08/03/2006 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mrs. Mate asked if neighbors could state concerns so they could work with the neighbors. Mr. O'Malley stated that they must first prove why the code should be varied. The code does allow a 50 foot tower and there should be a place on the property which would allow a 50 foot tower without a variance. Mr. Burke questioned the architect why she did not present the same plans from the 2005, which had already been approved. She was only given the footprint to stay within. Mr. Burke noted that the new variances that have not been considered. All three variances deal with the front and side porch. Further review of the home plans indicate that the home should be divided into two separate units, essentially two small apartments. The neighbors were given opportunity to speak, all of whom articulated concern with regard to both the radio tower and the modifications to the home structure. Both the Board and Mr. O'Malley agreed that the proposal for such a substantial variance would need to be submitted to the Building Department for review. Mrs. Mate stated that the plans had been approved previously; however, Mrs. Diver read from the last approved variances and found no record of approval for any such variances. Mr. Mate further explained that with regard to the tower, he already had a 70 foot antennae in his front yard attached to a tree and that his request was essentially for a lower structure. Mr. O'Malley noted that tabling the current requests for variances would have no direct effect on Mr. Mate's right to practice his licensed communication. Mr. Mate agreed. J. Mahoney moved table Joe & Vickie Mate of 23281 Marion Road. J. Burke seconded the motion whieh was unanimously approved. Tablecl 6. Joseph & Linda Ann Hogue; 24261 Palm Drive: (WRD # 4) Request for variance. The proposal consists of a shed. The following variances are requested: 1. An 88 square foot variance for a storage shed larger than code permits, (code permits 80 sq ft, applicant shows 168 sq ft), section 1135.02(D)(1). 2. A 4 foot variance for a storage shed higher than code permits, (code permits 8' applicant shows 12'), section 1135.02(D)(3), which is in violation of sections 1135.02(D)(1) and 1135.02(D)(3). Note: BZA denied the applicants larger request on 6/29/06. Mr. Joseph Hogue was sworn in. Mr. O'Malley articulated that if this application is not substantially different then what was denied before, then the commission cannot hear it. In fact, the applicant has reduced his request for a 300 foot variance to an 88 foot variance. Mr. Hogue is requesting a 4 foot variance for a shed higher than code permits 8 feet, making the height 12 feet. Mr. Hogue cited a shed that his neighbors have and stated that he is interested in creating a similar structure on his property. The shed he is interested in looks like an old fashioned barn. Mr. O'Malley stated that the board cannot judge the beauty or style of the shed, the board must simply consider the city policy based upon the lot size based, which is 8'x 8' shed. The current applicant bears the burden to prove why he should need one more square foot of what the code allows. Mr. Hogue felt that 8 feet was too low a clearance for storage. Mr. Burke maintained that the shed was just too large for the size of the yard in proximity to the neighbors. Mr. Hogue suggested he could make the shed 10 feet instead. Mr. O'Malley articulated to the board that they cannot negotiate with people simply based on what they would like to have, there must be proof to need the variance and they must remain within code. Mr. Burke suggested tabling the request. Mrs. Sergi requested that Mr. Hogue bring pictures next time and examine other options at the home improvement store. N. Sergi moved to table Joseph & Linda Ann Hogue of 24261 Palm Drive. M. Diver seconded the motion which vvas unanimously appa-oved. Tabled 5