My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/18/2001 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
2001
>
2001 Board of Building Code Appeals
>
10/18/2001 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:48:32 PM
Creation date
1/28/2019 4:53:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
2001
Board Name
Board of Building Code Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
10/18/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
<br />1 <br />CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED <br />'"TOGETHER WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE" <br />BOARD OF BUII..DING CODE APPEALS <br />MINUTES OC'TOBER 18, 2001 <br />IN COUNCIL CHAMBER5 <br />5:30 P.M. <br />I. ROLL CALL: <br />Chairman, Puzzitiello called the meeting to order at 5:30pm. <br />PRESENT: Chairman, R. Puzzitiello, Board members; P. Engoglia, R. Klesta, M. <br />Conway and N. Althen. - <br />ALSO PRESENT: Asst. Building Commissioner, T. Rymarczyk and Asst. Clerk of <br />Commissions, S. Solomon. <br />II. REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES: The minutes of June 21, 2001 <br />Board of Building Codes Appeals minutes have been submitted for approval. <br />P. Engoglia motioned to approve the Board of Building Code of Appeals minutes <br />dated June 21, 2001 as written. The motion was seconded by R. Klesta and <br />unanimously approved. <br />III. BUILDING DEPARTMENT REQUESTS: <br />James Dittebrand• 6122 Stearns Rd. . <br />Proposal consists of fence. Built split rail fence, but attached unapproved type of <br />wire fence constituting a double fence. <br />Chairman Puzzitiello called all interested parties forward to review the request. The <br />homeowner, James Dittebrand, came forward to review the request. Mr. Puzzitiello <br />questioned if he had anything to say. Mr. Dittebrand replied not really. Mr. <br />Engoglia indicated that he thought it should be allowed to stay the way it is. Mr. <br />Klesta indicated that he consulted with the building department and this is definitely. <br />an unapproved type of fencing that was used. His problem is, what would be to stop <br />other people from using that application in a different series. Last year someone <br />tried to put deer fencing up, what would stop them from using that fiberglass mesh <br />with wood pickets. There are set codes on what we do allow in North Olmsted and <br />what we do not allow and there are reasons for that. Mr. Conway suggested that the <br />board is not here to punish anyone. 1VIr. Dittebrand questioned what else he could <br />put up to keep his dog in the yard. 1VIr. Klesta indicated that originally he pulled a <br />permit for chain link. Mr. Dittebrand replied right, then . he had it extended. He <br />- spoke with a woman in the building department and he told her he was going to a <br />split rail. He had the temporary wire fence up before,, then he built the split rail <br />fence. He has had problems with kids coming up to the house and ripping the screen <br />off, the glass block window. So he put the fence and some dogs doors up and since <br />then he has had no problems. . He believes the split rail eosmetically looks better than <br />a chain link. Mr. Althen agreed. Mr. Engoglia again commented that he would let <br />this stay_ Mr. Klesta questioned what other types of wire or chain fences are <br />approved by North Olmsted. Mr. Rymarczyk indicated that there are a few out <br />there, he believes that he might even have what is approved by the City. Mr.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.