06/06/2016 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BUILDING & ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED MINUTES OF JUNE 6, 2016 ROLL CALL Chairman Raig called the meeting to order at 7:07 pm in Council Chambers and led the Pledge of Allegiance. Present: Michael Raig, Bob Papotto, Melissa Meredith, Eric Allain (arrived during case 16-6001) Absent: Donna Sabo Staff: Law Director Michael Gareau, Assistant Building Commissioner Dan Russell, Planner James Aspery, Administrative Assistant Nicole Rambo REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES Ms. Meredith moved, seconded by Mr. Papotto, to approve the Building & Zoning Board of Appeals minutes of May 2, 2016, motion passed 3-0. RESIDENTIAL APPEALS AND REQUESTS 16-5923; Jerome Buescher; 23461 Stonevbrook Representative: Jerome Buescher, owner Proposal consists of a 6 ft. high fence. The property is zoned One Family Residence C. The following variances are requested: 1. A variance for a solid wood fence in the front building setback of the abutting property; code permits 50% open fence, applicant shows a solid wood fence, Section 1135.02(f)(1). 2. A 42 in. variance for a 6 ft. high solid fence in the front building setback of the abutting property; code permits 30 in., applicant shows 72 in., Section 1135.02(f)(1). 3. A variance for a 6 ft. high fence located on a corner lot within the front building setback of the abutting lot on the side street; code does not allow, applicant shows a 6 ft. high fence on a corner lot within the front building setback of the abutting lot, Section 1135.02(f)(2). Mr. Aspery stated that the property is at the intersection of Stoneybrook Drive and Greenwood Lane with frontage on Greenwood Lane. A new solid wood 6' high fence with lattice top would enclose most of the back yard porch area. A setback of 22 feet from the sidewalk is proposed. Code allows a fence in the front building setback so long as it is 50% open and no more than 30 inches high. The proposed fence will be stained to match the existing fence along the neighboring property line to the east. Applicant has also requested a variance to allow a 6 ft. fence within the front setback of the abutting lot on the side street. Mr. Buescher stated that he removed old arborvitae and chose to replace them. The applicant would like to install a privacy fence because half of the replacement arborvitae did not survive. Mr. Papotto clarified that the fence will be in line with the face of the garage and just off of the edge of the patio. Ms. Meredith ensured that the fence will not run along the rear property line; it will only go along the sides of the property. Mr. Papotto said the two corner lots are wide open without the arborvitae and there is no privacy, Ms. Meredith and Mr. Raig agreed.