03/26/1996 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

} 1.0 have a clear view of it. Mr. Moluse advised that.it would be needed for the westbound driver (from the auport) he also believed that it would appear as a build.ing sign from a distance. He clarified that the front variance would be about 20 feet, but it was just for the port cochere and canopy, not for the building. Mr. Herbster stated that tlie 18 foot high sign, 25 feet above I-480 would be almost 50 foot above the level of the cars. Mr. Tallon asked that a hedgerow or some landscaping be planted in the rear to screen cars parked in back since they would be visible from I-480 and the access ramp. Building Commissioner Conway advised that this sign and any non-conforming sign would have to be re- reviewed in 1998 when the new sign ordinance takes effect and a variance would have to be requested. Mr. Brennan believed that it would be redundant to grant a variance for a sign, knowing that the ordinance will not allow it in 1998. Mr. Conway advised that if the satellite dish did not conform to the codes, it would have to be appealed to the board of building code appeals. It was pointed out that the du.mpster is in the receiving area and is hidden by a screen wall. Mr. Manuing suggested a walkway between this property and Lone Star. Mr. Moluse stated that there was a walk across the front of the building and agreed to extend it to the property line. The developer was asked to present a plan showing the curb cuts across the street when he returns to the next meeting. R. Tallon moved to refer the Marriott Courtyard Hotel, permanent parcel 236-17-004, building located on Country Club Boulevard, east of Lone Star Steak House, proposal to construct a hotel in Miaced Use District, to the board of zoning appeals with the recommendation that the variances for the front canopy, the rear corner of bu.ilding and the rear landscape buffer along I-480 be granted, but the commission will not recommend that the variances be granted for the signage but asked that the board of zoning appeals look at the height and number of signs, and consider the area where they are to be installed. The motion was seconded by T. Brennan, and unaniinously approved. 3) Beau.mont Place, permauent parcels 231-26-012, 015, & 089, property located to the west of the existing Beaumont Drive which is to be extended for this development. Proposal to construct cluster homes. Rezoning will be required. Mr. Hammerschmidt, builder, Mr. Resax, engineer, Mr. Schilens, landscape architect, and Mr. Bolak, architect, presented plans for a cluster, condominium development. They have acqu.ired approximaxely 5.8 acres including the old Deerfield, North Homeowners Association recreational area and another adjacent lot, on which they have designed 31 cluster units. He explained that there will be a landscape buffer around the perimeter with a walldng track incorporated within it. The units are approximately 1,500 to 2,000 square feet and will sell for approximately $120,000. to $160,000. Mr. Brennan noted that the term cluster, condominiu.m was not in the code. Mr. Tallon stated it was a single family cluster home according to the code. The properiy is currently zoned class "C" residential. It was pointed out that the aerial view in the plans showed all buildings within 200 feet of the development. One house, now located on one of the lots, will be moved onto Gessner. Mr. Brennan questioned why this property, which is surrounded by single family homes, is being developed as for cluster homes. Since he has acquired the 5 acres requ.ired, Mr. Hammerschmidt advised that he is allowed to apply for a cluster development. Mr. Brennan responded that the zoning should be enforced to protect the residents. Mr. Bolak, the designer, explained that they have tried to keep the design within the vein of a residential home and the square footage conforms to that of a 2 or 3 bedroom home and this concept has been used for single family homes. Mr. Brennan agreed that they were attractive and had a comparable square footage of a home, but they did not have the square footage for yards and he believed it to be over development. Drainage plans will be submitted later. Mr. Bouman, a neighbor, explained that 375 feet ofhis property abut the development and there are 40 or 50 people present who do not believe that tlus development is in the best interest of North Olmsted, especially those who are in the immediate area. He stated that they have had very serious drainage problems and problems with sewer water in 3