07/13/1993 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

motion. At first it was stated that it should be entrance only on Lorain, but during the motion it was decided that the Lorain Road exit could be both in and out. Mr. Benik again objected that an exit only on Whitethorn woulcl eliminate the driveway across the front of the builcTing. Mr. Thomas reminded the members that the Law Department has advised that the Comrnission could grant the curb cuts without sending the recommendations to the Board of Zoning Appeals, they could stop it now or could add it after the variances are granted. Assistant Law Director Dubelko advised that this was not actually the case, this proposal contains a rnunber of code violations, the Comnission is making recommendations as to whether the Board of Zoning Appeals should approve those particular variations to the codes. When this returns, tYzen the Commission must make their final determinations based on its duties whieh involved the aesthetics of the property, traffic safety considerations, and impact on residential neighbors. Once variances are given for curb cuts, the Coirnnission would be hard pressed denying them, it could regulate where the access points are going to be, if the members are favorably recommending the variances for access, but it would be hard to eliminate them at that time. If this is ttie case, the Comnission must be specific in explaining why they are recommending to deny the variance, if it is decided to recommend against the variance it must be made clear that it is based on the configuration of the lot, the building, traffic, and safety. That the Commission would agree to a curb eut on Whitethorn subject to their approval of a safe traffic flow. It was agreed that tlie motion must be specific and in the recomnendation for or against and i:t must be explained what the Commission is going to do. Mr. Dubelko clarified for Mr. Benik that both access points do require a variance. If the Boarcl of Zoriing Appeals grants the variance without these access points, the Commission coul:d eliminate the access on Whitethorn, and they could approve it later. Mr. Dubelko also clarified that the city could not realistically deny both accesses because the owner is entitled to access, but they do not have to grant both accesses. He also clarified that the Whitethorn Avenue access was never lawfully granted. Mr. Benik maintained that this access saas closed when Toys 'R Us catne before the Commission with no notice to him and that the electrical box for the light was put on his property. This is in the city right of way. Mr. Benik wanted to lmow why the Conunission is recommending that the variance for the 20 foot landscape buffer not be approved, because at other meetings there were no objections to this, why did the opinions change. Mre Orlowski stated that he did not remember being in favor of the front setback variance in the beginning. After the-motion was voted on, Mr. Benik asked for clarification. Mr. Orlowski stated that they were recommeneling that there should be a 20 foot landscape bu.ffer in.the front whieh would elimina.te the drive in the front. Mr. Benik asked why they did not want the drive in the front. The members stated for safety and aesthetics, etc. and that was why the code required it. He asked Mr. Orlowski why it would be a safety problem. Mr. Benik was advised that the Board of Zoning Appeals would have the final say. He insisted on having a reason, because his recommendations have followed every code, every regulation that the city has required, if this is not approved the place will rema.in an automotive tune up center because there are prospective tenants. If the city wants this building there for another 20 years so be it, if the city would like a new building, he would do it. Mr. Gorris stated that he would only build the building if every one of his demands are met. Mr. Benik still would like legitimate reasons why the Commission does not agree with his plans and maintained that he has not received one legitimate reason. He asked Mr. Orlowski to explain the safety factors. Mr. Gorris stated that the things he has asked for do not meet code, he should go to the B.Z.A. for approval. Mr. Benik stated that a professional at the city has made recommendations and they are in black and 5