11/01/2007 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

setback" it should read "front yard setbaclc". If the applicants addition met current codes only a special permit would be required which is not the case. Board members found that the public peace, health, safety, morals, welfare nor convenience would not be jeopardized nor affected. The use, value, development nor enjoyment of neighboring properties would be adversely affected. Neither a public or private nuisance would be created by noise, smoke, odors, fire, vibrations, lights or traffic. There would be no traffic or safety hazards created granting the variance. The uses would not adversely affect the public peace, health, safety, morals, welfare or convenience, of neighboring properties. Addressing the area variance factors the board* found that the property could yield a reasonable return without a variance. The variance was not substantial and the neighboring properties would not be adversely affected by the additiori. Owners are presumed to know codes prior to buying their home, governmental services would not be affected. The property can continue to be used as it currently is and the spirit and intent of the zoning code would be upheld granting the applicants variance. Mrs. Sergi rnoved, seconded by Mr. Menser, to approve William Slama of 28670 Jenkins Road his request for a special permit to add to a non-conforming builcling (1165.02),, the existii1g residence is 1 1/2 feet from the sideyard property line ancl code requires 5 feet which was unanimously approved 4-0. Mr. Menser rrnoved, seconded by Mrs. Sergi, to approve William Slama of 28670 Jenkins. Road .his request for variance (1123.12), which consists of a resYdential addition and the followirig variances are granted: 1. A variance fa-om section (1165.02) as the addition does not compiy with front yard setlback requirements. 2. A 6 foot front yard variance for resid.ence closer too the right of way than code allows, (code require 501, applicant shows 441); se,etion (1135.06 (a)). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections (1165.02) and (1135:06 (a)) and was unanimously approved 4-0. Thaddeus & Catherine Radwan; 27608 Laurell Lane: (Ward 1) Requesf for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of an addition (all season room). The following variance is requested: 1. An 8"foot variance for a residence too close to rear property line, (code requires 50', applicant sfiows 42'). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section (1135.08 (a)). Represeritatives: Mrs. Radwan the owner and Mr. Bailey with Champion Window each came forward; to be sworn in and address the request. • ,. .. Mrs'Radwan said the addition would replace her existing deck. The existing deck is 20' x 25' and wi11 be removed to accommodate the three season room which will be smaller. The addition will be `14' x 16' and the backyard is fenced. Mr. Bailey presented a photo of the proposed room? being added. The room will be an all season room as it is heated and cooled. Mr. Conway revi&w;ed that due to the existing size and depth of the yard there could not be any addition added to the home without a variance. The existing deck never required a variance as it is not higher than, 4. feet. Mrs. Sergi preferred the three season room over the existing deck. The addition wotild'riot be obtrusive to the neighbors as it is mainly glass. The property could continue to provide. a reasonable return without the variance. The variance is not substantial as the addition is basically glass walls. The character of the neighborhood would not be altered nor would the 3