Laserfiche WebLink
Board of Zoning Appeals9 October 5, 1966 <br />Page 2 <br />The Board felt that inasmuch as they had granted another auto agency a <br />limit of 85 square feet in response to thej_r request for variance, it <br />would not be advisable to grant more than this amount of square footage. <br />Nlessrs. _%wland and I{yman felt i'+ord would be agreeable to using smaller <br />size signs9 totaling 84 square feet, providi.ng they could be mounted on <br />two poles, height of one to be 201 overall and the other 16' overall, the <br />first to measure 52 sqm fte and the second, 32 sqa t'ue Only one ground <br />sign is planned9 -that to be a 7x3 directional sign to the service depta <br />Mr. Scheeff moved that two signs be granted, total area not to exceed <br />85 square fee-t, neither sign to exceed the height of 251' and that the <br />two signs be locatecl as shown on the plans submitted to the Building <br />Departmentg Second by NIr. Idelsono <br />1Ir. Ackerer9 whose property is adjacent to the west, objected to two pole <br />signs. 1lfter it was explained that these tyso signs wou.ld replace the very <br />large sign they now have, he had no objection. <br />Mr. Scheeff withdrew his motion and Mr. Nelson withdrew his second to the <br />motiono Mr. Scheeff then made the following motion: That the appellant <br />be allowed two pole signs tqith total area not to exceed 85 square feet <br />and neither sign to exceed 2.5 ft, in height., with the stipulation that the <br />signs ibe placed in accordance with the proposal submitted to the Building <br />Department' an.d one ground sign, as indicated on the situation plan, for the <br />service department, to 'oe the on1.y ground sign. Second b3? I1r. Velson. <br />Motion passed. <br />3. Peter R7epka9 Perth Land Com9 5261 Broadview Rd,, Parma 34 <br />Request ior variance (11133.13) by Per-ch Land io build a home on <br />S/L 77 Noreen :)r:ive (24336) with 40' zront yard setback. Re- <br />quest is in violation of Section 1159.01, zihich requi-res 50' <br />front yard setback. <br />Mr. Frank Moss 9 attorney, represented the appellant. He stated permit for <br />building the home stated a 501 setbacke Hoti•Tever., tre man who stalced -the <br />house for Perth Land Co. erred in that instead of iollowing the 50, set- <br />back, he lined stakes up with other houses built or being buil.t on the <br />street' on v;hich lOt variances had been obtained, with the result that <br />house was erected 40' from front. Building reached drywal.l stage before <br />arror Trras notede. Builder of home on aajacent lot, S/L 78, received a <br />variance Sept. 7., 1955, to build with 401 setbacke <br />Mr. Greene read a le tter from Concord Homes, builder of home on S/L 78, <br />indicating he was in favor oj' homes being in lineo <br />iqro and Mrs. Patrick Cannon, for whom the house is being built on S/L 78., <br />objected very much to Perth Land's building with 40' setback wmthout <br />having secured a variance from the Board. They objected to the fact that <br />home being built by 1'er_th^would opstruct view from their living room. <br />Their home is a colonial9 with garage ext',ending out front, living room <br />set back. House on S/L 77 is a spliti level with attached garage. <br />Mre IJelson moved that the variance be granted9 Second by 1•r. Scheeff. <br />i'fiotion passed..