Laserfiche WebLink
. <br />Mr. Tallon pointed out that these spaces needed a variance. Mr. Orlowski noted <br />that he was asking that the Commission recomnend variances. Mr. Thomas believed <br />that they had tried to work with him, but Mr. Benik rejected. the engineers <br />suggestions. Mr. Benik reiterated that the suggested plan is not feasible. r1r. <br />Thomas questioned if his assumptions were based on enough expertise to determine <br />if a new configuration would be feasibleo Mr. Benik stated that, just like the <br />last meeti.ng, they are going on to another issue without finishing the main <br />point. He would like to finish the main point concerning the driveway in front of <br />the bui.lding. Mr. Tallon clarified that the Commission does not want to allow <br />landbanked parking to be used as a driveway, a variance would be needed to put <br />parking in front:, and the Commission would recommend to the Board of Zoning <br />Appeals not to grant a variance for parki.ng right up to a sidewalk. Mr. Benik <br />asked if the Comnission would like exanples of other buildings on Lorain Road <br />which had this situation. Mr. Tallon responded that was done in the past. Mr. <br />Benik questioned how are they going to work together on this as stated at the <br />June 8 meeting when this started. Mr. Tallon stated that if the building were <br />rectangular it would fit an the property better and its location could Ue <br />adjusted. Mr. Benik responded that he had given reasons why the plan drawn by Mr. <br />Dubelko would not fit because of the traffie flow and he explained that he did <br />not want to put his building to the left. of the property becau.se, as shown on <br />sheet rnamber 2 which shows the adJacent lots, there is a vacant parking lot on <br />the left which is being rented out by the bank.for parking, the building on the <br />right sits 5 feet off the sidewalk and cannot be moved... He did not want to mve <br />his building to the left and take away all the open space and pin his customers <br />in between his brand new $350,000.00 building and the shack of buildings next to <br />his property. The way this is planned his customers will drive around and park on <br />the open area and go into a new modern building.. The size of his building is <br />irrelevant as long as he follows the regulations of the city which he has done. <br />Regarding the drive in the front, he still wants it, if the Commission does not <br />he wi11 put parking in. Mr. Orlowski stated that they are back to access only on <br />Lorain, exit only on Whitethorn whieh eliminates the drive across the entire <br />front and in order to do this would require some type of curbing to define the <br />exit an Whitethorn and would entail landscaping the entire front area which would <br />possibly give him four landbanked 5paces. Mr. Beni.k did not underst-and his point. <br />Mr. Orlowski pointed aut to A1r. BenYk what he meant on the plan and showed him <br />how the curbing would have to be configured to keep people froM driving in the <br />Px;t. Mr. Benik believed that they will drive in regardless. Mr. Gorris stated <br />that there could possibly be 6 landbanked spaces with 16 existing spaces. Mr. <br />Benik asked why they did not want the drive in front of the building. Mr. Gorris <br />responded that there could be a drive in front of the building, but he did not <br />want to see a drive cro.ssing though parking spaces. N1r. Benik stated it would not <br />have to cross through parking arrd he cotxld ha,ve 4 or, if Mr. Gorris agrees, 6 <br />spaces. Mr. Gorris asked that he bring back a plan showing this. Mr. Orlowski <br />asked for 6 landbanked spaces without a drive and with entrance only on Lorain <br />and exit only on Whitethorn wherein he could gain 6 landbanked spaceso Mr. Benik <br />asked if he could have 4 landbanked spaces and leave the drive in front of the <br />building. Mr. Orlowski responded that they were not in favor,of that. Mr. Benik <br />asked for a reason. Mr. Orlowski stated that this would give him an entrance off <br />Whitethorn. Mr. Benik asked what was wrong with an entrance off Whitethorn. Mr. <br />Orlowski responded this was the best traffic pattern for this property. Mr. <br />Gorris clarified that it was the best traffic pattern for property with the <br />building configured the way he wanted it. Mr. Orlowski corrected his statement <br />that it was the best traffic pattern for this property with the unique building <br />he wished to put on it. Mr. Benik asked why the building is unique. Mr. Orlowski <br />3