Laserfiche WebLink
along the rear but would look to adding more landscaping along the front. Mr. Malone said as <br />the curb cut is being resized he would like to see brick pavers installed. He commended the <br />applicant for using permeable pavers along the back parking area. Mr. Pinter said the monument <br />has not been designed to date; the sign shown is an example of may be installed later. The wall <br />sign will be the same size and scale of the previous sign and the lettering will be aluminum <br />letters. Mr. Bohlmann said it was a good idea to keep the arborvitaes along the back for <br />buffering. He asked that the extra wires along the front east and west side of the building be <br />removed. He questioned if the existing utility pole on the site would be removed and Mr. Pinter <br />said it was not scheduled to be removed. Mr. Mitchell said abandoned poles are the owner's <br />responsibility to remove. Mr. Bohlmann asked if there would be a dumpster in the back and Ms. <br />Hinkel said the dumpster will remain inside and only place outdoors when being picked up. Mr. <br />Bohlmann asked that approval be contingent upon if any items are stored outdoors it will be kept <br />within an enclosure with gates. Mr. Peepers questioned who owned the building and Ms. <br />Wenger said the city owns the building. <br />Mr. Peepers said he was concerned that noise would become an issue from the bikes. He <br />questioned running the motor cycles outdoors for testing. Mr. Pany felt the rear overhead door <br />should be kept down during working hours. He asked if the septic tank shown on the plan would <br />remain and Mr. Mitchell said the tank could be a washout tank. Mr. Pinter said they have to <br />have the tank checked to see what it is and what it was used for. Mr. Parry agreed that the rear <br />landscaping was needed but didn't feel the east side landscaping needed to be as dense as it is <br />abutting commercial property. A brief discussion ensued pertaining to a solid or board on board <br />fence and Mr. Rerko said a board on board is a better sound barrier then a solid fence. <br />Discussion occurred about the west drive being two-way traffic as an existing condition and rear <br />traffic will be for employees and customer parking will be in front. The proposed drive will need <br />to be sized to meet code which is 18 ft wide. <br />Mr. Stare who owns the property to the west said he is concerned about noise levels. If there is <br />no air conditioning how can work be conducted during the suminer months without the doors <br />being open. He didn't think a motorcycle shop was appropriate for the site. Mr.1Vlahoney asked <br />the zoning of the site and surrounding areas. Ms. Wenger said the site is zoned commercial as is <br />to the east and west lots there is only a very small area of residential to the northwest corner of <br />the site. Mr. Mahoney said the last use was a fire house and he did not feel the proposed use <br />would adversely affect the neighborhood. Mr. Pinter said this is not a performance shop it is a <br />restoration shop. Mr. Bassett said he rebuilds engines, tool and die work, and part fabrication so <br />there are less motorcycle noises. Ms. Hinkel noted that there would be no work conducted in the <br />building along the west side as it is all offices or separate compartments all work areas are on the <br />east side of the building. Mr. Bohlmann said he did not believe noise would be an issue at the <br />site and believed that the use would fit the area. Mr. Mahoney voiced his agreement with Mr. <br />Bohlmann. A brief discussion pertaining to requiring the overhead door to remain closed or not <br />during hours of operation ensued. It was noted that the overhead door was glass so requiring it <br />to be closed would not buffer noise. Irrigation was brought up and the commission felt it would <br />not be warranted if the brick pavers were installed. The applicant preferred not to have brick <br />pavers they would like to have more green space. Ms. Wenger pointed out that the only area <br />which would require pavers is the center drive. Mr. O'Malley advised the commission that they <br />were within their right to require pavers along the entire front. Commissioners felt not requiring