My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/07/2001 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
2001
>
2001 Board of Zoning Appeals
>
06/07/2001 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:48:37 PM
Creation date
1/28/2019 5:07:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
2001
Board Name
Board of Zoning Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
6/7/2001
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
Wharton showed and explained to the Simoncic's just where the building would be placed. Mrs. <br />Simoncic questioned how they would handle the construction and if it would all be coming by their <br />house. Mr. Wharton indicated that there are 200 units back there that were built the same way. This <br />building will be slightly larger than one of the existing houses back there. Mr. Simoncic indicated that <br />there was originally supposed to be an entrance at the top of Canterbury and Butternut, for those people <br />to get in so they didn't have 350 cars coming down their street everyday. The entrance was never built <br />and everybody that lives back there goes through right past their house. Mr. Wharton indicated that there <br />would only be four people working in there. Mr. Maloney questioned if he had any other comments or <br />questions. He called for a motion. <br />T. Koberna motioned to grant Northern Ohio Golf Association their request for variance (1123.12). <br />Which consists of constructing a 2 story golf office/administration building and that the following <br />variance is granted: <br />1) A 7 ft. height variance for height of structure (code permits 30 ft., applicant shows 37 ft.). <br />Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section, (1136.04). The motion was seconded by J. Konold and was <br />unanimously approved. Variance Granted 6/7/01. The clerk announced that this"proposal would go on <br />to Planning Commission on June 12, 2001. <br />9. EI Rodeo Mexecan Restaurant• 23135 Lorain Rd. <br />Request for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of adding to and revamping e?sting structure. <br />The following variance is requested: <br />1) A special permit to add to a non-conforming building (1165.02). <br />2) A 71 ft. variance for front yard setback (code requires 75 ft., applicant shows 4 ft.), section (1139.07). <br />3) A 42 ft. variance for side yard setback (code requires 50 ft., applicant shows 8 ft.), section (1139.07). <br />4) A 12 car parking variance for number of car parking (code requires 84 spaces, applicant shows 72 <br />spaces). <br />NOTE: Item #4 above includes 12 car parking for the patio area, which is to be used seasonally. Which <br />is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section, 1165.02, and 1139.07. <br />Chairman Maloney called all interested parties forward to review the proposal. The oath was <br />administered to Craig Dixon, architect, and Elijol Arellano, with El Rodeo, who came forward to review <br />the request. Mr. Maloney questioned if they could explain to the board what exactly they want to do. <br />Mr. Dixon indicated that they wanted to build a portico around about 75°/a of the existing building to <br />dress it up. Right now it is an existing brick building with an overhang. Mr. Kremzar indicated that the <br />building has a Chinese restaurant look to it now. Mr. Dixon replied correct. They would like to remove <br />the roof element that is on there and just put a porch type roof over it to shade the windows on the east <br />and west side. These gentlemen have several other restaurants in this state and others. They would like <br />to bring in this design to the building with a nice tile roof, raising the roof up quite a bit by putting some <br />parapet walls up there. All new brick, some stucco on the upper areas of the parapet wall. They really <br />want to do a nice job. They can't do anything about where the existing building is now. They aren't <br />adding any livable space. It is all just for looks on the outside of the building. Mr. Kremzar questioned if <br />they were losing 12 spaces. Mr. Dixon indicated that they are actually adding some spaces, he believes <br />they're adding 6 spaces and re-striping the lot. There some seats they would like to use on the outside as <br />a seasonal dining area on the east side and for that purpose they are asking for a variance for 12 cars. <br />Mr. Konold questioned if they have room for those 12 spaces. Mr. Dixon replied no, that's why they're <br />asking for a variance. Mr. Conway indicated that the seating on the inside is 12 more than they're <br />allowed. Mr. Dixon indicated that there are two tables in the restaurant that are for two people, all the <br />rest are four person tables. That is just the way they lay it out and they don't foresee any parking <br />problems arising. Mr. Gareau indicated that if they did they could probably work out something with the <br />7
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.