02/26/1980 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

?. PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRIIARY 26, 1980 PAGE 2 (c) Carlton Place Condominiums, Brookpark and Mastick Roads. The recommendations of the Architectural Board of Review were 3'ead and the revised plans were studied. Mr. B(mer, Shore West Construction, explained that the revised plans included the recommendations of the Architectural Board of Review, however they were unable to remove all of the "D" units facing Brookpark and replace them with-"A" or "B" units. One "D" unit was ex- changed for a"B: unit. The landscane plans will be submitted to the Architectural Board of Review at a later date with the lighting plan and grading plan. B. Gorris moved to approve the final site plan and the Building Plans of Carlton Place -- .. , , • Condominiums, seconded by T. Morgan, _'and unanimously -approvEd:, IV. NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND SUBDIVISIONS: (a) Olmsted Farms 5ubdivision 3I,=Finai Piat-and Improvements, ' - . iaest -off -:Barton- Rd. .between City's -south -corporate line and 1480. . _Subdivision of Parcel 234-13-9 into _twenty three. ?23) . sublots. Preliminary Plan approved by-Planning Commission on 5eptember 11, 1979,-as ,Olmsted Farms Subdivision. D. McDermott introduced the plaas and the Minutes of September 11, 1979 were read. A. Kanareff explained that the developers were working with the City of Cleveland [aater Department to provide a satisfactory supply for the development and the surrounding-home owners and they are awaiting word from the : -.Water:Department on what.is _to be required. D. McDermott ex- _: : plained that -the -drainage -plans-:had. been -reviewed -and that . -there might.=be some minor-de-tails .to ?bE =changed -but the -Prin- ciple concept had :been =appxoved. The City=-request. that the . street -shown on -the plans -as -Meaiiawoo.d ramain:=unaned -at- this . time, since the Gity_:.Engineer, f-eels .=that it .is the City's perogative to name it. -Mr. McDermott also :advised =that the name of this development has been ..changed to Olmsted Farms -Subdivision II, since there was an Olmsted Farms Subdiyision _which has been- -develnped. = The lots are the same :as -originally .presented and they.do conform to code. Phylis Hanobek, a resident, questioned the.drainage, and-it was explained that , a water retension basin would be installed and that no ad- _ditional water would run off onto the surrounding properties .or into the drainage ditch. Mr. Wilkens,.a neighbor, questioued . _, if the homesand lots would -meet `.-'A."--residential requirements, . . and if the developer was,required to put in street lighting. He was advised that the Iots were larger than the ndnimum "A" residential requirements and the homes would conform to code, . and at this time the developer is not required to provide•' street lighting. Mr. Wilkens was also concerned that the bal- ance of the vacant property would be developed for condominiums and that the present.residents-of the neighborhood would not be notified. fle was advised that in order to put condominiums in the area, the zoning would have to be changed and that would require public hearings. J. Brvon moved to approve the Final