09/26/1995 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

231-1 1-43, located to the uorth and west of the Maple Ridge Road/West 231 Street intersection and adjaceut to the residential portiou of the previously approved (Preliminary Plan, only) Bridgeport Village (Wlutlatch) Subdivision, into seveu (7) residential lots plus a proposed above grouud retention area, aud includes the west extensiou and dedication of Maple Ridge Road. Zoning is C-Residence Single, entirely. Coutinued fiom ineetuig of Septeinber 12, 1995. The motion was seconded by R. Koeth. Pi7or to the vote, Mr. Tallon advised that they had tried to come up with what was in the best interest of the citizens, and he, too, was not iu favor of above ground retention. However, the planning coimnission must take each project individually on its own merits, and because of the input of the Engineering Departinent, he did make a motion to accept. He also.advised the commission does uuderstand that there is a traffic problein ou West 231st, but the reason for opeuivg Maple Ridge is so the developinents have two entrances so the safety velucles can get in and out. Other developments have beeu built with only one entrance wluch proved to be a nightmare for the safety forces, if sometlung blocks one eutrance there is no way einergency vehicles can get iu or out. He pointed out that, if there were only one eutrauce there would still be a traffic problem, but it would be concentrated in one area. Mr. Herbster asked if the motion should include that the developer had committed to pay a portion of the costs of the retention system and also that he had agreed to install a fence. Mr. Dubellco suggested that the approval should include the fence at tlus time. Mr. Wlutlatch stated that they would agree to 'a 4 foot lugh vinyl chaiu liuk fence around the peruneter of the property including the easemeut with a uiinunum of 15 foot of existing vegetatiou and new landscapiug to surround the entire retentiou basiv outside the retentiov area, but along the boundary of the property so at least 15 feet of buffer strip would be mauitaiued along the property. T'he chanuel going through the reteution area would be concrete and accorduig to the requirements of the Engiueering Departmeut. He stated that they would be willing to make some coutribution toward the upkeep, but he did not believe it should be in the motion foi- a five year period because of the ownerslup of the property down the line. Mr. Herbster suggested a 6 foot fence, and after some discussiou it was decided that the heiglit of the fence should be deternined Uy the Building Coinnnissioner. It was decided that the inotion should read a muuinum of 5 foot. Seivice Director Boh-lmanu asked that the motion conditional upon fiual approval of the Euguieeruig Department. 1Vh-. Tallon moved to amend the motion to iuclude the following stipulations: that a minimuin of a 5 foot lugh vinyl clad chain link feuce with the actual heiglit to be determined by the Building Comnissioner and a 15 foot wide buffer of landscaping must sunound the retention area along the boundary of the basin area; that the chanuel going through the retentiou be concrete; that the propeirty of the retention basin and the access to it must be deeded to the city; and all of tlus is to be based on final approval by the Engineering Department. The amended motion was seconded by R. Koeth, and unanunously approved. 3) Lorain Road/Fleharty Avenue Cousolidation Plat. The proposal is to combine Pennanent Parce] Nos. 236-3-8 aud 236-3-9,10, 11 into one (1) parcel, wluch is the site of the proposed Maijak Building. Location is the southeast corner of the Lorain/Fleharty 'vitersection. Zoiuug is Retail Business, General, entirely. No representative was present. Mr. and Mrs. Nowack , who live directly behind the shoppiug center, were coucenied that the buffer tliat was oizgiually planned would not be installed. They had been told wheu they bought the property that there would be a laudscape buffer. The members advised that if they changed the original plans, the developer would have to retui7i to Planniug Commission at which tune they would be notified. Mrs. Nowack stated that they had asked the developers to remove some of the pines that were on thev- property because the_y were in bad condition. R Tallon moved to taUle the Lorain Road/Fleharty Avenue Consolidatiou Plat uutil the uext meeting, seconded by T. Breimau, and wiaiuinously approved. 6