Laserfiche WebLink
requested permitting a nonconforming side yard on the house's eastern edge. The current side <br />yard is 2 feet 1 inch; code requires 5 feet. <br />Mr. Rufener said the nice side of the fence faces out from his property. He said the fence style is <br />used on other properties in his neighborhood. He increased the fence height at some points of his <br />property to keep the top of the fence level. The fence is needed to provide privacy from the <br />soccer fields abutting their property. The applicants have had issues with people entering their <br />property without their permission. He provided pictures of the inside of the fence. Mr. Schumann <br />added that a permit was pulled for the fence a few years ago and the applicant has since been <br />cited for it. The fence is not allowed by code, but the codes are currently under review. Mrs. <br />Rufener stated that it was unclear to them that the fence type was not allowed when they pulled <br />the permit. Mr. Davis does not have a problem with the fence which abuts his property. Mr. <br />Shumay believed the fence was architecturally interesting and did not think the additional height <br />made much difference. Mr. Christoff, the contractor, advised the applicant to get the reverse- <br />runner fence because it is sounder than the applicant's original proposal. Mr. Martin also did not <br />have an issue with the fence. Mr. Papotto believed that if the fence details were included with the <br />permit application, he would have been advised that it was not allowed. That being said, he <br />believed it looked nice. Mr. Raig liked the architectural interest the posts add to the fence. <br />Mr. Papotto moved, seconcled by Mr. Mackey, to grant the following variances for 17-8631; <br />Chris & Maria Rufener; 5842 Barton Road: <br />1. A 6 in. variance for fence height, code permits 6 ft., applicant shows 6 ft. 6 in.; Section <br />1135.02(f)(1). <br />2. A variance for exposed posts or supporting cross-elements that face the public right-of- <br />way or a lot other than the lot on which the fence is to be constructed; code does not <br />allow exposed posts or cross-elements unless both sides of the fence are the same, <br />applicant shows exposed posts where the sides of the fence are not the same, Section <br />1369.04(c). <br />Motion passed 3-0. <br />17-8657; Weslev Coffiniz; 23204 Alexander Road <br />Representatives: Wesley and Karen Coffing, owners <br />Proposal consists of a building addition. The property is zoned One Family Residence C. <br />The following variances are requested: <br />1. A 7 ft. 9 in. variance for the sum of both side yards; code requires 20 ft., applicant shows 12 <br />ft. 3 in., Section 1135.07(a). <br />2. A 2 ft. 11 in. variance for side yard requirements; code requires 5 ft., applicant shows 2 ft. 1 <br />in., Section 1135.07(a). <br />Note: The existing property is non-conforming with a width of 40 ft. - code requires width of 60 <br />ft. The house is non-conforming with an existing side yard of 2 ft. 1 in. - code requires 5 ft. and <br />a combination of 20 ft. for side yards. <br />Mr. Aspery stated that the applicant is proposing to construct a 12 foot by 8.5 foot addition to the <br />west of their home. A variance is requested permitting a side yard sum of less than 20 feet; code <br />requires 20 feet, and the applicant show 12 feet 3 inches. Note that the existing property is non- <br />conforming with a width of 40 feet; code requires width of 60 feet. A variance is also requested