06/28/1988 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

?. ? PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 28, 1988 PAGE 3 4) Nightfall Night Club, 30850 Lorain Road Iteview of site plan (continued from Planning Commission meeting of January 27, 1987 as ordered by the court). . Continued from Planning Commission meeting of June.14, 1988. No representative was present. Assistant Law Director Dubelko advised that proposal should be continued and that he will inform the court that the developer has f.ailed to appear.. Mr. Morgan requested that letters submitted at the last meeting from the adjacent Timber Trails Homeowners Association outlining their on going problems with this establishment also be forwarded to the court. Mr. Thomas questioned how long this proposal was to be continued. Mr. Dubelko advised that the court had ordered the issue" to be resolved by July 30th. T. Morgan moved to con- tinue the Nightfall.Night Club issue until the next meeting, seconded by E. Traczyk. Roll- call on motion: Morgan, Traczyk, Betts, and Bierman, yes. Gorris and Thomas, no. Motion carried. 1) Brendan Place, Lorain Road and.David Drive ., Revised landscape plan. . . Heard.by the Architectural Board of -Review June 22-, 1988. .., . Representative still not present, -Proposal will'be..continued.until the next meeting. IV. NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND SUBDTVISIONS:. ' . - .,.' 1) Gustafson Lot Split . The proposal is to subdivide permanent parcel no. 237=30775 into two (2) sublots. Location is the east side.of Columbia Road, south.of Cedar•. Point Road. Zoning is "A" Residence, Single. Note that pro.posed sublot. no. l'does not conform to the Zoning Code requirements for:mimimum side yard width of five (5.0) feet. Note that. required variance.was granted. by.the Board of Zoning Appeals on June 8, 1988. Mr. Morgan stated that he has received one:letter from H. Reichel and E. Ojemann and a second letter from M. Friedman objecting to this proposal basically because of the erosion p.roblems in the area. City EngineerBoyer advised that from the front of the property to the.ugper bank of the Rocky River there would be approximately 10,000 square feet of useable area and they could build a 65 by 40 foot.house:on the lot and still con- form to the set backs. There was no representative present.- Mr. Evers, bxother of Mrs. Ojemann, the adjacent neighbor, and Mr. Reichel, a resi- dent of Columbia Road, repeated their objections to the subdivision on the basis of existing erosion problems. Mr. Reichel stated that originally this property had a:50 foot back yard and at present there is only about 5 feet. Mrs. Ojemann recentl.y had to move in her fence because she lost 10 more feet of her yard.. He believes that bringing in heavy equipment to build another house would make these problems greater and maintains that if a retention:wa.ll is installed (as was mentioned at`,:the Board of Zoning Appeals meeting) it would have to be 250 feet high to be effective. Mr. Reichel also objects to an 80 foot lot because all the other lots in the area have 100 foot frontages. Mr. Evers.believes that 'splitting the . lot will lessen the historical value of the house:.: Mr. Boyer advised that, prior to constructing a liouse, soil borings by an independent soil