09/02/1992 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 !• ? ~ on the mansard, and he estimated this would be about 30 square feet. Building Commissioner Conway studied this and advised that thi.s appears to conform to the code. The applicant withdrew the request. 7. Szarka's Restaurant, 29691 Lorain Rd. Request for variance (1123.12). Request 10 foot variance for side yard landscape buffer. Also request 30 foot front setback variance to construct addition. Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section 1139.07. Also request special permit to add to non-conforming building (front setback). Special permission required Ord. 90-125, Section 1165.02(b)1. Chairman Gomersall called all interested parties before the Board. The oath was administered to Mr. Ingrassia, builder; and neighbors, Mr. and Mrs. Anders and Mrs. Gladwin and her son-in-law, Mr. Plunkett. Mr. Ingrassia presented a revised site plan and explained that the addition has been increased to 36 feet long, instead of 30 feet and will house a reception area with rest rooms (relocated from the basement) and a new entrance (the entrance is now on west side of the building); a 20 foot landscape buffer has been added in the front; and handi- capped spaces are shown. Building Coirnnissioner Conway stated that the parking conforms to code,, but cautioned that the Planning Commission is not aware that the addition is to be 6 foot longer. Mrs. Anders objected because the building is non-conforming now, the addition will also be in the front setback, and that the parking would not conform to code. Mr. Ingrassia advised that the seating will be reduced from 90 to 72 so less parking will be required, and explained that the front landscaping will be increased. Mrs. Gladwin, who lives to the east of the parking lot, was concerned about safety, since a car did crash into her yard, damaging her fence and a tree; she pointed out that the addition will remove the parking spaces where most customers parked previously, so now they will have to park next to her property, and the headlights will shine into her lot. She maintained that the 3 foot strip between their parking lot and her property line was not well maintained and the parking lot is about 3 feet higher than her property. She mentioned other concerns: the trash enclosure will be next to her property line; a light has been relocated so it shines into her back yard; and that large delivery trucks might have more difficulty maneuvering into the parking lot because of the addition. The members agreed that a guard rail and a fence should be installed, and suggested that the dumpster be relocated toward the middle of the property. At this point Mr. Patterson and Mr. Lash, new owners of the property, were sworn in. Mr. Gomersall explained Mrs. Gladwin's concerns which the members agreed were valid. Mr. Conway explained that the Planning Commission usually required a 6 foot privacy fence. The developers pointed out that there was shrubbery along that line. Mr. Conway suggested that Mrs. Gladwin attend the Planning Commi.ssion meeting September 8th. B. Grace moved to grant a 10 foot variance for side yard landscape buffer; a 30 foot front setback variance to construct an addition; and a special permit to add to a non-conforming building with the stipulations that the pole light be realigned so as not to shine into the neighbor's yard; the trash enclosure be relocated more toward,the middle of the property; a safety barrier or guard rail and a 6 foot privacy fence be installed along the east property line for length of the area where the parking spaces are marked, seconded by R. Gomersall, and unanimously approved. Mr. Patterson questioned why a 6 foot fence was needed, and was advised that, after the parking lot had been installed, this property became 2 or 3 feet higher than the adjacent property. Variances and special permit granted. 8. Charles Jones, 26730 Butternut Ridge Road. Request for variance (1123.12). Request 6 foot side yard variance for drive (constructing detached garage). Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section 1135.07(a). 3