My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/10/1998 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1998
>
1998 Board of Zoning Appeals
>
09/10/1998 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:47:53 PM
Creation date
1/28/2019 3:31:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1998
Board Name
Board of Zoning Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
9/10/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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 />what tlus board can do is grant you a temporary sign uutil the total size is resolved for the building. <br />Mr. Koberna asked what kind of temporary sign would be granted. Mr. Gomersall suggested a banner <br />that would comply with the building departments requirements. All members agreed that a temporary <br />sign would be best. Mr. Gomersall indicated we need to address Giant Eagles and Star Banks sign <br />packages for this building at the same time. Mr. Gareau suggested this case be tabled so no additional <br />fees would have to be paid, and allow Star Bank to have a banner until a complete package is reviewed. <br />Mr. Conway indicated the building department has been requiring banners to have some kind of wood <br />frame to hold it taunt so it is not flapping in the wind. No further questions were asked. <br />J. Konold moved to grant Star Bank of 4700 Great Northern Blvd. A temporary sign that would be <br />agreeable to the building department be issued to Star Bank until Criant Eagle submits their sign <br />package. This will table Star Banks sign package request until Giant Eagle submits their sign <br />package. The motion was seconded by J. Kremzar, and unanimously approved. Sign package <br />tabled, and temporary sign granted. <br />13. Clark Merrill; 3580 Huuter Drive: <br />Request for variance (1123.12). Request a variance to permit a 6' ft Board on board fence in the <br />required front set back. Fence extends 13' ft 4" Inches into the required front set-back of home, and <br />the first house on the abutting side street. (House is non-conformin.g being built facing Hunter, but <br />the required front set back is on Doe Drive.) Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section 1135.02 (F-1) Wluch <br />prolubits any fence higher than thirty (30) inches and less than 50% open in a required front set back, <br />between the front building liue and the street line. Note: A vaxiance was granted in Ju1y, 1994 for a <br />4' Ft High fence extending 25' ft Iuto the set back. (6' ft Was denied). Fence was never built. A <br />fence was built in 1983 with a permit (#22043). The plot plan submitted was even with the front <br />building line paralleling doe and was a combination of 5' ft& 6' ft In height. It didn't extend into the <br />required set back. <br />Chairman Gomersall called all interested parties before the board. The oath was admini.stered to Mr. <br />Brilla, and Mr. Wood. A fax indicating Mr. Merrill's request for the board.to allow Mr. Brilla, and <br />Mr. Wood to present his case to the board as he is out of town on business was reviewed. Mr. <br />Gomersall stated for the record a letter was received from a resident who is opposed to this request. <br />Mr. Gomersall reviewed the variances and indicated Mr. Merrill has akeady put the 6' ft fence up. <br />Mr. Brilla indicated he lives right next to Mr. Merrill and the Merrills fence abuts his property. Mr. <br />Brilla has no objections to Mr. Merrills fence. Mr. Conway suggested the fence is actually in Mr. <br />Brillas front yard, so he would be effected. Mr. Gomersall ask what Mr. Brilla had to say about the <br />fence. Mr. Brilla suggested he doesn't have a problem with the current fence, but was against the <br />red wood picket fence that was 5' or 6' feet tall which was removed previously as it was an eye sore. <br />Mr. Gomersall suggested by code he cannot have that fence there it would have to be right across his <br />line. Speaking on Mr. Merrill's behalt Mr. Wood indicated the only reason for coming that far out <br />with the fence was because the house was built on a variance, and there isn't that much square <br />footage to give his kids to play in the backyard. Mr. Merrill really doesn't have any backyard per se, <br />so he built the fence to contain his children. Mr. Gomersall indicated he was sorry but, that was bad <br />thinking on Mr. Merrills part. Mr. Wood indicated his home is right aeross the street from the <br />Merrll's properiy. Speaking on behalf of Mr. Merrill, Mr. Wood suggested when the last application <br />was applied for the board did.n't send as many notices out as they did this time. Mr. Wood suggested <br />he had spoken to the neighbors on the left and right of his house and no one that could visually see <br />the fence had a problem with it, as Mr. Merrill asked the neighbors if they were concerned. Mr. Wood <br />agreed with Mr. Brilla regarding the old fence that was previously up, this looks a lot better and has <br />9 ?
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.