05/04/2006 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'. existing wooded area which abuts lus backyard. The natural area should be preserved. Mr. Bauer offered to purchase 20-feet of his rear yaPd which he turned down arid suggested neighbors 'had offered to purchase the lot froan Mr. Bauer to preserve the lot and have been turned down as well. 'd'he variances being requested are substantial due to the lot not being large enough to accommodate a home. I'!e stated for the record he would be vvalling to purchase the lot fZOffi fhe nevv ownea. Mr. Neff voiced he was concerned that the properry values of the neighborhood wobild decrease as a11 traffic entering or existing the development would have to #ravel past the proposed home which vvould be the smallest home and lot in the entire development thereby decreasing the values of the homes within tlie development. Nir. Modenback read aloud an excerpt of Board of Zoning Appeals rninutes datecl October 1, 1980, whereby Mr. Bauer was denied a 35 foot fPOnt yard setback variance. More variances a.re now being requested inciuding for the size of the home which doe not meet codes. The request is just too much and he daes nat believe that the creaYion of the lot was ever approved by the city it was just deeded and never a pat°t of a development plan. Mr. O'MaIley advfsed that tIie clerk provided each commissioner excerpts of three different Board of Zoning Appeals minutes whereby there were variances both denied and granted but irrelevant at this tiine as they have long smce expired. The neighbor bas brought up a relevant point, whnch is the legitimacy of the land being created by a deed and not part of am officnal approved development plan. If zn fact the city of ]Vorth Olmsted in creating the subdivision created a lot of record which was of insuffiGient size a.nd zoned residentiaily ihen the ovvner of the lot may have property rights to use it even if it requires variances froyn city codes. However if tlae lot/plot was "nof" created or recognized through the subdivision process it could be a iJN build-able lot. Furtlier research may be required to determine whether in fact the lot was officially created or not. 1VIr. Burke questioned if the I,aw Departaient could advise the board whether the lot was in fact legal or not. 1VIr. O'lvgalley advised #hat the board could request both the city and the applicant to research and provide documents to determine if the lot is in fact Iegai, but ultimately it is the burden of the applicant to submit and present evidence to the board to show that they do in fact have the right to develop t.heir land. T7ie board ca.u table 7he ffiatter to obtain ftu-ther information or the appliccannt may request permission to withdra.w the request to seek legal guidance. 1VIr. Burke questioned if iai fact NIr. Bauer had knowledge whether or not the lotJparcel quaiified as a Iegai non-conforming lot i.e. did the City of North Olmsted approve the creation of the lot. Mr. Bauer suggested that Ex Building Coamnissioner Ernie Gundy issued hian a buildixag permdt to build a home and it was posted but he changed his mnnd and didn't build tiie home. Mr. Poltorek voiced that the vacant lot was not properly maintained as three trees have fallen inta his yard from the lot which have damaged his drain tiles. Most of the trees along his property line on the lot in question are dead and need to be cleaned up. He apposes the lot being developed and purchased Iiis home a year ?/z ago due to the size of wooded Iots in the area. He suggested that Mr. Bauer had approached him about purchasing a 1/3`d of an acre from him and he turned him down unless he paid $350,000 for the entire lot. The plan shows a drainage swell which would kill his trees, fizrther darnaging his lot and he is against the request. Mr. Poiice voiced that he lived in North Ohnsted aII his life and purchased his home due to the wooded Iots in the area as well. Neither the lot rnor any home constructed on the lot would be conducive to the neighborhood. He suggested that ovvners within the developinent planted flowers and cleaned the lot so the lot is cleaned. Mr. Modenback presented photos of the wooded lot to show that the lot was clean. 1VIs. Pieifer the fonmer owner of 6222 Fitch Road came forward to be sworn in and address the board. Ms. Pieifer advased that she and her husband owaed and maintained the area in question froffi 1987 until two years ago when they sold their home. She advised that sbe had receipts faom lawn company's showing they were maintaining the Iand. She suggested that in tiie past there was discussions of purchasing the lot for an access road once rear sections of other hornes along Fitch were purchased. She believed that if the lot was sold it should he stated that the lot couid only be purchased to build a 4