Laserfiche WebLink
1'1/24/86 <br />170 Page 2 <br />Counci'1 enacts this legis'lation, the Village wi'1'1 iiot be in contempt of. <br />Court, and the Court case is over. Meanwhile, the Village can do a study <br />of the property. Mr. Etz'ler said h.e thinks the bottom line is whi'le our ordinance says <br />residential, which may or nay not be right and proper, the Courts have <br />uphe'ld time and time again that cities and vi'1'lages in due course can <br />rezone land. The land that we're talking about rezoning was commanded <br />by the Courts to uphold zonitig that was in effect in 1972. He can',t <br />see where anybody has a prob'lem with this. Of course it says.residential, <br />that's what the majority of the peop'le in the Village are :Looking for, <br />they don,`_t tiant commercia'1 deve'lopmerLt. He fee'ls we cou'ld. take that out <br />of the ordinance and it wou'ldn't make any difference:. <br />Mr. Fene'li said if the Village wou'ld have a p'lanner come in to get a fee'1 <br />of the community and t.o know what the residents want, maybe the p'lanner wi'll <br />figure out some type of residential development, then the Village wi1:L[have <br />his study and expertise to back it up. , <br />Mr. Fene'li referred to the prcb'lems that occurred in 1977=78. He sai:d that <br />one of the main reasons that we were taken to task (as mentioned in the Court <br />of Appeals decision in a couple of places) was because there were no studies, <br />p'lanners, or zoning experts at that Gime; the Council just decided they <br />wanted resideritia'l. <br />Discussion was he'ld regarding the p'lanner's duties, and the risk invo'lved. <br />Mr. Basi'le, seconded by Mr. Etzler, made a motiorl to amend Ordinance No. <br />86-18 as presented. Ro1'1 Ca'11: AYES : A'1'1 <br /> <br />NAYS: None <br />Mot.ion Carried <br />Ordinance Amend.ed <br />(as.presented) <br />Mr. Basi'le, secoiided by Mr. Etzler, made a motioii to eziact Ordinarce No. 86-18 <br />as amended. <br />Mr. Go'l.ey 5aid he is sti'11 concerned that we may have more to lose by -passing <br />this ordinance. Right now.we have :Layercake zoning•and the p'lanner cou'ld <br />decide that is too restrictive. He asked if there is a'limitation on the <br />amount to spend ori the study. <br />Mr. Fene'li explained that Cour..ci1 cou'ld always repea'1 the ordinance if they <br />find that the study wi'll cost more than the Village can afford to spend. <br />Mr. Etz'ler said he thinks the bottom line is whether we think layercake <br />zoni.ng i.s right and proper. <br />Mr. Etz'ler said by the next Caucus they would like Mr. Fene'li to give them <br />names of p'lanners. <br />Mr. F'lynn questioned how the specific duties of the p'lanner wou'ld be determined. <br />Mr. Fene'li said that wou'ld be inc'luded in::the Vi'1'lage's cor,tract with'the <br />p'lanner. <br />. <br /> <br />: . <br />I" <br />?ii