My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01/11/2000 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
2000
>
2000 Planning Commission
>
01/11/2000 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:48:24 PM
Creation date
1/28/2019 4:27:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
2000
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
1/11/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
? <br />14 <br />variances would be required, but a special permit to add to a non-conforming building would <br />be required. Mr. Spalding inquired if there would. be additional lighting added or changes to <br />any of the existing lighting in the parking lot. Mr. Solt indicated that one of the lights in the <br />parking lot would have to be moved for the new addition. Mr. Spalding questioned were the <br />light would be inoved and if it was shown on the site plans. Mr. Solt suggested that the light <br />would be moved 15 feet to the north. Mr. Koeth informed the arclutect that the light would <br />need to be shown on the site plans, so there would be no mistakes as to where it is to be <br />located. 1V1r. Cmznau showed the Coinmission where the light would be located and indicated <br />that all the material would match the existing building. Mr. Solt indicated that the color of the <br />cedar shingle siding, asphalt shingles and new windows would match the existing material and <br />colors. Mr. Spalding questioned if there would be any other changes to the existing building. <br />Mr. Solt indicated "no". N1r. Hreha questioned if the light_that needed to be moved 15 feet <br />north would be closer to the parking lot or closer to the property line. Mr. Solt commented <br />that the light would be moved closer to the center of the parking lot. Mr. Spalding questioned <br />if there would be new landscaping . Mr. Solt suggested that landscaping would be added to <br />the north West Side of the addition. Mrs. O'Rourke inquired if a dumpster area was needed. <br />Mr. Solt responded "no". Mr. Koeth questioned the Assistant Building Commissioner as to if <br />a dumpster area was required. Mr. Rymarczyk indicated that the applicants were not required <br />to have a dumpster, but he would like to have the site plans show exactly where the existing <br />light location would be once it is moved. Mr. Solt indicated that he would have it put on the <br />site plans. Mr. Koeth questioned if the applicants would need to submit a cut sheet for the <br />lights to_ make sure the lighting does not spill over onto the resident's property. Mr._ <br />Rymarczyk suggested it would be up to the Cormnission, but the applicants indicated that they <br />would not be adding any additional lighting to the site. Mr. Solt suggested that they would <br />only be adding lights that are required by Code, which would be at the entrances. Mr. Koeth <br />commented that the lights that are required on the building are to be down lights. Mr. <br />Spalding questioned if there would be more then one entrance added. Mr. Solt suggested that <br />there would be an entrance door for the main office, but it would not be used on regular basis. <br />The office entrance will only be used during the workweek. Mr. Allan indicated that over the <br />past two years he has'noticed quite a few churches expanding, which he felt was a good sign <br />as it shows an increase in memberships. He questioned if the addition being added would <br />require more parking spaces as well. Mr. Solt responded "no", as there will be no additional <br />seating added. Mrs. Joslyn, a concerned neighbor, came forward to review the site plans. <br />Mr. Koeth questioned the City Engineer regarding the drainage for the site. Mr. I3eichmann, <br />the City Engineer reviewed that any time a building is added too which increases the hardened <br />surface area a retention requirement will be activated. Mrs. Joslyn reviewed that when the <br />church expanded the parking lot a year ago, her husband attended all of the meetings. She <br />suggested that the church assured her husband at that time that the trees along the boundary <br />of the church property and theirs would remain intact. Mr. Solt commented that rnore trees <br />had to be removed then what they had expected to accommodate the Churches drainage ditch. <br />Mrs. Joslyn indicated that she has left many messages on the church answering machine, as the <br />expansion of the pavement is killing the trees. The church is a good neighbor overall, but <br />dying liinbs are fallina in her yard and she is concerned for the safety of her children. If the <br />light is moved 15 feet to accommodate the new addition, that suggests to her there will be <br />additional foliage reinoved. She questioned what type of landscaping would be added to <br />replace the foliage being removed. N1rs. Joslyn questioned what the church intended to do <br />about the dying trees that boarder her property, as one of the churches dead trees fell into her <br />2
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.