My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/11/1988 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1988
>
1988 Planning Commission
>
10/11/1988 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:31:11 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 3:57:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1988
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
10/11/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />` PLANNING COMMISSION <br />OCTOBER 11, 1988 PAGE 5 <br />that a telephone exchange is permitted in a General Retail District and <br />the Commission has to approve this use in the Mixed Use District. Mr. <br />Rafferty stated that this is not a retail use, this is a public utility, <br />and that the general public does not enter the facility; it is only <br />serviced once a week. The Commission is concerned because allowing a <br />retail use in the building could set a precedent and would like the Law <br />Department to check into that. Assistant Law Director Dubelko stated <br />that the code allows the Commission discretion in permitting a General <br />Retail use in a Mixed Use District, however, this could weaken the Cityls <br />position in court if another retail use is.refused. He suggested that <br />the code could be amended to specifically permit such a use, if it is <br />determined that this use does not conflict with the residential use, <br />Mr. Gorris stated that it makes more sense to use an existing building ?- <br />rather than building a 300 foot tower. Mr. Morgan would like this pro- <br />posal tabled until the next?meeting so that the developers can submit to <br />Mr. Conway all information available regarding fire protection, alarm <br />systems, fire ratings, etc, in writing, so that it may be forwarded to <br />the Safety Department for their review, to the Law Department for further <br />review, and to the Engineering Department for their evaluati.on of decible <br />ratings, noise generated, etc. <br />2) Nightfall Night Club, 30850 Lorain Road <br />Review of site plan (continued from Planning Commission meeting of <br />January 27, 1987 as ordered by the court). <br />Heard by Architectural Board of Review September 21, 1988. <br />Representative still not present. Mr. Morgan advised that the proposal <br />will be tabled until the next meeting, but there was a resident present <br />who wished to address the Commission at this time. Mr. Zonar, president <br />of the Timber Trails Home Owners Association, asked the Commission to <br />consider the safety problems involved with this proposal since customers <br />of the club frequently drive over the sidewalk and curb to exi;t', the <br />facility,-pointing out that the curbs shown on the plan are only 6 inches <br />high. He presented pictures of the area showing the shrubs knocked down <br />and tire tracks over the sidewa7,k and a copy of a letter written to the <br />President of Council, J. Saringer, advising Council bf their concerns, <br />Mr. Zonar further stated that these plans indicate that the arborvitae <br />in the tree lawn are unsightly and are to be removed, and advised the <br />Commission that the home owners association has been maintaining these <br />shrubs and they believe that they do deter customers from driving over <br />the sidewalk. He advised that there had been a near accident because <br />of a-.c.ar exiting improperly just this last week. It was stated that the <br />hedges were in the right of way and could not be removed by the owner, <br />and that the letter and pictures will be made nart of the file. Mr. Morgan <br />stated that this proposal will be tabled until the next meeting. Mr. Thomas <br />objected since the developer has missed several meeting and pointed out <br />that the property is in foreclosure and is in arrears in the payment-of <br />taxes. Assistant Law Director Dubelko advised that he has filed a motion <br />for contempt of court, but believes that the City should do everything <br />possible to expedite approval of these plans as ordered by the court. <br />IV. NEW DEVELOPPIENTS AND SUBDIVISIONS: <br />1) 7515 Company's Subdivision No. 2 <br />The proposal is to subdivide and <br />the 7515 Company's Subdivision No <br />Re-Subdivision. <br />realign sublot nos. 23, 24, and 25 of <br />. 2 and permanent parcel nos 231-20-16 <br />"k
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.