10/07/1999 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

? A 9 foot 6 inch variance for distance from dwelling, (code requires 15ft, applicant shows Sft 6inches, section (1135.02 c2). Which 4s in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections, (1165.02) and (1135.02 C1). The motion was seconded by W. Kremzar and unanimously approved. Variance Granted. In the framing of the motion Chairman Gomersall informed that applicant that the next time he planned on doing work he is to contact the Building department to find out if a permit is required. 3. Joan Puinno27181 Glouchester Dr: Request for variance (1123.12). Proposal consists of adding a three-season room to exi'sting home. The following variances are requested: 1) A special permit to add to a non-conforming building, (1165.02). 2) A variance to enlarge a non-conforming dwelling, (1165.02 B 2). 3) A 14 foot variance for rear yard setback, (Code requires SOft, applicant shows 36ft), section (1135.08A). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections, (1165.02 B2) and (1135.08 A). Chairman Gomersall called all interested parties forward, and reviewed the variances requested. Mrs. Puinno came forward to review her request. Mrs. Puinno submitted letters from her neighbors, which indicated that they had no objections to her request. Mr. Gomersall asked if any Board members or audience members had comments or concerns they would like to address. No further coinments were made. W. Kremzar motioned to grant Joan Puinno of 27181 Glouchester Dr. her request for variance (1123.12). Which consists of adding a three-season room to the existing home and that the following variances be granted: 1) A special permit to add to a non-conforming building, (1165.02). 2) A variance to enlarge a non-conforming dwelling, (1165.02 B 2). A 14 foot variance for rear yard setback, (Code requires SOft, applicant shows 36ft), section (1135.08A). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections, (1165.02 B2) and (1135.08 A). The motion was seconded by J. Konold and unanimously approved. Varaance Granted. 4. Marv Lou Ciulla; 2321 Cla u? e Rd: Request for variance (1123.12). Proposal consists of excessive fence height. The following variances are requested: 1) A 30-inch height variance for a 5-foot high fence located in front setback of a corner lot facing south and west, (Code permits 30inch, applicant shows 60 inch). 2) An 18-inch height variance for 17 feet of fence in front setback of corner lot facing east, (Code permits 30inch, applicant shows 48 inch). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section, (1135.02 F 2). Cnairman Gomersall called all interested parties forward, and reviewed the variances requested. Ms. Ciulla came forward to review her proposal. Mr. Gomersall reviewed that the height of the fence was not shown to be the correct size as it should be 5 foot high. Ms. Ciulla reviewed that she had spoken to the neighbors on all sides of her and they have indicated they do not have a problem with the fence. The yard was cleared of over grown landscaping, which has opened the view of her yard and she would like to have privacy. Mr. Gomersall reviewed that the 5-foot fence would be 10 feet off the sidewalk and 4 foot high from the corner to the garage. He questioned if the applicant would need a variance for placing a fence in the front setback. Mr. Conway indicated that the applicant could place a 30-inch fence in her front yard without needing a variance. As the applicant is requesting the fence be 5 feet high she needs a 30-inch variance. Mr. Maloney sugDested making 3