My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05/27/1997 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1997
>
1997 Planning Commission
>
05/27/1997 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:33:35 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 9:32:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1997
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
5/27/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
ll <br />Conway suggested that the developer contact the fire department as there are required distauces <br />for fire hydrants and a fire line may have to be put in because of the lot depth. Mrs. O'Rourke <br />wondered if there would be any screening on the south west edge of the property. Mr. Terwilicker <br />advised there are existing trees, and additional trees would be added in the area. Mr. Koeth <br />wondered if there are any shrubs or bushes abutting the chain link fence. Mr. Bu.rk stated there <br />were none included in this submission, but he was open for suggestions. Mr. Manuing invited the <br />audience to come forward one at a time with any questions or comments. Mr. Bedford, residing <br />on West 232nd, advised the residents were concerned about Mildred Road being joined with <br />Clague Road or Summerland Avenue. He explained the residents on Mildred are concerned about <br />enlarging the parking lot, flooding, and the noise produced by ambulances and garbage trucks. <br />Mr. Bedford noted the flooding on the abutting residential streets increased when Manor Care <br />raised the grade of their land several years ago. He believed increasing the size of the facility <br />would aggravate those conditions even more. Mr. Deichmann advised Manor Care will be <br />required to contain the drainage on their own property as this is a requirement. Mr. Mauniug <br />added the ordinance is better now than when Manor Care originally built, and since they are <br />proposing renovations the drainage must be upgraded to meet the current code standards which <br />are more stringent. Mrs. Sironen, a resident on West 232nd, advised the water floods two ofher <br />neighbors prior to flooding the corner ofher lot and the back yards become swamps. She believed <br />the Manor Care facility is on a hill and they drain into the residential neighborhood and the only <br />way it is removed is if it evaporates. Mr. Deichmaun advised the existing grading plan appears to <br />show that some of the water from the Manor Care parking lot is draining onto the residential <br />neighborhood. He noted a solution would be to include a curb along the entire parking lot so that <br />the water is directed to the retention basin. It was noted the curb will only extend across the new <br />portion of the parking lot. Mr. Burk advised the existing parking lot has an asphalt curb. Mr. <br />Deichmau explained the asphalt curb cracks over time causing the water to seep through those <br />cracks and into the residential neighborhood. A continuous concrete curb is less likely to crack. <br />Mr. Burk did not have a problem extending the concrete curb across the existing parking lot. Mr. <br />Baker, an abutting Mildred resident asked for an explanation on the variances and wondered how <br />much of the lot is commerciaL He was told the commercial zoning extends 500 feet back from the <br />center of Lorain Road and the remaining properiy is residential. Mr. Baker stated the addition is <br />being constructed in place of the existing parking, which pushes the parking lot farther back <br />towards the residents devaluing the entire neighborhood. He was not in favor of the granting of <br />these variances and believed the parking lot is considered business and should not be permitted in a <br />residential neighborhood. Mr. Baker noted that the plans indicate the ditch to the rear, <br />southernmost area of the properiy will be swailed, however nothing is shown along the west and <br />east property lines. Mr. Burk explained the drainage system. Mr. Manning advised the drainage <br />system has to be approved by the city engineers, before this project can be completed. Mr. Burk <br />explained several trees were cut down three years ago, but were never removed. He further stated <br />less than a year ago Manor Care began clearing out the trees and he believed the purpose was this <br />proposal. Mr. Bartko did not believe the commission u.nderstood the water problem. He noted <br />the grade of the Manor Care property is much higher than that of the residential areas. Mr. Bartko <br />wondered if the abutting residents would be permitted to raise the grade or if the city will install <br />adequate sewers. Mr. Manning wondered if this problem can be addressed. Mr: Deichmann <br />noted, as part of the project a yard drainage system could be provided to make up for the change <br />in grade. Mr. Baker advised that the lights are too bright and the noise is too loud. Mr. Manning <br />advised the lighting used would be installed so tliat tliere is a miniiuu.m amount of light at the lot <br />lines. He asked the developer to assu.re the commission tliere is no lridden plan for an exit onto <br />Mildred. Mr. Burk advised there are no plans to have an exit on Mildred. Mr. Kilroy, a resident <br />4
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.