09/26/1996 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED BOARD OF BUII.DING CODE APPEALS MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 26, 1996 1. ROLL CALL: Chairman Burk called the meeting to order at 732 p.m. Present: P. Engoglia, J. Kazak, and R. Burk. Absent: W. Piar and D. Spoerke. Also present: Assistant Bu.ilding Commissioner Rymarczyk and Clerk of Commissions Oring. U. REVIEW AND CORRECTIONS OF NIINLJTES: J. Kazak moved to accept the minutes for June 27, 1996, Ju1y 10, 1996, and Ju1y 31, 1996, seconded by P. Engoglia, and unauunously approved. III. COMMUNICATIONS: No items. N. HEARINGS: 1) Daryl Davis, 27516 Butternut Ridge Road, Request variance to keep slab for a non-conforming garage foundation since the slab does not have 4 inch curbs and is not 8 inch above finish grade as required. Also, the untreated lumber and siding ranges between 8 inch and 5 inch offfinish grade (minimum of 8 inch is required for framing and 6 inch for sidiug"). Violations of Chapter 1305.04, Sections R209.2(c)ii and R 308. Chairman Burk administered to Mr. J. Duffy, attorney, representing Mrs. Davis. Assistant Building Commissioner Rymarczyk advised that a permit had not been taken out originally. Mr. Engoglia explained that he was on the properiy, and was told by a resident that a permit had been taken out. Mrs. Davis is the landlord and does not live on the premises. Mr. Duffy presented a permit and it was determined that it was taken out after the garage was started. It was clarified that since the permit was taken out by the homeowner, there would not be a double fee. Mr. Duffy believed that a permit had been issued prior to construction of the garage, and Mrs. Davis had presented drawings; and the inspector had noted on the plans that the curb was required. Mrs. Davis, who is not knowledgeable in these matters, had a builder replace the garage, but she failed to give him the approved plans with the notations so he built the garage with the original plans. However, he has looked at the garage and is aware that it is in violation, at least as far as the curb is concerned. He is asking the board to grant a variance, since the original garage was in very bad condition. Mr. Duffy stated that Mrs. Davis did not intend to violate the code, it was an innocent mistake, but since she used most of lier inheritance to have the garage built, it would be a major hardship to have the garage torn down in order to redo the slab and re-build the garage. He noted that most of the older, detached garages in the city were built before this code was in place and they do not conform either. He believed that since the slab is about 4 inches above the ground, the pu.rpose of the ordinance might be served. He noted that the garage is set back from the street in a wooded area and would not be visible from the street. He asked that the , board grant a variance, because it would be a major hardship for Mrs. Davis to have the slab redone unless there was an alternative method that would be less demanding, then she would comply. Mr. Burk and Mr. Engoglia agreed that the slab was about 4 inches the grade except for the doorway. The members agreed that the garage could be jacked up and the curb could be poured without a big