02/11/2003 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

^. ? on the site for safety reasons. Mr. Conway reviewed that the city had no control over the content of the signs since the new code was written. Mr. I{oeth reiterated that the board would like the safety department to review the plans. Mr. Hreha questioned why the applicant could not stay within the Cities maximum square footage for signs allowed for the site. At this point in the meeting discussion regarding what Planning Commission should review or not took place between the Building Commissioner, Assistant Law Director and board members. Mr. Coiiway suggested that if the applicant lowered the overall height of the ground sign to 8- feet he would be allowed a 65 square foot sign, which would still make them 6-feet off. Mr. Mnrgulnes suggested he inisunderstood the code and would rework the size to make sure it meets the city code. They will still require the variances for the additional ground signs. Boai•d inembei•s commeiflts aaYd cancerns regarding front of the site: 1VIrs. Hoff-Smith questioned the change in the handi cap ramp and how it allowed the additional parking spaces. Mr. Margulies indicated that when they redesigned the ramp and entrance of the restaurant it eliminated two spaces so the van space was moved which gave them back one parking space. He further r-eviewed that they added additional landscaping to the front of the site to take the attention away from the handi cap ramp as well as colored canopies. Mr. ICoeth questioned if the awning leading into the entrance would be illuminated. Mr. Geoi•ge indicated that there would be an 8-foot florescent light under the canopy. Law I)epartments comntents: Mr. O'Malley indicated that he was present at the Architectural Review Board meeting and the applicants have been inore then willing to work with the City to make sure the outcome of the proposal is tlie best for everyone. He thanked the applicants for being so patient and cooperative. R. Koeth motioiaed to approve Daniel E. Margul'aes (Pepper Joe's Restaurant) of 24538 Loa•ain Road his t•equest which consists of interior renovation for restaurant including new handiclpped ramp, canvas canopy, o•ailidigs and signage. With the following stipulations; (1). The dumpster located in tlae southwest area is moved to parking space # 33 of the plaiis dated 02/11/03. (2). The proposal will go to Board of Zoning Appeals with the followioig recommendations; grant 10-foot reai• setback, 5-foot sicleyard setback, and other 10-foot setback. The developer is willing to meet the i•equirements for signage to meet city code. Grant the variance to have tliree ga•ound sagns. (3). Tlae applicants are to follow Safety Departments recoinmendations reglrcliaag their fire trucks being able to inaiYeuver oii the site. J. Lasko seconded the inotion, wliich was unanimously approved. The proposal does not need to return to Planning Cotnmission and will move forward to Architectural Review Board and Board of Zoning Appeals. IV. NEVV 1)EVELOPIVIEN7C5 AIeTD SUBI)IVISIONS: Consolidatioii Plat for Pepper Joe's Restaurant; 24532 Loi-ain Road: The proposal is to consolidate Permanent Parcel Numbers 231-37-008 and 231-37-010 (0.00 aci-e) with 231-37-017 (0.06 acre). The consolidated parcel will be 0,72 acre. The location is on the noi-th side of Lorain Road and approximately 150 feet east of Columbia Road. Zoning is Retail Business, General. " 3