07/08/1986 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PLANNING COMMISSION , JULY 8, 1986 PAGE 2 the side, questioned if a fence would be installed on side property line and if dumpster shown on that same line could be relocated. There is now an existing chain link fence on the rear property of the existing building and also a fence which runs north between this building and the proposed building. The developer agreed to install a 5' high board on board fence, either as a continua.tion of the chain link fence, or he will replace the chain link with board on board, Mr. Modic, a neighbor, complained about the condition of the ditch which is to the rear of this proposal, but was not sure if it was on this property. The City Engineer will investigate. Mr. Wixted questioned if the space at the rear of building "A" and the existing building allowed enough-room for emergency vehicles: Building Commissioner Spino suggested that some lights on the rear of the building would be needed at night for security. J. Wixted moved to fonaard the Carter Plaza proposal to build two retail buildings to the Architectural Board of Review for their input and suggestions; to the Safety Department with the stipulation that they take a look at the distance between the . existing retail b uilding and the proposed retail building "A" in so far as the ability to maneuver safety vehicles in-and out of that area; to the Engineering Department-and ask that they pay particu-lar-=attention to drain- age on this parcel and how it might impact-the drainage ditch to the south of the parcel; and also to have the forester take a look at the landscape plan and since, there seems to be an abundance of trees in the rear of the lot, take a look at any of those trees that will be disturbed; it is our understanding that when Mr. Draeger presents this to the Architectural Board of Review, the plans will show the proposed fence screening for the residents on Columbia Road; and it has also been suggested relocating the dumpster, that is.now adjacent to the residential property, to the area between.the exist.ing building and b uilding "A", seconded by B. Gorris, and unanimously approved. 3) Ponderosa, Tnc. 25779 Lorain Road Proposal to construct vestibule addition. Mr. Jenk, representing Ponderosa, explained that this would be a complete interior renovation and they will be adding a front garden room where porch is located now (not just a vestibule as described above). They now have 180 seats and with new addition there will be 194. Building Commissioner Spino stated that parking.requirements had not.been checked, but they would require 97 spaces'(87 are shown on plan). Mr. Jenk believes that these spaces are 101 wide and lot could be restriped with diagonal spaces in order to p:ick up the additional spaces. If not, they will reduce the num- ber of seats. Sinee the original building had 200 seats, he questioned if a variance could have been granted. He will submit a revised parking plan to the next Planning'Commi.ssion meeting. It was noted that no dumpster is shown on-the plan but there is one on the property. Existing wall sign will be-removed-and-the=-new-sign-wi-l-l-be-smaller, pole sign_faces_ wi11 be_re- placed and a reader board will be added. Mr. Spino will check into the signage. B. Gorris moved to refer the Ponderosa addition to the Architec- tural Board of Review for any input that they may have, and.also to the Safety and Engineering Departments for any input that they may have; and, additionally, we would suggest that he would have the restriping of the parking Iot to be sure he is in compliance with the code at that point and that he is prepared on the signage, seconded by J. Brown, and unanimously approved.