10/03/2002 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Note: The following variances are added due to Planning Commission requesting the existing flag pole remain on site in a new location instead of removing it. 6. A 20 foot variance for a flagpole higher than code permits (code allows 25' applicant shows 45') section (1163.32 (a)). 7. A 130 square foot variance for a flag larger than code permits (code allows 20 sq. ft. applicant shows 150 sq. ft.), section (1163.32 (e)). 8. A 10 foot variance for a flag longer than code permits, (code allows 5' applicant shows 15'), section (1163.32 (e)). 9. A 39 foot variance for a freestanding flagpole closer to side yard line then code permits, (code requires 45' applicant shows 6'), section (1163.32 (d)). 10. A 10 foot variance for a flagpole closer to the front property line then code permits, (code requires 45', applicant shows 35'), section (1163.32 (d)). Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 section (1163.25), (1163.27 (a)), (1163.24 (a)), (1139.07) and (1163.32 (a) (e) (d)). Note: Flag size and pole height are estimated based on reasonable estimations from the Building Department. Vice Chairman Kremzar called all interested parties forward to review the request. Ms. Catherine Radwanski, of Marathon Ashland Petroleum, came forward to be sworn in. She explained they are proposing to demolish the existing station, the canopy, and dispensers. They will rebuild the store, which will be 2300 square feet. She said they would like two canopy signs for visual effect. She referred to drawings of the proposed site. She indicated they had more signs initially but toned it down based on the Planning Commission recommendations. They removed the moving "S" on the front, which was the first variance request. She said the second variance request is to allow them to put the moving "S" above the doorway and have a reader board for advertisement. The third variance is for the total square footage of signage. Their total square footage is 267.7, which is what their standard signs are. They are asking for a rear yard setback of 20 feet because they would like to push the building back for safety reasons. The tankers that come in need to be able to turn. They are asking for a variance for the front setback, again for safety reasons. They are proposing 16 feet so there will be more room for cars coming in and out. They have added more landscaping in the front to make up for the 4 feet. She mentioned the Planning Commission requested that the flagpole stay on the site. Mr. Kremzar asked if it will remain the same size. Ms. Radwanski said it is the exact same flag and it will just be relocated. They want to get it away from the ground mount sign. Mrs. Sergi asked if there will be one or two driveways. She asked for clarification on where the pole will be placed. Ms. Radwanski confirmed the flag pole will be on the side by Boston 1Vlarket. Mr. Kremzar asked if there are exits anywhere else on the property. Mrs. Sergi mentioned it is difficult to get in and out of the station currently. She asked why they couldn't consider an exit at the rear of the site. Ms. Radwanski said if they wanted to do that, they would have to go to Babies 'R Us because it would be their property. Mrs. Sergi asked if they would consider reducing the reader board from 8x5 to a 6x5. She mentioned it would eliminate one of the variance requests. Ms. Radwanski indicated a 6x5 reader board would really limit them. An 8x5 board allows them to advertise better. Reducing the sign to 6x5 might mean the lettering is so small it can't be seen from Lorain Road. She added that they gave up building signs in order to keep the reader board. Mr. Maloney complimented them on being able to get the tanker trucks in and out. They discussed the traffic congestion at the site. Mr. Rymarczyk said that with regard to variance #1, the two canopy signs, his recommendation would be that the board not allow it unless they remove the ground sign out front. He said there is visibility up and down Lorain from either the ground sign or the canopy. If they grant the canopy, it would be recommended that they not be able to install a ground sign. Mr. Kremzar asked if the applicant can accept that. Ms. Radwanski said they could not. She said there are several gas stations on Lorain that have canopy signs and ground mount signs. Mr. Rymarczyk said that currently their ground mount sign cannot be read with all the other signs up there. Ms. Radwanski responded they have a whole new sign going up. She indicated the new sign will only have gas prices. Mr. Rymarczyk commented there are signs on light poles and utility poles. He said the ground sign can barely be seen coming down Lorain with all the obstruction. He said currently it cannot be read with all the other litter they have hung up on that property. He said they do not need both. Mr. Konold asked what signs are coming off and what is being replaced. Ms. Radwanski indicated the old ground mount sign will be replaced. It will list the gas prices. NIr. Rymarczyk said it would be allowed by the zoning code. What he is saying is why should they have two. They should either give them the ground sign, which is allowed, and don't grant the variance for the canopy. Ms. Radwanski said the city is only allowing an 8 foot ground sign and when someone is down Lorain Road, the canopy is all a person can see. She said they would not see the ground mount sign. Mr. Rymarcryk asked why they need the ground sign there theu. Ms. Radwanski replied they need it to display the gas prices. Mrs. Sergi asked if each of the pumps will have Speedway on them. 1VIs. Radwanski confirmed they will. 1VIr. Rymarezyk said he recommends diat the board