10/25/1994 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ever are needed they can be used later. He believed that the extra green area would add to the aesthetics Mr. Papandreas stated that they were tr}ring to have 5 cars per 1,000 square feet of building area, and thL North Olmsted code calls for 6.5 cars per 1,000 (note: this is without storage areas which are subtracted). Their tenants believe that this ratio will insure that, under any circumstances, they will have adequate spaces in front of their stores. As developers they want to get traffic off the street and into the parking lot, without being in a situation where there is not adequate parking. The tenants also want to insure that there will be no out parcel development to hinder visibility of their unit. Mr. Thomas believed that out parcel development is up to the owner of the parcel and that some the outlying spaces would not be desirable parking areas for customers aud might even be used for parking for adjacent businesses. He repeated that landbankiug them would insure they would have su.fficient spaces in the future if needed, but would allow for additional green space. Nfr. Papandreas stated that they had increased the green space through out the center, but they are botuid by the terms of the agreements with their tenants and since this was signi.ficantly b.elow what was required by the city they did not t]iink it was an excessive amount ofparking aud was appropriate for this type ofuse. Further the extra spaces would allow an area to pile snow during the bad weather. Tliey do not want to hinder their tenants' business because there are not enougli parking spaces. Good shopping center design requires a minimum of 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet. Tlus is far different from office use and must deal with specific aud seasonal trends of the retailer: They want to be able to accommodate traffic under all circttinstances. Mr. Gorris wondered how there could ever be any out parcel development when the parking was at its limit. Mr. Papandreas agreed, but stated that with a new shopping center, the teuants tried to identify any possible problems since the center is in a state of flux. Mr. Thomas recapped the reasons: 1) a place to put snow and 2) in case there might be a day when the lot might be full. Mr. I'apandreas stated that the customers of these categoiy retailers frequently stayed longer to make a major purchase, than a customer nunning into a discount stori to pick up a few items. Mr. Thomas noted that their customers would be drawn from a large radius, bui the cost of the infrastructure improvements would cost North Olmsted tax payers 1.2 million dollars. He would think that they would be williug to give back a few hundred feet of green space. Mr. Papandreas responded that they had tried to put together a development that would meet with the codes of the city without any variances aud he has done everything in his power to accommodate all of the Coinmissions concerns which collectively did make a,significant impact on the financial aspects of this project. He -named a few of these things: introduced mounding; fencing; landscaping; sidewalks; a deceleratiou laue -:on Lorain; along with limiting the truck traffic on the property. He offered to ask the tenants if they -would agree to fewer spaces, but he could not commit to it at this time. Iu reference to statemeuts made :.by the Law Director at the last meeting, Mr. Thomas asked Assistant Law Director Dubelko how the -City or Council would assess for improvements that were necessary for the development of a business, -that would not be needed if the business were not built. Mr. Dubelko responded that such assessments -would not be up to the Plavniug Commission, but they could make recommendations to Council. He stated that he was not too familiar with the assessmeut process siuce little of it has been done in North Olmsted but there is a statute wluch should be followed. Mr. Deichmaiui stated that no assessments have been levied since he has been with the City. IV1r. Dubelko stated that tlus is being considered at present, but the Law Director would be more familiar with it. Mr. Miller stated that he had addressed Council on this asked that an appropriate ordinance be passed for an assessmeut and impact program for uew incoming developments aud he was advised that it was a very difficult process. Mr. Gorris questioned why the infrastructure improvements for this proposal would cost less than the improvements for Wal- Mart which were estimated at 4 to 6 million. Mr. Deichmann responded that there were three differen* options for Wa1 Mart rangiug from estunates of 1 million to 4 inillion. In the 1.2 mi]]ion package, thi right-of way acquisition was kept to a minimum: such as the turning lane on Dover Center at Lorain 4