01/05/1972 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BQARD OF ZONING APPEALS - 1/5/72 - Page 2 Mr. Scheef 'said that he did not think there was anything in this application that real.ly rightfully bel.ongs before the Zoning Boarda The Zoning Board does not interpret a .ega1 situation. In this particular problem, there is no question that this is one lot, bu-t the fact that there is one 1ot and to ptxt another business on it, the proper place for this is the P1ann3.ng Commission or a joint meeting with Council. The reason being that the neighbors do have a valid position, as far as the traffic probl,em is concerned. Mr. Gordon stated that the Board has an obligation to rule on this issue. Mr. Scheef stated that the on1.y thing that is supposed to happen on a thing like th'is is it should be done in the bast interest of the neighbors and the community. Planning and Council have the talent and interest to do tfiis. Mr. Scheef made a motion that the interpret- ation as to the requirement of 50' frontage on Lorain Road to make this s3.te useable is a.ncorrect, and that after the decision is rendered by the Soard of Zoning, that the proper function of Mrs. Ludwig would be to reappear with the entire program before the Planning Commission and Council, Mr, Kristoff objected that the Board is giving permission to Mrs. Ludwig to build. Mr. Tubbs explained that Nirs. Ludwig cannot build. She has a 1ot on Lorain Road that does have 500 of frontage. Our Ordinance does not specify egress or access on Lorain Rd. Mr. Scheeffs motion was seconded by Mrso Eian and unanimously agreed upon. 4. Appellant: Co].umbia Estates - ftequest to erect dwelling on S/L 10, 26780 Hyannis Port Drm9 North Olmsted with a 10' rear yard variance (1133.13)a Request is in violation of Ord. #62-33, Section 1163001, which requires a 501 rear yardo Present: Mr. Donahue, Mr. King, Mro Green, Ll1 witnesses were sworn in. tvlr°. Tubbs read the request sent in by Mr. Bennett of Columbia Estateso Mrm Donahue wanted to know if the front of the lots would line upm Since the people behind this property were not notified, it was the decision of the Board that the case be continued next month. 5. Appellant: Harry Constant3.ne9 27080 Lorain Rd. - Request for special permit to use projecting sign from the facia to replace existing projecting signm Request is in violatyon of Ord. #62-33, Section 1227.039 which states f7.ashing9 moving or intermittent illumination and outline lighting sha11 not be permittedg by right; the Board may, however, make a finding and perm3.t such lighting as a conditional use; if such permit is granted' the maximum area of signs sha11 be reduced by one halfo The Board was informed that Mr. Constantine was il1 and could not appear, therefore the Board wi11 continue the case next month. 6. Appellants Manor Care Inc., 23233, 23235 Lorain Rd. - Request for canopy projection onto 501 side setback line. Request is in violation of Ord. #62-33, Section 1173a02 D(5) which states no part thereof is nearer than 50' from any side or rear property 1ine. AZso request rear yard setback of 281, in lieu of the 50' required as stated in Section 1174.06. Present: Mr. Patrick Gareau & Wayne Ranka.n representing Manor Care, Mr, Pohlman, Jim Kilroy9 Ra1.ph Yeigh, Mr. Bartko, Mr. Sironen.