01/12/1999 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

w R. Tallon motioned to send North Olmsted Evangelical Friends Church on to the Architectural Review Board and tliat the architectural plans be ready for their review. Mr. Shirkey asked for the dates of the meetings. Mr. Tallon indicated the clerk rvould give the dates as soon as he was done. The next time you come back before the Planning Commission show the relocation of the dumpster, the mound landscaping along the rear of the property as well as the lighting fixtures, also photometrics. The Commission would like for you to see what you can do on the ditch side, they're not sure what by looking at the plans what can be done, but would like the developer to look into some type of buffer. Mr. Shirkey questioned if the Engineering Department would need access. Mr. Tallon answered "yes" and indicated when Evangelical Friends Church returns before the board, their plans should show the location of all air conditioning condensers and how they will be screened, or if their rated DB ratings they are to be below. Mr. Tallon asked the clerk to have the forester look at the site regarding the motuiding possibly killing the existing trees. The clerk announced the Board of Zoning Appeals meeting would be held February 4, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., the Architectural Review Board meeting would be held February 17, 1999 at 5:30 p.m., that the applicants would return to the Planning Commission on February 23, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., and that no further natices would be sent out. Mr. Tallon indicated the developer is to go to the above meetings, redo their drawings and return to Planning Commission when they are ready. The motion was seconded by, T. Brennan, roll call on the motion; T. Brennan; Yes, R. Tallon; Yes, K. 0'Rourke; Yes, S. Asseff; Yes, and W. Spalding; abstain. IV. NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND SUBDIVISIONS: A) Jones, Andrews, Dansberg: Lot Split & Consolidation Plat : The proposal is to re-align permanent parcels 231-32-009 & 231-32-023, forming three(3) new parcels, each currently having residential structures. Location is the west side of Columbia Road between Gessner Road and Florence Avenue. Zoning is B-Residence, Single entirely and all proposed parcels conform to Zoning Code requirements for area and lot depth. Proposed parcel A does not have sufficient frontage at the fifty (50) feet setback line. Note that additional access easements will be required as well as a variance. Chairman Tallon reviewed Jones, Andrews, Dansberg's request and called all interested parties forward to present their proposal. Ms. Randy Jones, one of the siblings that own the property came forward to present the proposal. Ms. Jones suggested they would like to split the parcel which has three existing homes on it now. They would like to divide the property into two lots. An easement would be needed for the drive as the opening to the garage faces the driveway. Mr. O'Rourke questioned if the driveway between the two proposed lots was really 15' feet wide, and where the other driveways were located. Ms. Jones indicated that was the only driveway ever put in place. An unidentified audience member asked if 15' feet would be wide enough to put a driveway in. Mr. Deichmann suggested the 15'foot distance was at an angle it is only really about 10' feet wide. The Building Department would have to be asked if a driveway could be placed right on the property lines, and if it was allowed it would be a very tight driveway. Ms. O'Rourke asked if the narrow driveway on the plans was for the home shown as parcel A. Ms. Jones suggested that is why a driveway easement is needed so they can get to their home and that parcel B can get to their garage. Mr. Tallon asked why the house on parcel A was built. Ms. Jones suggested it was a barn, her mother wanted to live in a barn so a grandfather moved it to the back and made it into a house. Mr. Brennan questioned what would happen in the future if one of the lots are sold. Mr. Brennan asked if there was enough property on parcel C that they could sale part of it to the parcel A owner to have a wider driveway. Mrs. Jones suggested she didn't think there was enough room. Mrs. O'Rourke asked if Root Road property was ever used as an entrance, and why not front parcel A home on Root Road. Mr. Brennan suggested the parcel known as 231- 32-010 is not a build-able lot. Mr. Tallon asked why the request to separate parcels are being made now. Mrs. Jones indicated the reason to separate the homes is so they can be sold. Mr. 8