Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Skoulis objected because the members did not have the A.R.B. of the last meeting. <br />Mr. Skoulis stated that the person who made the motion last week was not present <br />at this meeting, in view of that he would like the discussion tabled until they <br />luiow what the A.R.B. had recommended and there would be no guessing. Mr. Thomas <br />clarified for Mr. Skoulis that the Architectural Review Board has always been an <br />advisory board to the Commission. Mr. Skoulis reiterated that he would like <br />discussion of the landscaping, mounding, and building delayed until the next <br />meeting. He advised that he has had several discussions with Mr. Bellinger of the <br />O.D.O.T. regarding the curb cuts. Mr. Bellinger was confused about what Mr. <br />Papandreas was asking for since the letter only mentioned one ctirb cut and the <br />plans showed twoa Mr. Skoulis advised that Mr. Bellinger would do nothing on this <br />request until a new evaluation is made of that land and presented to O.D.O.T. Mr. <br />Skoulis reiterated what had been previously indicated that the second curb cut <br />would be treated: as a new request and would have to be approved by Council before <br />they can act on the second curb cut. He advised that the original request for a <br />curb cut was at 1269.33 feet, and the letter written by Mr. Papandreas in March <br />put the curb cut at 1149. feet. Mr. Bellinger i.mderstood that that would put the <br />curb cut directly in front of the Wal-Mart building, not 50 or 100 feet away. He <br />has noticed signs on the fence around the garden center at other Wal-Ma.rt <br />locations giving directions to the lube area, advertising merchandise, along with <br />toys and equipment displayed in the perimeter of the garden center, and all the <br />stores had mulch, shrubs, railroad ties, etca in the parking lot. He stated that <br />P7r. 'Itucker had advised that in Medina, pallets had to be stored outside because <br />of fire laws and warned the Conunission that in all probability pallets will be <br />stacked outside. Mr. Conway does not luiow what fire code that will be but advised <br />that this building will be fully suppressed due to its size. He could see no <br />objection to having pallets stored inside for temporary stores, since there are <br />all kinds of other combustibles inside. Mr. Skoulis repeated what Mr. Tucker had <br />said about the truck unloading procedures and wanted the Commission to know that <br />there would always be trucks at the the loadino dock. He would like to talk about <br />mounding buffering, etc. at another meeting. Mrs. Diver, a resident whose <br />backyard abuts parcel "E", was concerned about what impact Wal-Mart will have on <br />on parcel "E" and the surrounding residents and repeated the concern that there <br />could be a Sam's Club on parcel "E". She wondered why Wal-Mart could not <br />compromise and reduce the size of the store by the 13,000 square feet that is in <br />the garden center since they advertise that they are good neighbors. Mrs. <br />Schuler, representing the condominium associations, advised that their <br />associations agreed with what Mr. Skoulis and Mrs. Diver had stated. She advised <br />that Mr. J.T. Darcy, the executive director of the Northeast Ohio Masonry, had <br />advised the Architectural Review Board that brick was superior to wood. He was <br />unable to stay for this entire meeting, but he did leave a tapes for the board to <br />review and he and the architect on the board did agree that an 8 foot wall will <br />not ca.ve in, crack, or fall in. He advised that he would be happy to answer any <br />questions that any of the members might have. The 8 foot brick wall is what their <br />association wants. Councilman McKay asked that the members compare the first <br />motion of the Architectural Review Board with what was passed at tonight's <br />meeting. He stated that he has never seen so much waffjing as he has with this <br />proposal. He asked that they also compare the first traffic study with the second <br />one and take note of the contradictions. He pointed out the contradictions in the <br />review on the drive in front of the building and the information submitted as to <br />the effects on the streets east of Columbia Road. He noted that with 8 trucks a <br />day there will be 16 trips and there is a traffic hazard since trucks will have <br />to cross 4 lanes of traffic to get into the property. He also questioned <br />contradictions regarding land use, since it had been stated that single family <br />homes could not be built next to I-480 and homes are being built at another point <br />10