My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/02/1983 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1983
>
1983 Board of Zoning Appeals
>
11/02/1983 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:34:22 PM
Creation date
1/30/2019 5:03:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1983
Board Name
Board of Zoning Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
11/2/1983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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 NOVEMBER 2, 1983 PAGE 3 <br />1157.01A. Request 20' variance for depth of lot (135' required). Violation of <br />Ord. 62-33, Section 1157.01C. <br />B) Request for variance (1133.13). Request 10' front set back variance to move <br />house on sublot 2. Violation of Ord. 62-33, Section 1159.01. Also request 11' <br />rear set back variance for same. Violation of Ord. 62-33, Section 1163.01. <br />Chairman Remmel called all interested parties before the Board. The oath was <br />administered to Mr. Wright and several neighbors. It was explained that the <br />existing three lots are to be, subdivided into two. Both lots will need variances <br />to conform to the square foot requirements in a"B" residential neighborhood, and <br />lots are not deep enough to conform to the minimum 135' depth requirement. Mr. <br />Wright would like to move the former City owned home (Department of Human Re- <br />sourses building) onto sublot 2. This will require a 10' front yard variance <br />and an 11 foot rear yard variance. It was explained that a variance would be <br />required to build any house on the property. Since there have been two rezoning <br />requests before Council on this property, neighbors are concerned that house might <br />be used for commercial purposes. This is not Mr. Wright's intent, and also any <br />further rezoning attempt would have to have public hearings and neighbors would <br />again be notified. Neighbors agreed they would like to see property developed <br />residentially. L. Horvath moved to grant the variance for Ben K. Wright, se- <br />conded by E. Graves, and unanimously approved. <br />9. Richard Hansen, 31040 Lorain Rd. <br />Request for variance (1133.13). Request 4' front set back variance for addition <br />(existing dwelling to be converted to commercial). Violation of.Ord. 62-33, <br />f Section 1174.02. Also request special permit to add to non-conforming bu'ilding. <br />Special permission required Ord. 62-33, Section 1231.02. <br />Chairman Remmel called all interested parties before the Board. The oath was <br />administered to Mr. & Mrs. Hanson who presented a mQdel of the proposed addition <br />and alteration. The front porch will be extended across the front of the house <br />for a show room. Board questioned parking. Building Commissioner Gundy stated <br />that there is ample space to the rear to add parking if this particular layout <br />does not conform to code. Mr. Hanson had not submitted parking plan to him as <br />yet. Proposal will have to go to Planning Commission and parking will be re- <br />viewed at this time. Building must be subject to all building codes. C. Remmel <br />moved to grant the 4' front set back variance and the special permit subject to <br />approval of Planning Commission and the Architectural Board of Review, and to <br />all building codes, seconded by T. Restifo, and unanimously approved. Variance <br />and special permit granted. <br />10, Neil R. Bower, 5961 Louis Dr. <br />Request for variance (1133.13)e Request variance to have electrif ied wire on <br />top.of fence to contain horses. Violation of Ord. 62-33, Section 1151.04H. <br />Chairma.n Remmel called all interested parties before the Board. The oath was <br />administered to Mr. Bowers and neighborse Mr. Crowly a neighbor has no objection <br />and is pleased that fence is keeping horses within yard. Mr. Yesberger of North <br />Olmsted Golf Cours stated that he was concerned regarding his liability if a <br />golfer gets hurt by the electricity. He appreciates the fact that this fence <br />contains the horses-and keeps them off the course. Mr. Bower stated that the <br />fence is 6" inside his property and the amount of voltage is not dangerous. <br />He has 4 children and does not fear any danger to them. Mrs. Gadd, whose husband
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.