Laserfiche WebLink
CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED <br />PLANNING & DESIGN COMIVIISSION MEETING <br />COUNCIL CHAMBERS <br />WEDNESDAY, MAY 10, 2006 <br />MINUTES <br />1. CAUCUS: <br />7:15 PM <br />II. I20LL CALL: <br />Vice Chaii-man Maloney called the meeting to order at 7:35 pm <br />PRESENT: M. Mahoney, R. Bohlmann, J. Cotner, G. Malone, M. Meredith and M. Yager. <br />ALSO PRESENT: Planning Director K. Wenger, Assistant Law Director B. O'Malley, <br />Assistant Building Commissioner T. Rymarczyk, Engineering Consultant M. Raig and Clerk of <br />Commissions D. Rote. <br />ABSENT: J. Laslco <br />III. REVIEVV AND CORREC'I'ION OF MINUTES: <br />Mr. Yager cominended the clerk for transcribing the April 26th minutes so accurately without <br />the assistance of the audio system. <br />M. Yager moved to approve the Planning & Design Commission minutes of April 26, <br />2006 as written. M. Meredith seconded the motion. Roll call: R. Bohlmann, G. Malone, <br />M. Meredith, M. Yager - yes; J. Cotner, M. Mahoney - abstained. Motion Passed <br />IV. OLI) BUSINESS: <br />1. DD12 MDT Great Northern; 26035-26437 Great Northern ShoUping Center: (WRD # 4) <br />Proposal consists of replacing existing sidewallcs and relocating 13 existing trees to new <br />location. Note Planning & Design Commission tabled the proposal on 04-12-06. <br />Ms. Wenger reported that the applicant's proposal was unchanged since the previous meeting. <br />The Cotnmission's concerns were cement replacement, landscape removal and deviating from <br />the original desigii intent of the development. Applicants were asked to provide copies of the <br />original development plan and information on the concrete proposal. The applicants submitted <br />a report from URS regarding their concrete proposal but did not supply a copy of the <br />developinent plan. The office attempted to find previously approved plans and found they had <br />been microfilmed and could not be reproduced. <br />Mr. Raig reported that he reviewed URS's letter of April 20, 2006 regarding the colored <br />concrete, and questioned some of the findings. He said spot repairing is difficult for both <br />colored and non-colored concrete. Concrete is comprised of natural ingredients and is colored <br />differently each time it is poured and sets-up due to stone type, sand, cement, water and other <br />factors listed dealing with weather and atmospheric pressure. He believed it could be argued <br />that color concrete would have a more uniformed finish. Regarding water penetrating into the <br />sub-grade reasons listed include control joints which are designed to control where the concrete <br />will craclc as it will craclc. It can be tooled at the time of pouring or saw-cut the following day. <br />Control joints should be cut in a square pattern as concrete cracks in a square pattern. The sub- <br />grade should be designed with the anticipation that water will infiltrate into it, either through a <br />control or construction joint. Therefore water needs to be properly managed in the sub-grade. <br />The letter also suggests that due to multiple construction joints there will be heaving which <br />causes tripping hazards. However the construction joints can be designed to minimize any <br />1