My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07/06/1988 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1988
>
1988 Board of Zoning Appeals
>
07/06/1988 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:31:20 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 4:16:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1988
Board Name
Board of Zoning Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
7/6/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS JULY 6, 1988 PAGE 2 <br />purchased land from adjacent properties, the Ground Round Restaurant which <br />was in violation of the parking ordinance and the Ashland Oil Company which <br />does not conform to the existing ordiances. He maintains that the proposal . <br />has had all sorts of variances and special treatment, and there is now a <br />choice between giving the variance or removing the trees, he pointed out <br />that there is a third choice which would be reducing the size of the building. <br />Mr. Zayac responded that only one variance was granted for the driveways <br />which originally were more than 120 feet apart. He maintains that they have <br />met the ordinances of the city, and that they are requesting this variance <br />at the request of Council, the BZD Committee, the forester, and the Planning <br />Commission. Mr. Kouri pointed out that this configuration of the drives <br />would improve the traffic flow since the driveways are further away from <br />Walter Road. Mr. Wendell stated that these two trees are very old and that <br />too many trees have been removed from Lorain Road previously thus creating <br />an eyesore. A neighbor contended that having too many vacant strip centers <br />also created an eyesore on Lorain Road. Mrs. Abbot believes that there <br />have been many interpretations made that favored the developer, and that the <br />residents were never-given an opportunity to express their.opinion to the Council. It was clarified that the development required 266 parking spaces <br />and they were requesting a variance to reduce this by 19 spaces. Mr. Gomersall <br />stated that the only issue before the Board was to grant the variance in order <br />to save the trees. Mr. Pattison stated that the forester has the right-to <br />forbide them from removing the trees and if the Board refuses to grant the <br />variance, as they have done in the past, and if they do not get permission <br />to remove the trees, they will have to reduce the size of the building. Law <br />Director Gareau stated that this Board has, in the past, granted variance in <br />order to save trees. Chairman Remmel, stated that the city has ma.de its • <br />decision regarding Lauren Hills, and that all the Board is to do is decide <br />if a variance should be granted in order to save these trees. C. Remmel <br />moved to grant the request for the variance for 19 parking spaces with the <br />condition that if those"trees are ever taken out, that those parking spaces <br />are returned, seconded by R. Bugala. Roll call on motion: Remmel, no. <br />Bugala and Gomersall, yes. At this point Mr. Remmel stated that he was <br />changino his vote to yes. Motion passed. Variance granted. The forester <br />advised the developers that there were cerain precautions that they would <br />have to take to save these trees. He would meet with them prior to construction. <br />Law Director Gareau advised the Board that he must leave the meeting to <br />attend a special Council meeting. <br />3. Sunset Memorial Park Association, 6265 Columbia Road <br />Request for ruling (1123.12). Request ruling to determine whether the <br />erection of a building to be used for services and viewing of deceased <br />persons is a permitted use in a residential district. (Section 1135.01). <br />Chairma.n Remmel called all interested parties before the Board. The oath was <br />administered to adjacent neighbors, A. Welms, H. Welms, B. Harrison, repre- <br />senting V. Harrison, D. Clingan, and W. Schiely;and to W. Giesser, attorney <br />and R. McConoughey, owner. The developers explained that they would like to <br />raze a house and three outbuildings in order to erect a chapel with three <br />rooms for services: Each viewing would be for 1 or 2 days, but they maintain <br />that this is not a funeral parlor since there would be no embalming on the <br />premises. They presently have a chapel for viewing in one room. Neighbors <br />are opposed on the basis of additional traffic stating that road is now heavily
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.