05/15/2003 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

indicating six trailers but he hears the applicant describing four. Mr. Pouliot said that Mr. Franz indicated they are looking for six. Mr. O'Malley said the code describes the storage of these trailers in relation to the right of way and so the board can certainly look at a map or diagram of where the storage is proposed and what can be done to buffer or screen it to be sure they are confined in some way. As Mr. Rymarczyk pointed out, you do not want other violations. Mr. Conway said he does not want to find out there are four construction trailers and two that are not. Mr. Pouliot said if they find that, Mr. Franz will not be the store manager. W. Klesta said he understands renovation and the need to move things back and forth. He said if they find the trailers contain products and are being used as storage trailers, there is a major issue. W. Pouliot said he would have a major issue because they are spending a ton of money renting a warehouse so this never happens again. Mr. Franz assured the board they will not be merchandise trailers. Mr. Conway asked where they intend to park the trailers. Mr. Franz said their proposal was to put them where they were originally but they know they cannot be visible from Country Club Blvd. or block parking spots. He said there is a concrete apron out there that does not have any parking spots. They can put the trailers there. He said if you look at the front of the building, it is in the far .right corner. Mr. Klesta asked if that hinders egress of fire trucks. Mr. Franz then reviewed plans with the board members. He showed where the trucks used to be parked. He said there is an area where there is no parking and there is a berm and retaining wall. It would take care of the problem of visibility from Country Club Blvd. Mr. Conway asked W. Rymarczyk if that area would work out. Mr. Rymarczyk said he believes it would. It gives them adequate truck delivery space and it's not blocking the drive isle, or taking up required parking. M. Conway made a motion to grant Wal Mart Store #2316, 24801 Brookpark Road, a variance to have up to six construction trailers on site, to be removed by July 8, 2003 and to be located on the southeast corner of the parking lot. The motion was seconded by R. Klesta and unanimously approved. Variance granted as amended. Mr. Klesta pointed out that the board would not have been so critical if this had not been an issue every year. Mr. Pouliot said that Wal Mart will not come before the board ever again for merchandise trailers. 2. Kristen Lusnia and Jefferv Sobieski; 23888 Delmere Drive: Proposal consists of a fence. A variance to allow additional fence along rear property line. 1369.03 General requirements for fences. (a) (3). Where neighbor has already installed fence along a property line an additional fence will not be permitted. Vice Chairman Klesta called all interested parties forward. Ms. Kristen Lusnia and Mr. Jeffrey Sobieski came forward to address the board. Ms. Lusnia informed the board that they hired a contractor to install a fence enclosing their backyard. The appeal material that they submitted articulates their feelings on the issue. She said she would like to use this time to answer any questions or address any concerns the board may have so they can come to a resolution. Mr. Klesta said the major concern is that the ordinance is in place because the city does not want double fences, because of maintenance issues and overall appearance issues. Ms. Lusnia said the reason they have proposed to do the fence in this manner is due to the existence of an easement that runs along the rear property line. As far as maintenance is concerned, the area will still be accessible. W. Sobieski indicated their fence will not be right on the property line. Mr. Conway asked for confirmation there is a swale there. Ms. Lusnia confirmed that. Mr. Althen asked if there is an existing fence on the right side of the property. The applicants indicated there is not a fence there. Mr. Althen asked if they are just going for a variance across the back. The applicants indicated that is correct. Ms. Lusnia said they are not insisting that the fence is installed in the proposed manner but if they do not take that route, she asked how they could enclose their backyard and be in compliance with the code. Mr. Sobieski indicated the purpose of enclosing the yard is to protect their daughter. W. Klesta asked Mr. Rymarczyk if there are any engineering issues with there being a swale. W. Rymarczyk said no, not that he is aware of. He said as long as water can flow through it, there is not a problem. Mr. Conway said he does not see a