09/28/1999 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. ,,. indicated that the sign was in a 35-foot triangle and the overall height was too high. Mr. Schill suggested that he thought a pylon sign was allowed more height. Mr. Rymarczyk reviewed that the sign was a ground sign and in a 35 foot triangle. Mr. Schill indicated that he did not understand. Mr. Rymarczyk commented that a 35-foot triangle needed to be created from the drive and the right of way line. The ground sign is located within that triangle so a variance will be needed. Mr. Schill questioned if the sign was moved would a variance still be needed. Mr. Rymarczyk indicated that even if the sign were moved the applicant would need a variance. Mr. Tallon suggested creating the triangle and placing the sign were it would require the least amount of variances. Mr. Schill questioned if the building could be addressed now and return for the ground sign later as winter was approaching. Mr. Rymarczyk suggested showing the change to the Architectural Review Board. R. Tallon motioned to send Thomasville Furniture of 27336 Lorain Road and their proposal which consists of remodeling the front elevation, installing landscaping, to the Architectural Review Board. The forester is to be asked to look at the size and type of tree that should be used for the site. The board would like to see cuts of the outside light fi3rtures, as well as materials that will be used on the outside of the building. Such as the type of shingles, color samples, tile and parking lot diagram. Thomasville will return to Planning Commission on October 26, 1999. The motion was seconded by T. Brennan and unanimously approved. Motion Carried. IV. NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND SUBDIVISIONS: V. COMIvIUIVICATIONS: The Planning Commission will need to review the following ordinances: that were tabled at the September 14, 1999, meeting as well as the two new ordinances submitted for review. 1). Ordinance No. 99-106: An ordinance creating new section 1139.12 of the North Olmsted Zoning Code regulating the location of free-standing industr'ialized units on commercial property. R. Tallon asked the Assistant Law Director to review ordinance 1139.12 for the board. Mr. Dubelko bndicated that there was presently nothing within the cities current code to regulate modular units on commercial property. The ordinance is being sponsored by Councilman Miller to allow the City the right to regulate the use of modular units on commercial property in the future. Such as regulating their use and location, it is basically for esthetic reasons to preserve property values along Lorain Road. If owners are going to use such units along Lorain Road, then they will be used for an ancillary type building and sufficiently away from Lorain Road. So that it does not become a part of the overall esthetics of Lorain Road. 1139.12 is worded in such a manor that it has to be an accessory building, 100 feet from public right of way, which puts it back far enough from view. It has to be surrounded with landscaping, be approved by the Planning Commission and the only business that can be operated out of the unit is the same as the main building on the property. The building is not to be taken into consideration for maximum sign face area and there is an exception for construction trailers. Mrs. O'Rourke questioned if something was stated that the modular unit would need to match the main building in color. Mr. Tallon commented that he thought that should be left up to the Architectural Review Board to 3