My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07/27/1966 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1966
>
1966 Board of Zoning Appeals
>
07/27/1966 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:36:36 PM
Creation date
1/31/2019 9:16:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1966
Board Name
Board of Zoning Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
7/27/1966
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
Boa??d of Zoning Appeals' Nlinutes <br />August 31, 1966 Page 2 <br />subdivision signs sha1l be erected within one subdivision. <br />No subdivisa.on sign shall be.located witk!in 100 ft. from <br />? any occupied residence9 and shall be within the sub- <br />division being devel.oped and wi--thin 500 fte of developrr,ent <br />Mr. 3auer° said signs would be co7.orful and 9.n line with expensive homes„ He <br />needs signs to se1l the homes;, without signs peaple wi11 not be able to 1.oc ate <br />the subdivision. Interstate 80 will cross -the subdivisiono This will make <br />Revere -Tr, a dPadend and will divide the subdiva.sian into two parts,, Lots <br />are still available in the Beverly Hi11s sectiona There will be only one <br />egress into each part. <br />Sign at Bellevue and Fitch will be placed on a tree at corner, on sub- <br />division property, and will be approximatel,y' 65 ft, from dwelling occupied <br />by Iqr. arrJ. Mrse Moyes,, Mrs. Moyes was present and said she understood need <br />for sa.gn but zaished it placed so that it would not obstruct viewe Size stated <br />she felt where house had been demol.ished on Y°o Bauer4s property',: th?? area had: <br />not been properly cleared up and hoped that he would not use this lot for <br />storing buildi.ng materials. Niro Bauer sa?d Yae planned t,o build e home on <br />this I.ot and would see that the area was clearedo . . <br />Mr.. Bauer said he 13ad not as yet ob&ained permissi.on for placing the sign on <br />corner of R.evere azd Butternut but had spoken to Mr, Howard Webb., 27137 Butter- <br />nu-to kZro John Webb9 27132 Butternuta was 1resent and objected to the sign. <br />He said he was speaking for his father, ifr. Howard Webb,, and several of tle <br />neighbors who Urere unable ta attend. He stated thb sign which Mr. Bauer had <br />placed at this corner to adverta.se Beverly Hills Subowas poo-rly constructed9 <br />fe11 in disrepa,r and debris was not cleared awaye The brick entryway vaas <br />desecrated and not kept in repaira He felt beeause af this past experience <br />he did not want another sign put up. He said he felt his father would not <br />a11ow it to be placed on his property and on any corner property' it wouia <br />be less than 100 ft, from an occupied dwelling. <br />MrQ Byers fe7.t that with the bu..:i..lding of Interstate 80., the subdivision <br />would be in two parts and two signs would be permi.ssibleo <br />11r, 5cheeff made a motion that an 81x121 sign on the northwest corner of <br />Fitch azd Bellevue be approved' waiving the 100 ft, adjaeent dwelZing re- <br />quaxement; t1hat the 84x121 sign on Butternut and Revere be granted with -the <br />understanding tha t Nre Bauer has to ob-tain written pe rmission from one of <br />the cox`ner propervy owners before erecting9 waving the l00 fto from adjBCent <br />dwelling requirement and the 500 it, d.istance from the subcli.vision; tkiat these <br />variances be allowed fox the ?cwo signs for the p?x?.?od o? 6 months, at which <br />tzme ivir. Bauer may appear bexore -the BOard for renewal. <br />Motion was seconded by Mra Nelsona Motion passed. <br />3. App°1lanto Ediqard L. Co1.la.nsy 24250 Woodmere Dr,9 North Olm ted. <br />P,?quest for variance to erect a detached garage 31811 from <br />side property line9 Request is in violation of Section <br />1151,04Cwhich requires a detached garage to be so 1ocated <br />that no part of sane shall be within 201 af a dwellang on <br />. 1Lhe same lot or any adjacent lot' or within 5' of any pro- <br />? perty line oi the lot on -vahic h the s ame is lac ated. <br />Mrs. collins explained that through an error the contractos' had povred the <br />concrete base 3+81e from the property lim instead of 5' . 5he presented
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.