12/12/1995 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Duffy, representing BP, presented plans for the eventual reconstruction of the service station at the corner of Stearns and Lorain Roads. He explained that the site plan is based on drawings created by the County Engineering Department for the widening and extend.ing Stearns Road and also includes the property abutting theirs on which a convenient store is located. He explained that the county will be taking about 12 feet of their property facing Lorain Road and about 20 feet along Stearns which is basically a total take of their land since it will take the underground storage tanks and about half of the fueling islands on Lorain Road. They have taken an option on the abutting property and eventually will do a lot consolidation to create a lot which will be big enough for their needs. Even though they do not know when the road will be built, he needs an approval of these plans in order to close the deal with the adjacent property. This plan shows both the existing and proposed buildings. After approval is given, they may build the canopy and the building with the existing curb cut with the right of way line as it exists now, and do the balance when the highway work is done; or, they may just continue to operate as is, and do the complete construction after the highway work is completed. The county has not given a definite date for the construction. He presented brochures showing prototype stations and explained that they would put their store practically in the foot print of the old building, but it would face Steams Road, not Lorain as the existing one does; and the canopy with four pumps would also face Stearns. He again explained that if they do this construction before the road take, they will operate with the existing curb cuts, street sign, and perimeter improvements, and after the take there will be a singular curb cut on Stearns and a singular curb cut on Lorain, which will eliminate 2 curb cuts on Lorain Road. He believed that when they do install a new sign it will conform to the codes and they do not intend to ask for sign variances at this time. He noted that the property to the south was residential, but he believed that it would eventually become commercial. ffthey had to build within the code, this would be an unbuildable lot, and they will need variances for both the building and the canopy ; however, the existing canopy is non conforming and the new canopy will be less non-conforming than the existing one. The building will need a front setback variance. He believed that this is a vast improvement over what is there now, and since they have to rebuild, it will be for a more efficient operation. He clarified for the members that this site will be built, but the time element is unlaiown. If the entire project were built before the roadwork was done, the county might have to dig some of it up, and reimburse them They believe it would be more prudent to wait until the county has dug it up, and then put in the new portions, landscaping, eta The footprint of the building and canopy will not change, but he does not know if they will be building it in 1996 or 1997; however, he must close on the adjacent property. He clarified that there would be no car wash, but the station would be open 24 hours. Mr. Brennan is concerned abou.t the residents to the south since the building will be turned so that the traffic will be coming in and out next to them for 24 hours a day. He questioned why the dumpster could not be moved away from the residents yard. Mr. Duffy responded that it cou.ld be moved, but since there are two street sides, if it is moved to the other side, it would be visible from Lorain Road. This location is behind the fence which is adjacent to the neighbor and the dumpster will be enclosed. He also pointed out that the wall of the building next to the neighbor is a solid with only a man door used by employees. Now the dumpster is serviced through an easement at the rear of the property. Mr. Manuing noted that the commission does not want the neon light stripes that are shown on the canopy. Since it was clarified far Mr. Duffy that there is nothing in the code prohibiting the neon stripes, he advised that he would make application to the architectural review board for them, He maintained that this was only a 3/8th inch neon tube, set back into a convex indentation which is painted a different shade of green and creates an architectural accent to the front of the canopy, it does not illuminate the canopy, and it is not adjacent to the residents' property. There is no lighting on the canopy. Mr. Tallon advised that other developers have been denied neon stripes. He further noted that are no landscape buffers shown on Lorain or Stearns Road. Mr. Duffy responded that there will be but, until the County's plans are final, they are not sure where the lines will be on Loraiu and Stearns. He would be willing to make guarantees 4