My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01/25/1994 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1994
>
1994 Planning Commission
>
01/25/1994 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:32:34 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 7:38:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1994
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
1/25/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
.•? > <br />stated that there is no warrant for a traffic light at the Country_Club access to <br />this site, neither is a light warranted at Columbia Road and Country Club <br />Boulevard even taking into consideration post development traffic. He clarified <br />that their traffic engineer had worked with Mr. Griffith, the city traffic <br />consultant. The Mayor had i.ndicated that infrastructure work is planned, for <br />Brookpark and Columbia Roads. The Great Northern Boulevard intersection at <br />Chester's easement operates at present at the highest level of service, that <br />intersection is controlled by lights at Country Club and Great Northern and <br />Brookpark and Great Northern c-i1.lowing gaps in the traffic. Relocating the <br />building is not practical from Wal-Mart's point of view, the only place this <br />building fits on the site is an east-west orientation, since from a retailing <br />viewpoint the parking has to be in front of the door. They did try other <br />orientations of the building, but this one worked best. He strongly emphasized, <br />that as a resident, he would prefer to have a landscaped area between his <br />residence and a commercial neighbor, than to have a parking lot with the <br />attendant noise and lighting adjacent to his house. It will be easier to buffer <br />this area with mounding, landscaping, and fencing than it would be to screen a <br />parking lot. The landscaping pl3n will be revised as they proceed through the <br />various boards. He stated that from a layout standpoint, the garden center, <br />T.B.O. and compactor cannot be r_elocated. The warehouse is in the rear of the <br />store and it would not be practical to bring customers through the warehouse to <br />these facilities. The fencing and landscaping will provide noise screening. There <br />will be 100 feet between the truck dock and compactor and the neighboring <br />building. Mr. Orlowski noted that the Commission had discussed the truck dock <br />with the developers for 8 months before it was finally relocated at the former <br />site. Mr. Newberry stated that the only place they could relocate would be <br />against Brookpark Road which would put the truck access on Brookpark Road. The <br />parking to the south of the building is needed to conform to the codes, and will <br />also provide parking for the T.B.O., the garden center, and employees. Building <br />Commissioner Conway advised that by his count they need 832 spaces, they show 858 <br />spaces. Mr. Gorris asked how many spaces Wal-Mart would want, if there were no <br />city codes. Mr. Newberry responded that Wal-riart needed 6-%2 spaces per 1,000 <br />square feet which is the same as the city requirements. Mr. Gorris asked Mr. <br />Papandreas, representing Biskind Development, to give a synopsis of the history <br />of the parcel and how they believe that this fits into the overall scheme of <br />things and what property will be left vacant. Mr. Papandreas outlined the <br />location of the entire parcel "A" and explained that there was a vision for this <br />parcel in the early 1980's for a Mixed Use development. In 1983, they submitted a <br />land use plan that predominantly iocused on office development which at that time <br />was a promising opportunity for development. However, later the market changed <br />and they have had to develop the property in what they believed was best for the <br />property and in the best interest of the community so the plan was amended to <br />include a hotel and restaurant. At this time the parcel contains Corporate Center <br />I and II which are class "A" office buildings and «ere part of the original plan <br />then the hotel was added and later the restaurant. Recently two restaurants were <br />added across Country Club. Now they have submitted an amended preliminary land <br />use plan to include this retail development, which is a result of market <br />conditions, since office developznent is not been productive and the market is <br />dry. They have put together a development criteria for this parcel which must be <br />adhered to with this development. Mr. Gorris stated that originally retail areas <br />were included in this p1an, but only as an ancillary use to the offices. Mr. <br />Papandreas responded that in some of the consultant's„plans, retail had been <br />included, in garticular a retail strip facing Great Northern Boulevard, but they <br />opted for the hotel and restaurant. Two acres of land adjacent to Chester's will <br />4
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.