasko, and neighbors; Dale Thomas and William <br />Bratton. Mr. Lasko said his clients are requesting a 30 inch height variance for the proposed <br />gate. The gate will be 230 to 240 feet back from Mastick Road and is a standard gate height. <br />The purpose of the gate is to detour vehicular activity which takes place quite often. Drivers <br />mistake his client's driveway as a road to the Metro Parks. There are two other driveways which <br />have easements to use the front portion of the drive. The placement of the gate will not impede <br />or keep the easement owners from accessing or using the driveway. Mr. Lasko submitted photos <br />which showed existing fences and said the gate will be in line with the eastern fence. His clients <br />have tried to use no trespassing and other signs to deter the vehicle traffic which just isn't <br />working. The 5 foot gate height will be high enough to be seen by both cars and trucks and <br />identify the driveway as a private drive. The gates will not be locked nor will it be an <br />impediment to police, fire, rescue squads or other delivery services. <br />Ms. Rudolph questioned if the applicants owned all the property to the gate and beyond. Mr. <br />Lasko said they own the entrance driveway and all property past the abutting neighbors. Mr. <br />Papotto noted the numerous signs at the site and asked if there would be any signs on the gate <br />and Mr. Lasko said no. Mr. Bratton said his only concern is the height of the gate as a 5 foot <br />gate is intrusive to the natural surroundings which abut the Metro Parks. He asked if there would <br />be fencing attached to the gate. There are FedEx and UPS deliveries to and from the applicants <br />home and questioned once the gate is installed how deliveries/pickups would be made. Mr. <br />Lasko said the gates would not be locked. The existing fences are 6 feet high and the proposed <br />wrought iron gate is a 1 foot shorter and more than 50% open. Nor will it be attached to any <br />fencing. Mr. Bratton said the existing fence along the east side belonged to the applicants. Mr. <br />Thomas said he is concerned that once the gate is installed the rest of the property would be