03/08/2005 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

well. Ms. Wenger asked if the fencing would continue along the northern Dewey Road property line, down the mound and around the baclc of the existing service garage to the end of the Porter Road property to ensure there would be no gap between abutting neighbor's property and theirs. The Commission was concerned that most of the arborvitaes planted along the existing service garage were dying. The Commission was concerned with the area between the Dewey mound and existing service garage remaining open. Mrs. Hoff-Smith questioned if the applicants outsource the maintenance of their landscaping needs. Ms. Wenger advised, that although the illumination level variance was granted, the commission had the flexibility to request the average reading of 10.4 be modified to better displace the light levels throughout the site. Mr. Yager asked the applicant to submit a new photometric plan as additional pole lights were removed, which would drastically change the readings. The Commission is looking for zero readings at the lot lines. Ms. Wenger requested the. applicants submit new elevation plans as Planning Commission had asked the applicant to address the second floor windows. Mr. Koeth questioned the manner in which new cars would be delivered. The applicant's were instructed to stager the fence off the mound and continue it to the front west corner of the existing garage. Arborvitaes are to be planted in front of the fence facing the vacant lot. The applicants may install a walking gate to maintain access to their vacant lot. Mr. Lasko questioned if the applicants intended to heat and air condition the new service bays to malce sure the doors remain closed. Applicant's Responses: Mr. Suhayda stated that the only fence being added would start at the northeast corner of the existing service garage along the property line east to 20-feet in from the Porter Road curb. For the most part, there is about 2-feet of property behind the existing service garage. Mr. Kula stated that he had a landscaper 'scheduled to address the plantings on the site. He added that under the last approval he was required to have specific plantings which are required to be maintained. A landscaping company maintained the vacant lot. Mr. Suhayda said that no changes were made to the elevations as Architectural Review Board and Landmarks approved them as they were submitted: The building would be constructed entirely out of brick. He reviewed that all delivery trucks would enter the lot at the Lorain Road entrance and circle behind the building. Once the vehicles are downloaded they would leave the lot via the Porter Road driveway. Mr. Kula stated that there would be no air conditioning and in the summer months the bays doors would remain open. He"further stated that they do not have a sound system or radios, nor does he intend to add them. Audience Comments: Mr. Maxim voiced that he is concerned about the increase in noise levels, fumes and traffic from the addition of six new automotive bays. He is also concerned that the 22 foot distance between the existing service garage and the mound, would only reinforce his concerns. He requested that mound and fencing be continued to the front corner of the existing garage. He suggested that the current opening has lead to people cutting through the lot and roaming around on the vacant lot late at night. Mr. Trapp questioned if all the lots the applicants owned were consolidated, would it change the residential lots to commercial. He questioned if the consolidation required legislative action. Mr. O'Malley advised the commission that it 'would be best to only request those lots zoned commercial be consolidated and final approval of the consolidation would be through Ciiy Council. Mr. Trapp suggested a sound survey be conducted in the area to get an idea of the projected noise levels. He does not believe that a fence with arborvitae iri front of it is going to buffer the residents from anything. Mr. Holter felt that the current layout of the proposed 3