10/04/2007 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

felt thaf the variances for illumination in drive and .2 fc should be met as they were so minimal. Mr. Brooker reviewed that the areas between the buildings as well as along side, behind and along the front are all referenced as drives and reviewed the manor in which the average was reached: Mr. Conway said that if the applicants state that they will comply with 5 fc in front row the variance can be withdrawn and he would verify the reading with the fax received earlier in the day. Mr. Broolc said variances numbers 6& 7 listed are withdrawn. The new light poles will be installed on 30 inch bases however the existing flush bases which are located in landscape beds they would lilce to continue to use as the flush bases are within landscaping beds only. The purpose of the bases is to protect the light fixtures however the landscape areas will not have vehicles so the bases are not really needed and would detour from the beds appearances. A variance for flood lights on front poles he believed that code allows as long as the light does not shine out 90 degrees vertical. The lights will be angled to 15 degrees and all front poles will be a maxiinum of 20 feet high with general luminaries at the top. At 15 feet on each pole there will be a food light mounted which will be angled 15 degrees and have shrouds on all 4 sides of the light to highlight vehicles. Mrs: Sergi questioned if the new or replaced signs would block semi delivery vehicles from dowriloading or entering the site. Mr. Moreno said that the vehicle deliveries will now be able to enter the site forward make their deliveries and maneuver the site to leave with the new layout. Mr. Coriway had no objections to the existing signs being reused and the setbaclc was due to a canopy. The light variances are for being on neighboring property which is commercial and as long as the residential property is protected he has no objections. The concrete pedestals are required to protect the poles so if only the landscape beds have no base it will be a maintenance issue 'for the owner. The flood lights on the front poles are prohibited by code so the variance stands. He is concerned that the glare will affect rear residential sites. Mr. Moreno said the currerit flood lights which are on the poles now are being replaced with proper lights which have shrouds'and will be shielded. Mrs. Sergi asked about the proposed fence and cherry tree possibly being :saved. Mr. Moreno believed that the style of fence being installed and the landscaping being planted will bloclc lights from being visible to the neighbors. The cherry tree unfortunately can not be saved. Mr. O'Malley recommended the board place the condition that any variances granted be based upon tlle lot consolidation being approved. Mr. Conway requested that any variances granted be based bn plans dated Received by Building September 18, lighting September 28, 2007. Boarci inembers reviewed the property could yield a reasonable return and beneficial uses continue without variances. The variances are not substantial, the character of the neighborhood would not be altered nor would adjoining properties be adversely affected. Governmental services would not change, owner purchased the property with knowledge of the zoning restrictions and the spirit and intent of the zoning code would be observed granting the variances. Mrs.:' Sergi moved, seconded by Ms. Williamson, to approve CMS07-0021: Mercedes/Porsche Dealership; 28450 Lorain Road their proposal wlaich consists of signage and site improvements and that the following variances are granted: 1. A variance for 3 additional ground signs on a lot, (code permits 1, applicant shows 4), section (1163.26 (A)). 2. A variance for ground signs closer than allowed, (eode requires 200', applicant shows less `than 2001), section (1163.26 (A)), 3. A variance for 3 additional signs for Mercedes, code permits 1, applicant shows 3), section (1163.27 (A)). 10