Laserfiche WebLink
" 't _?, .1,4 <br />recommendations of the Architectural Review Board, the variances granted by the <br />Boaxd of Zoning Appeals, with the recommendation that the architect take a look <br />at the strip center at Porter and Center Ridge Roads and see if it would be <br />possible to incorporate a similar type of mansaxd on the west side of this <br />building, either an the entire side or else partially down the side to screen the <br />H.V.A.C. units and present that to the B.Z.D. Comnittee of Council. The <br />Commission also suggests that the arehi.tect check with Rini Realty to see if they <br />would be in favor of tha.t type of mansard on the building. Also if there are any <br />complaints that the 100 watt lamps are too bright, they will have to be changed <br />to 70 watt lamps, seconded A. Skoulis, and unanimously approved. During the <br />motion, it was clarified that the existing signs would be reinstalled and that <br />the pole sign was not being altered. <br />3) Halleen Chevrolet, Inc. 27932 Lorain Road. <br />Proposal to renovate building and to construct two small additions. <br />Heard by Architectural Review Board October 20, 1993. <br />Mr. Giesser, attorney, explained that between the last Planning Commission <br />meeting and the Architectural Review Board meeting, the Board'of Zoning Appeals <br />approved the set back on the adjacent lot where the Partner's Lounge building is <br />located and the Architectural Board approved ttie landscaping in this setback, so <br />in additian to the renovation of the building, the landscaping and lighting on <br />that lot is to be included with this renovation. The members studied the plans <br />and Assistant Law Director Dubelko ma,de some explanations privately (not audible <br />on tape). Building Counissioner Conway advised that he visited the homes to the <br />north of this property, the first lot comes partially back, and the Halleen <br />property juts behind it; ane fixture installed an the East Park Drive side washes <br />that house, but that neighbor has no complaints about it. On the second lot, the <br />globe itself can be seen from the yard, the actual light is not a problem. He <br />walked tha.t property with the home owner and noted that the light was minimal and <br />was noz a DoLner, Dut tne ii-xtures on Lorc <br />He pointed out that the globes and fixtw <br />fixtures that were recently installed acr <br />light on Halleen's buffer, but he could nc <br />He noted that the probler.i seems to be the j <br />the owner, had advised that these lights ai <br />a customer stays later. Mr. ?Halleen, who <br />were normally turned off at 9:00 p.m. Mondz <br />these fixtures cannot really be shielded <br />Tallon stated that the lights should not : <br />try to shield the glare from the residents. <br />the lights on the lot across the streei <br />residents adequately. Mr. Giesser state( <br />shining on adjacent properties, it is be <br />almost impossible to rectify that. Mr. TE <br />would stop that, but they might have to ac <br />when they lowered the poles in the truck <br />Mr. Conway advised that 5 lights have been <br />placed on the Partner's lot, and he is conc <br />beyond the east end of the building will <br />houses next door. It was clarified for Mr. <br />problem that the Gommission had with the pr <br />he would agree to put the new fixtures on <br />Tallon agreed that this fixture would con <br />poles should not be a problem. It was estiis <br />in xoaa can be seen trom her property. <br />es.are not visible on the newer type <br />)ss the back property: There is some <br />t see any.on the residential property. <br />ixtures on Lorain Road. Mr. Halleen, <br />e turned off at about 9:00 p.m. unless <br />was present, verified that the lights <br />y through Thursday, and explained tha.t <br />and still give adequate light. bir. <br />?e used as a sign and asked that they <br />The shields that have been placed on <br />do not shield the lights from the <br />that the problem is not the light <br />ing able to see the bulb, and it is <br />Llon responded that lowering the poles <br />i lights. Mr. Giesser responded tha.t <br />_ot, there was more spill-over light. <br />3dded to this proposal which are to be <br />=rned that some of the lights that are <br />be seen frori the back yards of the <br />Halleen that the lights were the only <br />oposal. Mr. Halleen then advised that <br />all the light poles on the lot. Mr. <br />Lrol the light and the height of the <br />3ted that the poles sqere probably 25 <br />2