Laserfiche WebLink
requests. One concern was saving as many trees as possible, which they agree on. The other concern <br />was buffering, and setbacks with regard to the rear and side property lines. The residents prefer the units <br />be ownership units as opposed to rentals, and that there would be no dumpster for rubbish. It would be a <br />standard, single-family rubbish pick up. There are some low lying areas within the Columbia Rd. <br />property owners' backyards that were having some drainage problems. Mr. Corsi said with the location <br />of their retention and with their drainage issues, they believe they have helped resolve some of the <br />problem, if not all of the problem, that they are experiencing. He understands the city ordinances are to <br />ensure a quality development within the city. The design for both the land plan and the architectural plan <br />is to offer a total development and design concept by creating a quality environment with respect to how <br />the streets and structures relate, and how they in turn affect and invoke a sense of community. The code <br />recognizes the importance of a well-designed neighborhood, allowing for variances for those that meet a <br />high standard. Their intent is to create a sense of quaintness and community where quality and value <br />play a larger role than mere square footage. They are designing to the market; young professionals, <br />empty-nesters, and retirees, many of whom they hope are currently North Olmsted residents. They have <br />done a lot of research for single-family cluster developments and believe they have assembled an <br />exemplary plan of single-family cluster units and at this time they are requesting the rezoning of the <br />property to single-family cluster. Mr. Spalding asked about the property to the east. He said it is zoned <br />residence A. He asked what will happen to that property. Mr. Corsi indicated he is not proposing <br />anything for that land. That parcel is a consolidated plat owned by one entity. The majority of that <br />consolidated plat is zoned for apartments. A portion of that land, a smaller portion, is zoned single <br />residence A. He can only speculate that the owner may hold that land long enough so the entire thing <br />may become apartments. Mr. Spalding asked how much acreage is represented by the A residence area. <br />Mr. Jack Stephens, the engineer on the project, indicated it is 3-5 acres. He mentioned that according to <br />the tax map, A residential single-family is landlocked and the only way to it is through the multi-family <br />area that comes off the street to the north of them. Mr. Spalding said he is concerned because that <br />surrounding area is zoned residential, and then there is cluster and multiple-family zoning adjacent to it. <br />There are three separate uses and he is concerned about that. As a practical matter that does not make <br />much sense. Mr. Stephens reviewed the plans with the board. He said with all the multi-family in the <br />area, the likelihood of their site staying single-family is very small because of the shape of the parcel. If <br />a cluster development does not get approved in the future, someone may come along and request multi- <br />family zoning. They chose to request the single-family cluster zoning and would like input from the <br />community. With that kind of proposal they have to do a lot of up-front work with the community. And <br />they believe it's a nice transition between single-family and multi-family. He said with the way the code <br />is written it allows them to put in all the buffering that is needed between them and the single-family <br />area. Mr. Spalding asked if they consulted with the o.wner of the adjoining property to see if he was <br />interested in single-family cluster zoning. Mr. Corsi indicated they did not. He said that any owner with <br />multi-family zoning who has additional land is not going to rezone it or look for cluster zoning. Mr. <br />Stephens referred to the colored landscape plan. He said they have the same concern as the board. If the <br />neighbors aren't happy then the likelihood of the development happening is not good. Mr. O'Malley <br />suggested that it might benefit the applicant to make their presentation to the residents in attendance as <br />well as the board members. Mr. Stephens pointed out that the plans show the neighbors along Columbia <br />Rd. and the units are positioned so they face that property. Most of the bufFering is concentrated right <br />where those properties are. They tried to put as much distance between themselves and the neighbors <br />with the long back yards. He added that with the property being as flat as it is, and the flooding issues <br />that are out there, it worked out and allowed them to save as many trees as possible. It also allowed them <br />to put a marketing device into the property, which is the creation of a preserve down in the southwest <br />corner. Mr. Koeth asked to hear what the residents have to say. Mr. Michael Kovach indicated he was <br />present on behalf of Ed & Dixie Golya of Columbia Rd. He said he did not understand the plot that has <br />both residential single-family and apartment zoning. Mr. Corsi explained the plot and pointed out the <br />property on a map. He indicated there is'one owner and he showed where the apartments are located. <br />Mr. Stephens then showed another drawing to Mr. Kovach. Mr. Kovach said there appears to be a lot of <br />w <br />8