12/08/1964 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Cooney produced photographs to support his claims that certain condi- tions pertaining to the operation of the Auto Wash were not in compliance with the 2oning Ordinance, such as cars being parked on the Bailey Road side of the building, which is not blacktopped. Mr. Kanareff indicated said area would be paved to conf orm to the Code. Mr. Cooney said there was a saf ety h azard at the rear of the Auto Wash property, where cars are moved prior to washing, in that there seemed to be inadequate pro?ection £or his house if a car skidded off the apron and broke through a concrete block wall. Mr. Kanareff said a highway guard rail f ence would be installed, and also a privacy cyclone fence would Ue erected at the rear of the property adjoining the Cooney property. Mr. Cooney said the conveyor tow bar used to pull cars through the Auto Wash extended beyond the end of the building to a point where its end was less than fifty feet from his home, and, in his interpretation, was load- ing equipment of the building and a violation of the Codee Mr. Gundy indicated that sucli a conveyor tow bar was not part of the building, and that the building itself was the necessary distance £rom the Cooney houseo Mr. Schaaf said he did not Uelieve the definition of loading and unloading facilities in the Ordinance was intendea to apply to such things as the conveyor tow bars for auto washes. Mrm Schaaf nioved to show the Board interprets the Zoning Ordinance as having Ueen observed as to the side yard requiremen'cs and that the loading f acilities do not apply to the conveyor tow bar system now in use, and that a safety fence will be erected along the rear of the propertyo Mrs. Eian seconded. Mro Byers, Mro Schaaf and Mrs. Eian voted af£irmatively, while ULr. Greene voted in favor of the safety fence, but abstained from voting on the interpretation of the conveyor tow bar. 4. Appellant: Concord Corpe, 14305 Waslzington Blvdm, University Hts., Ohio. Ref: Request for f ront yard setback variances on sublots 78 ana 79 on Noreen Drive, North Olmsted, for 451 setback on 78 and 40' on 79, necessitated by an open ditcn running along the rear of sai.d lots, in violation of Section 1159 oi the Zoning Ordinance, which stipulates f ront yard setbacks of f if ty f eet. Mr. Tuily Lapidus, President of Concord Corp., represented his company, saying he wouid like to build attached garages on the model homes chosen for these lots which would range from $22,500 to $25,900, and that the remaining lots in the subdivision vaould be the sites for homes sold off the models. Without variances, he would be obliged to build homes in the $17,000 to $18,000 ran.ge without attached garages. Mrm Greene moved to grant the variances. hsr. Schaaf seconded. Vote was unanimousa Meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p,m, Chai rm an S cretary