My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08/05/2010 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
2010
>
2010 Board of Zoning Appeals
>
08/05/2010 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:47:22 PM
Creation date
1/25/2019 6:55:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
2010
Board Name
Board of Zoning Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
8/5/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Ms. Rudolph moved, seconded by Mrs. Diver, to grant William Kraley of 4302 Porter Road <br />an 18 inch height variance for a fence 8 feet off the sidewalk higher than code allows in the <br />front setbaclc provided the spiked tops are replaced; code permits 30", applicant shows <br />4811, section 1135.02(f)(1) which was approved 4-0. <br />Michael Nelko; 4121 Laurell Lane: <br />Request for variance; proposal consists of a new fence and the following variances are requested: <br />1. A 42 inch variance for a 6 foot fence located with in a 25 foot setbaclc of a corner lot; code <br />allows; code permits 30", applicant shows 72", section 1135.02(f)(2). <br />2. A variance for a fence less than 50% open in a 25' setback of a corner lot; code requires 50% <br />open, applicant shows 0% open, section 1135.02(fl(1). <br />Michael Nelko and Lindsey Ott were sworn in. Mr. Nelko said he would lilce to have the yard <br />fenced in for their dog and his intent is to match the neighbor's fence both in style, composition <br />and line of site for placement. Ms. Rudolph asked how far from the sidewallc the fence would be <br />and Mr. Nellco said the fence line would follow the neighbor's existing fence. <br />Mr. Mitchell said the rear neighbor has a fence which is two feet from the sidewallc which was <br />granted a variance. Mrs. Diver said she was against the fence as it is too high and less than 50% <br />open and would give the appearance of being a stockade fence. Mr. Mitchell would like the <br />fence height to be the same as his neighbors' but he would like the wooden fence to be a shadow <br />box style so it is not just a solid wall. Mr. Nellco agreed to install a 5 foot wooden shadow box <br />fence as requested. Mr. Mitchell asked where the gate would be installed and Mr. Nelko said <br />that it would be installed on the south side of the house. All board members said they had no <br />objections to the request if the applicant agreed to install the recommended 5 foot wooden <br />shadow box fence 2 feet in from the sidewalk following the neighbor's fence line. <br />Ms. Rudolph moved, seconded by Mrs. Bellido, to grant Michael Nelko of 4121 Laurell <br />Lane a 30 inch height variance for a 5 foot wooden shadow box fence located 2 feet off the <br />sidewalk which is within the 25 foot setback of a corner lot; code permits 3011, applicant <br />shows 60", section 1135.02(f)(2), which was approved 4-0. <br />NON RESIDENTIAL APPEALS AND REQUESTS <br />WEA Great Northern Mall, LLC; 4954 Great Northern Mall: <br />Request for an extension of time from August 6, 2009 approval date. Code states ruling, <br />determination or order of BZA expire one year from the effective date of such ruling, <br />determination or order, Section 1123.15. <br />Kurt Reddick with Westfield Great Northern was sworn in and Tony Vcanti, attorney for the <br />applicant, was present. Mr. Vcanti said his client was seelcing an extension of time on the <br />variances which were previously granted. Mr. Reddick said that the variances were granted for a <br />specific development which they are still committed to bringing about; however, due to <br />economic reasons they need additional time to finish the project. Ms. Diver asked if the <br />proposed tenant was still the same. Mr. Reddick said that the development plan had not changed <br />from when it was presented. Mr. Vcanti said that the variances were granted based on the <br />uniqueness of the site and the hardships it created and not possible tenants. <br />2
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.