My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07/10/2002 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
2002
>
2002 Board of Zoning Appeals
>
07/10/2002 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:48:53 PM
Creation date
1/28/2019 5:41:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
2002
Board Name
Board of Zoning Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
7/10/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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
Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections (1165.02), (1139.07), and (1161.10 (b)). The motion <br />was seconded by T. Kelly and unanimously approved. Variance Granted. <br />13. Cafe Stratos- 23642 Lorain Rd.; (WRI)-2) <br />Request for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of seasonal seating for cafe eating. <br />The following variances are requested: <br />1. A variance for 25 car parking (code requires 66, applicant shows 41), section (1161.05 (q)). <br />2. A 15-foot variance for conducting a business activity in the required setback of a corner lot (code <br />requires 50 ft., applicant shows 35 ft.), section (1139.08). <br />3. A 5-ft. variance for conducting a business activity in the required front yard setback (code requires <br />75-ft., applicant shows 70 ft.), section (1139.07). <br />Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections (1161.05 (q)), (1139.08), and (1139.07). <br />Chairman Maloney called all interested parties forward to review the request. Mr. Stratos, the <br />owner, came forward to be sworn in and address his request. Mr. Maloney invited the applicant to <br />explain why the deck was erected without a permit. Mr. Stratos suggested that the building <br />department informed him that a building permit is not required as long as the deck is not attached to <br />the building. Once the buildina department explained what was required, he applied for Planning <br />Commission and for his variances. Mr. Kremzar questioned when the handi-cap parking would be <br />added. Mr. Stratos indicated that he would be putting in the handi-cap parking right away. <br />Discussion of signs placed on the light pole and who owns the light pole took place. Mr. Rymarczyk <br />believed that the sign is in the right-of-way but it would be up to the Service Department to make a <br />ruling. Mr. Stratos commented that if he is not allowed to put sians on the light pole he would remove <br />them. The parking variance is really a seasonal one as the deck will only be used on good weather <br />days. Mr. Kremzar questioned if any parking were removed to erect the deck. Mr. Stratos indicated <br />that no parking was removed to accommodate the deck. Mr. Maloney commented that due to the <br />additional seating on the deck, an increase in parking spaces is required. <br />W. Kremzar motioned to grant Cafe Stratos of 23642 Lorain Road their request for variance <br />(1123.12), which consists of seasonal seatirig for cafe eatiing arid tliat the following variances are <br />granted: <br />1. A variance for 25 car parking (code requires 66, applicant shows 41), section (1161.05 (q)). <br />2. A 15 foot variance for conducting a business activity in the required setback of a corner lot (code <br />requires 50 ft., applicant shows 35 ft.), section (1139.08). <br />3. A 5 ft. variance for conducting a business activity in the required front yard setback (code requires <br />75 ft., applicant shows 70 ft.), section (1139.07). <br />Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections (1161.05 (q)), (1139.08), and (1139.07): The motion <br />was seconded by J. Maloney and unanimously approved. Variances Granted. <br />14. William Cara/Moran Construction23135 Lorain Rd: f'V6'RD-2) <br />Request for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of a ground sign. <br />The following variance is requested: <br />l. A 3 foot variance for ground sign too close to right of way (code requires S ft., applicant shows 2 <br />ft.). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section (1163.26 (b)). <br />Chairman Maloney called all interested parties forward to review the request. Mr. Carey, the owner, <br />came forward to be sworn in and address his request. Mr. Carey indicated that they did not address <br />signage when the building itself was being approved. Now if they place the ground sign in <br />accordance to city codes the sign will be too close to the building. They would like to center the sign <br />within the triangle. The ground sign will have a brick base with landscaping around it. Mr. Maloney <br />questioned if the sign would block traffic view. Mr. Carey suggested that the sign height and width is <br />within code. <br />12
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.