|
, . , •f .
<br />addition needed to exceed the maximum square footage by 22 sq ft. Mr. Hurst said that the 2
<br />year- old slab was 20' x 20' so it dictates the size of the addition. Mr. Conway voiced that if the
<br />applicant decreased the rear of the addition by 1 foot it would eliminate the 22 sq ft variance.
<br />The sideyard setback is warranted to stay in line with the existing garage and the sideyard area
<br />can be:maintained. Mrs. Sergi asked if the slab met code for constructing a garage and if it was
<br />the applicant's intent to build a garage when installing the slab. Mr. Hurst said at the time it was
<br />not fiis intent and the slab met code for constructing the garage atop the slab.
<br />Board members felt that the public peace, health, safety, morals, welfare or convenience would
<br />not be jeopardized or affected. The use, value, development or enjoyment of neighboring
<br />property would not be affected, nor would the health or safety of persons residing in the
<br />neigliborhood be adversely affected. There would not be public or private nuisance nor noise,
<br />smoke, odors, fire, vibrations, objectionable lights or congestion of traffic created by the
<br />addit'ion. The combination or accumulation of uses of the same nature in proximity or in the
<br />same, neighborhood would not adversely affect the public peace, health, safety, morals,
<br />welfare, or convenience of the neighboring properties. The proposed use would not comply
<br />with?other provisions or standards specified in the Code. .
<br />Mi=s:,_S;ergi moved, seconded by Mrs. Diver to approve Thomas Hursx of 23071 Virginia
<br />Ave=rhis; request for a special permit to add to a non-conforming building (section 1165.02),
<br />which, was unanimously approved 4-0.
<br />Mrs. biver reviewed that the home could yield a reasonable return without the variance, the
<br />request;was not substantial, governmental services would not be altered. The addition could be
<br />constructed without a variance. It is presumed all owners have knowledge of zoning codes. The
<br />spirit.and intent of the zoning code would be upheld granting the variance.
<br />.,
<br />Mr.-1VIenser moved, seconded by Mrs. Diver to approve Thomas Hurst of 23071 Virginia
<br />Ave`?.;his request for variance (1123.12), which consists of a garage addition and the
<br />following variances are granted: A variance from section (1165.02).
<br />1. A. 1 foot 6 inch variance for an accessory structure too close to sideyard setback, (code
<br />requires 5' applicant shows 3'6"), section (1135.02 (C2)).
<br />2. A22` square foot variance for a detached garage larger than code allows, (code permits
<br />750;s44,ft applicant shows 772 sq ft), section (1135.02 (C1)).
<br />Wh-ichls `in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections; (1135.02 (C1)) and (1135.02 (C2)), roll call;
<br />M. D;iver; R. Menser, A. Williamson "yes" and N. Sergi "no", Approved 3-1.
<br />NON=RESIDENTIAL APPEALS AND REQUESTS:
<br />COlVIS07-0016: Clark Gas Station; 28925 Lorain Road: (Ward 3)
<br />• A-special permit to add to a non-conforming building (1165.02).
<br />• A variance to section (1165.02) as the addition does not comply with front and rear setbacks.
<br />Request,for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of signage and redeveloping the site.
<br />The Olowing variances are requested:
<br />1. A;1.3foot variance for a ground sign to close to the side lot line (code requires 20', applicant
<br />? shows 7'), section (1163.26 (b)).
<br />2. .A;;variance for ground sign in the 35 foot sight triangle (code does not permit, applicant sows
<br />` iri, triangle), section (1163.17 (A)). ,
<br />3. ,Ari'??18 square foot variance for maximum sign face area per building (code permits 51 sq ft,
<br />applicant shows 69 sq ft), section (1163.28 (C)).
<br />3
|