11/28/1995 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

V The members discussed the variances. Building Commissioner Conway clarified that the property to the east was used for residential, but it was zoned General Retail and this property would be required to have 10 foot landscape side yard, so a 7 foot variance would be required on both sides with this plan. Mr. Acciarri stated that they had looked at elongating the building, but it would not work with this business. They had considered a third option of relocating the building 10 feet offthe west property line, eliminating that variance, and installing an 18 foot two way drive along the east, with a 7 foot landscape buffer which would require only a 3 foot variance on the east. They do, however, prefer the circulation with two one-way drives. The members preferred the third plan. Mr. Acciarri stated that they might be able to landbank the three front spaces and clarified that they would eliminate parking space 22 and 23 in order to have a truck turn around. Mr. Smith advised that deliveries were not made by large trucks, maiuly vans and cars. R. Tallon moved to forward the O.S.V. Productions, 29587 Lorain Road, to the board of zoning appeals with recommendations that the building be moved 10 feet offthe west lot line, and that the developers apply for a 3 foot side yard variance on the east property line and that this commission would recommend to the board o£ zoning appeals that this 3 foot variance be granted on the east side of the property. This variance is based on drawings SP-A. The motion was seconded by A. Mazuung, and unanimously approved. The members will discuss landbavking parking spaces at the next meeting. The developers will present revised plans for the board of zoning appeals. 2) Silverdale Plaza, 26324 Lorain Rd. Proposal to construct retail building. Refenal to the board of zoning appeals is required. Heard by Planniug Commission November 14th (driveway onto Silverdale has been eliminated). NOTE: Deed restriction filed would not permit the drive on Silverdale or a dumpster on the original 47 foot lot. It also required a landscaped mounded buffer to protect the next door neighbor beginning at the front of the structure and ending at the rear of the house. Mr. Strelau, architect, distributed revised plans which have eliminated the drive onto Silverdale Road, and has included the 15 foot setback adjacent to residential property on the northerly properry line. The build.ing will be set 22 feet offthe west property line which will be a driveway, and it will be 1 foot off the east line. There will be no landscape buffers on either side. Mr. Strelau stated that they are trading the side yard setbacks to the rear so that the landscaping will be carried through to the east property line, adjacent to the residential property on the north. Mr. Herbster pointed out that the rear landscape buffer is required by code. Mr. Strelau responded that they intend to carry it back behind the adjacent restaurant which is not part of this development. They have not done a traffic study, but they do have the traffic counts from the county. Mr. Georgalis, owner, advised that the prospective lessee is a national video rental company who will be taking the whole building and it is projected that there will be 12 to 18 cars an hour during working hours. He maintained that the restaurant that is there now generates about 12 cars an hour. He explained that the building has been decreased by 400 square feet from the one presented previously. Mr. Manning stated that this area of the city is a complete bottleneck and there are specific times when people,would be more likely to rent videos, so there would be more cars at these times. Assistant Law Director Dubelko advised that, if the planning commission and city council, wanted to allow the drive on Silverdale, they could do so, in spite of the deed restriction. Mr. Georgalis stated that there would be approximately 4,000 square foot of green area in the back which would isolate the residential area completely from the business district. Mr. Tallon noted that, if they eliminated 8 feet from both sides of the build.ing, it would fit on the property. Mr. Georgalis reiterated that they were putting more landscaping in the rear, and maintained that his tenant would not lease a smaller building, so if this is not approved, the dilapidated bu.ilding that is now, on the property will remain there for another 20 years because. He does not believe it is economically feasible to build a smaller building. He did not believe that landscaping beside Arby's guard rail and Burger King's fence 2