My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/14/2004 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
2004
>
2004 Planning Commission
>
12/14/2004 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:49:34 PM
Creation date
1/28/2019 8:15:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
2004
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
12/14/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
concrete. Also, the roll curbs are more "snow plow" friendly and easier to maintain. Chairman <br />Koeth further pointed out that his experience is that high curbs protect the lawn and keeps salt <br />out of the grass. The applicant stated that each unit has two car garages and the length of the <br />drives is approximately 25-30 feet. The engineering department said code indicates how many <br />guest parking spaces are required. The applicant has one more necessary guest spots than is <br />needed. They have eleven spaces. The cul-de-sac is about 1,400 feet including all phases. <br />Mr. O'Malley advised the chairman that the Planning Commission can recommend having <br />exception from the code. He informed Mr. Lasko that the turnaround was actually the turning <br />into property and is not indicated on the drawings. Mr. Lasko said that if the turnaround is <br />eliminated, then the potential avenue of egress and ingress can be eliminated. The applicant said <br />this will be eliminated since it will not be done in several phases. The commission recommends <br />that applicant follow code and use concrete. Mr. Spalding informed the applicant that concrete <br />is required in most new developments. <br />Ms. Wenger said more extensive landscape islands were added since the applicant appeared <br />before Architectural Review Board. She further stated certain units that are more visible are <br />delineated for more extensive side yard landscaping. <br />Mr. Yager said the applicant attended a number of ineetings with himself and city staff and have <br />established a stronger aesthetic look. They have followed suggestions that included adding stone <br />to the front, adding landscape beds and different roof pitches. However, he was unsure if they <br />identified the layout mix of the units. Mr. Koeth questioned what is on the north side of the <br />property. The applicant said that a chain link fence and a four foot rail fence are located there. <br />Natural vegetation will be on the back side of the property. Mr. Urbanick has met with Mr. <br />Wendell several times to discuss buffering and will recommend where vegetation should be <br />moved and this will be shown on the construction drawings as well. Mr. Spalding said a <br />vegetation landscape buffer is on the south side. The ditch areas that are open will have fencing. <br />Board asked if there would be any visitor parking at the hainmerhead site. Applicant indicated <br />that there would be group parking spaces near the turn around. <br />Several residents expressed the following concerns: <br />Mr. Mike Basic, inquired about using a row of trees for buffering and thought they were <br />receiving a 25 foot buffer near Barton Woods. The applicant stated the side yard had been <br />extended from 15 ft to 35 ft. to accommodate this end of the development. Mr. Yager clarified <br />with Mr. Urbanick that the landscaping plan depicts a 25 ft buffer, however, the engineering site <br />plan shows an 8" sanitary line that is coming down from unit 31 to 35 and the buffer along <br />Bradley Woods is getting reduced less than 25'. Mr. Urbanick said the building could have been <br />built 15 ft from the property line. However, at the time of application it was extended to 40 ft. <br />He said Mr. Wendell could make a determination as to whether any additional planting would be <br />addressed where natural vegetation currently is. Mr. Yager asked Mr. Urbanick if it is possible <br />to move sanitary catch basin #7 and 8 closer to the units so that it creates a natural buffer. <br />Mr. Ray Oakley, is concerned about drainage on his lot. He was made aware of a detention <br />basin on his property between two units that had previously caved in. He questioned if homes <br />would be built over it. Chairman Koeth said this is not possible and informed Mr. Oakley to <br />speak with the Engineering Department to find out where the creek runs. Mr. Oakley has owned <br />this unit for 13 years and has never had flooding, however, did say that it is close to being a <br />wetland type area. Mr. O'Malley informed Mr. Oakley that water issues are not for the Board to <br />discuss. Mr. Urbanick indicated that grading plan is to maintain water on their own land. <br />Mr. Howard Hatsel, who owns property that will abut the entire east side of the property asked <br />what type and how much buffer will he have. Mr. O'Malley said this was previously discussed <br />6
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.