2003-02-11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING HELD 2/11/03 Present: Lloyd Frink, Chair, Susan Ruder, Vice Chair, Mike Kocan, Newell Russell, Dave Crawford and Mary Ann Bolander, Secretary Others Present: George Kolb John Tolliver Eileen Sassmann Peter McDonald Margaret Cuccia Elizabeth Smith Garcha Bupinder Joseph Guarino Dawna Chase Raymond Harp Lou Viglotti Dennis O'Brien Peggie McDonald Charles McDonald Susan Masterson Philip Kenney, Esq. Will Paltridge Tom Borgia Judy Morris Bob Morris Meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. Secretary took roll and all members were present. At this point Mr. Frink made a motion for the Board to go into Executive Session, seconded by Mr. Crawford. On roll call vote - Mr. Frink - Aye, Mr. Crawford - Aye, Mr. Russell - Aye and Ms. Ruder - Aye. Mr. Kocan was not present for the vote but arrived while Board was in Executive Session. Board returned to regular session at 7:58 p.m. JOHN TOLLIVER, 16 NORTH MESIER AVENUE Mr. Frink excused himself from this heating as he is a personal friend of Mr. Tolliver's. Mr. Tolliver had received an area variance last month but there has been a change in facts. The Board received a letter from Mr. Kolb regarding the area variance Mr. Tolliver received last month. Ms. Ruder read Mr. Kolb's letter dated January 23, 2003 into the record. Mr. Kolb stated last month Mr. Tolliver was granted an area variance for the setback of his property. Upon Mr. Kolb's visual inspection of the property there is a significant overhang on his sturcntre that was not noted on the survey that Mr. Tolliver provided to the Board. He went on to state that our zoning code does allow for a 2'6" overhang into the approved/required setback. The problem is that Mr. Tolliver does not have the required set back and therefore the 2'6" overhang should not be allowed to increase the non-conformity. Mr. Kolb's feels the information provided by the applicant last month was incorrect and therefore the Board should be made aware of this fact and be able to vote for a rehearing if they deem so. Ms. Ruder stated for the record the information supplied by Mr. Tolliver, i.e. the sketch of the structure and the survey does not show an overhang. She also went on to state that the Board did not do a visual inspection of the property so they had no way of knowing that this existed at the time the variance was granted. Ms. Ruder stated that her understanding of the ZBA is to hear appeals of decisions based on the Code Enforcement Officer and if the Code Enforcement Officer interprets the code in such a way that the overhang should not be extended into the area- the ZBA can hear an appeal to the original decision.