Laserfiche WebLink
dealing with sewer problems that have existed for decades, and he -intends to address a significant number of basement flooding problems in the next.year. <br />In reference to the wetlands, he agrees any approval must be held until they <br />have the Corp.. of.Engineers permit. He further advised that both traffic <br />reports, including the conelusions, were based"-on the guidelines from the . <br />Institute of Transportation Engineers. He again stated that a traffic signal <br />warrant analysis might be helpful to determine if the developer should pay for . <br />a portion of the signalization at the intersection of Clague and Brookpark <br />Roads. Chairman Thoma.s stated that a wetlands study must be done by some <br />organization in conjunction with the Engineering Department; he would still <br />like more consideration to access an Brookpark Road, and would have a problem <br />supporting an access onto Clagae Road. Mr. Gorris would like the clubhouse <br />and pool relocated further ba.ck in the development, perhaps where building "G" <br />is located, and also believes that sidewalks are needed. Mr. Orlowski would <br />like more information an lumins of the lighting and type of fixtures, specific <br />information on dumpster enclosures, etc. It was pointed out that 1 dtunpster <br />located in the single family area has not.been removed. In respons.e to Mr.. <br />Gorris' question, Mr. Bollinger clarified that they did not have a variance <br />for the height, only for 3 stories but with the conforming 35 foot height. Mr. <br />Betts believed, that the. P1arLn;ng Conmssion.should make some determination as ., . <br />to the desirability of a 3 story. versus 22 story, building. Mr.. Conway . <br />clarified tha.t the access drives could be.on the single family.zoned property, but buildings, parking, etc., could not be placed pn property zoned for single <br />family. The developers were asked to look into the issue of children, and <br />-playgrounds, etc. as weil as rnnnber of children they might ha.ve, security <br />plans for the jogging path, and deed restrictions on the split zoned parcel.. <br />J. Thomas moved to table the proposal to :construct an apartment deuelopment . <br />for Shore !West Construction until we have a study performed to determine <br />whether or7 not this is a wetland area that would have an effect on the . <br />development; and assuming that the Engineering Departmerit will notify me when . <br />that study has been accomplished, and the developers cari have the other <br />information for the Commission the next:time we.meet, seconded- by.R. Bowen,and imanimously approved. The residents were advised that no notices would.be <br />sent, but that some of.the residents would be notified when this would again <br />be on the agenda. <br />IV. NEnT DEVELOPMENTS : <br />No items. <br />V. COMMUNICATIONS: <br />Ord. 90-142: will be discussed at the next meeting: <br />VI. COMNNUTTF,E REPORTS: <br />No items. <br />VII. NEW BUSTNESS : <br />No items. <br />9