Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING <br />Village of Mayfield <br />October 21, 1974 <br />The Council of the Village of Mayfield met in regular session at the <br />Village Hall on Monday, October 21, 1974 at 8:15 P.M. Council President <br />Frank Prager presided in Mayor Leech's absence. <br />The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was given. <br />Roll Call: Present: Messrs. Barclay, Bennett, Bordonaro, Prager, Mrs. <br />Negrelli and Mr. Schulte <br />Absent: Mayor Leecn <br />Also present were: Messrs. Byrnes, Hovancsek, Relic, Amendola and Chief <br />Shortle. <br />Mr. Prager opened the meeting by asking for comments from the floor: <br />David Burke, 6727 Sandalwood: As representative of the Kenwood Estates, <br />he asked what action has been taken regarding the rear portion of the <br />development on Sandalwood and S.O.M. He stated a petition had been <br />submitted at the last Council meeting requesting a brick wall and now <br />phase 2 is about to begin. Mr. Barclay stated landscape plans had been <br />submitted by the Sand-Som Co. to the Architectural Board which were <br />disapproved as the Board requested a masonry wall 514 in height. <br />Martin Comella, 673 Robley Lane: He pointed out what he considered a <br />shortcoming in the charter regarding individual's.rights to voice an <br />opinion re any structures a neighbar may add to his property and felt <br />abutting neighbors should have some say as to what a neighbor might do. <br />Mr. Barclay advised the Architectural Board tries to protect all property <br />values for everyone according to ordinances.. Mro Prager said we would see <br />what could be provided. <br />Richard Schanfarber, 6719 Sandalwood: <br />the Van Curen development to build 16' <br />960 requires 30'. Mr. Prager said Mr. <br />information on subject matter. <br />He asked if a variance had been granted <br />from the lot line when Ordinance <br />Amendola would provide all the <br />There being no further comments from the floor, that segment of the meeting <br />concluded. <br />Mr. Prager commented on the recent postponement by the PUCO in denying <br />a rate increase for OBT, The Village's stand is??.in opposition of that <br />increase and would go on record of same when the matter is brought up <br />again in two years. <br />Mr. Prager also advised there had been no new developments in the C.E.I. <br />i matter regarding a proposed substation in the Village and the erection of <br />utility lines. The Village submitted its decision to the Court and we are <br />awaiting a hearing date. <br />- 1 -