Laserfiche WebLink
accurately described that Planning Commission was trying to create a lifestyle center and make <br />residential work on the site with the retail. However, now the residential use has been subtracted, a <br />little bit of office added and it has now become nothing more than an attractive strip center. Mr. <br />Berryhill voiced that council approved the preliminary plans unanimously. <br />Mr. Conway advised the board that a 10`" variance would be required. The applicants submitted <br />plans and according to their plans they will require a height variance. Applicants plan shows <br />buildings 45-feet high and code only allows 36-feet high. Request 1), was granted once before based <br />on conditions so those will have to be reviewed again. 2), stands as it is 3), he does not have <br />objections to the request. If the applicants do not have enough parking for their clients they hurt <br />themselves. 4), The setback relates to the second floor office use. The first floor is not out of code <br />but second floor is out of code, he has no objections to the request. 5), 6), and 7) stand on their own. <br />8), He does not have a problem with the loading zone. 9), Lighting variance can be removed as new <br />plans submitted showed zero at the lot line. Mr. Berryhill indicated that variance request 6) could be <br />eliminated as the new plans show 50-foot setback. Mr. Berryhill stated that they would withdraw <br />variance request 6& 9 as they will meet code regarding the two issues. Mr. 0'Malley advised the <br />board to review the conditions that were placed on the last request and suggested that the first 8 <br />conditions out of the 14 would still apply. He further requested the board include City Councils <br />conditional approval as an amendment to the plan. The applicants will be required to meet and <br />satisfy the conditions of City Council. Mr. McKay voiced that Council required a letter from the <br />property owner. The board took time to deliberate. <br />Prior to the motion Mr. Barnett again voiced that the residents were in favor of the new plans and <br />commended the applicants for working so closely with the residents. Mr. Yunu came forward to be <br />sworn in and questioned when the variances would be voted on and inquired if he could view the <br />plans. The clerk advised Mr. Yunu that the plans were open to the public in her office during office <br />hours and copies of any plans could be purchased. <br />M. Maloney move to grant Carnegie 1Vlanagement Parcel E Brookpark Road their request for <br />variance (1123.12), which consists of a new development and that the following variances are <br />granted as amended: <br />1. A 50,238 square foot variance for building massing of retail "A", (code permits 73,162 sq. <br />ft. and applicant shows 123,400 sq. ft.), section (1149.041 (i)). <br />2. A 25.8% variance for retail occupying more than 50% of gross floor area, (code permits <br />50% and applicant shows 75.8%), section (1149.04 (j)). <br />3. A 442 car parking space variance for off street parking spaces, (code requires 1476, and <br />applicant shows 1034), section (1161.05 (w)). <br />4. A 36 foot variance for front yard setback of building, (code requires 100 ft. and applicant <br />shows 64 ft.), section (1141.06). <br />5. A variance for yaxd screening & landscaping for buildangs B, C, & D, (code requires 10% <br />and applicant shows none), section (1141.07 (c)). <br />7. E1 14 foot wariance for not having proper size loading/unloading facilities at buildings C& <br />D, (code requires 50 ft. and applicant shows 36 ft.), section (1161.13 (D)). <br />8. A 16 foot variance for width of drive, (code permits a minimum of 34 ft, and applicant <br />shows 50 ft), section (1161.10 (B)). <br />10. A 9- foot varianee for height of buildings code permits 36 foot applicant shows 45 feet. <br />Which is in violation of Ord. 90-125 sections (1149.041 (i)), (1149.04 (j)), (1161.05 (w)), <br />(1141.06), (1141.07 (c)), (1161.13 (D)), (1161.10 (B)), and (1149.041 (fl). The approval of all <br />variances is subject to the following conditions: <br />1. Applicants will limit access to Brookpark Road in accordanee with access management <br />standards and the recommendations of the traffic analyst; prohibit access to Columbia, <br />Mitchell, and Westview & Lareaont. <br />2. Applicants will limit development on the site to buildings as shown; no additional phases or <br />buildings will be added to this site. <br />3. Applicants will construct the entire mixture of uses in one phase.