04/24/2001 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

? ? ` X CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED "TOGETHER WE CAN-1MAKE A DIFFERENCEI" PLANNIlNG COMMISSION - IVIINUTES - APRIL 24, 2001 IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:30 P.M. I. ROL.L CALL: . Chairman, 'I'allon called the meeting to arder at 7:5OPNY. PRE5ENT: Chairman, R. Tallon and Board 1Vlembers, K. O'Rourke, C. Allan, S: Asseff, W. Spalciing and T. Hreha. ALSO PRESENT: Assistant Law Director, J. Dubelko, City Engineer, P. Deichmann, Building Commissioner, D. Conway and Asst. Clerk of Cominissions, S. Solomon. ABSENT: Board member, R. Koeth. II. REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES: The Planning Commission rninutes dated April 10, 2001 have been submitted for approval. R. Tallon motioned to approve the April 10, 2001 minutes as submitted. The motion was seconded by K. O'Rourke. Roll call on the motion: Tallon, O'Rourke, Hreha, Spalding, and Allan; yes. Asseff; abstain. Motion Carried. III. BUILDINC'r DEPARTMEN'i' REQUESTS: 1. Lorain Point Building; 24693 Lorain Rd. The proposal consists of an addition to the existing office building. Note: 1) This proposal is pending lot consolidation. 2) Planrung Commission reiFerred this proposal to the Board of Zoning Appeals on 3/13/01, but due to major changes this proposal is returning for further review. Chairman Tallon called all interested parties forward to review the proposal. Andy Ruel, the architect, and Dr. Waghray, the owner, came forward to review the proposal. Mfr. Riiel explained that when the lot assembly plat, was drawn up and the survey was completed they found that the existing structure was approximately 10 feet further back off of Lorain Rd., which forced them to re- think the addition and parking lot layout. Nb-. Tallon questioned if the building department had the variances for this proposal. W. Conway explained that the variances thetriselves haven't been changed, but the numbers would be a little different on the variances. There is a 16-ft. variance for the front yard setback. An 11-foot variance for the front yard for parking, which is actually reduced from what it was before. An 8-ft. variance for existing side yard parking. Also a variance for not having a 25 ft. apron and a variance for not being 90 degrees from Lorain Rd. So, everything is the same except for the second one, but that is the one that has been reduced from the old site plan. I3e then commented that the biggest thing is that the Planning Commission wanted was that second drive to be eliminated, which they are now showing again on this new plan. Mr. Riiel commented that previously they retained the parking in front of the building and in ta,lking with the doctor they would like to eliminate the parking, except for temporary parking and treat it as a drop off area. The parking count is 23 cars shown on the site. The west row of parking has 12 cars, but 1 of therri is going over the 20-ft. setback line and the two extra cars show in the drop off area. He understands that those cars will not be included in the total parking count. Therefore, they have 21 spaces shown and the building will be