Laserfiche WebLink
The Coinmission discussed the timing of the approval versus finalizing the report. Mr. <br />Bohlmaim voiced his concern regarding the sanitary sewer and manhole issues and felt the <br />developer should be required to address the issues regardless if they are responsible for them or <br />not. He thought the new basements could experience sewage backup due to existing issues of <br />the area and questioned if a sanitary detention system could be required. Mr. Collins said that <br />the subdivision as presented will not strain or burden the existing system and detailed <br />engineering reviews are required following Commission and Council approval not now. Mr. <br />O'Malley advised that once a plan is approved the developer is required by code to submit <br />engineering plans in accordance to engineering code requirements. Mr. Cotner asked if the <br />commission could require baclcflow protectors installed. Mr. Collins said backflow preventers <br />are not recommended. Mr. Bohlmann said outside the possible engineering issues pending he <br />lilced the proposal but without engineering questions finalized he could not vote favorably for the <br />proposal. <br />Mr. Lasko moved, seconded by Mr. Bohlmann, to approve the development proposal for <br />COMS07-0026: Biddulph Trail, findang that the development meets the spirit and intent of <br />the Residential Cluster District provided various conditions are met. Furthermore, the <br />Commission recommends Council approve the request to rezone to Residential Cluster <br />District as described in the report of findings and recommendations. Conditions of <br />approval are as follows: <br />1. 'I'he declaration of rules/bylaws meet the Law Department's approval prior to the site <br />plan being released by the engineering department for recorcling. <br />2. A document/letter from the property owners is submitted stating the developer has the <br />authority to present the development site plan. <br />3. A private 10 foot wide easement to the homeowners association for the stormwater <br />drainage line behind units 22 through 29 is to be indicated on the plat. <br />Roll call on the motion: Lasko, Williamson, Malone, Rerko, Meredith - yes; Bohlmann, <br />Cotner - no. Motion approved 5-2. <br />Mr. Rerko commented that there has been a lifestyle change which has occurred in the last few <br />years and baby boomers are loolcing for housing which provides smaller lots which North <br />Olmsted does not currently have. The applicants have gone out of their way to fit into the <br />neighborhood and from Butternut Ridge the development will not impact the historical district as <br />the current home will be preserved and the site will blend into the neighborhood. Ms. <br />Williamson agreed with Mr. Rerlco. Mr. Lasko also agreed and believed that both by the <br />analysis of the Landmarks Commission as well as the Planning & Design Commissions findings <br />under Chapter 1136 the conclusion is the right one based upon the facts presented. Ms. Meredith <br />recommended there be no further architectural or landscaping changes made to the plans as <br />professionals from both commissions and the applicant experts have gone to great lengths to <br />ensure that the plan fits into the historical district. Modifications to the plans would have a <br />detrimental impact to the site. Mr. Rerlco noted that unit 1 which will be the location of the <br />existing home would have modifications made to fit the buyer's needs. <br />NEW BUSINESS <br />4