09/14/1993 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

? the Ice Cream Parlor at the middle of the property, with nineteen parking spaces, one handicapped space, and 6 landbanked spaces for a total of 26 parking spaces. The existing aprons will be utilized with two accesses, no existing trees will be removed and additional landscaping is planned. The plans are based on the variances that were received. Mr. Orlowski pointed out that the handicapped spaces would necessitate the handicapped person crossing the parking lot, he suggested relocating that space in the parking area on the east side of the building next to the entrance, since the A.D.A. specified tYiat handicapped persons should not have to cross a parking lot if other areas are available. He did not believe that the landbanked space on the north west corner of the property was a viable pa.rking space, and he further believed that the spaces on the front will have to be angled to be accessible, which would eliminate another space. Mr. Agnew presented an amendment to his plan depicting this area with 5 angled landbanked spaces. It was noted that this plan has a discrepancy on the east parking area which shows only 3 spaces where the original plan showed four. Mr. Orlowski still doubted there would be room for 5 landbanked spaces. He also questioned the width of the front drive, and further noted the lack of dimensions on the plan. He questioned the footprint of the floor plan which indicated that the entrance of the building would extend into a parking space, and the door would open 3 feet further into it. Mr. Tallon scaled out the plans and after much discussion it was determined that the line in question was not a building line, but the overhanging roof line. Mr. Agnew advised that he would present a more detailed plan. During that discussion; when Mr. Gorris noted that the amended plan of the landbanked parking could not be overlaid on the origina.l plans, Mr. Agnew advised that it was a different scale. Mr. Tallon asked that the traffic engi.neer review the turning radius on the Whitethorn Drive since he is concerned that a car could not make that turn. Mr. Gorris doubted that location of the access point on Whitethorn was accurately shown. He noted that variances were granted for driveways and questioned if variances were granted for the correct l.ocations. The members studied the plan that was presented to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Agnew advised that he based his draw-ing an the one submitted to the B.Z.A. Mr. Orlowski did not believe that the drawing was accurate, and the B.Z.A. granted variances based on Mr. Benik's drawing. Mr. Agnew will obtain city drawings showing locations of curb lines, etc. Assistant City Engineer McDermott did not believe that there were plats showing that. The members discussed the variances. Assistant Law Director Dubelko advised that the variances were granted to allow two access drives within the 100 foot area of the intersection and that those drives could both be in and out, but he could not specify the exact location. Mr. Gorris questioned if it was in the purview of the B.Z.A. to grant in and out access. Mro Conway believed that they granted the variances in response to the wording of the Planning Commission's recommendation. Mr. Dubelko stated that the Law Director considered that, as a condition of the variances, the drives could be both in and out based on the recommendation of the City Engineer since he thought that in and out on both drives would be the safest situation. Mr. Skoulis stated that this access was in a hazardous area. Mr. Orlowski responded that this is why the Commission needs accurate drawings that correctly depict this property with everything that surrounds it, including the intersections of these roadways, since there should be some kind of signage to keep cars stacked on this property rather than have them pull into the intersection and block it in both directions. Mr. Benik believed that this was overruling the recoirunendations of the City Engineers who zvere on the site. He asked that if this drawing were correct, would the Commission still say it would be impossible to do. Mrm Orlowski had been on the site and did not believe this drawing depicts what exists. Mr. Gorris clarified for Mr. Benik that the Commission was not trying to overrule the B.Z.A. but it is their responsibility 7