Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Commercial Development Site Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission tables BJ Concrete building proposal after resident concerns on drainage, setbacks and design
Summary
Vladimir Vlad of BJ Concrete proposed a 30-by-50-foot steel building at 1360 C357; commissioners tabled the preliminary plan and asked for revised drawings showing drainage, landscaping and setbacks.
The Eastlake Planning Commission on April 10, 2025, tabled a preliminary development plan from BJ Concrete for a new 30-by-50-foot steel building at 1360 C357 after neighbors raised concerns about drainage, site orientation, setbacks and appearance.
“Good evening everyone, Vladimir Vlad with BJ Concrete. I'm the owner of the property on 1360 C357,” Vlad told the commission and described plans for a 30-by-50 steel building with a 14-foot height and a 12-foot overhead door to house equipment and a small 10-by-10 office and restroom. He said he planned to keep the building 30 feet from the adjacent residential property line and that much of the lot would be gravel or paved.
Neighbors and commissioners raised multiple concerns. Resident Heather Freeman asked about the building orientation, winter storage for vehicles and recent flooding on adjacent property; she asked the applicant to consider moving the building back and adding landscaping buffering. “Last week, the room was almost flooded because there's no stormwater in the property,” a neighbor said on the record. Commissioners and staff asked for engineered drainage details, a formal site plan (including stormwater measures such as catch basins the applicant mentioned) and a landscape plan to screen the building from the street.
Staff and commissioners noted the application was at a preliminary stage and that detailed engineered plans and full development-plan materials are required for final approval. Commissioners voted to table the item and asked the applicant to submit revised drawings showing parking, drainage, setback compliance and proposed landscaping; staff said the applicant could work with building and engineering staff to resolve technical issues. The applicant said he would mark the site and meet staff on site within days and requested the option to order the building while design details were finalized; staff warned there is a risk ordering before final approvals and potential variance processes if setbacks change.
The commission requested a revised submission and scheduled the item to return for review after updated drawings were filed.
