My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/02/1992 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1992
>
1992 Board of Zoning Appeals
>
09/02/1992 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:32:16 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 6:47:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1992
Board Name
Board of Zoning Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
9/2/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
a <br />M 8 !? <br />Chairman Gomersall called a]Ll interested parties before the Board. The oath was <br />administered to Mr. and Mrs. Roff who explained that Lighthouse Pools had not <br />told them that a permit was needed Lmtil after they received the citation. Mre <br />Gomersall would like the Building Department to send a letter to Lighthouse Pools <br />warning them that if this ha.ppens again they will have to appear before the Board <br />of Building Code Appeals for a hearing regarding revoking their license. B. Grace <br />moved to grant to Bill and Amy Roff, 3410 Dawn Drive, a 196 square foot variance <br />to install pool which will exceed the 20% coverage of the rear yard, seconded by <br />R. Gomersall, and imanimousl_y approved. Variance grarited. <br />3. Bob D. Cutler, 5927 Barton Rd. <br />Request for variance (1123.12). Request 418 square foot variance for garage area <br />to construct detached garage (existing attached garage on property)v Violation of <br />Ord. 90-125, Section 1135o0?_(c)1. <br />Chairman Gomersall called a11 interested parties before the Board. The oath was <br />aciministered to Mr. Cutler who explained that he wanted to store his 4 cars in a <br />garagea The members had no objections since the lot is so deep. B.-Grace moved to <br />grant a variance for Bob D. Cutler, 5927 Barton Road, for a 418 square foot <br />variance for garage area to construct a detached ga.rage (existing attached garage <br />on property), seconded by W. Purper, and unanimously approved. Variance grantedo <br />4. Charles J. Wollenzier, 23412 Marion Rd. <br />Request for variance (1123.12). Request 2 foot side setback variance and 7 foot <br />rear setback variance to replace existing detached garage. Violation of Ord. <br />90-125, Section 1135.02(c). <br />Chairman Gomersall called a11 interested parties before the Board. The oath was <br />administered to Mr. and.Mrs. Wollenzier. N1r. Gomersall believed that this would <br />be an improvement. J. Maloney moved to grant Charles J. Wollenzier, 23412 Marion <br />Road a a 2 foot side setback variance and a 7 foot rear setback variance to <br />replace existing detached garage, seconded by R. Gomersall, and tmanimously <br />approved. Variances granted.. <br />5e Jeffery Buza, 4366 Coe Ave._ <br />Request for variance (1123.12). Request 1 foot rear yard variance to install new <br />deck and awning over existing concrete pad. Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section <br />1135.08(a). <br />Chairman Gomersall called all interested parties before the Board. The oath was <br />admi.nistered to Mr. Buza., Mr. Gomersall complemented Mr. Buza on the many <br />improvements he had made to his property. R. Gomersall moved to grant the <br />variance to Jeffery Buza, 4366 Coe Avenue for a 1 foot rear yard variance to <br />install a new deck and awna_ng over existing concrete pad, seconded by B. Grace, <br />and unanimously approved. Variance granted. <br />6. Egghead Software, 24942 Lorain Road. ? <br />Request for variance (1123.12). Request 42 square foot variance for total sign <br />area for a business unito Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section 1163.11(c). <br />Chairman Gomersall called all interested parties before the Board. The oath was <br />administered to Mr. Burge and Mrs. Kate, sign contractors. T2r. Gomersall stated <br />that this sign was too big and should conform to the others in the shopping <br />center. Mr. Burge explained that the owners are from out of town, and were misled <br />by the terms of their lease which states they could have 80% of the store front <br />in signage if the sign was less than 35 feet. Mr. Burge has advised them that he <br />doubted that the variance would be approved. He asked if the Board would approve <br />2 feet high letters for "Egghead" which would conform with the other signs on the <br />?
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.