My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03/11/1997 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1997
>
1997 Planning Commission
>
03/11/1997 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:33:34 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 9:30:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1997
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
3/11/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
•-. <br />comments that the guest parking along Lorain Road appears to be within the 7 foot right-of-way <br />and the parking is not adequate for the entire development. Mr. Kaneriff wondered how the plan <br />can be redesigned to meet the building commissioner's specifications. Mr. Herbster explained it is <br />up to the developer, to redesign the plau. Mrs. O'Rourke clarified, if the streets are not declicated <br />it is up to the developer to maintain tliem. The mail boxes will be along the street. Mrs. O'Rouke <br />noted the postman would have to be in a truck else he would also be walking in the street. The <br />members objected to the fact there were no sidewalks. Mr. Kaneriff wondered if the Shore West <br />development had sidewalks. Mr. Maiuung clarified the commission objects to not having <br />sidewalks because this development would be a major cut through, whereas the Shore West <br />development is landlocked. He noted that in Olmsted Townslup, between Stems and McKenzie <br />there is a development with a gate at mne end to prevent non-residents of the development from <br />cutting through. He clarified, residents have to use a card to get in and out of the development. <br />Mr. I{aueriffwondered if a gate oftlus nature would be permitted in North Olmsted. Mr. Dubelko <br />advised there may be a safety concern and would have to be reviewed further. Mr. Kaneriff <br />advised there is approxiynately a 50 foot setback, from the eight or nine Timber Trails homes <br />abutting this proposed developmeut. He noted some of the trees would have to be removed to <br />provide room for the twiu retentiou pipes. Mr. Kaueriff agreed to mound up the area abutting the <br />Timber Trails Development, thereby creating a buffer. Mr. Kaneriff explaiued the homeowners <br />association would be responsible for inaintaining the property. 1VIr. Mamung did not feel the <br />development is designed to accommodate kids, as there is no play area. Mrs. O'Rourke added <br />there are no sidewalks for the children to ride bikes. Mr. Varga explained that tlus development is <br />similar to one in Brook Park, wluch contained 97 units. He noted, over a six year period, only <br />three of the uuits were purchased by families. Mr. Varga and Mr. Kaneriff explained this type of <br />development attracts young professionals, newly weds, and the empty nesters. Mr. Mauning was <br />worried about visiting kids "playing glow in the dark on the high tension wires", as this is the only <br />open area for the kids to play. Mr. Kaneriff agreed to consider providing a play area. There will <br />be approximately 36 parking spots as noted ou the plan. Mrs. O'Rourke noted the visitor's <br />parking may not be adequate for individuals living on the cul-de-sac near the lake. Assistant <br />Building Coinmissioner Rymarczyk noted all three models are falling below the requuement <br />accordiug to the code. Mr. Varga advised the two bedroom will contain 1,561 square feet livable <br />space, whereas the cape cod is 1,900 square feet of livable space. Mr. Manuiug explained <br />according to Buildiug Coimnissioner Couway the square footage of the wuts are as follows: uuit <br />"A" is 1;335 square foot; unit `B" is 1,124 square foot; and uuit "C" is 1443 square foot. Mr. <br />Kaueiiff advised he was not aware of these figures. Mr. Rymarczyk believed the difference is Mr. <br />Kaneriff included the utility room as livable space. Mr. Kaneriff agreed to have his arclutect work <br />out these differences with the building department. Mrs. O'Rourke wondered where the laundry <br />room would be in the floor plan of uuit "C". Mr. Varga believed it will be in the basement. Mr. <br />Rymarczyk advised this would reduce the square footage. N1r. Brennan wondered if there is <br />enough room to get equipment back near the lake in order to maintain the water at a reasonable <br />level during times of flooding. Mr. Kaneriffbelieved there was ample space available. He noted <br />the grade of the site will be raised. Mr. Mauning was concerned about suzTOUnding properties <br />floodiug if the grade is raised. Mr. Kaneriff responded they will provide rear yard iulets to <br />prevent these sunounding properties from flooding. Mr. Mauuing questioned if tlus has been <br />submitted to the engineering department. Mr. Kaueriff advised plans have been submitted, but he <br />has uot yet received comments from the city ou any deficiencies in the plan or recommendations <br />for change. W. Varga clarified there will be vinyl siding and asphalt roofs. Soine of the <br />discussiou here was inaudible. It was noted there is no recreatioual areas for the people living in <br />tlus developinent. Mr. Brennan believed these are single family homes crainmed into a lot. Mr. <br />Rymarczyk uoted a 25 foot setback is required from either the sidewallc or the drive. He further
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.