07/23/1985 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

? PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 23, 1985 PAGE 4 equipment and if it violates the ordinance, they will then go to a beeper system. Mr. Dubelko advised that the neighbors were within their rights to call police because: the ordinance also states that if noise is un- reasonable, annoying, or irritating, it could still be a violation of the noise ordinance and that a decible reading would not necessarily be a factor. Regarding retention, neighbors objected that if storm water is pumped onto Lorain Road and there is a power failure, and the pump goes out, they would be flooded since retention system could not hold water. Mr. Schaller explained that they will be required to buffer the property so that overflow water would be retained on property. Mr. Gundy stated that a back up pump system (not electrical) could be installed and would be activated automatically in the event of a power failure. Neighbors still maintain that drainage in the area is not sufficient even with a retention system and there will be problems with any new development. City would be held liable if they approve a plan and any property damage or personal injury results from this approval. Mrs. Ely stated that she has had no water problems in the last 13 years and she wants to state for the record, if she has problems in the future she will institute legal proceedings against the City and anyone else her attorney names. Regard- ing fencing, n;eighbors would also like some type of trees in planting strip to buffer sound as well as the solid fencing. Neighbors to the west (res-- idential in use, commercially zoned) would like solid fencing as well, and also would like fence brought down closer to the street to keep people from trespassing on their property from front car lot. Mr. Halleen stated that since they have a semi-truck in their back yard, he sees no reason to put up a solid fence. Regarding the lighting, C.E.I. lights are planned on 30' poles, and Mr. Leonard, who lives adjacent to the existing Halleen lot, stated that these are the same type as are in the. front of the existing lot and they do shine on his property. These are designed to shine only on property involved and Mr. Halleen claims that he had a candle power check and lights were not shining on neighbors pro- perty, lights could be seen, but were not spilling overornto residential property. Chairman Burns read Police Department report by Captain Krynak who made the followirig comments: 1) I do not think there will be problem with passenger vehicles getting in and out of this business. I do think the semi - car carriers will have a difficult time. There seems to be very little area for them to turn around and they may try to back in or out. 2) Some of the parking spots seem small for trucks. 3) The plans do not indicate which spots would be used for customer parking, which for employees, etc. 4) The building would be difficult to cover for security checks. He also pointed out that Halleen employees were presently parking in North Olmsted Park, and it would appear that he did not have sufficient parking for his employees. The Fire Department had no objection to the proposal. Mr. Gorris suggested that the neighbors negotiate with Mr. Halleen by granting an easement for drainage into the ditch, since pump would be costly, in exchange for concessions on paging etc. Chairman Burns suggested that maintaining the ditch properly would help the water runoff. Mr. Wixted agreed that the paging system could be a problem. Mr. Dubelko stated that noise ordinance is not part of the Zoning Codes and Planning Commission could not disapprove on the basis of paging system being installed, but after being installed and it goes into operation, then it is up to the Safety Department to enforece the ordinance. Councilman