11/26/2002 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

planning consultant assisted the city in revainping the code in terms of creating larger lots, greater setbacks, etc. It is a function of having enough room to accommodate this use. Mr. Willse asked if there is a provision that allows something less than 1.5 acres if the same owner owns two parcels. Mr. Ryinarczyk said the law director had made a motion at one time whereby if the lot had been owned by the same owner and then split, this would fall into effect. If it was a legal conforming lot and it conforms to other requirements of zoning, it would be acceptable. Mr. Willse said they are trying to conform to the city codes. Their typical lot size is about 1 acre. It is considered adequate. They could move the building back and not have to deal with a front setback variance but that would put parking closer to the street and in front of the building. They would prefer parking behind the building. He has a new landscape plan and it references the irrigation systein. They added more screening and trees that will block lights. He does not have a copy of the revised plan. Mr. Rymarczyk indicated he needs a copy of the revised plan showing the irrigation, which would eliminate one variance. He said there was supposed to be documentation on the easement as well. Mr. Willse said he does not have it with him. Mr. Rymarczyk said it is needed before the matter can be forwarded to the Board of Zoning Appeals. There was further discussion about the variances. Mr. Willse said there are things they discussed internally as an organization that they are prepared to do but he would like to hear feedback from the residents. Mr. O'1Vlalley asked if the applicant has a proposal that he is not yet ready to share until he hears from the residents. Mr. Willse said that Mr. O'Malley may have misinterpreted his comment. He said they are prepared to do fencing and additional landscaping that was brought up at the last meeting. He is not holding back any other proposal. Mr. Koeth turned the discussion over to the audience members. Mrs. Mary Jane Smith of Clague Rd. expressed concerns about the setback from Clague, the lot size, headlights coming into her home, the major traffic issues, the view of the restaurant from her home. Mr. Richard Kreps of Clague expressed concern about pedestrian and car safety, accidents not included in trafFic survey, drainage, and backyards being flooded. He indicated he has enough difficulty trying to pull out of his driveway. Mr. Jeff Sturgeon said his nuinber one concern is also safety. He said the apron needs to be blocked off with a rope. It is not safe. The city has codes for a reason and it ought to stick by them. The lot is not big enough and the board shouldn't ignore what the Planning Commission said in the past, which is no restaurant. He said drainage is a huge problem and he can't see where they will put water. He said traffic, odor, noise, the fencing, and lighting are all major issues for the residents. They want some assurance there will be no trucks on Clague. Mr. Rymarczyk said there is no way to give them that assurance. Note: The second audio tape malfunctioned. This portion of the minutes is taken from the clerk's notes. Mr. Sturgeon said all the deliveries should be from Lorain and trucks should exit onto Lorain. Mr. O'Malley indicated that could certainly be a condition of the development approval but realistically it would be difficult to enforce. Mr. Koeth indicated they could make it a recominendation to have trucks coming and going off of Lorain. Mr. Willse the trucks would use Lorain and added there are only 3 deliveries a week. Mrs. Kay Bowman of Clague expressed a great deal of concern about having a restaurant directly across from her home, the affects on her property value, the distance between the building and her home, and the severe traffic problems. Mrs. Sturgeon of Clague Rd. indicated she cannot get out of her driveway now and the problem will be worse with this development. She has been working with the city on the drainage issue but wants the board to know she has hired an attorney to get this all resolved. Mr. Lasko said he has a fundamental concern about the traffic. He has to take into account what Mr. O'Malley has said at this meeting and other meetings. The off site conditions are not to be considered. We have an independent analysis and the off site traffic is not necessarily a problem. There is a requirement that a restaurant property is 1.5 acres. He understands Wendy's can accommodate their building on the site but unless and until it is shown that it mitigates the 1.5 acre requirement, he would be hard pressed to go against that requirement. Mr. Spalding agreed and added the owner was aware of the code based on the commentary of Mr. Tallon. The owner was advised that a restaurant is not a feasible use of that lot because of the acreage requirement. The individual owner was wrong to bring 4