01/11/2005 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• t ? that just because they don't fry, broil, or griddle, use those facts to circumvent placing a fast food restaurant on the smaller lots. The city should look at regulating specialty shops operating hours such as not being open late at night and not generating a lot of traffic which would cause a negative impact on the surrounding neighbors. Ms. Wenger believes that given the square footage limitation there is a lot of room to work with when only 6.25% of the site can be covered. The issues regarding operating hours and other things of that nature are regulated by North Olmsted's Business Regulations. Mr. Yager believes that drive- through establishments with squawk-boxes are a very big issue and an issue which is a large bargaining tool for the City. Mr. Laslco questioned if the proposed 1139.06 wording related to minimum lot sizes, would mean there would be no minimum lost area or lot width requirements as to where restaurant - limited service could be located. Ms. Wenger advised that this category would be under the category of "all uses" which has a minimum lot area of 40,000 square feet and width minimum of 150 feet. The only area it is removed from is the Restaurant category, but it doesn't take it out of the other provisions of all other uses in the general retail district. The board can recommend to Council that they make the wording an explicit footnote that Sandwich Shop/Limited Service fall in the all uses category. Mr. Lasko requested that Council use wording to say were it specifically goes, in order to avoid confusion. Board members discussed whether or not the city should restrict the Sandwich Shop/Limited Service buildings from having drive-through-windows. Board members had mixed feelings on whether or not drive-through-windows should be allowed. Mr. Yager felt that if the City restricted all the limited service shops from having drive-through-windows, the city would be restricting their ability to compete with other businesses. Ms. Wenger believed that if the smaller shops are imbedded in the commercial district it has a lot less impact than if it abuts residential. If there is a drive-through which generates more traffic then it makes more sense to place the building on a 1.5 acres lot then a lot of 40,000 square feet. So there are good points to both sides. Some board members felt the drive thru issues should be dealt with on a case by case basis. Audience comments: Mr. Sturgeon read allowed from a prewritten stated which is attached to these minutes. The following are the major concerns: 1). Sandwich shops in or abutting residential properties being allowed. 2). Concerned that there are too many fast food shops within the city now. 3). Believes that the city is rezoning too much residential land. 4). He is concerned that the city is allowing the developers to dictate and create spot zoning. 5).Concerned about the ordinance and feels it would allow sandwich shops in the residential districts. 6). He does not believe that using the way food is heated is a good way to regulate how land is use. 7). The County Board of Health considers Sandwich shops as a level 3 risk classification and a level 4 is the highest risk level. 8). No other City uses heating methods for the basis of classification. He believed that a petition against the ordinance could easily be obtained. In closing he asked that restaurants of any nature not be allowed to infringe upon the tranquility of what is left of residential areas. Ms. Wells, the daughter of Ms. Sturgeon was present for her ill mother. She questioned if there were a lot of demands or requests to change the current definitions of the code. She was concerned as to what prompted the sudden changes being proposed. When the City allowed the lot which abuts her mothers home to be cut away from CVS, the owner of the land was advised that a restaurant would never be permissible on the lot. Since then Wendy's, and Dunkin Doughnuts both have tried to build on the lot. The only thing that kept the restaurants from building on the parcel was the fact that it did not meet the minimum 3