08/22/2007 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

mulch could be used to eliminate possible maintenance issues throughout the site. Evergreens ?- should be planted along the entire south side not just the southeast corner. All landscape beds are to be irrigated per code and the streetscape pavers are required as well. Mr. Bohlmann is concerned that the existing canopy which has three pumps can not accommodate another pump. He would lilce to see the applicant submit an accurate drawing showing the distance from pump to pump and the distance from pump to buildings. The site already has traffic issues and another pump will compound those problems. Vehicles stack up on the neighboring site waiting to get to an open pump. There is no traffic channelization so traffic patterns need to be shown on a set of plans. Mr. O'Malley advised the applicant that the law department would need to see the implied cross easement between the shared drives with the neighbor to the west. Mr. Bohlmann noted that improvements exceeded 50% therefore all utilities are required to be ran underground. Mr. Conway requested to see an accurate elevation of the canopy showing all columns. Mr. Bohlmann felt that the gas station should be tabled until new plans are submitted so the commission could make sound recommendations on the variances being requested. It would also give the applicant an opportunity to eliminate a few variances as well. Mr. Manning said that most of the topics brought up could be done but the owner needs to lcnow the outcome of the variances prior to putting anymore into plans. Ms. Wenger said it is commendable that the owner submitted letters stating willing changes. However without accurate plans and appropriate submittals, the commission can not make sound recommendations to the BZA nor can the commission give the applicant final approval. Mr. Manning said time is of the essence and the owner has stipulated what they are willing to do so there is no reason to not move forward. Mr. Lasko noted that it was not uncommon for an applicant to be aslced to malce modifications and return before the commission prior to going to BZA. He reiterated Mr. Bohlmann's comments that the commission could not make sound recommendations on the variances required with the current plans before them. If the commission has to make recommendations based on the current plans their recommendation may not be favorable, however if the applicant returns with accurate drawings the commission can malce sound recommendations. Mr. Manning asked how delaying would impact the timeline for approval. After reviewing the deadlines the chairman advised that the applicant would be in a better position to return with new plans for the commission then go to the BZA. Mr. Mahoney questioned if the applicants were in a position to meet the August 23, 2007 submittal deadline for BZA and the architect said he could not meet the deadline. Therefore the applicant would be better served returning for recommendatibns. Ms. Wenger cautioned the applicant that adding a parking space to the east would create a variance and Mr. Conway reviewed the ground sign as shown does not meet code. The Commission recapped what should be submitted: 1. Photometric plan showing number of existing lights and new lighting placement and averages 2. The rear (south) of the building is to have paint removed to reveal the brick 3. All utilities are to be shown ran underground 4. Accurate measurements from pump to pump and pump to building shown and total number of pumps 5. Loading dock location and details 6. Landscape recommendations are to be shown 7. All landscaping is to be irrigated 8. Accurate detailed sign package 9. Air dispenser is to be reflected on plan and dumpster enclosure details shown 3