Laserfiche WebLink
area which is what happened in the Strongsville development. Mr. Orlowski stated <br />that this same situation occurred in the Vista Homes in View Point. Mr. Skoulis <br />believed that had been an tmusual circwnstance and was specified in the approval. <br />He believed that the Whitlatch development gave a crowded appearance with a <br />square of buildings and an open area in-the rear. Mr: Conway stated that the <br />purpose of the codes was to -allow Planning Commission more flexibility and allow <br />more creativity. The deii.sity -allowed for cluster is only 1 unit more than a <br />Single Family "C" District. The golf course is an excellent application of this <br />flexibility. Mr. Skoulis explained that the Whitlatch development is a large, 3 <br />phase development and there has to be a minimtun of 25 acres. Part of their comanon <br />area was a large drainage ditch around the perimeter of the property. Mr. <br />Orlowski pointed out that some of this ditch actually went between homes, and <br />there was no restrictive fencing. He believed that this might be more attractive <br />on a smaller scale, and would.like the entire Commission to look into this. Mr. <br />Conway wi11 attempt to:get a site plan of this development. Mr. Skoulis clarified <br />that this area is called Townhouse Cluster FIousing, R.T.C. zoning district,.which <br />is explained as ".o.especially well suited to encourage the development of <br />relatively small groups of bowling ally lots in conjunction with larger <br />development areas". Mr. Thomas suggested that this could be discussed at length <br />when the full board is present. J. Thomas moved to accept Mr. Skoulis's report, <br />seconded by K. 0'Rourke, and unanimously approved. <br />VII. NEW BUSINESS: <br />No items. <br />VIII. OLD BUSINESS: <br />View Point Development. Proposal for minor change. Building Commissioner Conway <br />advised that these changes will not effect any of the building permits that are <br />now being issued. He further explained that.what they are planning is not against <br />code, but these changes were not what Planning Commission approved and they <br />failed to advise the Engineering Department prior to making the changes. It was <br />decided to delay this until the next meeting since there was not a full board <br />present. Building Commissioner Conway withrlrew the request Until the next <br />meeting. , <br />IX. ADJOURNMENT: <br />J. Thomas moved to excuse the absence of B. Gorris, and R. Tallon, seconded by K. <br />0'Rourke, and unanimously approved. <br />The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. <br />r- <br />? 6?2 <br />ce Chairman B. Orin; <br />c- ? <br />4