Laserfiche WebLink
Residents Comments: <br />Mr. Nieberding suggested if building D flipped, place spruce or evergreens along the suggested <br />new loading dock area to enhance the corner of the building and buffer the loading docks from <br />Brookpark Road. Mr. Gouker stated that residents along Mitchell Drive want the 8-foot mounds <br />with 8-foot fences. Mr. Poffenberger is concerned with the mound being moved closer to Linda <br />Drive. Councilman McKay reviewed that Parcel E was supposed to be developed as 50% <br />residential and 50% retail. However, the development turned out to be 70% retail and 30% <br />office. The applicant has a superstore outside the required radius of the freeway due to a <br />technicality of the regulating ordinance. He feels that the developer has been very clear as to <br />what their needs and wants are however, they are not addressing #he needs and rights of the <br />residents or City. He further advised that the Building, Zoning and Development Committee <br />denied the buildings being moved closer to the residents. Residents request mounds, wa.lls, <br />fences and trees to protect their properiy from the noise, lights, traffic and pedestrian intrusions <br />brought on by the development not because they think it looks good. They are trying to protect <br />their homes. He believes that the City has treated the developer very fairly. He does not believe <br />that distance to the building from parking spaces is an issue as Wal Mart and the Mall have the <br />same type of parking. He requested the retail azea not be altered at the expense of the residents, <br />and suggested the buildings remain as approved. Mr. O'Ma11ey clazified that the Building, <br />Zoning and Development Committee met with the developer to help expedite and accommodate <br />the developers request for input. Mr. Das requested that the mound not be allowed to be moved <br />closer to the residents. Mr. Skoulis did not agree with the applicant regarding the state of the area <br />along Linda Drive. He believes tha.t the value of the homes would decrease if the mounds are <br />moved back. He suggested that Council advised the applicants to not request the buildings be <br />moved closer to the residents. He stated that the variances which were granted were based on the <br />project being constructed at the same time. He believed that the applicants were not complying <br />with that provision and as such it would have adverse impacts on tlie site once Tazget is <br />completed. 1VIr. Yun is against the mound and fence moving north as it would be closer to his <br />ya.rd. He would like to request that the mound, fence and landscaping abutting the residents be <br />constructed first rather tkian the buildings to protect the residents during construction. <br />B. Zergott moved to table Carnegie 1blanagement & Development Corporation, Parcel E <br />with the following recommendations: 1) More evergreens across Brookpark Road, <br />eliminating some of the itea plants, the cLina girl holly should be replaced with blue prince <br />and princes, which is hardier. 2) If buildings are moved the landscaping should be <br />mirrored using building B. 3) The turf and planting areas along Brookpark Road should <br />undulate no more than a couple of feet to create interest. 4) The mound is to be maintained <br />behind the buildings and the fence be held off until proper compacNon of the mound is <br />done. 5) The 8-foot fence which is to be placed atop the mound should be able to handle a <br />high wind capacity. 6) The amount of evergreens along Linda Drive is suffieient but the <br />density along Mitchell Road needs to bQ heavier. 7) The setback areas between the mounds <br />and the homes along both Linda Drive and Mitchell Drive are to be reseeded with a prairie <br />grass and wildflower miz to bring it closer to its original state. 8) The ezisting trees receive <br />proper care by placing orange snow fences approzimately 15 to 20 feet around them so no <br />compaction is done around them and to hold the soil off of them. 9) Plans are to be revised <br />and submitted in accordance to the board's suggestions. 10) The relocation of the site <br />lighting and the foot-candles are to be adjusted to comply with City ordinances. 11) The <br />whole design of areas including buildings C& D accommodate more green space, <br />pedestrian type lifestyle amenities as discussed. 12) Building C is to be reconfigured to <br />6