|
CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED
<br />BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
<br />MINUTES - AUGUST 3, 1988
<br />Chairman Remmel called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
<br />Present: R. Bugala, R. Gomersall, B. Grace, J. Helon, and C. Remmel
<br />Also Present: Law Director M. Gareau, Building Commissioner D. Conway,
<br />Clerk of Commissions B. Oring
<br />Chairman Remmel advised that there is a correction.of the minutes of July 6th,
<br />the motion in item number 6 should be corrected to include a location variance
<br />for the gazebo. R. Bugala moved to accept the minutes of July 6, 1988 as
<br />amended, seconded by C..Remmel, and unanimously approved.,
<br />Sunset Memorial Park Association, 6265 Columbia Road
<br />Request for ruling (1123.10). Request ruling to detex-mine whether the erectio.n
<br />of a building to be used for services and viewing.of deceased persons is a
<br />permitted use in a Residential District. (S.ection 1135.01).
<br />(Continued from meet,ing,of July.6, 1988).
<br />Chairman Remmel called all interested parties befo,re the Board. The oath was
<br />administered to A. Wilms, B. Harrison,.0. Clingan, H. Wilms, J. Steed, B. Miller,
<br />all neighbors; D. McKay, Councilman; W. Giesser, attorney, Mr. and Mrs. Baracslcai,
<br />and Mr. McConoughey, all representing Sunset Memorial Park. Chairman Remmel
<br />stated that this item had been continued since,he had been advised, after.•th:e
<br />Board had refused to rule on this at the last meeting, that the Board must
<br />make a ruling when it is requested. Mr. Giesser stated that, they are request-
<br />ing a determination that the chapel they intend to build is a.permitted use.in
<br />a residential district and read Chapter 1135.01, Residence Districts, Use
<br />Restrictions, (a)-4 which states "Crematories in cemeteries existing on the
<br />date of the passage of the Zoning Code, provided no part thereof is closer than
<br />300 feet to its lot line adjacent to any residence district;" and stated that
<br />the cemetery is permitted and that this chapel, only to view deceased.persons, ,
<br />is an accessory use to the cemetery. There is an existing chapel.with one room,
<br />but the new chapel will increase the number of persons to be viewed. It was
<br />determined that all neighbo.rs present were opposed to this proposal. Councilman
<br />McKay pointed out that Section 1135.01 does not list mortuaries as a permitted
<br />use, that they are permitted in the General Retail Business District.and he
<br />maintained that if a use is permitted under General Retail, it cannot be per-
<br />mitted in a Re.s±dential District. He further stated that for a variance they
<br />need to prove a hardship, in that an owner is being deprived of his property
<br />rights; that granting this use is contrary to the purpose and intentions.of
<br />the Zoning Codes; that the code also states that such a use should not create.
<br />traffic to a greater extent than the other,uses permit in the same district,.
<br />and that this proposal will create more traffic; and further questioned if this
<br />proposal is for profit.- Mr. Giesser responded that a cemetery is a non-profit
<br />organization, but nothing is done in the cemetery for nothing, and there would
<br />be charges; and clarified that they are not requesting a variance, this is
<br />merely a request for an interpretation of the code, hardship did not have to
<br />be shown. Law Director Gareau agreed that there was-no variance requested.
<br />Mr. Remmel'pointed out that this is not a mortuary nor a funeral home. A neigh-
<br />bor, (not ideiitified) stated that they realize that this is not a mortuary, but
<br />are objecting because t.here would be continuous traffic both day and night for
|