11/14/1978 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 14, 1978 PAGE•2 allowing ingress and egress through cooperation of other businesses fronting on Lorain all the way to Silverdale. Morton Stoddard, Attorney for State Wholesale asked to be heard. He stated that there were two possib le plans under study bu t that they are not finalized „ since ,they have.been unable to collect easement rights, as yet. Mr. Stoddard stated that State Wholesale was trying to relieve a situation that was here be-fore they bought the property. Mr. Prokasy asked to clarify if thedriveway in question was to front or rear of property facing Lorain. Mr. Stoddard sta.ted that in either plan driveway would be to rear of property. Mr. Zurawski, City Engineer, stated that a new timi.ng of' traffic lights had been studied and would be implemented later, but that he could not recommend another traffic light at this section of Lorain Road. Law Director M. Gareau observed that the city cannot, soley based on traffic, deny the use of the property, b ut the city may have to take steps to solve the traffic problem in a way that is not to the liking of State Wholesale; the city may have.to eliminate left hand turns from Lorain Road. Attorney Stoddard stated that they, State Wholesale, would continue to work to resolve the traffic problem for their own.interest as well as that of the community. City Engineer Zurawski presented a diagram which showed traffic volume in Cuyahoga County and pointed,out the high volume of traffic on Lorain at the sec- tion in question. Mr. William Jackman, Traffic Consultant':for State Wholesale was introduced. He stated that State Wholesale would not generate much traffic during the peak traffic hours of 4 to 6:30 p.m. since that was the slowest time for State Wholesale business, and that their b usiest time was from 7 p.m. to 9:30 p.m, and that the Lorain Road problem is diminishing at that time. Mr. Jackman reiterated that State Wholesale was still working on alternate plans and would continue to do so, and expressed a hope that if one of the alternate plans was executed that, at that time, the city mi-ght consider putting a light, if necessary, at the driveway. Mr. Prokasy questioned the approving of plans that will have to be changed if access is granted from other " property awners, .Mr. Jac?cman assured him that plans would not have to be sub.stantially changed:to accomodate alternate plans. The alternate plans were produced by Mr. Frantz, Architect for State Wholesale, and shown to the committee even though the easement has not been granted. The Commission studied the alternate plans and it was clarified that the original plans would not need a lot of revision to accommodate either of the two plans. It was also determined that construction would be such that it could handle the traffic under either plan. Mr. Ryan asked if State Wholesale was-willing to live with no left hand turns into or out of Lorain Road. Mr Jackman replied that they would accept that if necessary. Parking per Mr. Gundy is no problem. Mr. Bugula asked to revi.ew minutes of the last Architectural Review Board pertaining to State Wholesale and to review the plan for signs and lighting. Signs are within City Code. Mr. BugAla questioned the glare of lights into neighborhood adjacent to State Wholesale property. Architect for State Wholesale said they were planning to use a non glare light which could probably have a shield incorporated if necessary, or else push light up to reduce glare. Mr. Kanaref, Project Engineer, has met with residents of adjoining properties and has assured them that drainage will be accommodated. Neighbors are in agreement with plans and buffer be- tween State Wholesale property and their property. The fence will cover i.