09/27/1994 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. • to protect the residents and all property owners of the community, and he did not believed that they were arbitrarily imposing restrictions on anyone. Mr. Gavin responded that when he read in the transcript that one person did not believe that this property should be used for retail, he is concerned because that is the law, Council has stated that this parcel is retail. The law is extremely clear in that a property owner is entitled to install a driveway on every road he faces, but they might give one up. Mr. Orlowski stated that they realized the property was still zoned retail; and were aLso aware that the proposal needed no variances, and it was within code. Mr. Miller noted that Law Director Gareau had advised on the curb cut issue in his memo, but in the interest of the health, safety, and welfare, the Commission does have a right and a responsibility to inquire about, the activities within the center. He noted that one citizen had a valid concem about emergency vehicles being able to get down Dover Center Road or through the intersection, and the Commission needs to know what draw these businesses will have. Mr. Gavin responded by citing a case in Lyndhurst where the city barricaded an existing driveway because it was a safety problem, and Lyndhurst lost in the Ohio Supreme Court. He maintained that there have been traffic problems in this area for some time, and questioned the right of the Commission to take. this developer's money to cure these problems, and if they do, they should go back to other property owners and assess them as well. Mr. Miller noted that an inquiry is not an assessment. Mr. Thomas stated that he preferred not to have an adversarial discussion with an attorney without benefit of advise from the city's attorney. It was agreed that Mr. Papandreas should present the revised plans. Mr. Papandreas addressed the points brought up from at the previous meeting. They did meet with the residents who had some certain concerns. The neighbors would like to keep the existing fence for security, and Mr. Papandreas noted that it was salvageable but it would have to be relocated. There are some drainage problems caused by the Cross Roads' retention system and they were concerned that there might be other problems with the drainage from the mouud. The develop ers have assured them that the on site retention system would have a number of drain outlets along the base of the mound and that they would correct any existing problems with the drainage. The developers had also agreed to screen the H.V.A.C. units for sound. In reference to some other items mentioned by Planuing Commission, they have doubled the landscaping buffer in the back so there would be an 8 foot lugh, 40 foot wide mound. They have agreed to put in as much sound deadening material as possible to limit the noise from the back of the building where there wou.id be truck traffic, car stereo installation facilities, etc. They have also presented the neighbors with site plans. The neighbor also requested that, if there was a need for a curb cut on Mill Road, that it be located in such a way as not to interfere with the others on the road. Instead of overlay plans, he has presented 3 site plans: one with 3 accesses, one with 2 and one was with 1 Lorain Road only. The Mill Road curb cut is different than the existing cut, the Dover Center cut is identicaL Mr: Thomas asked Mr. Deichmann if there were records of all curb cuts that were approved or dedicated by the city. Mr. Deichmann responded that there were not necessarily records of all of them since the approved plans do not go back much before '1970. If there are no approved curb cuts, it would have to be assumed that there should be an access on a parcel that fronts on a street. In the past when there have been unapproved curb cuts, did he not remember any case where a curb cut was relocated for safety reasons. He explained that if someone wanted to replace an apron and there was no record of it ever being approved, they would still issue the permit for the apron. Mr. Thomas was asking about a new development and believed that they needed an attorney for the correct answer. Mr. Papandreas continued, stating that he has also included a revised landscape plan dealing with 2