06/26/2001 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CI'TY OF NOR'I'H OI.MS'I'ED "TOGETHER WlE CAN NYAKE A I)IFF'ERENCE!" PLANNYNG COl!'d1VYYSSION le'IINUTES - JL1NE 26, 2001 Il!T COUNCII, CHAIVIBElZS 7:30 P.M. I. ROLL CALL: Chairman, Tallon called the meeting to order at 7:45pm. PRESENT: Chairman, R. Tallon, Board members; R. Koeth, S. Asseff, and C. Allan. ALSO PRESENT: Assistant Law Director, J. Dubelko, and Clerk of Commissions, D. Rote. ABSENT: Board members; K. O'Rourke, T. Hreha and W. Spalding. II. REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MIN-[JTES: The Planning Commission minutes dated June 12, 2001have been submitted for approval. R. Tallon motioned to approve the 7une 12, 2001 Planning Commission minutes as written. The motion was seconded by C. Allan and unanimously approved. III. BUII,DING DEPARTIVIENT REQUESTS: El Rodeo Mexican Restaurant; 237-10-012, 028 and 036 Proposal consists of remodeling existing Khan's Cuisine to have new exterior roof parapet and roof element. Note: Planning Commission reviewed this proposal 5/22/01 and 6/12/01. Board of Zoning Appeals granted variance request 6/7/01. Chairman Tallon called all interested parties forward to review their proposal. Mr. Dixon, the architect came forward to review the proposal. Mr. Dixon presented the board with material samples for the building. The clay roof will be multi colored and the new face of the building will be off white stucco. He suggested that the Architectural Review Board requested a wooden fence to buffer part of the roof, which will house the mechanical equipment. They also requested that the dumpster area be fenced in as well. Mr. Yager from the Architectural Review Board requested that wooden windows be used to replace the existing windows. Mr. Asseff questioned if the air conditioning unit on the roof of the building was in good working order and quiet. Mr. Dixon implied that he was not sure of the working order of the air conditioning units nor, how quiet they are. Mr. Tallon questioned the condition of the existing landscaping along the property line. Mr. Dixon suggested that a surveyor was hired to find out where the property lines are located and until that. is completed, they are not sure. Mr. Tallon indicated that he wanted the landscaping along the rear of the property to be continued to block/buffer the neighbor. Mr. Dixon suggested that the rear area is paved and if the landscaping is continued, they would have to plant the greenery on the neighbor's property. Mr. Tallon indicated that if the applicant did not want to place the landscaping on the neighbors property line then dig up the pavement on the applicants side and continue the landscaping along the property line. NIr. Dixon indicated that there is a 4-foot high fence on the south side of the building. Mr. Tallon indicated that the board would add to the motion that if the proposed fencing does not conceal all of the mechanical equipment then additional fencing is to be added. Mr. Tallon requested to see the photometric plans the board requested at the last meeting. Mr. Dixon indicated that as the Architectural Review Board requested 16-foot light poles he was unable to get the new photometric back in time for the meeting. Mr. Tallon questioned why the applicant was proposing 16-foot high poles when Planning Commission requested 10-foot light poles. Mr. Dixon suggested that the lighting company indicated that they could not use 10-foot high poles to meet the lighting requirements. Mr. Asseff questioned what size light bulbs would be used. Mr. Dixon indicated that the wattage of the lights would be 250 watts. He reviewed why they would-like to use 16-foot high light poles. Mr. Tallon indicated that when the applicant first came in there was no lights proposed, now they do not want to do what was requested. He reviewed where the lights could be placed and indicated that the applicant could use additional lOfoot poles with