10/23/1990 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, -. for drainage be provided for the B:Z.D. Committee, and that, an amended drawing be presented with the exact location of all the landbanked parking spaces shown so that the Building Commissioner can concur that the lot as developed will provide sufficient parking to meet code. Also the five spaces shown on the rear be.landbanked tmtil the property.is leased so that.they can determine with the Building Commissioner exactly how many spaces they will need, - seconded by L. Orlowski, and tmanimously approved. It-was.clarified that all the information on drainage.(soil boring, drainage plan, etc.) would be needed for the B.Z.D. meeting November 13th, and if it is not available, they should continue the proposal until the next meeting. 5) Steeple Walk Apartments, property located south of I-480, west of S.R.252, and north of lots facing Butternut Ridge Road. Revisions to plans previously approved by Planning Commission on December -12, 1989. Heard by Architectural Board of Review October 17, 1990. The Architectural Review Board would like to see all the finalized colors prior to construction. Mr. Haas, architect, explained that the traffic.pattern was basically the saine as before; that are no definite plans for a fence around the lakes. In reference to the above ground.retention, Assistant Law Director Dubelko had presented a letter which advised that there has been a policy not to permit above ground retention, but there is really nothing prohibiting them in the codes. Permitting them would be.up to the Engineering Department to determine if the retention is adequa.te. City Engineer Deichmann, stated-that he would not alter a city policy lightly; but he believed that the 100 year capability of this plan was sufficient justification.. He further stated that he would not be in favor of what is called "detention basins" which he believed were eyesores, since the system is normally dry and only holds water after-a rain. These are retention ponds with aeration facilities which always have water in them. In reference to the fence,- Mr. Haas, architect, advised that there were no definite plans for a fence as.yet, since they were waiting for a definite determination that a fence.would be required., They would probably use a metal fence. Councilman McKay suggested a wrought iron fence would enhance the appearance of the development. He stated that it would be difficult to tell someone that they needed a fence around a swinun.ing pool. when a lake had been approved wi:th no ferice around it. Mr. Gorris suggested a.fence with landscaping around it,, pointing.out -he, did not want a chain link fence around the lake. Building Comnissioner Conway stated that there will be a 6 foot high fence required, but they do have the option of appealing this decision to the Board of Building.Code Appeals. Mr. Thomas stated that. Planning Commission could forward to the B.Z.D. with the stipulation that fence plans must be submitted to them. B. Gorris moved to approve the Steeple-Walk Apartment Complex, location south of I-480, west of S.R. 2523, it is our Lmderstancling that, the developer will present to the B.Z.D. their proposal as it relates to the fencing around the water.features on the property, and this board would like to see the fencing (or whatever is plarmed to to surround the water features, even if it is such that it has togo to the Board of Building Code Appeals) that was ul.timately approved by . B.Z.D. and also the Commission would like to be advised of the colors of the proposal after they have been approved by the Architectural Review Board, and further it is.our understanding that the water features would have aeration, seconded by _J. Thomas.' Roll call on motion: Gorris, Thoma.s, Betts, and. Bowen, yes. Mr. Bierman, no. Mr. Orlowski, abstained. Motion carried.? 4