Laserfiche WebLink
Minutese Board of 2oning Appeals <br />June 1, 1966 Page 2 <br />? . 401 deep' variance having been gran.ted builder at time of <br />construction of home. Reguest is in violation of Section <br />1163m019 which -requires 501 rear yard setback. <br />Mr. Biggins explained that roofed over porch was needed because older child <br />is asthmatic and needs rests during day in the shade. Trees are not large <br />enough to provide shade. Mx. °Chas. J. Salury' 25017 Fawn., was presen.t but <br />had no objectione Mrs. Hodgins said home abutti.ng i.n rear has a very deep <br />1ot. Nir, Ne1son moved to grant the variance. Sedond by Mro Scheef£. Plotion <br />wad passedo <br />4s Appel.lantr Tvlro Thomas DilZa.ng? 23080 MiZdred9 Norttl OLmsted <br />N.equest for variance to ereet a detached garage wh;.ch wi_1l, os <br />15' fxom dwellings on adjacent properties. This is contirnia- <br />tion of Yearing held Niay ?., 1966;, appe7lant to present d?ra??-? <br />ings o.f proposed de-tached garage., ibquest is in violation of <br />Section 1151A Sub c' which requires a detac.Yed garage to be <br />20' from dtiaelling on the sam lot or any adjacent loto <br />Mr. Greene read a letter from ivIrs. Virginia Carney, who oms property at 22975 <br />M3.ldr.ede She had no object.but felt garage would be an asset to neighbox°hood. <br />Mro Di.lling presented drawings of proposed garage; 7)an Benuska t,o be builder. <br />IJeighbors present were 11Irr. Ro'oert Smith9 Mrs. 'Frantz and Mr. Cezny. Mrs. Frantz, <br />S/I, 36, protestedo ti+lhen they purchased home were under impression a garage wou?d <br />? never be built on Mro Di11ing's loto Mre Cerny emphatically stated it was a <br />matter of esthetics and economics. He fe3t by addition of garage value of <br />neighboro s property would go down considerablyo He stated he had 'oeen assured <br />a garage would not be bui].t on the Dilling 1ot. <br />Mr. ?.lling presented pictures showing distances. He said he had surveyed tke <br />neighborhood and found many detached garageso Mr„ Scheeff examined the draw- <br />a.ngs and indic ated that if a garage and aha1f were built, it could be so situated <br />that it would be 20 fto from S/L 37 and 20 fto froxn s/L 36 and the only variance <br />needed would be one of 5 gt. to the Dilling home. Mr, Dillingss present plans <br />show a 2-car garage., 22 x 22e Ntr. Nelson moveci that the variance be denied.. <br />Second by n4re Scheei.f o Niotion passedn <br />5o Appellants Olmsted Developznent Co,'25124 Detroit lldo, trJestlalce <br />Request for variance to build ti-ro buildangs on Perm.Parcel Nos. <br />232°9-34 and 359 on MiZI rd0 Buildir.gs to have eight suites <br />per building, to be used as retirement apartments arxt to be isi <br />conjunetion w ith nursing home now under constxuction on N1i11 <br />Rd. Request is in violation of Section 1157,01a because square <br />foot area does x?ot raeet arenizirements; Section 1159.01' which <br />requires 50" rear yard depth. <br />Mrm Howard Greene of Greene & Heinrich' 2120 S. Green Rdo, Cleveland., was pre- <br />sent, He said intent was to have apartments occupied by peop:te who wished to <br />l3ve in their own home but havp advantage 62 a doctor and nurses on callo Phore <br />? Connectian would be in each apt, to nursasig home across street. Each apt. to <br />be approximately 450 square feet. Buildings to be 2-story. Parking of one cax <br />per unit.to be provided. Design of buildings to be same as nursing home. First <br />buildi.ng?:,ta be 301 off Mi11 Rda, 501 bet-vaaen fmrst and second building9 witn 159 <br />fxom second building to rear lot 1ine.