10/25/2023 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Filarski reported that they conducted an initial review of utilities and traffic for the development plan. Sanitary sewer connections were to be made to an existing sewer on Grace Road. providing ample capacity for the project. Storm water drainage. impacting a wetland on the north side. required permits for proper tilling by the developer. ensuring compliance with storm water management regulations. A detention pond along Brookpark Road was planned for stormwater management, adhering to the chapter on stormwater mana�oement guidelines. Water supply improvements involved replacing a 6 -inch water main on Grace Road with a 12 -inch line to enhance capacity. Traffic considerations led to a determination that the development generated less than 40 vehicles during peak hours. exempting it from the requirement of a traffic impact study as per the city's code. Mr. O'Malley aliened with and endorsed the Directors report regarding the scope of review. He emphasized that a granted variance pertains solely to the variance itself and not the overall development plan review and approval. which are distinct processes. He stated it was crucial not to perceive a granted variance as untouchable. While certain elements may be addressed through variances. many aspects remain within the broad realm of the development plan reN iew. He stated their role involved considering the broader view. focusing on details like traffic circulation and buffering. Mr. Geor(_,e Davis. residing in Mentor. Ohio shared his backgrotmd as the o��ner of Pro Built Homes. a company specializing in single-family home construction. apartment homes and road development in Northeastern Ohio. He expressed his excitement about the multifamily parcel in North Olmsted. and aimed to contribute something missing in the city's housing( landscape. Mr. David asked how he (Mr. Davis) came to the decision of the style that vvas chosen. not feelino the more modern architecture truly tit. Mr. Davis replied that the v01,111ger generation tended to want more of the trend\, modern architecture. and he was trying to do something that was not too modern but still attractive enou�21h. Mr. David inquired about the density of the proposed development, questioning the number of units relative to the lot size. Director Upton replied that this development was less dense that the traditional garden style apartments. Mr. Oliyos addressed the overall plan. noting a focus on entrance and exit through Grace Road. which is a dead-end street. He made a suOgestion to consider creatine pathways or connections to Brookpark for pedestrians and cyclists. particularly in the context of reaching out to the younger generation. The strategic location of the site. approximately a portable mile east to the Metro Parks. he emphasized the potential for enhancing community connections. Mr. Davis acknowledged the suggestion as a great idea. and was happy to incorporate that into his plan. Mr. Peeples expressed gratitude for the proposed project. He inquired if there was am engagement with the Rockwynd subdivision abutting the property. Mr. Davis replied he had not and apologized. He explained that he would be happy to hear recommendations and suggestions as to what they would like to have as buffering whether it was a fence or greenery. Mr. Peeples also recommended to sit with the HOA to discuss concerns regarding lighting. dumpsters. noise and other potential issues arising from the nesv development Mr. Peeples also inquired about a marketing survey in which Mr. Davis replied that there x\ as a demand exceeding the 68 planned units. He anticipated a quick lease -up based on previous projects. He explained the construction plan was developing all roads. stormwater facilities. and utilities simultaneously. x\,ith the buildings constructed in two phases. He went on to explain the residential manager role and hoxy he plans to have the property maintained and residence issues addressed. ensuring the projects