My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03/22/1988 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1988
>
1988 Planning Commission
>
03/22/1988 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:31:07 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 3:51:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1988
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
3/22/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
;: `?G'•` ? .. . y . <br />?. - . .. ' <br />? <br />;';., , <br /> <br /> 01 <br />1tt <br />:IIf NIIXt4 Olrii$tCbr <br /> 1 <br />V <br /> Pepttrtment nf XM£u <br />?(;> <br />,,• 23821 LORAIN ROAD <br /> NORTH OLMSTED, OHIO 44070 <br />r;. <br />• MICHAEL R. GAREAU <br />Directorof Law <br />? 777-1500 <br />JAMES M. DUBELKO <br />Assistant Director of Law <br />777-1500 <br />March 22, 1988 <br />T0: CHAIRMAN TOM MORGAN AND <br />MENIBERS.OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION <br />FROM: MICHAEL R. GAREAU, DIRECTOR OF LAW <br />DONALD P. ALBENZE <br />Prosecuting Attorney <br />777-5300 <br />SUBJECT: LETTER T0 PLANNING COMNNUSSION NEMBER "BRUCE" GORRIS <br />FROM FORMER ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD MIIMBER DARRELL <br />K. PATTISON. <br />I have. reviewed Mr. Pattison's letter to Brian Gorris, whom he <br />misidentifies as "Bruce" Gorris. This. error at the start of Mr..Pattison's <br />letter is certainly an omen of additional factual and legal errors and <br />"inaccuracies,which follow.in the letter. <br />I should first note ;that I feel compelled to immediately respond'to Mr. Pattison's letter, because I do not want to leave anyone with the <br />impression, as Mr. Pattison charges in his letter, that the.Law:Department <br />has been remiss in fulfilling its responsibilities to the City with respect <br />to the review process for the Lauren Hill Plaza Development Proposal. <br />As I have advised this Commission in the past, the function of the Law <br />Department in the review process for building permit applications is not to , <br />be an advocate for either the deeeloper or for private interests, <br />including, adjacent neighbors,' who oppose the developer. The function of. <br />.the Law Department, instead, is to provide.legal advice to city officers, <br />boards and commissions with respect to questions and issues which arise <br />?during the review process. In turn, city-officers, boards and commissions <br />.are under-a sworn duty to fairlq execute the laws.of the city --- not to <br />;be, again, an advocate for either a developer or an opposing private <br />interests. I take special exception to Mr. Pattison's statement in his letter that <br />he is "sure •that the Building Department.and Law Director can come up with <br />a ruling which will negate any of these (his) concerns relative to the <br />neighboring parcels." I read-Mr. Pattison as actually saying to you, if <br />you don't agree with me and oppose the proposed Laur,en Hill Plaza <br />Development, "then you must be.bending the law for the developer. Of. <br />. <br />??7..
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.