07/30/2002 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.. Dubelko said the question is at what stage in the process is that done. Mr. O'Malley said it may be worth exploring on the front end, at the preliminary stage. He asked if that would be too soon. Mr. Koeth indicated he believed it is too soon. He explained the board has someone come in with a preliminary plan and that is what the Planning Commission asks for, a police, fire, and forester report. And that depends on if they approve.the plan itself. Once they see the footprint, they have a better idea and can ask the forester to take a look and make adjustments from there. Mr. Koeth said it would almost be premature to ask any sooner. Mr. O'Malley said if the preliminary plan suggests a certain layout and a development comes in consistent with that, it might be too late for the forester to have any influence on the location. Mr. Koeth said it has been the opposite of that. The forester needs to be able'to make other suggestions and give his plans to the board. Mr. Dubelko said there is another provision in the code, he believes chapter 1126, that is helpful, the commercial building permit process. If a developer is submitting a preliminary plan that triggers the.requirement to apply for the building permit consistent with 1126 that gives authority to the building commissioner to require certain documents be subm'itted and to add to it_ Mr. Smerigan indicated he looked at 1149 and part of the problem he sees is if they look at the section, about detailed development plans, it talks about submitting data showing the volume of traffic expected to be generated. He said his position is that is inappropriate and it's too late there. He said they would want to look at those kinds of impacts up front. Mr. Dubelko said that with the way mixed use has worked, the plans have been very general initially. He added that with a preliminary plan it might be too soon to know what type of impact traffic will have. He refened to the hotels,and restaurants. on Country Club Blvd. Mr. Smerigan pointed out on the detailed development plan it mentions preliminary landscape plans (1149). He has to assume there is another step in the process that is not reflected in that section of the code. He is used to either a 2-step process„ where they get preliminary plan approval,, the conceptual approval, in which case you are dealing with all the impact issues. Then the final plan approval where they deal with all the detail and what they are doing is based on preliminary approval; they're nailing it down tight. They agree that in the preliminary plan they will have a landscape buffer with inounds and vegetation, and they come back with the detail plan talking about the spacing of the trees and the specific species, etc. It doesn't read in the North Olmsted book like a detailed development plan goes into that level of detail. The 3 step process he is used to dealing with has a very conceptual plan up front and then a preliminary phase where they work out all the details and then very specific final plans for individual pieces. He said he is not very familiar with our normal process but our book doesn't read like either process. Mr. Dubelko said they may be biting off more than they can chew right now. Mr. Srrierigan said it may be worthwhile to look at the bigger picture and inaybe some adjustments or formalizing to it can be done. For instance, a traffic study is included as a next step. Mr. Koeth said he likes the idea of an independent traffic study. He said they are trying to bite off too much right now. Mr. O'Malley said it sounds like Mr. SmeriDan has conceptualized a preliminary plan review that is more detailed than they are accustomed to. The developer acquires a certain right when the preliminary plan is approved and he has the ability to insist that the final plans be approved that are consistent with the preliminary plans. Mr. Smerigan said it is making a representation to your residents that a certain level and style of development on the site is going to be acceptable. He referred to Mr. Dubellco's example of the hotels on Country Club and the unknowns in that situation. He said the specifics need to be spelled out. Mr. Dubelko indicated their job now is to make changes in the district. Mr. Allen pointed out .that Mr. Smerigan did a wonderful job. He came into this as a liaison between the city, the_residents, and the property owner and provided great information. It is a work in progress but they can move forward from here. Mr. Spalding said the framework is certainly there for this parcel. Mr. Dubelko suggested they use the language he mentioned earlier for the motion. 9