01/24/1989 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

!11 .1 ? .- PLANNING COriMISSION JANUARY 24, 1989 PAGE 3 it blends in more with the building and with the request that the Engi- neering Department look into the sidewalk. Mr. Frarik, the developer, explained that some of the sidewalk on Lorain Road is broken and they were planning to replace it. He further advised that there are three parcels involved in this proposal and they will be submitting an assembly plat. Councilman McKay again stated that the residents of Bentley Drive are opposed to a driveway on their street. T. Morgan moved to approve the Bentley Coe Plaza, south side of Lorain Road between Coe Avenue and Bentley Drive, a proposal to construct a shopping center, as shown on drawing A-la which includes no driveways on either Bentley or Coe with two driveways onto Lorain, and incorporating the minutes of the Archi- tectural Board of Review and their recommendations and the landscaping as approved by the Architectural Board of Review, seconded by R. Bierman, and unanimously approved. Mr. Thomas thanked the developer for his cooperation and the residents for their input. Mr. Frank stated that if, at a later time, it becomes imperative that a rear entrance is necessary for this property, they would like to be able to come back and discuss it with the Commission. 3) McDonald's Restaurant, 27322 Lorain Road Revised proposal to construct new building and revised site plan. Heard by Architectural Board of Review January 18, 1989. Mr. Glueck, representing McDonald's, presented proposal. Building Commis- sioner Conway advised that 63 parking spaces are required and a variance had been granted for 1 parking space. Mr. Gorris read the report from Captain Krynak, Police Deparment which stated: I would like to see the first parking space on the left of the entrance drive removed and possibly be made green area. Vehicles in this space will be forced to back out as traffic is entering causing possible accidents. They will also have to baek over Lorain Road sidewalk to be abTe to clear cars parked to their right, this causes a hazard to pedestrians. The Commission agreed that neither this space nor the first one on the other side of the en- trance drive are viable parking spaces, liut does. not believe that either could be legimately landbanked. Assistant Law Director Dubelko advised that he would have a concern about landbanking a space that was not functional. Mr. Conway advised that previously Mr•. Glueck had stated that only about 40% of their seats were occupied during peak hours, and that if another variance is required, they could not appear before the Board of Zoning Appeals until March lst. In reference to several com- ments that the site is being over developed, Mr. Glueck presented the original site plan with an overlay of the new plan showing that the foot prints of the buildings are similar. After some discussion and scaling the plans it was determined that there is an area beside the eastern drive where two parallel parking spaces could be landbanked. The plans were noted as to where these spaces were to be landbanked. Mr. Glueck stated that the light pole show in this.area could be relocated in the future if these spaces were ever needed. In reference to the existing pole sign, Mr. Glueck stated that they preferred not to install a ground sign since the pole sign is their insignia, this building is set back farther than the present one, and much of their business is generated by impulse. Mr. Morgan and Mr. Thomas still prefer a ground sign and it was suggested that it could be put on the mounded area of the property. Mr. Thomas advised Mr. Glueck that two members were absent and it would still take four affirmative votes to approve the proposal. Mr. P4organ