10/10/1989 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.d_ ? INA• , . PLANNING CONIMISSION OCTOBER 10, 1989 PAGE 5 an access would create the image that the developers are looking for, nor do they know how the office complex will be laid out. They would have no problem with an emergency access through their propertym Mr. Thomas requested that this be tabled and asked the developer to consider relocating the`recreational facilities and to leave just green area on Butternut Ridge. He further stated that the open retention issue must be decided by the Engineering Department, but the Commission would have no problem with ornamental lakes. B. Gorris stated that, with the devel- opers approval, he would move to table the Atrium Apartment Homes, property located south of I-480, west of S.R.252, until the next Planning Commission meeting and ask that the developer consider the following for presentation at that meeting: the relocation of recreation and/or other items which could be considered a nuisance and to relocate those items away from the existing residences on Butternut as much as possible to the northern end of the development; ask that the developer present at the next meeting site elevations that indicate what of this development will be seen from Butternut Ridge Road; also ask that the developer clearly indicate the type of perimeter vegetation and any other type of screening which he feels will appropriately shelter, not only this development from the resi- dents on Butternut Ridge, but also the residents of this development from the interstate and the office buildings on their north; there seems to be a question as to the legality of the above ground retention, keeping in r.iind what is supposed to happen to that parcel of land that is closest to the intersection of Butternut Ridge and Great Northern Blvd, we would like the developer to more clearly define that within the parameters that we have asked tonight, we see nothing wrong with water features as a landscaping item; we would also like to see a traffic study at the last meeting prior to approval to determine if there should.be signalization at the entrance; prior to the next meeting we would like a copy of the court order pertaining to this property; and request that the city forester look at this at this time, but we will submit this to the Safety Department later when the revised plans are presented, seconded by R. Bowen, and unanimously approved. It was decided_that recommendations could be made to the Board of Zoning Appeals.regarding the height of the towers at the next meeting after the rendering is presented showing how this will appear from Butternut Ridge Road. Mr. Conway would like the Law Department to clarify if Council must approve.the height of these structures prior to their seeking a variance. P4r. Thomas advised those presented that this proposal would be discussed again on October 24th. The Commission took a short recess at this time. 1) Therm-All Inc, located on the south side of the North Olmsted Industrial Parkway., Proposal to construct buildingo (Heard at this point). Mr. Neiden, representing the builder, and Mr. Smigel, the owner, presented the plans. Mr. Smigel advised that their company laminates fiberglass insulation.. This will be their corporate office and they will be employing 30 to 35 people. Mr. Conway advised that approximately 22 parking spaces would be required and the proposed parking is in excess of that. Mr. Neiden explained that the building will be a tilt-up concrete, the parapet will screen the mechanical units on the roof and the loading dock is located behind the screenwall. In`response to Councilman Wilamosky's questions, Mr. Smigel advised that the main scrap material is paper and all trash