02/10/1987 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i s• ;,, V ? PLANN'ING COMMISSION EEBRUARY 10, 1987 PAGE 3 .? Assistant Law Director Dubelko advised that.they should be aware that. different uses could require more parking spaces. Mr. Griffith, traffic engineering consultant, explained how traffic studies are conducted and by using a 1985 traffic count made by the County Engineers at.the Lorain and Brookpark intersection and by using certain factors.to determine the Lorain Road traffic at present, he has figured that:23,833 vehicles travel Lorain Road in front of this site, and concluded that the.trip-ins to the proposed business to be 286 per day which is only a:1.2% increase in traffic.on Lorain Road. He believed th?at this business would have a minimal inpact on ihe Lorain Road traffic. He estimated that tHe Bob Evans Restaurant was.generating 850 trip=ins daily. Mr. Gorris has . concerns that Lorain Road cannot take.much more traffic and each-new development claims only to have a minimum impact on that traffic. Dr. Kouri further explained that his hours would be approximately 8:00 a.m. to 6i00 p.m. with evening.hours one day a week; he.did not know the eye care hours. Councilman Tallon stated that when the property (.a long bowling alley type lot) was being rezoned the.representative of Bob Evans had indicated that they had,no problem with owning the extra property, that the reastuarant.coulil maintain that the condition of the re- .zoning was that Bob Evans would have to assume the responsibility of the land as -a single lot. Mr. Griffitli"disagreed and read portions of the Planning Commission minutes taken during the discussion of the rezoning and building proposal wherein the Bob Evans' representative made no representation.that.this property would remain vacant and.made statements- as to restric.tions that would be placed on that land for future development. Councilman Tallon responded that Mr. Vollman, the representative, had stated, during discussion with the BZD Committee, that the rear portion of the property would remain vacant. Mr. Gorris does not believe that the Planning Commission could, in good conscience, create a non-conforming lot. He also has questions about what this subdivision would create in- the future, specifically a future request , for an access off Brookpark Road b ased on the h ardship of the property . being landlocked. Ciiairman Burns questioned a variance being.granted for no frontage sin.ce this would be- creating a hardship for the owner.. Counei.lman Lackey believes that the city should be concerned about the safety of using a parking lot as a driveway.to a retail business. Mr. . Dubelko advised.that the city should see the easement document prior to approval of the development; the Building Department should verify that there are enough.parking spaces.to accomodate the acutal seating in the restaurant,. since the lot split would prohibit them adding any . more spaces; a varian.ce can be requested for any variation from the zoning.codes, and that it will'be up to the- developer to prove to the Board of Zoning.Appeals a hardship is.being:placed upon them by strict compliance with the provisions of the zoning codes, it will be up to that.Board to determine if they are creating a hardship and.that.this Commission should make their recommendations to that Board. Mr. Waldeck responded that they are not ma.king an argument for.right of access on Brookpark Road and that their circumstances are unique. J. Burns moved to forward,the Bob Evans parcel lot split proposal to divide permanent parcel number 236-2-2-into two parcels to the Board of Zoning Appeals and ask that at the same time that.the content and substance of the access easement and sewer_easement be provided to that body and recommend to the Board of Zoning Appeals that the variance be denied,