03/09/1993 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

? ?. .- -- -• _ Mrs. Schiely objected to what the Council ha.d done to the city and complained about its commercial growth. Mr. Orlowski suggested that she talk to her elected officials some of whom were present. Mr. Barascki maintained that they ca.nnot relocate the chapel because there is?no other area in the park large enough and without burials an it where they could put it. Councilman McKay stated that Coupcil had objected to this origirially because they believed that this use was more similar to a funeral home than to any thing else. Mr. Dubelko again explained what had gone before during the court procedures and advised that the city had fought this to the highest court possible which ruled in favor of Sunset Memorial. He stated that the neighbors should fight now for buffering from noise, lighting, etc. and that was all this board could do. If the proposal is built and it is creating a nuisance the residents can ask for legislation to control that. He used the city's regulations pertaining to drive through restaurants as an example of legislation which was passed to protect residents and was subsequently -_; upheld by the courts. Mr. Wilms believed that this could become a funeral home. Mrs. Baracski stated this would not be possible in this area; that the cemetery has been there since 1929, before the residents, and services have been conducted since the 19501 s. Mr. McKay suggested that there should be an eight foot high mound for maximwn buffering. The developers doubted that there would be room for that and again mentioned that some funeral processions would be eliminated and the new drive will be off a four lane road. .Mrsa Schielp advised the Commission that Mrs. Baracski had mentioned putting in some pines across the street in the neighbors' yards which might help to block the lights. Mr. Skoulis explained that this proposal will be going to -the Architectural Review Board and the developers and the neighbors might get together there to work out out plans for proper screening, -lighting, and protection from traffic. L. Orlowski moved to refer the Sunset Memorial Park proposal, 6265 Colunbia Road, to the Architectural Review Board for :their review of the landscaping with particular attention paid to . mounding in:the front with additional landscaping to shield the building and the parking area from the street and these neighbors, to request that they:look at the color scheme of the building, the lighting with the suggestion that the chapel .be lit only during business hours with possibly some IriLnimal ground security lighting, to eonsider 12 fooz high light poles in the parking area with shields to direct the light down -to the parking lot area only. To refer this proposal to the Safety Department for their input on the new proposed entrance versus the existing entrance to see if something could be worked out on this (if one entrance is better than the other or if two.access would be better for this particular enterprise), seconded by A. Skoulis, and unanimously approved. Prior to the vote Mr. Gorris explained to the residents that the proposal would proceed to the A.R.B. and return to Planning Coitunission two weeks from this evening, and that final approval would be by Council. He suggested that the residents try to work out their problems with the owriers ahead of time, and reminded them that if this establishment did become a problem, they could contact their elected officials. 2). Little Cottage Doll House, 30036 Zorain Road. Proposal to determine if "Reader and Advisor" is a like and simi.lar use as. specified in Section 1139..01(b) and as required in Section 1123.10. No representative was present. Buildi.ng Commissioner Conway explained that this use was not listed as a use in the new code which now gives specific uses, but this board can incorporate a use that is not specified. Irlr. Conway was not sure what a Reader and Advisor actually did. The members were concerned that the time limitation might nm out if this were tabled until the next meeting. The owner, had withdrawn from last mnth's meeting. Assistant Law Director Dubelko advised 3