Resolution - #13-01-018 - 01/22/2013

Home

10.That a bypass lane shall be provided for each drive-thru use, allowing cars to leave the drive- thru lane from the stacking area. 11.That based on the submitted Site Plan, it appears that adequate stacking space is provided for the drive-thru. 12.That a bypass lane is provided to allow vehicles to leave the drive-thru lane from the stacking area. 13.That the restriction on the use of electronic speaker devices in City Code may have been unintentional and the City is currently processing an ordinance amendment that would outright permit the use of electronic speaker devices twenty-four (24) hours per day in the COR-2b Sub-District. 14.That based on the orientation of the drive-thru, headlight glare will be toward Armstrong Boulevard (during ordering) and then toward Lot 3 Block 1 COR TWO, which is currently vacant but does have an approved site plan on file. Due to the private drive for ingress/egress and no green space, screening of headlight glare is not feasible. 15.That the Design Framework allows the use of the Development Plan to determine general building placement and said Development Plan approved a setback scenario instead of a build-to scenario and outlined the drive-thru and bypass lanes as shown on the Site Plan. Furthermore, due to extenuating circumstances, such as the approved Development Plan (6.1) (which shows the building footprint in this location), the shift to more auto-oriented uses in the COR-2b Sub-District, and the realigned Sunwood Drive (which now has six [6] vehicle lanes and diminishes the pedestrian ‘feel’ along this stretch of road), it may be appropriate to defer to the general business zoning districts related to the drive-thru, as permitted by City Code Section 117-118 (f), which districts do not restrict the location of drive-thru and bypass lanes. 16.That the proposed configuration depicted in the Site Plan minimizes potential conflicts between pedestrians and drive-thru traffic better so than alternative configurations, providing a safer, and thus more desirable, site. 17.That the proposed use will not adversely impact traffic in the area. 18.That the proposed use will not be unduly dangerous or otherwise detrimental to persons residing or working in the vicinity of the use or to the public welfare. 19.That the proposed use will not substantially adversely impair the use, enjoyment, or market value of any surrounding property. 20.That the proposed use will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. 21.That the proposed use will be served adequately by public facilities and services such as highways and streets. RESOLUTION #13-01-018 Page 2 of 3