|
<br />CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED
<br />BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
<br />MINUTES - JUNE 8, 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 Conway, and
<br />Clerk of Commissions B. Oring.
<br />R. Bugala moved to accept the May 5th minutes as written, seconded by R.
<br />Gomersall, and unanimously approved.
<br />Mattress King, 24765 Lorain Road
<br />Request for variance (1123.12). Request 34 square foot variance for total
<br />sign area for wall sign. Violation of Ord. 87-93, Section 1163.06(d).
<br />Continued from meeting of May 5, 1988.
<br />Chairman Remmel called all interested parties before the Board. The oath was
<br />administered to L. Holsman, sign contractor, who presented pictures of the ex-
<br />isting sign and of others in the area that were larger. Mr. Remmel believes that
<br />the new sign would be an improvement. R. Bugala moved to grant the 34 square
<br />foot variance for total sign area of a wall sign for Mattress King at 24765
<br />Lorain Road, seconded by B. Grace, and unanimously approved. Variance granted.
<br />l. Thomas J. Schneid, 25105 Randall Dr.
<br />Request for ruling (1123:10). Request ruling if a_skate b.ard ramp is a
<br />permitted accessory use in a residential district.
<br />Chairman Remmel called all interested parties before the Board. The oath was
<br />administered to T. Schneid, K. Everhardt, A. Schneid, Mr. Boepple, T. Nenes,
<br />J. Niedermeyer; T. Pelton, S. Schneid, J. Everhard, A. Everhard,..R. Schr.oeder,
<br />J. Mason, K. Nemes, Mr. and rirs. Tliompson, S. Rogers, Mrs. Terrara, Mr. and
<br />Mrs. Buckholtz, E. Pawlus, Mrs. Skoulis, S. Fisher, E. Tomasello, T. Sprague,
<br />J. Beck, J. Leopold and Councilmembers D. McKay and P. Bahas. Chairman Remmel
<br />advised a11 present the the Board can only rule on the use of the land and
<br />requested that they limit their rema.rks to that issue. Mr. Schneid, the property
<br />owner speaking in behalf of his son, advised that he was supporting his son's
<br />interest in skate boarding, and pointed out that, if skate boarding is as'obj•ec-
<br />tionable as claimed, perhaps the city should not allow the sale of skate boards
<br />within the city. K. Everhard, who has had a ramp in his yard for three years,
<br />stated that the Schneid ramp would be less noisey than his because it is
<br />better insulated and that he does not believe that ramps lower property values
<br />pointing out that homes have sold in his neighborhood while his ramp was there.
<br />Mr. Schneid, owner of the ramp in.question, stated that prior to constructing
<br />the ramp, they had been told they did not,need a building permit. He maintains
<br />that there were no complaints on the ramp until after an article appeared in
<br />the Cleveland Plain Dealer stating'that these ramp.s would bring down property
<br />values. After complaints were made to the city, they were told to remove the
<br />ramp. He pointed out that some of their neighbors had Helped build the ramp.
<br />He claims that the people who use a-swimming pool.behind his ho.use create'as =
<br />much noise as the skate boards make,: and that a swimming pool.could decrease
|