My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/18/2003 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
2003
>
2003 Board of Building Code Appeals
>
09/18/2003 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:49:17 PM
Creation date
1/28/2019 7:33:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
2003
Board Name
Board of Building Code Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
9/18/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
CITY OF NO1tTH OLMSTED <br />"TOGETHER WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE" <br />BOARD OF BUILDING CODE APPEALS <br />AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 18, 2003 <br />IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS <br />5:30 P.M. <br />I. ROLL CALL: <br />Chairman Puzzitiello called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. <br />PRESENT: Board members; M. Conway, P. Engoglia and N. Althen. , <br />ABSENT: Chairman R. Puzzitiello and Board member R. Klesta. <br />ALSO PRESENT: Building Commissioner D. Conway, and Clerk of Commissions D. Rote. <br />II. REVIL-EW AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES: <br />The Board of Building Code Appeals minutes for September 4, 2003 have been submitted <br />for approval. <br />Acting chairman Engoglia indicated that the board would defer addressing the September 4, <br />2003 minutes until meeting next. <br />M. OLD BUSINESS: <br />William & Susan. Minnich, 3474 West 231St Street, VVRD2 <br />A variance for an adjacent board fence 9 inches west of the property line. <br />(1369.03 (a) (3)) General requirements for fences: Where a neighbor has already installed <br />a fence along a property line, an additional fence will not be permitted. <br />NOTE: This proposal was tabled on 8/21/03 and 9/04/03. <br />Acting Chairman Engoglia called all interested parties forward to review the request. Mr. <br />Minnich came forward to address his request. Mr. Engoglia reviewed that the board <br />received a letter from the neighbor but could not accept it as it suggests that the neighbor <br />would have the right to remove the section of fence on his lot at any time. 1dIr. Minnich <br />indicated that he had not seen the letter and has tried to work something out but with the <br />new changes, he would just like to erect the fence and leave a 9-inch gap between the <br />fences. Mr. Wiebausch requested that the board table the issue again until he retains a <br />lawyer. The Commissioners did not feel that the applicant should be held up any longer. <br />Mr. Conway suggested that he would be reluctant to keep the applicant from fencing in his <br />own yard. Discussion suggesting the fence be placed two feet from rear property line took <br />place, Mr. Minnich did not feel it would be fair to him when the neighbor is only 9 inches <br />off his property line. He felt it was his responsibility to protect his neighbors from his dogs <br />but if the issue could not be settled he would just build a fence to what code allows. Mr. <br />Wiebausch felt that there had to be something between the end of his fence and the <br />applicant's fence or the dogs would get out. Mr. Engoglia did not think it was fair to the <br />applicant to have to wait another month. Mr. Conway advised the board members that they <br />needed to determine where the fence is to be place. Mr. VJesta questioned if the applicant <br />would be willing to move the fence inward. Mr. Minnich commented that he did not want
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.