8/7/2023 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

showed 450 square feet. The new proposed shed was 18 feet by 25 feet by 9 feet high and the lot size; 34,412 sq. ft. Mr. Sharp explained the reason for the request was due to the current structure being in complete disrepair. He said that they would destroy the old structure and the new structure would be a benefit for the property. He expressed no concerns from himself and another neighbor and believed with all of the equipment Mr. Brunello had, he was in need of the additional storage on his property. There were no comments from city staff. Board members asked if the carport was going to be taken down and if the new shed was going in the same place as the old shed. Both were answered with a yes. Mr. Rahm mad e a motion; seconded by Mr. Kovach; to approve 23-24835; Anthony Brunello; 25417 Butternut Ridge Rd. Board members entered into their discussion and agreed the old shed was in disrepair and needed to be removed. They also agreed the applicant demonstrated a need for the extra storage. Mr. Papotto agreed with all except he felt the building structure size was too large and was not in favor. Motion Passed: 4-1; Mr. Papotto opposed. 23-24848; Ralph Weber; 6678 Wedgewood Dr. Representative: Adrian Rondini; Superior Fence and Rail at 6039 Engle Rd. Middleburg Hts. Ms. Seeley explained the case was for a fence in the side and rear yard of a corner lot. This was a 16 ft. variance for the setback of a fence in the side and rear yard of a corner lot. The code required 20 ft., applicant showed 4 ft. Mr. Rondini explained they were taking down the chain link fence and from the street the setback was 20 ft. however, technically that wasn't correct and that the street setback actually began at the sidewalk which is why they are requesting the 4 ft. variance. The other problem he explained was the tree in Mr. Weber's yard. If they went 20 ft. from the sidewalk the tree would have had to be taken down which they didn't want to have to do. Mr. Upton expressed that the city would prefer to keep as much of the tree canopy as it possibly could, so keeping the tree would be better in his opinion. Mr. Rahm made a motion; seconded by Mr. Kovach; to approve 23-24848; Ralph Weber; 6678 Wedgewood Dr. Board members entered into a discussion; Mr. Kovach, Mr. Rahm, Mr. Mackey and Ms. Patton all agreed they were in favor due to the tree issue. Mr. Papotto was in disagreement specifically to how close the fence was to the sidewalk. Motion Passed: 4-1 Mr. Papotto opposed.