09/24/2002 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the Board of Zoning Appeals with a recordation to approve the ground sign, the neon light is removed so there is rio need for the neon variance. The plans will then go to the Architectural Review Board and will not have to return unless major changes are required. C. Allan seconded the motion which was unanimously approved. The clerk anriounced the da.tes and times of the Architectural Review Board and Board of Zoning.Appeals meetings. IV: NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND SUBDIVISIONS: 1. Rockwvnd Subdivision• Columbia Rd between Broolmark and Countrv Club Blvd.: The proposal is to rezone Permanent Parcel Number 237-19-002 (5.571 acres) from A, Residence, Single to Single Family Cluster District in order to construct a 31-unit single family cluster development. The location of the property is on the east,side of Columbia Road, approximately 300 feet south of Brookpark Road, and north of Interstate I-480. A variance will be required for construction of ari aboveground detention basin. A variance will be required for construction of an asphalt roadway instead of a.concrete roadway.. A variance will be required for construction of a proposed roadway width of 23-feet instead of 28-feet back to back of curb. Note: This request is discussed in the minutes of. Planning Commissions special work session dated September 24, 2002 2. Romp Realty Lot Split PP# 237-01-001,007, 007: The proposal is to split Permanent Parcel Number 237-01-001 into two parcels. The existing parcel is 4.06 . acres. The parcel is-l-shaped and fronts on both Lorain Road and the east side of Columbia Road. The parcel has a Lorain Road address. The new property line will subdivide an existing building and several variances will be required. The northern 500 feet +/- of the parcel is zoned Retail Business, General. The southern 150 feet +/- of the parcel is zoned C Residence, Single. New Parcel A will be located "in the northeast portion of the existing parcel in the Retail Business, General zone. New parcel B will be located in the southern portion of the existing parcel in both the Retail Business, General zone and the C Residence, Single zone. NOTE: Planning Commission tabled this proposal at its March 26, 2002 meeting and the applicant tabled themselves at the Apri19,2002 Planning Commission meeting. Chairman Koeth called all interested parties forward to review the proposal. Mr. Schmitz the architect and Mr. Oravecz from Terra Group came forward to review the proposal. Mr. Oravecz suggested that they specialize in remodeling properties. They would like to purchase 1.73 acres, which consist of a freestanding building. They will either remodel the existing Drug Mart building or demo the building and resubmit new plans for a new building. Since the last meeting, they have worked with the City and the Mayor on a new facade for of the building. Mr. 0'Malley apologized and indicated that he would like to submit a memo to the board members regarding the proposal that is about to be addressed. The photographs before the board is what could be, but not an official submittal. This proposal raises development plan issues that need to be further explored as recommended in the memo. If this were a virgin piece of land, it would be an easy determination whether or not the lot conforms to code. Chapter 1101.07 outlines the procedure for Planning Commission to review a minor subdivision. The building commissioner voiced many concerns regarding drawing property lines, which create non-conforming buildings. The applicant has proposed a plan, which draws a line between the existing Drug Mart building, and tke building, which is only divided by a wall creating two non-conforming buildings. This also raises other issues dealing with parking, rear yard setbacks and front yard setbacks., The applicant has indicated that they would receive cross easements form the Danny Boy and Dairy Queen enterprises for parking. The applicant would like the commission to believe that the conditions of the site will be made no worse -then what currently exist. They also suggested that the site might be redeveloped in the future. However, he would not recommend that the Planning Commission attempt to control the parcel (A) development (Drug Mart) by a subdivision plat of this type. Only through official development plans can Planning Commission. set or impose conditions and restrictions. It would be difficult to ensure that the development plans that are being offered would ever come about. Once -the lot split is granted there is little the City can do to enforce wha.tever promises were made. He would like to suggest that the Planning Commission request the applicant submit a formal development. By requesting a formal plan the Planning Commission would have an opportunity to address any and all issues the City may have with this site. This lot split has been developed to sale a piece of the existing lot, which has always been one lot. 5