My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/26/1994 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1994
>
1994 Planning Commission
>
04/26/1994 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:32:37 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 7:41:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1994
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
4/26/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
Commission sent these plans to Council and those plans are approved by City <br />Council, it would seem that those accesses had been approved. Mr. Thomas would <br />like an opinion from the Assistant Law Director. According to the Traff-Pro <br />study, Mr. Miller noted that only 5% of the traffic would enter by the <br />westernmost drive and only 6% of the traffic exit there. He quoted page 8 of the <br />Traff-Pro study which stated that by eliminatirg that drive, it would only reduce <br />the level of service to the main drive from an "A" to a"B" level, which would <br />not be a significant change; and he concluded that it should be eliminated. Mr. <br />Newberry advised that they have reviewed the access with both Mr. Griffith and <br />Mr. Deichmann, and even though the percentages seem small, it was concluded that <br />by drawing traffic off of Brookpark before the signalized intersection the entire <br />east bound traffic patterns from Great Northern to Coltnnbia would nm smoother. <br />He further clarified that Biskind Development has requested the director of <br />district 12 of O.D.O.T. to review whether it would be appropriate for O.D.O.T. to <br />grant a break in the limited access line. After the landowner makes application <br />requesting this break at a certain distance from an established intersection, <br />O.D.O.T. then appraises the adjoining lands to determine the increased value of <br />the use of that land if the limited access line is broken; they then send a <br />letter to the applicant ad.vising what the appraisal value is; at that time, they <br />request a review or an approval by the municipality; and if the municipality <br />supports it, the landowner or the assigned pays the appraisal fee and an entry is <br />made in the director's journal and the limited access line is broken at that <br />point. He tmderstood that the support of the access had to come from Council. In <br />reference to other points, the outdoor display is in addition to what is being <br />asked for at that time, and is an issue that might come up later. Mr. Gorris <br />stated that usually when a development is presented it is a maximun use of the <br />land, and when the proposed pa.rking is within 5 spaces of the IIllnimum, they have <br />reached the m.ax;mun development of the parcel. The Commission likes to make it <br />part of public.record that so that when a developer applies for a variance, it is <br />known tYiat the Commission believed that the variances are self created; because <br />had they tailored the development to the size of the parcel, no variances would <br />be needed in the future. Mr. Newberry again advised that they had stated that <br />there would be 8 to 10 trucks daily including the U.P.S. etc.; they are not <br />adding to the number of trucks, whether they are Pepsi, or whatever. The number <br />of trucks are based on the distribution system, not the hours of operation. Mr. <br />Deichmarm advised that the drainage ditch east of the property is part of the <br />city drainage system, and it is his understanding that Wal-Mart has looked into <br />culverting the ditch. Mr. Newberry explained that they are planning to place four <br />ditch type inlets along the alignment of the ditch which will lead into their -. <br />internal drainage system and will also vary the grade of the ditch so water would <br />be flow into the inlets. However 'they are not replacing the ditch with a pipe; <br />they are basically drawing the water back to their side. He explained that they <br />were not piping in the ditch because it is on the condominium property. Mr. <br />Deichmaim clarified for Mr. Thomas that the ditch served both parcels. Mr. <br />Newberry stated that the flow from the mound would drain in that direction, but <br />the inlets would pick up this flow and the westerly flow from the condominiums <br />thus collecting the water and bringing it back into their drainage system. Mr. <br />Orlowski believed that the ditch was supposed to be covered. Mr. Newberry stated <br />that this is essentially right; the ditch inlets will be placed in the ditch. <br />They are going to regrade the property between the inlets so the water will flow <br />to the inl:ets, and basically the ditch will not operate as a ditch. He also gave <br />the details of how this would be done, but Mr. Orlowski was concerned that if <br />they raised the grade of the ditch, the water could not be picked up properly. <br />Mra Deichmarm understood that they are proposing to turn the ditch into a swale <br />with four yard drains which would pick up a portion of the the water in the swale <br />7
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.