Laserfiche WebLink
Architect and the board members regarding lighting and landscaping plans requested at two <br />separate meetings took place. Mr. Koeth reviewed the December 11, 2002 minutes regarding Mr. <br />Suhayda's comment agreeing to submit new plans. Mr. Farrell suggested that the board members <br />were making illogical requests of his clients regarding lighting changes. The board has requested <br />lights be removed, lower wattage and, reduce the size of the poles. Mr. Farrell indicated that new <br />photo metric (lighting) plans, showing removal of the entrance on Dewy Road, and the extension of <br />the mounds was submitted for the boards review. The current photo metrics shows that there will <br />be no bleed over of lights into the abutting properties. Mr. Spalding voiced that he disagreed with <br />Mr. Farrell's characterization of what Planning Commission requested. He felt the board was very <br />specific as to what they requested from his clients. Mr. Farrell suggested that he was not trying to <br />get into an argument with the board he is just trying to get the proposal through the boards to the <br />benefit of the neighborhood and the owner of the properties. He again accused the Planning <br />Commission of making ill founded, illogical recommendations and the board could not expect the <br />Car dealership to have their lights at such a low wattage that they can not display their merchandise. <br />This boaxd has requested that the lights be at such a low wattage that his client's vehicles will not <br />be recognizable and other dealerships in North Olmsted have been allowed higher wattage lights to <br />display their merchandise. His client is fully aware of the neighbors concerns regarding the lights <br />bleeding over. The photometric plans before the board tonight shows that that will not happen. <br />The proposed lights as shown on the current plaris are much less intrusive then what is currently in <br />place now. Mr. Farrell suggested that a Mr. Parson a lighting expert came before Planning <br />Commission and reviewed the photometric plans for the board. He feels that his clients are being <br />held to restrictions that other dealers aren't. Mr. Asseff questioned what use would the land be used <br />for which obtained the use variance. Mr. Farrell indicated that parcels 24 and 25 would be used for <br />storing vehicles only. Mr. Asseff suggested that the lighting on the lots, which will be used for <br />storage, should not be to light the entire lots up, but to address safety issues and discourage vandals. <br />Mr. Farrell indicated that the proposed lights for the storage area are only 250 watts and conform to <br />what Planning Commission requested. He further suggested that Planning Commission requested <br />that all the lights on the lots be 250 watts, which is unreasonable. Mr. Spalding indicated that the <br />board did not restrict the wattage of the front lights just the number of lights being proposed. Mr. <br />Farrell indicated that the front of the lot would have four (4) light poles with metal halide lights at <br />1,000-watts each. The residents on Dewy Road will be able to see the source of the light but the <br />light will not shine into their homes. The lights along Dewy Road are angled so that the light will <br />shine into the dealership and not into the residents homes. 1Vlr. Asseff questioned how high the <br />front pole lights would be. Mr. Farrell indicated that the front pole lights would be 15-feet high <br />with a 2-foot base, total height of 17 feet. The mound along Dewy road was extended an additional <br />20-feet south and will be 6-feet high as requested by the Board of Zoning Appeals board. He <br />further suggested that the Board of Zoning Appeals requested evergreens be used atop the mounds, <br />which is shown. Mr. Koeth indicated that the Planning Commission had not viewed a landscaping <br />plan. Mr. Suhayda commented that the board saw a landscape plan with the original submittal in <br />November 2001. Mr. Koeth indicated that the Planning Commission requested changes be made at <br />that time and the applicants have not submitted the changes that were agreed upon. 1V1r. Farrell <br />suggested that a fence was suggested and evergreens placed on either sides of the fence, which is <br />not practical, as there would not be enough room for the trees to survive. Mr. Hreha indicated that <br />the original submittal did not include the underground irrigation nor do these plans tonight. Mr. <br />Fanell believed that the irrigation was for the landscaping in the front and did not believe that <br />irrigation was warranted. Mr. Asseff indicated that the board requested that the mounds along <br />Dewy Road need to have an irrigation system so it does not die out. Mr. Farrell believed that since <br />variances were granted for the setbacks, which required the irrigation system, the system should not <br />be needed. Mrs. O'Rourke indicated that the plans submitted tonight still show the curb cut that