My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/10/1998 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1998
>
1998 Planning Commission
>
11/10/1998 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:47:43 PM
Creation date
1/28/2019 3:10:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1998
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
11/10/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
meetings there was a report which addressed the issues of traffic. The report stated the traffic <br />was not a serious problem, we dealt with that and it was determined that widening of Dover <br />Road and Mill Road would be an improvement which would bring it to a level "C". We donated <br />the land to widen Mill Road and donated a computerized control to the City. Mr. Papandreas <br />suggested further more our engineer because of our concerns on how the development was <br />going to effect the traffic, did a traffic report on a store with the same amount of footage. There <br />were comments about turning radius which has been reviewed with the City and it was found <br />they can make the turn on Lorain. To say traffic from water tower square will congest the <br />intersections would be a disservice. Other concerns were people outside North Olmsted doing <br />their grocery shopping here. Mr. Papandreas is not sure about other people but he doesn't go to <br />a store 30 minutes away to get his groceries. There is a geographic area it is not designed to <br />attract outside residents. There is also the factor of getting the groceries and bringing it home. <br />Mr. Papandreas suggested some comments have been made about my integrity being shot, and <br />the agreement that was made. frankly he is concerned as he went back to the minutes and they <br />are not exact and don't match the notes of his office. It limited it to two stores and not more. <br />NIr. Papandreas suggested their intent was to have a store with a reasonable volume of traffic <br />and believes they are upholding what they are doing. They have been meeting with residents <br />drainage issues, mounding, lights shielding, the HVAC and trash compactors. They have <br />donated the land to help the impact that the City was already having. This shopping center has <br />been in place since 95, and has been vacant for two years. Mr. Papandreas suggested they could <br />have put in more tenants that came within the 80, 000 square foot and they would have made <br />more traffic then this store will. We could have put in a movie theater and other things, but we <br />kept it open to find a suitable tenant. If traffic is an issue it will be the same and this user falls in <br />compliance with our agreements with you. Mr. Papandreas indicated we have made sure no <br />variances are needed and have followed the code. Mr. Dubleko stated that the superstore <br />ordinance was in effect before this developer came before this board the last time. Ms. Sokol a <br />concerned resident counted 6,000 cars in three hours. Mr. Vansack repeated his earlier <br />statement that other Giant Eagle stores in different areas have three entrances and one light, <br />Southland three entrances one light. Here in North Olmsted there is only one major entrance, <br />isn't this going to be a safety issue. Mr. Hoelter from Porter Road suggested he would like to <br />read his letter to the Planning Commission and would give a copy to the Commissioners. ( <br />"Letter is attached" to the back of these minutes.) Mr. Hoelter read aloud his written complaint. <br />THE REMAINDER OF THE MINUTES ARE TRA,NSCRIBED FROM 'Y'APE 3 OF 3. <br />Mr. Hoelter suggested all of this was brought up because the concerns of the residents. The self <br />stated restrictions should be kept in tack. There is increase in trucks. Mr. Hoelter questioned <br />what about the developer who agreed to help out the City's expense incurred because of the <br />building contract. Can he back out of these later on, or maybe if he pays them can he get rein- <br />burst for them. We can change any contract as fare as he is concerned. Carnegie Management <br />not only agreed to but in many cases volunteered for these negotiated terms of settlement. <br />Because of their haste to acquire the City's approval to open an unneeded retail stores which the <br />residents have already told them they are unneeded. In a City that is already above the national <br />average for square footage for retail space. Why should this City's residents be forced to pay for <br />the developers miscalculations by lowering our life's quality or by adding new expenses to try <br />and keep our present life quality. More street traffic that everyone has talked about, great <br />increase in delivery trucks. Mr. Hoelter suggested he drives past the Giant Eagle store on <br />14
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.