10/01/2009 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

makes it impossible to build a garage to code. The variance is being sought because one size doesn't fit all and the garage which was standing there prior to being destroyed fit the neighborhood and they are not asking for more than what was originally there. Mrs. Sergi said being 3 feet off the rear yard line is not an issue unless the auto dealership chooses to develop their lot. The backyard is only 50' by 69' and placement is a preexisting issue. Placing the new garage to code requires half the backyard and driveway reconfigured. Mrs. Diver said she did not think it would be practical to require the garage and driveway reconfigured to meet the code. Mrs. Bellido said all garages in the neighborhood were placed in the same location as what is being shown therefore neither the character of the neighborhood nor governmental services would be affected. Ms. Rudolph felt that as the location was indicative to the area and the garage size was not being increased the spirit and intent of the code would be met granting the variances. Mrs. Sergi asked if there is enough room to maintain the garage and yard. Other board members felt that as the location and placement is preexisting and the area was maintained in the past it could be in the future as well. Ms. Rudolph moved, seconded by Mrs. Sergi, to grant Robert & Kimberly Doyle of 5201 Dewey Road the following variances: 1. A 2 foot side yard setback variance for garage too close to side yard line; code requires 5 ft, applicant shows 3 ft section,1135.02(c)(2). 2. A 7 foot rear yard setback variance for garage to close to rear property line; code requires 10 ft, applicant shows 3 ft section,1135.02(c)(2). The motion was unanimously approved 4-0. NON-RESIDENTIAL APPEALS AND REQUESTS: Powerhouse Gvm; 27336 Lorain Road: Request for variance (1123.12). Proposal consists of an additional sign and the following variances are required: 1. A variance for 1 additional wall sign; code permits 1 and 2 are shown, section 1163.28(a) 2. A 1 foot variance for a wall sign higher than allowed; code permits 4 ft and 5 ft is shown, section 1163.28(c) Mr. Schramm and Mr. Dixon were sworn in. Mr. Schramm said he was tabled due to the landlord's letter not addressing the variances needed and the gym owner being absent from the meeting. The existing wall sign and ground sign meets city codes. They are requesting a variance to install a 5 foot high Powerhouse Gym logo. The Gym is the anchor tenant in the strip center which only has two other tenants and a new letter from the landlord was submitted indicating they had no objections to the variance. Mr. Dixon said the gym is required to have the logo. Mrs. Diver questioned why the logo wasn't addressed with the other signs and Mr. Schramm said that if the logo and sign was combined into one sign the number and size of variances needed would have increased and would have delayed the opening date so it was decided to install the two which met code then return for variances for logo after the opening. Ms. Rudolph questioned the distance of the building setback and Mr. Mitchell said the distance was 200 feet off the road and the logo at 5 feet tall will be noticeable but wording unreadable from the road. The logo will fit aesthetically in the arch of the entrance and there is no way to incorporate a logo without variances. Due to the size and setback he does not object to the variances requested for the logo. Ms. Rudolph asked if the sign and logo exceeds the square 4