12/07/2015 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

abutting neighbors have no objection which is noted in the signed letter submitted. When he purchased the home he was not aware of the cities fencing codes. His intent is to enhance his property value while providing privacy and security. The property slopes downward away from the road which exposes his yard and home to more vehicular noise. Ms. Rudolph noted there were no other front yard fences in the neighborhood and felt the fence was very prohibitive. Mr. Zimmerman said he has a dog, and while tending his yard or just relaxing out front he has to deal with vehicle noise and comments being yelled at him from passing cars. Ms. Rudolph said while at the site she noted the L-shape mound and questioned if the fence would be atop the mound and Mr. Zimmerman said yes. Mr. Allain questioned if thought had been given to a shorter more open type fence and Mr. Zimmerman said the height of the fence is scaled with the height of the evergreens. Mr. Raig questioned the write-up which says the fence will be 102 inches high and 1VIr. Russell said the total height of the fence includes the mound as the measurement is taken from grade to the top of the fence. Mr. Zimmerman said the top of the mound is even with the road. A shorter fence wouldn't provide privacy or buffer vehicular noise. Mr. Papotto said currently the design and layout of the mound is an interesting feature but once fencing is added atop the mound the fencing would dominate the entire site and be out of character of the neighborhood. He questioned if the applicant was open to fencing which isn't solid and Mr. Zimmerman said the solid style was chosen for privacy. Board members felt the height and solid style fence would adversely impact the neighborhood. Ms. Rudolph moved, seconded by Mr. Papotto, to grant 15-4932; Caleb Zimmerman of 6190 Fitch Road the following variances for a cleeorative gence: 1. A 72 in. variance for fence in the front yard; code permits 30 in., applicant shows 102 in., Section 1135.02(f)(1). 2. A variance for a solid wood fence in the front yard; code requires 50% open, applicant shows solid; Section 1135o02(f)(1), rrnotion failed 0-5. 15-4937; William Merrell: 4389 Danberry Proposal consists of a fence. The following variances are requested: 1. A 30 in. variance for the height of a fence constructed on a corner lot, code permits 30 in., applicant shows 60 in., Section 1135.02(f)(2). 2. A variance for a solid fence constructed in the front building line of the neighbor's on a corner lot, code permits 50% open, applicant shows solid, Section 1135.02(fl(1). 3. A variance for a 5 ft. high fence in a neighbor's front setback on a corner lot, code does not allow, applicant shows a fence in the front setback on a corner lot, Section 1135.02(f)(2). The oath was administered to homeowner William Merrell and contractor Mathew McMillon. Mr. Merrell said the existing 5' high board on board fence had been in place for 29 years and needed to be replaced. They hired Budget 1 Fence to replace sections of the exiting fence which are visible from the street with new 5' high white vinyl fence sections. The remaining sections of board on board fence will be replaced as the budget permits. The only change made was the gate which was 4' wide and now 5' wide for easier access. When Budget 1 Fence was hired they were assured the contractor would acquire all permits needed to install the fence which was installed in August. Mr. McMillon said he submitted all the paperwork to the city in June or July for the permit and unintentionally installed the fence prior to being told a variance was required or a permit being issued. It was no fault of Mr. Merrell nor was it done intentionally, he pulls hundreds of permits a year in North Olmsted for fences and it was his mistake it was installed 2