My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02/28/1995 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1995
>
1995 Planning Commission
>
02/28/1995 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:32:53 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 8:27:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1995
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
2/28/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
? W <br />. ? <br />build.ings for access to the rear. Mr. Glazier explained that they will be installing a bus shelter for the children <br />and will be setting it back from corner as requested by the residents. Ms. Cameron-Alston noted that this <br />looked like an RT.A. shelter, and was advised that it would be similar, but would not have the RT.A. <br />identification. Mr. Mongello stated that the placement of the shelter would be up to the residents, the <br />developers agreed that setting it back 35 feet from the property line, as stated in the Board of Zoning <br />Appeals minutes would be acceptable. Mrs. O'Rourke advised that the pines on the adjacent property would <br />remain and the neighbors would like arborvitae, but the Architectural Review Board does not usually <br />recommend arborvitae. Mr. McKee stated that these might be a problem along Lorain Road because of the <br />salt, but he did not think that they would be a problem at this location. Mr. Manning questioned if the <br />su.nburst locust would along Lorain Road would hinder visibility, and it was e}cplained that they should not <br />present a problem- since they have a small leaf and start to branch out fairly,high. It was . clarified that the -.- <br />existing Safelite building would be demolished. W. Manning read a letter from Councihnan McKay, who <br />had been u.nable to attend the meeting. He requested that there be as much buffering/shielding as possible <br />between the retail and residential development and suggested that the board consider a 4 foot mound with an <br />eight foot high fence and trees on top between Mr. PfafFs property and the parking lot of this development. <br />Mr. Mongello did not remember any fence being mentioned at the Board of Zoning Appeals meeting, nor <br />does he remember any mounding. He pointed out that with a 4 foot mound and an 8 foot fence the buffer <br />would be 12 feet high. Mr. Glazier stated that a fence had been mentioned, however he thought that the <br />residents had preferred arborvitae. He believed that it should be one or the other and believed that the <br />arborvitae had been decided on. Mr. Pfaff agreed that he would prefer arborvitae Mr. McKee is concerned <br />that a mound might cause so much water run off that it would kill the trees on Mr. Pfaffs property. Mr. <br />Mongello believed that the owners would agree to the mound with the arborvitae. It was clarified for Mr. <br />Koeth that the overhead glass door was for the glass compauy since cars occasionally stopped there for <br />estimates. Mr. Glazier explained that the majority of the work was done off site, but cars are brought in for <br />estimates and this is the same use that is there now. Mr. Mongello advised that the existing building had the <br />same type door and it would be 16 feet wide and 8 feet high and it would follow the mullions of the window <br />across the front of the building. Mr. Manning suggested swinging or sliding doors which would conform <br />better to the rest of the center. Mr. Mongello believed that that cou.ld agree to slid.ing doors, the same as <br />what is used in auto agencies. There will be no basement under the garage, but a basement area is being <br />constructed under the other sections to help support the building because of the topography of the ground. <br />Mr. Koeth wondered if the garage door could be in the back, and believed that the door was not consistent <br />with the rest of the building. The guard rail along Fleharty has been eliminated since there will be no drive <br />and the side area will be landscaped. At Mr. Mauuiug's suggestion, Mr. Mongello agreed that there could be <br />a small mound of the landscaping brought around onto Fleharty. Mr. Koeth noted that no lights are shown to <br />illuminate the steps are on the west side of the bu.ilding. Mr. Mongello responded that they will be shown on <br />the working drawings. Ms. Cameron-Alston questioned if there would be tenants in the basement and was <br />advised that the tenant on top would also lease the basement space beneath his unit for storage. There will be <br />approxinately 5,400 square feet of basement area, but this could be reduced in the working drawings <br />depending on the grade and what is needed to support the building. Mr. Manning asked if this could ever be <br />used for retail, and was advised that it was specifically designed for storage, and that the exterior stairway <br />was shown now, but the interior stairways will be shown later. The guard rail along Flehariy has been <br />eliminated since there will be no drive and the side area will be landscaped. Mrs. O'Rourke pointed out that the Board of Zoning Appeals minutes specified a guard rail from the corner of the building to the property <br />line to keep trucks from e}riting across the landscaping. Mr. Mongello stated that with the mounding <br />extended arou.nd the side, he did not tliink it would be possible to drive across it. Mr. Manning noted that the <br />landscaping was supposed to stop cars from driving on to Root Road, from the car wash, but driver still cut <br />2
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.