1989-04-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . Minutes - Plan Commission Page 2 April 26, 1989 wide landscaping or park maintenance. Mr. Chip McDonald of the Sweeney Company, realtor for U. S. Auto Glass, further explained that the glass company would need sign exposure along Olive Boulevard and had proposed same in its application. Chairman McCauley called on Al Goldman, Director of Planning, for his report on the application. Mr. Goldman stated that the building at 8664 Olive Boulevard is still under construction and no final inspections of the building or its systems had been scheduled. All proposed improvements approved by the City Council on July 11, 1989, should be completed before occupancy, including installation of the fifteen foot transitional yard along the lot line which abuts the residential property to the east. This was an important feature of the plans approved in July of 1988, and is required by Zoning Code Section 34-3S.6d. The black top paving that has been substituted in this location must be removed. The specified location for a refuse container near this transitional yard, however, could be changed if practical difficulties arose in effective pick up by the refuse contractor. Mr. Goldman further explained that the 8664 Olive building is actually on a lot that fronts on Beyers Court, a private road, with no property line abutting Olive Boulevard. Since the property is not located on Olive, placing a sign on Olive, off the business premises, is prohibited by the Zoning Code. In adopting the site plan for this new building, the City Council specifically stated that signs for the business or businesses occupying the building should be strictly in accordance with the Zoning Code. Chairman McCauley asked the applicant and the other representatives of the property to answer questions from Commission members. Mr. Marsh asked if the required landscaping could not be substantially completed before a City Council decision on the permit, thus allowing occupancy soon after issuance of the permit. Mr. Mannion stated that this would be possible; however, the developers were seeking a decision on the permit application from the Plan Commission in order to provide occupancy for the glass company as soon as possible. The developers could post bond for completion of the site work if occupancy could be granted this week. Ms. Elwood explained that the Plan Commission's decision on the application was only of an advisory nature, and in no event, would an occupancy permit be issued until after the City Council's decision, potentially at its next meeting on May 1, 1989. She explained that this was the normal procedure for any Conditional Use Permit application. Mr. Marsh asked why Beyers Industrial Court was not a standard street. Mr. Goldman explained that the thirty foot-wide court was an existing access to all industrial buildings in this area even before the most recent subdivision of lots permitting new buildings on the newly established tracts. Mr. Washington asked about specific access to the site in question from the private drive. Mr. McDonald explained that the building was serviced by two driveways into the parking area directly from the private drive. Mr. Safe asked how many separate property owners would eventually be included in the Beyers Industrial Court. Mr. Mannion replied that there would be four separate property owners with potentially a greater number of businesses. Mr. Safe believed that some signage along Olive Boulevard could indicate the location and existence of businesses behind the Olive properties within the industrial subdivision. Mr. Goldman stated that the Zoning Code made no provision for such signage, but that the Code did provide for a similar type of Shopping Center Identification Signage for a number of businesses located in one retail building. Chairman McCauley and Mr. Rice agreed that this same type of group signage would be appropriate for groups of industrial buildings and should be included in the Sign Code. Chairman McCauley suggested that Planning staff coordinate such a sign proposal for the Commission's review at its next