Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of Council <br />Monday, June 18; 2018 <br />. Page 21. . <br />path;. whicli they co.uld, there would be no public discussion other than.what.the applicant <br />chose to have a public discussion. Tlaere would be no review or discussion at Planning: <br />There would be no review. or discussion from your cabinet heads, police,, fire, engineering,. <br />buildirig department: Tliey just put it on. That's the procedure that you can do. Now is <br />that a procedure that's lawful? Absolutely. Is thata great procedure? That's subjective. . <br />Tlie other way to do it, is to have your Charter followed which allows an applicant to file an <br />applicatiori to the Planning Cominission, vet it at Planriing; liave all of the department <br />heads review it, they have an opportunity at Planning or before CounciFto comment on it. <br />If Planning Commission chooses at their discretion to pass it on to Council since it is an <br />Ordinance lawfully approved by this Community over a decade ago I believe, then Council <br />can make the decision about whether they want to give the voters an opportunity to change <br />essentially the zoning on this.property. <br />So that's a two-prong approach and this ordinance, while it says what it says, does not go <br />into effect until the voters of Mayfield Village approve it. If they don't approve it, it never <br />goes into effect and. the status.quo remains. Those are things. that have to be kept in mind.. <br />And I would note when you talk about the current zoning; the current zoning is U-1. U-1 is <br />single family residential. Also permifted is farming, nurseries, truck gardening and any <br />property that's owned by. the Village could be used for any municipal purpose .no matter <br />what without an y discretion. So. those are the uses thaf are. there now. The applicant's. <br />proposal' for 1159 to be applied which is the plarined re.sideritial development; 'tliat's a 10- <br />page section of your Code fhat has a.lot of other regulatory, provisions that.the, applicant <br />would have to rneet.. In addition, the_applicant; upon the zoning code changing, would have <br />to still go through the proc.ess- to have all of the consultants for the Village review and _ <br />approve, in fhe case of Mr. Cappello's departmerit, best engineering practices to make. sure <br />the_ flooding issues are not going to be aggravated, although there appears to be no real. . <br />evidence of flooding issues from what's been looked at thus far. So that's really the <br />procedure. And it's not uncommon to liave those two pathways. Zoning is something that <br />regulates land use and you. can, without everi having the Village get involved, you ean put <br />it on the ballot. Or you cari come in ancl show some of the conceptual plaris that he lias. <br />We have all, seen some of the plans and suggestions that he has had. But he sfill has to <br />. comply with the Code. Council President Saponazo asked; so here's my question. What prohibits us. from changing <br />- the way tliat this is worded? Why is that bei:ng worded as an ordinance that approves it <br />instead o.f worded as Council allows it to go on the ballot so that the electorate can vote on <br />it? Because to nie, wlien you have it this way, to me this .is premature. We :can have an <br />ordinarice that basically says exactly what I said.before and then this can be soinething tliat . is supplementary to it if we needed it to be. <br />Mr.. Coyne stated, if. Ordinance 2018-17 is approved by. the voters, what.'s on your agenda <br />_ is exactly what's going fio happen. If it doesn't get approved by the voters, that won't <br />happen:.