12/02/1970 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BoUT oF zorrzNG aPPFazs -(lz!zf7o) -Page z ? t4r. Gole sta'ued that the proposed nursery school would be primarily ?-_service to tenants of the PDwrtsnents. Neighbors present comPla,ined of oroblems idth children presently a.nd objected to the nursery school pronosal. Mr. Cole pointed aut that with the proro:sed school, children wou7d be uncler urofessional supervision and that the problem shauld therefore be improved. Discussion ti;as held. It was the opinion of the board that the pronosal was for a business in ? residential area a.nd that therefore a rezonino of the land would be the onlv w-a.y that t'ne nurseryT school couTa be 1ocated here. Mr. F.oberts mooed to deny the va.riance request; sPCOndPd by Mr. E. Green and una.n?mously passed. 4. 4pnellants Gary ricDaniel, 27897 Edgepa.rk Drive - Reauest to canstruct 2n entrance roof over front door. Roof extends 71?1 into front setback a.rea. uiolation Ord. -E62-33, Section 1159.01 Which renuires a 50' front yard. ?resent: Mr. r4lcDaniel Mr. McDa.niel stateci that they had cut down the size of the entrance roof and that it would now extend only 3' into the front setba.ck area. He presented rhotogxax?hs and furthur stated that at ground level, no varience was necessary - th?.t it was th.e roof extension only that extended into the front setback. Mr. F.obe-rts nioved to ?rant a 3' vari:,nce for the proposed overhang; seconded by Mrs. Eian and unanimously passed. 5. Appellant: Mr. Hero Sutrnarinee, 26650 Larain Road - F,.equest to erect sign in excess of permitted square footage. Violation Ord. #62-33, Section I225. Presentt Mr. Copel.and (owner), Sirkins Sign Co. representative '. rdr. Co-peland expzained that the sign rec;uest k*as for afacia sign on.the sloping shingle roof. He feelQ that the sigr_ is vite-.Z to hiv -business in this itighly comraetitive area. The proposed sign, is 32t X 61. According to the ordinar_ce 1911 is permitted. The pole sign uses up 48 snua.re feet oi this tata.I which wou? amean thata variance of 49' woulcl be necesGary. It tiTas rointed out that the pronosed sign would confor-m to othex signs in the area. Board members rointed out that they felt alarge Dole sign iy-oulcl he objectionable but that they felt that the fact that the area for the proposed 9ign which was pxeviously checkered d.nd which has been pa.inted over i-nproves the appearance of the building. Mr. Tubbs moved to grant a, vwriance of 49 square ieet for' bui? ding sign; seconded bur I4r. E. Green and unpnimous7.y passed. 6, Apnellant: Jamnstown Village Apartmentc, BrookpPrk ancl CoTumbia Roa.ds - Recluest to erect 61 fence separ.ating the ?-partment comp].ex °rom its neighbors on Grace F:aad. Violation Orn. vY62-33, Section 115I.04, fence not to exceed 4' in height. PreGent: Mr. Tdar?olius, Mr. 7eman, Mrs. Bencli;, Mr. & I'-frs. Burk, Mr. Cifra.nic, Mr. Berndt, Mr. .'c{ilbane., Mr. F.obinson ?fir. ?emGn and Mr. Margolius ex,r?lFine?' that the Zoning Baasd had requeGted that a fence be situated in this lacation at the time +hat they granted a variance on the garages in the ?partment complex.. Since that time, residents in the a,rea had requested that the ience be 61 rat.her than 41 for privacy purposes. They wiah to ins'Uall c"1 WOOden ornGmental fence. Discussion ?,ras held. F:eaiclents f avored instaTla.tion o: the fence but aaked about wha would riaintain it. It was e-xplained that the develoner 4aOllld. ;1133.T1t31L1 the fence. 'Mrs. Fian moTred to grant a variance for a.pTroxi.ma.tely 9001 of 6' fence along Grace Road Coundary line with the stirula+.,ion that fenc:e is not to clisturb the dra.ins.ge; seeonded by Mr. E. Green and unan3.mously pasSede 7, Appell=.nt: Ann Darragh, 23251 Stonevbrook Drive - Reauest ta erect 'o" redwood fence along rear ?ot li-neo V3olation Ord. 1+62-33, Section 1151.04, fence not to exceed 41 in height.