Laserfiche WebLink
North Olmsted for some time and would like to remain in the city. Landscaping for the building will be <br />done where permitted. There are 2 parking spaces on the site that are parallel and one parking space will <br />be needed to meet what is required for the site. As far as deliveries there is a wide track, they deal with <br />heavy-duty stuff on the site and the double doors will be sufficient for were the building is located. Mr. <br />Gomersall suggested the board members had viewed the property and are concerned about the number of <br />variances being requested. Mr. Maloney suggested he reviewed the property in question very carefully. <br />He can not agree with a zero tolerance for the rear wall construction, because of safety, drainage, and <br />maintenance of the building would be difficult. When the proposal for Forest City was before tlus board <br />in 1997 they were encouraged to speak to the neighboring property owner for easement or possibly <br />buying additional land, by the looks of these plans that was not done. He has talked to many furniture <br />companies, which indicated trailer tractors that are used for deliveries rang from 40'feet to 53'feet in <br />length. Mr. Maloney suggested he had witnessed the trailer traffic being unloaded at their current <br />location, and it interfered with the public parking. There is a difference between auto parts being <br />delivered and bulky furniture. Mr. Maloney presented a scale model he made to show how far trailers <br />would extend under the proposed plan both in front and along the side of the building, and indicated it <br />would interfere with the proposed parking. He indicated he is against the addition to the existing <br />building. The proposed building covers more than 35% of the property, asphalt pavement covers the rest <br />of the site and there is an existing drainage problem. Mr. Maloney suggested he had never witnessed <br />trailer tractors of that size delivering auto parts for Forest City or NAPA. Mr. Hershcman suggested the <br />owner of the building could better answer the board's question regarding deliveries. Mr. Gomersall <br />suggested this would perpetuate a bad situation that now eYists. He would have trouble allowing the <br />variances. Mr. Koberna asked if the business would be used as a show room only. He agrees with Mr. <br />Maloney that the front apron is to small to have a trailer tractor brought in. Mr. Kush, the proposed tenant <br />oame forward and was sworn in. Mr. Kush indicated big trucks would not be coming to the building. <br />The only trucks that will be used on this site will be small trucks the size of UPS, trucks. The furniture <br />will be stored in a warehouse, located in North Ridgeville and this building will be a show room only. <br />Mr. Kobema reviewed that the building only being used as a show room was not brought out in the <br />Planning Commission meeting. Mr. iVlaloney suggested" he has seen a tractor trailer at the current store <br />location. W. Kush suggested the trucks would be directed to the warehouse. 1VIr. Kremzar asked if they <br />currently come to this store, why wouldn't they come to the new store. Mr. Kush suggested because the <br />only reason they came in the past was for directions, there would be no warehousing trucks at this site. <br />Mr. Kremzar inquired if tractor-trailers would be used to initially stock the store. Mr. Kush suggested the <br />fumiture would be brought to the store in a truck , the size of a UPS truck. Mr. Maloney asked where the <br />trucks would be unloaded. Mr. Kush indicated in the back of the building through the double doors. Mr. <br />Kremzar asked if the truck would be parallel or perpendicular to the street. Mr. Kush suggested the truck <br />would be backed in and would clear the sidewalk. Mr. Koberna asked if the developer had addressed the <br />drainage. Mr. Hershcman suggested there would be 2 retention basins which would tie into a roofs <br />reverse drainage to be held internally on the site. There will be nothing draining off on the neighboring <br />property. W. Maloney asked how the building would be maintained as they would have to be on <br />someone's property to work on their own building. Mr. Forester the landlord came forward to be sworn <br />in. Mr. Forester suggested he would like to address two of the questions the board members asked. 1) <br />the question of the building being on the zero lot line. 2) The question of imposing upon the abutting <br />neighbor. There is an easement that is presently in place. The easement covers the existing wall and a <br />little part of the sidewalk. 1VIr. Gomersall asked if there was an easement in place for the new addition. <br />Mr. Forester suggested he has spoken to the abutting neighbor regarding purchasing land. Horizons <br />Activity Center owns the land and they have indicated they were not interested in selling at this time. <br />Horizons indicated they would work with us on an easement for the addition. Mr. Forester suggested the <br />new building could be pulled back, so the building could be serviced easily. The architect has also <br />reversed the drainage on the roof so there would not be a problem with drainage and the existing doors on <br />the back of the building will be eliminated. Mr. Forester suggested he had spoken to Mr. Smith the <br />2