Laserfiche WebLink
r-- <br />as a car lot for over a year. They intend to use this area as a car lot again, <br />but because there are 3 bui.ldings on the property, and because of the setback of <br />the building they will be using, they wish to display vehicles immediately beyond <br />the 7 foot. Mr. Gomersall preferred that they install an approximate 20 foot <br />green area with pods an which to display vehicles as suggested in the previous <br />request. Law Director Gareau questioned how customers could get to the tire store <br />in the rear. Mr. Giesser stated that there are drives on both Lorain and Porter <br />Roads. John Thomas, a resident and a member of Planning Commission, came forward <br />at this time and stated his opposition to any variance considering that no <br />improvements are being made to the property. He advised that County Planning <br />Commission had presented slides of blighted areas during the review of the Master <br />Plan, and if this request is allowed it would match those blighted areas very <br />closelya A11 the Boards in the City are trying to improve the aesthetics along <br />Lorain Road, and he is opposed to any developer coming forward to merely plant <br />his merchandise down in an existing lot without any improvements, additions, or <br />changes that would create some kind of buffer or visual approach to the property. <br />He sees no hardship, they. are not being required to use this property which is <br />poorly developed and has poor ingress and egress into the area. He believed this <br />would ereate an tmsafe condition for cars coming in and aut of the tire store. He <br />clarified that this was his personal opinion, and that he was not representing <br />the P1arLn;ng Cominission. Law Director Gareau explained that imder the old Zoning <br />Code there was a provision that there used car lot had to be associated with and <br />adjacent to a new car dealership, and for some reason the language of this <br />section was changed. He could not say now (under the new code) that a used car <br />lot was excluded, since the anly requirement is that there must be a show room. <br />He is hoping this definition is changed quickly. This lot would give an <br />impression of a Kamm's corners abandoned gas stations being turned into used car <br />lots. He pointed out that now the cars are back 75 feet and there is some kind of <br />barricade, presumably to direct people.to the tixe store. Mr. Giesser responded <br />that this was to judge the 75 foot setback and also to prohibit the customers of <br />adjacent businesses from parking in this lot. Mr. Gomersall stated that all they <br />are doing is putting up signs in order to sell cars. Mr. Grace agreed with what <br />Mr. Thomas said, but pointed aut that these are not developers since they are not <br />developing anything. He stated i.f a developer did come in with viable <br />improvements it would be different..Mr. Giesser clarified that this developer has <br />owned this property for many years, including the period when it was a car <br />dealership. The previous tenant was rentingm Mr. Giesser stated that they will be <br />sprucing up the building, adding an awni.ng, and doing extensive interior <br />remodeling. In these economic times they cannot tear the building down, but the <br />building does block the view of the lote Mr. Grace would like a plan that would <br />define by green areas or raised curbs the ingress or egress for the tire store <br />and believed this should be referred to Planning Commission. Mr. Giesser pointed <br />out that there is also egress to Porter Roada Mr. Gomersall stated that the only <br />plus in this proposal were the flowers that are to.be planted around the ground <br />sign, and stated that the members are in agreement that some green area should be <br />installedo Mr.. Giesser stated that now that he lmows that a 20 foot buffer would <br />be acceptable, he can discuss this wi.th the awners. Mre Gomersall clarified that <br />the Board has suggested 20 feet with pods and parking behind that. Mr. Grace <br />stated that 20 feet was a bare min;Tmum, it is not guaranteed that the Board will <br />agree to a bare minimUm, they have stated that they will agree to less than 75 <br />feeta Mr. Gareau stated that this area is close to the Historic District, the <br />center of old town, and not only does the Board have to consider these two <br />proposals, there is no indication of the future use of the existi.ng truck lot. <br />Now there is an opportunity for the developer to make an impact in an area that <br />3