12/09/1997 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

been discussed before, once it is rezoned anytlung can go in, and it is intruding into residential area. Assistant Law Director Dubelko advised that the commission must consider what the Master Plan states, and he does not think the Master Plan calls for this property to be rezoned. Mr. Tallon agreed and stated that none of the issues or reasoning have changed since the last time. The Master Plan calls for this to be residential and he sees no reason to change it since it could be developed as residential. The residents spoke at this time. Dr. Smith/Dorry, stated that she has lived on Dewey since 1968 and extolled the virtue of this dead-end street with only 16 houses on it. Since there is no outlet on the street and no way one can be installed, any development that will instigate traffic will cause drivers who go down to turn around in either the residents' driveways or the mud pit at the end of the street. It would be a nuisance to have another dealership in the area and this particular dealership has never kept their word. They recently took over a building and the promised buffers, fencing, and landscaping were never installed only asphalt with a curb was installed. The neighbors were also told that the lights would not effect the residents of the street. Both of their other dealerships have ridiculous lighting, and the proposed buffer will do nothing to protect the two story houses. This is a pedestrian street with 100 year old trees on it. Mr. Conel, speaking for his mother, a 49 year resident of the street, mentioned that there are no storm sewers on the street and paving these lots will create more flooding. Mr. Jordan stated that the neighbors did grow up together, and the neighbors have stayed at this meeting for three hours just to say this. He noted that the property to the east and on property on Porter Road is akeady owned by the developer and this rezoning would tie them all together and increase the paving, lighting, and traffic. R. Tallon moved that the C. & C. Realty rezoning request to rezone permanent parcel nos. 232-10-23, 232-10-24, and 232-10-25 from the existing `B" Residence, Single zone to Retail Business, General zone be denied. This decision is based mainly on the Master Plan which indicates that this is a residential area and there is no reason to change that, the city is not in need of any extra retail space. In order to maiutain the quality of life in the city of North Olmsted and on this street, I so move. The motion was seconded by T. Brennan, and unanimously approved. 2) Granite Development Re-Subdivision: Sublot 11, North Olmsted Industrial Park. The proposal is to split existing sublot No. 11, located at the northeast end of North Olmsted Industrial Parkway, into two (2) additional sublots. Zoning is Limited Industry/ Industrial Park, entirely, and both proposed sublots conform to zoning code requirements for frontage and area. Mr. Wagner, Forest City Land Group, explained that this is a 7.5 acre parcel remaining on the cul-de- sac and they have a buyer for a 3.8 acre parcel that they are asking to split off. Mr. Tallon verified that the minimum lot size was two acres as required by code. R. Tallon moved to grant the Granite Development Re-Subdivision, for sublot 11, the proposal to split existing sublot 11, located at the northeast end of North Olmsted Industrial Parkway, into two (2) additional sublots. Zoning is Limited Industry/Industrial Park, entirely and both proposed sublots conform to zoning code requirements for frontage and area. The motion was seconded by A. Manning, and unanimously approved. V. COMMITNICATIONS: No items. VI. COMIVIITTEE REPORTS: No items. VII. MMOR CHANGES: No items. 10