My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/03/2011 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
2011
>
2011 Board of Zoning Appeals
>
11/03/2011 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:47:33 PM
Creation date
1/25/2019 7:35:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
2011
Board Name
Board of Zoning Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
11/3/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
. , <br />Conditions: <br />The variance shall be subject to the following conditions: <br />1. Z Applicant consents (yes/no) Not applicable - No Conditions imposed <br />Order & Findinqs: <br />The Board finds that practical difficulties to support the area variance were not presented by <br />the Applicant. The Board finds that this business premise has had and proposes to continue more <br />than sufficient wall and ground signage to attract and direct customer traffic, based on Code <br />allotment and previous variances granted in 2007. The Board finds that it is not reasonable to vary <br />from the Code further and to add a further variance for the proposed monument sign. Accordingly, <br />based on the substantial, probative and reliable evidence presented on the record, and by application <br />of the foregoing practical difficulties factors for area variances and as governed by legal standards, <br />and further subject to the conditions, the variance is hereby Ordered: <br />GRANTED DENIED <br /> <br />Bo"ard of Zoning Afppeals Chair <br />of Commissions <br />Date mailed to applicant <br />Date <br />_ h-?-( <br />Date <br />AREA VARIANCE STANDARDS: <br />1. Can the property yield a reasonable return or can there be any beneficial use of the property without the <br />variance? <br />2. Is the variance substantial? <br />3. Will the essential character of the neighborhood be substantially altered or will adjoining properties suffer a <br />substantial detriment as a result of the variance? <br />4. Will the variance adversely affect the delivery of governmental services (e.g. water, sewer, garbage)? <br />5. Did the property owner purchase the property with knowledge of the zoning restriction? <br />6. Can the property owner's predicament be precluded through some method other than a variance? <br />7. Would the spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement be observed and substantial justice done by granting <br />the variance? <br />WWW.NORTH-OLMSTED.COM
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.