Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Generators topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Bratenahl BZA approves most generator placements, asks for screening and urges code review

Village of Bratenahl Board of Zoning Appeals · March 6, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Board of Zoning Appeals unanimously approved most homeowner requests to site emergency generators — typically in side yards or on corner lots — with conditions requiring vegetation or screening, and voted to ask Village Council to consider a zoning change to reduce routine variances.

Bratenahl — The Village of Bratenahl Board of Zoning Appeals on March 6 unanimously approved a series of homeowner requests to place standby generators on small lots and corner properties, while requiring additional screening and asking the village council to consider a code amendment so homeowners won’t need frequent variances.

The cluster of requests came after staff said many homeowners have sought generators since last summer’s storm. Mayor Keith Benjamin told the Board, “almost all of them are requests for variances to install generators. I'm assuming this is an outcome of last August's storm.” Planner Kris Hopkins reviewed each site, noting that Bratenahl’s zoning requires generators to be in a rear yard and to meet 20-foot setbacks from rear and side lot lines; several small and corner lots make that standard impractical.

The Board approved the following with conditions (screening required unless noted): 10 West Mather Lane — side-yard placement; complies with the 20-foot side setback but sits 17'5" from the rear lot line (2'7" variance); approved with landscaping to screen visibility to a nearby house. 18 West Mather Lane — proposed at 6 feet from the side lot line (14-foot variance); the HOA later provided approval and the Board required screening from the adjacent house. 123 Hampton Court — side-yard placement behind existing bushes; approved. 46 Haskell Drive — end unit within a gated community; the proposal crosses HOA common area but was approved with screening required. 112 Haskell Drive — proposed 7'11" from side lot line (12'1" variance); approved with screening. 10494 Lakeshore Boulevard — corner lot where code defines there is no rear yard; applicants proposed placement behind an eight-foot wall and gate; approved as presented.

Contractor Zach Jordan, who appeared for several applicants, explained technical siting constraints and clearances, saying installers follow manufacturer rules including maintaining a minimum three-foot clearance from the unit: “you have to have three-foot clearance from the front and the sides,” he told the Board.

One front-yard request, 10007 Lakeshore Boulevard, was tabled because the application lacked a precise proposed location and photos; the Board asked the Building Administrator to obtain a definitive siting and photographic evidence before the item returns.

Votes at a glance: all generator motions listed above were approved by unanimous roll call votes where recorded. The Board also voted unanimously to request that Council consider a zoning code amendment to reduce the need for repetitive generator variances and to establish clearer administrative permitting steps for common situations.

Why it matters: After the August storm many Bratenahl homeowners want reliable backup power. The BZA’s actions will allow several installations to proceed quickly, but the Board’s recommendation to Council signals a desire to make the permitting process more predictable and less reliant on repeated variance requests.

What’s next: The Building Department will follow up on the tabled front-yard application (10007 Lakeshore). The BZA’s recommendation to Council will be placed on an upcoming Council agenda for discussion; if Council wishes, staff and the law director will draft proposed code language for review.