04/24/1969 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BOARD OF ZONIN'G APPFALS - 4/24/69 - Page 2 with the city's efforts to better the appearance of Lorain R.6ad. Mr. Greene moved tm grant,a variance of 251. Mr. Lancashire seconded the motion. The mmtian passed with Mr. Roberts voting noo 3, Appellant: Jame.s Irvine, 4585 Carsten Lane. Cc>nti.nuation of request to i.nstall a 52 fence along rear of 7.ot. Request is in violatian of Ordinance #62-33, Section 1I5I.04 which states that a fence must not exceed 4' in height. Present: Mr. Irri.n`e, Mr. Lawson Mr. Irvine stated. that he wishes to install a redwood basketweave fence along rear of Zat to coneeal an existing wire fenee;. Because of the slope af the land, a 41 fence would not hide the mthez° fence. There is a 5' swa3e at the rear of the Zote The ground slapes down between the-house and the-.place that the_fence.would be 1-ocated. Mr. Lawson' resident of the house:-to tlae reax of Mr. Irvine's; stated that he has no ob3ections and verified the fact tha.t the elevation differs. Mrs. Eian moved to grant a variance of It in height for a 51 fence al:ong rear of Iot. Mr. Greene seconded the motion. Unanimously passeds 4, Appellant: Brvoks E].ectra.c Sign-Ca.-..-Con'tinuatian of request_.ta i.ns.tall a co-op sign to serve C1eveZand Paint=.&•Golor Ca.,# Todd's Cleaners, Sun Loans ( a].l . tenants of the same bui.lding located at 26630 Lorain Road) o Request is in vi.o2ation of E}rc?inance #62-33, Seetien 1225,02. Present: Representative of Brooks E7-ectric Sign Co. Mr. Roberts read a Ietter from the Safety Director stating that such a sign would be neither a benefit not a hazard to the-safety situation. Copies of the proposed traffic plan for the area.were studied. It wa$ pointed out that there is already an existing vari.ance on signs for this building and that if this request is granted, it would mean a, total variance of 117 squart feet. MY'Gs Eian mvved to den7 the request; seconded by Mr. Lancashire and passed with Mr. Greene voting nca. 5, Appellant: Don G. MeDanielsp 3791 Columbia Road. Reouest to erect a detached garage 3' from existing-dwelling.... Request is in violation of Ordinance #62-33, Section 1151.04 whi-ch r.equires a mi.nimum distance of 20' between dwelling and a detached gara.ge. Present: iu[r. McDaniels Mr. MeDaniel5 explained that he has no garage whatsaever at the.present time. 5ince there is a drivewa.y already in, he prefers to build a deta.ched garage. His neighbors do not object. He pointed out that he is 72 years old and retaired and that attaehing a garage.to the house would.not be ecvnomicalls f.easibleo It would also mean that some lsree maple trees wouZd taave to be eut down in order to attach a garage. Nlersbers felt that a real hardship exists since there is riv :existing garage but felt a detached garage wvuld detract from the home because of the close proximity ta the house. It wa.a suggested that P2re NtcDanieZs try to came up with some other plan. Mr. Greene moved to continue the case; seconeled by Mrs. Eian ancl unanimousZy passed. 6. Appellants Rabert Grecol? 25282 Fawn Drive. Request to eroct a deta.ched garage 161 from adjacent dwelling. Request is in violation of Ordinance #,62-33, Seetion 1151.04 which requires a mi.nimum dis°tance of 201 between any dwelling and detached garagee Mr. Greeol expla.ined that due to the location--.of?-..house. .in, reTation to lot Iine, the garage would- have to= be closer- to.. t??- 'tLdj$"nt ,dwelling. in ort3er to be in a straight lim.e with the driveway. It was poi:nted out that a rear. yard variance; had been granted for the houve in question. The awner of said house, Mr. 'Walters, sent a