My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03/22/1994 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1994
>
1994 Planning Commission
>
03/22/1994 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:32:36 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 7:39:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1994
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
3/22/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED <br />PLANNING COMNNU SSION <br />MINUTES-MARCH 22, 1994 <br />I. ROLL CALL: <br />Chairman Gorris called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.ma <br />Present: D. Alston, P. Mi.ller, L. Orlowski, K. 0'Rourke, R. Tallon and <br />- B. Gorris. <br />Absent: J. Thomas. <br />Also Present: Assistant Law Director Dubelko, City Engineer Deichmann, <br />'Building Commissioner Conway, and Clerk of Commissions Oring. <br />II. REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES: <br />K. 0'Rourke moved to accept the minutes of March 8, 1994 as presented, seconded <br />by L. Orlowski, and unanimously approved. <br />III < BUILDING DEPAR'I'MIIVT REQLTESTS : <br />1) Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Property Located on Brookpark Roacl, east of the Westbury <br />Apartments and west of Colebrook and Clareshire Condominiums. <br />Proposal to construct building. <br />Heard by Board of Zoning Appeals on March 9, 1994. <br />Mr. Newberry, engineer for Wal-Ma,rt, explained that the Board of Zoning Appeals <br />had approved a setback variance on Brookpark which would be similar to the 33.57 <br />foot setback from the Brookpark right of way now existing at Colebrook <br />CondominiUms. The second variance was from the east property line where a 100 <br />foot setback is required, they asked for a 50 foot encroachment and the board <br />granted a 40 foot encroachment, thus placing the building 60 feet at the closest <br />point to the property line. The conditions of that approval had been that they <br />build an 8 foot high mound practically from border to border along the east line <br />with a six foot fence on the top of the mound and a double row of evergreen <br />trees, one row an either side of the fence. As a result of these variances they <br />will be moving their building 6 feet south and 10 feet west from where it was <br />originally shown. The revised landscape plans shows the double row of trees and a <br />representation of the mounding along with a typical cross section through the <br />mound. He presented a cross section of the building showing the sight lines of a <br />, 6 foot tall.person standing near the property line, from the top of the window of <br />the first floor in the Colebrook Condominiums, as well as from the top of a <br />second floor window in the condominiun. It also shows that the parapet wall that <br />will be built on the back side of the building, extends almost 5 feet above the <br />roof line, and will effectively screen the closest roof top units from the view <br />of any of those vantage points and it further illustrates that a 42 foot high <br />light pole, located some 472 feet from the buildings, will also be screened from <br />view by the parapet wall and the mounding. Essentially, any view from the <br />Colebrook Condominium building toward Wal-Mart will show about a 4 to 6 foot <br />piece of wall in between the trees and above the fence along the rear line. He <br />noted that the Commission had asked for an elevation of this wall, but he <br />believed that the cross section showed more of what would be visible from the <br />east side. Based on their analysis, they believe that noise levels from either <br />the truck dock or the activities at the south end will be effectively screened to <br />an acceptable level. He advised that the compactor would not cr.ly be sound <br />-- Yioofed,- but would be enclosed within walls with a roof over it so that any noise <br />will be minimized. Mr. Newberry responded to several items mentioned at the last <br />Planning Commission meeting. Alternate building locations, one showing the <br />1
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.