My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05/22/2001 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
2001
>
2001 Planning Commission
>
05/22/2001 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:48:42 PM
Creation date
1/28/2019 5:16:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
2001
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
5/22/2001
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
\ .. • <br />? CITY OF NORTIi OLMSTED <br />"TOGETHEI2 WE CA1V MAIKE A DIFFEI2ENCE!" <br />PLANNING COMIVIISSION <br />MINUTES - MAY 22, 2001 <br />7:30 P.M. IN COgTNCIL CHAMBERS <br />I. ROLL CALL: <br />Acting Chairman, Spalding called the meeting to order at 8:00pm. <br />PRESENT: Acting Chairman, Spalding, Board members, K. O'Rourke, T. Hreha and C. Allan. <br />ALSO PRESENT: Assistant Law Director, J. Dubelko, City Engineer, P. Deichmann, Building <br />Commissioner, D. Conway and Clerk of Commissions, D. Rote. <br />ABSENT: Chaii-znan, R. Tallon, Board members, S. Asseff and R. Koeth. <br />U. REVIEW AIVD CORRECTION OF M[NUTES: <br />The Plarming Commission minutes dated Apri124, 2001 have been submitted for approval. <br />W. Spalding motioned to approve the April 24, 2001 Plannina Commission minutes as submitted. The <br />motion was seconded by C. Allan and unanimously approved. Motion Carried. <br />III. BUII_,D1NG DEPARTMENT REQUESTS: <br />l. Lorain Point Building; 24693 Lorain Rd. <br />The proposal consists of an addition to the existing office building. <br />Note: Planning Commission reviewed this proposal on 3/13/01 and 4/24/01 at which time lot <br />consolidation was approved. Architectural Review Board approved this proposal on 3/12/01 and Board <br />of Zoning Appeals granted variances on 5/3/01. <br />Acting Chairman Spalding called all interested parties forward to review their proposal. Mr. Ruel the <br />Architect came forward to review the proposal. Mr. Spalding indicated that the proposal had changed <br />since the applicant had addressed the board. Mr. Riiel indicated that the parking in front of the building <br />was removed and a landscaping area was put in its place. The eastern entrance drive has been <br />eliminated. The Architectural Review Board requested landscaping changes that include modification <br />to the plants and there will be additional trim added to the windows on the building to enhance the <br />appearance. Mrs. O'Rourke and Mr. Allan both felt that the applicants accomplished what was asked <br />of them and believe the changes will be a welcomed improvement. Mr. Spalding asked if there were any <br />comments from the audience, no one came forward. No further comments were made. The clerk <br />announced that the proposal would go before the Building, Zoning and Development board on June 12, <br />2001, at 6:30pm in Council Chambers. <br />W. Spalding motioned to approve Lorain Point Building of 24693 Lorain Road their request that <br />consists of an addition to the existing office building. The motion was seconded by T. Hreha and <br />unanimously approved. l?I'Iotion Carrned - <br />2. Fieldstone Development; S/L 11 Industrial Pkwv. <br />The proposal consists of a multi-phase, multi-tenant office warehouse "facility to match the current <br />facility on the adjoining lot. Note: Planning Cominission reviewed this proposal on 3/13/01and <br />4/24/01. The Architectural Review Board reviewed the proposal May 16, 2001. Board of Zoning <br />Appeals granted variances on 4/5/01. <br />Acting Chairman, Spalding called all interested parties forward to review their proposal. Mr. <br />Hammerschmidt the owner came forward to review the proposal. Mr. Dubelko indicated that there was <br />a concern at the last meeting regarding common drives. The question was whether a cross easement <br />was needed for this proposal. The law department researched this and an easement is not needed as the
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.