07/10/1974 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2. amended changes since the ordinance was introduced, therefore there are some variations from the Charter. Mre Rickey will be given a copy of the amended ordinance. He stated that he understood that the procedure for a zoning request, was first presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission, next to Coisn.cil, then referred to the electorate. He asked if the individual would have to pay for the referendum fees. He was told that the Village would have to pay. He wondered uihy the ordinance was being passed, since the Charter which becoraes effective Jan. 1, 1975 would override any ordinance. Mx°. Prager said that the ordinance had been introduced, given a second reading and it was just a matter of cleaning house - finishing of ordinances that had been introduced for codification purposea. Nirm Relic added that our reasons for needing an osdinance was to comply with the Charter. In answer to Mr. Rickey's question concerning expediting the ordinance , Mr. Bordonaro stated he did not feel we were acting too quickly since the ordinance had been introduced in 1973• Mre Rickey feels that the individual home owner does not haee a chance. Mr. Busa cited the case of Mr. Cutting, an individual, who won a case when it was placed on referendum. Mr. Rickey again gave his reason fcsii opposing this ordinance , is that it puts the individual out of business when zoning re- quests are referred to referendum. Mayor Leech explained that Vae are incorporatizkg the provisions of the Charter in this ordinance. The hearing on Ordinance 73-27 adjourned at 8:10 P.M. The meeting for the hearing of the proponents and opponents on Ord. 74-18 was called to order by Niayor Leech:at 8:12 P.M. Mr. Prager was asked to read the title of Ord. 74-18, " AN ORDINANCE REG- IILATING THE PARKING AND/OR STORING OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES UPON PRIVATE PROPERTY WITHIN THE VILLAGE OF MAYFIELD." There were no proponents for the ordinancee Mayor Leech asked for opponents. Robert Grogan - 480 Oakton Circle: Is opposed to Sec. 6, referring to the storing of vehicles over 7 ft. in height. He feels that this section is unworkable and all vehicles should be prohibited regas°dless of height. Jos. A. Gagliano - 6705 Bonnieview : Asked for the definition of storage of a vehicle. Storage is explained in Sec. 1(h). Robert Beebe - 537 Zorn Lane : Thinks that essentially this ordinance is well written, but he feels that Sec. 6 referring to the granting of- variances has a lot of latitude.