3/7/2022 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

plans on installim_ a dour to the buck ill the property to get titan equipment out oft hc storage area. Ile is tvilline to get rid otthe shed it needed since it prubahk pill not last sen long, mid he tants evertthing stored closer- hlr. Mackey svgs iniI alh concerned about the applicants rcasonS lite the large addition. Ile agreed that show curs tsould not ttanl to be stored Outside and sines there ocre no uhjections from the neighbors. Ado. Kuhm agreed. Mr. Pupotto thought the turiance is significant. hilt he asked the Bound it the need for the shed tsps there. his. Patton thought the case needed to he considered IL koLMg a r shed tsould be permitted even itm it seas reosed Mr. Mackey mmred, seconded by Ms. Patton, to appravc the fallowing variance for 22-21311; Scott Damalas; 29998 hVestmi niter Drive: I. A 438 sq. ft. variance for arca of private garage; code permits 750 sq. ft., applicant shows 1188 sq. ft., Section 1135.02(B)(I)(a). Motion passed 4-0. 22-21314; John Calloway; 5759 Sherwood Drive Keprescntatoe: John Calloway. ot-Nner Proposal consists of new shed. Propalt is avud B-One I amih Residence the fitllowng sallances arc requested: I . A -Naritnncc f0r,1 second stnrsge huilding un It residential los code permits one. applicant .hosts moo Section II"i.0?(C'1('_). _. ;A 106 sq. It, variance fix the combined total We otthe .;turuge buildiu,_s: code permits I �0 Sq. h.: applicant shotty tttO sheds at ]X( s+ IL. Section I I».0' t( t) 'sole: Applicant has an emstine 8 It. \ 17 li, (96 sq. I).) shed Proposed shed is 10 IL s 16 ft s 10 it 6 in. high 1160 sq. II.). Lot size is 1 1 A 10 sq. It, \It_ Calluttav No ant, to get an additional shed to store his 1,1\k 11 equipment- thereis a lot of stuff stored in the garage as well and the cun-enl shed is 6z1'_ and ILII of paliu furniture. Al r. (iurcau asked what the strueWre teas shotin in the middle of the vend, Ms. Scelet said permits stere not pulled lot the freestanding deck. Mr. (iareau asked itthe shed tuwld he installed on the propertc line. his. Seeley said the setback requirentems t-Nould be met. which ttould be required on the building permit drawings. Mr. Macke% asked it the existing shed could he c\pandecl m , Air. ( alloRnt said the current shed ttas installed about ' -Neaps ng and he ails assured It permit was pulled at the lime. Air. ('alloway stunts to install the nett ded in the corner ill the prupei that is [are]V used hCCUUJe it is usuallt wet Zinc] did not think it ttould impact the foundation ur looters. Mr. Galeal thoueht there could he It swats in the rear hard. AIs. Serle. said the Building Department will look into that it ximance is amnted. Mr. K,1hm thought his concerns v ould headdressed hN the Building Ucparununt when permits arc pulled. Mr. Macke tt as cuncemal about the resident building in a shale area. Art Pepomo pointed Out that the current shed is at the totter end of the stomas Shed silo_ Ile would he more Imnrable to one larger shed that min be slighth bigger than vthat is permitted. rather thin) hw torianees. Poll. Pupotto suggested the applicant get alone inttmudtiun Zibout the current shed and the deck that the Building erwork Department does not have papfor_ flu applicant asked to be tabled until the nest nxeting. pending snore intonualion.