My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/11/1990 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1990
>
1990 Planning Commission
>
12/11/1990 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:31:43 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 5:09:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1990
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
12/11/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
_ .,? ? + ? ? • <br />1 <br />1 • <br />• ingress/egress, maneuverability on the site, and a convenience store. Suilding <br />Commissioner Conway advised several variance would be required: a 16 foot <br />variance for the setback of the canopy; variances for the width of the drives <br />which are wider than the maximLUn allowed; and a variance for one drive which <br />is less than 60 feet from the intersection. Mr. Coburn believes that these <br />items were probably addressed when.the station was built in 1978 or 79, and if <br />variances were required they probably were granted at that time. He was <br />advised that the Zoning Codes had been changed. He pointed out that the <br />western driveway was exit only and that their deliveries were by large <br />transports which need additional room to maneuver. Mr. Conway clarified that <br />the code reads that the center line of a driveway shall le located not further <br />than 60 feet from the intersecting street line, and this drive is only 25 feet <br />from the street line. He further clarified that variances would be required <br />because, since they are redeveloping the entire site, the violations cannot be <br />grandfatfiered in. Assistant Law Director Dubelko agreed. Mr. Coburn advised <br />that tlie station and the adjacent shopping eenter were owned by the same <br />person and clarified that they were not moving their property line at all. <br />Since one tree is to be removed, their consultant, Mr. Moore advised that in <br />order to have easy access to the food mart that tree would have to be removed. <br />They will be adding some additional green area. Mr. Thomas requested that it <br />.. be -verified if the station and the shopping center are all on one parcel, or <br />if the station is on a separate parcel. Mr. Betts i-s concerned because there <br />are so many curb cuts from this property onto both Lorain and Clague Roads <br />considering that this is an extremely congested intersection. Mr. Thomas <br />would like to see a plan of the entire parcel with the contiguous parking lot, <br />showing a11 curb cuts on this property, those next to the gas station, those <br />_ behind shopping center as well as how the traffic flows throughout the <br />u= property, and how the gas station property will be segregated or joined to <br />- this property. Mr. Coburn stated that this is a separate parcel that was <br />?- taken fran the larger parcel. Mr. Thomas responded that since they do have an <br />-access on to this adjacent parcel they are effecting the adjacent parcel. Mr. <br />Moore pointed out that this access drive onto the adjacent parcel was approved <br />when. the station was built. Mr. Thomas responded that the nature of the <br />traffic has been changing rapidly and it is not unusual to request a plan of <br />adjacent drives within 500 to 1,000 feet of a development. He would also like <br />to see the curb cut opposite this 'parcel, both across Clague and Lorain Roads. <br />In response to Mr. Moore's.eomments that the adjaeent parcel is imder used at <br />this time, Mr. Gorris responded that the. use of this parcel could change <br />-" radically. Mra Thomas assured the developers that the Commission is not <br />_trying to delay the development and that this is one of the more attractive <br />proposals submitted to Commission. Mr. Coburn further advised that the awner <br />of the property would not allow any expansion of the station. Mr. Thomas <br />questioned if there was any way that the City could require the owner to <br />provide additional space in order to allow his lessee to conform to code, <br />pointing out that if there were more property, they would not need the <br />variance for the canopy. Assistant Law Director Dubelko will look into this, <br />further stated that it could be a reason to deny, the variance on the basis <br />that the business could conform. It was noted that variance would be required <br />for the signs. Mr. Moore questioned what else the Commission might want <br />included in the plans. It was noted that the dumpster would be visible all the <br />way down Clague Road, and that the only enclosure was a board on board fence. <br />It was suggested that another material be used for the enclosure or the <br />location be changed. Mr. Moore stated that the trash enclosure could not be <br />made of the same ma.terial as the building, and Mr. Conway stated that if a. <br />3
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.