The Board of Zoning Appeals is a 5-member body responsible for hearing appeals from individuals who are requesting exceptions or variations for city ordinances in regard to land use and building requirements https://t.co/qyBbBuFrls

The live stream can be accessed here:&list=PLJLxV4B9wSw8CIc5Z5FUwDvUqrDYCe3dh&index=26&t=1099s
FYI: The meeting does not begin until 18 minutes after stream starts. Board Chair Britt, Barnes, Brown, Holzer, and Faith were present.

The following cases were postponed: https://t.co/eZF6l5VzzT

Calendar No : 22-134 of Linwood ave is postponed as a city representative will not be present

Calendar No 22-112 proposes the establishment of a new taco bell in a G2 Limited Retail Business and Urban form Overlay District. This case is postponed for further staff review

Want to know what a Limited Retail Business is? Check out this chart from the City Planning Commission: https://planning.clevelandohio.gov/zoning/ohioCity.php https://t.co/VlcNj47eiR

Urban Overlays are sweet! “They are walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods. The Urban Overlay is an essential tool for Cleveland neighborhoods to use in their transition from single-use, auto-centric policies to a healthy, inclusive and sustainable future.”

Check out more on Urban Overlay Districts here: https://planning.clevelandohio.gov/zoning/ohioCityUrbanOverlay.php

Back to the meeting! https://t.co/tyCV0MKQ9H

Calendar No. 22-126
John’s Hot dogs is appealing 241.37 section 5 hot dog vendors need to be 100 ft. from restaurants as he is more than 100 ft away.

Sidewalks representative confirmed that per section 5 of the code John’s hot dog stand was not within 100 feet of a food service business and therefore this appeal was approved.

Calendar No. 22-131 Appellant erected this 6ft fence but is in violation of the following ordinances and is appealing their strict application.... https://t.co/0btEhvC3mR

1. Section 358.03(a) which states a fence running parallel to a driveway within 15 feet from property line shall not exceed (2-1/2’) in height and shall be at least 75% percent open.

1. Section 358.04(a) which states fence in side street yards shall not exceed 4 feet in height and shall be at least 50 people open

Ms. Glass who represents community development argues that this fence is the same height as a lot of fences in the area, is structurally sound, and is in favor of keeping it up

Mr. Ruelens, speaking on behalf of City Planning,
Wishes that this fence and its dimensions were proposed to council prior to being built. Ruelens prefers shadow boxes so that there is more transparency.

HOWEVER Ruelens observes that the fence is pulled back enough from the driveway to be able to view pedestrians. This appeal was approved.

Moving on to Case Calendar No. 22-135 & 137 https://t.co/QyQodVBpSH

Rencz appeals the strict application of Section 343.01 which states that the boarding of dogs is not a permitted use in a Local Retail Business District. 🐶

Rencz argues that her business is not solely boarding animals but the boarding is integral to the training aspect of their business where they also sell commercial items.

Per code 137 a dog training school with dog boarding included is not permitted either

Appellant has to prove that denial of this variance will result in the property becoming not economical feasible and deny the appellant of property rights.

Justin Stevenson argues that this business will NOT increase foot traffic to the neighborhood because the business is appointment only, has never received a noise complaint, and does a service to the community.

This appeal set out to show that the business owner (who now lives in the district) and the business was economically viable and dedicated to the community. The appeal was approved! https://t.co/mP5WV9SrXG

Calendar No. 22-73: An out of state landlord Fisher and Payne would like to convert a the two family dwelling at 1725 holmden ave to a three family unit.

This would be in violation of section 337.03 which states that a three family dwelling is not permitted in a two family district.

The neighborhood is opposed as there are suspicions that the garage is being used as a hair cutting business and other parts of the property r being used as additional units, and the appellant needs to clean up the condition of the property.

Here is a picture of the property for reference: https://t.co/PsajgaekIr

Fisher states that he has no control over the supposed business that is being run in the garage and that there is no possibility of someone living in the basement.

Riordan (a representative of the neighborhood) speaks for the community and their standards for an out of state property manager: https://t.co/h3q3SHrCAO

LAST CASE! Calendar No. 22-111
Owners of property 2525 Thurman Ave. (which is under construction) are looking to build one concrete parking space and new drive apron to existing single family residence in a B1 Two-Family Residential District.

This would violate ordinance 349.05(a) which states no parking space shall be located within 10 feet of any wall of residential building that contains ground floor window.

Ruelens (on behalf of City Planning) states that this would set a bad precedence for building parking lots next to residential spaces.
This case’s appeal was denied. https://t.co/xdPIn86UX3

That’s it for me folks! Have questions? Think we got something wrong? Send any inquiries on the meeting or these tweets to @cledocumenters. Or email us at cledocumenters@gmail.com

Have a great day!! https://t.co/zf6Y3R9nWR