05/04/1992 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

It is the Commission's i.mderstanding from the Architectural Review Board minutes that the sign as proposed will not have a white background, but will have individual letters, backlit against the blue metal (the same color of the glass). This Board further recommends that the Council pay particular attention to the lighting of the parki.ng lot, it was the Commission's concern initially about the height of the poles, but the Architectural Review Board seems to feel that this can be corrected with the proper recessing of lights on these larger poles, and this Board would feel more comfortable if someone else looks at this, and the developers did agree to recess the lighting. It is the recommendation of this Board that, with the approval of this development, sidewalks be put in from the northernmost property line of the overall 43 acre parcel all the way up to connect with the sidewalks that have been approved for the apartment building which will lead all the way up to Butternut Ridge Road on the south, and even though the center parcel has not been developed, these sidewalks will be installed with this construction phase prior to occupancy of the Moen Building. It is further reiterated at this meeting that the traffic light at the intersection of Moen Drive and Great Northern will be put in by the developer. This recomnendation is contingent upon subsequent agreement between the City and the developer on the combining and re-configuration of the remaining parcels within this development, seconded by T. Morgan, and unanimously approved. During the motion the members had discussed recommending that the dedication of Moen Drive not be approved and decided to make a separate motion on that issue. Mr. Berryhill advised that the agreement that with the City to bring Moen into the City was specifically contingent upon a dedicated road into the property. Assistant Law Director Dubelko advised that once this is initiated by Council, the ordinance pertaining to the dedication will be referred to the Commission. Mr. Orlowski pointed out that this road would service only these properties, and he sees no reason why it should be dedicated for the City to maintain. It was agreed to defer discussion until the ordinance is referred to the Commission. 4) Church of St. Clarence, 30106 Lorain Rd. Proposal to construct picnic pavilion on church property. Mr. Zarzycki, architect, explained the plans to build an 8,000 square foot picnic pavilion in the northwest corner of the site which will shelter a maximum of 500 peopl.e. The design of the pavilion will be compatible with the existing church and the materials will be exactly the same. There will be rest rooms, a fireplace, and a platform inside and it will open out to the Metro Parks in the rear. They are now negotiating with the Park Board to grant some relief from their deed restrictions designating what type of building can be built up to the property line. Since the park is zoned as residential property, a 75 foot rear setback is required by the City and the pavilion will only be 18 feet off the rear line, and a variance for the height of a structure in relationship to the side and rear yards will.be needed beeause the church is a conditiona.l use and the rear property is zoned residential, even though it will never be developed as residential. A side yard variance might be required, but since the church owns the adjacent property, the two lots could be combined. Building Commissioner Conway advised the side yard variance would be for the parking lot, not the structure. It was clarified that the adjacent property faces Lorain Road (where a blue house is located) and is where the church is considering constructing senior housing (this house may be used as a book store for the present)o It was also determined that there is a home and a lot in between these parcels but the church's two lots abut in the rear. The pavilion is about 400 feet back and will be used for picnics, reunions, family oriented activities and also during their