My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/24/1990 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1990
>
1990 Planning Commission
>
04/24/1990 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:31:36 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 5:01:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1990
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
4/24/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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 />. . ;?: <br />PLANNING COIOfISSION APRIL 24, 1990 PAGE 2 <br />would improve the property. We also ask that the city forester, Dave <br />Wendell, assist you in choasing the type and design of landscaping for <br />your property, seconded by R. Bierman, and unanimously approved. <br />3) Aquatic Dreams, 29245 Lorain Road <br />Proposal to construct addition to retail building. <br />Heard by Architectural Board of Review on April 19, 1990. <br />Mr. Johnson, owner, presented revised plans which had been re-drawn to <br />the specifications of the Architectural Review Board (plans had been ap- proved by Mr. Sohn of that Board). Mr. Thomas.noted that the,?width of the <br />mansard had been reduced; the mansard on the east has been changed to <br />match the one on the west and has been extended to tfie porch; the chimney <br />has been raised 2 feet; the inansard on the west has been returned about <br />three foot further and they had agreed that the sample,of the split face <br />block had matched the existing'brick. Mr. Johnson advised that the only <br />landscaping on the property .was a 3 by 5 foot area around the sign on the <br />west side of the driveway. Building Commissioner Conway responded to <br />various questions stating: that the existing gravel drive in the rear would <br />be conforming since it is a residential drive (the Johnson family lives in <br />the house); that .7 parking spaces are required, 10 are shown, but he -- <br />believes that 2 of those spaces.on the upper portion of the drive are not <br />viable since cars parked in them would block the drive to the house. After <br />some discussion, the members agreed that these 2 spaces should be elimina- <br />ted along with 1 space on the east side of the drive in the front where <br />landscaping should be installed. Mr. Johnson is concernecl since on the <br />weekend he.needs all of this parking,.he would be be willing to increase <br />the landscape area on the west side of the drive as much as possible, he <br />might be able to remove the two spaces near the drive because.that is <br />where he keeps his service vehicles. He explained that he had 3 service ' <br />vans and would be getting a fourth and that they must park these on _ <br />the property over the weekend. Members discussed the feasibility of <br />installing 2 parallel spaces beside the hard surfaced drive across from <br />the house.for the service vans. Mr. Orlowski was concerned that these <br />spaces would cause a problem with vehicles turning around. Mr..Johnson . <br />stated that during the week the service vans left before the store opened <br />and during the weekend they did.:.not have"-.to.be moved. Members are con- <br />cerned since.it would appear that the property is being over developed, <br />that there is a residence on the property which might be effected, but <br />they believed that the parking spaces for the vans should be shown and ._ . _: <br />that there should be more landscaping in the front. In,response to the <br />suggestion that the hard surface be extended further back, Mro Johnson pointed out that would necessitate cutting down a large maple tree. He <br />also stated.that removing the hard surface in the front space would be . <br />quite expensive. It was suggested.that perhaps some kind of planter could. .. <br />be used instead of taking out the concrete. T. Morgan moved that. the pro-. <br />posal to construct an addition to a retail building, Aquatic Dreams at <br />29290 Lorain Road be approved with the stipulations ma.de?.by the Archi-: <br />tectural Review Board and with the recommendation that the developer work <br />with the city forester to see what can be done about.eliminating the , <br />first parking space on the southeast corner of the parking lot and re- <br />placing it with some sort of landscaping which can be contained above the <br />concrete and which.would be aestically compatible with the landscaping on - <br />the.west side of the.property.; and.that the two spaces.blocking the drive , <br />be.eliminated and installed elsewriere'{unless these spaces could somehow <br />?
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.