05/24/2005 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Regarding the 5 foot variance for parking setback along Dewey Road, 10 foot variance for parking setback along north property line, and variance for irrigation, Ms. Wenger said there is no reason why the applicant cannot meet the code. Regarding the 68 foot variance for display of inerchandise in front setback, Ms. Wenger said this is another case where there could be a little give and take. Regarding the 5.04 foot candle variance for illumination level, Ms. Wenger said this is for the new section only of Dewey and Lorain. Regarding the 98 foot variance for minimum distance of luminary from residential property, Mr. Rymarczyk said this is for both lights on Dewey Road. Regarding the lighting trespass variance, code requires that foot candle readings must be 0 at the lot line. Ms. Wenger said that it was the recommendation from the meeting with Mr. Halleen, architect and legal counsel to increase the amount of buffering and incorporate some mounding, fencing and landscaping onto the site. The applicant has not done what was requested. Resident Comments: Mr. James Maxim, 5211 Dewey Rd is concerned about the access proposed for Dewey and how the lights shine onto the neighbors. He indicated this occurs on the northern portion of the site on Lorain Road and their neighbors. R. Koeth moved to recommend the use variance, W. Spalding seconded the motion. Hoff-Smith-no, Bohlmann-no, Lasko-no with comment unless or until the applicant would be willing to meet the requirements that if this were commercial property in relations to setback and other requirements, Hreha-no, with the same considerations of Mr. Lasko, Spalding-no, echoed Mr. Lasko and Mr.-Hreha's comments, Koeth-no. Motion failed. R Koeth moved to recommend parking setback variance along Loraan Road. W. Spalding seconded the motion. Hoff-Smith-yes, Bohlmann-no, Lasko - yes with comment in terms of the overall review of potential development plan, he would expect that the yes vote is contingent upon the fact that other. requirements and other considerations would, in fact, be accommodated, Hreha-yes, along with Mr Lasko's comments would maintain the current situation on Lorain Road, Spalding-yes agree with Mr. Hreha, Koeth-yes. Motion passed. R. Koeth moved to recommend parking setback variance along Dewey Road. J. Lasko seconded the motion. Hoff-Smith-no, Bohlmann-no, Lasko-no, Hreha-no, Spalding-no, Koeth- no with comment that the 20' can be met. Motion failed. R. Koeth moved to recommend parking setback variance along north property line. J. Lasko seconded. Hoff-Smith-no, Bohlmann-no, Lasko-no with comment that along the lines with Mr. Koeth's comment in relation to the earlier motion that without any adverse impact on the applicant this could be met, Hreha-no, Spalding-no, Koeth-no.. Motion failed. R. Koeth moved to recommend display of inerchandise variance in front setback.