10/02/2023 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

second variance requested a seven -foot deviation from the maximum allowed width of 24 feet for a driveway serving an attached garage. with the applicant proposing a width of 31 feet. Mr. Casedonte explained that he has been residing in the house since 2007. He expressed his intention to pour a pad for the driveway extension to match the existing "bump out" width of 31 feet. which has been gravel since he moved in. He highlighted the historical context of the driveway, dating back to the original construction of the house in 1952. He emphasized the aesthetic improvement and alignment provided by extending the driveway to the specified widths. He also noted his belief that the setback distance mitigates any potential concerns from neighbors, concluding with a request for consideration. Mr. Kovach moved to approve 23-25326. Mark Casedonte: 23456 Mastick Road: seconded by Ms. Patton. Board members agreed the concrete would look better than the gravel and the need for the size was aureed with. Motion Passed: 4-0 23-25352; Brad Bierman; 27922 North Park Drive Representative: Brad Bierman: 27922 North Park Drive Ms. Seeley stated that the proposal involves a new shed with three variance requests. Firstly. a variance is sought for a second storage building on a residential lot. with the applicant proposiih-1 two whereas the code permits one. Secondly. a variance of 284 square feet is requested for the combined size of storage buildings. with the applicant proposing 484 square feet while the code allows only 200 square feet. Lastly, a two -foot variance is requested for the height of the storage building, with the applicant proposing 14 feet while the code allows only 12 feet. The property currently has two existing shed with one beino removed. The shed to remain is 10 by 10, totaling-, 100 square feet. while the proposed newshed measures 16 feet by 24 feet by 14 feet high. The lot size is just under an acre, at 34.700 square feet. Mr. Bierman stated the request was for a small building designated for hobby woodworkin,. distinct from the existing shed which will continue to store lawn equipment. The proposed location is chosen to be concealed from the roadway. positioned behind the house and lower than the house's roofline to minimize visibility. With the plan to remove the lesser quality- shed and retain the existing one, the new building's presence should not raise concerns for neighbors or passerby. The board members inquired if there was a way to achieve woodworking needs without requiring such a large shed. to which Mr. Bierman responded negatively, citing safety and utility as driving factors for the shed's dimensions. He explained the necessity of ample space for maneuvering large boards, highlighting that anything smaller than the proposed size would be impractical. Mr. Bierman confirmed that the shed at the rear of the property would be removed. while the one closer to the house would be retained.