Laserfiche WebLink
CT'I"Y OF NORTH OLMSTED <br />"TOGE'I'HER WE CAN 1VIAKE A DIFFERENCE" <br />BOE312D OF ZONING APPEALS <br />1VIINUTES - SEPTEMBER 2, 1999 <br />7:30PM <br />I. ROLL CALL: <br />Acting Chairman, Maloney called the meeting to order at 7:30pm. <br />PRESENT: Board members, J. Maloney, T. Koberna, W. Kremzar, and J. Konold <br />ABSENT: Chairman, R. Gomersall <br />ALSO PRESENT: Law Director, M. Gareau, Building Commissioner, D. Conway, and Clerk of <br />Commissions D. Rote. <br />II. REVIEW AND C012RECTION OF MINUTES: The Board of Zoning and Appeals minutes of August 5, <br />1999 have been submitted for review. <br />J. Konold motioned to approve the Board of Zoning and Appeals minutes dated August 5, 1999 as written. <br />The motion was seconded by, W. Kremzar and unanimously approved. <br />Acting Chairman Maloney advised that each case would be judged on the physical situation peculiar to <br />itself,, so that in no way is a judgment rendered considered to be a general policy judgment affectuig <br />properties and like situations elsewhere. <br />III. BUILDING DEPARTMENT REQUESTS: <br />Jeff Peepers: 6110 Bums Road: <br />Request for variance (1123.12). Proposal consists of placing a swiiruning pool in the rear yard. <br />The following variance is required: <br />1) A 238 square foot variance for rear yard coverage, (code pernuts 570.6sq ft, applicant shows 808sq <br />ft), (1135.02 2). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section, (1165.02) and (1135.02 2). Note: <br />Pernutted coverage is already exceeded by the combination of an existing deck, detached garage and shed. <br />Acting Chairman Maloney called all interested parties forward and reviewed the variance being requested. <br />Mr. & Mrs. Peepers came fonvard to review their request. Mr. Maloney asked Mr..Peepers to review his <br />request. Mr. Peepers indicated that he would like to have a pool in his back yard. The pool that was <br />chosen is the smallest pool the company makes. He suggested that the prior owners of the home added. the <br />deck as well as the shed. Mr. Maloney suggested that there wouldn't be much room left to the backyard if <br />the pool was added. Mrs. Peepers suggested they would have some room to planet a few things. Mr. <br />Konold indicated that he felt that the yard would be crowded. Mr. Kremzar indicated that he felt that <br />adding the pool would not leave much room to the backyard. Mr. Peepers suggested that the pool would <br />be lOfeet from the sideyard and SOfeet off the rear property line. It won't allow much playroom in the <br />backyard, but their children are older and it would be less grass for him to mow. Mrs. Peepers suggested <br />they had talked to their neighbors who indicated they didn't have a problem. Mr. Koberna indicated he <br />had no problem with the pool being added. <br />J. Konold motioned to approve Jeff.Peepers of 6110 Burns Road his request for variance (1123.12). <br />Proposal consisCs of placing a swunnung pool in the rear yard and that the following variance be granted: <br />A 238 square foot variance for rear yard coverage, (code pernuts 570.6sq ft, applicant shows 808sq ft), <br />(1135.02 2). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section, (1165.02) and (1135.02 2). The motion was <br />seconded by, W. Kremzar and unanimously approved. Variance Granted.