My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/2/2021 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
2021
>
Building and Zoning Board of Appeals
>
8/2/2021 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/8/2021 7:50:23 AM
Creation date
11/8/2021 7:43:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
2021
Board Name
Building & Zoning Board of Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
8/2/2021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
2. A variance for a parking pad in a front yard; code allows parking pads in the side or rear yard <br />of a residential lot unless the lot has access to an arterial street, applicant shows a parking pad <br />in the front yard; Section 1135.02(B)(3)(a). <br />Note: Proposed parking pad is 18 ft. x 18 ft. <br />Mr. Allain asked if the applicant's mother-in-law was able to speak on behalf of the applicant <br />without prior acknowledgement. Mr. Gareau and Ms. Lieber agreed that as long as the <br />representative could present the case and answer the questions of the Board, then it could be <br />acceptable. <br />The applicant is proposing to widen their existing driveway and install a parking pad in the front <br />yard. Driveways serving detached garages may be 12 feet wide and the widening results in a <br />width of 15 feet. Parking pads in the front yard are only permitted on arterial streets and <br />Mackenzie Road is not classified as an arterial street. Ms. Zarife said she is handicapped and <br />there are several drivers living in the home. The additional driveway area would provide space <br />for her to enter and exit vehicles without falling. Ms. Lieber thought there may be room to tum <br />around where the concrete widens at the face of the garage. Mr. Mackey asked the representative <br />if there is sufficient space between the garage and house to provide for an alternative solution, <br />Ms. Zarife said there was not. Mr. Papotto appreciated Ms. Lieber's comments but thought it <br />would be difficult to maneuver behind the house. He understood Mackenzie Road is not <br />classified as a minor or principal arterial street but thought the double yellow line down <br />Mackenzie Road shows how much traffic is on the road, Mr. Mackey agreed. Mr. Allain agreed <br />and thought Mackenzie Road may be approaching arterial street status. <br />Mr. Papotto moved, seconded by Mr. Mackey, to approve the following variances for 21- <br />19853; Russell Mortenson; 6646 Mackenzie Road: <br />1. A 3 ft. variance for width of a driveway serving a detached garage; code allows 12 ft. <br />wide in the front yard; applicant shows driveway 15 ft. wide in the front yard; Section <br />1135.02(B)(2)(c). <br />2. A variance for a parking pad in a front yard; code allows parking pads in the side or <br />rear yard of a residential lot unless the lot has access to an arterial street, applicant <br />shows a parking pad in the front yard; Section 1135.02(B)(3)(a). <br />Motion passed 3-0. <br />21-19878; Daniel & Martha Panek: 4397 Martin Drive <br />Representative: Martha Panek, owner <br />Proposal consists of a fence in the front yard. Property is zoned B -One Family Residence. <br />1. A 1 ft. variance for height of a fence in the front yard; code allows a fence in the front yard <br />not to exceed 30 in., applicant shows 3 ft. 6 in., Section 1135(D)(2). <br />Note: The fence is a 3 ft. 6 in. high picket. The portion that extends beyond the house is located <br />in the front yard. <br />The applicant is proposing to replace an existing fence in the front yard. While the fence is at <br />least 50% open, it exceeds permitted height by one foot. No previous variance was found for the <br />existing fence height. Ms. Panek said the picket fence was built in 1988 and both fences need to <br />be replaced due to their age. There seems to be a concrete pad under the enclosed area and grass <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.