My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
09-28-09
Washington-Twp
>
Development Services
>
BZA
>
Meeting Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2009
>
09-28-09
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2015 11:22:53 AM
Creation date
12/29/2009 1:31:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Date
9/28/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES <br />September 28, 2009 <br /> <br />The Washington Township Board of Zoning Appeals met in regular session on Sept 28, 2009 in the <br />Meeting Room of Washington Township Government Center. Members of the Board present were Mr. <br />Horine, Mr. Schwartz, Mr. Roberts, and Mrs. Mulligan. Mrs. Fish was excused. Ms. Miller served as <br />alternate. <br />Call to order at 7:00 p.m. <br />Mr. Horine explained the hearing format and voting procedure. <br />The Oath was administered by Mr. Horine. <br />Case A-1586: Katie & Chris Levens, 5487 Marshall Road <br />Request under Article 2, Section 3; an Administrative Appeal of the Zoning Inspector for his decision <br />dated June 30, 2008. <br /> <br />James Wahl, Zoning Manager presented the case going through slide show explaining zoning inspector’s <br />action. This case was originally heard by the board in June, 2008 for a setback variance to build an <br />addition to the existing building. One condition of the approval was screening to block vehicle headlights <br />shining onto the adjoining property. This pending complaint was filed for an administrative appeal to the <br />inspector’s determination that the fence was decorative lattice that did not provide sufficient screening. <br />Katie Levens 5487 Marshall Road, as you can see in the motion passed by the BZA we were to provide <br />screening to a six foot height. WE discussed our plans with township staff and they concurred it. The <br />current trellis includes climbing roses that will provide the screening required. The original complaint was <br />about light which is a non-issue as there is no light shining in the neighbor’s windows. <br />I have pictures which I took early this morning with my vehicle headlights on and, as you can see, there is <br />no light issue. <br />Mr. Horine noted that he had added the work “solid” in the written motion referencing the fence as an <br />indication that the board meant something solid, not vegetation. <br />Ms. Levens – There is no lighting issue since there is a six foot privacy fence at the back of her yard. <br />They agreed to install the trellis as requested by the board in order to proceed with the building addition. <br />She chose a trellis with vegetation as it seemed more fitting with what the township prefers. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.