05/23/2000 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

almost 40 years and this is a rare occasion. Mr. Richie indicated that Mr. Rego is investing $60,000 into a machine that would be used at the most 15-20 times in a year, and that is in an effort to be a"good neighbor." Mr. Rymarczyk indicated the Building Department would want a letter from the EPA with the verification. Mr. Richie indicated that he would accommodate that. He reviewed that in looking at a pernut, Mr. Rego would have to fill out a lengthy application. Mr. Rymarczyk suggested that it would not be a problem obtaining the verification from the EPA then. Mr. Richie iridicated it would not be a problem. Mr. Scanlon indicated that the applicant needed to obtain a building permit to install the booth, with the plans and specifications they would include the approval letter from the EPA. Mr. Richie indicated that the applicant has already submitted proper applications for the fire suppression system and it has already been approved by the in the city by Lee Gerber, P. Deichmann City Engineer and D. Conway, Building Commissioner. Now, when the applicant applies for a building permit, at the same time, the electrician would apply for the proper electrical permit, and what other sub-contractors involved would apply. Mr. Richie would supply all the information the building needs from the EPA. Mr. Spalding questioned if there was a building in existence where this type of work was being performed presently. Mr. Rego indicated he had been in the supermarket business for 42 years, he retired and now he would like to do something he has always wanted to do. Mr. Spalding questioned if there was an organization that helps him. Mr. Rego indicated that he has a crew of 8 people that has combined 150 years experience in this business. Mr. Spalding questioned if there were any other facilities as to what Mr. Rego is proposing. Mr. Rego indicated that there is a facility in Painesville and one in Newton Falls. Mr. Tallon indicated that from the proposal and letters submitted that it appears that the primary function is to build street classics and the secondary function is to sell retail parts. Mr. Rego indicated that was correct and that there would also be a line of clothing. Mr. Tallon indicated that the assembly of cars is the hang up since this type of business is not a permitted use in this district. Mr. Tallon indicated that it is a very close use to a repair facility even though cars are being assembled from scratch; therefore, it is not a similar in like use. He indicated that the retail sale of the parts is fine, but the building of the cars is not. In Mr. Tallon's opinion, in order to build cars the facility must be in the industrial area where there would be manufacturing. Mr. Scanlon believes that where there are garages rebuilding cars in the event that they are totally demolished, which there is a similar facility that would be close to that. He indicated that the cars are not being repaired, they are just being assembled. Mr. Miller questioned what would happen if 16 cars a year becomes 50. 1VIr. Scanlon indicated that there is not enough land available to expand this amount. Mr. Scanlon indicated it would stay one shift with 10 employees. No further comments were made. Mr. Tallon motioned to deny C&M Street Performance, Inc. of 29919 Lorain Rd. the proposal, which consists of determination of similar use, possible Conditional Use Group as that the manufacturing of vehicles is not part of the retail district. The motion was seconded by W. Spalding and unanimously approved. NOTE: In the framing of the motion, Mr. Tallon indicated that this proposal would go on to Board of Zoning and Development and at that time, Council has the opportunity to review and make a ruling. Mr. Rego indicated that if you drive up and down Lorain Rd., the same type of business can be found. Mr. Tallon indicated that the area was a service district, not a manufacturing district. Motion Carried. 5