Laserfiche WebLink
for parcel 44 previously, but this approval will expire tmder the new code if <br />building permits are not obtained by June 21, 1992. It was clarified that this <br />would apply to any proposal which has been approved prior to the adoption of the <br />new codes. Mr. Schultz then explained the impact analyses for this area: parcels <br />17-21, (the former landfill) would be suitable for recreation, even a par 3 golf <br />course. Site 88, about 13 acres, the rear portion of the recreation complex, was <br />compared for various residential uses, including senior citizens' apartments, and <br />also for recreational use (table 3). Even though senior citizens' apartments <br />indicated a negative impact on surrounding land use compatibility, some <br />adjustments in the code could be made in the maximun density so as to lessen the <br />impact. The members discussed these senior housing regulations, and decided that <br />the density probably should be reduced in order to reduce the deficit for the <br />city. Since developers build to the ma_x;muin density allowed, there will always be <br />a deficit unless the codes are changed, but changes should also be such that it <br />would be feasible for a developer to build senior housing. The members agreed <br />tha.t this would be a good site for senior housi.ng, however the Director of Parks <br />and Recreation had advised that they are plann-ing to use this area for additiona.l <br />recreational facilities. Table 4 compares 5 alternative uses for land west of <br />Root Road and north of Lorain (site 74, 75, 76, and 86 and includes the rear <br />portions of 80-85 which are developed facing Lorain Road). The four residential <br />uses compaxed would cost the city more than would be taken in, an office use <br />would give the city a surplus, however this would have a negative impact on the <br />surrounding residential districts. Mr. Schultz believed that aportion of the <br />parcels could be used for a 1 or 2 story office building if a landscaped buffer <br />was installed and 3 parcels could remain residential. It was claxified that <br />parcel 69 is not vacant and is the site of a medical office with parcels 67 and <br />68 as their drive to Root Road. It was suggested that this building would have <br />access fran relocated 252 after the road is constructed, and the drive would not <br />be needed. Members questioned if relocated 252 was to be limited access. Mr. <br />Gorris was concerned about this area since the road will go through the rear <br />yards of many lots. City Engineer Deichmann advised that he has heard nothing <br />about this road being limited access. Mr. Schultz will check into this. Assistant <br />Law Director Dubelko noted that several of the rear portions of yards facing Root <br />Road were not specified as vacant, and is concerned that some of these might be <br />overlooked, he pointp-d out that the master plan should address every vacant <br />parcelo In reference to relocated 252, Mr. Tressler advised that the first stage <br />had been the construction of Great Northern Boulevard; stage 2 had been the <br />construction of 252 south of Great Northern Mall beyond Butternut Ridge (the old <br />Columbia Road from Lorain Road to Boedecker Hill is now a county road: and the <br />third portion (relocated 252) will be north of Lorain Road where it meets with <br />Columbia Road at Rose Road and Fawn Drive. He recapped some other pending <br />transportation projects: the city-wide signalization program, construction date <br />1993; the widening of Great Northern Boulevard to include a 5th lane also to be <br />constructed in 1993; and the installation of sidewalks, including crosswalks and <br />signals at Brookpark and Great Northern (Mr. Deichmann stated that Great Northern <br />Boulevard will be totally resvrfaced with asphalt); separating the intersection <br />of Brookpark and Great Northern (proposed in the 1986 Transportation Study) is <br />might be feasible, but is not too likely; and the eictension of the Rapid Transit <br />(discussed at a p)revious meeting). The relocation of 252 north of Lorain was <br />origi.nally proposed about 30 years ago, however O.D.O.T. had stipulated tha.t they <br />will not fund this segnent unless Colinnbia Road is widened north of relocated 252 <br />to Hilliard Road in Westlake. He explained that Westlake is planning to widen <br />Columbia Road north of Hilliard almost to the Bay Village line. So far Westlake <br />has voted down any widening of 252 north of the relocation. He noted that eyen <br />2