10/25/1983 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

` PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 25, 1983 PAGE 2 is concerned'that the limited access restriction could be removed from Brookpark, or an access or marginal road could be constructed parallel to it; then there would be staggered front set backs along roadway. They would like to contact the State. as to any future plans for Brookpark. Mr. Draeger, architect, and Mr. Rini, owner, explained that two additions were being planned in two phases; the first would be to the north (parallel to Brookpark) and the second to the east. Mr. Richland,representing Great Northern Partnership who owns the adjacent vacant land, questioned the Board of Zoning Appeals' ruling regarding a"through lot". He quoted from Zoning Codes (Section 1174.02 and 117406) and concluded that nothing in codes states there is an allowable 20' set back on a retail lot and that the codes require that all buildings should be 50' from a public road. Building Commissioner Gundy stated that, theoretically, if the City did not require a pass through, a building could be built to the property line. Mr. Richland stated that Great Northern adjacent property is zoned Class "B", High Rise, and is required to have a 75' rear set back and this addi- tion will obstruct the view of any building constructed on their property. He also stated that Great Northern has had some dis- cussion with the State that would indicate that there is a pos- sibility that the limited access restriction on Brookpark could be removed. Assistant Law Director Dubelko stated that the Board of Zoning Appeals's ruling is binding and Planning Commission must abide by it. The Board of Zoning Appeals voted unanimously that this property is not considered an "Inside Through Lot" and it is a dead issue. Mr. Richland questioned if Council had received official notice.of ruling, if ruling were properly acted 'upon by Council, and if dimensions on site plan were accurate. Mr. Dubelko advised that the minutes were considered as official notice to Council. Prior to proposal's return to Planning Commission, Mr. Morgan would like several issues resolved: 1) Request if Coun- cil was properly notified of ruling, 2)'. if it was nroperly acknow- ledged, 3) request that atchitect determine actual dimension from curb to new site. T. Morgan moved to refer the Rini's Supermarket proposal to the Architectural Board of Review and also to the Law Department for their review and input whether, in fact, the Board of Zoning Appeals` decision and the decision of the Law Department were properly referred to Council within the time span of the Ordi- nances, and that the architect provide the exact dimensions from the right-of-way to the building which appears unclear on the drawing presented, and that the Building Department re-evaluate the parking proposal, seconded by J. Burns, and unanimously approved. Mr. Morgan will set up a committee to contact the State regarding status of limited access of Brookpark and the possibility of using undeveloped right-of-way for access street if ever required. (3) Christ The King Community, located on the west side of Barton Road between I-480 and the North Olmsted south corporate line. Proposal to construct crosses on Community property. Mr. Young of Christ The King presented the proposal and a letter from the Ohio Department of Transportation advising that they had no objection to the installation. The Architectural Board had ap-