Laserfiche WebLink
e <br />? <br />? <br />CI'TY OF NOR'TH OY.IVIS'I'EI) <br />"TOGETHElZ WE CAN 1VIAKE A DIEFFERENCE" <br />BOA12ID OI+ ZONIloT? APPEAI,S <br />MINi7TES- OCTOBEflS 4, 2,001 <br />IN COiTNCIL CHAIVIBER5 <br />7:30 PM <br />L ROLL CALL: <br />Chairman, Maloney called the meeting to order, at 7:30 p.m. <br />PRESENT: Chairman, J. Maloney, Board members, W. Kremzar, J. Konold and T. Koberna. <br />ABSENT: Board members, T. Kelley. <br />ALSO PRESENT: Law Director, M. Gareau, Building Commissioner, D. Conway. and Clerk of <br />Commissions, D. Rote. <br />II. REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES: The Board of Zoning Appeals minutes of September <br />6, 2001 have b-een submitted for approval: W. Kremzar motioned to approve the September 6, 2001 minutes as submitted. The motion was <br />seconded by T. Koberna and unanimously approved. <br />Chairman Maloney advised that there would be .14 cases requesting a total of 29 variances. At the <br />September 6, 2001 meeting the case of Carol Hawen of 4610 Kew Drive was carried over to this <br />meeting. However, Ms. Hawen notified the clerlc that she was withdrawing her application. The <br />Chairman further advised that each board member had viewed the premises involved for each case. <br />Three votes are required for approval. In addition each case will be judged on the physical situation <br />peculiar to itself, so that in no way is a judgment rendered considered to be a general policy judgment <br />affecting properties and like situations elsewhere. <br />III. BUII_,DING DEPARTMENT-REQUESTS: <br />1. James Fetterman: 25082 Randall Dr. <br />Request for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of building a shed. The following variances <br />are requested; <br />1) A 7 ft. 6 inch variance for rear lot line setback (code requires 10 ft., applicant shows'2 ft. 6 <br />inches), section (1135.02 D-4). <br />2) A 28 square ft. variance for exceeding 2% lot coverage (code permits 52 square ft., applicant <br />shows 80 square ft.), section (1135.02 D-1). <br />Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section, 1135.02 D-l, and 1135.02 D-4. <br />Chairman Maloney called all interested parties forward to review the request. Mr. Fetterman the <br />owner came forward to be sworn in and address his request. Mr. & Mrs. Steal, neighbors also came <br />forward to be sworn in ancl review the request. Mr. Fetterman indicated that he did not have enough <br />room in the garage for his tools and grandchildren's toys. He suggested that he had a small yard and <br />by following city code requirements the shed would end up in the middle of the yard. Mr. Maloney <br />indicated that he understood the distance but there is an easement for the power lines and the <br />applicant could be asked to: move the shed at a later date, if CEI needed to work in the area. The <br />shed should be at least 5 feet from the rear property line, 2.5 feet is to close. Mr. Kremzar indicated <br />that there were other items in the rear of the yard that are not shown on the plans. He questioned <br />what the size of the shed would be. Mr. Fetterman indicated that it was a 10' X 8' shed. Mrs. Steal <br />indicated that she was not against the shed being built. However, she is concerned about things being <br />stored behind the shed and what time the workers would be working. Mr. Maloney indicated that the