11/22/2005 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• 10). Storm water issues for engineering department should be addressed • 11). Small loading zone is sufficient for current use Mr. King the Attorney for Carlton Park Apartments and Columbia Square Apartments believed that the commission did a good job addressing most of the associations concerns listed in his letter. Water detention plans should be submitted for the engineering departments review. Would lilce possible lighting issues addressed by the applicant to make sure proposed lighting plan meets city codes. The site is very small and addressing possible noise issues residents would like to see detailed study not just summary of each possible machine used. Would like to see detailed study showing noise levels of other self serve facilities as noise levels are a major concern which will impact the abutting neighbors. Buffering issues are being addressed adequately by the commission as well as the landscaping. The remaining issues his clients believe adversely impact them and would like address are: 1). Foreseeable traffic issues i.e. moving west drive 10-feet further east, cars backing up along Lorain Road blocking the abutting neighbors private road and patrons of the car wash using the private drive as a staging area while waiting in line. 2). The required front setbaclc requires a variance which he believes is significant and would impact his clients. 3). More information regarding emergency exist issue. He has seen an additional designated lane for emergencies at other car washes. He does not believe that the size of the lot can adequately accommodate a business of this type. He believes that a different type of business should be looked at for the site. He suggested that the applicants were less than forthcoming as there had been no engineering plans submitted or water calculations submitted as requested twice by the city engineer. Applicants also say there would be no vacuums or vending machines now but could be later. Mr. Koeth suggested the city would look at posting a sign prohibiting cars from bloclcing the condominiums driveway. The commission further believed that with the number of car washes currently located within North Olmsted and the staging area for the proposed site would accommodate possibly 14 cars they did not foresee the proposed carwash traffic backing up along Lorain Road as it was not currently a problem for existing sites. Mr. O'Malley advised that it was not uncommon for the engineering department to draft memos addressing specific engineering issues even more than once, which has been seen in the past. It is not rood nor uncommon for the developer to ignore the letters as they are subject to comply with the City's engineering and storm water management controls. Once applicants are through this part of the approval process they will not be issued any permits until all engineering requirements are met. Mr. Casey advised that the civil engineering plans once submitted would show that they would have an underground detention system which would meet city requirements. Furthermore as there will be more greenspace on the site then there currently is now it would also decrease water runoff. A representative from the testing company would be asked to attend the commissions next meeting. J. Lasko motion to send North Olmsted Laser Carwash of 25054 Lorain Road to BZA with the following stipulations: A). No vacuums or vending machines are to be on the site/lot. B). Due to the possible adverse impact on abutting neighbors hours or operations are to follow city regulations under chapter 729 which regulates hours of operation (6:00 am to 10:00 pm). C). The proposed vinyl fence is to be replaced with a brick wall to separate the proposed parcel froYn abutting parcels and serve as an additional sound/noise barrier. D). The driveway is to be moved 10-feet to the east to accommodate city code requirements. Variance recommendations: 1). A 15 foot variance for front building setback. 2). A 186.28 foot variance for being within 500 feet of church property. 3). A 10 foot variance for front drive to close 7