02/03/1993 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, ,r . '. request had an attached garage and a separate, oversized, detached garage, the seaond request had a 24 by 56 foot garage on either side. This proposal has one attached, 24 by 56 foot, garage which includ.es a 624 square foot workshop. Mr. Creadon clarified that there would be . a fireproof wall and a metal door -between -- the garage and the workshop, and the door would be large enough for a car to fit through; and there will be an 8 foot sliding glass door on the rear wall of the workshop. Law Director Gareau questioned why a workshop is considered garage area. Mr. Conway responded that since a vehicle can be put in it, he considered it a garage. If no vehicle could be stored in it, no variance zaould be required. Mr: Conway advised Mr. Creadon that he could not indiscriminately repair cars, technically the code states that a garage is only for the storage of vehicles, but people do minor work in their garages, but he still must adhere to rules concerning bothering his neighbors. Mr. Creadon stated that he worked only on his own cars, he does not work on cars at night, he has no oil spots on his drive in the condominium where he lives now and has had no complaints from his neighbors. This shop would be both a metal and a wood working shop, but there would be no lift or pit, it would have electric heat, and there would be an air compressor, a welding machine, drill, press and possibly a small lathe. Mr. Grace believed that is an improvement and noted that no neighbors were present to object. Mr. Creadon pointed out that the garage door has been reduced to 8 foot. Mr. Gomersall still believed that this request was too big. Ms. Shields pointed out that once a car is being worked on it becomes inunobilized and other cars have to be stored outside. Mr. Gareau agreed that this a vast improvement and noted that only a wa]1 makes the distinction between a garage and a shop. The members agreed that this was an improvement. Mr. Creadon clarified that ane half of the sliding glass door in the rear wall would not be removable and no car could be driven though it. Ms. Shields reminded the members that they had 5 vehicles. B. Grace moved to approve the request for a 624 square foot variance for garage area to add a workshop behind conforming attached garage, for R. Creadon and M. Shields, s/1 133-134 Broxbourne Road, seconded by R. Gomersall. Roll call on motion: Grace, Gomersall, Maloney, and Purper, yes. Mr. Koberna had abstained. Variance granted. 10. Crossroad Olds, Inc. (Oldsmobile of North Olmsted), 27871-81 Lorain Road. Request for variance (1123.12). Request variance to keep prohibited existing pole sign. Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section 1163,22(a). Proposal heard by Planning Commission January 12, 1993 and by Architectural Reviexe Board January 20, 1993 and Withdrawn from Planning Commission agenda of January 26, 1993. No representative present. At the end of the meeting the request was continued until next month. 11. Nightfall Night Club, 30850 Lorain Road. Request for variance (1123.12). Request variance for landscape buffers: 13 foot variance on Lorain Road and 17 foat variance on Hickory Lane. Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section 1139.07. Also request 1 foot 8 inch height variance for frame of ground sign; request variance for the changeable copy portion of sign; and variance for location which is in the prohibited 35 foot triangular area. Violations of Ord. 90-125, Sections 1163.03(b)(2)(A); 1163.04(k); 1163.09(a); and 1163.12(b). Chairrian Gomersall called a11 interested pa.rties before the board. Mr. Martin, architect, and A1r. Thomas, owner of the property ca.me forward. Building Commissioner Conway explained that this proposal has been before Planning ComirLission and Architectural Review Board to atte.mpt to lessen the impact of- business on the neighbors to the rear. To accomplish this, Planning Commission had agreed that the setback requirements could be reduced in order to allow for 6