04/01/1999 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.' an eYtension of the existing driveway to have access to the new garage. Mrs. Deeley indicated as she had written in her letter, the reason for moving to the suburbs was to have more green space. Mr. Gomersall suggested he felt the request was to much as the back of the garage would be on the rea; lot line. Nlr. Deeley suggested the garage would be over half way into his lot. Mr. Conway indicated the maximum height allowed for the roof of the garage is 12'foot so he would need a height variance. Mr. Goulding suggested the work area would have a flat roof. Mr. Kremzar suggested the roof would drain off onto the neighbor's lot. He asked how the back of the addition would be maintained as the addition would be on the lot line. Mr. Goulding indicated it would be vinyl siding so it would not require maintenance. He further suggested the rear neighbor indicated she would not have a problem with the rear addition. Nlr. Gomersall suggested she might not have a problem with it but he did. Mr. Conway corrected his earlier statement regarding allowable height, and indicated a 15'feet roof is allowed by code. Mr. Gomersall suggested the addition would be too much for the property. NIr. Konold inquired as to why the additional garage was needed. 1VIr. Goulding suggested he needed the garage to put his vehicles indoors and not have them exposed to the elements. Nlr. Koberna suggested he didn't have a problem with the addition for the bay, but felt the work area addition would be too much. Mrs. Deeley suggested with more vehicles there would be more noise and a workshop would add noise also. Nlr. Koberna indicated he was against the workshop being added. Mr. Goulding suggested making the work area smaller by 5'feet, and asked if the board would allow that. Mr. Gomersall suggested Mr. Goulding would still not be able to maintain that part of his yard. Nlr. Deeley suggested Mr. Goulding planed on putting up a fence for a dog down the road. Nlr. Goulding indicated one day he would be adding a fence. Mr. Gomersall suggested the issue of a fence could not be addressed, as it was not being requested. Mr. Gomersall asked if IVIr. Koberna felt the garage bay should be allowed. Mr. Koberna indicated he felt the bay was warranted. Mr. Gomersall asked how drainage would be addressed. Mr. Goulding suggested the garage would have gutters, which will tie into the existing drain that is located in the driveway. Mrs. Deeley suggested the notice they received indicated the variances being requested is against ordinance so why is it allowed. Mr. Koberna suggested this board was established to help residents who need more than what is allowed. Mrs. Deeley suggested if this is allowed he could start a business or start working on other peoples vehicles. Nlr. Deeley suggested he didn't believe that the roof would be as indicated on the plans. Mr. Gomersall suggested the board could not address the issue of the proposed height of the roof, because it is within code. Mr. Gomersall indicated the building department follows up on the work as it is being done to make sure the plans are followed. Mr. Conway suggested Mr. Gomersall was correct. Mr. Deeley indicated he didn't believe that Mr. Goulding would follow the plans. Mr. Gomersall suggested he was sorry Mr. Deeley felt that way but the plans would be followed. Mr. & Mrs. Deeley became argumentative over the height of the proposed roo£ Mr. Conway announced that the Board of Zoning Appeals board could not address building codes, only zoning codes, so how the building is constructed is not their issue they strictly deal with lot coverage. If you have a concern with the building you can take it to the Building code of appeals board. Mrs. Deeley asked how high the roof is allowed to stand. Mr. Conway indicated he is allowed 15'feet. Mrs. Deeley asked what the height of the existing garage roof stands. Mr. Goulding suggested the present roof is 13'feet. Mrs. Deeley suggested it is going to stick out like a sore thumb, if a couple of more feet are added. 1VIr. Goulding suggested it would not be any higher than the house. Mrs. Deeley suggested the board was not looking at the addition the same way they were. Mr. Gomersall asked if the Deeley's had any further questions. Mrs. Deeley indicated they did not. Mr. Gomersall and Mr. Koberna reviewed what they would be willing to allow. Mr. Gomersall indicated to Mr. Goulding that he would not need the cement walk if the work area is eliminated. 1VIr. Goulding suggested Mr. Gomersall was correct. Mr. Gomersall asked if the garage would be 11' feet x 24'feet. Nlr. Deeley asked what the sidewalk had to do with it, as there is 5'feet on the side and the garage is 35'feet so that is 40'feet now. 1VIr. Gomersall suggested the garage would not be 35'feet unless the addition is added and the 5'feet of sideyard had nothing to do with the garage. Nlr. Deeley indicated he didn't care about the sidewalk he was talking about the 5' feet of property. Nlr. Gomersall suggested the 5' foot was not an issue. Nlr. Deeley suggested the garage would be 40'feet into the 70'foot lot. Mrs. Deeley questioned why someone would purchase a small lot if they want all these additions. Nlr. Koberna suggested people have different needs. Mrs. Deeley suggested Mr. Goulding should've purchased more property. Mr. Gomersall asked Mr. Conway if the work area is removed would Mr. Goulding still need a 9% variance for lot coverage. Nlr. Conway asked what the dimensions were. Mr. Goulding suggested the dimensions would be 24.3 feet x 35'feet. Mr. Conway suggested the current proposal exceeded the lot coverage by 442'feet, so without the work area it would be 1130square feet being requested. He would need about 4% for lot coverage, and the final garage size would be about 845 square feet. He is permitted to have 750 square feet so a variance of 7