10/06/1993 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

be a financial hardship since a 6 foot evergreen cost about $150.00 to $170.00 per tree. Mr. Purper stated that this is the same type fence as was installed at the corner of Butternut Ridge and Great Northern, which has received several favorable comaients. Mr. Martin stated that he lived directly across the street and has no objection, and he noted.that Mrs. Williams lives down the street a bito He also pointed out that the Fo1tz's have a lovely yard. Mrs. Willi:ams also is concerned that the fence will -deteriorate and become unsightly. Mr. Gomersall stated that at first he did not agree with this request, however this type of fence is very attractive and also since Mr. Foltz has stated that if the bushes die, he will put more in, he cannot see how there can be an argtunent against it. Mr. Foltz presented signatures of some neighbors stating that they have no problem with the fence. W. Purper moved to grant the request of William and Amy Foltz, 6828 Warrington Drive, for a 15 foot variance for location of 6 foot high fence which is required to be located at the setback line of the abutting property, seconded by J. Maloney and imanimously approved. Variance granted. OLD BUSINESS: Chairman Gomersall asked Law Director Gareau if it, would be legal to give the Building Commissioner the right to approve a face change in a pole sign when the sign will be the same and only the copy changed. Mr: Gareau suggested that the board could make a ruling to that effect. Mr. Conway stated that in some circumstances where a sign is enormous, he would like to have an opportunity to bring it to the board and he also suggested that there should be a time limit stipulated that will be before the time these signs are to be totally eliminated. It was decided that any non-conforning sign whose size was within 25% of conformity could be approved by the Building Commissioner. B. Gomersall moved that the board is going to adopt a rule that will provide that whenever an application is made to change the copy of an existing non-conforming pole sign which does not exceed 25% of the permitted size, it need not come before the Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance, this rule will remain in effect until 31 of December, 1996, seconded by J. Maloney, and unanimously approved. Rally's Restaurant, 27208 Lorain Road. Revised requests for variance granted November 5, 1992. Building Commissioner Conway presented a revised site plan for Rally's and explained that the Engineering Department had required that they relocate the drive as far west as possible which changed the site plan. They had to eli.minate some of the landscaping where the driveway had to curve. Also in order to align the structure with the driveway, the building had to be shifted 2 feet which put the building right at the 75 foot setback. The building is conforming, however the 3 foot canopies which were approved are no longer manufactured, and they can only get a 5 foot canopy with a 2 foot border across the front of the building. Consequently, there will be a 5 foot encroachment on the 75 foot side yard for the canopy and a 2 foot encroachment on the front so that the front set back will be 48 feet instead of 50 (they had received a 25 foot variance previously). These canopies are approximately 15 or 16 feet above the ground. B. Grace moved to let the record reflect that this matter dealing with Rally's is ba.ck before the Board of Zoning Appeals as a result of some modifications required by Engineering Department for purposes of safety dealing with the location of the driveway and as a result of that the variance that was previously granted with respect to the front setback of the building which was a 25 foot variance now be amended to be a 27 foot variance and there was no side yard variance, now that these mod:ifications have been made, that they be given a 5 foot side yard variance and that the front setback with respect to the 20 foot green strip be in accordance 7