The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05/11/1981 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS .\1 illlltes of VILLJ\GE C'F DUPLIN natio I grcrmlCS -'1 cd ing National Graphics Corp" Cols" 0, Form No, 1097 ' 1I de! May II, 1981 19 The special meeting of Cnunci I tn discuss Sisters Chicken Restaur- ant Appeal and HDirectinns fnr the 80'S,H was cal led tn nrder by ~!aynr Head I ee at 7: 30 P. ~.~. Thnse members present were: Chambers, Head lee, Lew is, \land, il1aurer. ~'r. Geese and Mr. S hawan were ab- sent frnm the meeting. Als" present were ~r. Helman, Vi Ilage Planner,\lr. Smith, Law Directnr, and \lr. Gunner, Assistant Law D i rectnr. Sisters Chicken Restaurant Appeal The Clerk read cnrrespnndence tattached) frnm persnns expressing their desire fnr a Sisters-type restaurant In the Dubl in area. Mr. Pen Ha Ie, Att nrney represent i ng Chari es r~uma, summar i zed the reasnns fnr appealing the Planning and Znning Cnmmissinn recnmmen- datinn tn Cnunci I. He said the area is znned fnr said restaurant and they had cnmpl ied with al I requirements requested by the Vi Ilage Planner and Planning and Znning. jR" Mr. Ruma reviewed the three (3) reasnns fnr denial nf the applica- tinn and referred tn the C.D.D. requirements. He feels the re- qu i rements perta i n tn curb cuts, ingress and ~gress f I nw, and traffic flnw within the site itself. It dnes nnt mentinn the ef- fect nf traffic at an intersectinn that is nff-site. Mr. Ruma feels the use is permissible under the C.D.D. requirements fnr these reasnns. He said they have studied the traffic flnw nf the drive-thrnugh windnw and it is nnt substantial. Any traffic cre- ated is nn-site and additinnal curb cuts are nnt required. In reference tn unsafe pedestrian access rnutes, he said their plan is nnt different frnm nther restaurant parking areas thrnughnut Dub I in. Finally, he felt the specific setback requirements have been met and theirJ.ndscape plans meet the intent nf an Hnpen feel ingH a I nn g S. R. 257. Mr. ~and reviewed the actinns taken by the Planning and Znning Cnmmissinn. He qunted the C.D.D. requirements and said it was the feel~n9 nf the Cnmm~ssibn that a drive-thrnugh faci I ity fnr this particular site was nnt in the best interest nf the cnmmunity. In reference tn the safe pedestrian access rnute, he said a restaurant such as LaScala is different in that it is nnt surrnunded by a shnpping center and prnvides a different set nf circumstances. He said plan cnnfnrmance was nnt merely related tn ~pen space but the fact that trash dispnsal fa~i I ities were cnntigunus tn S.R. 257. Mr. Chambers felt as far as the traffic issue is cnncerned, he fel the shnpping area needed snmething tn stimulate traffic since the parking area is mnre than half empty at the present time. He said there is a change needed in the traffic flnw alnng 9~R. 257 and that is being develnped with the impr~vement nf Dale Drive. Mrs. ~~aurer asked appr nx i mate I y hnw muc h bus i ness is" sit dnwn H and hnw much is Hdrive-thrnugh.H ~~r. Ruma said in a heavy traffic RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS c\I illutcs of VILLAGE 0F DUPLIN ,\[ectillg ~ ks National Graphics Corp., Cols" O. Form No. 1097,,';. II de! ~lay II, 1981 19 Pace Twc ".I area of another Sisters Restaurant the drive-through business in approximately ten percent (10%). He said the menu is large and therefore the window business is not that great. Mrs. Maurer felt the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommenda- tiOn is supportable because the proposed lOcation has pecular and particular prOblems. She referred to the Wendy~ restaurant just south of the proposed lOcation for Sisters that needs a special pol ic~ng to cOntrol traffic. '.layor Head I ee sa i d sh e vis i ted a Sisters Restaurant and fe It the greater husiness was frOm persOns eating inside Or those that came into the restaurant to carry their food out. She asked if it w~s pOssihle to el iminate the drive-through wind"w. Mr. Ruma said the) wanted a typical Sisters Restaurant at this lOcatiOn. He explaine it wnuld be a flagship type faci I ity since Wendys is On the "pPO_ site cOrner (Sisters is nnw owned by the Wendys COrporation) and representatives and franchise nwners c"uld be brought to the Dubl i IOcati"n tn show them the OperatiOn "f both restaurants. In assessing the actions taken by the Planning and Zoning Commissi n and noting the changes made and incorporated into the plans by the devel"per during the last six mnnths, ~r. Lewis felt the appl ica- iOn shnuld he apprnved. ~'r. Chambers mnved, seconded byl4r . Lewis to approve the app I i ca- inn. Vote On the mntinn was as fnll"ws: 3 Yeas - Headlee, Lewis, hamhers; 2 Nays - Mand, Yaurer. ~r. Smith interpreted SectiOn . I I ( c) 0 f the C h art e r i n d i cat i n 9 the m f)t iOn fa i led. I n an s we r n '-lr. Chambers Quest i On as t n what, if any, opt iOns were n Ow open n the applicant, Mr. Smith said they could either appeal tf) the ,nard of ZOning Appeal Or resuhmit their appl ication t" the Plann- ing and ZOning Cf)mmission. lanner_Pr~~~ntation - "Direction of i:.~80's" ~!r. Larry He I man and r.lr. Denn j s ',Frandon were present to rev I ew and i scuss "D i rect ions of the 80' s. "'lr. Prandon rev i ewed items d i s- ussed at the special meeting in February 1981. He felt what is eeded is to work On their pol icies and get a directiOn established, nd make that a part "f a capital budgeting process. Py having a .early growth statement priOr tn a capital imprOvement prOgram, "unci I would be able tn review projetts of priOrity. ':r. Lew i s sa i d after the spec i a I meet i ng in February he had a cOn- ersation with Mr. pohm in which they discussed Mr. Lewis' propOsal hat was presented to Cnunci I in December 1980 and how closely his ecommendati"ns follOwed that of the Planning firm.1i!r. Lewis said it was his understanding Vr. ~ohm would consider the prOpOsal when e prepared "DirectiOns of the 80's" and the pOssihi lities of im- lementing them with the Planners key reCOmmendation. He said her~ was nO further cOntact frOm ~r.Bohm and nOw the ery same principals are being discussed with COnsideration of how RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ,\1 ill lites of VILLAGE "F DUBLIN ,\1cc/iug natiQnalCSll ~ ~QrnonK National Graphics Corp., Cols., O. Form No. 1097. Held May II, 1981 H) Paoe Three . they might be implemented. He said he w~uld like tn resubmit his rec~mmendations, review them and brin~ them up t~ date fOr a m~re seri~us c~nsiderati~n by Cnunci I at a future meeting. ~r. Mand expressed c~ncern that plans and directi~ns made are nnt supp~rted Or implemented by the Planner. He specifically cited the C.D.D. nrdinance and felt it was receiving very I ittle support from the Planner. Mr. Helman said he \"as I imited from becoming inv~lved with actual enfnrcement nf a Vi I lage nrdinance. r':ay~r Head I ee referred t n t he rec~mmendat i ~ns that \vere i nc I uded i r the "Directinns nf the 80's" and whether nr nnt they wnuld improve procedures. She specifically mentinned the flnnding problem sur- rnunding the f\luirfield devel~pment. She said this should n~t have happened if plans were prnperly reviewed and fol Inwed and asked what Cnunci I c~uld d~ tn prevent prnblems in the future. Mr. Hei- man suggested a type nf checkl ist and Mr. Brandnn said a fnl I~w-up system that wnuld insureapprnved plans wnuld be carried nut. Mr. Brandnn asked C~unci I's permissi~n tn implement nne, several, nr al I nf these rec~mmendati~ns. Mr. Chambers ,sa~d! that a "scope of w~rk" be prepared by the Planner cnncerning Item #2 - "Update nf the ~':aster Plan" and #3 - "Procedures" which wnuld establ ish better prncessing nf zOning matters, etc. ;-'1a~'''r Head lee adj nurned t he meet j nf' at 9: 40 P. M. I,t~~ P~~~er /J. 7Mll-. ~,mUt<J/___ ~ Council i, Ie f. ~ i. ~ \ :/. 'GlL J!orI9enlxk.1I 5646 91_L-ie @our' 'CD,uUm,$4;o 43011 ii' t:' ~;I iff' 'h ", ,'; . 'i::'[if'Vr ';Aprit30 '1'81 ';~ "~,:' . .' . . I ,.{)j::~:',,;ni . i~,~, /:,', \ . ,:. . :,',;~i':;rt;~ik'ij~::i&A~lii[, ,',,; ,:! f,~f,;;;ihS~;II~ill;~;~I~~rat~?S,; ,A ~ .. " "" " I,.:", , "" } 'd'~"'~l!!,~V"N'\'" "'i,JJ.l, ..\il!1'l')Ht~.:J\i l;i.+.~i~ ",,';'1.4' . '1('th$rm' " "" . '~'r:;J;~"h"i?'" """'4;<n ',f!I~"II)f~~'l't,t q',; t, , fi;".\1~~1.'~~.*:]t(i: ",! ['!1 'i;lif{;I~~I?:~;~:{ :,~iir(;I;t;j\}jr,i{t!\I~jijl~f!J~r ';,'.';;' rl\' To:Whom It ~Y~ertt: . ,\iPi(~W;';I~,j;:r::!;nn,;' r . I would like to Introduce myself as a resident of ,the bublln community. I moved .nto ~blin from Upper A.rlington In 1979. I ,enjoy ,the'Oub,lIn areatr~ndou~ly and am iext"~meJy . lnt~rested in :its gr()wth. 'i':' . ,. . c-,:..",: . ; ~ .'. I :.~~"~\;{J t f, :1, . \' . .' pay a very large tax bill '~ch year fOr....'Ij:tr'~iiege ~ . Hving in this area. 'pay;tt)is willingly'becatrsedfall the opportunities that the Oublin. area affords me,. ,It js because of this interest.in oorc:qmmunlty ,thatt am writing to you today. I..have been .~.OII.oWing ;the". ews. p. aper,c..av.. era,ge.. of ..the. . ." ,ongoing ,struggle bet,,~ !'$~ster's C~kken";Bnd~he (D~lIn ; council. While I am 'sure that .the Council has the best 'Interest of the community at heart, IWOl.dd like toexpress.lp~c.J)nCern with respect to thlssltuation.- . ., :,', I . I' ,", " ! ,-;.-, ','t.1 . ." ' I have a ,family: which :~Qr.slst~r9f'.a "wifea~d 1th~!j~~ " '.' duaghters ,ages six, three and' eighteen months.' At this point in time, if I wish to take my family to dinner I there is no restaurant operation in our Immediate surrounding area that is capable of comfortably accommodating our family situation. A unit like "Sister's Chicken"provides us with ""J " . L j I 9he J]ongenUers 5646 g I enkeT'Pie @our' (J)ub/in, c9kio 43017 April 30, 1981 Page -2- ~ " an economical, nutritional meal. But, equally as important, an environment that is conducive to a family is also found at their establishments. If I take our children to a more formal restaurant, oftentimes it disturbs the surrounding tables. It is also mine and my wife's concern that sandwich menus offered by the only existing neighborhood restaurants at this time are not the best meal for our children. These reasons are why I feel so strongly that "Sister's Chicken" would represent a major asset to our community and I would wish that Dublin City Council would include everyone's interests in their decisions regarding the location of this type of restaurant in the near locale of Dublin. Like aU of you, I am a very busy person. However, r feel so strongly about this Issue that if it would be beneficial, t would be glad to personally appear before Council to state my reasons for wanting "Sisterl,$ Chickenll in Dublin. .-, I ~ Kln~t'regards , , ( , , , ' , : , " t .~ REL & CL/mec ,j 't': 1 . ~ ~. {]~~ /I/~~ '_ ~!/~/~~ ~. t~~s'" ~~~ /~, &L ~3.,/1 /YJT~ "-~~~: . J ~ a.. ~ PJ{ JJ1~ ~ . .:zL:- ~ ~ ~,,-.z 7r' .'.4.... ~ ~ ' Ct~ ~~ :z:Lc C--<.-L.4 ~ ~ ~~. .5-~~u~{/~~~~ tt dd,l.-<., -.. < --Z1o ~ ~~...d- a....,. <..-U<-LLL O-<J .C<- ~,~~;zL;t~. ~. o I-",;"...d. '-tu..L ~ ~ <<-v-- ~ ~ .A.l:.~<v~ ~ ~ 0u.. ~ ~ '. ~,d!...f}.. ;;t:. ~, ~.~, .zL.~ 4..-......L. ~ ~ ,&,./ e:"- ~ ~ ~ ...zL ~...:... [l~ tI---d- )n~ ~ ~ IL ~ ~, J/:. ~ 6' rd .~ Aa" C,.l. ~ j J ~ JL- 'yLz.....,.~ ~ d--v- ~ ~ '..... -::i.L.- ~.' '. e." t-/..zk ~ ~ JLc $;L . ~.d:~~~~~IZ.~. '17J~ s: /7,n 4~, c:L-tl. ~ 1J-1J ~J ~~ . . I "--'