Minutes · Sep 15, 2022
September 15, 2022 Regular Meeting
fdcd1dc472333b72b53122122193552489f18217457b09670b627f829bb4d8b7Indexed text · page 11
Show all pagese Mr. John Hess asked if there is going to be a private trash collector. Ms. Savitz responded that there was going to be only private bulk pick up and the bins will be place on the sidewalk for pick-up. e Mr. Hess said that the parking space on the front does not have enough space to back up, he then opined that the applicant should have it removed and replace with landscaping. To which Ms. Savitz responded that specific parking will be designated for employee visiting or operating other vehicles on site, but Mr. Donat included that the applicant is willing to eliminate that specific parking space as a condition of approval and accommodate the space with landscaping. NO PUBLIC ADVOCATE QUESTIONS PUBLIC QUESTIONS e Kevin Malanga at 57 Ridge Road asked if the applicant intention to park vehicles only in the line spaces. Chairperson Neuer said that it is not been a request to allow parking in any place other than the line spaces. PRESENTATION Mr. Dougherty entered on the record, was sworn under oath and his credential were accepted by the board. Mr. Dougherty started his testimony by explaining the plans for this application. The commercial use and mixed use are permitted, the connection with commercial vehicles parked at the site is not permitted. The site is already suited for commercial use for light truck parking, they will do a reasonable permitted extension at the site. The site is adjacent to an automotive center use to repair and storage, which they will clean-up and put it behind private fencing so the site looks presentable in the neighborhood. The negatives impacts that the Mr. Dougherty brought up was the commercial vehicles parked at the site, but he said that they can come to an agreement regarding what type of trucks can park on site and also the fencing around the site will not over power the neighborhood. The proposed fence will be 6 feet for the front yard, they think is appropriate given the visual impact to not over power the public ground. Mr. Dougherty conclude by saying that this is a positive application and that everything can be satisfy with C2 and accommodations and conditions from the board can be made in order to have this application approved. NO BOARD QUESTIONS PROFESSIONALS QUESTIONS Mr. Grygicl asked if the use of this property was a permitted used instead of mixed use, would you still need to have parking in similar
ication approved. NO BOARD QUESTIONS PROFESSIONALS QUESTIONS Mr. Grygicl asked if the use of this property was a permitted used instead of mixed use, would you still need to have parking in similar arrangements on this property and if the impacts would be similar. Mr. Dougherty said that they would be similar arrangements.
File revisions (1)
- Sep 29, 2026
fdcd1dc472334,349,172 bytes