Laserfiche WebLink
t 1. i w <br />CITY OF NOR'T]EL Ol.MSTED <br />"TOGETIffER WE CAliT MAIKE A DIFFERENCE" <br />BOARD OF BUILI)ING COI)E APPEAI.S <br />MINUTES - ApRIL 18, 2002 <br />IN COUNCIL CHAM:BERS <br />5:30 P.M. <br />I. ROLL CALL: <br />Chairman Puzzitiello called the meetina to order at 5:40 p.m. <br />PRESENT: Chairman R. Puzzitiello, Board members; R Klesta and N. Althen. <br />ALSO PRESENT: Law Director, J. IDubelko, Assistant Building Commissioner, T. <br />Rymarczyk and Clerk of Commissions D. Rote. ABSENT: Board members; M. Conway and P. Enaoglia. <br />IIgEVIEw AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES: <br />The Board of Building Code of Appeals minutes dated February 21, 2002 is submitted <br />for approval. <br />R. Puzzitiello motioned to approve the February 21, 2002 minutes as written. The <br />motion was seconded by R. Klesta and unanimously approved. <br />]TI. OLD BUSINESS: <br />IV. NEVJ BUSINESS: <br />Denise & George Gatsos- 5268 Evertzreen Drive: <br />Proposal consists of erecting a fence. The violation is: <br />A). Erecting a fenGe along side of an 11-foot section of split rail fence along neighbors <br />side lot.line. This is in violation of section (1369.03) (a) 3 of the building code. <br />Note: App licants have in dicated that the y, would provide maintenance for areas along <br />the 11-foot section if necessary i.e. asphalt, cement, or stone decoration to keep area <br />clear. <br />Chairman Puzzitiello called all interested parties forward to review the request. Mrs. <br />Gatsos the owner came forward to review her request. IS&s. Gatsos indicated that the <br />fence that is in place is a decorative fence, which is visibly rotted. Even with the <br />proposed fence being erected, the neighbors could easily maintain the area. The home is <br />vacant and has been for three years. They have dogs, which need an area for exercise <br />and running. Mrs. Ga.tsos voiced that she does not want to give up the area of her yard <br />in question and would work with the board to be allowed the fence. Mr. Klesta inquired <br />what type of fence the applicant wished to erect. Mz's. Gatsos indicated that she would <br />like to erect a chainlink fence. She suggested that she spoke with each of her neighbors ' <br />each af whom voiced they had no objection. Mr. Dubelko indicated that there are <br />questions raised whether or not the existing fence is a decorative item, which does not <br />close at all. The existing fence is clearly a decorative fence. The applicant's intent is to <br />erect a fence for the purpose of i.e. privacy, main.tain pets, safety for children, enclosing <br />poois ext. therefore he would encourage the board to allow the applicant's request. Mr. <br />Puzzitiello questioned were the fence would be placect. Mrs. Gatsos indicated that sh.