05/01/2003 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED "TOGETHEI2 WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE" BOA12D OF ZOloTING APPEALS MIlNUTES - MAY 1, 2003 COUNCIL CHAIVIBERS I. IaOLL CALL: Chairmari Maloney called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. PRESENT: Chairman J. Maloney, Board members N. Sergi, J. Konold, W. Kremzar, and T. Kelly ALSO PRESENT: Assistant Law Director B. O'Malley, Assistant Building Commissioner T. Rymarczyk, and Assistant Clerk of Commissions A. Kilbane. II. REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES: The Board of Zoning Appeals minutes of April 3, 2002 have been submitted for approval. 7. Konold made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. The motion was seconded by T. Kelly and unanimously approved. Chairman Maloney indicated there are 10 cases requesting 15 variances. The Chairman advised that the board members have viewed the premises involved for each case. Three votes are required for approval. In addition each case will be judged on the physical situation peculiar to itself, so that in no way is a judgment rendered considered to be a general policy judgment affecting properties and like situations elsewhere. III. BiTII,DING DEPARTNIENT REQUES'I'S: 1). Dominic Ruccella, 6691 Stearns Road. Ward 3 Request for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of a lot split creating a lot narrower than required by the zoning code. The following variance is requested: 1. An 8.83 foot variance for lot width (code requires 70 ft., applicant shows 61.17 ft.). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section (1135.05). Note: The Planning Commission referred this matter to the Board of Zoning Appeals on March 25, 2003 and the Board of Zoning Appeals tabled this proposal4/3/03. Chairman Maloney called all interested parties forward. Mr. Dominic Ruccella came forward to be sworn in and address the request. He explained he would like to split off the residence that is on the land and save the balance of 2.91 acres. He would then like to build a home on that property. He indicated he also owns another lot next to it. He said he is not trying to develop it, as it is not economically feasible. He would like to have two legal lots and if someone where to purchase the one property, he would like to have a new building, and a new garage on the property. They would sell it off and put the proceeds toward the balance of the property costs. Mr. Maloney asked if the old garage will be removed. Mr. Ruccella replied it is on the three acres of land and it will be destroyed and replaced by a new garage by agreement. He already has a purchase agreement which is tentative based on the board's decision. He pointed out that everything except the frontage of the lot complies with the requirements of the city. Mr. Konold asked if there are sewers on the property. Mr. Ruccella said the sewers are there. Mr. Kremzar asked if there is any other intent for the property, such as a road to go back into a development. Mr. Ruccella said no, it is not economical. He is a commercial contractor but if he intended to do that, he would have presented it as such. He said the offer he has is based on a new garage. It is a cash offer. It would be best for him to complete this in the next month or two. Mr. Maloney suggested that he be given 90 days. He asked if there were any further questions or comments. Mr. Rymarczyk said that he would like to get a letter of intent from Mr. Ruccella regarding the new garage being built. W. Ruccella said he thought he submitted one. Mr. Rymarczyk confirmed he does not have a letter in the file. Mr. Ruccella said he will take care of submitting a hard copy to the building department. Mrs. Sergi asked if he owns the property on the other side,6f the house as well. Mr. Ruccella said he does not. He said the lot that will remain is adjoining to the property at the back. They reviewed the plans. Mr. Kremzar asked if the property he owns is U-shaped. Mr. Ruccella confirmed that and again referred to the plans. Mrs. Sergi