12/10/1991 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

? the street are zoned General Retail. He stated that there is a natural dividing line of Brookpark Extension. This home has no value whatsoever as a residence, and the only appropriate use is retail or some business use. It would appear to be unjust and inequitable to establish the dividing line on this person's property merely to make a statement. It was pointed out that there was no notification of adjacent property owners since this was presented by Council as an ordinance. Mr. Morgan questioned what would happen if the church asked for a rezoning if Brookpark Extension was used as the zoning line. Mr. Thoma,s stated that the church would not have a Yiardship, but this property could not be sold as residential, and a court could rule it was inappropriately zoned. Mr. Orlowski considered this to be spot zoning. Assistant Law Director Dubelko did not agree that this would be spot zoning and advised that when a rezoning is requested, the entire area must be studied, not just the lot involved. If a property is rendered valueless by its present zoning classification, then there would be grounds for rezoning. Mr. Morgan pointed out that there are a number of homes which are adjacent to retail which would be in the same situation. Mr. Gorris cited the house on the corner of Dover Center and Brookpark Extension as an example. Mr. Skoulis could not understand why the members are not in favor of this which is in the middle of a commercial area, when they had no problem with rezoning the Biskind property on Coltunbia Road. rlr. Gorris pointed out that this parcel was not in the middle of retail property, the church is on a parcel zoned for single family use. Mr. Thomas claimed that since the church property was a huge parcel which could be reconfigured for another type of`residential use and, even though it was across from Brookpark Extension, it was large enough to include buffering. He suggested asking the planners who are working on the master plan for advice on this parcel. Mr. Dubelko agreed and suggested that Commission vote against the ordinance and recommend to Council that the planner be asked to identify the entire area; and considering that the Christ The King rezoning has been delayed for study, it would not be tmreasonable to delay this. If the Commission recommends this lot for rezoning, Mr. Gorris was concerned that the church would ask for a rezoning. Mr. Morgan believed that the Commission has an obligation to protect the residential character of the City. Mre Bowen believed that Council would be more likely to agree with the approach to merely delay the rezoning, but would be less likely to agree to disapproving ito J. Thomas moved that the Commission recommend that Council have the Cuyahoga County Planning Commission review this parcel for appropriate use prior to passing, rejecting, or altering this ordinance, and that any recommendation be returned to the Commission. Chairman Gorris and Mr: Dubelko both stated that the motion should be to either approve or disapprove. J. Thomas moved to disapprove Ord. 91-186 subject to the above recommendations. After some discussion, Mr. Thomas withdrew his motion. Mr. Skoulis moved that Council approve the changing of the zoning on this piece of property from Residence "B" District to General Retail, Business, seconded by B. Gorris. Roll call on motion: Skoulis, Orlowski, and Thomas, yes. Gorris, Bowen, and Morgan, no. Motion failed to passm Mr. Dubelko stated that the Commission must either approve or disapprove the motion, it cannot be left in a tie vote. The members discussed asking Council for additional time until a seventh member is appointed. Chairman Gorris stated that he had been planning to make another motion requesting that Council defer the passage of this ordinance until the County Planning Conunission has a chance to study the area. Mr. Thomas agreed to change his vote. Chairman Gorris called for another vote on the last motion to approve Ordinance 91-186. Skoulis, yes, Gorris, no, Bowen, no. Morgan, no, Orlowski, no, and Thomas, yes. Motion failed to pass. Cha,irman Gorris moved to recommend to council that action be deferred on Ord. 91-186 Lmtil the Planning Commission has a chance to refer this particular parcel as a focus area to 3