My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/19/1961 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1961
>
1961 Board of Zoning Appeals
>
12/19/1961 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:36:08 PM
Creation date
1/31/2019 7:53:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1961
Board Name
Board of Zoning Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
12/19/1961
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
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
Nlinuted Dec. 199 1961 <br />Page 2 <br />Origi.nal application for permi.t was lost or misplaced by Mr. Steer. 1Vew <br />application was submitted tonight, Dec. 19s 1961, baek-dated Dec. 1., 19619 <br />and 1edenied" by TvIr. Gund,y, Building Comriissioner' per Ord. #2445. This new <br />application was aecepted to rep3.ace the original, and filed with the Board <br />of Zoning., Buildin.g Dept. Description of proposeci building is shown on <br />application form. <br />Appellant submitted map of proposed building and landscaping. Map shows <br />; n? tials of Mr. Geo. L. Blazey, 4724 Canterbury, owner of lot immediate],y <br />to the North of proposed buildings and initials of a Mr. Talman, lessee of <br />house next to Mr. &lazey, indicating they have no objection to building. <br />Di.rector of Law, Mr. Oviatt, was askeel to clarify l.egality of gas statios <br />having entrance on Canterburye A.dvice tiaas that as station is a corner 1ot <br />with frontage on Lorain, aEd a corner lot can have entrance f'rom the front <br />and the sidee Appellantts frontage is the back of the gas station, and not <br />Lorain, <br />Mr. Isl.inite cited that i£ appellantfs proposed building were later sold,- <br />city would haJe no control, of maintena.nce of I.andscaping, or i?ho mioht occupy <br />same. Also, Mx°. Klinite pointed out the possibi].ity of others 'quilding on <br />available lots facing Lorain and appellant"s lot used for parking facilities. <br />Canterbury- Roa.d residents at the meetixig, and Mr. Leonard, objected to grant- <br />inLy variance because: <br />1. Canterbury is a residential street. <br />2Q Too much traffic would be hazardous to children. <br />3. P!djaeent homes would show too much depreciation. <br />j?- , ? <br />Mo-tion was raMr. Kl3.nite to either approve or deny,,the varianca. <br />Mr. Greene moved to deny,, seconded by Mr. Byerse It was uaaanimously voted <br />that the variance be denied. <br />meeting adjourned at 9:45 P sm. <br />i ar i.nite CYuarman <br />oy organ, re <br />EBS
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.