Laserfiche WebLink
•-. <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