10/27/2010 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

retaining wall would be and if the mound would be shorter than the existing mound once cut. Mr. Matson said the mound height would not change when the retaining wall is added. Ms. Wenger said if parking were landbanked a variance could be required and that she felt the parking was needed given the expansion. A brief discussion pertaining to parking spaces located along the west and south areas of the lot ensued. It was noted that there would be a total of 21 parking spaces less than currently in place. Mr. Lasko said the bollards are to be masonry, directional arrows are to be painted at all egress points, planting numbers are to follow the amount of plants shown on the plan and all maintenance issues throughout the site will be addressed during the expansion. Mre Lasko moved, seconded by Mr. Rerko, to approve the proposal for CMS10-26: Wal- Ndart of 24801 Brookpark Roacl which consists of building expansion and site improvements which was approved 7-0. COMMUNICATION Ordinance No. 2010-126 An ordinance repealing section 1123.15 of the North Olmsted zoning code entitled "expiration of order," and amending section 1123.12 of the north olmsted zoning code entitled "appeal conditions," in order to time limit certain variances granted pursuant to section 1123.12 and further authorizing the director of Planning and Development to administratively extend established variance time limitations. PDC tabled 09/24/10 Ordinance No. 2010-128 An ordinance amending section 1126.10 of the North Olmsted zoning code entitled "expiration of approval," to authorize the director of Planning and Development to administratively extend established time limitations. PDC tabled 09/24/10 Ms. Wenger said based upon concerns expressed by the Commission, amendinents had been proposed. The amendments would still allow for time extensions of up to one year, but they take away the discretionary aspect of the approvals. A time extension shall be approved so long as the applicant meets the three criteria listed in the ordinance. Mr. O'Malley agreed with the planner on the changes made to the ordinances. He does not believe that the BZA should be in the habit of readdressing any variances which were already granted. Mr. Bohlmann asked what other cities such as Westlalce required, and Mr. Parry said variances ran with the land and did not expire however development approval does. If a development is about to expire the applicant can write a letter to the commission requesting a time extension if there are no modifications to what was approved and if granted there is no set time limit. Mr. Parry and Mrs. Meredith noted that they preferred the amended version of the ordinances to the original, but still thought changes were required. Mr. Bohlmann felt the ordinance placed the director in a position of circumventing the boards and commissions. He thinks the timeframe should be eighteen months before it expires. Mr. Cotner asked how applicants would ask for an amendment and Ms. Wenger said the director would go through a checklist to determine if the factors are met. Mr. Cotner suggested a letter be submitted as a request to the commission for extension. Mr. Lasko felt one year was too long of an extension and felt the ordinance was more 2