11/12/2002 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED "TOGETHER WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE" PLANNING COIVIMISSION MINUTES - NOVEIVIBER 12, 2002 AT 7:30 P.M. I. ROLL CALL: Chairman Koeth called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. PRESENT: Board members, R. Koeth, S. Hoff-Smith, K. O'Rourke, W. Spalding, and C. Allan ALSO PRESENT: Assistant Law Director B. 0'1Vlalley, Assistant Buildirig Commissioner T. Rymarczyk, City Engineer P. Deichmann, Assistant Clerk of Commissions A. Kilbane ABSENT: T. Hreha, and J. Lasko Note: New Planning Commission member, Shannon Hoff-Smith was sworn in by Mr. O'Malley before the meeting started. II. REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES: The Planning Commission minutes dated October 22, 2002 have been submitted for approval. Mr. Koeth pointed out the assistant clerk made a slight change to the motion on page 8. He said the wording was amended but not the meaning of the motion. R. Koeth made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 22, 2002 meeting. The motion was seconded by W. Spalding and unanimously approved. III. BUILDING DEPARTMENT REQUESTS: 1. Speedwav Gas Station; 26516 Lorain Rd.: Proposal consists of demolishing existing gas station & canopy and constructing new gas station & new canopy and sign package. Note: Planning Commission reviewed this proposal on 9/10/02 and referred the proposal to the Board of Zoning Appeals and Architectural Review Board at their 9/24/02 meeting. Board of Zoning Appeals amended and approved the variances requested on 10/3/02. The Architectural Review Board required major changes 10-20-02. Ms. Catherine Radwanski and Mr. Anthony Quinn of Marathon Ashland Petroleum came forward. Mr. Koeth indicated the Planning Commission reviewed the minutes from the Architectural Review Board. The question comes down to what types of changes they have made. He asked if they passed on another rendering to the Architectural Review Board. Ms. Radwanski indicated they did e-mail photos for review. Mr. Koeth asked where that rendering is. Ms. Radwanski said it was rejected so she did not bring it with her. She pointed out the rendering showed a brick building as was requested by the Architectural Review Board. She said they received very positive comments from both the Plamung Commission and the Board of Zoning Appeals. She said the comments from the Architectural Review Board were very vague. They involved re-designing the entire building and canopy and Marathon feels they have an adequate design. They did ofFer to do the building in brick and they are still willing to do so. They would do red or gray brick but would prefer to do the gray brick based on the fact that the surroundings are all gray and white. They would like to blend in. Mrs. O'Rourke asked what was suggested for the canopy. Ms. Radwanski said the Architectural Review Board wants them to totally re-design their canopy, which they feel is an appropriate design for the area. They used the design in Lakewood and they are doing it in Olmsted Falls. She said both are historic districts. She pointed out Lakewood has very stringent design guidelines. The site is near a residential area, along with the Olmsted Falls site, and they have accepted the canopy design. Mrs. Hoff-Smith said from reading the minutes she thought it was the Architectural Review Board suggestion that they brick the building. She asked why they would reject the new rendering. Ms. Radwanski said the board would have to ask the Architectural Review Board that question. They received no feedback from them except that they rejected the brick. Mr. Koeth asked if she has a picture of what was sent to the Architectural Review Board. Ms. Radwanski pointed out it was e-mailed. Mr. Quinn indicated that was all that was asked, that they send a picture by e-mail. If it was approved, it would not be necessary to come back to the Planning Commission. The pictures they sent showed a red brick design but the feedback was not favorable, and they did not reconvene a meeting. He thinks the way the meeting concluded, several suggestions were made in the motion and it dealt with a sample of the red brick that was available, the pillars of the canopy being brick, the sign base being brick, and that the landscaping be improved. It was said that if those requirements can be met, they would recommend that the proposal go back to the Planning Commission and then the motion was denied. They were to e-mail a copy of the photos of other brick buildings that Marathon has done, and then Mr. Zergott said it sounds like if those photos are accepted, the proposal would not return to the Planning Commission. W. Quinn said the direction was not really clear and under the zoning code, the Architectural Review Board is only advisory so they are here to say they want to work with the Planning Commission and the city to get the