10/08/1991 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

* ,. that section, discussion ensued between Mr. Grindell and Mr. Dubelko regarding whether the land would have to be rezoned or a plan for cluster homes merely had to be approved. Mr. Dubelko pointed out that any rezoning of the golf course would have to come back from Council to the Planning Commission. Mr. Grindell stated that then Planning Conunission would then have to approve within 30 days, and the church will have to wait until next Spring. Mr. Dubelko stated that was not necessarily true, but concluded that his advice to the Planning Commission was to not lock themselves into setting a specific date, either a far date or a close date, it should be left up to the planner, this is an important piece of land, there is a lot of acreage, it is on the west end of town, and it should be left up to the Planner as to how long it would take to make an intelligent recommendation to the City. Once a decision is made, the City and the Planning Commission could act relatively quickly. Mr. Grindell objected that this was agreed to be done in July, and nothing has happened. Mr. Dubelko stated that it was not fair to say that nothing has happened in the last three months, a lot has happened. The developers maintained that they were not on the agenda, and that when they were an the agenda, they withdrew because they could not be heard. Mr. Grindell stated that they had asked to have a meeting with the Conunission and a planner, that they did have a meeting with the Mayor, but apparently that was an aggravation to some members of the Commission and 3 months later nothing has happened. He stated that the Planning Comnission should do what they are going to do and they wilT do what they have to do. Mr. Dubelko responded that they had both stated their positions in their correspondence and he did not think they would have to go into this any further.. The motion was approved unanimously. Mr. Morgan advised Mr. Grindell that the Commission would keep him informed. V. COMMUNICATIONS: Ord. 91-132: An Ordinance providi.ng for the Amendment of the Zone map of the City of North Olmsted, which zone map is part of the Zoning Code of the City of North Olmsted, by Changing the Premises Hereinafter Described from single Residence A District to Mixed Use District A. Assistant Law Director Dubelko advised that this rezoning is basically what the Planning Commission approved previously and was then vetoed by the Mayor. The deed restrictions are basically the same, except that they provide that it cannot exceed whatever is permitted under the current zoning codes Mr. Skoulis stated that he was involved in this as a representative of his home owners' association and since the veto they have been having meetings to work out some sort of a compromise with Biskind Development Company. Biskind has all ready filed in the courts for a rezoning, and the opinion of the Law Department is that the city would lose the ca,se. Mr. Dubelko stated that the planner probably had told the City that the property is inappropriately zoned as single family, since Planning Commission had recommended rezoning and Council passed it, the veto would be construed as unreasonable. Mr. Skoulis advised that the Mayor vetoed it because there was concern that the whole area would request rezoning to Mixed Use. Mr. Skoulis questioned if Ord. 91-132 would be retroactive to the old code or would it have to apply to the new code. Mr. Dubelko stated that it would have to conform to the Mixed Use A restriction in the present code. Mre Skoulis advised that there are two areas of concern at present: that adjacent property will be rezoned to Mixed Use; and that there would not be adequate landscaping and bufferi.ng. The developer agreed to 50 feet of landscaping and mounding, the residents wanted a brick wall, but the owner wanted to keep the area consistent with his other developments which have mouncli ng. Mr. Morgan stated that when the Conunission studied this, the developer was proposing a 3 or 4 story office 8