My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/04/2003 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
2003
>
2003 Board of Zoning Appeals
>
09/04/2003 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:49:12 PM
Creation date
1/28/2019 6:25:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
2003
Board Name
Board of Zoning Appeals
Document Name
Minutes
Date
9/4/2003
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
further review of the plans between the board members and the applicants. Mr. 1Vlaloney asked how <br />custoiners would come in to the parking spots. Mr. Jeric referred to the plans and said they could come in <br />off Lorain or off of Coralyn Ave. Mr. Kremzar commented that they cannot block the bay areas. Mr. Jeric <br />indicated that would not be a problem. He pointed out that most people come in by appointment and are in <br />and out rather quickly. Mr. Kremzar asked how many employees there will be. Mr. Jeric replied there are <br />two others aside from himself. Mr. Maloney said the board can only vote on the variance but he would like <br />to know that the applicant is taking into consideration the comments by Mr. Limpert. Mr. Jeric said as with <br />any business, they will do their best to make it as pleasing as possible. Mr. O'Malley said that the items <br />being discussed can be made a condition of the approval. He would not recommend that they make <br />anything a condition that is unrelated to the variance being requested. If there is some connection with the <br />variance and the applicant is willing to do some things in order to persuade the board to grant the variance, <br />then it is acceptable. In addition, whatever sketches or changes are being made to the plans are going to be <br />subject to the building department's review and could result in the need for additional variances. As he <br />understands it from Mr. Rymarczyk, the matter has not been before the Planning Commission and is not <br />expected to be. There are no development plans. The change of use triggers the analysis of the number of <br />parking spots required. No one is looking at rehabbing the entire parking lot, redoing the landscaping to <br />code, redoing the right of way, or any other matters that might come up before the Planning Commission. <br />They are taking down one business and putting in another. All the existing conditions as they are, remain. <br />Mr. Rymarczyk said before they can take the building, they have to repair the lot and re-stripe it according <br />to code so that portion would have to be done prior to occupancy. Mr. Brennan said last week they applied <br />for and received a perinit for the parking lot, the drain, and they are addressing that. Mr. Konold asked if <br />this is all prior to occupancy. NIr. Rymarczyk said that prior to the business opening and issuing an <br />occupancy permit, they will have to have the lot repaired and striped. Mr. O'Malley said the existing <br />condition is pretty much wall to wall asphalt. If they were to start from scratch, they would have <br />landscaping, irrigation, the addition of green space, and other issues to address. Mr. Maloney indicated the <br />board understands that and they are not emphasizing the landscaping as it was just brought up because of <br />Mr. Limpert's letter. As to Mr. Rymarczyk's comments, before the applicant can start up the business, they <br />have to re-stripe the parking areas to come up to code. Mr. O'Malley reminded the board that putting in a <br />landscaped garden in some area or a buffered area somewhere can be a condition of the approval. <br />J. Konold made a motion to grant Mary JericBrennln, 25044 Lorain Itoad, the request for variance <br />wliich consists of new automotive repair shop and that the follownng variance be granted: <br />1. A 1 space vai•iance for number of car parking (code requires 9, applicant shows 8). <br />Which is in vaolation of Ord. 90-125 sections (1161.05 (v)). <br />The motion was seconded by W. Kremzar and unanimously approved. VARIANCE GRANTEI). <br />6. Kennedv Ridge Apartments, 24900 Kennedy Rddge, WRD 4 <br />Request for variance (1123.12). The proposal consists of a construction trailer. <br />The following variance is requested: <br />1. A special permit for a construction trailer in a residential area (code does not permit, applicant shows 1). <br />Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections (1123.06 (a)). <br />Chairman Maloney called all interested parties forward to be sworn in and review the request. N1r. Paul <br />Marvin and Mr. Jerry Hodge with the contractor, came forward to address the board. Mr. Marvin indicated <br />they need a temporary job trailer for ten months. Mr. Hodge assured the board the trailer would only be <br />needed for ten months. <br />T. Kelly made a motion to grant Kennedy Ridge Apartments, 24900 Kennedy Ridge, the request for <br />varilnee which consists of a construction trailer and that the following variance be granted with the <br />amendment that it will only be there for ten months: <br />1. A special permit for a consti•uction trailer in aresidential area (code c9oes not permit, applicant <br />shows 1). <br />Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections (1123.06 (a)).
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.