2/4/2019 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

he thought it would be 3.5 foot candles below what would be allowed in that situation. The building lighting is cutoff and will not affect the vacuum lighting levels. He said the lighting is needed to help the business grow and help them compete. Mr. Aspery said there is no regulation in the code to allow lighting to bleed onto neighboring commercial properties. He did not believe there was a hardship preventing the applicant from complying with the code and did not want the light pollution level to be higher than necessary. Mr. Papotto asked about the intention of the light, Mr. Matejka said the light would illuminate the interiors of the vehicles since pole lighting would only illuminate the exterior. Mr. Papotto asked if there is an option for the lighting to turn on when the vacuum is in use, Mr. Yund said the light would always be on. Mr. Yund said an option to have a canopy with attached lights was available but it would only prevent light from going up, not out. Mr. Yund said the business is dependent on daylight savings time, so the hours and lighting needs change. Mr. Allain thought the requirements are intended to allow people to find their way, but the applicant needs more lighting to help customers perform a function. Mr. Aspery said Director Lieber believed the nine foot candles could be decreased to comply and he clarified that the area is the parking lot, not a building entrance. He added that staff are not experts on the lighting industry but they have seen other lighting options. Mr. Allain thought the lighting proposal should be viewed as a building entrance, not a general parking lot. The increased light at an entrance is to protect the citizens and he thought it carried over in this situation. Mr. Allain pointed out that the foot candles would drop to 0.1 by the time it reached the sidewalk, Mr. Matejka confirmed. Mr. Raig asked about the hours since the plans say 10:00 p.m. Mr. Yund said the lights are not designed to be on all night, so when the business closes, the lights would be turned off. Mr. Raig was concerned about the lights being on during the day, Mr. Yund said they would not be. Mr. Raig was concerned about enforcement. Mr. Gareau said the board can issue a conditional variance. Mr. Papotto pointed out that the light levels change throughout the year. Mr. Allain understood the applicant's position that additional lighting may be needed at certain points during the day but he thought more could be done in respect to the light cutoffs. He was concerned about drivers being blinded while driving down Lorain Road. Mr. Papotto said the light at the property line would not be that bright unless the driver looked right at the fixture, similar to other fixtures. Mr. Allain said an absolute time could be set, the code could be complied with the remainder of the code or do a flexible option between the two. Mr. Gareau said the code reads that nonessential lighting should be turned off after the hours of business. Mr. Allain wanted to add hours of operation consistent with the code, but not later than 10:00 p.m. Mr. Allain moved, seconded by Mr. Papotto, to approve the following variances for 18- 12763; Andy's Auto Wash; 28800 Lorain Road conditioned upon compliance with 1161.10(F) code requirements, but not later than 10:00 p.m.: 1. A variance for a non full cut-off fixture type; code requires exterior site lights for parking area illumination to be full cut-off, applicant shows LED tube lights, Section 1161.10(C)(1). 2. A 4.0 foot candle variance for maximum illumination level; code permits a maximum illumination of 5.0 foot candles in an open parking area, applicant shows 9.0 foot candles, Section 1161.10(E)(3). Motion passed 4-0.