Laserfiche WebLink
Session 1839 <br />May 6,2002 <br /> <br />residential property that his in-laws own. He said he just got a letter about this from the <br />City on May 3'd and he simply has not had time to review the plans. <br /> <br />Maurice Valentine, 6501 Bartmer, said that he has the similar concern as the previous <br />speaker. He also just received a letter notifying him of these plans. He wants more <br />information on the expansion. <br /> <br />Todd Hamilton, 9280 Dielman Industrial, representing the applicant, said that they are <br />proposing a new warehouse to the existing site. There is no more traffic expected than <br />there is currently. There will be landscaping and a retaining wall along the north <br />property line which will improve the appearance along that residential area. Right now <br />there is a run down fence. <br /> <br />Ms. Colquitt asked what the owners were planning to store inside of the warehouse. <br />Mr. Hamilton said that they would store building supply materials, such as insulation and <br />shingles. <br /> <br />Responding to Ms. Welsch, Mr. Ollendorff said that he was not aware that there was <br />any notification required to the residents for a site plan. Typically, on a rezoning or a <br />conditional use permit there are notice requirements to the public. Site plans usually do <br />not require a notice. He will have to find out why it happened in this case. He is happy <br />that it did, but he believes that it is unusual. Ms. Welsch asked if there were any <br />mandate by law which requires the public to be notified in this instance. Mr. Ollendorff <br />responded that he is not aware of any legal requirement to notify residents in a site plan <br />review. The Mayor said that these owners have owned this property for some time and <br />it is in an industrial park for this purpose. Ms. Welsch clarified that the materials to be <br />stored in the warehouse right now are stored on open ground. Mr. Hamilton responded <br />in the affirmative. Mr. Munkel clarified that the owners had owned this property for a <br />number of years, which Mr. Hamilton affirmed. <br /> <br />Mr. Sharpe moved approval of the site plan. Ms. Colquitt seconded the motion, which <br />carried unanimously. <br /> <br />CITIZEN COMMENTS: <br /> <br />Nancy Sachar, 8044 Lafon, wished to discuss the subject of construction fencing that <br />was discussed at the earlier study session. She believes that some of the information <br />given was not accurate. She had asked three builders to give her some information on <br />building this type of fence and the highest price she received was four thousand dollars <br />for a Clayton lot. Most of the people suggested two thousand dollars to three thousand <br />dollars for a University City lot. She would like to suggest two possible alternatives to <br />just thinking about the price. One option would be to consider a percentage of the price <br />of the total construction. The other option is for the neighbors to be able to put up a <br />construction fence on their own. <br /> <br />]3 <br /> <br /> <br />