Laserfiche WebLink
would lilce to suggest that the rails be affixed so they can not be pulled out. Mrs. Diver asked if <br />Mr. Thomas had spoken to his neighbors about his concerns and suggested the two owners <br />exchange contact information so they can arrange to meet and work together to keep possible <br />issues from arising. Mr. Boyle said they would establish employee parking spaces. <br />Mr. .Conway reported that the signs are all ground signs as language/content of any signs are mute. <br />The parking variance total is partially due to 4 landbanked spaces under the outdoor seating area <br />becoming unusable or inaccessible to ever use. Mrs. Sergi asked if there was ever parking <br />complaints to the city. Mr. Conway indicated his office had not received parking complaints <br />however at the planning meeting a tenant pointed out existing parking issues at the site. Mr. <br />Thomas said his tenants voice their complaints to him and he takes care of the issues including <br />towing cars if needed. Mrs. Sergi questioned if the problems were created by employees or <br />customers to the businesses. Mr. Thomas said he doesn't know whose customers are whose but <br />they can tell the employee's vehicles as they are there longer and more often. <br />Mrs. Sergi questioned the signs marked double sided directional signs. Mr. Boyle said the <br />nortfiwest ground sign will say drive-thru and the east ground sign would say exit only. Mrs. Sergi <br />pointed;out that the documents submitted list more verbiage on the directionaUground signs then <br />stated. -If the two directional signs are for safety of traffic flow and control only as Mr. Boyle <br />stated fhey are warranted. However if additional verbiage is included they are merely ground signs <br />and not warranted. Mrs. Diver reviewed that the applicant agreed to mark 4 parking spaces for <br />employees and have the west and east signs submitted as directional signs giving directions only. <br />Iii reviewing the standards; Mrs. Sergi felt the variances requested were substantial and the prior <br />business did not have parking issues only traffic flow issues. Mr. Menser voiced that parking <br />concerned him as once 4 spaces are marked employees only there will be only 14 parking spaces <br />left on the site for 57 seats. Mrs. Diver; the property can yield a reasonable return without the <br />parking variance. The parking variance is substantial and the variance can be reduced if the <br />number of indoor seats were reduced to meet what code allows. Mr. Conway reviewed that there <br />are 18 actual spaces 4 landbanlced space totaling 22 parking spaces which allows 44 seats <br />excludirig the outdoor seating. The applicant shows 47 indoor seats and an additional 12 outdoor <br />seats which eliminates the 4 landbanlced spaces thereby increasing the parking variance from 2 to <br />12 spaces needed (4 landbanked + 2 indoor + 6 outdoor = 12 short). Mrs. Sergi explained that <br />whether or not there is outdoor seating or how many indoor seats there is the number of parking <br />spaces on the lot does not change. Therefore she is not as concerned with the parking request <br />knowing that there would be no more parking spaces available with or without the outdoor seating <br />whicli she believes enhances the site. Mr. Kelly felt the circumstance was very difficult due to the <br />size of the lot and he agrees outdoor seating is a plus. <br />Mr. 1Vlenser was more concerned with signage requested as there are no visibility issues due to <br />setUacks or the building being visibly blocked. The Lorain access point does not have issues <br />however the curb cut onto whitethorn should be exit only for vehicle and pedestrian safety. Mrs. <br />Sergi qiiestioned the number of employees per shift. Mr. Bolye believed there would be 3 to 4 <br />employees each shift. Mrs. Sergi said any new directional signs installed should match the existing <br />directional signs otherwise they are not needed. Mr. O'Malley advised that the content of the <br />proposed signs was not to be a factor to grant or deny the variances. The applicant stated they are <br />replacing the existing abandoned signs. Mrs. Sergi said the applicant stated the signs to be installed <br />are different from what are in members packets. Mr. Boyle said the sign located at the northeast <br />corner will say exit only the northwest sign will say drive-thru or enter. Mrs. Sergi said if the <br />d'irectional signs say what the applicant stated then she does not object to the signs. However, if <br />6