02/28/2007 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

?, ? 2. Corso's Trust, Lot Split Plat; 29691 Lorain I2oad: (WRD # 3) The proposal is to split Permanent Parcel Numbers 234-14-003 and 234-14-004 (approximately 0.99 acre) into two parcels. The north parcel (Corso's Restaurant) will be 0.3854 acre, and the south parcel (office building) will be 0.6095 acre. The location is on the south side of Lorain Road and approximately 200 feet west of Christman Drive. Zoning is Retail Business, General. The existing parcel does not conform to the area requirements of the Zoning Code. A free-standing restaurant requires a minimum of 1.5 acres. The existing parcel conforms to the frontage requirements of the Zoning Code. The proposed north parcel will not conform to the area requirements of the Zoning Code. The proposed parcel will be 0.3854 acre and the required area is 1.5 acres. The proposed north parcel will conform to the frontage requirements of the Zoning Code. The proposed south parcel will not conform to the area requirements of the Zoning Code. The proposed parcel will be 0.6095 acre (26,549 square feet) and the required area is 40,000 square feet. The proposed south parcel will not conform to the frontage requirements of the Zoning Code. The proposed frontage on Christman Drive is 99.74 feet, and the required frontage is 150 feet. Ms. Wenger reported that the proposal involved splitting an existing parcel of land approximately one acre into two parcels in order to accommodate two separate buildings located on the same parcel. Splitting the lot would create two non-conforming parcels neither of which would meet the requirements for lot area or frontage. She advised the commissioners to limit their discussion to preliminary comments and recommendations pertaining to variances BZA needed to address. Mr. Conway advised that there were a number of zoning issues pertaining to setbacks which would require variances. Mr. Collins advised that the plat submitted was dated more than three years ago and may create issues with the county. It was also noted that there was no official certification on the plan which is required. Mr. O'Malley reviewed the commissioners' role in reviewing lot splits. The main issue is that the proposed lines would create two non-conforming lots. Under the standards of 1101.07 which outline the procedure for minor subdivisions it is suggested that a lot split should only be approved if it meets all other zoning requirements. However, as neither lot would conform to zoning code requirements the commission is obliged to send the plat to BZA to address the variances required. Mr. Gareau, Sr., the applicant's attorney, and Mr. Szarka, the owner, were present to address the request. Mr. Szarka advised that the lot split request was to reflect the ownership of the two buildings on the lot. In the yeax 2000 banks didn't care that the owner of the land was different from the owner of the building however that is no longer the case. Mortgagers will no longer allow mortgages for buildings in which the land under it is not owned. The dilemma is that if the restaurant owner wanted to purchase the land it sits upon the owner would not only have to purchase the land but the rear building as well. At this time there is no intent to change the buildings so the request will not affect the ownership of the buildings, physical appearance of the buildings nor abutting neighbors. Mr. Gareau reviewed past history of the Szarka family and the buildings on the lot. The request to split the lot is not for development purposes but for family planning purposes only. The situation of having two separate businesses on the same lot is not new nor is it the first time in North Olmsted that it has occurred. He sited the Roinp family development at the comer of Coluinbia and Lorain as a similar setup. The family is just establishing property lines 6